299 7.5.7 MEROPS ORNATUS (RAINBOW BEE
Transcription
299 7.5.7 MEROPS ORNATUS (RAINBOW BEE
QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.5.7 MEROPS ORNATUS (RAINBOW BEE-EATER) Significant Species Management Plan 48 Merops ornatus (Rainbow Bee-eater) Merops ornatus (Photo: Bruce Thomson) Merops ornatus Occurrence Records Map ( Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Migratory / Marine NC Act Conservation Status Least Concern Known Distribution The Rainbow Bee-eater is found throughout mainland Australia. It is not found in Tasmania, and is thinly distributed in the most arid regions of central and Western Australia (Barrett et al. 2003; Blakers et al. 1984; Higgins 1999). After breeding, they move north and remain there for the duration of the Australian winter. However, populations that breed in northern Australia are considered to be resident, and in many northern localities the Rainbow Bee-eater is present throughout the year (Emison et al. 1987; Lane 1963; Morris et al. 1981; Saunders and Ingram 1995; Serventy 1948; Serventy and Whittell 1976; Terrill and Rix 1950). A potential habitat map for the Rainbow Bee-eater is contained at the end of this individual SMP. Occurrence within Gas Field Field surveys have recorded several individuals throughout the Gas Field. Description and Relevant Characteristics The Rainbow Bee-eater is a medium-sized bird, males measure 25cm in length and the females 22cm. 299 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Both length measurements include the central tail-streamers. The adult males and females are similar in appearance, but can usually be distinguished by differences in the length and shape of the tail-streamers (Higgins 1999). Biology and Reproduction The Rainbow Bee-eater mainly feeds on insects (Lea and Gray 1935; Serventy and Whittell 1976; Fry 1984; Calver et al. 1987; Higgins 1999), and will occasionally take other animal items including earthworms (Cleland et al. 1918), spiders (Lea and Gray 1935) and tadpoles (Wheeler 1973). Birds gather in small flocks before returning to summer breeding areas after over-wintering in the north (apart from the resident northern populations). Both males and females select a suitable nesting site in a sandy bank and dig a long tunnel (average length: 89.4 cm). The nesting chamber is generally unlined (the eggs are laid directly onto the bare earth or sand) (Forshaw and Cooper 1987), although in some burrows the chamber may be lined with grass, feathers, snail shells or wasp wings (Berney 1906; Cleland 1909; Higgins 1999). Both parents incubate the eggs and both feed the young, sometimes with the assistance of auxiliaries (helpers). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat The Rainbow Bee-eater occurs mainly in open forests and woodlands, shrublands, and in various cleared or semi-cleared habitats, including farmland and areas of human habitation (Higgins 1999). Birds breed throughout most of the distributional range, although southern birds often move north to breed. General Threats Few threats are known. This species is listed as Migratory and is subject to international treaties in relation to migratory birds. Human activities can disrupt Rainbow Bee Eater nests built in active mines or quarries, or in natural creek banks and other sites where construction or other disturbance may occur; Introduced predators such as foxes and wild dogs can dig down into nests to eat nestlings. Cane Toads have also been identified to reduce the breeding success of the species by feeding on eggs and nestlings, as well as occupying nesting burrows; and Rainbow Bee Eaters also sometimes collide with lighthouses when migrating. Potential Project Threats Development Disturbance of nesting sites due to clearing, especially if these activities occur in riverine environments with sandy substrates; Disturbance to foraging/roosting/breeding by noise pollution; and Disturbance to roosting/breeding by light pollution. Operation and Decommissioning Disturbance to foraging/roosting/breeding by noise pollution; and Disturbance to roosting/breeding by light pollution. Management Strategies The primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and breeding areas. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the species or their nest be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined 300 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. Should a Rainbow Bee Eater breeding place be identified and it is determined that disturbance or tampering to the breeding site is unavoidable the management strategy will be to follow the procedures outlined in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on the Rainbow Bee-eater are: As required under the Protocol a pre-clearance survey will be undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of Rainbow Bee-eaters and their nesting sites; As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of the Rainbow Bee-eater and particularly any nesting sites in the area; All clearing activities to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas; Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas including “no go” zones delineating Rainbow Bee-eater habitat or nests identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; If any such nesting sites of the Rainbow Bee-eater are identified they shall be clearly marked out as ‘no go’ zones with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative. All possible measures shall be taken to avoid disturbing any such sites, including the reduction of the clearance area or relocation of any associated site infrastructure; If it is determined that clearing of nesting trees is unavoidable, a suitably qualified and licensed fauna spotter catcher who is in possession of appropriate permits for fauna relocation will check the nest for active use by the Rainbow Bee-eater. Should the nest have evidence of previous use, actions as identified in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004) will be implemented. This may include relocating nests where feasible which shall be undertaken by the licensed fauna spotter catcher in an appropriate manner. Displaced nests will then be relocated by the licensed fauna spotter catcher to a suitable recipient site; Measures will be taken to avoid any injury to the Rainbow Bee-eater at all times, however if any injured birds are found they shall be transported to a veterinarian or recognised wildlife carer immediately for treatment; All recorded sightings of the Rainbow Bee-eater, the locations of any nesting sites and any relocations which may be required will be reported to the relevant authority as part of the Project reporting; Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where barbed wire fencing is absolutely necessary, QGC will investigate the use of the following design: - electrical fence ribbon should be co-located with the top strand of barbed wire, or - plastic bunting (or warning tags) should be attached to the top strand of barbed wire. Where the species has been identified in proximity to the Gas Field infrastructure, temporary lighting shall be directed away from light-sensitive areas such as nesting areas and light shades and low lighting must be applied to construction and operational areas where these are located adjacent to 301 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans remnant vegetation and other environmentally sensitive areas; Vehicle activities should be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the non-compliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of Rainbow Bee-eaters and nests. Avoidance of nesting sites where possible. Successful relocation of nests where practicable. Monitoring An appropriate monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site where applicable, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once any impact to the Rainbow Bee-eater is identified. Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP. References Atlas of Living Australia (2015), Available from http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Merops+%28Merops%29+ornatus, Accessed 13 January 2015. Barrett, G., Silcocks, A. Barry, S. Cunningham, R. and Poulter, R. (2003). The New Atlas of Australian Birds. Melbourne, Victoria: Birds Australia. Blakers, M., Davies, S. J. J. F. and Reilly, P. N. (1984). The Atlas of Australian Birds. RAOU and Melbourne University Press, Melbourne. Berney, F.L. (1906). Field notes on birds of the Richmond district, north Queensland. Emu. 6:41-7. Cleland, J.B. (1909). Notes on several birds found at Strelley River (Port Hedland, Marble Bar Road), north-western Australia. Emu. 8:155-156. Calver, MC, Saunders, DA and Porter, BD (1987). The diet of nestling Rainbow Bee-eaters, Merops ornatus, on Rottnest Island, Western Australia, and observations on a non-destructive method of diet analysis. Australian Wildlife Research. 14:541-550. Emison, W.B., Beardsell, C.M., Norman, F.I., Loyn, R.H. and Bennett, S.C. (1987). Atlas of Victorian Birds. Melbourne: Department of Conservation (Forest and Lands) and Royal Australian Ornithological Union. Forshaw, J.M. and W.T. Cooper (1987). Kingfishers and Related Birds: Todidae, Momotidae, Meropidae. Lansdowne Editions, Melbourne. 302 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Fry, CH (1984). The Bee-eaters. In: Book. Poyser, Calton, England. Higgins, P.J. (ed.) (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Four Parrots to Dollarbird. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Lane, S.G. (1963). Notes on banding Rainbow Birds. Australian Bird Bander. 1:59- 61. Lea, A. M. and Gray, J.T. (1935). The food of Australian birds: an analysis of the stomach contents. Part 2. Emu. 35:63-98. Morris, A.K., McGill, A.R. and Holmes, G. (1981). Handlist of Birds in New South Wales. Sydney: NSW Field Ornithologists Club. Saunders, D.A. and Ingram J.A. (1995). Birds of Southwestern Australia: An Atlas of Changes in the Distribution and Abundance of the Wheatbelt Avifauna. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, NSW. Serventy, D.L. and Whittell, H.M. (1976). Birds of Western Australia. Perth: University of Western Australia Press. Terrill, S.E. and Rix, C.E. (1950). The birds of South Australia: their distribution and habitat. South Australian Ornithologist. 19:53-100. Wheeler, R. (1973). Rainbow birds taking tadpoles. Australian Bird Watcher. 5:48. 303 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN Ö Ö LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC H ROMA H Ö Ö AR DT Cooper Basin Surat Basin CHINCHILLA Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA Y N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S ! ? Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 48 - RAINBOW BEE-EATER Merops ornatus ± 0 10 Ö Ö 20 40 Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Secondary Road SCALE: Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq 1:650,000 (A3) ! ? Merops ornatus Survey Records (QGC) Merops ornatus Indicative habitat QCLNG Project DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_46 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.5.8 TURNIX MELANOGASTER (BLACK-BREASTED BUTTON-QUAIL) Significant Species Management Plan 49 Turnix melanogaster (Black Breasted Button Quail) Turnix melanogaster (Photo: Luke Hogan) Turnix melanogaster Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable NC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable Known Distribution The Black-breasted Button-quail is known to occur in eastern Queensland (Qld) and New South Wales (NSW) from the Byfield region in the north, to the Border Ranges rainforests in the south, generally east of the Great Dividing Range. Some observations have been made on its western slopes, up to 300 km inland at locations such as Palmgrove National Park and Barakula State Forest in Qld (Mathieson and Smith 2009) although some inland records may involve misidentifications of the Painted Button-quail (Turnix varius). The closest confirmed records to the project area come from the Bunya Mountains. Potential habitat is mapped for this species using RE associations. The map is contained at the end of this SMP. Occurrence within Gas Field None recorded to date within the Gas Field. Description and Relevant Characteristics The Black-breasted Button-quail is a large, plump, pale-eyed bird. Females are slightly larger than males and measure up to 19cm and weighing up to 100g (Marchant and Higgins 1993). The sexes differ in plumage with males having finely patterned backs, wings with brown, black, grey and white mottling and face and throat are whitish and the breast is black with numerous white half-moon markings. The female is similar in all respects except for having a black face and throat, a larger dark area over the upper and lower breast with heavier white half-moon markings. The bill is grey and the legs are pale yellow. Juveniles resemble males but are duller (Marchant and Higgins 1993). 305 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Biology and Reproduction Males, juveniles and immature birds may be confused with Painted Button-quail which sometimes occur in the drier parts of the environment occupied by Black-breasted Button-quail (Marchant and Higgins 1993). This species forages using a pivoting action, in which individuals dig amongst leaf litter with their feet, pivoting in a circular fashion. This foraging behaviour creates distinctive circular depressions in the leaf litter called platelets (Hughes & Huges 1991; Marchant & Higgins 1993). The species is polyandrous (female breeds with several males within a season), ground-dweller and ground-nester, usually producing 3-4 young per clutch, which are incubated and tended solely by the male. Black-breasted Button-quails are commonly seen in pairs or occasionally in small groups. Being territorial, females are occasionally seen singly (Hughes and Hughes 1991; Marchant and Higgins 1993). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat Habitat considered critical to the survival of the black-breasted button-quail includes: Vine thickets and rainforest vegetation types that are periodically water-stressed. These include: semi-evergreen vine thicket, low microphyll vine forest, Araucarian microphyll vine forest, Araucarian notophyll vine forest and Brachychiton scrubs that may incorporate bottle trees (Brachychiton sp.), Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) and belah (Casuarina cristata); Low thickets or woodlands with a dense understorey but little ground cover, typically dominated by Acacia spp.; and In littoral situations, dry vine scrubs, acacia thickets and areas densely covered in shrubs, particularly Midgen Berry (Austromyrtus dulcis). REs likely to provide potential habitat for the black-breasted button-quail include 11.8.3, 11.9.4, 11.9.4a, 11.9.4c, 11.9.5 and 11.9.5a. Short descriptions of these REs are presented in the table below. Table 1 – Regional Ecosystems know to support Turnix melanogaster RE Code Short Description 11.8.3 Semi-evergreen vine thicket on Cainozoic igneous rocks. 11.9.4 Semi-evergreen vine thicket on fine grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.4a 11.9.4c 11.9.5 11.9.5a Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata open-forest on fine-grained sedimentary rocks General Threats Threats faced by the Black-breasted Button-quail include: Loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation due to clearing for a range of purposes (timber-harvesting and other forestry-related practices, agriculture, infrastructure construction and urban development); Habitat degradation as a result of domestic stock and feral pigs utilising black-breasted button-quail habitat; Habitat loss or degradation due to inappropriate fire regimes; and Predation by feral animals. Potential Project Threats Development 306 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Loss of habitat during construction; The removal of vegetative cover may increase vulnerability to predation as the species nests, roosts and feeds on the ground. Disturbance by noise and light pollution; Increased likelihood and intensity of fire; Increased likelihood of weed invasion leading to habitat alteration. Operation and Decommissioning Disturbance by noise and light pollution; Increased likelihood and intensity of fire; Increased likelihood of weed invasion leading to habitat degradation. Management Strategies As the Black-breasted Button-quail has not been identified as occurring within the Gas Field, the primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, and habitat and breeding areas. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the species or their habitat be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. Should a Black-breasted Button-quail breeding place be identified and it is determined that disturbance or tampering to the breeding site is unavoidable the management strategy will be to follow the procedures outlined in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on the Black-breasted Button-quail are: Following a desktop assessment, scouting surveys will be undertaken in order to identify if any suitable habitat (including microhabitat) will be impacted by the proposed clearing activities. If there is potential for suitable habitat to be adversely impacted, targeted surveys will be undertaken in order to confirm the presence/absence of species; The EPBC Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened birds (2010) recommend that (for sites less than 50 ha) the survey methodology for Black Breasted Button Quail should consist of area searches (in accordance with page 18 of the guidelines) over a period of 3 days and a minimum of 15 person hours. These survey methodologies will be implemented where appropriate and practicable; As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of the Black-breasted Button-quail and particularly any nesting sites in the area; All clearing activities to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas; Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas including “no go” zones delineating Black-breasted Buttonquail nesting sites identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; These areas will be recorded and all possible measures shall be taken to avoid disturbing any such sites, including the reduction of the clearance area or relocation of any associated site infrastructure; Due to the location of nests (on ground) and the ground dwelling nature of the birds, all vehicles and 307 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans pedestrians are to remain within the designated access tracks; Measures will be taken to avoid any injury to the Black-breasted Button-quail at all times, however if any injured birds are found they shall be transported to a veterinarian or recognised wildlife carer immediately for treatment; All recorded sightings of the Black-breasted Button-quail, the locations of any nesting sites and any relocations which may be required will be reported to the relevant authority as part of the Project reporting; Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where barbed wire fencing is absolutely necessary, QGC will investigate the use of the following design: - electrical fence ribbon should be co-located with the top strand of barbed wire, or - plastic bunting (or warning tags) should be attached to the top strand of barbed wire Where the species has been identified in proximity to the Gas Field infrastructure, temporary lighting shall be directed away from light-sensitive areas such as nesting areas and light shades and low lighting must be applied to construction and operational areas where these are located adjacent to remnant vegetation and other environmentally sensitive areas; Vehicle activities should be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the non-compliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of the Black-breasted Button-quail and nests. Refer to Section 4.1 for more detail. Avoidance of nesting sites where possible. Successful relocation of nests where practicable. Monitoring An appropriate monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site where applicable, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once any impact to the Black-breasted Buttonquail is identified. Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP 308 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans References Atlas of Living Australia (2015), Available from http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Turnix+%28Austroturnix%29+melanogaster, Accessed 13 January 2015. Hughes, P. and Hughes, B. (1991), Notes on the Black-breasted Button-Quail at Widgee, Queensland. Australian Bird Watcher 14, 113-118. Marchant, S. and Higgins, P.J. eds. (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 2 - Raptors to Lapwings. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press. Mathieson, M. and Smith, G. (2009). National recovery plan for the black-breasted button-quail Turnix melanogaster [Online] The State of Queensland, Department of the Environment and Resource Management. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/pubs/black-breasted-buttonquail.pdf, Accessed 29 November 2010. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS) (1997) Turnix melanogaster Factsheet. 309 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN Ö Ö LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC H H AR Cooper Basin ROMA Ö Ö DT Surat Basin CHINCHILLA Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Y Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 49 - BLACK BREASTED BUTTON QUAIL Turnix melanogaster ± 0 10 20 40 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 Ö Ö SCALE: 1:650,000 (A3) Secondary Road Turnix melanogaster Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Area Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_47 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6 MAMMALS 7.6.1 CHALINOLOBUS DWYERI (LARGE-EARED PIED BAT) Significant Species Management Plan 50 Chalinolobus dwyeri (Large-eared Pied Bat) Chalinolobus dwyeri (Photo: © Michael Pennay) Chalinolobus dwyeri Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable NC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable Known Distribution The current distribution of this species is also poorly known. Records exist from Shoalwater Bay, north of Rockhampton, Queensland, through to the vicinity of Ulladulla, in the south of New South Wales (Hoye 2005). In Queensland, further records are known from sandstone escarpments in the Carnarvon, Expedition Ranges and Blackdown Tablelands. It is likely that these areas support a high proportion of the Queensland population of the Large-eared Pied Bat, although estimates of the number of individuals present and their distribution in these areas has not been established. Additional records exist in the Scenic Rim near the New South Wales / Queensland border. The populations in this area appear to be reliant on the presence of roosts in volcanic rock types (Hoye 2005). Potential habitat has been mapped for this species using RE associations. The map is contained at the end of this individual SMP. Occurrence within Gas Field Field surveys made a tentative record of this species in Gurulmundi State Forest. Description and Relevant Characteristics The Large-eared Pied Bat is a small to medium-sized black bat measuring approximately 10cm including the head and tail with long ears. It has broad white lateral stripes that join to form a V-shape (DoE 2015). 311 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans of Mammalogy 47: 716-718. Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015). Chalinolobus dwyeri in Species Profile and Threats Database, DoE, Canberra, Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts (DEWHA) (2010). Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened bats, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Duncan, A., Baker, G.B. and Montgomery, N. (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Environment Australia. Hoye, G.A. (2005). Recovery plan for the Large-eared Pied Bat Chalinolobus dwyeri, Brisbane, Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. Hoye, G.A. and P.D. Dwyer (1995). Large-eared pied bat Chalinolobus dwyeri. In: Stahan, R, ed. The Mammals of Australia. Page(s) 510-511. Chatswood, NSW: Reed Books. Pennay, M. (2008). A maternity roost of the Large-eared Pied Bat Chalinolobus dwyeri (Ryan) (Microchiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in central New South Wales Australia. Australian Zoologist 34:564-569. Schulz, M. (1998). Bats and other fauna in disused Fairy Martin Hirundo arial nests. Emu 98:184-191. 317 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN Ö Ö LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC H H AR Cooper Basin ROMA Ö Ö DT Surat Basin CHINCHILLA Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Y Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 50 - LARGE-EARED PIED BAT Chalinolobus dwyeri ± 0 10 20 40 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 Ö Ö SCALE: 1:650,000 (A3) Secondary Road Chalinolobus dwyeri Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Area Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_48 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6.2 NYCTOPHILUS CORBENI (SOUTH-EASTERN LONG-EARED BAT) PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS N. TIMORIENSIS Significant Species Management Plan 51 Nyctophilus corbeni (South-eastern Long-eared Bat) Nyctophilus corbeni (Photo: Bruce Thomson) Nyctophilus corbeni Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable NC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable Known Distribution The South-eastern Long-eared Bat was formerly considered to be a distinct form of the Greater Longeared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis complex (Parnaby 1988; Duncan et al. 1999). This former taxonomy is reflected in the common and scientific names under which the species is listed in State nature conservation legislation, and in the scientific literature. However, the species was very recently formally described as a separate species and is now called, Nyctophilus corbeni (Parnaby 2009). The South-eastern Long-eared Bat is found from eastern South Australia, through the slopes and plains of New South Wales and into central southern Qld. Throughout its distribution it appears to be uncommon with scattered populations (Turbill and Ellis 2006). Records also indicate populations in River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) forests along the Murray River (Law and Anderson 1999). In Queensland, the South-eastern Long-eared Bat is mainly recorded in the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion, extending eastwards to the Bunya Mountains National Park. It has been recorded as far north as the Expedition Range and Dawson River areas. Its westerly range extends into the Mulgalands Bioregion and west of Bollon. There are limited records in Victoria, with patchy distributions in the Northern Plains and Mallee regions (Lumsden 1994; Koehler 2006). Potential habitat has been mapped for this species using RE associations. The map is contained at the end of this individual SMP – Plan 60: South-eastern Long-eared Bat potential habitat. 319 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Occurrence within Gas Field Once specimen was recorded in the southern portion of the Gas Field in the Condamine State Forest. This species has also been recorded within 25km of Gurulmundi State Forest (DEHP 2013). Description and Relevant Characteristics The South-eastern Long-eared Bat has a head and body length of 50-75 mm and a tail length of 35-50 mm. This species is distinguishable from other long-eared bats by its larger size as well as a broader skull and jaw. It is also geographically separated from other long-eared bats (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008). Biology and Reproduction The South-eastern Long-eared Bat is an insectivorous bat. Food can be taken in flight, by gleaning vegetation or ground foraging (Lumsden and Bennett 2000; Van Dyck and Strahan 2008). In flight, it commonly feeds on beetles, bugs, and moths (Lumsden and Bennett 2000); however, it has also been recorded feeding on grasshoppers and crickets. Foraging activities are concentrated around patches of trees in the landscape. Individuals appear to have defined foraging areas which they return to; they do not defend foraging areas and many individual from different species may share the same area. There is little information currently available on this species' reproductive biology. Pregnant and lactating females have been trapped in November in central-western New South Wales and Queensland suggesting a similar breeding cycle to other sympatric long-eared bat species (Schulz and Lumsden 2010). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat The South-eastern Long-eared Bat occurs in a range of inland woodland vegetation types, including box, ironbark and cypress pine woodlands (DoE 2015). The species also occurs in Bulloak woodland, Brigalow woodland, Belah woodland, Smooth-barked Apple, Angophora leiocarpa, woodland; River Red Gum, Eucalyptus camaldulensis, forests lining watercourses and lakes (DoE 2015). Throughout inland Queensland, the species habitat is dominated by various eucalypt and bloodwood species and various types of tree mallee with it being most abundant in vegetation with a distinct canopy and a dense cluttered shrub layer (Lumsden 1994; Parnaby 1995; Ellis et al. 1999; McFarland et al. 1999; Dominelli 2000; Koehler 2006; Turbill and Ellis 2006). There are a small number of records from closed forest adjacent to dry sclerophyll woodlands; in Araucarian notophyll vine forest in the Bunya Mountains and in semi evergreen vine thickets on the banks of the Dawson River and in the Brigalow Belt Bioregion (Pennay 2002; Venz et al. 2002). REs likely to provide potential habitat for this species includes; 11.3.1, 11.3.1b, 11.3.1d, 11.3.2, 11.3.2a, 11.3.2b, 11.3.14, 11.3.17, 11.3.18, 11.3.19, 11.3.26, 11.4.3, 11.4.3a, 11.4.3b, 11.4.7, 11.4.10, 11.4.12, 11.4.12a, 11.5.1, 11.5.1a, 11.5.4, 11.5.4a, 11.5.5, 11.5.5a, 11.5.5c, 11.5.20, 11.5.21, 11.7.1, 11.7.4, 11.7.4c, 11.7.6, 11.7.7, 11.8.3, 11.9.1, 11.9.4, 11.9.4a, 11.9.4c, 11.9.5, 11.9.5a, 11.9.7, 11.9.7a, 11.10.1, 11.10.1a, 11.10.1d, 11.10.3, 11.10.7, 11.10.7a, 11.10.9, 11.10.11 and 11.10.11a. Short descriptions of these REs are presented in the table below. Table 2 - – Regional Ecosystems known to support Nyctophilus corbeni RE Code Short Description 11.3.1 Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata open-forest on alluvial plains 11.3.1b 11.3.1d 11.3.2 320 Eucalyptus populnea woodland on alluvial plains UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 11.3.2a 11.3.2b 11.3.14 Eucalyptus spp., Angophora spp., Callitris spp. woodland on alluvial plains. 11.3.17 Eucalyptus populnea woodland with Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata on alluvial plains 11.3.18 Eucalyptus populnea, Callitris glaucophylla, Allocasuarina luehmannii shrubby woodland on alluvium 11.3.19 Callitris glaucophylla, Corymbia spp. and/or Eucalyptus melanophloia openforest to woodland on Cainozoic alluvial plains 11.3.26 Eucalyptus moluccana or E. microcarpa woodland to open-forest on margins of alluvial plains 11.4.3 Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata shrubby open-forest on Cainozoic clay plains 11.4.3a 11.4.3b 11.4.7 Eucalyptus populnea with Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata openforest to woodland on Cainozoic clay plains 11.4.10 Eucalyptus populnea or E. woollsiana, Acacia harpophylla, Casuarina cristata open-forest to woodland on margins of Cainozoic clay plains 11.4.12 Eucalyptus populnea woodland on Cainozoic clay plains 11.4.12a 11.5.1, 11.5.1a Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, Angophora leiocarpa, Allocasuarina luehmannii woodland on Cainozoic sandplains/remnant surfaces 11.5.4, 11.5.4a Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, C. endlicheri, E. chloroclada, Angophora leiocarpa on Cainozoic sandplains/remnant surfaces. Deep sands 11.5.5, 11.5.5a, 11.5.5c Eucalyptus melanophloia, Callitris glaucophylla woodland on Cainozoic sandplains/remnant surfaces. Deep red sands 11.5.20 Eucalyptus moluccana and/or E. microcarpa/ E. woollsiana +/- E. crebra woodland on Cainozoic sandplains 11.5.21 Corymbia bloxsomei +/- Callitris glaucophylla +/- Eucalyptus crebra +/Angophora leiocarpa woodland on Cainozoic sandplains/remnant surfaces 11.7.1 Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata and Eucalyptus thozetiana or E. microcarpa woodland on lower scarp slopes on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust 11.7.4, 11.7.4c Eucalyptus decorticans and/or Eucalyptus spp., Corymbia spp., Acacia spp., Lysicarpus angustifolius on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust 11.7.6 Corymbia citriodora or Eucalyptus crebra woodland on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust 11.7.7 Eucalyptus fibrosa subsp. nubila +/- Corymbia sp. +/- Eucalyptus spp. on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust 11.8.3 Semi-evergreen vine thicket on Cainozoic igneous rocks 321 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 11.9.1 Acacia harpophylla-Eucalyptus cambageana open-forest to woodland on finegrained sedimentary rocks 11.9.4, 11.9.4a, 11.9.4c Semi-evergreen vine thicket on fine grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.5 11.9.5a Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata open-forest on fine-grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.7, 11.9.7a Eucalyptus populnea, Eremophila mitchellii shrubby woodland on fine-grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.10 Eucalyptus populnea, Acacia harpophylla open-forest on fine-grained sedimentary rocks 11.10.1, 11.10.1a Corymbia citriodora open-forest on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks 11.10.1d 11.10.3 Acacia catenulata or A. shirleyi open-forest on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks. Crests and scarps 11.10.7, 11.10.7a Eucalyptus crebra woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks 11.10.9 Callitris glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks 11.10.11, 11.10.11a Eucalyptus populnea, E. melanophloia +/- Callitris glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks General Threats Due to the lack of data available, assessment of threats is difficult. Broad-scale vegetation clearing is likely to be a key threat in many areas. This leads to habitat destruction and fragmentation. Prior to European settlement, mallee and woodland habitats were extensive across inland eastern Australia. Agriculture is the main cause of habitat fragmentation; this is a threat as trapping surveys show the species displays a preference for larger habitats. Increased fire frequencies destroy understorey vegetation and this may be a key microhabitat feature for this species. The South-eastern Long-eared Bat is believed to forage on low ground and shrubs (DoE 2015). High density grazing around such regions destroys shrubs and limits the regeneration of the habitat. Overgrazing by feral species such as the rabbit may also pose a threat to this bat. The availability of suitable roosting habitats is essential for the presence of bat populations. The Southeastern Long-eared Bat is known to roost in deadwood or hollow trunks / branches from 25mm – 30mm in size and frequently under bark. Standard forestry practices remove such items from the environment and are hence considered a potential threat. Potential Project Threats Impacts to this species are projected to be quite low, since no broad scale clearing of remnant vegetation will occur in any areas. The species is also highly mobile across habitats, which should ensure that populations are not fragmented. The only other impact may be due to the loss of large riverine, hollow-bearing trees; however, preclearance surveys will identify such trees and will be avoided wherever possible. 322 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Development Loss of habitat during construction; Damage or disturbance to roosting habitat; Loss of mature hollow bearing trees; Increased competition for tree hollows by feral species and species which may benefit from the disturbance; Mortality during clearing activities; and Increased likelihood of fire. Operation Disturbance to foraging by light pollution; Disturbance to roosting/breeding by noise pollution; and Increased likelihood and intensity of fire. Decommissioning Disturbance to foraging by light pollution, and Disturbance to roosting/breeding by noise pollution. Management Strategies The primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and roosting sites. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the species be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. Should a South-eastern Long-eared Bat breeding place (i.e. roost in trees) be identified and it is determined that disturbance or tampering to the breeding site is unavoidable the management strategy will be to follow the procedures outlined in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). Offset sites will potentially be established for unavoidable impacts to EPBC listed fauna species habitat. Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on South-eastern Long-eared Bat are: Following the desktop assessment, scouting surveys will be undertaken in order to identify if there is any suitable habitat (or micro-habitat) impacted by the proposed clearing activities. If there is potential for suitable habitat to be adversely impacted, targeted surveys will be undertaken in order to confirm the presence/absence of species. Where appropriate and practicable, and in accordance with the EPBC Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened bats (DEWHA 2010) targeted surveys for the South-eastern Long-eared Bat should be undertaken on warmer nights from October through to April. The following survey methods are recommended by the guidelines and will be implemented where appropriate and practicable: 323 - Passive acoustic detection: Bat detectors can be used to identify areas used by long-eared bats, even if they cannot be identified to species level. Acoustic detection can then be followed up with an appropriate level of trapping. - Trapping: Mist nets and harp traps should be placed in woodland, mallee and forest, given that the species forages below the tree canopy, often to ground level. Equipment should be placed both in open fly-ways and within cluttered vegetation. If open water bodies (earth dams, fire dams, open UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans top tanks and watercourses) occur in or near the project area, then significant effort should be given to mist-netting or harp trapping over the water. For project sites where there is no surface water, mist nets can be set over temporary water pools specifically constructed for the purpose of the survey. For sites less than 50 ha (for sites greater than 50 ha, appropriate survey methods should be confirmed with DoE) a combination of the following trapping techniques should be employed: Survey technique Total effort Minimum number of nights Harp traps 20 trap nights 5 Mist nets 20 mist-net nights 5 As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of this species and particularly any roosts in the area; All clearing activities to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas; Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas including “no go” zones delineating roost sites identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; Pre-clearance survey to be undertaken by suitably qualified, experienced and licensed fauna catchers prior to any clearing activities being undertaken. If roosting sites for the South-eastern Long-eared Bat are identified within the clearance area or within close proximity to it, these sites shall be clearly marked out as a ‘no go’ zone with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative. An appropriate buffer zone as determined by the licensed fauna spotter catcher shall also be applied and marked out around the roost site. These areas shall be recorded by GPS and mapped in the Environmental Constraints Mapping as temporary ‘no go’ zones until management actions are finalised; Clearing activities shall carry on around the outside of any defined buffer zone until appropriate actions to manage the roost site have been determined in conjunction with the licensed fauna spotter catcher. A monitoring programme to determine potential construction impacts to the roost shall be implemented during the construction period as per the monitoring section of this SSMP; All possible measures shall be taken to avoid disturbing any roost site including the reduction of the clearance area or relocation of any associated site infrastructure. If any previously unidentified high value roost areas such as caves are discovered during a pre-clearance survey, construction activities shall cease at this location and alternative construction techniques that will not compromise the stability of sandstone ridges containing the caves/roosts shall be investigated; If it is determined that an active roost cannot be avoided actions will be put in place as identified in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNGBG00-ENV-RPT-000004). This will include ensuring a licensed and experienced fauna spotter catcher who is in possession of appropriate permits for fauna relocation is onsite during all clearing activities and that any injured bats are transported to an appropriate veterinarian or wildlife carer immediately; In areas where South-eastern Long-eared Bat are identified and breeding sites are removed as part of clearing activities, habitat creation activities shall be undertaken, including the installation of artificial roost sites in appropriate locations outside the clearing area as determined by the licensed fauna spotter catcher; All recorded sightings of South-eastern Long-eared Bat, the locations of any breeding sites and any relocations which may be required will be reported to the relevant authority as part of the Project reporting; 324 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where barbed wire fencing is absolutely necessary, QGC will investigate the use of the following design: - electrical fence ribbon should be co-located with the top strand of barbed wire, or - plastic bunting (or warning tags) should be attached to the top strand of barbed wire. Where the species has been identified in proximity to the Gas Field infrastructure, temporary lighting shall be directed away from light-sensitive areas such as nesting areas and light shades and low lighting must be applied to construction and operational areas where these are located adjacent to remnant vegetation and other environmentally sensitive areas; Vehicle activities should be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the non-compliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery In areas where South-eastern Long-eared Bat are identified and breeding sites are removed as part of clearing activities, habitat creation activities shall be undertaken, including the installation of artificial roost sites in appropriate locations outside the clearing area as determined by the licensed fauna spotter catcher. Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of the South-eastern Long-eared Bat or their roost sites. Avoidance of roost sites where possible. Successful establishment of artificial roost sites where appropriate. Monitoring If a South-eastern Long-eared Bat roost is identified and located within or in close proximity to the clearance area, a monitoring programme to capture any potential disturbance impacts arising from construction activities will be developed in accordance with the Survey Guidelines for Australia’s threatened Bats. The monitoring programme shall continue for the duration during which any construction related activities are being carried out which may have a potential impact on the roost site. Any installed artificial roost sites will be monitored yearly for successful occupation by the bats. An additional monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once an impact to the South-eastern Long-eared Bat is identified and quantified. 325 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP. References Atlas of Living Australia (2015), Available from http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Nyctophilus+corbeni, Accessed 13 January 2015. Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) (2013) Wildlife Online Extract. The Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection, Brisbane. Available: http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/wildlife-online/index.html, Accessed December 2013. Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts (DEWHA) (2010). Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened bats, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Department of the Environment (2015). Nyctophilus corbeni in Species Profile and Threats Database, DoE, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 5 January 2015. Dominelli, S. (2000). Distribution, roost requirements and foraging behaviour of the Greater Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus timoriensis) and the Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus) in the Bookmark Biosphere Reserve. Unpublished report. Unpublished report to the Bookmark Biosphere Trust, South Australia. Duncan, A, Baker, G.B. and Montgomery, N. (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Environment Australia. Ellis, M., Lumsden, L. Schulz, M. Reardon, T. Richards G. and Hoye, G. (1999). Eastern Long-eared Bat. Pp. 42-43. In: Duncan, A., G.B. Baker, and N. Montgomery. (Eds.). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Canberra: Environment Australia. Koehler, S. (2006). New record of a Greater Long-eared Bat in Victoria. Australasian Bat Society Newsletter 26: 43-44. Law, B. and Anderson, J. (1999). A survey for the Southern Myotis Myotis macropus (Vespertilionidae) and other bat species in River Red Gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis forests of the Murray River, New South Wales. Australian Zoologist 31:166-174. Lumsden, L.F. (1994). The distribution, habitat and conservation status of the Greater Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis in Victoria. Victorian Naturalist 111: 4-9. Lumsden, L. and Bennett A. (2000). Bats in rural landscapes: a significant but largely unknown faunal component. T. Barlow and R. Thorburn, eds. Bushcare Grassy Landscapes Conference. Page(s) 42-50. Canberra: Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group. McFarland, D., Venz, M. and Reis, T. (1999). Priority Species Summaries. An attachment to the report: Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna of the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion: Assessment and Analysis for Conservation Planning. Brisbane: Biodiversity Planning, Environmental Protection Agency. Parnaby, H. (1995). Greater Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis. Chatswood, NSW: Reed Books. Schulz, M. and Lumsden, L. (2010). (Draft) National Recovery Plan for the South-eastern Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus corbeni. Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment. Turbill, C. and Ellis, M. (2006). Distribution and abundance of the south eastern form of the Greater Longeared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis. Australian Mammalogy 28:1-7. Van Dyck, S. and Strahan, R. (2008). The Mammals of Australia, Third Edition. Page(s) 880. Sydney: Reed New Holland. 326 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö 26°S TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö oo rr tt hh ee rr nn ee rr rr ii tt oo rr yy Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC Cooper Basin H Ö Ö ROMA H Ö Ö CHINCHILLA AR Surat Basin DT oo uu tt hh A A uu ss tt rr aa ll ii aa Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Y Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 51 - South-eastern Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus corbeni ± 0 10 20 40 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 Ö Ö SCALE: 1:650,000 (A3) Secondary Road Nyctophilus corbeni Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_49 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6.3 PTEROPUS POLICEPHALUS (GREY-HEADED FLYING-FOX) Significant Species Management Plan 52 Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying-fox) Pteropus policephalus (Source: Bruce Thomson) Pteropus poliocephalus Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable NC Act Conservation Status Least Concern Known Distribution The Grey-headed Flying-fox is Australia’s only endemic flying-fox in a coastal belt form south-eastern Queensland to Melbourne, Victoria. Regular or frequently used camps have been located between Rockhampton in Queensland south to around Mallacoota in East Gippsland, Victoria. Less consistent records extend the south range of the species to Warrnambool, Victoria. They are generally recorded between the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range. Recent surveys have located camps of this species as far north as the Mackay region, with several records further south between Gladstone and Bundaberg, Queensland. Despite one regular camp in Melbourne, the southern range of the species appears to have considerably retracted (Tidemann 1998). Potential habitat has been mapped for this species using RE associations. The map is contained at the end of this individual SMP. Occurrence within Gas Field The Grey-headed Flying-fox has been found in the Gas Field tenement of Lauren Field, south of Miles. No roost sites have been observed in the Gas Field therefore the species was likely to be foraging on the nectar and pollen from the flowers of Eucalypts (genera Eucalyptus, Corymbia and Angophora) species in the area. 328 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Description and Relevant Characteristics The Grey-headed Flying-fox is one of the largest bats in the world ranging in weight from 600g to 1000g and having a length between 230mm and 289mm in head and body. Its appearance can be distinguished by: The collar is orange/brown fully encircling its neck; The leg fur extends to the ankle; The head is covered by light grey fur; and The belly fur is grey, often with flecks of white and ginger. Biology and Reproduction The Grey-headed Flying-fox has a diverse native diet, which it supplements with introduced plants (Eby 1995, 1998; Parry-Jones and Augee 1991; Hall and Richards 2000). Nectar and pollen from the flowers of Eucalypts (genera Eucalyptus, Corymbia and Angophora), Melaleucas and Banksias are the primary food for the species (Duncan et al. 1999). Most eucalypts have regular seasonal flowering schedules but do not flower every year and there are a few areas within the range of the Grey-headed Flying-fox where nectar is available continuously (House 1997; Wilson and Bennett 1999; Law et al. 2000). The species has no adaptations for withstanding food shortages and migrates in response to changes in the amount and location of flowering (Eby 1991; Spencer et al. 1991; Eby and Lunney 2002). The species is responsible for the seed dispersal of many rainforest trees, such as native figs and palms (Tidemann 1998). The Grey-headed Flying-fox will also feed on cultivated fruits like other species of Australian flying-fox (Hall and Richards 2000). The species commutes daily to foraging areas, usually within 15 km of the day roost site (Tidemann 1998). Grey-headed Flying-foxes are capable of nightly flights of up to 50 km from their roost to feeding areas that shift as food resources change (Eby unpubl. cited in Eby 1991). In suitable winds Greyheaded Flying-foxes can cruise at speeds in excess of 35km per hour for extended periods (Tidemann 1998). At most times of the year there is a complete exodus from the colony site at dusk. The exception to this rule occurs in spring and early summer when juveniles are left in the nursery colony sites at night. During this time small groups of adult Grey-headed Flying-foxes leave the site more than an hour after the majority of bats fly out. In nursery colonies Grey-headed Flying-foxes fly in and out of the site throughout the night (Parry-Jones and Augee 1992). Sexual maturity is generally not reached by females until three years of age (Martin 2000). However, research in Martin’s breeding colony observed pregnancy occurring in some females whilst in their second year (McIlwee and Martin 2002). Mating occurs in early autumn, after which time the larger camps begin to break up, reforming in late spring/early summer, as food resources become more abundant (Hall and Richards 2000). Males and females segregate in October at the time females usually give birth. Lactation also usually begins in October and continues for three to four months or sometimes longer (Nelson 1965b). Following six months of gestation, females bear a single young each year. Twins are rare (Martin 2000). During birthing, the female hangs by the feet and young are born headfirst and are positioned so that wings are folded around the head (Nelson 1965b; Martin et al. 1987). For a period of four to five weeks after giving birth, the mother carries her single young with her to feeding sites. Young are carried on the ventral surface of their foraging mothers for four to five weeks after birth (Tidemann 1998). Young are sometimes abandoned by their mothers, particularly when food is short in early summer (Tidemann 1998). Once the young are completely furred, they are left in maternal camps and continue to be nursed until they are independent after around 12 weeks (Hall and Richards 2000). During this nursery phase, males re-join the females and attempt to court females with pair bonds being formed (Hall and Richards 2000). 329 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans In the wild, most adult female Grey-headed Flying-foxes conceive each year (Nelson 1965b; Towers and Martin 1985, 1995). However, females are prone to abort (Dukelow et al. 1990) in response to environmental stress and mass abortions and premature births are known to occur in the wild (Hall et al. 1991). A natural mortality rate in the wild is believed to be between 15-20 years (Mcllwee and Martin 2002). Heat-related deaths in Australian flying-foxes have been documented repeatedly over the years. In 2004, a heatwave in north-east NSW reaching 45 °C resulted in the death of an estimated 5000-7000 individuals. The study, conducted in the Bellingen Island (NSW) roost, reported a significant impact on young bats less than 4 months old, as well as a decline in the percentage of adult females (Eby et al. 2004). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat The Grey-headed Flying-fox requires foraging resources and roosting sites. It is a canopy-feeding frugivore and nectarivore, which utilises vegetation communities including rainforests, open forests, closed and open woodlands, Melaleuca swamps and Banksia woodlands. It also feeds in introduced tree species in urban areas and in commercial fruit crops. The primary food source is blossom from Eucalyptus and related genera but in some areas it also utilises a wide range of rainforest fruits (Eby 1998). None of the vegetation communities used by the Grey-headed Flying-fox produce continuous foraging resources throughout the year, and the species has adopted complex migration traits in response to ephemeral and patchy food resources (Nelson 1965a; Spencer et al. 1991; Parry-Jones and Augee 1992; Eby 1996, 1998; Duncan et al. 1999). The Grey-headed Flying-fox roosts in aggregations of various sizes on exposed branches, commonly of emergent trees. Roost sites are typically located near water, such as lakes, rivers or the coast (van der Ree et al. 2005). Roost vegetation includes rainforest patches, stands of Melaleuca, mangroves and riparian vegetation (Ratcliffe 1931; Nelson 1965a), but colonies also use highly modified vegetation in urban and suburban areas (Tidemann & Vardon 1997; Birt et al. 1998; van der Ree et al. 2005). The species can maintain fidelity to roost sites for extended periods (Lunney and Moon 1997), although new sites have been colonised in recent times (Tidemann and Vardon 1997). REs likely to provide potential habitat include; 11.3.3, 11.3.4, 11.3.18, 11.3.19, 11.3.25, 11.3.26, 11.3.27b and 11.3.39. Short descriptions of these REs are presented in the table below. Table 2 – Regional Ecosystems known to support Pteropus poliocephalus RE Code Short Description 11.3.3 Eucalyptus coolabah woodland on alluvial plains 11.3.4 Eucalyptus tereticornis and/or Eucalyptus spp. tall woodland on alluvial plains 11.3.18 Eucalyptus populnea, Callitris glaucophylla, Allocasuarina luehmannii shrubby woodland on alluvium 11.3.19 Callitris glaucophylla, Corymbia spp. and/or Eucalyptus melanophloia woodland on Cainozoic alluvial plains 11.3.25 Eucalyptus tereticornis or E. camaldulensis woodland fringing drainage lines 11.3.26 Eucalyptus moluccana or E. microcarpa woodland to open forest on margins of alluvial plains 11.3.27b Freshwater wetlands 11.3.39 Eucalyptus melanophloia +/- E. chloroclada woodland on undulating plains and valleys with sandy soils 330 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans General Threats No critical habitat has been listed for the Grey-headed Flying-fox under the EPBC Act, and it is not known to associate with nor is dependent on any other listed threatened species (DoE 2015). General Threats: Loss of foraging and roosting habitat throughout its distribution; Direct killing of animals in orchards; Harassment and destruction of roosts; Competition with the Black Flying-fox (P. alecto) (and perhaps the Little Red Flying-fox (P. scapulatus)) may be a threat to the Grey-headed Flying-fox; Fragmentation of habitat; Accumulation of lead and other pollutants in the environment; Electrocution on power lines; and Entanglement in netting and on barbed-wire. Potential Project Threats Development Potential clearing of foraging habitat; Getting caught and injured on barbed wire fences; Disturbance to foraging by light pollution; Disturbance to foraging by noise pollution; and Dust coating blossom (food resource). Operation Getting caught and injured on barbed wire fences; Disturbance to foraging by light pollution; Disturbance to foraging by noise pollution; Dust coating blossom (food resource); and Project impacts to groundwater are unlikely to impact this species. Decommissioning Distance to foraging by light pollution; Disturbance to foraging by noise pollution; and Dust coating blossom (food resource). Management Strategies The Grey-headed Flying-fox has been observed in the Gas Field however no roost sites have been identified. The primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and roosting sites. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the species be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. 331 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Should a Grey-headed Flying-fox breeding place (i.e. roost in trees) be identified and it is determined that disturbance or tampering to the breeding site is unavoidable the management strategy will be to follow the procedures outlined in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). Offset sites will potentially be established for unavoidable impacts to EPBC listed fauna species habitat. Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on Grey-headed Flying-fox are: Prior to clearing activities the area should be traversed by qualified spotter catchers searching for active roost areas or camps; The EPBC Survey Guidelines for Australia’s Threatened Bats (2010) recommend the following survey methods be used for surveys: - Review of databases and available literature; - Daytime field surveys of suitable habitats for camp/roost sites; - Surveys of vegetation communities and food plants; and - Night time surveys. Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas will be clearly marked out and any occurrences of this species which may be located on the periphery of the construction areas or in other locations where clearing can be avoided or minimised will be identified as “no go” zones. Such areas will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; If an active roosting site for the Grey-headed Flying-fox is identified within the clearance area or within close proximity to it, these sites shall be clearly marked out as a ‘no go’ zone with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; A 100 m buffer will be identified around any roost of the Grey-headed Flying-fox. Any works required within the 100m buffer will require assessment and advice from a qualified ecologist; The buffer shall be applied and marked out around the roost site. These areas shall be recorded by GPS and mapped in the Environmental Constraints Mapping as temporary ‘no go’ zones until management actions are finalised; Clearing activities shall carry on around the outside of any defined buffer zone until appropriate actions to manage the roost site have been determined in conjunction with the licensed fauna spotter catcher. A monitoring programme to determine potential construction impacts to the roost shall be implemented during the construction period as per the monitoring section of this SSMP; As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including Grey-headed Flying-fox and any other likely significant flora and fauna species and populations they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the species and particularly any roosts in the area and their habitat; All possible measures shall be taken to avoid disturbing any roost site including the reduction of the clearance area or relocation of any associated site infrastructure. If any previously unidentified high value roost areas such as caves are discovered during a pre clear and grade walk, construction activities shall cease at this location and alternative construction techniques that will not compromise the stability of sandstone ridges containing the caves/roosts shall be investigated; If it is determined that an active roost cannot be avoided actions will be put in place as identified in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). This will include ensuring a licensed and experienced fauna spotter catcher who is in possession of appropriate permits for fauna relocation is onsite during all clearing activities and that any injured bats are transported to an appropriate veterinarian or wildlife 332 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans carer immediately; In areas where Grey-headed Flying-fox are identified and breeding sites are removed as part of clearing activities, habitat creation activities shall be undertaken, including the installation of artificial roost sites in appropriate locations outside the clearing area as determined by the licensed fauna spotter catcher; Clearing is to be to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas of their own volition. Sequential clearing coupled with the slow nature of the clearing activities will take into account any variation in landscape features such as rocky escarpments, riparian habitats and steep sloping areas and provide fauna with sufficient time to exit the disturbance area; All clearing activities will be carried out in a manner that will not result in the isolation of habitat, habitat features or any noted fauna persisting within the construction areas. Sequential clearing activities will provide safe escape routes for fauna and allow sufficient time for fauna spotter catchers to identify any potential fauna habitat, habitat features or fauna for relocation prior to clearing and identify this for consideration by the clearing team. Decisions will then be made jointly between the spotter catchers and construction contractor as to the most appropriate clearing method based on each situation and the surrounding landscape/geological features; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where barbed wire fencing is absolutely necessary, QGC will investigate the use of the following design: - electrical fence ribbon should be co-located with the top strand of barbed wire, or - plastic bunting (or warning tags) should be attached to the top strand of barbed wire. Vertebrate pests will be managed in accordance with the Pest Management Plan for the Project; Should roosting colonies be identified, adjacent to infrastructure requiring light, light shield will be fitted to prevent light spillage into colonies. Light spillage has potential to impact nursery sites leading to the death of juvenile bats; Excessively hot or frequent fires are likely to have a negative impact on remnant vegetation and possibly reduce flowering of Eucalypts and Melaleuca which are a primary food resource. The Site Specific Fire Management Plan must be implemented to ensure that the Project activities do not contribute in any way, to increased fire frequencies or severity. Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; Infrastructure, particularly electrical, should be designed and constructed in accordance with APLIC Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power-Lines: The State of the Art in 2005 in order to minimise the risk of collision to flying wildlife (i.e. adequate clearance between energised and/or grounded parts); Dust suppression will be managed in accordance with the Operation Environmental Management Plan for the Project, reducing potential for blossom smothering; Maintain contact details for qualified veterinarian staff that can assess, treat or euthanize (as necessary) any large native vertebrates; Vehicle activities will be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces wherever possible to reduce the possibility of wildfire, spread of weeds and any potential impact on significant or other species; Implementation of the Pipeline Weed Management Action Plan will be undertaken to minimise the impact of weeds on survival and reproduction of this species; Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this 333 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties to be followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the noncompliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative; and Following the completion of clearing, the actual area of disturbance to this species will be recorded in a register of clearance areas as per the method outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP to enable calculation of disturbance areas and reconciliation against the QCLNG Offset Program. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of the Grey-headed Flying-fox. Monitoring If a Grey-headed Flying-fox roost is identified and located within or in close proximity to the clearance area, a monitoring programme to capture any potential disturbance impacts arising from construction activities will be developed in accordance with the Survey Guidelines for Australia’s threatened Bats. The monitoring programme shall continue for the duration during which any construction related activities are being carried out which may have a potential impact on the roost site. An additional monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once an impact to the Grey-headed Flying-fox is identified and quantified. Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP. References Atlas of Living Australia (2015), Available from http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Pteropus+poliocephalus#, Accessed 13 January 2015. Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015). Pteropus poliocephalus in Species Profile and Threats Database, DoE, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 5 January 2015. Duncan, A., Baker, G.B. and Montomery, N. (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. [Online]. Environment Australia, Canberra: Environment Australia. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/action/bats/index.htm Eby, P. (1991). Seasonal Movements of Grey-headed Flying-foxes, Pteropus poliocephalus (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae), from Two Maternity Camps in Northern New South Wales, Wildlife Research 18: 547559. Eby, P. (1995). The biology and management of flying foxes in NSW. In: Species Management Report, No 18. Hurstville, NSW Parks and Wildlife Service. Eby, P. (1998). An analysis of diet specialization in frugivore Pteropus poliocephalus in Australian subtropical rainforest. Australian Journal of Ecology, 23:443-456. Eby, P. and Lunney, D. (2002). Managing the Grey-headed Flying-Fox as a threatened species in NSW. In: Proceedings of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman, Sydney: Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales. Hall, L. and Richards, G. (2000). Flying Foxes: Fruit and Blossom of Australia. Sydney: University of 334 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans New South Wales Press. Hando, R. and Hando, V. (1997). Going bush with Chinchilla Nats. Second Edition. Chinchilla Field Naturalist’s Club Inc, Chinchilla. House, S.M. (1997), Reproductive Biology of Eucalypts. In: Williams, J and Woniarski, J (eds) Eucalypt ecology: individuals to ecosystems. Cambridge University Press. Law, C., Mackowski, L., Schoer, L. and Tweedie, T. (2000). Flowering phenology of myrtaceous trees and relation to climatic, environmental and disturbance variables in northern New South Wales. Australian Ecology, 25:160-178. McFarland, D., Venz, M. and Reis, T. (1999). ‘Priority species summaries. An attachment to the report: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion: Assessment and analysis for conservation planning.’ Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane. Nelson, J.E., (1965a). Movements of Australian flying-foxes (Pteropodidae: Megachiroptera). Australian Journal of Zoology 13: 53–73. Nelson, J. E. W. (1965b). Behaviour of Australian Pteropodidae (Megachiroptera). Animal Behaviour 13(4): 544–557. Parry-Jones, K. and Augee, M.L. (1991). Food Selection by Grey-headed Flying Foxes (Pteropus poliocephalus) Occupying a Summer Colony Site near Gosford, New South Wales. In: Wildlife Research 18: 111-124. Spencer, H.J., Palmer, C. and Parry-Jones, K. (1991). Movements of fruit-bats in eastern Australia, determined by using radio-tracking. Wildlife Research 18: 463-468. Tidemann, C.R. (1998). Grey-headed Flying-Fox, Pteropus poliocephalus, Temminck, 1824. In: Strahan, R (ed) The Mammals of Australia. Frenchs Forest, New Holland Publishers Pty Ltd. Whitlock, F.L. (1919). Notes on birds breeding in Dampier Archipelago, NW coast of Australia. Emu (18) 240-253. Wilson, J. and Bennett, A. (1999). Patchiness of a floral resource: flowering of Red Ironbark Eucalyptus tricarpa in a box and ironbark forest. Victorian Naturalist 116: 48-53. 335 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN Ö Ö LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC H H AR Cooper Basin ROMA Ö Ö CHINCHILLA DT Surat Basin Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Y Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 52 - GREY- HEADED FLYING FOX Pteropus policephalus ± 0 10 20 40 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 Ö Ö SCALE: 1:650,000 (A3) Secondary Road Pteropus poliocephalus Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_50 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6.4 DASYURUS HALLUCATUS (NORTHERN QUOLL) Significant Species Management Plan 53 Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll) Dasyurus hallucatus (Photo: Bruce Thomson) Dasyurus hallucatus Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Endangered NC Act Conservation Status Least Concern Biology and Reproduction Northern Quolls are mainly nocturnal and are opportunistic omnivores, consuming various fruits as well as insects and small mammals. Males are larger than females and occupy home ranges of approximately 100ha, overlapping several smaller home ranges occupied by females. They breed once per year and the litter size average is seven. Males usually die at one year of age and females live for one to two years. In flat, open grasslands, all males die after mating, but in rockier habitats, where the populations appear to be less stressed, they may live for up to two years (DSEWPaC 2005). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat Northern Quolls live in a range of habitats, but prefer rocky areas and eucalypt forests (DSEWPaC 2005). Daytime den sites provide shelter and protection from predators and weather. They include rocky outcrops, tree hollows, hollow logs, termite mounds, goanna burrows and human dwellings (Hill and Ward 2010). In the Project area, they may occur around the sandstone escarpments of Gurulmundi State Forest and occasional records are reported from elsewhere, such as the township of Dalby. It is unlikely that any significant populations occur in the Project Area where development activities are planned. Gurulmundi is included in the upstream CSG Fields, but no development is proposed for that area. General Threats Populations may have initially been impacted by the introduction and spread of the Cane Toad (Rhinella marina). General threats include: Loss or modification of habitat; 337 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Inappropriate fire regimes; Invasion of exotic grasses, such as Gamba Grass (Andropogon gayanus), which promote intensive dry season fires; and Predation by cats and foxes. Potential Project Threats Development Threats Clearing and disturbance of habitat; Facilitated spread and/or increased abundance of Cane Toads (constructing lots of water bodies); Altered fire regimes, and Degradation and fragmentation of critical habitat areas, which need to be relatively large and free from the degrading impacts of feral animals and fire. Operational Threats Altered fire regimes; Increased predation due to increased presence of feral species, particularly cats; Degradation of habitat by weed invasion from disturbed areas; Disturbance from light pollution; and Project impacts to groundwater are unlikely to impact this species. Decommissioning Threats Altered fire regimes; Increased predation due to increased presence of feral species, particularly cats; and Degradation of habitat by weed invasion from disturbed areas. Management Strategies As the Northern Quoll has not been identified as occurring within the Gas Field, the primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and breeding areas and to avoid injury or death in gathering line and trunkline trenches. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the species or their habitat be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. Should a Northern Quoll breeding place (i.e. their den) be identified and it is determined that disturbance or tampering to the breeding site is unavoidable the management strategy will be to follow the procedures outlined in the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004). Offset sites will potentially be established for unavoidable impacts to EPBC listed fauna species habitat. Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on Northern Quolls are: Following a desktop assessment, scouting surveys will be undertaken in order to identify if any suitable habitat (including microhabitat) will be impacted by the proposed clearing activities. If there is potential for suitable habitat to be adversely impacted, targeted surveys will be undertaken in order to confirm the presence/absence of species. The EPBC Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals (2011) recommend the following survey methods. These survey methodologies will be implemented where appropriate and practicable: - 338 Cage trapping surveys for areas up to 5ha in size. Trapping is best conducted between May and August; UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans - In remote locations where it is difficult to deploy large numbers of cage traps, Elliot trapping is a suitable alternative. Trapping should be concentrated in rocky denning habitat, with some consideration of non-rocky foraging and dispersal habitats; - Baiting of traps should be undertaken in accordance with the guideline, using preferably oats, sardines and/or peanut butter; and - Other techniques that could be implemented in remote locations include daytime searches in suitable habitat, use of sand traps, remote cameras, hair tubes and/or spotlight surveys. As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of the species and particularly any den site/s in the area; Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas including “no go” zones delineating identified Northern Quoll habitat areas or den/s identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; Pre-clearance survey to be undertaken by suitably qualified, experienced and licensed fauna catchers prior to any clearing activities being undertaken. Northern Quolls are nocturnal and therefore unlikely to be observed during the pre-clearance survey. Fauna catchers shall subject any likely habitat areas to mild disturbance to encourage the natural relocation of any resident Northern Quolls; Clearing to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas; If Northern Quolls are found prior to or during clearing activities, they shall be removed as appropriate from the clearing area to a suitable location by a licensed fauna spotter catcher in possession of appropriate permits for fauna relocation. Non breeding Quolls found occupying a den within the clearing area shall be relocated into suitable available hollows or nesting areas within adjacent vegetation as determined by the licensed fauna catcher; If prior to or during clearing activities an active breeding site and / or a den shelter (e.g. hollows, goanna burrows and rocky outcrops) is identified within or adjacent to the clearing area, the location will be clearly flagged and identified as a “no go” zone including a 100 m buffer around the den. Wherever possible, all measures including the relocation of site infrastructure or the reduction of the clearing area shall be taken to avoid disturbing the den; Actions in accordance with the Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species (QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004) will be followed, including that if tampering of a breeding place is required work will cease until a licensed fauna catcher with the appropriate fauna relocation permit is available to investigate the area and remove any Northern Quolls to suitable available hollows or nesting areas within adjacent vegetation. After which time the ‘no go’ zone will be removed and clearing work may continue; In areas where Northern Quolls are identified and breeding sites (dense understorey/logs) are removed as part of project activities, cleared materials will be stored and relocated or replaced after construction. Key areas will be rehabilitated with shrubs and grasses as appropriate in order to restore habitat micro features; Any injured fauna shall be transported to a veterinarian or recognised wildlife carer immediately for treatment; To avoid and minimise injury to Northern Quolls in gathering line and trunkline trenches, in areas where threatened fauna species susceptible to be caught in trenches are likely to occur, fauna spotter catchers must inspect and remove any fauna from gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall inspect trenches at least once daily; Additional measures in relation to the trenches and preventing fauna entrapment are detailed in the Site Based Environmental Management Plan (SBEMP). They include providing exit ramps for fauna and 339 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans shelter such as hessian sacks soaked in water; Prior to backfilling of the trench site personnel will check the open trench for trapped fauna and where required a fauna spotter catcher will be called to move any fauna to a safe location away from the trench; All recorded sightings of Northern Quolls, the locations of any breeding sites and any relocations which may be required will be reported to the relevant authority as part of the Project reporting; Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; In areas where mulching of cleared vegetation for distribution during rehabilitation may not be undertaken, vegetation shall be stick raked into piles to provide fauna habitat; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where the species has been identified in proximity to the Gas Field infrastructure, temporary lighting shall be directed away from light-sensitive areas such as nesting areas and light shades and low lighting must be applied to construction and operational areas where these are located adjacent to remnant vegetation and other environmentally sensitive areas; Vehicle activities should be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the non-compliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Control of pest animals, including feral cats will be undertaken across the Gas Field Project area in accordance with the Weed and Pest Management Plan. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of the Northern Quoll or their dens. Surveys for this species are carried out in accordance with the DoE Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals (2011). Avoidance of dens where possible. Monitoring An appropriate monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site where applicable, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once any impact to the Northern Quoll is identified. In areas where the Northern Quoll is likely to be present, fauna spotter catchers must monitor gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall monitor trenches at least once daily. If weed pest or fire management regimes are found to be ineffective, responsive management strategies 340 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans will be employed, such as increasing frequency of pest management activities. Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP. References Atlas of Living Australia (2015), Available from http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Dasyurus+hallucatus, Accessed 13 January 2015. Braithwaite, R. W. & R.J. Begg (1995). Northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus Gould, 1842. In: Strahan, R., ed. The Mammals of Australia: National Photographic Index of Australian Wildlife. Page(s) 65-66. Sydney: Reed Books. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC) (2005). Threatened Species Day Fact Sheet, Quolls of Australia, Accessed online at http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/tsday08-quoll.pdf. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC) (2011). Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Hill B.M. and Ward S.J. (2010). National Recovery Plan for the Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. Department of Natural Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport, Darwin. Oakwood, M. (2008).Northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. In: Van Dyck, S. and R. Strahan, eds. The Mammals of Australia (3rd ed). Page(s) 57-59. Sydney, NSW: Reed New Holland. 341 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd Ö Ö MACKAY 26°S CLERMONT Ö Ö Bowen Basin WANDOAN Ö Ö LE Ö Ö GLADSTONE IC H H AR Cooper Basin ROMA Ö Ö DT Surat Basin CHINCHILLA Ö Ö BRISBANE HI GH WA N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss Y Ö W A R REGO HIGHWA Y Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RRE GO HIG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A CO ND AM I NE ROA D 27°S 27°S Ö Ö TARA RDT HHA L EI C W HIG H AY Ö Ö MO O E NI HI GH AY W 150°E 151°E PLAN 53 - NORTHERN QUOLL Dasyurus hallucatus ± 0 10 20 40 DATA SOURCE: Town/City Principal Road Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94 Ö Ö SCALE: 1:650,000 (A3) Secondary Road Dasyurus hallucatus Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq DATE: 14/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_51 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6.5 ONYCHOGALEA FRAENATA (BRIDLED NAILTAIL WALLABY) Significant Species Management Plan 54 Onychogalea fraenata (Bridled Nailtail Wallaby) Onychogalea fraenata (Photo: Lundie-Jenkins and Lowry 2005) Distribution Map (DoE, 2015) Onychogalea fraenata Distribution Map (DoE, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Endangered NC Act Conservation Status Endangered Back on Track Species Known Distribution The only known significant population (approx. 200 individuals) occurs in Taunton National Park (Scientific), located near the town of Dingo (Davidson 1991; Lundie-Jenkins 2001). The species has been re-introduced in a small section of Idalia National Park in Western Queensland (Pople et al. 2001), as well as in Avocet Nature Refuge near Emerald (Lundie-Jenkins & Lowry 2005). A population has also been re-introduced approximately 150 km south of Broken Hill NSW, at Scotia Sanctuary (Finlayson et al. 2008). The species is not known to occur within the Project area. Occurrence in the Gas Field None recorded to date within the Gas Field. Description and Relevant Characteristics The Bridled Nailtail Wallaby weighs up to 8 kg (males) and up to 1 m tall. The species has a distinctive marking of a white 'bridle' line running from the centre of the neck, along the shoulder to behind the forearm on each side of the body. A black stripe runs the length of the body, and white cheek stripes are present on both sides of the head (DSEWPaC 2013). On the tip of the tail the species has a horny ‘nail’ between 3 and 6mm in length and is partly concealed by hair (Evans 1992 cited in Lundie-Jenkins 2001). Known Distribution 343 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans The only known significant population (approx. 200 individuals) occurs in Taunton National Park (Scientific), located near the town of Dingo (Davidson 1991; Lundie-Jenkins 2001). The species has been re-introduced in a small section of Idalia National Park in Western Queensland (Pople et al. 2001), as well as in Avocet Nature Refuge near Emerald (Lundie-Jenkins & Lowry 2005). A population has also been re-introduced approximately 150 km south of Broken Hill NSW, at Scotia Sanctuary (Finlayson et al. 2008). The species is not known to occur within the Project area. Biology and Reproduction The Bridled Nailtail Wallaby is mostly nocturnal. During the day adults rest and shelter in hollow logs or under young Brigalow trees, with females leaving their young-at-foot in low, dense vegetation such as grass tussocks. Bridled Nailtail Wallabies are able to breed at any time, and can potentially have three young a year. The gestation period is around 24 days and young stay in the pouch for around 120 days. They mature at a young age (females at 136 days and males at 270 days); however, it may take up to 18 months before a male is large and strong enough to successfully mate (LundieJenkins 2001). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat The Bridled Nailtail Wallaby lives in semi-arid areas where dense acacia shrubland and grassy woodland meet (Tierney 1985). The species' core nocturnal feeding range centred on the ecotone between pasture and young Brigalow regrowth. When feeding in the open pasture, wallabies remain close to the edge of shelter habitat (Evans 1996). General Threats Threats faced by the Bridled Nailtail Wallaby include: Predation by foxes and feral cats, and some predation from wild dogs; Habitat loss, modification and degradation mainly through land clearing, drought, fire, and Buffel Grass; and Competition with introduced stock (mainly sheep) and rabbits. Potential Project Threats Development Threats Animals may be trapped if they fall into the gathering line and trunkline trenches during construction; Temporary loss of habitat during construction; The removal of vegetative cover may expose young animals to elevated predation; and Altered fire regimes. Operational Threats Altered fire regimes; and The removal of vegetative cover may expose young animals to elevated predation. Decommissioning Threats Altered fire regimes. Management Strategies As the Bridled Nailtail Wallaby has not been identified as occurring within the Gas Field, the primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and breeding areas and to avoid injury or death in gathering line and trunkline trenches. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following 344 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans section. Should the species or their habitat be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the QCLNG Gas Field SSMP will be applied. Offset sites will potentially be established for unavoidable impacts to EPBC listed fauna species habitat. Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on Bridled Nailtail Wallaby are: Following a desktop assessment, scouting surveys will be undertaken in order to identify if any suitable habitat (including microhabitat) will be impacted by the proposed clearing activities. If there is potential for suitable habitat to be adversely impacted, targeted surveys will be undertaken in order to confirm the presence/absence of species; The EPBC Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals (DSEWPaC 2011) recommend the following survey methods (for areas up to 5 ha). These survey methodologies will be implemented where appropriate and practicable: - Daytime searches for potentially suitable habitat resources, such as areas of open eucalypt forest, woodland and Brigalow scrub; - Daytime searches for signs of activity, including tracks, scats and scrapes; - Diurnal surveys for wallabies resting; - Baited camera traps may be of use in confirming the presence and identity of wallabies; and - Spotlight surveys conducted either on foot or from a vehicle. Pre-clearance survey to be undertaken by suitably qualified, experienced and licensed fauna catchers prior to any clearing activities being undertaken. Bridled Nailtail Wallaby is nocturnal and therefore unlikely to be observed during the pre-clearance survey. Fauna catchers shall subject any likely habitat areas to mild disturbance to encourage the natural relocation of any resident Bridled Nailtail Wallaby; As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter; Wherever practicable signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of the species; Prior to clearing, limits of clearing areas including “no go” zones delineating identified Bridled Nailtail Wallaby habitat identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative; Clearing to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas; If Bridled Nailtail Wallabies are found prior to or during clearing activities, they shall be removed as appropriate from the clearing area to a suitable location by a licensed fauna spotter catcher in possession of appropriate permits for fauna relocation; Any injured fauna shall be transported to a veterinarian or recognised wildlife carer immediately for treatment; To avoid and minimise injury to Bridled Nailtail Wallaby in gathering line and trunkline trenches, in areas where threatened fauna species susceptible to be caught in trenches are likely to occur, fauna spotter catchers must inspect and remove any fauna from gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall inspect 345 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans trenches at least once daily; Additional measures in relation to the trenches and preventing fauna entrapment are detailed in the Site Based Environmental Management Plan (SBEMP). They include providing exit ramps for fauna and shelter such as hessian sacks soaked in water; Prior to backfilling of the trench site personnel will check the open trench for trapped fauna and where required a fauna spotter catcher will be called to move any fauna to a safe location away from the trench; All recorded sightings of Bridled Nailtail Wallaby will be reported to the relevant authority as part of the Project reporting; Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; In areas where mulching of cleared vegetation for distribution during rehabilitation may not be undertaken, vegetation shall be stick raked into piles to provide fauna habitat; Where possible, when erecting any project related fencing the use of barb wire, particularly on the top strand, is to be avoided to avoid birds and other fauna getting caught; Where barbed wire fencing is absolutely necessary, QGC will consider the implementation of the following design: - electrical fence ribbon should be co-located with the top strand of barbed wire, or - plastic bunting (or warning tags) should be attached to the top strand of barbed wire Where the species has been identified in proximity to the Gas Field infrastructure, temporary lighting shall be directed away from light-sensitive areas such as nesting areas and light shades and low lighting must be applied to construction and operational areas where these are located adjacent to remnant vegetation and other environmentally sensitive areas; Vehicle activities should be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to protect remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor HSSE requirements, relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the noncompliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the Project. Further detail on rehabilitation is provided in the Gas Field RRRMP. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify the presence / absence of the Bridled Nailtail Wallaby. Monitoring An appropriate monitoring program, incorporating the monitoring of any offset site where applicable, will be established in conjunction with the relevant authority once an impact to the Bridled Nailtail Wallaby is identified and quantified. 346 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans In areas where the Bridled Nailtail Wallaby is likely to be present, fauna spotter catchers must monitor gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall monitor trenches at least once daily. Monitoring of rehabilitation areas will be undertaken as detailed in the Gas Field RRRMP. References Davidson, C. (1991). Recovery plan for the bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea frenata). ANPWS Endangered Species Program. Unpublished report to ANPWS. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC) (2011), Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015). Onychogalea fraenata in Species Profile and Threats Database, DoE, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 13 January 2015. Evans, M. (1996). Home ranges and movement schedules of sympatric bridled nailtail and blackstriped wallabies. Wildlife Research 23: 547-556. Finlayson, G.R., E.M. Vieira, D. Priddel, R. Wheeler, J. Bentley & C.R. Dickman (2008). Multi-scale patterns of habitat use by re-introduced mammals: A case study using medium-sized marsupials. Biological Conservation. 141 (1):320-331. Lundie-Jenkins, G. (2001). Recovery plan for the bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) 1997-2001. [Online]. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/b-nailtailedwallaby/index.html. Lundie-Jenkins, G. & J. Lowry (2005). Recovery plan for the bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata), 2005-2009. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. Pople, A.R., J. Lowry, G. Lundie-Jenkins, T.F. Clancy, H.I. McCallum, D.P. Sigg, D. Hoolihan & S. Hamilton (2001). Demography of bridled nailtail wallabies translocated to the edge of their former range from captive and wild stock. Biological Conservation. 102:285-299. Tierney, P.J. (1985). Habitat and ecology of the bridled nailtail wallaby with implications for management. M.Sc. Thesis. Queensland Institute of Technology. 347 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 7.6.6 PHASCOLARCTOS CINEREUS (KOALA) Significant Species Management Plan 55 Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) Phascolarctos cinereus (Photo: Gerry Pearce) Phascolarctos cinereus Distribution Map (DoE, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable (Listed April 2012) NC Act Conservation Status Areas other than South East Queensland Bioregion – Special Least Concern Animal South East Queensland Bioregion – Vulnerable (Listed March 2004) Known Distribution Koalas occur throughout Eastern Australia in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. In Queensland the highest concentrations are in South East Queensland, particularly within the local government areas of Sunshine Coast, Moreton Bay, Brisbane, Ipswich, Logan, Redland and Gold Coast. Lower densities occur throughout the rest of the state. Occurrence within Gas Field The Koala is known to occur throughout the Brigalow Belt Bioregion (North and South). Koala densities within the QCLNG Project area are considered typically low relative to coastal populations and generally range from 0.01 – 0.1 Koalas/ha (Melzer 2000 and Ellis 2002). Given that relatively few signs of Koala presence within the QCLNG project area have been observed, it is likely that Koala density is at the lower end of this range. The species is likely to be scattered throughout the QCLNG Project area and may occur in a range of vegetation communities typically associated with the presence of surface water, riparian and wetland ecosystems (Gordon 1988; Munks 1996; Sullivan 2003; Wu 2012). In particular, Koalas are more likely to inhabit fringing riparian regional ecosystems associated with watercourses and adjoining vegetation communities dominated by Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gum), Eucalyptus tereticornis (Forest Red Gum), Eucalyptus coolabah (Coolabah), Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar box), Eucalyptus thozetiana (Napunyah) and Eucalyptus melanophloia (Silver-leaved Ironbark) (Sullivan 2003; Wu 2012). Eucalyptus tereticornis The dietary preferences of the Koala can be considered to be quite broad ranging from Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Angophora and Lophostemon species however soil nutrients, water availability, temperature and elevation ultimately limit the specific dietary preferences of local populations to one or a few species (Moore & Foley 2000; Martin & Handasyde 1999; Sullivan 2003). Further, Sullivan (2004) and Wu (2012) suggests that E. camaldulensis, E. coolabah, E. populnea, E. thozetiana and E. melanophloia are the most important tree species within central and western districts of Queensland while E. tereticornis is considered an important tree fodder species within inland and coastal transition zones. On this basis, Koalas will be most likely associated with the following Regional Ecosystems (vegetation communities) within the QCLNG 348 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Gas Fields: RE 11.3.1, 11.3.2, 11.3.3, 11.3.4, 11.3.14, 11.3.17, 11.3.18, 11.3.19, 11.3.21, 11.3.25, 11.3.26, 11.3.27a, 11.3.27b, 11.3.27d, 11.3.27i, 11.3.39, 11.4.3, 11.4.3a, 11.4.3b, 11.4.7, 11.4.10, 11.4.12, 11.5.1, 11.5.1a,11.5.5, 11.5.13, 11.7.1, 11.7.2, 11.8.2a, 11.8.4, 11.8.5, 11.8.11 , 11.9.1, 11.9.2, 11.9.5a, 11.9.6, 11.9.7, 11.9.10, 11.9.14, 11.10.7, 11.10.9, 11.10.11, 11.11.4, 11.11.9, 11.11.10,11.11.10a, 11.11.15, 11.12.1, 11.12.2, 11.12.3, 11.12.6, and 11.12.17. Habitat for this species has been mapped using RE associations cognisant of vegetation community composition and structure at a broad vegetation group level (Table 1). Table 1 – Regional Ecosystems known to support Phascolarctos cinereus 11.3.1 Open forest dominated by Acacia harpophylla (Brigalow) and/or Casuarina cristata (Belah) (particularly in southern parts), with or without scattered emergent Eucalyptus spp. such as E. coolabah, E. largiflorens, E. populnea, E. orgadophila, and E. woollsiana. 11.3.2 Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar Box) woodland on alluvial plains. 11.3.3 Eucalyptus coolabah (Coolabah) woodland on alluvial plains 11.3.4 Eucalyptus tereticornis (Forest Red Gum) and/or Eucalyptus spp. tall woodland on alluvial plains. 11.3.14 Eucalyptus spp., Angophora spp., Callitris spp. woodland on alluvial plains. Sandy soils. 11.3.17 Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar Box) woodland with Acacia harpophylla (Brigalow) and/or Casuarina cristata (Belah) on alluvial plains. 11.3.18 Eucalyptus populnea, Callitris glaucophylla (Cypress), Allocasuarina luehmannii (Bull-oak) shrubby woodland on alluvium. 11.3.19 Callitris glaucophylla, Corymbia spp. and/or Eucalyptus melanophloia (Silver-leaved ironbark) open forest to woodland on Cainozoic alluvial plains 11.3.21 Dichanthium sericeum and/or Astrebla spp. grassland on alluvial plains. Cracking clay soils. Scattered trees and shrubs may occur including Eucalyptus coolabah, E. populnea, E. tereticornis or Acacia spp. 11.3.25 Eucalyptus tereticornis (Forest Red Gum) or E. camaldulensis (River Red Gum) woodland fringing drainage lines. 11.3.26 Eucalyptus moluccana or E. woollsiana +/- E. populnea +/- E. melanophloia tall open forest to woodland +/- Allocasuarina luehmannii low tree layer and a grassy ground layer. 11.3.27a A narrow fringing woodland commonly dominated by E. camaldulensis or E. coolabah but also a range of other tree species may be present. 11.3.27b Fringing woodland, commonly Eucalyptus camaldulensis or E. coolabah but also a wide range of other species including Eucalyptus platyphylla, E. tereticornis, Melaleuca spp., Acacia holosericea or other Acacia spp. Occurs on billabongs. 11.3.27d Palustrine wetland (e.g. vegetated swamp). Eucalyptus camaldulensis and/or E. tereticornis woodland. 11.3.27i Palustrine wetland (e.g. vegetated swamp). Eucalyptus camaldulensis or E. tereticornis woodland to open woodland with sedge land ground layer. 11.3.39 Eucalyptus melanophloia ± E. chloroclada open woodland on undulating plains and valleys with sandy soils 11.4.3 Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata shrubby open forest on Cainozoic clay plains. Eucalyptus spp. such as E. orgadophila, E. populnea, E. microcarpa, Eucalyptus woollsiana, E. cambageana and E. thozetiana (on shallower soils and upper slopes) may be scattered through the canopy or occur as emergents up to 22m high. 11.4.3a Palustrine wetland (e.g. vegetated swamp). Melaleuca bracteata woodland associated with Acacia harpophylla communities. May include scattered occurrences of other tree species such as Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. populnea, Acacia harpophylla and Casuarina cristata. In some instances E. tereticornis dominates with other species restricting to a narrow fringe. 11.4.3b Eucalyptus argophloia, Acacia harpophylla open forest. Associated trees may include Casuarina 349 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans cristata, Eucalyptus populnea or Eucalyptus microcarpa, with a shrub layer of Geijera parviflora. 11.4.7 Eucalyptus populnea with Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata open forest to woodland on Cainozoic clay plains 11.4.10 Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar Box) or E. pilligaensis (Gum-topped Box), Acacia harpophylla (Brigalow), Casuarina cristata (Belah) open forest to woodland on margins of Cainozoic clay plains. 11.4.12 Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar Box) woodland on Cainozoic clay plains. 11.5.1 Eucalyptus crebra and/or E. populnea, Callitris glaucophylla, Angophora leiocarpa, Allocasuarina luehmannii woodland on Cainozoic sand plains and/or remnant surfaces. 11.5.1a Eucalyptus populnea woodland with Allocasuarina luehmannii low tree layer. 11.5.5 Eucalyptus melanophloia, Callitris glaucophylla woodland on Cainozoic sand plains/remnant surfaces. Deep red sands. 11.5.13 Eucalyptus populnea (Poplar Box) +/- Acacia aneura (Mulga) +/- E. melanophloia (Silver-leaf Ironbark) woodland on Cainozoic sand plains/remnant surfaces. 11.7.1 Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata and Eucalyptus thozetiana or E. microcarpa woodland on lower scarp slopes on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust 11.7.2 Acacia spp. woodland on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust. Scarp retreat zone. Emergent eucalypt species such as Eucalyptus thozetiana, E. crebra, E. decorticans and E. exserta may be present. 11.8.2a Eucalyptus tereticornis and E. melliodora occurring on low hills. 11.8.4 Eucalyptus melanophloia open woodland on Cainozoic igneous rocks. 11.8.5 Eucalyptus orgadophila grassy open woodland. Eucalyptus orgadophila predominates and forms a distinct but discontinuous canopy sometimes with other sub-dominant species such as Corymbia erythrophloia, E. melanophloia and occasionally E. crebra. 11.8.11 Grassland dominated by Dichanthium sericeum, Aristida spp., Astrebla spp. and Panicum decompositum with or without trees such as Eucalyptus orgadophila, E. melanophloia, Corymbia erythrophloia and Acacia salicina, (height 11+/-3 m). 11.9.1 Acacia harpophylla (Brigalow) / Eucalyptus cambageana (Dawson Gum) open forest to woodland on fine-grained sedimentary rocks. 11.9.2 Eucalyptus melanophloia +/- E. orgadophila woodland on fine-grained sedimentary rocks. 11.9.5a Acacia harpophylla predominates and forms a fairly continuous canopy (10-18m high). Other tree species such as Eucalyptus populnea, Casuarina cristata, Cadellia pentastylis and Brachychiton spp. may also be present in some areas and form part of the canopy or emerge above it. 11.9.6 Open forest dominated by Acacia melvillei with or without Acacia harpophylla, and with or without Eucalyptus populnea. 11.9.7 Eucalyptus populnea, Eremophila mitchellii shrubby woodland on fine-grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.10 Eucalyptus populnea open forest with a secondary tree layer of Acacia harpophylla and sometimes Casuarina cristata on fine-grained sedimentary rocks 11.9.14 Lysiphyllum carronii, Atalaya hemiglauca ± Eucalyptus melanophloia ± Acacia excelsa open woodland. 11.10.7 Eucalyptus crebra and/or E. melanophloia +/- E. populnea shrubby woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks. Eucalyptus melanophloia and/or E. crebra predominate and form a distinct but open canopy. 11.10.9 Callitris glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks. E. populnea is commonly present and may be locally dominant particularly on lower slopes. 11.10.11 Eucalyptus populnea, E. melanophloia ± Callitris glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks 11.11.4 Eucalyptus crebra woodland +/- Corymbia citriodora +/- E. tereticornis +/- C. tessellaris +/Lophostemon suaveolens with Xanthorrhoea spp. and Macrozamia spp. often present in shrub layer. 11.11.9 Eucalyptus populnea or E. brownii woodland on deformed and metamorphosed sediments and interbedded volcanics 350 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans 11.11.10 Eucalyptus melanophloia woodland on deformed and metamorphosed sediments and interbedded volcanics 11.11.10a Eucalyptus moluccana woodland. Eucalyptus moluccana, E. tereticornis may be prominent components of the tree layer, particularly on lower slopes. 11.11.15 Eucalyptus crebra +/- Corymbia erythrophloia +/- E. populnea +/- E. melanophloia +/- C. tessellaris +/- C. clarksoniana woodland to open woodland often with a shrubby layer. 11.12.1 Eucalyptus crebra +/- Corymbia erythrophloia shrubby woodland. E. melanophloia is often present and may be locally dominant. 11.12.2 Eucalyptus melanophloia woodland on igneous rocks 11.12.3 Eucalyptus crebra, E. tereticornis, Angophora leiocarpa woodland on igneous rocks especially granite 11.12.6 Corymbia citriodora, Eucalyptus crebra, E. microcarpa/E. moluccana, Angophora leiocarpa and E. melanophloia open forest to woodland. Other tree species that may be present include E. tereticornis +/- C. tessellaris +/- C. clarksoniana and E. fibrosa. 11.12.17 Eucalyptus populnea woodland on igneous rocks. Colluvial lower slopes Description and Relevant Characteristics The Koala is of medium size with predominately grey coloured fur. It has large round ears, a stocky body, a very small tail and sharp claws. The species displays sexual dimorphism (males are generally larger than females). It is a marsupial with a backward facing pouch. While there is only one species of Koala, their appearance differs throughout their range and these adaptations are thought to be linked to regional characteristics, such as temperature. Generally, populations in the northern parts of the range are smaller and have lighter coloured fur than populations further south (DoE 2014, DOE 2015). Biology and Reproduction On average, Queensland Koalas weigh between 5 and 10 Kilograms, with males being larger than females. They have a lifespan of about 15 years in the wild. Koalas are solitary animals with their own home range, which is usually arranged in an overlapping matrix with those of other Koalas. The size of a home range may differ greatly depending on the quality of habitat, food sources available and the gender of the Koala (males generally have larger home ranges) (DoE 2014, DOE 2015). Typically home ranges for the koala within central Queensland tend to be relatively large, up to 135ha (Ellis 2002). Females breed from two years of age and give birth once per year, usually in January or December (although it may be earlier or later). Young emerge from the pouch at six months of age and are weaned at about twelve months. Chlamydial infections of the reproductive tract may cause infertility in female Koalas, affecting the reproductive potential of a population and stunting population growth. It is thought that the occurrence of these infections may increase due to environmental stresses (DEHP, 2008). Weaned Koalas often have a home range overlapping with their mothers until approximately two to four years of age at which point they disperse. This puts them at greater risk of vehicle strikes and dog attacks (DEHP, 2006). Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat Koalas live in ecosystems where the vegetation is dominated by eucalypt species, including a range of temperate, sub-tropical and tropical forests, woodlands and semi-arid communities. While the dietary preferences of the koala can be considered to be quite broad ranging from Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Angophora and Lophostemon species, soil nutrients, water availability, temperature and elevation ultimately limit the specific dietary preferences of local populations to one or a few species (Moore & Foley 2000; Martin & Handasyde 1999; Sullivan 2003). Wu (2012) concluded that within southwest Queensland, tree species composition in koala diet was strongly correlated with species foliar moisture content. Over all, studies found that leaf moisture was significantly higher with the presence of surface water, supported by Munks (1996) and Gordon (1988). Studies also suggest that water availability, rather than soil type was the primary factor identifying optimum koala habitat in arid and semi-arid woodlands (Munks 1996; Wu 2012). 351 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Furthermore, there is a strong correlation between water availability and eucalypt species and land form elements such as critically important riparian areas and adjacent woodlands (Wu 2012; Sullivan 2003). As such, the role of eucalypt dominated riparian and adjacent woodland areas in supporting koala populations in the western and central areas of Queensland is key to identifying habitat critical to the survival of the Koala (Wu 2012; Sullivan 2003). Within the Brigalow Belt Bioregion, Koalas are more likely to inhabit fringing riparian regional ecosystems associated with watercourses and adjoining woodlands and low ranges particularly dominated by E. camaldulensis, E. coolabah, E. populnea, E. thozetiana, E. melanophloia, and E. tereticornis (Wu 2012; Sullivan 2003). General Threats The main threats to the Koala within the QCLNG Project area are the loss of habitat and fragmentation due to land development and death or injury from vehicle strike (DoE2015). Mortality due to dog attacks and disease remains a significant threat for koala populations nationally however these threats generally affect more densely populated coastal areas such as south-east Queensland and northern New South Wales (DoE 2015). Other threats include: Direct fatality due to clearing activities and proximity to heavy machinery; Degradation of habitat from disturbance of feed trees; Reduced water availability; Dust (from traffic movement or project activities) has the potential to affect this species during construction periods and long periods without rain. This can lead to habitat degradation and respiratory issues; Altered fire regimes; Loss and fragmentation of habitat; Death or injury from vehicle strikes; Disease; Predation by dogs; and, Drought, extreme heat and fires Potential Project Threats Development Threats Loss and fragmentation of habitat from clearing activities; Habitat degradation resulting from clearing activities; Increased vehicles strikes due to increased road traffic; and Direct fatality due to clearing activities and proximity to heavy machinery. Operational Threats Vehicle strikes due to continued road use for project activities; Degradation of habitat by weed invasion from disturbed areas; and Altered fire regimes. Decommissioning Threats Vehicle strikes due to continued road use for project activities; Degradation of habitat by weed invasion from disturbed areas; and Altered fire regimes. Management Strategies The primary management strategy is to focus on the identification and avoidance of individuals and habitat and to avoid injury or death from vehicle strike and gathering and trunkline trenches. Various mitigation measures outlining how this will occur are detailed in the following section. Should the Koala or its habitat be identified, and impacts confirmed, the management strategies outlined in Section 4.1 of the SSMP will be applied. Mitigation Measures 352 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Mitigation measures to minimise Project impacts on Koalas are: 353 Following a desktop assessment, environmental surveys will be undertaken in order to identify if suitable Koala habitat will be impacted by the proposed clearing activities. If there is a potential for suitable habitat to be adversely impacted, targeted surveys will be undertaken in order to confirm the presence/absence of the species and to assess the extent and condition of suitable habitat, including food trees. The Department of the Environment (DoE 2014) provides guidance for gathering information concerning Koala habitat and occurrence including appropriate survey techniques and assessments in order to gather adequate information regarding: o Koala presence (potentially abundance or density); o Vegetation composition; o Habitat connectivity; o Existing threats to koalas; and o Recovery value. The DoE (2014) guideline does not prescribe survey effort standards for the Koala due to the high level of variation in environmental attributes across the Koala’s range, however, the following key principles should be considered: o Sampling is only considered appropriate for moderate or large study areas (several hectares or more); census (surveying the entire site) is relevant for small sites; o Direct (observation) or indirect surveys (signs: scats, scratches) must be undertaken to maximise the chance of detecting the species; o Spatial and temporal replication of survey effort is important so as not to misinterpret presence / absence data; o Methodologies must be developed to suit the environmental characteristics and known values of the site and the strengths and limitations of the applied methodologies should be acknowledged; o Do not extrapolate ecological findings derived from one community / bioregion to different communities or bioregions; and o Statistical and methodological rigor must be applied when drawing assumptions based on sampling results. Direct survey methods include (DoE 2014): o Strip transects; o Nocturnal spotlighting; o Call playback; o Remote sensor activated cameras; o Mark-resight / mark-recapture; o Radio or satellite collars. Indirect survey methods include (DoE 2014): o Detection of scratchings; o Spot Assessment Technique (SAT); o Regularised Grid Based Spot Assessment Technique (RGB-SAT); o Koala optimised Rapid Assessment Methodology (KRAM); o Faecal standing crop assessment. If Koalas are known to be present in the area, consideration must be given in the pegging of infrastructure, which includes: o Actual and potential clearing of Koala habitat must be avoided wherever possible; o If unavoidable, areas of lower habitat value or pre-existing disturbance must be preferentially chosen for infrastructure; o Areas with higher incidences of preferred food trees must be avoided; and o Fragmentation of habitat by linear infrastructure, such as roads, tracks and pipes, must be avoided by altering alignments to divert around Koala habitat, wherever possible and practicable. Pre-clearance survey to be undertaken by suitably qualified, experienced and licensed fauna catchers UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans prior to any clearing activities being undertaken. Fauna spotter must also be present during vegetation clearing activity at all time. Prior to clearing, limits of clearing delineating actual Koala habitat identified during pre-clearance surveys will be clearly marked out with appropriate flagging material and/or barricade webbing as determined by the site Environment Representative. Clearing is to be carried out in a sequential manner and in a way that directs escaping wildlife away from clearing and into adjacent native vegetation or natural areas of their own volition. Sequential clearing coupled with the slow nature of the clearing activities will take into account any variation in landscape features such as rocky escarpments, riparian habitats and steep sloping areas and provide fauna with sufficient time to exit the disturbance area. Decisions will then be made jointly between the spotter catchers and construction contractor as to the most appropriate clearing method based on each situation and the surrounding landscape/geological features; All clearing activities will be carried out in a manner that will avoid the isolation of habitat, habitat features or any noted fauna persisting within the construction areas. If a Koala is found prior to or during clearing activities, it must not be forcibly relocated. Any tree that has a Koala present, as well as any tree with its crown overlapping that tree, must not be removed and remain in place until the Koala vacates the tree of its own accord. Allow a buffer zone distance equal to the height of the tree or surrounding trees (whichever is tallest) or a buffer zone deemed appropriate by the spotter catcher. Clearly mark out this area to ensure contractors and personnel do not clear the trees until vacation by the Koala is confirmed. As part of routine pre-start meetings, work crews will be briefed on any known and potential environmental constraints occurring in that work location, including any likely significant flora and fauna species, populations and TEC they may encounter. Wherever practicable, signage should be erected to increase the general awareness amongst work crews of the presence of the species. Any injured fauna shall be transported to a veterinarian or recognised wildlife carer immediately for treatment. To avoid and minimise injury to Koalas in gathering line and trunkline trenches, in areas where Koalas may be susceptible to being caught in trenches, fauna spotter catchers must inspect and remove any fauna from gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall inspect trenches at least once daily. Prior to backfilling of the trench site personnel will check the open trench for trapped fauna and where required a fauna spotter catcher will be called to move any fauna to a safe location away from the trench. All recorded sightings of Koalas will be reported as part of the Project reporting. Dust suppression measures including road watering and reduced vehicle speeds will be implemented to minimise dust deposition in habitat areas; In areas where mulching of cleared vegetation for distribution during rehabilitation may not be undertaken; vegetation shall be stick raked into piles to provide fauna habitat; Vehicle activities should, where practicable, be restricted to roads, access tracks and hardened surfaces to reduce potential impacts to threatened species; Fire management measures shall take into account the need to manage remnant vegetation from frequent and hot fires. On site fire management practices shall be in accordance with Contractor; Relevant construction permits and method statements and appropriate dedicated firefighting equipment will be available at high risk construction sites to manage any fires that may start up and to avoid wildfires breaking out; and 354 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Should non-compliance with the mitigation measures or management strategies outlined in this SSMP occur on site, an investigation shall be undertaken by all responsible parties followed by corrective action procedures if required. Work in the area will cease at the time of the non-compliance if the incident is deemed significant by the site Environment Representative. Rehabilitation and Recovery Rehabilitation will be progressively undertaken during construction following backfilling and completion of infrastructure establishment. Natural regeneration of disturbed areas will be encouraged after construction activities and also at the conclusion of the project. Performance Measures Pre-clearance surveys are undertaken of each planned infrastructure area (also known as a pegging party) by a qualified ecologist to identify any potential or actual impacts on Koala populations and/or their habitat. Presence / absence surveys for this species should be carried out in accordance with the DoE Survey guidelines. Monitoring In areas where the Koala is likely to be present, fauna spotter catchers must monitor gathering line and trunkline trenches twice daily (early morning and late afternoon) every day while the trenches are open and have access to the site in all weather. In all other areas fauna spotter catchers shall monitor trenches at least once daily. Activities within the ‘No-Go’ Zone(s) limited to ecological survey/mitigation work. All other activities require approval from the QGC Management Team. Effectiveness of ‘No-Go’ Zone management to be recorded during the weekly inspections and reported in the weekly site environmental inspection checklist. If works are to occur within close proximity to a known sighting, work must be undertaken in accordance with the SSMP especially the following information: o Any incidents involving the Koala will be reported to DEHP within 24 hours followed by a written incident report within 10 business days of initial notification; o The person in charge (e.g. Field Environmental Officer) will be notified immediately of the occurrence of an incident involving the Koala; and, o All incident, non-compliances of approval conditions, species record, checklist, and any reports must be recorded as per described in the in this SSMP and according to approval requirements. The report must include actions taken to bring the matter into compliance. References Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015) Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Accessed 8 February 2015, available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Department of Environment (DoE) (2014) EPBC Act Referral Guidelines for the Vulnerable Koala. Department of Environment (DoE) (2013) Matters of National Environmental Significance. Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 EPBC Act 1999. Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection (2006), Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation Plan 2006 and Management Program 2006-2016. Available at <www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/Koalas/ legislation/pdf/conservation-plan-06-16.pdf> (Accessed 21 September 2012). Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection (2008), Conservation management Profile Koala Phascolarctos cinereus. Available at < www.ehp.qld.gov.au/register/p02352aa.pdf> (Accessed 11 December 2012). Ellis, W.A.H., A. Melzer, F.N. Carrick & M. Hasegawa (2002). Tree use, diet and home range of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) at Blair Athol, central Queensland. Wildlife Research. 29:303-311. 355 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Gordon, G., Brown, A. S. and Pulsford, T. (1988). A koala (Phascolarctos cinereus Goldfuss) population crash during drought and heatwave conditions in south-western Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 13: 451-461. Martin, R. & K. Handasyde (1999). The Koala: Natural history, conservation and management. Sydney, NSW: UNSW Press. Melzer, A., F. Carrick, P. Menkhorst, D. Lunney & B.S. John (2000). Overview, critical assessment, and conservation implications of koala distribution and abundance. Conservation Biology. 14:619-628. Moore, B.D. & W.J. Foley (2000). A review of feeding and diet selection in koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus). Australian Journal of Zoology. 48:317-333. Munks, S.A., Corkrey, R. and Foley, W.J. (1996). Characteristics of arboreal marsupial habitat in the semiarid woodlands of northern Queensland. Wildlife Research 23: 185-195. RPS Australia East (RPS) (2014) Ecological Assessment: Braemar State Forest ATP 1188. Sattler, P., Williams, R. (1999). The conservation status of Queensland’s bioregional ecosystems. Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland Government. ISBN: 0734510209 Sullivan, B. J., Norris, W. M. and Baxter, G. S. (2003). Low density koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) populations in the mulgalands of south-west Queensland. II. Distribution and diet. Wildlife Research 30: 331338 The dietary preferences of koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) in southwest Queensland. Australian Zoologist 36: 93-102 356 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Ö TAROOM Ö 150°E 151°E Ö Ö CAIRNS Ö Ö TOWNSVILLE Ö Ö 26°S Q Q uu ee ee nn ss ll aa nn dd IC Bowen Basin Ö Ö H H Cooper Basin 26°S CLERMONT WANDOAN LE Ö Ö Ö Ö MACKAY Ö Ö ROMA Ö Ö GLADSTONE CHINCHILLA AR Ö Ö DT Surat Basin BRISBANE HI GH N N ee w w S S oo uu tt hh W W aa ll ee ss WA Y W A R REGO HIGHW A Y Ö Ö DULACCA Ö Ö MILES WA RR E GO H IG HW AY Ö Ö CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Ö Ö RO M A COND AM I N E R OA D 27°S 27°S ! ? ! ? Ö Ö ! ? ! ? TARA HHA L EI C RDT W HIG H Ö Ö AY MO ON IE GH HI W AY 150°E 151°E PLAN 55 - KOALA Phascolarctos cinereus ± 0 10 Map Projection: GDA 94 DATA SOURCE: 20 Kilometers 40 SCALE: Tenements - DNRM Habitat data - Amec/DEHP Towns - GA ,Roads - Navteq 1:650,000 (A3) Ö Ö Town/City Principal Road Secondary Road ! ? Phascolarctos cinereus Survey Records (QGC) Phascolarctos cinereus Indicative habitat QCLNG Project Area DATE: 13/01/2015 CREATED BY: MAP NO: NOTE: Whilst care has been taken to prepare this map, QGC (and associated data custodians) make no guarantees about its accuracy, reliability or completeness and cannot accept responsibility of any kind for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are incurred by any party as a result of this product. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2015. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." LN-pagew01 M_39786_52 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans APPENDIX 1. DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS In this document, the following definitions apply: Term Meaning Critically Endangered Designated as ‘Critically Endangered’ under the EPBC Act. Refer to definition of ‘EPBC Act conservation status’ for meaning of Critically Endangered under the Act Ecological Community An assemblage of species occupying a particular area Endangered Designated as ‘Endangered’ under the EPBC Act, NC Act and / or VM Act. Refer to definitions of ‘EPBC Act conservation status’, ‘NC Act conservation status’ and ‘VM Act conservation status’ for meaning of Endangered under each Act EPBC Act conservation status Under the EPBC Act, listed threatened species and ecological communities are assigned a conservation status of ‘Extinct’, ‘Extinct in the Wild’, ‘Critically Endangered’, ‘Endangered’, ‘Vulnerable’ or Conservation dependent. Definitions of those relevant terms under the EPBC Act are as follows: Extinct in the Wild it is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalised population well outside its past range or it has not been recorded in its known and / or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite exhaustive surveys over a time frame appropriate to its life cycle and form. Critically Endangered it is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Endangered it is not Critically Endangered and it is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Vulnerable it is not Critically Endangered or Endangered and it is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Habitat An area or areas permanently, periodically or occasionally occupied by a species, population or ecological community, including any and all biotic and abiotic features of the area or areas occupied. Migratory species Species listed as ‘Migratory’ under the EPBC Act. NC Act conservation status Under the NC Act, protected species are assigned a conservation status of ‘Extinct in the wild’, ‘Endangered’, ‘Vulnerable’, ‘Near Threatened’, or ‘Least Concern’. Definitions of these terms under the NC Act are as follows: Extinct in the wild there have been thorough searches conducted for the wildlife and it has not been seen in the wild over a period that is appropriate for the life cycle or form of the wildlife. Endangered there have not been thorough searches conducted for the wildlife and the wildlife has not been seen in the wild over a period that is appropriate for the life cycle or form of the wildlife or UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Term Meaning the habitat or distribution of the wildlife has been reduced to an extent that the wildlife may be in danger of extinction or the population size of the wildlife has declined, or is likely to decline, to an extent that the wildlife may be in danger of extinction or the survival of the wildlife in the wild is unlikely if a threatening process continues. Vulnerable its population is decreasing because of threatening processes or its population has been seriously depleted and its protection is not secured or its population, while abundant, is at risk because of threatening processes or its population is low or localised or depends on limited habitat that is at risk because of threatening processes. Near Threatened the population size or distribution of the wildlife is small and may become smaller or the population size of the wildlife has declined, or is likely to decline, at a rate higher than the usual rate for population changes for the wildlife or the survival of the wildlife in the wild is affected to an extent that the wildlife is in danger of becoming vulnerable. Least Concern the wildlife is common or abundant and is likely to survive in the wild. Near Threatened Designated as ‘Near Threatened’ under the NC Act. Refer to definition of ‘NC Act conservation statuses for meaning of Near Threatened under the NC Act. Regional Ecosystem A vegetation community, within a bioregion, that is consistently associated with a particular combination of geology, landform and soil. REs may be classified under schedules 1–3 of the Vegetation Management Regulation 2000 as Endangered, Of Concern or Least Concern. Refer to ‘VM Act conservation statuses for meaning of Endangered, Of Concern or Least Concern under the VC Act. Remnant vegetation Remnant woody vegetation is defined as vegetation where the dominant canopy has >70% of the height and >50% of the cover relative to the undisturbed height and cover of that stratum and is dominated by species characteristic of the vegetation’s undisturbed canopy (Neldner et al. 2005). Sequential clearing Sequential clearing is a method of felling trees where operations are conducted in discrete stages such that animals are provided sufficient time and space to move from the clearing site of their own volition without the need for human intervention to remove and relocate them (clearing of all trees on site in a single, uninterrupted operation is not sequential clearing). Sequential clearing will take into account any variation in landscape features such as rocky escarpments, riparian habitats and steep sloping areas and provide fauna with sufficient time to exit the disturbance area and a safe escape route. UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Term Spotter Catcher Meaning A person that has been approved by DEHP under Section 12(d) – Nature Conservation (Administration) Regulation 2006 and holds a valid Rehabilitation Permit. Licenced Fauna Spotter Catchers must have demonstrated the following to DEHP before granting of a Rehabilitation Permit: Demonstrated ability to handle a wide variety of wildlife, including macropods and reptiles; Well-developed wildlife identification skills; Demonstrated ability to determine appropriate habitat through knowledge of fauna/flora associations and habitat requirements; and A minimum of two independent referees of professional standing within wildlife rehabilitation or a related field to attest for the Fauna Spotter Catchers wildlife knowledge as well as their own experience. Approved Fauna Spotter Catchers should have relevant experience in zookeeping, veterinary practices and/or wildlife rehabilitation as well as access to appropriate equipment to undertake fauna handling activities. Fauna Spotter Catchers should be vaccinated against the Lyssavirus if handling microbats and flying foxes. Threatened VM Act conservation status A term used for: Flora and fauna species which have been designated as Extinct in the wild, Endangered or Vulnerable under the NC Act; Flora and fauna species which have been designated as Extinct in the wild, Endangered or Vulnerable under the EPBC Act; Ecological Communities designated as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable under the EPBC Act; and / or REs designated as Endangered or Of Concern under the VM Act. Under the VM Act, REs may be classified as either ‘Endangered’, ‘Of Concern’ or ‘Least Concern’. Definitions of these terms under the VM Act are provided below. Endangered less than 10% of pre-clearance extent of remnant vegetation (see following definition) exists in the bioregion, or 10 to 30 % of pre-clearance extent remains and the remnant vegetation is less than 10 000 hectares. In addition, for biodiversity planning purposes DEHP also classifies a regional ecosystem as Endangered if: less than 10% of its pre-clearance extent remains unaffected by severe degradation and / or biodiversity loss or 10-30% of its pre-clearance extent remains unaffected by severe degradation and / or biodiversity loss and the remnant vegetation is less than 10,000 hectares; or it is a rare regional ecosystem subject to a threatening process. Of Concern 10 to 30% of pre-clearance extent of remnant vegetation exists in the bioregion, or more than 30% of pre-clearance extent remains and the remnant vegetation is less than 10 000 hectares. In addition, for biodiversity planning purposes DEHP also classifies a regional ecosystem as Of Concern if: 10-30% of its pre-clearance extent remains unaffected by moderate UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans Term Meaning degradation and / or biodiversity loss. Least Concern more than 30% of pre-clearance extent of remnant vegetation exists in the bioregion, and it is greater than 10, 000 hectares. In addition, for biodiversity planning purposes DEHP also classifies a regional ecosystem as Least Concern if the degradation criteria listed above for Endangered or Of Concern regional ecosystems are not met. Vulnerable Designated as ‘Vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act and / or NC Act. Refer to definitions of ‘EPBC Act conservation status’ and ‘NC Act conservation statuses for meaning of ‘Vulnerable’ under these Acts. UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans In this document, the following acronyms and abbreviations apply: Acronym/Abbreviation Meaning CE Critically Endangered CG Queensland Coordinator-General DEHP The Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection DoE Department of the Environment E Endangered EA Environmental Authority e.g. Latin for exempli gratia (Meaning: for example) EMP Environment Management Plan EPBC Act Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 et al. Latin for `et alii' (masculine plural) or `et aliae' (feminine plural) or `et alia' (neuteral plural) (Meaning : and others) EVNT Endangered, Vulnerable and Near Threatened flora and fauna species under the EPBC Act and NC Act FEO Field Environmental Officer FES Field Environment Superintendent GCH Gas Collection Header GPS Global Positioning System Ha Hectare i.e. Latin for id est (Meaning: that is) MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance n/a not applicable or not available NC Act Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 NT Near Threatened RE Regional Ecosystem RoW Right of Way RRRMP Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan SSRP Site Specific Rehabilitation Plans V Vulnerable VM Act Queensland Vegetation Management Act 1999 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans APPENDIX 2. REFERENCED / ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS Document Number Title/Description QCLNG-BX00-ENV-PLN-000023 Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol QCLNG-BX00-ENV-PLN-000025 Gas Field Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan QCLNG-BX00-ENV-PLN-000027 Gas Field Pest and Weed Management Plan QCLNG-BXOO-WAT-RPT-000005 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan – Stage 1 N/A Statement No. 9 Policy for the Translocation of Threatened Fauna in NSW PR105153-1 Wieambilla Creek Assessment of Matters of National Environmental Significance for the creek section potentially affected by treated water discharge. QCLNG-BG00-ENV-RPT-000004 Species Management Plan - Tampering with Breeding Place of a Protected Animal Species. UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans APPENDIX 3. RELEVANT APPROVAL CONDITIONS UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Approval To develop, construct, o perate and decommission the Coal Seam Gas Field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, including expansion of the QGC operated coal seam gas fields in the Surat Basin as described in referral EPBC 2008/4398. This decision is made under sections 130(1) and 133 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). person to whom the approval is granted Queensland Gas Company Ltd (QGC) and BG International Limited (BG) · proponent's ABN ABN: 089 642 553 (QGC) ABN: 72 114 818 825 (BG) proposed action To develop, construct, operate and decommission the coal seam gas field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, including expansion of the QGC operated coal seam gas fields in the Surat Basin, to supply gas for the Queensland Curtis LNG Project to the proposed Queensland Curtis LNG Plant located on Curtis Island: • • decision as described in the proponent's referral received under the EPBC Act on 18 August 2008; and as described in the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement and Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement. To approve the proposed action for each of the following controlling provisions: • Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A, EPBC Act) • Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A, EPBC Act) conditions of approval This approval is subject to the conditions specified below. expiry date of approval This approval has effect until 31 October 2060. name and position signature date of decision The Hon Tony Burke MP Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Conditions Project area 1. The project area is the area identified at Figure 1, with a maximum gas field development area of 26,760 ha, within the following petroleum tenures (as they are at the date of the decision to which these conditions are attached): • ATPs 610, 621, 632 (portion of), 647, 648, 651, 676 and 768 (portion of); • PLs 179, 201, 228, 229, 171,180, 211, 247; • PLAs 212, 257, 259, 261, 262, 263, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279. Infrastructure limits 2. Impacts must be limited to a maximum of 6,000 production wells and impacts related to associated gas field development. Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol for Constraints Planning and Field Development 3. Before the commencement of gas field development, the proponent must develop a Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol (the Protocol). 4. The Protocol must apply for the life of the project and include the principles of: a. avoiding direct and indirect adverse impacts on MNES; b. mitigating and managing direct and cumulative adverse impacts on MNES; c. active site remediation and rehabilitation of impacted areas to promote and maintain long-term recovery of MNES. indirect impacts to minimise 5. The Protocol must: a. classify the following as being within the proponent's highest environmental constraint class - Zone 4a (or should the proponent's classification be revised, an equivalent high environmental constraints class): i. all listed threatened ecological communities; ii. all listed flora species; and iii. those listed threatened and migratory fauna species habitats as identified in management plans required under these conditions, which where relevant may be described in terms of specific niche habitat types; Note: The proponent's approach to environmental constraint class Zone 4a and related impact avoidance and mitigation is described in volume 3, chapter 7 (7.6.2.4) of the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement (dated July 2009). The protocol conditions do not apply to the other constraints that the proponent has included in environmental constraint class – Zone 4a unless these are relevant to MNES. b. take into account all current survey data and available information and maps of all MNES relevant to the project area as described within environmental constraint class Zone 4a; c. require the undertaking and documentation of planning and pre-clearance site assessments and field ecological surveys in proposed gas field development areas where constraint class Zone 4a is mapped, likely, or found. The pre-clearance site assessments and field ecological surveys must identify and assess options relating to potential gas field development impacts on MNES and provide recommendations to inform the proponent's decision to develop the project area; d. to avoid direct and indirect adverse impacts on MNES, including fragmentation and edge effects, require the proponent to determine the location of proposed infrastructure in accordance with the following: i. preferentially avoid native vegetation that constitutes a listed ecological community and/or may provide habitat for listed species and utilise previously cleared or previously utilised areas; ii. wells from within exclude exploration and production areas identified as environmental constraint class Zone 4a unless their location within environmental constraint class Zone 4a is justified as an exception given other constraints and the impact on any MNES will be minimal, short term and recoverable; and Note: Directional drilling and multiple drill holes from one well pad are options to avoid well site and related infrastructure disturbance to environmental constraint class Zone 4a. iii. either: I. II. iv. exclude other non linear infrastructure from the no impact zone; or where the location of other non linear infrastructure in the no impact zone is justified given other constraints and cannot be avoided, only authorise the siting of that infrastructure in that zone where field ecological surveys demonstrate that there will be minimal, short term and recoverable, or no adverse impact on any MNES, including habitat for any listed species; either: I. II. exclude linear infrastructure from the impact risk zone; or where the location of linear infrastructure in the impact risk zone is justified given other constraints and cannot be avoided, only authorise the siting of that infrastructure in that zone where field ecological surveys demonstrate that there will be minimal adverse impact on any MNES, including habitat for any listed species. Note: Justification is reportable in accordance with condition 13 a) vii). The management plan requirements under condition 8 h) may also indicate that a species or its habitat can co-exist with specific types of gas field infrastructure and operations. e. require the proponent to plan for and decide the extent that proposed linear infrastructure may have adverse impacts on MNES in accordance with the following: 3 all linear disturbance within environmental constraints class Zone 4a for MNES and the impact risk zone must be: i. ii. I. limited to 6 metres in width for single lane track; II. limited to 15 metres if there are one or two parallel gas or water gathering lines; Ill. limited to 20 metres if there are three, four, or five parallel gas or water gathering lines; IV. limited to 25 metres if there are six, seven or eight parallel gas or water gathering lines; V. limited to 30 metres if there are greater than eight parallel gas or water gathering lines. gas and water trunkline rights of way, water distribution pipeline rights of way, the Upstream Infrastructure Corridor (UIC), and other major linear infrastructure disturbance corridors within environmental constraints class Zone 4a and the impact risk zone must be: I. limited to 30 m in width where there are one or two gas and optic water trunklines, underground 33kV power lines and fibre cables in parallel; II. limited to 30 metres plus an additional 4 metres for every additional gas or water trunkline in parallel with the initial one or two gas or water trunklines, underground 33kV power lines and fibre optic cable; Ill. iii. limited to disturbance in the corridor described for the UIC. where feasible, gas trunklines, pipelines for associated water and other transmission lines must be co-located to reduce total disturbance on MNES. Note: Any area of a disturbance referred to in this condition would be subtracted from the disturbance limits specified elsewhere in these conditions. f. support bioregional corridors for listed threatened species and migratory species, and connectivity for listed threatened ecological communities; g. ensure site assessments and field ecological surveys: i. are undertaken in accordance with the Department's survey guidelines in effect at the time of the survey. This information can be obtained from http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/guidelinespolicies.html#lhreatened; ii. take into account and reference previous ecological surveys undertaken in the area and relevant new information on likely presence or absence of MNES; iii. are undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist approved by the Department; iv. document the survey methodology, results and significant findings in relation to MNES. v. apply best practice site assessment and ecological survey methods appropriate for each listed threatened species, migratory species, their habitat and listed ecological communities; Note: Best practice includes applying the optimum timing and frequency of site assessments and surveys to determine presence or absence of listed threatened 4 species or migratory species or their habitat, or a listed threatened ecological community. vi. apply the mapping of environmental constraints class Zone 4a; the infrastructure location requirements; minimum no impact zones; impact risk zones; and the width requirements for linear infrastructure corridors described in e); vii. reports are published by the proponent on the internet 20 business days before clearance of native vegetation in an infrastructure impact area and provided to the Department on .request; h. require species and include: i. ii. i. ecological community management plans which relevant avoidance and mitigation measures to be applied; measures for protecting each listed threatened species and migratory species and their habitat, and each listed threatened ecological community not previously assessed by the proponent, should one or more be found in the project area at any time over the life of the project. Any s u c h m a n a g e m e n t p l a n s m u s t b e developed in a timeframe to be approved by the Department. Notification of additional MNES found must be provided to the Department in writing within 10 business days. Measures must include the development of a management plan consistent with requirements under condition 8; and ensure constraints planning and field development decisions are made in accordance with the Protocol (including any relevant species and ecological community management plans) before final selection of specific sites for gas field development within the project area. 6. The Protocol must ensure relevant information on MNES is available and used by the proponent to support field development and management decisions throughout the life of the project. Management plans for listed species and ecological communities 7. Before commencement of each major stage of gas field development the proponent must develop management plans for that area addressing each listed species and listed ecological community that, as indicated through assessment or more recent information, may be potentially impacted by gas field development within the project area (defined by condition 1), or external to the project area, as a result of gas field development. The management plans must address as a minimum, the ecological communities and species and their habitat as specified in Tables 1, 2 and 3 of these conditions: Note 1: The proponent may develop management plans to align with the requirements of the Queensland Government where there are species and ecological communities covered by both Queensland requirements and the requirements of this approval. Note 2: Major stages of development are to be notified under condition 88. Table 1: Species potentially impacted by gas field development for which management plans are required Species EPBC Indicative habitat status Oasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll) Endangered Habitat generally encompasses some form of rocky area for denning purposes with surrounding vegetated habitats used for foraging and dispersal. Preferred habitat of rocky hills and escarpments, open forest and open woodland Chalinolobus Vulnerable dwyeri (Largeeared Pied Bat, Large Pied Bat) Tumix melanogaster (Black-breasted Button-quail) Erythrotriorchis Usually found in proximity to cliff lines and escarpments and sandstone outcrops where shallow caves appear to be used as roosts, although the species is also known to use tree hollows. Known to forage in adjoining woodlands including Brigalow ecological communities Vulnerable Vulnerable Drier low closed forests, particularly semievergreen vine thicket, low microphyll vine forest, araucarian microphyll vine forest and araucarian notophyll vine Forest Eucalypt woodland, open forest, gallery rainforest, swamp, sclerophyll forest and rainforest margins, Usually in association with large tracts of forest. Prefers a mosaic of radiatus (Red Goshawk) vegetation types and permanent water. . Rostratufa australis (Australian Painted Snipe) Vulnerable permanent lakes, swamps and claypans. Favours freshwater swamps and samphire salt marshes. Delma torquata (Collared Delma) Potentially any wetland and farm dams with suitable vegetation cover, temporary and Vulnerable Eucalypt or acacia dominated woodland including Brigalow ecological communities and open forest where it is associated with suitable microhabitats (exposed rocky outcrops or a sparse understorey of tussock grass, shrubs or semi-evergreen vine thickets). Geophaps scriptascripta (Squatter Pigeon (Southern)) Vulnerable roads and railways, and around settlements). Grassy woodlands and open forest that are dominated by eucalypts, open grassy pastures in association with cattle grazing marshes, acacia growth and disturbed habitats (i.e. around stockyards, along Denisonia maculata Vulnerable Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) woodland growing on clay, cracking clay soils and Table 1: Species potentially impacted by gas field development for which management plans are required Species Indicative habitat EPBC status sandy soils, riverside woodland and open forest growing on natural levees and other riparian habitats. (Ornamental Snake) Shelters under fallen timber and in soil cracks. Known from cleared grazing and cropping lands where suitable soils exist. Furina dunmalli (Dunmall's Snake) Nyctophilus timoriensis Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) forest and Vulnerable woodland growing on cracking black clay and clay loam soils (usually on heavy clay soils): Also known to occur in eucalypt and callitris woodland with fallen timber and qround litter. River red gum forest, semi-arid woodlands, Vulnerable savannahs and open woodlands, often in association with riverine environments in Brigalow Belt of inland Queensland. (Eastern Longeared Bat) Note 1: Table 1 is derived from Table 2 EPBC Act Listed Ecological Community and Flora Species Impacts; Table. 3 MNES Fauna Species Requiring Offset Consideration; and Table 2 Determination of EPBC Act Listed Fauna Species Impacted of the Unidel QCLNG Project Revised Terrestrial Offsets and Implementation Report QGC020-ENV-RPT0002 24 June 2010 and from listed threatened species profiles available on the Department's website. Note 2: Habitat for species in Table 1 is to be fully described in the management plan for each species as required under condition 8. The habitat described in Table 1 is for general context and indicative only. 8. The management plans required under condition 7 must be developed by a qualified ecologist approved in writing by the Department and as a minimum address the following as is relevant to each MNES: a. current legal status (under EPBC Act); b. known distribution; c. known species' populations and their relationships within the region; d. extent of ecological community fragmentation within the region and if appropriate minimum patch size for that community; e. to support field identification and ecological surveys, description of the relevant characteristics of the ecological community; f. species' biology, reproduction and description of general habitat; g. to support field identification and ecological surveys, description of the species' habitat, which may be described in terms of essential habitat and microhabitat, associations with geology, soils, landscape features, associations with other native fauna and/or flora or ecological communities, and specific niche habitat descriptions; Note: Constraints mapping may be limited by available data for many species and may therefore be inadequate to map habitat requirements for planning and management purposes, or to indicate presence without on ground assessment. Condition 8 g) requires the essential components of a species' habitat to be described where relevant to support field identification and environmental constraints decision making. This should include essential habitat components for widely distributed species present in low numbers and for other species likely to be present but not often observed. h. threats to MNES relating to the development and management of land within the gas fields including from the development, operation and decommissioning of infrastructure within the gas fields; and from groundwater extraction and aquifer depressurisation, CSG water use and disposal, whether the threat is within or outside the gas field development area; Note: This part of a management plan may also indicate that a species or its habitat can co-exist with specific types of gas field operations. i. relevant management practices and methods to minimise impact and recover from impact that should include: i.. site rehabilitation timeframes, standards and methods; ii. use of sequential clearing to direct fauna away from an impact zone; re- iii. establishment of native vegetation in linear infrastructure corridors; iv. welfare and safe handling of fauna specimens requiring relocation from impact sites; v. handling practices for flora specimens; vi. translocation practices and monitoring for translocation success; vii. monitoring methods including for rehabilitation success and recovery; j. surface and ground water quality and quantity requirements, including relevant downstream environmental quality parameters; k. reference relevant conservation advice, recovery plans, or other policies, practices, standards or guidelines relevant to MNES published or approved from time to time by the Department. Note: The management plans must include sufficient detail to inform field development decisions, ongoing management and decommissioning, and management external to the project area to minimise impacts on MNES through the life of the project. Note 1: To the extent that the requirements of condition 8 are satisfied for each species, a single plan may be prepared to address a group of species which have similar ecological characteristics and habitat needs. Other conditions also require species or ecological community management plans to be developed in certain circumstances in accordance with condition 8. 9. Each species and ecological community management plan must be submitted for the approval of the Minister. Commencement of each major stage of gas field development within the project area must not occur without written approval of a plan for each listed species and ecological community within the proposed area of development. The proponent may undertake activities that are critical to commencement that are associated with mobilisation of plant and equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of development only if such activities will have no adverse impact on MNES, and only if the proponent has notified the Department in writing before an activity is undertaken. Approved species and ecological c o m m u n i t y m a n a g e m e n t plans must be implemented. 10. The proponent must establish a program for routine review of the species and ecological community management plans to be undertaken by a qualified ecologist approved by the Department (with other experts as appropriate) to take into account any new information available to the proponent, including any information and advice provided by Commonwealth or Queensland Government agencies, or available from other CSG proponents. 11. The Minister may require through a request in writing the periodic review of the species and ecological community management plans, either by the Department; or alternatively by an independent qualified ecologist, or other experts, approved by the Department. 12. Independent review of plans will be at the financial expense of the proponent. Once independently reviewed, plans must be submitted for written approval by the Department. Approved plans must be implemented. Record of impacts 13. If an impact occurs (which may include a presumed impact where the species is presumed to be present) to a MNES during gas field development, operation, or decommissioning the proponent must: a. record the impact by reference to: i. ii. iii. the location, specific site and type of infrastructure or activity; each MNES subject to disturbance; the related site assessment or field ecological survey documentation and recommendations, or the decision that the particular MNES was presumed to be present; iv. the disturbance limit set under 25; v. the total area of actual disturbance; vi. vii. viii. the remaining disturbance limit for each affected MNES; the reasons for the decision including justification for the action taken, description of the efforts taken to avoid impact, and explanation why other constraints might justify the impact on MNES; actions and commitments by the proponent to remediate, rehabilitate, or make good any unauthorised disturbance; and Note: This condition applies to any adverse impact on MNES, whether or not a disturbance limit has been set, and whether or not the impact has been decided by the proponent under the Protocol based on other physical constraints. b. record the information to a standard which can be independently audited. Site remediation, rehabilitation and recovery plan 14. Where a direct or indirect impact has occurred to MNES (which may include a presumed impact where the species is presumed to be present) the proponent must under the Protocol apply remediation, rehabilitation and recovery measures appropriate for each MNES to restore connectivity or rehabilitate disturbed areas to pre-clearance quality or better, and to minimise cumulative impacts throughout the life of the project. 15. Before commencement of gas field development the proponent must develop a Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan. The Plan must: 9 a. include site remediation measures including timeframes and standards for preventing erosion and stabilising disturbed soil in impact areas; b. include measures to support recovery of listed species' habitat and recovery of listed ecological communities affected by gas field development; c. include responses to threats to MNES from the proponent's operational activities and land management activities including the disposal and use of associated water, damage by livestock, and impacts from feral animals and weeds; d. provide for fire prevention and management regimes during construction, operation, and decommissioning to protected MNES; e. include performance measures and related remediation, rehabilitation and recovery; f. provide for reporting on the implementation of the Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan including monitoring and performance to a standard which can be independently audited; g. reference relevant conservation advice, recovery plans, species management plans, or policies, practices, standards or guidelines endorsed or approved from time to time by the Department. monitoring to assess site Note: The proponent may develop the plan to satisfy the requirements of both the Queensland Government and these conditions as indicated in condition 98b). 16. The Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan must be submitted for the approval of the Minister. Commencement of gas field development must not occur without approval of this Plan. The proponent that are may undertake activities that are critical to commencement associated with mobilisation of plant and equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of development only if such activities will have no adverse impact on MNES, and only if the proponent has notified the Department in writing before an activity is undertaken. The approved Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan must be implemented. 17. The proponent must establish a program to routinely review the Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan by an independent qualified ecologist, or other experts, approved by the Department to take into account any new information available to the proponent, including any information and advice provided by Commonwealth or Queensland Government agencies, or available from other CSG proponents. 18. The Minister may require through a request in writing the periodic review of the Remediation, Rehabilitation, Recovery and Monitoring Plan by the Department, or alternatively by an independent qualified ecologist, or other experts, approved by the Department. Plans must be approved by the Department in writing. 19. Independent review of plans will be at the financial expense of the proponent. Once independently reviewed, plans must be submitted for written approval by the Department. Approved plans must be implemented. 10 Approval and Review of Protocol 20. The Protocol must be submitted for the approval of the Minister. Commencement of gas field development must not occur without written approval of the Protocol. The proponent may undertake activities that are critical to commencement that are associated with mobilisation of plant and equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of development only if such activities will have no adverse impact on MNES, and only if the proponent has notified the Department in writing before an activity is undertaken. The approved Protocol must be implemented. 21. The Protocol and related plans must be reviewed and updated by the proponent to take into account the findings of the Cumulative Impact Assessment Report required by the Queensland Government; before each major stage of the proponent's gas field development; or following a written request from the Department. Reviewed and updated Protocols and plans must be submitted for the Minister's written approval. Once approved, updated Protocols and plans must be implemented. Note: The review required following completion of the Cumulative Impact Assessment Report required by the Queensland Government may be done after approval of the Protocol. The Department may seek review of the Protocol to align with Queensland Government requirements to support efficiency and avoid duplication. 22. The proponent's review of the Protocol must take into account all relevant studies, policies, standards, guidelines and advice relating to CSG activity published or provided to the proponent by the Commonwealth or Queensland governments, or published or provided by other proponents undertaking similar activities, or published or provided by other parties, including any findings of an audit against conditions, or plans or other documentation required under the conditions of this approval. 23. The Department may require through request in writing that the Protocol and related plans be revised or amended before approval. Any such request must be acted on within the time frame specified. 24. The approved Protocol must be incorporated into the p r o p o n e n t’s management procedures, operational plans and other relevant documentation and kept current for the life of the project. Disturbance limits 25. The following maximum disturbance limits in Table 2 and Table 3 below apply to authorised unavoidable adverse impacts on MNES as a result of exploration, development, operation and decommissioning within the project area illustrated in Attachment 1, and external to it, ('whole of project' disturbance limits) and all associated activities for the life of the project. 11 Table 2: Disturbance limits for listed threatened ecological communities Ecological community Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) EPBC Act status Endangered The community of native Endangered species dependent on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin Semi-evergreen vine thickets of Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregions Natural Grasslands of the Queensland Central Highlands and the northern Fitzroy Basin Disturbance limit (ha) Endangered Endangered 73 ha 0 (No disturbance authorised) 0 (No disturbance the authorised) 0 (No disturbance authorised) Note: Table 2 is derived from Table 2 EPBC Act Listed Ecological Community and Flora Species Impacts of the Unidel QCLNG Project Revised Terrestrial Offsets and Implementation Report QGC020-ENV-RPT0002 24 June 2010). Table 3: Disturbance limits for listed species Species Paradelma orientalis (Brigalow Scaly-foot) EPBC status Disturbance limit (ha) Vulnerable Indicative habitat Occurs in a wide range of 235* ha of potential habitat {dry) forest and woodland habitats, including Brigalow woodland, Vine thicket regrowth and rocky habitats on sandstone ridges to flats and gently undulating plains with clay, loan or sand. Not tolerant of clearings. Egernia rugosa Egernia rugosa Open dry sclerophyll forest or woodland, Brigalow, shrublands, lancewood forests on sandy and open textured soils. Dense ground cover, cavities in soil-bound . . . 12 Table 3: Disturbance limits for listed species Species EPBCstatus Disturbance limit (ha) Indicative habitat root systems of fallen trees and beneath rocks, hollow logs and animal burrows are considered to provide suitable Philotheca sporadica Vulnerable 10 ha microhabitat for this species. Open to closed shrubland to closed woodland. Shallow sandy to clay loams or shallow texture contrast soils with loamy surfaces and medium clay subsoils. Ironstone gravel usually present within soil column. Some sites have duricrust surfaces. • Disturbance limits for Brigalow Scaly-foot and Yakka Skink potential habitat are as per the methodology applied in Unidel QCLNG Project Revised Terrestrial Offsets and Implementation Report QGC020-ENV-RPT0002 24 June 2010. Note: Table 3 is derived from: Table 2 EPBC Act Listed Ecological Community and Flora Species Impacts, Table 3 MNES Fauna Species Requiring Offset Consideration, and Table 2 Determination of EPBC Act Listed Fauna Species Impacted of the Unidel QCLNG Project Revised Terrestrial Offsets and Implementation Report QGC020-ENV-RPT0002 24 June 2010; and from the listed threatened species profiles available on the Department’s website. Habitat for species in Table 3 will be described in the management plan for each species as required under condition 8. The habitat described in Table 3 is for general context and indicative only. Offsets Plan to secure offsets 26. Within 6 months of the commencement of the action the proponent must prepare an Offset Plan to provide an offset area for the approved disturbance limits relating to MNES Within the project area. The offset area to be secured must be an area of private land which includes at least: a. b. c. d. 80 ha of Philotheca sporadica habitat; and 343 ha of potential Egemia rugosa (Yakka Skink) habitat which includes micro habitat required for the species; and 235 ha of potential Parade/rna orienta/is (Brigalow Scaly-foot) habitat which includes micro habitat required for the species; and 730 ha of Brigalow with representation of the following; i. 30% r e m n a n t Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and c o dominant); and ii. 70% which is a combination of: I. high value regrowth Brigalow; and 13 II. other Brigalow regrowth with potential for management to remnant Brigalow status. Note: Offsetting requirements for some species' habitat may be accommodated within the Brigalow components if this habitat is verified as present and includes specific habitat requirements for each relevant species. 27. The Offset Plan must include details of the offset area including: the timing and arrangements for securing properties, maps and site description, environmental values relevant to MNES, connectivity with other habitats and biodiversity corridors, a rehabilitation program, and mechanisms for long-term protection, conservation and management. 28. The Offset Plan must be submitted for the approval of the Minister within 6 months of the commencement of the action. The approved Offset Plan must be implemented. 29. If the a p p r o v e d O f f s e t P la n cannot b e im p le m e n te d b e c a u s e of failure of arrangements to secure the necessary area of private land then the proponent must submit for the Minister's approval an alternative Offset Plan. The alternative Offset Plan must provide at least an equivalent environmental outcome to those specified under condition 26(a) to (d). The approved alternative Offset Plan must be implemented. 30. If the proponent proposes any action within a proposed offset area, other than actions related to managing that area as an offset property, approval must be obtained, in writing from the Department. In seeking Departmental approval the proponent must provide a detailed assessment of the proposed action including a map identifying where the action is proposed to take place and an assessment of all associated adverse impacts on MNES. If the Department agrees to the action within the proposed offset site, the area identified for the action must be excised from the proposed offset and alternative offsets secured of equal or greater environmental value in relation to the impacted MNES. 31. The proponent must secure the offset within 2 years of commencement. OffsetArea Management 32. Within 12 months of securing the offset area required under the approved Offset Plan, the proponent must develop an Offset Area Management Plan which must specify measures to improve ·the environmental values of the offset area in relation to MNES, including; a. the documentation and mapping of current environmental values relevant to MNES of the area; b. measures to address threats to MNES including but not limited to grazing pressure and damage by livestock and adverse impacts from feral animals and weeds; c. measures to provide fire management regimes appropriate for the MNES; 14 d. management of revegetation areas to the stage where habitat is established or improved for listed species and revegetation areas meet the criteria for 'remnant status' for that threatened ecological community; e. an objective, that revegetation areas for Brigalow meet the criteria applicable at the time for 'remnant status', and measures to ensure application is made to have the revegetation areas reclassified as 'remnant vegetation' in accordance with the relevant Queensland legislation; f. monitoring, including the undertaking of ecological surveys to assess the success of the management measures against identified milestones and objectives; g. performance measures and reporting requirements against identified objectives, including trigger levels for corrective actions and the actions to be taken to ensure performance measures and objectives are met. 33. Within 12 months of securing the offset area the Offset Area Management Plan must be submitted for the approval of the Minister. The approved Offset Area Management Plan must be implemented. Rehabilitation Area Offset 34. Within 2 years of the commencement of gas field development the proponent must secure a Rehabilitation Area Offset of at least 700 hectares of privately held property to compensate for indirect adverse impacts on MNES. The proponent must: a. obtain ownership or a legally binding agreement from a landowner over an area of property to re-establish areas in perpetuity of the threatened Brigalow (Acacia harpophyl/a dominant and co-dominant) ecological community and associated listed migratory and listed threatened species' habitat; and b. notify the Department in writing within 30 business days of securing the Rehabilitation Area Offset. Note: The Rehabilitation Area Offset is an additional area to the Offset area required under condition 26. · 35. The Rehabilitation Area Offset must: a. Be within historical distributions of the ecological community (before clearing occurred) and as close as possible to the project area; b. include intact elements of remnant and/or high value regrowth of the Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) ecological community; and c. include or have potential for providing habitat and micro habitat requirements for listed migratory and threatened species (i.e. those in Table 3 that relate to this ecological community). 36. If, within 2 years of the commencement of gas field development the Rehabilitation Area Offset has not been secured, then the proponent must within 30 business days, notify the Minister and provide for the Minister's approval an alternative offset measure. The alternative must provide at least 15 an equivalent environmental outcome to those specified in relation to the Rehabilitation Area Offset. The approved alternative must be secured and implemented in accordance with conditions 34 and 35 in a timeframe specified in writing by the Minister. Rehabilitation Area Plan 37. Within 2 years of the commencement of gas field development, the proponent must prepare a Rehabilitation Area Plan for the offset required under condition 34. 38. The Rehabilitation Area Plan must provide for commitments and actions to lead to the increase in the spatial extent and improvement in the condition of existing remnants, and for the establishment of new self sustaining, functional 'remnant vegetation' communities, consistent with that which existed prior to clearing and with the capacity to provide habitat for the species identified in condition 25 as unavoidably impacted by the action. 39. The Rehabilitation Area Plan must include: a. details of the area to be rehabilitated including location and maps; b. documentation including mapping relevant to MNES of the area; environmental values c. where revegetation through planting seedlings and/or seeds is details of appropriate species and ratios of species relevant to occurring listed migratory and threatened species' habitat Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) community; intended historically and the ecological d. the source and provenance of the seed and/or seedlings which will be used; e. measures to address threats to MNES including but not limited to grazing pressure and damage by livestock and adverse impacts from feral animals and weeds; f. measures to provide fire management regimes appropriate for the MNES; g. monitoring measures including ecological surveys to measure the establishment and ongoing success of the revegetation based on a comparison with high quality habitat for listed migratory and threatened species and ecological community reference sites; h. performance measures and reporting requirements against identified objectives, including trigger levels for corrective actions and the actions to be taken to ensure performance measures and objectives are met. of current 40. Within 2 years of the commencement of gas field development the Rehabilitation Area Plan must be submitted for the approval of the Minister. The approved Rehabilitation Area Plan must be implemented. 16 41. To ensure the long term protection of the Rehabilitation Area the proponent must: a. manage the Rehabilitation Area to a stage where it meets the criteria for 'remnant vegetation' for the Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and codominant) ecological community. b. When areas of revegetation meet criteria applicable at the time for 'remnant vegetation' ensure application is made to have the revegetation areas remapped and reclassified as 'remnant vegetation' in accordance with the relevant Queensland legislation. The management measures must continue to be implemented in areas not meeting the criteria for 'remnant status' until this has been achieved (or until approval to cease the management regime is provided by the Minister in writing); c. define corrective actions which will be undertaken if performance measures and reporting indicate that successful rehabilitation has not been achieved; d. identify persons responsible and arrangements for implementing Rehabilitation Area Plan and for reporting on performance; and e. notify the Department in writing of the reclassification of areas within the Rehabilitation Area as 'remnant vegetation' within 30 business days of the reclassification occurring. the 42. If the proponent proposes any action within a proposed offset area, other than actions related to managing that area as an offset property, approval must be obtained, in writing from the Department. In seeking Departmental approval the proponent must provide a detailed assessment of the proposed action including a map identifying where the action is proposed to take place and an assessment of all associated adverse impacts on MNES. If the Department agrees to the action within the proposed offset site, the area identified for the action must be excised from the proposed offset and alternative offsets secured of equal or greater environmental value in relation to the impacted MNES. CSG Water Management 43. The proponent must: a. take all reasonable measures to ensure that CSG water, including extracted groundwater, treated or amended CSG water, and any associated waste water, brine crystals and/or solids generated as a result of treating or amending water have no significant impact on any MNES during or beyond the life of the project; and b. if any such impacts arise apply measures identified in the Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan, or other requirements under these conditions, to mitigate or make good such impacts to the satisfaction of the Minister. 17 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan Hydraulic connection 44. If the proponent demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Minister, on the advice of the expert panel, that an aquifer has negligible hydraulic c o n n e c t i v i t y t o other aquifers, then groundwater drawdown limits and threshold values (for groundwater drawdown and quality) for response measures in these conditions do not apply to that aquifer. 45. To avoid doubt, monitoring and risk management requirements in the Stage 1 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 1 CSG WMMP), the Stage 2 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 2 CSG WMMP) and Stage 3 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 3 CSG WMMP) (outlined below) will continue to apply to any aquifer which the proponent has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Minister, on the advice of the expert panel, has negligible hydraulic connectivity to other aquifers. 46. If the Minister, acting on advice of an expert panel, is satisfied that new evidence indicates a material change in hydraulic connectivity of an aquifer to which condition 44 applies, the Minister may notify the proponent, in writing, that condition 44 does not apply to that aquifer. Default drawdown 47. Within 20 business days from the date of the project approval, or such longer period specified by the Minister in writing, the proponent must submit to the satisfaction of the Minister, modelled groundwater drawdown c o n t o u r d a t a and contour plots for each targeted aquifer. 48. The Minister, having regard to the minimum drawdown prediction from the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement and the information supplied under condition 47, will specify to the proponent, in writing, the default groundwater drawdown limit for each aquifer that will apply until the Minister's approval of the Stage 1 CSG WMMP. The proponent must not exceed the groundwater drawdown limits specified by the Minister. Stage 1 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan 49. Within 6 months from the date of the project approval, the proponent must submit for the approval of the Minister a Stage 1 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 1 CSG WMMP) which includes at least: Groundwater monitoring and management a. groundwater drawdown limits for each targeted aquifer; b. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] c. a program and schedule for field piloting of aquifer reinjection of treated CSG water and other groundwater repressurisation techniques; 18 d. early warning approached. indicators where drawdown thresholds are being Hydraulic fracturing e. the estimated number and the spatial distribution of boreholes where hydraulic fracturing may be necessary, an annual review of the estimate, and recording of actual use; f. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] Surface water monitoring and management g. an ongoing water quality and quantity surface water monitoring plan that includes at least: i. identification of the surface and aquatic systems to be monitored and their environmental values; water quality, and environmental characteristics, and the rationale for selection; ii. the number and locations of monitoring sites upstream and downstream of proposed discharge of CSG water (whether treated water, amended water or raw water), including test and reference sites upstream and downstream and before and after any proposed impacts; iii. the frequency of the monitoring and rationale for the frequency; iv. baseline data for each monitoring site for comparison of monitoring results over the life of the project; v. the approach to be taken to analyse the results including the methods to determine trends to indicate potential impacts; vi. threshold values that protect relevant MNES (such as reporting or more intensive control line values for additional investigation, management action, make good, and cease operations) at which management actions will be initiated to respond to escalating levels of risk and designed to protect water quality and the associated environmental values of surface and aquatic systems; vii. water treatment and amendment methods and standards; viii. water storage locations and volumes including any storage and volumes required to pilot or implement reinjection or other groundwater repressurisation techniques; ix. water use or disposal options and methods (whether for beneficial use or not) including frequency, volumes, quality and environmental values documented for each receiving environment; x. brine storage management; xi. emergency water discharges, their volumes and quality; xii. references to standards and relevant policies and guidelines; locations and 19 volumes, and brine crystal waste Response actions h. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: i. ii. threshold values for surface water quality and water environmental values specified in the CSG WMMP are exceeded; [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] Reporting i. performance measures, annual reporting publication of reports on the internet. to the Department, and Note: A key objective of the CSG WMMP groundwater components is to maintain or restore aquifer pressure, as affected by CSG production, to levels that avoid risk of adverse impact on MNES. 50. The proponent must implement the Stage 1 CSG WMMP the Minister, on the advice of an expert panel. The exceed the groundwater drawdown limits for each aquifer 1 CSG WMMP. The Stage 1 CSG WMMP will apply until the approved Stage 2 CSG WMMP. approved in writing by proponent must not specified in the Stage the commencement of Stage 2 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan 51. Within 18 months from the date of the approval of the action the proponent must submit for the approval of the Minister, a Stage 2 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 2 CSG WMMP). The proponent must allow a further 3 months for the Minister's consideration of approval of the Stage 2 CSG WMMP including seeking advice from an expert panel. 52. In addition to the matters in the Stage 1 CSG WMMP, the Stage 2 CSG WMMP must also include: Groundwater monitoring and management a. an ongoing CSG water treatment program to ensure that any water to be used for re-injection, or used for other groundwater repressurisation options, is treated at least equal to the water quality of the receiving groundwater system or environment; b. the method, data and the evidentiary standards necessary to support a conclusion that an aquifer from which CSG water is being extracted is not hydraulically connected to other aquifers; c. a groundwater quality and quantity monitoring plan to monitor the aquifers underlying the project area using a statistically and hydrogeologically valid, best practice bore monitoring network across the project area, and at least; i. the aquifers to be monitored and the rationale for selection; ii. the number and locations of monitoring bores and their flow, pressure, head, and water quality characteristics; iii. the frequency of the monitoring and rationale for the frequency; 20 iv. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP;] v. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP;] vi. groundwater drawdown threshold values and groundwater quality threshold values for each aquifer (based on regional groundwater modelling endorsed by the Minister) at which management actions (such as reporting or control line values for additional investigation, more intensive management action, make good, and cease operations) will be initiated to respond to escalating levels of risk, including increasing levels of drawdown, contamination of groundwater, or subsidence; vii. references to standards and relevant policies and guidelines; viii. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP]; and ix. performance measures, annual reporting publication of reports on the internet; to Note 1: Threshold values will be identified in the plan and during the life of the the Department, and approval and related conditions may be varied by the Minister on advice from an expert panel to reflect the best available data and scientific information. Note 2: For clarity, the monitoring required under this condition may be undertaken jointly with others. Response actions d. an exceedence response plan that includes: i. ii. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: I. threshold values environmental exceeded; for surface water quality and water values specified in the CSG WMMP are II. removed to Stage 3 WMMP; Ill. removed to Stage 3 WMMP; IV. removed to Stage 3 WMMP; and [removed to Stage 3 WMMP.] Note: The design of these groundwater repressurisation activities must be informed by a regional-scale groundwater model and a hydrochemical model approved by the Minister. 53 The proponent must implement the approved Stage 2 WMMP no later than 26 months from the date of the project approval. 21 Implementation of Stage 1 and Stage 2 CSG WMMP 53A. Within 33 months from the date of the approval of the action the proponent must submit for the approval of the Minister, a Stage 3 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 3 CSG WMMP). The proponent must allow at least a further 3 months for the Minister's consideration of approval of the Stage 3 CSG WMMP including seeking advice from an expert panel. 53B. In addition to the matters in the Stage 1 CSG WMMP and the Stage 2 CSG WMMP,the Stage 3 CSG WMMP must also include: a program and schedule for aquifer connectivity studies and monitoring of relevant aquifers to determine hydraulic connectivity; a. b c. details of constit uent components of any hydraulic fracturing agents and any other reinjected fluid(s), and their toxicity as individual substances and as total effluent toxicity and ecotoxicity, based on methods outlined in the National Water Quality Management Strategy; mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if there are any unforeseen emergency discharges; d. a groundwater quality and quantity monitoring plan to monitor the aquifers underlying the project area using a statistically and hydrogeologically valid , best practice bore monitoring network across the project area, and at least; i. baseline data for each monitoring site monitoring results over the life of the project; ii. the approach to be taken to analyse the results including the methods to determine trends to indicate potential impacts; and iii. mechanisms to monitor, avoid, minimise, manage, and respond to risks. for comparison of Note 1: For clarity, the monitoring required under this condition may be undertaken jointly with others. e an exceedence response plan that includes: i. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: I. II. III. ii. threshold values specified in the CSG WMMP for aquifer drawdown or groundwater contamination are exceeded ; subsidence or surface deformation occurs which impacts on surface or groundwater hydrology ; there are any unforeseen emergency discharges ; and a program and timetable for repressurisation using re-injection of CSG water from hydraulically connected aquifers back into appropriate permeable aquifers and for other groundwater repressurisation options to re-establish pressure levels and water qualities to the satisfaction of the Minister on the advice of an expert panel, in conjunction with appropriate measures to forecast and proactively manage any shortterm impacts. Note: The design of these groundwater repressurisation activities must be informed by a regional-scale groundwater model and a hydrochemical model approved by the Minister. 21a Implementation of Stage 3 CSG WMMP 53C. The proponent must implement the approved Stage 3 CSG WMMP, no later than 38 months from the date of the project approval. 54. Three months before commencement of each subsequent major stage of the proponent's gas field development the proponent must submit a revised Stage 3 CSG WMMP for the consideration of approval of the Minister including seeking the advice of an expert panel. 55. The Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan should be based on the proponent's planned staged development within the project area over the total life of the project consistent with approvals granted by the Queensland Government. Note: Condition 88 requires notification of commencement o f major stages of gas field development. 56. The proponent may only have, own, hold, take, or otherwise utilise sufficient CSG water as is required to undertake the approved activities within the approved project area. 57. The Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 CSG WMMP as approved by the Minister in writing acting on advice of an expert panel and in accordance with the timing requirements under these conditions must be implemented. Note: The Queensland Coordinator-General also requires surface water and groundwater monitoring and management. The proponent may incorporate requirements meet both Queensland and Commonwealth requirements. into plans that Revisions of Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 CSG WMMP 58. Consistent with an adaptive management approach the Stage 3 CSG WMMP must be reviewed and updated for each new stage of gas field development: to take into account of major updates to the Regional Groundwater Model; and to address findings of Cumulative Impact Assessment Reports required by the Queensland Government and these conditions of this approval. 59. A reviewed and updated Stage 3 CSG WMMP must be submitted to the Minister for written approval. Commencement of each new stage of gas field development must not occur without approval. The proponent may undertake activities that are critical to commencement that are associated with mobilisation of plant and equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of development only if such activities will have no adverse impact on MNES, and only if the proponent has notified the Department in writing before the activity is undertaken. The approved CSG WMMP must be implemented for the relevant gas field area. 60. The Minister may, through a request in writing, require that the Stage 1, Stage 2 or Stage 3 CSG WMMP be revised or amended, which may include requirements for amendments to address independent expert advice. Any such request must be acted on within the timeframe specified. Note: The Minister may throughout the project life seek advice from experts, or an expert panel. As a consequence specific matters identified through such advice may need to be addressed in the Plan. Where such advice is sought the proponent would be provided with opportunity to submit information and respond to the specific matters identified, in order to ensure the Plan is based on the best available information. Review requirements will facilitate adaptive management, alignment with Queensland Government approval requirements, and account for potential cumulative impacts as new scientific information becomes available over the life of the project. 60A.The proponent must treat all coal seam gas water as required under this approval before the coal seam gas water associated with the approved action enters the following pipelines: a. The Kenya to Chinchilla Pipeline referred to the Department (EPC 2011/6000) b. The Woleebee Creek to Glebe Weir pipeline (EPBC 2011/6181) Once the coal seam gas water has been treated as required under this approval and has entered the pipelines specified above, conditions 43-60 will no longer apply to that water. Regional groundwater model 61. To avoid or minimise direct or indirect adverse impacts on MNES, the proponent must: a. develop a regional scale, multi-layer, transient groundwater flow model of the cumulative effects of multiple CSG developments; b. develop and implement an adaptive management framework, applicable at both the project scale and regional-scale, that includes monitoring and mitigation approaches to assess and manage the impacts of CSG developments, which takes into account the groundwater model of cumulative impacts required under (a); and c. contribute data as requested over the life of the Project to inform a Basin- scale multi-layer, transient groundwater flow model of the cumulative effects of multiple CSG developments in the Surat and Bowen Basins. Note 1: In the absence of sufficient evidence to characterise and quantify potential impacts at the regional scale, this condition requires the model to be developed as an early warning system, informed by any other regional cumulative hydrological modelling, such that any hydrological changes can be identified at an early stage and appropriate, effective remedial actions implemented before irreversible environmental adverse impacts on MNES. Note 2: Condition 9, Part 2, Appendix 2 of the Queensland Coordinator-General's report of 24 June 2010, provides for the proponent to 'provide a regional groundwater model. Note 3: The Minister may throughout the project life seek advice from the Department or additional advice from independent experts, or an expert panel. As a consequence specific matters identified through the advice may need to be addressed in the Model. Where such advice is sought the proponent would be provided with the opportunity to provide information and respond to specific matters in order to ensure the Model is based on the best available information and advice. 62. The model required under condition 61 (a) must: a. use the best hydrostratigraphic and hydrogeological information available at the time, to identify the likely cumulative impacts of multiple CSG developments across the Surat and Bowen Basins; b. detail all data relating to the hydraulic connectivity between aquifers and aquitards used to substantiate the model parameterisation; c. be calibrated against measured piezometer responses in areas where CSG development has commenced; d. in relation to the reporting of model outputs - conform to the recommendation of the former Murray Darling Basin s Commission Groundwater Modelling Guidelines; e. include: i. ii. recharge versus extraction volumes for those aquifers; iii. details of justification for and assumptions regarding aquifer seal integrity (i.e. thickness and distribution of aquitards); iv. quantification of hydraulic connectivity between different units (aquifers and aquitards) through drill stem and pump testing; and v. f. water balances for the major aquifers affected by the CSG operations including the expected timeframe of any changes in water balance and pressure; quantification of the impacts of reinjection and other groundwater repressurisation techniques on aquifer water balances. reporting of provide for adaptive monitoring, through six-monthly monitoring results and new data, and annual updates of numerical simulation models and re-interpretation of results to relevant Queensland Government and Commonwealth agencies. 63. The model required under condition 61 (a) must be provided at the same time it is provided to fulfil requirements of the Queensland Government. 64. The proponent must seek approval of the Department if the requirement for a model under condition 61 (a) is to be satisfied by the proponent's contribution to a regional groundwater model developed by the Queensland Water Commission (or its successor agency), as agreed between the proponent and the Commission. Note: Where the proponent is conditioned (here or elsewhere under the approval) to address a matter that may be most efficiently managed by another party, whether another CSG proponent or a Queensland Government agency, the proponent may discharge their responsibility under the condition by contributing financially and cooperating with other parties to meet the condition i.e. to develop a single representative regional model and/or to provided a single report from one or more proponents. 24 Groundwater assessment, mitigation and monitoring 65. The proponent must provide to the Minister a copy of the groundwater assessment required under condition 9 ('Groundwater assessment, mitigation and monitoring'), Part 2, Appendix 2 of conditions imposed by the Queensland Coordinator-General in his report dated 24 June 2010. In addition, as part of a staged process of adaptive management of CSG development, the proponent must also provide the following in relation to subsidence: a. baseline and ongoing geodetic monitoring programs to quantify deformation at the land surface within the proponent's tenures. This should link from the tenement scale to the wider region across which groundwater extraction activities are occurring and any relevant regional program of monitoring; b. modelling to estimate the potential hydrological implications of the predicted surface and subsurface deformation; and c. measures for linking surface and sub-surface deformation arising activities. 25 from CSG 66. When requested by the Department, the proponent must provide to the Department all geodetic monitoring data and related information from the program. This data must be provided within 30 days of request, or in a timeframe agreed to by the Department in writing. 67. Any program required under condition 65 must be submitted to the Minister for approval with a proposed implementation schedule. The approved program must be implemented in a timeframe specified by the Minister. Springs assessment, mitigation and monitoring 68. As a precautionary approach, the proponent must within 9 months of approval, or such other timeframe specified in writing by the Minister, survey for, reconfirm, and notify the Minister of the presence or absence of any springs proximal to the project area and within 100 kilometres of modelled limits of aquifer draw-down. The survey: a. must include the Dawson River 8 springs north of Taroom; the Cockatoo Creek springs east of Taroom; and the Scott's Creek springs northeast of Roma; and b. may with the written approval of the Minister comprise the proponent's contribution to a springs survey developed with input from the Department and undertaken by the Queensland Water Commission (or its successor agency). Note 1: This survey may include use of remote sensing and may be aligned or combined with similar survey requirements that are to be undertaken by other proponents or the Queensland Water Commission. To avoid doubt, the survey must report on both discharge and recharge springs, as EPBC listed species may occur in association with either. Note 2: Surveys required under this condition may be undertaken by the_ proponent alone or in partnership with other CSG proponents. 69. If presence of The community of native species dependant on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin, or listed threatened species that are reliant on springs, is confirmed by a survey under condition 68, then the proponent must (unless the proponent is not able to gain access to the spring, even with the assistance of relevant government agencies): a. for springs within the project area- within 1 month of survey completion protect the ecological community and/or listed threatened species from gas field development activities by establishing and maintaining a minimum 200 m employee/contractor exclusion zone from the relevant springs within the project area, unless such access is required in an for emergency, environmental management, or for monitoring purposes; Note: The Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol will also apply. within 12 months of the survey completion provide to the Minister a management plan for all the relevant springs which includes: b. i: a specific monitoring and remediation program to protect the ecological community and/or listed threatened species and to monitor and address cumulative impacts within the project area and within modelled limits of aquifer draw-down that may arise from CSG water 26 extraction, including identifying trigger levels and responses in the case of changes to groundwater flow or quality in each relevant spring; ii. a baseline analysis of four 3-monthly samplings to determine the seasonal presence or absence of all relevant springs, and to establish: the existence, distribution and extent of listed threatened species; aquatic macro-invertebrates; aquatic plants; water quality characteristics; spring physical parameters including seasonal variation, depth, and flow rate; aquifer source including hydrochemical and isotopic analysis, and comparison of water levels with respect to source aquifer potentiometric surface; iii. ongoing monitoring on a 6 monthly basis (to cover high and low rainfall seasons) over the life of the project in the region relevant to each spring; iv. analysis and calibration of the monitoring results against the baseline data (collected under (ii) of this condition) as the CSG water and gas extraction occurs over the life of the project; v. threshold values (such as reporting or control line values for additional investigation, more intensive management actions, make good, and cease operations) at which management actions will be initiated to respond escalating levels of impact and designed to protect The community of native species dependent on the natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin and listed threatened species in the case of changes to groundwater pressure, flow, or water quality in GAB springs; vi. specific mechanisms to avoid, minimise, and manage response actions that can be taken by the proponent where: risks, and I. any threshold values for surface environmental values are exceeded; II. any threshold values .for aquifer drawdown, water quality change, or aquifer contamination are exceeded; Ill. subsidence or surface deformation occurs, particularly if it impacts on surface or groundwater hydrology; and IV. any unforeseen emergency discharges occur; vii. established best practice standards, policies and guidelines; and viii. performance measures, reporting to the Department, and publication of reports on the internet. Note: Individual species and ecological community management plans are also required in accordance with condition 8. The management plans may be developed by the proponent alone or in partnership with other CSG proponents. 70. Any management plan required under condition 69(b) must be submitted to the Minister for consideration of approval including seeking expert advice from an expert panel. The approved plan must be implemented within the timeframe specified by the Minister. The approved plan must be published on the internet within 20 business days of being approved by the Minister. 71. The results of the baseline analysis under condition 69(b) must be made available to the Queensland Water Commission as part of the proponents' obligations in respect of the regional groundwater model under condition 61 (a) and provided on request to the Department. 27 Notification of threshold breaches and response actions 72. Within 10 business days of the proponent identifying monitoring outcomes that indicate a risk of reduction in groundwater pressure or water quality, the proponent must notify the Minister in writing of the trend and the proponent's response action. 73. Within 10 days of a surface or groundwater threshold value (for example, water quality, environmental value, pressure, head, volume, or flow) being exceeded, the proponent must advise the Minister in writing of the circumstances, the threshold exceeded, the immediate action taken by the proponent, and proposed action to remedy the breach and avoid a subsequent breach. 74. Immediate action may include a range of measures including but not limited to further monitoring and investigation, the ceasing of water I gas extraction and/or water discharge or use in the area affected, or such other measures as are appropriate, until investigations can be completed to determine the cause and remedial action. The proponent's proposed response action must be notified to the Minister in writing. 75. The Minister may direct in writing that the proponent cease water I gas extraction and/or water discharge or use in the area affected, and if the Minister is not satisfied that the action proposed or taken by the proponent will remedy the situation, or make good any environmental loss, the Minister may direct the proponent to implement alternative action at the expense of the proponent. Note: The proponent will be provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment on any such direction before it is required to be implemented. Notifications and requirements about construction, management and environmental management plans operation, brine 76. The proponent must notify the Department in writing when developing or reviewing construction, operational, groundwater, CSG water, brine management, salinity management, environmental management, or other plans where the scope of the plans relates to potential direct, indirect or cumulative adverse impacts on MNES, or involves management of MNES. The proponent must in the notification indicate the relevant components of such plans relating to MNES and their management, and the timeframe for development and approval of the plans under Queensland Government requirements. 77. Where the scope of the plans relates to potential adverse impact on MNES, or involves management of MNES the plans must be submitted to the Minister for approval of those components. Approved components of plans must be implemented. Note: Where efficiency will be enhanced the proponent may also prepare and align management plans required under these conditions with the requirements of the Queensland Government as long as the relevant matters under the conditions of this approval are clearly and adequately addressed. 28 Cumulative Impact Report 78. On the same date that an assessment of cumulative impacts is provided in accordance with requirements imposed by the Queensland Government, or such other timeframe specified in writing by the Minister, the proponent must provide a copy of that report to the Minister. 79. In addition to meeting any requirements imposed by the Queensland Government, the report on cumulative impacts provided to the Minister must also address the following, in relation to potential adverse impacts on MNES: a. cumulative impacts relating to all listed species and listed ecological communities within and outside project area, including The community of native species dependant on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin; b. any surface water and groundwater environmental values, including groundwater pressures and groundwater hydrochemistry which, if altered, may have an impact on listed species and ecological communities within and outside project area; Note: These requirements may also be included together with the detailed assessment of cumulative impacts required under condition 1, Part 2, Appendix 2, of the Coordinator- General's reported dated 24 June 2010. 80. Within 3 years of the date that the cumulative impact report is provided to the Minister, or such other timeframe specified in writing by the Minister, the proponent must review that cumulative assessment and the report in the light of the most up-to-date information and the regional transient groundwater model required under condition 61 (a). The proponent must provide a report on the review to the Minister and at the same time publish the report on its website. Note: The assessment scope of the cumulative impact report is not limited to groundwater or surface water impacts. These conditions provide that, if the Minister believes that it is necessary or desirable for the better protection of a relevant controlling provision for the action, the Minister may request the proponent to make,within a period specified by the Minister, revisions to a plan approved under these conditions. The Minister may make such a request in the light of the cumulative impacts assessment, or the review of the cumulative impacts assessment. Section 136(1)(b) of the EPBC Act additionally provides that the Minister may revoke, vary or add to a condition of this approval if the action has a significant impact that was not identified in assessing the action, and if the Minister relevantly believes it is necessary. Decommissioning Plan 81. Within five years of the commencement of gas f i e l d d e v e l o p m e n t , th e proponent must develop a Decommissioning Plan. The Plan must: a. require the progressive removal or reuse of infrastructure where gas field operations cease during the project life; b. establish management practices environmental disturbance; c. ensure MNES are not impacted by progressive decommissioning, or final decommissioning of gas field infrastructure; d. define rehabilitation actions decommissioning including for: for 29 and the safeguards infrastructure to sites minimise following i. optimising habitat and habitat connectivity for MNES; ii. enhancing pre-construction environmental quality; and iii. ongoing management during rehabilitation. 82. The Decommissioning Plan must be submitted for the approval o f the Minister. The approved Plan must be implemented. Survey data 83. All survey data collected for the project must be collected and recorded so as to conform to data standards notified from time to time by the Department. When requested by the Department, the proponent must provide to the Department all species and ecological survey data and related survey information from ecological surveys undertaken for MNES. This survey data must be provided within 30 days of request, or in a timeframe agreed to by the Department in writing. Publication of Protocol and Plans 84. The Protocol and all plans approved by the Minister under these conditions must be published on the proponent's website within 30 business days of approval by the Minister. · 85. The Department may request the proponent to publish on the internet a plan in a specified location or format, and with specified accompanying text. The proponent must comply with any such request. Notification of commencement 86. Within 20 business days of the commencement of the action, the proponent must advise the Department in writing of the actual date of commencement. 87. If, at any time after five years from the date of this approval, the Minister notifies the proponent in writing that the Minister is not satisfied that there has been commencement of the action, the action must not commence without the written agreement of the Minister. 88. The proponent must notify the Department in writing of the proposed dates for each subsequent major stage of gas field development at least 40 business days before their commencement, and within 20 business days notify actual commencement dates, and within 20 business days of any major variations to gas field development notify the variations. 30 Request for variation of plans by proponent 89. If the proponent wants to act other than in accordance with a plan approved by the Minister under these conditions, the proponent must submit a revised plan for the Minister's approval. 90. If the Minister approves the revised plan, then that plan must be implemented instead of the plan originally approved. 91. Until the Minister has approved the revised plan, the proponent must continue to implement the original plan. Revisions to plans by the Minister 92. If the Minister believes that it is necessary or desirable for the better protection of a relevant controlling provision for the action, the Minister may request the proponent to make, within a period specified by the Minister, specified revisions to a plan approved under these conditions. Without limiting this condition, the Minister may also make such a request following a study under s.255AA of the Water Act 2007. 93. If the Minister makes a request for revision to a plan, the proponent must: a. comply with that request; and b. submit the revised plan to the Minister for approval within the period specified in the request. 94. The proponent must implement the revised plan on approval of the Minister. 95. Until the Minister has approved the revised plan, the proponent must continue to implement the original plan. Minimum timeframes for consideration of plans 96. For any plan required to be approved by the Minister under these conditions, the proponent must ensure the Minister is provided at least 20 business days for review and consideration of the plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing between the proponent and the Minister. Compliance with State environmental and other authorities 97. The proponent must comply with all environmental authorisations issued by the State, including conditions of an environmental authority issued under the EP Act. 31 Provision of State plans 98. If a c o n d i t i o n o f a State a p p r o v a l r e q u i r e s t h e proponent to provide a plan then th e proponent must: provide the plan to the Department or Minister on period specified in the request; and. a. request, within the prepare and combine plans that meet both Queensland Government requirements and the Commonwealth requirements under this approval where this is efficient. In doing so the proponent must clearly identify the respective responsibilities and how these are being addressed in relation to these conditions. b. Timeframes 99. If these conditions require the proponent to provide something by a specified time, a longer period may be specified in writing by the Minister. Auditing 100. On the request of and within a period specified by the Department, the proponent must ensure that: a. an independent audit of compliance with these conditions is conducted; and b. an audit report, which addresses the audit criteria to the satisfaction of the Department, is published on the Internet and submitted to the Department. 101. Before the audit begins, the following must be approved by the Department: a. the independent auditor; and b. the audit criteria. 102. The audit report must include: a. b. the components of the project being audited; the conditions that were activated during the period covered by the audit; c. a compliance/non-compliance table; d. a description of the evidence to support audit findings of compliance or non-compliance; e. f. g. recommendations on any non-compliance or other matter to improve compliance; a response by the proponent to the recommendations in the report (or, if the proponent does not respond within 20 business days of a request to do so by the auditor, a statement by the auditor to that effect); certification by the independent auditor of the findings of the audit report. 32 103. The financial cost of the audit will be borne by the proponent 104. The proponent must: a. b. c. implement any recommendations in the audit report, as directed in writing by the Department after consultation with the proponent; investigate any non-compliance identified in the audit report; and if non-compliance is identified in the audit report – take action as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with these conditions. Note: The Department will discuss findings of audit reports with the proponent to ensure compliance with conditions and before the issue of any directions. 105. If the audit report identifies any non-compliance with the conditions, within 20 business days after the audit report is submitted to the Department the proponent must provide written advice to the Minister setting out the: a. actions taken by the proponent to ensure compliance with these conditions; and b. actions taken to prevent a recurrence of any non-compliance, or implement any other recommendation to improve compliance, identified in the audit report. Note: Independent third party auditing may include audit of the proponent's performance against the requirements of any plan required under these conditions. Reporting non-compliance 106. The proponent must, when first becoming aware of a non-compliance with these conditions, or a plan required to be approved by the Minister under these conditions: a. report the non-compliance and remedial action to the Department within five business days; b. bring the matter into compliance within a reasonable time frame specified in writing by the Department Record-keeping 107. The proponent must: a. maintain accurate records substantiating all activities associated with or relevant to these conditions of approval, including measures taken to implement a plan approved under these conditions; and b. make those records available on request to the Department Such records may be subject to audit by the Department or an independent auditor in accordance with section 458 of the EPBC Act, or used to verify compliance with these conditions. Note: Audits or summaries of audits carried out under these conditions, or under section 458 of the EPBC Act, may be posted on the Department's website. The results of such audits may also be publicised through the general media. 33 Financial assurance 108. The proponent must: a. provide the Minister with a financial assurance in the amount and form required from time to time by the Minister for activities to which these conditions apply; and b. review and maintain the amount of financial assurance based on proponent reporting on compliance with these conditions, and any auditing of the activities. 109. The financial assurance is to remain in force until the Minister is satisfied that no claim is likely to be made on the assurance. Note: The financial assurance may be used for rehabilitation of habitat and other purposes not addressed adequately by the proponent during the life of the project. Annual Environmental Return 11o. The proponent must produce an Annual Environmental Return which: a. b. c. d. addresses compliance with these conditions; records any unavoidable adverse impacts on MNES, mitigation measures applied to avoid adverse impacts on MNES; and any rehabilitation work undertaken in connection with any unavoidable adverse impact on MNES; identifies all non-compliances with these conditions; and identifies any amendments needed to plans to achieve compliance with these conditions. 111. The proponent must publish the Annual Environmental Return on the Internet within 20 business days of each anniversary date of this approval. Note: In complying with this publication requirement, the proponent must ensure that it has considered relevant confidentiality and intellectual property rights of third parties. Dictionary 112.1In these conditions, unless otherwise indicated: Brigalow means for the purposes of the application of the Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol the presence of the Brigalow (Acacia harpophy/Ja dominant and co-dominant) ecological community includes Brigalow regrowth that retains the species composition and structural elements typical of that found in the undisturbed li s t e d regional ecosystems but does not include: a. b. vegetation that has been comprehensively cleared (not just thinned) within the last 15 years; vegetation in which exotic perennial plants have more than 50% cover, assessed in a minimum area of 0.5 ha (100m by 50 m); and 34 c. individual patches of Brigalow that are smaller than 0.5 ha; Clearance of native vegetation means the cutting down, felling, thinning, logging, removing, killing, destroying, poisoning, ringbarking, uprooting or burning of native vegetation; Commencement means any physical disturbance including clearance of native vegetation, new road work, and the establishment of well sites to develop the gas field project area (the project area is specified in condition 1). Commencement does not include minor physical disturbance necessary to undertake preclearance surveys to establish monitoring programs; or associated with the mobilisation of the plant, equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of gas field development. Conditions means these conditions attached to the approval of the action; CSG means coal seam gas; Department means the Australian Government department responsible for administering Part 4 of the EPBC Act; Environmental constraints class Zone 4a means habitat for listed threatened species and migratory species and listed ecological communities as described in management plans 'for these matters, and as identified through ecological field surveys. It includes matters for which there is a disturbance limit specified in Tables 2 and 3 under condition 25. For the purposes of these conditions, environmental constraints class Zone 4a it does not include other constraints identified by the proponent unless these relate to MNES; Expert panel means an expert panel appointed by the Minister; EP Act means Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qid); EPBC Act means the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; Gas field development means all activities associated with the development of the gas fields including (but not limited to) site clearance and site preparation; development of exploration and production wells; development of water and gas transmission pipelines; infrastructure access road construction; construction of workers accommodation and office facilities; construction o f gas compression stations; construction of pumping stations; construction of water treatment facilities; and construction of water storage dams; High value regrowth for the purposes of these conditions means mature native vegetation that hasn't been cleared since 31 December 1989. Impact risk zone means the area within 200 metres from the perimeter of class Zone 4A; 35 Linear infrastructure means linear infrastructure including (but not limited to) gas and water gathering lines, low and high pressure gas and water pipelines, roads and tracks, power lines and other service lines; Listed means those species, ecological communities or other identified matters of environmental significance listed for protection under Part 3 of the EPBCAct; Minister means the Minister responsible for Chapter 4 of the EPBC Act, and may include a delegate of the Minister under s.133 of the EPBC Act; means matters of national environmental significance, relevant matters protected under Part 3 of the EPBC Act; MNES being the No impact zone means the area within 300 metres from the perimeter of class Zone4A; Non-linear infrastructure means infrastructure including (but not limited to) exploration and production wells, compressor stations, regulated dams, reverse osmosis plants, brine encapsulation facilities, workers camps, and maintenance facilities; includes described); Plan a report, study, protocol, program, or strategy (however Production means extraction of coal seam gas or associated water other than for exploration purposes; Proponent means the holder of the approval to which these conditions relate, and includes any person acting on behalf of the proponent; Referral means a referral under the EPBC Act including any amendment of the referral. Regulatory agency means agencies administering the EPBC Act and the EP Act (Qid); Remnant vegetation for the purposes of these conditions means vegetation that can meet the following: a. 50% of the predominant canopy cover that would exist if the vegetation community were undisturbed; and b. 70% of the height of the predominant canopy that would exist if the vegetation community were undisturbed; and c. Composed of the same floristic species that would exist if the vegetation community were undisturbed. Trunkline rights of way means the linear construction footprint required to install gas and water trunklines, underground 33 kV power lines, above ground 33 kV power lines, fibre optic cable and gas and water gathering lines. Trunkline rights of way may contain between one and ten gas and water 36 trunklines, between one and ten power lines, between one and ten fibre optic cables and between one and up to twelve gathering lines running in parallel; Upstream Infrastructure Corridor (UIC) is a linear corridor linking the Ruby CPP, Jordan CPP, Kenya WTP, Bellevue CPP and the Condamine Power Station. The UIC will contain multiple linear infrastructure items running in parallel, including gas trunklines, water trunklines, gas gathering lines, water gathering line, water distribution pipelines, above ground 132 kV power lines, above ground 33 kV power lines, below ground 33 kV power lines and fibre optic cable. The UIC and the infrastructure to be contained within the UIC along various sections of the UIC are shown in Figure 2 to these conditions; Water distribution pipelines means pipeline used to transfer raw or treated water to a user of that water or to transfer brine between facilities that manage brine; Water gathering lines means pipelines used to transfer water between wells andregional storage ponds (RSPs); Water trunklines means pipelines used to transfer water between regional storage ponds and water treatment plants. 113. Unless otherwise indicated, words in these conditions have the same meaning as in (in the following order of priority): a. the EPBC Act; and b. the EP Act. 114. Unless the contrary is indicated, in these conditions: a. b. words in the singular number include the plural and words in the plural number include the singular; and condition headings are inserted for convenient reference only and have no effect in limiting or extending the language of the condition to which they refer. 37 Figure 1 — Project area - gas field tenements Tal-a <i ·...... t PlJ'<fi1 c=J c=J t::> $ ,(1 0 C T G asF ield5 -A m lm li!yta P cl { .ili> A 'lll'W ; ! l! A I ; s ( r ii& J : . aM w g ,.:m tl!; A ;E r4 y G asf - P etroleum Lea A ppli:c.rnon N - 38 Figure 2 -Infrastructure corridor widths for the Upstream Infrastructure Corridor 39 VARIATION TO CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO APPROVAL To develop, construct, operate and decommission the Coal Seam Gas Field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, Including expansion of the QGC operated coal seam gas fields In the Surat Basin as described In referral EPBC 2008/4398. This decision to vary conditions of approval is made under section 143 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) . Approved action Person to whom the approval Is granted Queensland Gas Company Ltd (QGC) and BG International Limited (BG) ABN: 089 642 553 (QGC) ABN: 72 114 818 825 (BG) Approved action To develop,construct, operate and decommission the coal seam gas field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, including expansion of the QGC operated coal seam gas fields in the Surat Basin, to supply gas for the Queensland Curtis LNG Project to the proposed Queensland Curtis LNG Plant located on Curtis Island: • as described in the proponent's referral received under the EPBC Act on 18 August 2008; and • as described in the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement and Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement. Variation Variation of conditions of approval The variation is: Delete conditions 45, 49, 52, 54, 57,58, 59, 60 (excl. 60A) attached to the approval dated 22 October 2010 and substitute the conditions specified below. Add conditions 53A, 538 and 53C specified below. Date of effect This variation has effect on the date the instrument is signed Person authorised to make decision Name and position Signature b•te ol deol•lon a/ December 2012 Conditions attached to the approval 45. To avoid doubt, monitoring and risk management requirements in the Stage 1 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 1 CSG WMMP), the Stage 2 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 2 CSG WMMP) and Stage 3 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 3 CSG WMMP) (outlined below) will continue to apply to any aquifer which the proponent has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Minister, on the advice of the expert panel, has negligible hydraulic connectivity to other aquifers. Stage 1 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan 49. Within 6 months from the date of the project approval, the proponent must submit for the approval of the Minister a Stage 1 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 1 CSG WMMP) which includes at least: Groundwater monitoring and management a. groundwater drawdown limits for each targeted aquifer; b. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] c. a program and schedule for field piloting of aquifer reinjection of treated CSG water and other groundwater repressurisation techniques; d. early warning approached ; indicators where drawdown thresho lds are being Hydraulic fracturing e. the estimated number and the spatial distribution of boreholes where hydraulic fracturing may be necessary , an annual review of the estimate , and recording of actual use; f. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] Surface water monitoring and management g. an ongoing water quality and quantity surface water monitoring plan that includes at least: i. identification of the surface and aquatic systems to be monitored and their environmental values, water quality , and environmental characteristics, and the rationale for selection; ii. the number and locations of monitoring sites upstream and downstream of proposed discharge of CSG water (whether treated water , amended water or raw water) , including test and reference sites upstream and downstream and before and after any proposed impacts; iii. iv . the freque ncy of the monitoring and rationale for the frequency ; baseline data for each monitoring site for comparison of monitoring results over the life of the project; 2 v. the approach to be taken to analyse the results including the methods to determine trends to indicate potential impacts; vi. threshold values that protect relevant MNES (such as reporting or investigation , more intensive control line values for additional management action, make good, and cease operations) at which management actions will be initiated to respond to escalating levels of risk and designed to protect water quality and the associated environmental values of surface and aquatic systems ; vii. water treatment standards; viii. and amendment methods and water storage locations and volumes including any storage and volumes required to pilot or implement reinjection or other groundwater repressurisation techniques; ix. water use or disposal options and methods (whether for beneficial use or not) including frequency , volumes , quality and environmental values documented for each receiving environment; x. xi. brine storage management; locations and volumes , and brine crystal waste xii. emergency water discharges, their volumes and quality; Response actions h. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: i. ii. threshold values for surface water quality and water environmental values specified in the CSG WMMP are exceeded; and [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] Reporting i. performance measures, annual reporting publication of reports on the internet. to the Department, and Note: A key objective of the CSG WMMP groundwate r components is to maintain or restore aquifer pressure. as affected by CSG production, to levels that avoid risk of adverse impact on MNES. Stage 2 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan 52. In addition to the matters in the Stage 1 CSG WMMP , the Stage 2 CSG WMMP must also include: Groundwater monitoring and management a. an ongoing CSG water treatment program to ensure that any water to be used for re-inject ion, or used for other groundwater repressurisation options , is treated at least equal to the water quality of the receiving groundwater system or environment; b. the method, data and the evidentiary standards necessary to support a conclusion that an aquifer from which CSG water is being extracted is not hydraulically connected to other aquifers; c. a groundwater quality and quantity monitoring plan to monitor the aquifers underlying the project area using a statistically and hydrogeologically valid , best practice bore monitoring network across the project area, and at i. the number and locations of monitoring bores and their flow, pressure, head, and water quality characteristics; ii. iii. the aquifers to be monitored and the rationale for selection; the frequency of the monitoring and rationale for the frequency; [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] iv. v. vi. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] groundwater drawdown threshold values and groundwater quality threshold values for each aquifer (based on regional groundwater modelling endorsed by the Minister) at which management actions (such as reporting or control line values for additional investigation, more intensive management action, make good, and cease operations) will be initiated to respond to escalating levels of risk, including increasing levels of drawdown, contamination of groundwater, or subsidence; vii. references to standards and relevant policies and guidelines ; viii. [removed WMMP] ix. to Stage 3 performance measures, annual reporting to the publication of reports on the internet; Department, and Note 1: Threshold values will be identified in the plan and during the life of the approval and related conditions may be varied by the Minister on advice from an expert panel to reflect the best available data and scientific information. Note 2: For clarity, the monitor ing required under this condition may be undertaken Response actions d. an exceedence response plan that includes: i. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: I. threshold values for surface environmental values specified exceeded; water quality and water in the CSG WMMP are 11. Ill. IV. ii. [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] [removed to Stage 3 WMMP] Note: The design of these groundwater repressurisation activities must be informed by a regional-scale groundwater model and a hydrochemical modelapproved by the Minister. Stage 3 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan 53A. Within 33 months from the date of the approval of the action the proponent must submit for the approval of the Minister, a Stage 3 Coal Seam Gas Water Monitoring and Management Plan (Stage 3 CSG WMMP). The proponent must allow at least a further 3 months for the Minister's consideration of approval of the Stage 3 CSG WMMP including seeking advice from an expert panel. 538. In addition to the matters in the Stage 1 CSG WMMP and the Stage 2 CSG WMMP , the Stage 3 CSG WMMP must also include: a. a program and schedule for aquifer connectivity studies and monitoring of relevant aquifers to determine hydraulic connectivity; b. details of constit uent components of any hydraulic fracturing agents and any other reinjected fluid(s) , and their toxicity as individual substances and as total effluent toxicity and ecotoxicity , based on methods outlined in the National Water Quality Management Strategy; c. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if there are any unforeseen emergency discharges; d. a groundwater quality and quantity monitoring plan to monitor the aquifers underlying the project area using a statistically and hydrogeologically valid , best practice bore monitoring network across the project area, and at least; i. baseline data for each monitoring site for comparison of monitoring results over the life of the project; ii. the approach to be taken to analyse the results including the methods to determine trends to indicate potential impacts; and iii. mechanisms to monitor, avoid, minimise, manage,and respond to risks. Note 1: For clarity, the monitoring required under this condition may be undertaken jointly with others . e. an exceedence response plan that includes: i. mechanisms to avoid, minimise and manage risk of adverse impacts and response actions and timeframes that can be taken by the proponent if: 1. threshold values specified in the CSG WMMP for aquifer drawdown or groundwater contamination are exceeded ; 11. subsidence or surface deformation occurs which impacts on surface or groundwater hydrology; 111. there are any unforeseen emergency discharges ; and ii. a program and timetable for repressurisation using re-injection of CSG water from hydraulically connected aquifers back into appropriate permeable aquifers and for other groundwater repressurisation options to re-establish pressure levels and water qualities to the satisfaction of the Minister on the advice of an expert panel, in conjunction with appropriate measures to forecast and proactively manage any shortNote:The design of these groundwater repressurisation activities must be informed by a regional-scale groundwater model and a hydrochemical modelapproved by the Minister. 5 Implementation of Stage 3 CSG WMMP 53C. The proponent must implement the approved Stage 3 CSG WMMP, no later than 38 months from the date of the project approval. 54. Three months before commencement of each subsequent major Stage of the proponent's gas field development the proponent must submit a revised Stage 3 CSG WMMP for the consideration of approval of the Minister including seeking the advice of an expert panel. 57. The Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 CSG WMMP as approved by the Minister in writing acting on advice of an expert panel and in accordance with the timing requirements under these conditions must be implemented . Note: The Queensland Coordinator-General also requires surface water and groundwater monitoring and management. The proponent may incorporate requirements into plans that meet both Queensland and Commonwealth requirements. Revisions of Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 CSG WMMP 58. Consistent with an adaptive management approach the Stage 3 CSG WMMP must be reviewed and updated for each new Stage of gas field development: to take into account of major updates to the Regional Groundwater Model; and to address findings of Cumulative Impact Assessment Reports required by the Queensland Government and these conditions of this approval. 59. A reviewed and updated Stage 3 CSG WMMP must be submitted to the Minister for written approval. Commencement of each new Stage of gas field development must not occur without approval. The proponent may undertake activit ies that are critical to commencement that are associated with mobilisation of plant and equipment, materials, machinery and personnel prior to the start of development only if such activities will have no adverse impact on MNES, and only if the proponent has notified the Department in writing before the activity is undertaken. The approved CSG WMMP must be implemented for the relevant gas field area. 60. The Minister may,through a request in writing , require that the Stage 1, Stage 2 or Stage 3 CSG WMMP be revised or amended, which may include requirements for amendments to address independent expert advice. Any such request must be acted on within the timeframe specified. Note: The Minister may throughout the project life seek advice from experts, or an expert panel. As a consequence specific matters identified through such advice may need to be addressed in the Plan. Where such advice is sought the proponent would be provided with opportunity to submit information and respond to the specific matters identified, in order to ensure the Plan is based on the best available information. Review requirements will facilitate adaptive management , alignment with Queensland Government approval requirements, and account for potentialcumulative impacts as new scientific informat ion becomes available over the life of the project. Department of Sustain ability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities VARIATION TO CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO APPROVAL To develop, construct, operate and decommission the Coal Seam Gas Field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, including expansion of the QGC operated coal seam gas fields in the Surat Basin as described in referral EPBC 2008/4398. This decision to vary a condition of approval is made under section 143 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Proposed action Person to whom the approval is granted Proposed action Queensland Gas Company Ltd (QGC) BG International Limited (BG) ABN: 089 642 553 and (QGC) ABN: 72 114 818 825 (BC) To develop, construct,operate and decommission the coal seam gas field component of the Queensland Curtis LNG Project, including expansion of , the QGC operated coal seam gas fields in the Surat Basin, to supply gas for the Queensland Curtis LNG Project to the proposed Queensland Curtis LNG Plant located on Curtis Island: • as described in the proponent's referral received under the EPBC Act on 18 August 2008; and • as described in the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement and Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement. Variation Variation of conditions of approval The variation is to: Insert condition 60A of the approval dated 22 October 2010 as specified below. Date of effect This variation has effect from the date this instrument is signed. Person authorised Name and position to make decision Shane Gaddes A/g Assistant Secretary Compliance and Enforcement Branch Signature Date of decision 2- November 2012 Condition attached to the approval: 60A. The proponent must treat all coal seam gas water as required under this approval before the coal seam gas water associated with the approved action enters the following pipelines: a. The Kenya to Chinchilla Pipeline referred to the Department (EPC 2011/6000) b. The Woleebee Creek to Glebe Weir pipeline (EPBC 2011/6181) Once the coal seam gas water has been treated as required under this approval and has entered the pipelines specified above, conditions 43-60 will no longer apply to that water . QCLNG Upstream Project Significant Species Management Plans APPENDIX 4. RESUMES OF AUTHORS UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED QGC 2015 Revision 5 Curriculum Vitae STEVE CUPITT Senior Ecologist / Senior Environmental Scientist Toowoomba, Queensland Associate Degree of Applied Science (Distinction), University of QLD, 3 years AREAS OF EXPERTISE: Steve is an ecologist with over 18 years’ experience in linear / broad scale flora & fauna surveys, weed surveys / mapping and environmental surveys in the Galilee, Bowen and Surat Basin, Desert Uplands, Southern Gulf and NSW north-west slopes . During this time, he has worked with over 1,200 landholders in the field, located and implemented environmental offsets in NSW and Queensland, been Regional and State Coordinator for Natural Heritage Trust grants, and manager of the Greening Australia West Region. He has consulted for a number of organisations on terrestrial ecology, tree management/arborist, wetlands, weed quantification, management and control recommendations, riparian management and rehabilitation. Steve has worked closely with State and Commonwealth Departments on a number of programs, including managing the State Governments Vegetation Incentives Program and the Commonwealths Regional Support Contract. Steve was Greening Australia West Region manager for 7 years, Greening Australia State Coordinator for devolved grants, Environment Director of Southern Gulf Catchments for 3 years, a member of the Condamine Catchment Management Association for 5 years, was on the Delbessie Leasehold Land Advisory Committee during development of the leasehold land management guidelines, is a member of the biodiversity offsets committee, is a member of Desert Channels Regional Body, was a member of the Rangelands Grazing Advisory Committee for UQ Gatton and a technical member of the advisory committee for BAMM and AQUABAMM. As a result of Steve’s understanding of rural issues and land values and association with landholders throughout QLD, Steve developed an offset calculator to assist landholders and clients with costs of ongoing management and rehabilitation of degraded sites damaged by overgrazing, floods, fires and land-clearing. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE WHILST WORKING FOR RPS GROUP AND AMEC: Rehabilitation and Monitoring QGC LNG Species Management Plans - Development of a quick assessment tool for determining the likelihood of occurrence in any given location for significant flora/ fauna species. Origin Energy - Re-vegetation and tree planting project in Spring Gully. Braemar Power Station – Re-vegetation and rehabilitation on sites previously cleared for development. Peabody Wilkie Creek Mine – Conducted monitoring programs to measure the success/failure of rehabilitation. rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Fowks Design and Construction – planned, selected plant species, implemented and monitored rehabilitation on a 5 ha site north of Toowoomba. Offsets Eastern Star Gas (NSW) - Steve located and secured environmental offsets for ESG (now Santos) in the north-west slopes of NSW. Dysart Coal – Using a combination of Steve’s own landholder land-bank and the Galilee/Bowen offset strategy, Steve located offset sites and negotiated with landholders to sign a document indicating their interest in offsets. This provided Dysart with over 5,000 ha of potential offset sites in preparation for when offsets will be required. Logan Water Alliance - The project required an offset as a result of linear infrastructure development. Steve located a suitable offset area and secured the area to the satisfaction of State and Commonwealth Government. Queensland Curtis LNG Project - The QCLNG project required extensive linear and well-pad offsets under State and Commonwealth legislation. Steve was involved in assessment of the project’s current and future offset requirements, preparation of offset budgets and a landscape scale assessment to determine the feasibility of securing offsets as well as the early identification of priority offset sites associated with the Curtis Island Export Facility. Steve has also managed the landholder engagement process and undertook extensive liaison with rural landholders. He developed offset management plans with associated costs and prepared proposals to respective Government Departments. Origin APLNG Project - Steve was a member of the team involved in offset identification, assessments and landholder engagement as a result of impacts on remnant vegetation on well pads and linear infrastructure (ie. gathering, access, trunklines and the main-line. Origin APLNG Project (offset surveys) – Steve was a member of the team conducting flora and fauna surveys on five properties selected as likely offset properties. Steve conducted ecological condition and bio-condition surveys to determine the suitability as the areas as offsets. Steve prepared a condition report for the client and met with the State Government on a number of occasions to define offset scores. Xstrata Coal - Identification of offset properties, landholder engagement, vegetation ground-truthing, preliminary property reviews and Bio-Condition assessment. Wiggins Island Coal Terminal – Steve identified offsets areas, negotiated with landholders, conducted ecological assessments and liaised with Government Departments to secure suitable offsets. Newstead Pipeline Offsets Strategy, APA Wallumbilla - Steve was responsible for assessing the project’s offset requirements, preparing offset cost estimates and a landscape scale assessment to determine the feasibility of securing offsets. BMA Coal – Steve led a small team of ecologists to evaluate five BMA owned properties for suitability as environmental offset areas. Each property had 30+ rapid assessments conducted to determine the feasibility of securing offset sites on BMA owned land. Cockatoo Coal Limited – Steve assisted in the development of an offset strategy for CCL and provided extensive advice various offset options available to CCL. Flora / Fauna Management rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Origin APLNG Project - DEIS Mainline Survey: Steve was a member of a team of ecologists involved in the ecological survey of the linear LNG mainline for weeds, ecological values, habitat and riparian attributes. Origin APLNG Project Spring Gully – Steve led a team of ecologists for a survey of weeds, EVNT flora, habitat and Regional Ecosystem ground truth on the Spring Gully tenement. QGC LNG Project Surveys - Infrastructure and gas field development surveys conducting ecological surveys for gas field development, linear infrastructure and compressor stations. This involved habitat identification, weeds, EVNT, riparian management and regional ecosystem identification. QGC LNG EVNT Species Quantification Surveys – A number of QGC properties were identified as having a number of EVNT flora species. Steve devised a methodology to determine the number of species on site and provided data to the DEHP and QLD Herbarium. QGC LNG Species Management Plans - Development of a quick assessment tool for determining the likelihood of occurrence in any given location for 10 significant fauna species for use by field ecologists and contractors during linear operations and gas field development. Origin APLNG Project – Steve was a member of the team conducting environmental seismic surveys in the Dulwogan and Condabri fields for flora / fauna, weeds, habitat and significant ecological features. Kevin’s Corner / Hancock Coal / Rail Corridor – Flora / fauna surveys north of Alpha were required to locate specific EVNT flora / fauna species (ENVT), weeds, weed density, significant pasture weeds and / or nuisance species on a proposed mine site and 9km of rail line. Steve led a team of 6 ecologists to conduct linear and broad scale surveys over a three week timeframe. Origin Energy - Re-vegetation and tree planting project in Spring Gully Rothwell Retirement Village – Steve was a member of a small team conducting Bio-Condition and Ecological Equivalence on coastal vegetation for a development and assessing an area for vegetation offset suitability. Thornlands – This project required marine vegetation assessments and a review of a marine offset area as a result of a slipway development application. Steve and another ecologist reviewed both sites. Arrow Energy – Provided surveys for weed species identified as Weeds of National Significance (WONS), declared weeds, pasture and environmental weeds and weeds identified as being detrimental to livestock, quantification and control measures. This was followed up by development of a weed management plan and organising a weed control crew to control weeds on Arrows tenements. Santos - Consulting on ground-truth Regional Ecosystems and rehabilitation of degraded sites. Braemar Power and QGC - Weed Control on 200km Gas pipeline and Braemar Power Station Toowoomba Regional Council Proposed Pipeline (Hampton) – Assessment of the Hampton Pipeline for EVNT species, habitat trees and environmental significant issues. Toowoomba Regional Council O’Mara Road Alignment – Assessment of O’Mara Road widening for EVNT species, habitat trees and environmental significant issues. rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Toowoomba Regional Council OBrien’s Road Alignment - Assessment of O’Brien’s Road for EVNT species, habitat trees and environmental significant issues. Toowoomba Regional Council Sewerage Treatment Works Expansion – Assessment of the Treatment Work site for EVNT species, habitat trees and environmental significant issues. Toowoomba Regional Council Road Widening for Airport Link - Assessment of the airport road for EVNT species, habitat trees and environmental significant issues. Greening Australia Native Plant Nursery - Managed the weed control team, Environmental Services Unit and overall nursery operations. Condamine Alliance - Consultant for wetland, riparian management and rehabilitation. Greening Australia – Regional Manager of West Region for Rural Consultancy (9 full time and 3-10 casual staff), Environmental Services, Nursery, Weed Control Teams, Rehabilitation and Tree Planting. This role included budget development, job/work estimating, business development and client negotiations. Commonwealth Government - Regional Support Contract Manager of Queensland Government’s Vegetation Incentives Program Greening Australia - State and Regional Coordinator Devolved Grants with a permanent staff of 9 and responsible for development of funding applications to secure ongoing work programs. On Farm Conservation Greening Australia - State Manager of Government Vegetation Incentives Program Greening Australia - Field Officer with the On Farm Conservation Program Greening Australia - Regional Coordinator of the On Farm Conservation Program PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE: Senior Environmental Scientist / Ecologist – RPS (September 2012 - current) Senior Ecologist – Unidel / AMEC (3.5 years) Manager West Region, Greening Australia Queensland (7 years) Regional/State Coordinator QLD Grants Program, Greening Australia Queensland (6 years) MEMBERSHIPS & ACHIEVEMENTS: Environment Director of Southern Gulf Catchments Advisory member to Desert Channels Regional Body. Member Biodiversity Offsets Member Consulting Professionals rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Member Environmental Professionals QLD Member Natural Environmental Management Professionals Member of the Condamine Catchment Management Association [Membership/achievement name – Institute name] Accredited NSW Bio-Banker Accredited in QLD’s Vegetation Structure and Remnant Status under the VMA 1999 Winner of the “QLD Bush-Care Nature Conservation Award” and finalist of the Commonwealth BushCare Award Accredited in QLD’s Vegetation Structure and Remnant Status under the VMA 1999 Certificate 4 Assessments and Workplace Training RAQ31698 Certificate 3 Agriculture (production Horticulture) Developed an excel based model to calculate offset management costs and landholder compensation. Wrote Greening Australia’s Rural prospectus Wrote the “Monitoring Farm Flora and Fauna” manual Co-wrote “Managing Urban Reserves”. Co-wrote “Rehabilitating Mine Sites”. Permits and Licences Level 1 and 2 chainsaw operation Fire level 1 and 2 Shooters licence Training for operation of 4WD and quad bike Manual drivers licence including medium rigid up 13.8 tonnes, 38 seater bus and motorcycle rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae DR LYNISE WEARNE SENIOR ECOLOGIST BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (BOTANY/ECOLOGY), LA TROBE UNIVERSITY, 2006 BACHELOR OF SCIENCE HONOURS (BOTANY/ZOOLOGY), LA TROBE UNIVERSITY, 2000 AREAS OF EXPERTISE: Lynise is a senior ecologist with 10 years experience across a wide range of industries and locations within both government and private sectors, including natural resource management, energy, gas, mining and carbon farming. The primary areas of expertise are in the fields of ecological and biodiversity monitoring, assessment and management; development of vegetation monitoring and management plans; species distribution modelling and spatial analysis. Lynise has extensive experience field experience in riparian and terrestrial systems across numerous areas; including southern Australia (Victoria, Tasmania, New South Wales) and northern Australia (wet and dry tropics). She also has expertise in Regional Ecosystem assessment, Biocondition assessment, GIS analysis and environmental management. Lynise’s vast experience in the public and private sector has enabled her to interact and work with a variety of stakeholders, including indigenous groups, local councils, landholders, state and government agencies. Lynise is experienced at undertaking flora assessments on gas projects throughout the Brigalow Belt bioregion. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Energy & Resources Pipeline Additional Disturbance Areas (Origin) Field/ Project management, Flora and fauna surveys, Ecological constraints assessment, Regional Ecosystem classification, Threatened species surveys, Vegetation mapping, Pre-clearance surveys, GIS analysis and reporting. Dalwogan EVNT Offsets (Origin) Flora and fauna surveys, Ecological constraints assessment, Offsets strategy and assessment for Threatened Ecological Communities and threatened species, Biocondition assessment, GIS analysis and mapping, Project management. Dalwogan 3D Seismic (Origin) Field/ Project management, Flora and fauna surveys, Ecological constraints assessment, Regional Ecosystem classification, Threatened species surveys, Vegetation mapping, Pre-clearance surveys, GIS analysis and reporting. Condabri 3D Seismic (Origin) Field/ Project management, Flora and fauna surveys, Ecological constraints assessment, Regional Ecosystem classification, Threatened species surveys, Vegetation mapping, Pre-clearance surveys, GIS analysis and reporting. GLNG Project (Bechtel) Vegetation surveys, Regional Ecosystem classification, Biocondition assessment, Quaternary and Tertiary vegetation analysis. Carbon Farming of Native Regrowth (Queensland Government) Vegetation survey of regrowth and remnant Regional Ecosystems, threatened species distribution modelling and GIS analysis. rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Urban Growth Maddison Estate Southern EDL delineation (LM Arrowtown Pty Ltd) Assessment of ecologically significant features within the Ecological Delineation Line; identification and assessment of tree species; GIS analysis Bahrs Scrub Offsets (Stockland Development Pty Limited) Flora and fauna surveys, Ecological constraints assessment, Offsets strategy and assessment for Threatened Ecological Communities, threatened species, remnant vegetation and large tree, GIS analysis and mapping. Reconfiguring a Lot. Environment Seedbanks of Weed Invaded Wetlands: Biodiversity and Restoration (CSIRO/DAFF) Project management, including design, establishment, implementation and analysis of wetland seedbanks in northern Australia. The effects of different management strategies and hydrological treatments were assessed and recommendations made for restoration of weed invaded wetlands. The project involved extensive vegetation mapping and floristic analysis and an understanding of germinable seedbanks. English Broom (Cytisus scoparius) Adaptive Experimental Management Program (Parks Victoria) – Project management including liaison with Parks Victoria authorities regarding development, design, monitoring and analysis of an adaptive experimental program to examine best practice chemical for English Broom following wildfires. Involved extensive floristic monitoring and analysis. The final report analysed the cost and effectiveness of different management options, the off target impacts to vegetation, and made recommendations for the continued management of the species. Mungulla Wetland Management Strategy (CSIRO/Nywaigi Traditional Owners/DAFF) – Project management (including liaison with indigenous landholders, scientists, local council), workshop facilitation and incorporation of expert opinion/ indigenous values into a wetland management strategy. Development of short/medium/long term planning options for recovery and restoration of the wetlands. Ecology and biology of Hymenachne amplexicaulis (CSIRO/DAFF) – Project management of a large cross divisional project involving communication and co-ordination of multiple stakeholders across New South Wales, Northern Territory and Queensland. Involves extensive vegetation (phenology), soil seed bank sampling and analysis; risk assessment of Hymenachne across multiple spatial scales and prioritisation of resources for management. Vegetation Mapping Kosciuszko National Park (Ecology Australia/NSW Government) – Rapid assessment of vegetation communities within Kosciuszko National Park (alpine areas) Weed Risk Assessment (Ecology Australia/ Victorian Government) – Targeted survey for Hieracium aurantiacum/Hieracium pratense (Orange Hawkweed/ Yellow Hawkweed) Alpine National Park/ Falls Creek Resort Management) PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE: Senior Ecologist – Carbon Accumulation Through Ecosystem Recovery (CATER) Queensland Herbarium, Department of Environment and Resource Management 2011-2012 Research Fellow CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems (Townsville) 2007-2011 Consultant Victorian Government – Parks Victoria 2006 Post-Fire Monitoring Officer rpsgroup.com.au Curriculum Vitae - CONTINUED - Victorian Government – Parks Victoria 2004-2005 Consultant Ecology Australia 2004 Lecturer and Practical Coordinator La Trobe University 2002-2004 MEMBERSHIPS & ACHIEVEMENTS: Member – Queensland Weed Society Member - Ecological Society of Australia Member – Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand RECENT PUBLICATIONS: Wearne, L.J., Ko, D., Hannan-Jones, M. and Calvert, M (2013). Potential distribution of an invasive plant species and risk assessment: a case study of Hymenachne amplexicaulis in Australia. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. 19 Wearne, L.J., Clarkson, J., Grice, T., Van Klinken, R. and Vitelli, J (2010). The biology of Australian weeds. Hymenachne amplexicaulis (Rudge) Nees (hymenachne). Plant Protection Quarterly. rpsgroup.com.au Dr David Dique Partner (Biodiversity) Impact Assessment and Planning David is a Partner in ERMs Brisbane office and manages more than 20 staff within the Impact Assessment and Planning Team. David is also the Managing Partner for Biodiversity in Australia and New Zealand Over the last 7 years, David has been involved in leading projects throughout Queensland and NSW. The project work during this period has given David an excellent knowledge of the resources sector, having led large infrastructure and mine EISs, as well as delivering environmental services and approvals advice to the Oil and Gas sector. As a Partner, David is responsible for the commercial aspects of project delivery, contract management and client liaison. David is a Principal Ecologist that has held state government and private consultancy roles for 20 years. From an academic and research background, David has a detailed understanding of principles that underpin biodiversity research, survey and assessment, management and conservation. This, coupled with experience in biodiversity conservation planning and policy development from state government, has enabled David to provide high level strategic approvals advice for major projects in the energy and resources sector, both for State and Federal approval processes. David has recently provided technical oversight for biodiversity matters for large mining and oil and gas projects projects being undertaken against the EPBC Act as well as IFC Principles in NSW, Qld, south-east Asia and PNG. This has included baseline surveys and impact assessments, referral preparation, MNES reporting, management plan preparation and documentation against World Bank Guidelines and IFC PS6. The World’s Leading Sustainability Consultancy Fields of Competence • State and Federal strategic approvals • EPBC referral and MNES reporting • Ecological survey design and assessment • Threatened species management planning • Biodiversity impact assessment/EIA • Biodiversity policy and legislation • Project Management of ecological investigations • Threatened Species habitat mapping • Biodiversity Offsets • Contract Management • Major project delivery • IFC and World Bank Biodiversity assessments Education • 2004 – Doctor of Philosophy: University of Queensland, Brisbane Qld • 1994 – Bachelor of Natural Resources (Hons 1): UNE, Armidale NSW Languages • English Key Industry Sectors • Mining • Oil and Gas • Infrastructure • Government Key Projects • Technical Lead for Biodiversity, ecological field assessments, threatened species management planning, Aurukun Bauxite Mine EIS, Cape York, Chalco • Expert witness – Alpha Coal Mine, Allens Linklaters • Technical lead for Carmichael Coal mine EIS, ecology and threatened species management and strategic approvals advice for the mine and rail component of the project under EPBC Act, central Queensland, Adani • Technical Lead for Biodiversity, Etheridge Irrigation Project EIS, northern Qld, IFED • Technical lead for Biodiversity for Alpha Coal Project EIS, for a 500km proposed rail alignment, strategic approvals and threatened species management advice for the rail component of the project under EPBC Act, GVK/Hancock • Project Director for EPBC Act referral preparation, provision of strategic approvals advice and ecological assessment for 250km pipeline from Moranbah to Alpha, Sunwater • Technical Lead for Biodiversity for numerous studies over five years, field surveys, impact assessments, EPBC Referrals, management plans, Abbot Point Coal Terminal, BMA, Adani, GVK/Hancock, NQBO. • Project Director for Etheridge Irrigation Project EIS, northern Queensland, IFED • Project Director for Teresa Coal Mine EIS and strategic approvals advice, Linc Energy, Emerald • Project Director for pre-clearance surveys and threatened species surveys for 420km gas pipeline, Santos GLNG, Roma to Gladstone. • Project Director for ecological investigations for gas field expansion (EMP) for Origin, APLNG, Roma • Project Director for Wildlife Management Plan, pipeline construction team, QGC, QCLNG, Roma. • Project Director for Rehabilitation Management Plan and analogue site assessment for 420km gas pipeline, Santos GLNG, Roma to Gladstone • Project Director for water mouse surveys (over 12 month period) and preparation of water mouse management plan, Gladstone, QGC • Project Director for pre-clearance surveys and ecological investigations associated with gas field expansion and related infrastructure for Origin, APLNG, Roma • Technical lead for Biodiversity for Drake Coal Mine EIS, Collinsville • Technical lead for Biodiversity for two windfarm projects, EPBC Act referrals and regulator liaison in NSW, Wind Prospects • Technical Lead for Biodiversity for Jupiter Windfarm EIS, ecological impact assessment and 02.02.15 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • threatened species management plans, southern highlands of NSW, confidential Technical lead for EPBC Act referral preparation and regulator liaison, Bruce Highway upgrade, RMLS, Kempsey Project Director for analogue site identification, assessment and preparation of rehabilitation plans for gas fields and pipeline for QGC, QCLNG, Roma. Project Director for Nature Conservation Act 1992 Vegetation Clearing permits and approvals, Santos, GLNG, Roma Technical Biodiversity Lead for Confidential Rail assessment in South-east Qld for DFRC project, Port of Brisbane Project Director for SEQ Koala Habitat Mapping Project extending from Noosa to the Gold Coast covering 700,000 ha of bushland, DERM Project Director for baseline marine surveys at Abbott Point as part of collection of baseline information for expansion of the Abbott Point Port facility Project Director for numerous flora and fauna assessment projects for BCC Project Director for SEQ Water Grid vegetation offsets. Secured 1000 ha offset for 19 Development Applications, WCRWP Project Manager flora/fauna surveys and preparation of REF for Town Water Supply pipelines (50km) as part of the Western Corridor Recycled Water Pipeline project Management of flora/fauna surveys and technical review of fauna assessments near Aurukun, Cape York, as part of a large bauxite mining EIS project Project Director/Manager for two Koala Survey and Habitat Mapping projects across several local government areas in south-east Queensland (Caloundra, Pine Rivers, Caboolture, Redcliffe, Redland) Technical Biodiversity Lead for IFC PS6 assessment for Gas field development in Sumatra, Sarulla. Technical Biodiversity Lead for IFC PS6 assessment for proposed gas pipeline in PNG Western Province, Horizon Oil Project Director for powerline easement offset assessments and management planning, Powerlink, Brisbane. Project Manager for surveys of black-throated finch populations in Townsville for a subdivision development, Insight Management of surveys for estimating abundance of koalas at a proposed industrial development site at Pimpama, Gold Coast, DTMR Management of ecological assessment for proposed Gap Creek Road and Redland Bay Rd upgrades, south-east Queensland, BCC DAVID DIQUE Adam Marks Senior Environmental Consultant, Impact Assessment and Planning Adam is a Senior Environmental Consultant with ERM, Brisbane, Queensland. Adam currently has three years’ experience in the Coal Seam Gas (CSG) industry sector and more than 10 years’ experience in the public sector focusing on environmental management, assessment and statutory protection. Adam has contributed towards the development of CSG Proponent Upstream Rehabilitation Plans, review of habitat assessments for Project-wide development, development of Upstream Significant Species Management Plans and Flora Translocation Management Plans as well as providing technical and ecological advice on CSG Upstream Project development. Adam played a key role in the QCLNG Project Technical Services team by providing policy and statutory advice concerning environmental issues relating to project approvals and project development. In particular Adam was responsible for developing QGC submissions relating to reforms in biodiversity offsets and protected plant matters. Adam has been involved in the development and delivery of offsets for a major CSG Proponent, in particular the Monte Christo Offset on Curtis Island and offsets for upstream development. Adam has also been involved in the assessment and preparation of audit reports stemming from State and Federal Government approvals, authorities, management plans and permits including offsets, rehabilitation as well as specific requirements around the management of flora and fauna. Prior to working in the resources sector, Adam was the Operations Manager for Queensland Governments Nature Refuges Program. Adam managed the field based component of the Nature Refuges Program as well as actively participating and leading strategic field based Nature Refuge property assessments particularly within Queensland’s Northern Gulf and Cape York regions. The world’s leading sustainability consultancy Adam successfully assessed and negotiated one of Queensland’s largest Nature Refuges at 238,000 hectares. Fields of Competence Environmental assessment Queensland and Australian environmental legislation and policy Rehabilitation planning, assessment and monitoring Terrestrial and marine offsets Flora and fauna management plans Environmental permitting Education Currently undertaking a Masters of Environmental Management with University Of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld. Bachelor Degree of Science in Australian Environmental Studies (majoring in Ecology and Planning and Pollution and Health). Griffith University, Brisbane, Qld. 1996 Languages English, native speaker Key Industry Sectors Resources (Oil and Gas) Government (Natural Resource Management, legislation and policy) Honors and Awards 2011 Australia Day Medallion Publications Norton, M., Sharp, A., and Marks, A. (2011). An evaluation of faecal pellet counts to index rockwallaby population size. Australian Mammalogy 33, 221-227. Sharp, A., Norton, M., and Marks, A. (2006). Demography of a yellow-footed rock-wallaby Petrogale xanthopus colony in the threatened New South Wales sub-population. Australian Mammalogy 28, 215-227. doi: 10.1071/AM06030 Key Projects Environmental advisor responsible for the development and delivery of the QCLNG Philotheca sporadica Translocation Management Plan. QGC 2013. Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG Monte Christo Offset Plan. QGC, 2012 – 2014. Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG EPBC Act indirect offset funding agreement. QGC 2013. Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG Surat North Significant Species Management Plan Review. QGC 2013. Project manager responsible for the development of the GLNG Third Party Audit the EMP report for the Mainland GTP. Project manager responsible for the preparation of the QCLNG Water Mouse habitat assessment report. QCLNG 2015 Project manager responsible for the development of the QGC Koala Significant Impact and Referral Assessment. QGC 2015 Project manager responsible for the preparation of the QCLNG Significant Species Management Plan for koala. QCLNG 2015 Environmental advisor supporting the development of a Koala habitat offset assessment for a private property in Southeast Queensland. Earthtrade 2015 Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG Significant Species Management Plan review and update. QGC 2013. Environmental advisor responsible for the review and development of the QCLNG Significant Species Management Plan (SSMP) review. QGC 2014 Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG Project review of the Queensland State Government Biodiversity Offset Policy. QGC. 2012-2013. Environmental advisor supporting the preparation and development of the QCLNG Protected Plant review. QGC 2014 Environmental advisor supporting the development of the QCLNG Project Offset Plan. QGC, 2014. Environmental advisor responsible for the development of the QCLNG Regional Ecosystem Vegetation Analysis Project. QGC. 2012 Environmental advisor responsible for the preparation of the QCLNG EPBC targeted audit report. QGC, 2014. Environmental advisor supporting the preparation and development of the QCLNG Upstream Rehabilitation Plan. QGC. 2012-2013. Environmental advisor supporting the Permit and Compliance Tracking (‘Pact’) system testing and data migration, Queensland. Australia. Origin Energy 2104 Environmental advisor supporting the development of the Surat North Acreage Development Offset Plan. QGC 2014 MARCH 2015 ADAM MARKS