biodiversity assessment: mortlake south wind farm underground … · 2019-08-13 · brisbane: level...

MELBOURNE: 292 Mt Alexander Road, Ascot Vale VIC 3032 GEELONG: 230 Latrobe Terrace, Geelong West Vic 3218BRISBANE: Level 22, 127 Creek Street, Brisbane QLD 4000 ADELAIDE: 22 Greenhill Road, Wayville SA 5034

CANBERRA: PO Box 6067, O’Connor ACT 2602 SYDNEY: Level 5, 616 Harris Street, Ultimo, NSW, 2007www.ehpartners.com.au | (03) 9377 0100

Final Report

Biodiversity Assessment: Mortlake South Wind Farm

Underground Transmission Line

Prepared for

ACCIONA Energy Australia Global Pty Ltd

July 2019

Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd

2Biodiversity Assessment: Mortlake South Windfarm – Underground Transmission Line

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Assessment Biodiversity Assessment

Address Mortlake South Wind Farm Underground Transmission Line

Project number 11885

Project manager Shannon LeBel (Senior Ecologist)

Report reviewer Shannon LeBel (Senior Ecologist)

Report author Victoria Byrne (Botanist)

Other EHP staff Thorin Robertson (Zoologist); Elyse Harrison (Technical Officer)

Mapping Julian Yuan (GIS); Petra Sorenson (GIS)

File name 11885_EHP_BA_Mortlake_Finalv2_18072019

Client ACCIONA Energy Australia Global Pty Ltd

Bioregion Victorian Volcanic Plain

CMA Glenelg CMA

Council Moyne Shire and Corangamite Shire

Report versions Comments Comments updated by Date submitted

Draft Draft submitted to the client 29/05/2019

FinalMinor amendments and clarifications based oncomments provided by ACCIONA; Split offsetobligations by municipality

SLB 05/06/2019

Final v2Clarification of impacts, and associatedmitigation measures; Update to Avoid andMinimise Statement.

SLB 18/07/2019

Acknowledgements

We thank the following people for their contribution to the project:

Glenn Skoien and Jamie McGilp (ACCIONA) for project information and site access;

The Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning for access to ecological databases.

The Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy for access to ecological databases.

Copyright © Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty LtdThis document is subject to copyright and may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned.The use or copying of this document in whole or part without the permission of Ecology and Heritage PartnersPty Ltd is an infringement of copyright.

DisclaimerAlthough Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd have taken all the necessary steps to ensure that an accuratedocument has been prepared, the company accepts no liability for any damages or loss incurred as a resultof reliance placed upon the report and its contents.


Summary of Application Requirements

Table S1. Application requirements for a permit to remove native vegetation (Vic toria Pla nning ProvisionsClause 52.17

-3; DELWP 2017)

No. Application Requirement Response

Application requirements under the Detailed Assessment Pathway

1

Information about the native vegetation to be removed, including:

• The assessment pathway and reason for the assessmentpathway.

• A description of the native vegetation to be removed:

• Maps showing the native vegetation and property in context:

• The offset requirement that will apply if the native vegetation isapproved to be removed.

See Appendix 3 (NVR Report)

2

Topographic and land information relating to the native vegetation to beremoved, showing ridges, crests and hilltops, wetlands and waterways,slopes of more than 20 percent, drainage lines, low lying areas, salinedischarge areas, and areas of existing erosion, as appropriate.

Details provided in Section 1.3 andFigure 2.

3 Recent, dated photographs of the native vegetation to be removed. Details provided in Section 3.

4

Details of any other native vegetation approved to be removed, or thatwas removed without the required approvals, on the same property or oncontiguous land in the same ownership as the applicant, in the five yearperiod before the application for a permit is lodged.

Details provided in Section 3.3.

5

An avoid and minimise statement. The statement describes any efforts toavoid the removal of, and minimise the impacts on the biodiversity andother values of native vegetation, and how these efforts focussed onareas of native vegetation that have the most value.


6A copy of any Property Vegetation Plan contained within an agreementmade pursuant to section 69 of the Conservation, Forests and Lands Act1987 that applies to the native vegetation to be removed.

Not applicable.

7

Where the removal of native vegetation is to create defendable space, awritten statement explaining why the removal of native vegetation isnecessary. This statement must have regard to other available bushfirerisk mitigation measures. This statement is not required when thecreation of defendable space is in conjunction with an application underthe Bushfire Management Overlay.

Not applicable as the vegetationclearance is not for defendable space.

8If the application is under Clause 52.16, a statement that explains how theproposal responds to the Native Vegetation Precinct Plan considerationsat decision guideline 8.

Not applicable.

9An offset statement providing evidence that an offset that meets theoffset requirements for the native vegetation to be removed has beenidentified, and can be secured in accordance with the Guidelines.


10

A site assessment report of the native vegetation to be removed, including:

A habitat hectare assessment of any patches of native vegetation,including the condition, extent (in hectares), EcologicalVegetation Class and bioregional conservation status.

The location, number, circumference (in centimetres measuredat 1.3 metres above ground level) and species of any large treeswithin patches.

Refer to Section 3 and Appendix 1 of thisreport, and the NVR Report – Appendix3


No. Application Requirement Response

The location, number, circumference (in centimetres measured at 1.3metres above ground level) and species of any scattered trees, andwhether each tree is small or large.

11

Information about impacts on rare or threatened species habitat,including:

The relevant section of the Habitat importance map for each rareor threatened species requiring a species offset.

Within NVR report – Appendix 3


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd was commissioned by ACCIONA Energy Australia Global Pty Ltd to

conduct a Biodiversity Assessment for the proposed underground transmission line intended to service the

Mortlake South Wind Farm. The purpose of the assessment was to identify the extent and type of remnant

native vegetation present within the study area and to determine the presence of significant flora and fauna

species and/or ecological communities.

Methods

A detailed desktop and literature review was undertaken, followed by a flora and fauna assessment on 12 and

13 February 2019 to obtain information on terrestrial flora and fauna values within the study area. A habitat

hectare assessment was undertaken in conjunction with the flora survey. Vegetation within the study area

was assessed according to the habitat hectare methodology, which is described in the Vegetation Quality

Assessment Manual Version 1.3.

Results

Flora

Remnant native vegetation in the study area is representative of two EVCs: Plains Grassland and Plains Grassy

Woodland. All remnants of recorded EVC’s were highly modified due to historical and ongoing agricultural

land use (ploughing, grazing), and are in poor to moderate condition.

A total of eight (8) scattered Small Trees were recorded within, or immediately adjacent to the study area.

These trees would once have been part of the Plains Grassy Woodland EVC, however the understorey

vegetation consists of predominantly introduced species (mainly exotic pasture grasses) and the trees no

longer form a patch of native vegetation.

Based on the highly modified and agricultural nature of the study area, heavy cattle grazing, landscape context

and the proximity of previous records, significant flora species are considered unlikely to occur within the

construction corridor due to the absence of suitable, unmodified habitat.

Fauna

Based on the modified nature of the study area and landscape context, significant fauna species are considered

unlikely to occur within the construction corridor.

Several wetland values are present within the broader landscape that are likely to provide habitat for wetland

and migratory fauna (i.e. Brolga Grus rubicunda). However, the project will not impact on any waterways or

wetlands that potentially support these species.

Marginal habitat for the nationally significant Growling Gras Frog Litoria raniformis is potentially present in

private land adjacent to the construction corridor. However, the action will not result in a direct or indirect

impact to the habitat.

Based on the poor condition of habitat within the study area and proximity of previously records, targeted

surveys for significant fauna are not required.


Communities

Vegetation within the study area did not meet the condition thresholds that define any significant ecological

communities.

Legislative and Policy Implications

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act - Federal)

There is one dam located adjacent to the study area immediately south of Riley Road, Terang that is considered

to provide marginal habitat for one fauna species (Growling Grass Frog) listed under the EPBC Act. However,

the dam is located six metres from the edge of the construction corridor, with direct or indirect impacts to

habitat considered unlikely to occur. As such, the action will not result in a significant impact to Growling Grass

Frog, and a referral to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act is not required. No other matters of NES were

recorded, or are considered likely to occur.

Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (FFG Act - Victoria)

No FFG Act - listed or protected species were recorded within or adjacent to the construction corridor during

the field assessments, and due to the highly modified condition of habitats, are considered unlikely to occur.

No FFG Act-list communities were recorded within the construction corridor. As such, a permit under the FFG

Act is not required.

Planning and Environment Act 1987

A Planning Permit from the Responsible Authority is required to remove, destroy or lop any native vegetation.

Removal of native vegetation (the Guidelines)

The study area is within Location 2, with 3.928 hectares of native vegetation proposed to be removed as part

of the current application (excluding past removals). As such, the permit application falls under the Detailed

Assessment pathway.

The offset requirement for native vegetation removal throughout the entire alignment totals 0.888 General

Habitat Units (HUs), with a minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value of 0.253. No Large Trees are required to be

offset.

Within each of the municipalities, the offset obligation breaks down as follows:

Moyne Shire: 0.526 General HUs with a minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value of 0.256; and,

Corangamite Shire: 0.363 General HUs with a minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value of 0.248.

It should be noted that due to rounding protocols employed by DELWP, the offset quantum for the entire

alignment (0.888 General Units) does not equate to the offset quantum when split by municipality (0.889

General Units).

Other Legislation and Policy

Implications relating to other local and State policy (Wildlife Act 1975, Catchment and Land Protection Act

1994, local government authorities), as well as additional studies or reporting that may be required

(Conservation Management Plan, Weed Management Plan, Construction Environment Managements Plan)

are provided in Section 4


CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1 INTRODUCTION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................ 9

1.2 Scope and Objectives......................................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Study Area........................................................................................................................................ 10

2 METHODS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.1 Desktop Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 11

2.2 Field Assessment.............................................................................................................................. 11

2.3 Removal, Destruction or Lopping of Native Vegetation (the Guidelines) ........................................ 12

2.4 Assessment Qualifications and Limitations...................................................................................... 13

3 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1 Vegetation Condition ....................................................................................................................... 15

3.2 Fauna Habitat................................................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Removal of Native Vegetation (the Guidelines) ............................................................................... 19

3.4 Significance Assessment .................................................................................................................. 20

4 LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth) ....................... 23

4.2 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Victoria)............................................................................... 24

4.3 Planning and Environment Act 1987 ................................................................................................ 24

4.4 Wildlife Act 1975 and Wildlife Regulations 2013 (Victoria).............................................................. 25

4.5 Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Victoria) ........................................................................ 25

5 MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

5.1 Avoid and Minimisation Statement.................................................................................................. 27

5.2 Offset Strategy ................................................................................................................................. 27

5.3 Best Practice Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................. 28

6 FURTHER REQUIREMENTS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

APPENDIX 1 - FLORA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55


Appendix 1.1 – Flora Results ........................................................................................................................ 55

Appendix 1.2 – Significant Flora Species ...................................................................................................... 57

Appendix 1.3 – Habitat Hectares ................................................................................................................. 59

Appendix 1.4 – Scattered Trees ................................................................................................................... 60

APPENDIX 2 - FAUNA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Significant Fauna Species ............................................................................................................................. 61

APPENDIX 3 - NATIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL (NVR) REPORT .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd was commissioned by ACCIONA Energy Australia Global Pty Ltd (herein

referred to as ACCIONA) to conduct a Biodiversity Assessment for the proposed underground transmission

line intended to service the Mortlake South Wind Farm.

Ecology and Heritage Partners understands that the wind farm had originally intended to connect to the

electricity grid via an overhead 66kV powerline to be constructed by AusNet on behalf of ACCIONA. AusNet

had secured planning permits for the removal of native vegetation along the overhead alignment. ACCIONA

has advised that this proposal will not be progressed and that it intends on constructing an underground 220kV

transmission powerline to connect the wind farm from its on-site substation to the Terang Terminal Station.

The purpose of the Biodiversity Assessment was to identify the extent and type of remnant native vegetation

present within the study area and to determine the presence of significant flora and fauna species and/or

ecological communities. This report presents the results of the assessment and discusses the potential

ecological and legislative implications associated with the proposed action.

1.2 Scope and Objectives

The objectives of the Biodiversity Assessment were to:

Undertake a broad, desktop assessment of ecological values for the entire development area (as

defined in Section 1.3);

Conduct a detailed site assessment to identify flora and fauna values within the development area (as

defined in Section 1.3);

Provide maps showing any areas of remnant native vegetation and locations of any significant flora

and fauna species, and/or fauna habitat (if present);

Classify any flora and fauna species and vegetation communities identified or considered likely to

occur within the study area in accordance with Commonwealth and State legislation;

Document relevant environmental legislation and policy;

Document any opportunities and constraints associated with the proposed works;

Advise whether any additional flora and/or fauna surveys are required prior to works commencing

(e.g. targeted surveys for significant flora and fauna species); and,

Prepare a report detailing the above in a report to accompany future permit applications for the

underground transmission line.

Where areas of remnant vegetation were present, the following tasks were completed to address

requirements under the ‘Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation’ (the

Guidelines) (DELWP 2017):

A habitat hectare assessment of any areas of remnant native vegetation within the study area;


Recommendations to address requirements under the Guidelines to minimise impacts to remnant

vegetation; and,

Provision of offset targets for any native vegetation, scattered trees and habitat for rare or threatened

species proposed to be lost as a result of the proposed works.

1.3 Study Area

The Mortlake South Wind Farm is located approximately five kilometres south of the town of Mortlake and is

situated on private properties owned by 21 landowners, predominantly cleared pastoral grazing land used for

sheep and cattle farming.

The proposed underground transmission line alignment (the study area) is approximately 14.9 kilometres in

length, and is proposed to start near the intersection of Chamallak Lane and Tapps Lane in the north, and

traverses agricultural land, the Mortlake-Terang rail corridor, and the road reserves of Slaughteryard Road and

Riley Road, before connecting to the Terang Terminal Station near the intersection of McCrae Street and Littles

Lane in Terang (Figure 1).

The study area is generally flat with no ridges, crests within or immediately adjacent to the site. There is one

dam located within the study area immediately south of Riley Road, Terang.

According to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) Native Vegetation

Information Management (NVIM) Tool (DELWP 2019a), the study area occurs within the Victorian Volcanic

Plain bioregion. It is located within the jurisdiction of the Glenelg CMA Catchment Management Authority

(CMA) and the Moyne Shire and Corangamite Shire municipality.

The study area within the Moyne Shire Council is zoned as Farming Zone (FZ). No overlays apply to this area.

The study area within Corangamite Shire is subject to the following zoning:

Farming Zone – Schedule 1 (FZ1);

Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ);

Road Zone – Category 1 (RDZ1); and

Public Use Zone (PUZ1).

The study area within the Corangamite Shire is affected by the following overlays:

Heritage Overlay (HO287).


2 METHODS

2.1 Desktop Assessment

Relevant literature, online-resources and numerous databases were reviewed to provide an assessment of

flora and fauna values associated with the entire development area. The following information sources were

reviewed:

The DELWP NVIM Tool (DELWP 2019a) and Nature Kit Map (DELWP 2019b) for:

o Modelled data for location category, remnant vegetation patches, scattered trees and habitat

for rare or threatened species; and,

o The extent of historic and current Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs).

EVC benchmarks (DELWP 2019c) for descriptions of EVCs within the relevant bioregion;

The Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) for previously documented flora and fauna records within the

project locality (DELWP 2019d);

The Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) Protected Matters Search

Tool (PMST) for matters of National Environmental Significance (NES) protected under the

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (DoEE 2019);

The Planning Maps Online (DELWP 2019e) and Planning Schemes Online (DELWP 2019f) to ascertain

current zoning and environmental overlays in the study area;

Relevant ecological reports, including:

o Jacobs 2017. Mortlake South Transmission Line: Ecology Report. Report prepared for Ausnet.

Other relevant environmental legislation and policies as required; and,

Aerial photography of the study area.

2.2 Field Assessment

The field investigations were undertaken in an area identified as the ‘construction investigation zone’ (Figure

2), and comprised:

50 metres either side of the alignment (excluding where this abuts road reserves) where the alignment

is in private land;

The entire width of the VicTrack rail reservation (Mortlake – Terang rail corridor); and,

Both sides of Bramich Lane, Keilambete Road and Riley Road.

2.2.1 Flora Assessment

A flora assessment was undertaken on 12th and 13th of February 2019 to obtain information on flora values

within the study area, and to identify potential habitat for species and ecological communities listed under the

Commonwealth EPBC Act and Victorian FFG Act.


The study area was walked, with all observed flora species recorded, any significant records mapped and the

overall condition of vegetation noted. Native vegetation in the local area was also investigated to assist in

determining the pre-European vegetation within the study area. EVCs were determined with reference to

DELWP pre-1750 and extant EVC mapping and their published descriptions (DELWP 2019b). The significance

assessment criteria of taxa and vegetation communities are presented in Appendix 1.

Where native vegetation was identified a habitat hectare assessment was undertaken following methodology

described in the Vegetation Quality Assessment Manual (DSE 2004).

2.2.2 Fauna Assessment

A fauna assessment was undertaken on 12th and 13th of February 2019 to obtain information on terrestrial

fauna values within the study area. The study area was visually assessed and active searching under and

around ground debris for reptiles, frogs and small mammals was undertaken. Binoculars were also used to

scan the area for birds, and observers listened for calls and searched for other signs of fauna such as nests,

remains of dead animals, droppings and footprints. Potential habitat for fauna was assessed, with an emphasis

on habitats that may provide shelter, food or other resources for significant species.

2.3 Removal, Destruction or Lopping of Native Vegetation (theGuidelines)

Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Clause 52.17 of the Planning Schemes requires a planning

permit from the relevant local Council to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation. The assessment process

for the clearing of vegetation follows the ‘Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native

vegetation’ (the Guidelines) (DELWP 2017).

2.3.1 Assessment Pathway

The Guidelines manage the impacts on biodiversity from native vegetation removal using an assessment

pathway approach. Two factors – extent of native vegetation and Location category – are used to determine

the pathway associated with an application for a permit to remove native vegetation. The location category

(1, 2 or 3) has been determined for all areas in Victoria and is available on DELWP’s Native Vegetation

Information Management (NVIM) Tool (DELWP 2019a). Determination of assessment pathway is summarised

in Table 1.

Table 1. Application pathways for applications to remove native vegetation (DELWP 2017)

Extent of Native VegetationLocation Category

1 2 3

Less than 0.5 hectares and not including any large trees Basic Intermediate Detailed

Less than 0.5 hectares and including one or more large trees Intermediate Intermediate Detailed

0.5 hectares or more Detailed Detailed Detailed

Notes: For the purpose of determining the assessment pathway of an application to remove native vegetation the extent includes anyother native vegetation that was permitted to be removed on the same contiguous parcel of land with the same ownership as thenative vegetation to be removed, where the removal occurred in the five-year period before an application to remove native vegetationis lodged.


2.3.2 Vegetation Assessment

Native vegetation (as defined in Table 2) is assessed using two key parameters: extent (in hectares) and

condition. For the purposes of this assessment, both extent and condition were determined as part of the

habitat hectare assessment.

Table 2. Determination of remnant native vegetation (DELWP 2017)

Category Definition Extent Condition

Remnantpatch ofnativevegetation

An area of vegetation where at least 25 per cent ofthe total perennial understorey plant cover isnative;

OR

An area with three or more native canopy treeswhere the drip line of each tree touches the dripline of at least one other tree, forming acontinuous canopy;

OR

any mapped wetland included in the CurrentWetlands map, available in DELWP systems andtools.

Measured in hectares.

Based on hectare area of theremnant patch.

Vegetation QualityAssessmentManual (DSE2004).

Modelledcondition forCurrent Wetlands.

Scatteredtree

A native canopy tree that does not form part of aremnant patch.

Measured in hectares.

Each Large scattered tree isassigned an extent of 0.071hectares (30m diameter).

Each Small scattered tree isassigned a default extent of 0.31hectares (10 metre diameter)

Scattered treesare assigned adefault conditionscore of 0.2(outside a patch).

Notes: Native vegetation is defined in the Victoria Planning Provisions as ‘plants that are indigenous to Victoria,including trees, shrubs, herbs and grasses’

2.3.3 Impact Avoidance and Minimisation

All applications to remove native vegetation must demonstrate the three-step approach of avoid, minimise

and offset. This is a precautionary approach that aims to ensure that the removal of native vegetation is

restricted to what is reasonably necessary, and that biodiversity is appropriately compensated for any native

vegetation removal that is approved. An avoidance and minimisation statement is included in Section 6.1.

2.3.4 Offsets

Offsets are required to compensate for the permitted removal of native vegetation. The resulting Native

Vegetation Removal (NVR) report detailing the offset obligations is provided in Appendix 3.

2.4 Assessment Qualifications and Limitations

Data and information held within the ecological databases and mapping programs reviewed in the desktop

assessment (e.g. VBA, PMST, Biodiversity Interactive Maps etc.) are unlikely to represent all flora and fauna

observations within, and surrounding, the study area. It is therefore important to acknowledge that a lack of


documented records does not necessarily indicate that a species or community is absent.

Ecological values identified on site are recorded using a hand-held GPS or tablet with an accuracy of +/-5

metres. This level of accuracy is considered adequate to provide an accurate assessment of the ecological

values present within the study area; however, this data should not be used for detailed surveying purposes.

The field assessment was undertaken during a sub-optimal season for the identification of flora and fauna

species (late summer). The ‘snap shot’ nature of a standard biodiversity assessment, along with sub-optimal

timing of the survey, meant that migratory, transitory or uncommon fauna species may have been absent from

typically occupied habitats at the time of the field assessment. In addition, annual or cryptic flora species such

as those that persist via underground tubers may also be absent. Targeted flora or fauna surveys were not

undertaken, as this was beyond the preliminary scope of the project. Nevertheless, the terrestrial flora and

fauna data collected during the field assessment and information obtained from relevant desktop sources is

considered adequate to provide an accurate assessment of the ecological values present within the study area.


3 RESULTS

3.1 Vegetation Condition

3.1.1 Remnant Patches

Remnant native vegetation in the study area is representative of two EVCs: Plains Grassland (EVC 132_61) and

Plains Grassy Woodland (EVC 55_61) (Figure 2). All remnants of recorded EVC’s were highly modified due to

historical and ongoing agricultural land use (ploughing, grazing), and are in poor to moderate condition.

The presence of these EVCs is generally consistent with the modelled extant (2005) EVC mapping (DELWP

2019b). The remainder of the study area comprises introduced and planted vegetation, present as crop,

pasture, windrows and ornamental plantings. Specific details relating to observed EVCs are provided below.

Plains Grassland

Plains Grassland is located in areas north and south of Sisters-Noorat Road (Figure 2). The cover of indigenous

perennial grasses is dominated by Common Tussock-grass Poa labillardierei, and Rush Juncus spp., with

scattered occurrences of Blown Grass Lachnagrostis spp. (Plate 1; Plate 2). Herb species recorded include

Small Loosestrife Lythrum hyssopifolia, Grassland Wood-sorrel Oxalis perennans and Slender Dock Rumex

brownii.

Plate 1. Low quality Plains Grassland within the studyarea (Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 12/02/2019).

Plate 2. Low quality Plains Grassland within the studyarea (Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd12/02/2019).


Weed species, including Brown-top Bent Agrostis capillaris, Toowoomba Canary-grass Phalaris aquatica,

Cocksfoot Dactylis glomerata, Rye Grass Lolium spp. and Spear Thistle Cirsium vulgare were commonly found

throughout the remnant patches.

Plains Grassy Woodland

Plains Grassy Woodland EVC is located within the study area south of Londrigans Lane (east of Tapps Lane)

and within the Riley Road road reserve (Figure 2) (Plate 3; Plate 4). The tree canopy is absent, and when present

the shrub layer consisted of Blackwood Acacia melanoxylon. The understorey is dominated by native grasses

and sedge species, including Common Tussock-grass, Blown Grass, Rush, Small Loosestrife and Grassland

Wood-sorrel.

Weed species, including Toowoomba Canary-grass, Brown-top Bent, and Flatweed Hypochoeris radicata were

commonly found throughout many of the remnant patches. The Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) and

Victorian noxious weed African Box-thorn Lycium ferocissimum was also observed in these patches.

Plate 3. Plains Grassy Woodland within the study area(Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 12/02/2019).

Plate 4. Plains Grassland within the study area (Ecologyand Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 13/02/2019).

3.1.2 Scattered Trees

A total of eight (8) scattered Small Trees were recorded within, or immediately adjacent to the study area

(Figure 2e-2f; Plate 5; Appendix 1.4). These trees would once have been part of the Plains Grassy Woodland

EVC, however the understorey vegetation consists of predominantly introduced species (mainly exotic pasture

grasses) and the trees no longer form a patch of native vegetation.


Plate 5. Scattered tree within the study area (Ecology andHeritage Partners Pty Ltd 12/02/2019).

3.1.3 Introduced and Planted Vegetation

Introduced Vegetation

Areas not supporting remnant native vegetation have a high cover of exotic grass species (>90%), many of

which have been direct-seeded for use as pasture (Plate 6). Scattered native grasses are occasionally present

in these areas, however they did not have the required 25% cover to be considered a native patch as defined

by the Guidelines (DELWP 2017). Removal of embedded rock has also been undertaken to facilitate the direct

seeding of pasture grasses.

Disturbed areas were dominated by weeds such as Brown-top Bent and Toowoomba Canary-grass. Other

species present includes Cocksfoot, Rye Grass and Barley Grass Hordeum spp. (Plate 6).

Noxious weeds are present throughout the study area, with scattered occurrences of Spear Thistle, Hawthorn

Crataegus monogyna, African Box-thorn, Sweet Briar Rosa rubiginosa, Blackberry Rubus fruticosus spp. agg.,

Willow Salix spp., Golden Thistle Scolymus hispanicus and Gorse Ulex europaeus. African Box-thorn,

Blackberry, Willow and Gorse are also considered Weeds of National Significance (WONS).

Planted Vegetation

Planted vegetation in the study area consists of exotic and non-Victorian tree species, commonly River Red-

gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Southern Blue-gum Eucalyptus globulus, Sheoak Allocasuarina spp., and

Monterey Cypress Cupressus macrocarpa. (Plate 7).


Plate 6. Introduced grassland within the study area(Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 12/02/2019).

Plate 7. Planted vegetation within the study area(Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 12/02/2019).

3.2 Fauna Habitat

Native and Introduced Grasslands

The majority of the study area consists of paddocks which contain improved exotic pastures, likely to be used

as a foraging resource by common generalist bird species which are tolerant of modified open areas.

Patches of native grassland occur throughout the study area. These vary in quality and floristic composition

according to grazing regimes and historical land use.

Planted Trees

Planted vegetation in the form of windrows and ornamental plantings around dwellings are present within and

adjacent to the construction corridor. While these features provide foraging, roosting and nesting habitat for

mobile generalist fauna including locally common birds and microbats, they are not considered to provide

breeding or limiting habitat for significant fauna species.

Waterbodies

There is one dam located adjacent to the study area immediately south of Riley Road, Terang that has the

potential to provide habitat for the nationally significant Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (Figure 2l).


3.3 Removal of Native Vegetation (the Guidelines)

The following scenario is based on the extent of the underground transmission line construction corridor

provided to Ecology and Heritage Partners by ACCIONA on 7 May 2019. It is assumed that all native vegetation

within the construction corridor will be removed.

The extent of native vegetation removal also includes approved past removals totalling 0.749 hectares as per

below:

Permit PA1700310: 0.387 hectares; and,

Permit PA1700311: 0.052 hectares.

Permits PA1700310 and PA1700311 are both associated with ACCIONA's previous proposal to construct a

66kV overhead transmission line. ACCIONA has advised that this proposal is no longer intended to proceed;

however, as these permits remain live until 2023, these amounts have been included as 'past removal'.

Permit 2008/0538/A: up to 0.31 hectares.

Permit 2008/0538/A is associated with the use and development of the Mortlake South Wind Farm. ACCIONA

has advised that it has removed and offset the impacts associated with 0.236 hectares of native vegetation to

facilitate the upgrade of local public roads. The maximum extent of native vegetation removal allowed for

under this permit (0.31 hectares) has been included as 'past removal'.

3.3.1 Vegetation proposed to be removed

The study area is within Location 2, with a total extent of 4.677 hectares of native vegetation proposed to be

impacted (including past removals). As such, the permit application falls under the Detailed Assessment

pathway (Table 3).

As part of the current proposal, a total of 3.928 hectares is proposed to be removed (2.421 hectares in Moyne

Shire; 1.507 hectares in Corangamite Shire).

A habitat hectare assessment was completed to determine condition scores of vegetation proposed to be

removed, with condition scores provided in Appendix 1.3.

Table 3. Removal of Native Vegetation (the Guidelines)

Assessment pathway Detailed

Total Extent (ha) 4.677

Extent of past removal (ha) 0.749

Extent of proposed removal (ha) 3.928

Large Trees (no.) 0

Location Category 2

3.3.2 Offset Targets



offset.





A summary of proposed vegetation losses and associated offset requirements is presented in Table 4 and Table

5, and the Native Vegetation Removal Report is presented in Appendix 3.

Table 4. Offset targets for the entire alignment

General Offsets Required (Moyne) 0.888 General HUs

Vicinity (catchment) Glenelg Hopkins CMA

Minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value* 0..253

Note: HU = Habitat Units; * = Minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value (SBV) is 80% of the SBV of the clearing site.

Table 5. Offset targets by municipality

General Offsets Required (Moyne) 0.526 General HUs

General Offsets Required (Corangamite) 0.363 General HUs

Vicinity (catchment) Glenelg Hopkins CMA

Minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value* 0.256 (Moyne); 0.248 (Corangamite)

Note: HU = Habitat Units; * = Minimum Strategic Biodiversity Value (SBV) is 80% of the SBV of the clearing site.



General Units).

3.4 Significance Assessment

3.4.1 Flora

No nationally or state significant flora species were recorded within the study area during the field assessment.

A consolidated list of flora species recorded is provided in Appendix 1.1.

The VBA contains records of one nationally significant and eight State significant flora species previously

recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area (DELWP 2019d) (Appendix 1.2; Figure 3). The PMST nominated

an additional 15 nationally significant species which have not been previously recorded but have the potential

to occur in the locality (DoEE 2019).

Based on the highly modified and agricultural nature of the study area, heavy cattle grazing, landscape context

and the proximity of previous records, significant flora species are considered unlikely to occur within the

construction corridor due to the absence of suitable, unmodified habitat.

Recommendation

Targeted surveys are not required for significant flora within the study area.


3.4.2 Fauna

No nationally or state significant fauna species were recorded within the study area during the field

assessment. A consolidated list of fauna species recorded is provided in Appendix 2.1.

The VBA contains records of four nationally significant, 12 State significant and four regionally significant fauna

species previously recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area (DELWP 2019d) (Appendix 2; Figure 4). The

PMST nominated an additional 16 nationally significant species which have not been previously recorded but

have the potential to occur in the locality (DoEE 2019).

Based on the modified nature of the study area and landscape context, significant fauna species are considered

unlikely to occur within or immediately adjacent to the construction corridor. There is one dam located

adjacent to the construction corridor immediately south of Riley Road, Terang that is considered to provide

marginal habitat for the nationally significant Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (Figure 2l). This dam is

located six metres from the edge of the construction corridor and as such, the works are not considered to

directly or indirectly impact this habitat.

Several wetland values are present within the broader landscape that are likely to provide habitat for wetland

and migratory fauna (i.e. Brolga Grus rubicunda). However, the project will not impact on any waterways or

wetlands that potentially support these species.

Recommendation

There are two records located 13 kilometres to the north, and one record 18 kilometres to the south of Riley

Road which indicates that the locality may support low numbers of Growling Grass Frog.

Due to the low quality condition and sporadic distribution of habitat features preferred by the species (as

described in the National Recovery Plan for the species [DSE 2012]), within the broader landscape, it is

considered unlikely that Growling Grass Frog would utilise this dam as foraging habitat, or rely on the habitat

for breeding purposes. As such, targeted surveys are not required as the project will not impact on any

waterways or wetlands that potentially support these species.

However, to mitigate any potential impact to Growling Grass Frog and aquatic habitat at this location, it is

recommended that any transmission line works avoid direct or indirect impact to the dam by locating any

digging/trenching works at least five metres from the waterbody.

Currently, the dam is located six metres from the edge of the construction corridor, and no direct or indirect

impacts to the species are considered likely to occur due to the absence of suitable habitat within the road

reserve of Riley Road.

Drift fencing should be established along the southern boundary of the construction corridor between the

cable and the dam, to reduce the likelihood of any fauna (frogs, small mammals, reptiles) gaining access to the

construction corridor and getting trapped in any trenches that are constructed at this location. The preferred

location of drift fencing is shown at Figure 2L.

If any works are to be located within five metres of the waterbody, targeted surveys for Growling Grass Frog

are recommended to be undertaken during the species breeding season (usually between October and

December).


3.4.3 Communities

No national or State significant communities are present within the study area.

Three nationally listed ecological communities are predicted to occur within 10 kilometres of the study area

(DoEE 2019):

Grassy Eucalypt Woodland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain;

Natural Temperate Grassland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain; and

Seasonal Herbaceous Wetlands (Freshwater) of the Temperate Lowland Plains.

However, vegetation within the study area did not meet the condition thresholds that define any national or

State-significant communities due the lack of structural diversity, dominance of exotic flora and absence of

key indicator species.


4 LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

4.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999(Commonwealth)

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) establishes a Commonwealth

process for the assessment of proposed actions likely to have a significant impact on any matters of National

Environment Significance (NES), as described in Table 6.

Table 6. Potential impacts to matters of National Environmental Significance (NES)

Matter of NES Potential Impacts

World Heritage properties The proposed action will not impact any properties listed for World Heritage.

National heritage places The proposed action will not impact any places listed for national heritage.

Ramsar wetlands ofinternational significance

The study area occurs approximately 18 kilometres east of the Western District LakesRamsar wetland – (DoEE 2019):

The proposed action is highly unlikely to impact the ecological character of any Ramsarwetland.

Threatened species andecological communities

No habitat for nationally significant flora or fauna species will be impacted (Section 3.4.1and 3.4.2). No ecological community listed under the EPBC Act were recorded within thestudy area (Section 3.4.3).

Migratory and marine species

Several wetland values are present within the broader landscape that are likely to providehabitat for wetland and migratory fauna. However, the project will not impact on anywaterways or wetlands that potentially support these species.

There is no marine habitat within the study area and the study area would not be classedas an ‘important habitat’ as defined under the EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1 PrincipalSignificant Impact Guidelines (DoE 2013), in that it does not contain:

Habitat utilised by a migratory species occasionally or periodically within aregion that supports an ecologically significant proportion of the population ofthe species;

Habitat utilised by a migratory species which is at the limit of the species range;or,

Habitat within an area where the species is declining.

Commonwealth marine area The proposed action will not impact any Commonwealth marine areas.

Nuclear actions (includinguranium mining)

The proposed action is not a nuclear action.

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park The proposed action will not impact the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

Water resources impacted bycoal seam gas or miningdevelopment

The proposed action is not a mining development and will not impact water resources.

4.1.1 Implications

There is one dam located adjacent to the study area immediately south of Riley Road, Terang that is considered

to provide marginal habitat for one fauna species (Growling Grass Frog) listed under the EPBC Act. However,

the dam is located six metres from the edge of the construction corridor, with direct or indirect impacts to


habitat considered highly unlikely to occur. As such, the action will not result in a significant impact to Growling

Grass Frog, and a referral to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act is not required. No other matters of NES

were recorded, or are considered likely to occur.

If any works are to be located within five metres of the waterbody, targeted surveys for Growling Grass Frog

are recommended to be undertaken during the species breed season (usually between October and

December).

4.2 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Victoria)

The FFG Act is the primary legislation dealing with biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of native flora

and fauna in Victoria. Proponents are required to apply for an FFG Act Permit to ‘take’ listed and/or protected

flora species, listed vegetation communities and listed fish species in areas of public land (i.e. within road

reserves, drainage lines and public reserves).

4.2.1 Implications

No FFG Act - listed or protected species were recorded within or adjacent to the construction corridor during

the field assessments, and due to the highly modified condition of habitats, are considered unlikely to occur.

No FFG Act-list communities were recorded within the construction corridor. As such, a permit under the FFG

Act is not required.

4.3 Planning and Environment Act 1987

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 outlines the legislative framework for planning in Victoria and for the

development and administration of planning schemes. All planning schemes contain native vegetation

provisions at Clause 52.17 which require a planning permit from the relevant local Council to remove, destroy

or lop native vegetation on a site of more than 0.4 hectares, unless an exemption under clause 52.17-7 of the

Victorian Planning Schemes applies or a subdivision is proposed with lots less than 0.4 hectares1. Local planning

schemes may contain other provisions in relation to the removal of native vegetation.

4.3.1 Local Planning Schemes

The study area within the Moyne Shire Council is zoned as Farming Zone (FZ). No overlays apply to this area.

The following zoning and overlays apply to the study area within the Corangamite Shire:

Farming Zone – Schedule 1 (FZ1);

Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ);

Road Zone – Category 1 (RDZ1); and

Public Use Zone (PUZ1).

Heritage Overlay (HO287).

1 In accordance with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal’s (VCAT) decision Villawood v Greater Bendigo CC(2005) VCAT 2703 (20 December 2005) all native vegetation is considered lost where proposed lots are less than 0.4hectares in area and must be offset at the time of subdivision.


4.3.2 The Guidelines

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 outlines the legislative framework for planning in Victoria and for the

development and administration of planning schemes. All planning schemes contain native vegetation

provisions at Clause 52.17 which require a planning permit from the relevant local Council to remove, destroy

or lop native vegetation.

Where the clearing of native vegetation is permitted, the quantity and type of vegetation to be offset is

determined using methodology specified in the Guidelines (DELWP 2017).

4.3.3 Implications

The study area is within Location 2, with 3.928 hectares of native vegetation currently proposed to be

removed. As such, the permit application falls under the Detailed Assessment pathway.



offset.






General Units).

A Planning Permit from the Responsible Authority is required to remove, destroy or lop any native vegetation.

4.4 Wildlife Act 1975 and Wildlife Regulations 2013 (Victoria)

The Wildlife Act 1975 (and associated Wildlife Regulations 2013) is the primary legislation in Victoria providing

for protection and management of wildlife. Authorisation for habitat removal may be obtained under the

Wildlife Act 1975 through a licence granted under the Forests Act 1958, or under any other Act such as the

Planning and Environment Act 1987. Any persons engaged to remove, salvage, hold or relocate native fauna

during construction must hold a current Management Authorisation under the Wildlife Act 1975, issued by

DELWP.

4.4.1 Implications

Any persons engaged to conduct salvage and translocation, or general handling of terrestrial fauna species

must hold a current Management Authorisation.

4.5 Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Victoria)

The Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (CaLP Act) contains provisions relating to catchment planning,

land management, noxious weeds and pest animals. Landowners are responsible for the control of any

infestation of noxious weeds and pest fauna species to minimise their spread and impact on ecological values.


4.5.1 Implications

Weeds listed as noxious under the CaLP Act were recorded during the assessment (Spear Thistle, Hawthorn,

African Box-thorn, Sweet Briar, Blackberry, Willow, Golden Thistle and Gorse). Weed management measures

should be incorporated into the project Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to ensure the

risk of weed spread is minimised.


5 MITIGATION MEASURES

All applications under the Guidelines must demonstrate avoidance and minimisation of impacts to native

vegetation.

5.1 Avoid and Minimisation Statement

Due to the nature of the proposed works, and land constraints associated with the placement of the

underground transmission alignment, it is not possible to avoid impacts to native vegetation. However,

ACCIONA have demonstrated impact avoidance in several ways.

The results of the field investigations undertaken within an initial ‘assessment area’ (Section 2.2) were

provided to ACCIONA to allow the amended construction corridor to be designed and located to minimise

impacts to areas of native vegetation comprising the endangered Plains Grassy Woodland and Plains

Grassland EVCs where practical, particularly within the Mortlake-Terang rail corridor (Figure 2d – 2g) and Riley

Road (Figure 2k – 2o). The detailed design of the construction corridor has allowed for the retention of higher

quality areas of Plains Grassland and Plains Grassy Woodland vegetation recorded within the initial

‘construction investigation zone’. The construction corridor has also been designed to avoid any direct or

indirect impacts to the marginal Growling Grass Frog habitat on Riley Road (Figure 2l).

It should be noted that the construction corridor includes buffers to allow for unintended construction

impacts; however, this is a worst-case scenario, and impacts will be unlikely to extend this width along the

entirely of the construction corridor.

Thermal sand is used to insulate the cable and increase heat dissipation into the surrounding soil, enabling

electricity to flow through the cable with less resistance. As such, an open trenching methodology is required

to be used except in very limited circumstances. As such, it is not considered that boring is a feasible option

in this instance. ACCIONA has provided additional information in the Planning Application Report that

accompanies the planning permit application.

Given that the quality of native vegetation is low, and is limited to a low cover (approx. 25-30%) and diversity

of common grasses (Tussock Grass), rushes (Juncus spp.,) and Blackwood’s that have likely regenerated

naturally after previous disturbance in the now disused rail corridor, it is not considered that this vegetation

provides important habitat for significant flora and/or fauna, and the above avoid and minimise measures

implemented by ACCIONA are applicable in this instance.

5.2 Offset Strategy

Ecology and Heritage Partners are a DELWP accredited over-the-counter offset broker. We have two offset

sites listed within the Glenelg CMA region that are confirmed to contain native vegetation credits that can be

used to satisfy the offset obligations generated by the current proposal.

A fee proposal has been provided to the client to secure the offset obligations should a permit be issued for

the development.


5.3 Best Practice Mitigation Measures

Recommended measures to mitigate impacts upon terrestrial and aquatic values present within the study area

may include:

Ensuring any proposed works remain within the development footprint, i.e. not disturbing or removing

areas of native vegetation outside the proposed works area. This also applies to machinery storage,

materials stockpiles, personnel rest areas and access roads;

Minimise impacts to native vegetation and habitats through construction and micro-siting techniques,

including fencing retained areas of native vegetation. If indeed necessary, trees should be lopped or

trimmed rather than removed. Similarly, soil disturbance and sedimentation within wetlands should

be avoided or kept to a minimum, to avoid, or minimise impacts to fauna habitats;

All contractors should be aware of ecologically sensitive areas to minimise the likelihood of

inadvertent disturbance to areas marked for retention. Habitat Zones (areas of sensitivity) should be

included as a mapping overlay on any construction plans;

Tree Protection Zones (TPZs) should be implemented to prevent indirect losses of native vegetation

during construction activities. A TPZ applies to a tree and is a specific area above and below the

ground, with a radius 12 x the DBH. At a minimum standard a TPZ should consider the following:

o A TRZ of trees should be a radius no less than two metres or greater than 15 metres;

o Construction, related activities and encroachment (i.e. earthworks such as trenching that

disturb the root zone) should be excluded from the TPZ;

o Where encroachment exceeds 10% of the total area of the TPZ, the tree should be considered

as lost and offset accordingly;

o Directional drilling may be used for works within the TPZ without being considered

encroachment. The directional bore should be at least 600 millimetres deep;

o The above guidelines may be varied if a qualified arborist confirms the works will not

significantly damage the tree (including stags / dead trees). In this case the tree would be

retained, and no offset would be required; and,

o Where the minimum standard for a TPZ has not been met an offset may be required.

Removal of any habitat trees or shrubs (particularly hollow-bearing trees) should be undertaken

between February and September to avoid the breeding season for the majority of fauna species. If

any habitat trees or shrubs are proposed to be removed, this should be undertaken under the

supervision of an appropriately qualified zoologist to salvage and translocate any displaced fauna;

Construction stockpiles, machinery, roads, and other infrastructure should be wholly located in the

construction corridor, and placed away from areas supporting native vegetation, trees and/or

wetlands;

Ensure that best practice sedimentation and pollution control measures are undertaken at all times,

in accordance with Environment Protection Agency guidelines (EPA 1991; EPA 1996; Victorian Urban

Stormwater Committee 1999) to prevent offsite impacts to waterways and wetlands; and,


As indigenous flora provides valuable habitat for indigenous fauna, it is recommended that any

landscape plantings that are undertaken as part of the proposed works are conducted using

indigenous species sourced from a local provenance, rather than exotic deciduous trees and shrubs.


6 FURTHER REQUIREMENTS

Further requirements associated with development of the study area, as well as additional studies or reporting

that may be required, are provided below (Table 7).

Table 7. Further requirements associated with development of the study area

RelevantLegislation

Implications Further Action

EnvironmentProtection andBiodiversityConservationAct 1999

There is one dam located adjacent to the study area immediatelysouth of Riley Road, Terang that is considered to provide marginalhabitat for one fauna species (Growling Grass Frog) listed under theEPBC Act. However, the dam is located six metres from the edge ofthe construction corridor, with direct or indirect impacts to habitatconsidered highly unlikely to occur. As such, the action will not resultin a significant impact to Growling Grass Frog, and a referral to theCommonwealth under the EPBC Act is not required. No othermatters of NES were recorded, or are considered likely to occur.

No further action required

Flora andFaunaGuarantee Act1988

No FFG Act - listed or protected species were recorded within oradjacent to the construction corridor during the field assessments,and due to the highly modified condition of habitats, are consideredunlikely to occur. No FFG Act-list communities were recorded withinthe construction corridor. As such, a permit under the FFG Act is notrequired.

No further action required.

Planning andEnvironmentAct 1987

The study area is within Location 2, with 3.928 hectares of nativevegetation proposed to be removed. As such, the permit applicationfalls under the Detailed Assessment pathway.

The offset requirement for native vegetation removal totals 0.888General Habitat Units (HUs) across the entire alignment.

Prepare and submit a PlanningPermit application.

Wildlife Act1975

Any persons engaged to conduct salvage and translocation orgeneral handling of terrestrial fauna species must hold a currentManagement Authorisation.

Ensure wildlife specialists holda current ManagementAuthorisation.

Catchmentand LandProtection Act1994

Several weed species listed under the CaLP Act were recorded withinthe study area. To meet requirements under the CaLP Act, listednoxious weeds should be appropriately controlled throughout thestudy area.

Planning Permit conditions arelikely to include a requirementfor a Weed Management Plan.


REFERENCES

DELWP 2017. Removal Destruction or Lopping of Native Vegetation (the Guidelines). Victorian DepartmentEnvironment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2019a. Native Vegetation Information Management Tool [WWW Document] URLhttp://nvim.depi.vic.gov.au/. Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2019b. Nature Kit Map [www Document]. URL:

http://maps.biodiversity.vic.gov.au/viewer/?viewer=NatureKit>. Victorian Department of Environment,

Land, Water and Planning, Melbourne, Victoria.

DELWP 2019c. Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) Benchmarks for each Bioregion [WWW Document]. URLhttp://www.depi.vic.gov.au/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/evc-benchmarks#bioregionname.Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2018d. Victorian Biodiversity Atlas. Sourced from GIS layers: “VBA_FLORA25”, “VBA_FLORA100”,

“VBA_FAUNA25”, “VBA_FAUNA100”, May 2019. Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water

and Planning, Melbourne, Victoria.

DELWP 2019e. Planning Maps Online [www Document]. URLhttp://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/jsp/map/PlanningMapsIntro.jsp. Victoria Department ofEnvironment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2019f. Planning Schemes Online [www Document]. URL: http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au.

Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Melbourne, Victoria.

DoEE 2017. Protected Matters Search Tool: Interactive Map [WWW Document]. URLhttp://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/pmst/. Federal Department of Environment, Canberra.

DSE 2004. Vegetation quality assessment manual: Guidelines for applying the habitat hectares scoring method.

Version 1.3. Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne Victoria.

DSE 2012. National Recovery Plan for the Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis. Prepared by Nick Clemann

and Graeme R. Gillespie. Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and

Environment, Melbourne, January 2012.

DEPI 2014. Advisory List of Rare or Threatened Plants in Victoria. Victorian Department of Environment and

Primary Industries, Melbourne, Victoria.

EPA 1991. Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control. Published document prepared by the

Victorian Environment Protection Authority, Melbourne, Victoria.

EPA 1996. Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites. Published document prepared by the

Victorian Environmental Protection Authority, Melbourne, Victoria.

Jacobs 2017. Mortlake South Transmission Line: Ecology Report. Unpublished report prepared for Ausnet.

Victorian Urban Stormwater Committee 1999. Urban Stormwater: Best Practice Environmental Management

Guidelines. CSIRO, Collingwood, Victoria.


FIGURES

Terang - Mortlake RdMackinnons Bridge Rd

Princes Hwy

Darlin

gton -

Teran

g Rd

Dalvui Lane

Mccra

eRd

Terang - Framlingham Rd

Keilambete Rd

Glenormiston Rd

Race

cours

e Rd

Blacks Rd

Sisters - Noorat Rd

LakeKeilambete

Lake KeilambeteLake Reserve

KoloraGlenormiston

South

The Sisters

Noorat

Terang

11885_Fig01_StudyArea 31/05/2019 psorensen

¹0 1,500750

Metres

Figure 1Location of the study areaMortlake South Wind Farm:Underground TransmissionLine. Ecological Assessment

VicMap Data: The State of Victoria does not warrant theaccuracy or completeness of information in this publicationand any person using or relying upon such information doesso on the basis that the State of Victoria shall bear noresponsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults,defects or omissions in the information.

!(

_̂

Melbourne

Terang

Corangamite(S)

LegendStudy AreaRailwayMajor RoadCollector RoadMinor RoadMinor WatercoursePermanent WaterbodyLand Subject to InundationParks and ReservesCrown Land

!

! ! !

!! Localities

nmnmnmnmnmnmnmnm

EEE

Terang

Terang - Mortlake Rd

Princes Hwy

Kolor

a Lan

e

Keilambete Rd

Glenormiston RdMc

craeR

d

Terang - Framlingham Rd

Race

cours

e Rd

Sisters - Noorat Rd

Darlin

gton -

Teran

g Rd

Dalvui Lane

Mccrae St

Bramich Lane

Black St

Tapp

s Lan

e

Coom

bes R

d

Slaughteryard Rd

Bakers Rd

Chamallak Lane

Riley Rd

Le Couteur Rd

Cliffords Lane

LakeKeilambete

PG1

PGW2PGW2

PGW2

PGWPGW

PGWPGW PGW

PGW2PGW2

PGW1PGW1

PG1 PG1

PG2

¹Figure 2 OverviewEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment

LegendCable routeConstruction corridorConstruction InvestigationZoneRecommended location fordrift fencingCurrent WetlandsImportant VictorianWetlandsPotential Growling GrassFrog habitat

Previously approvedvegetation removal

nm Scattered Small TreeE Impacted trees

Tree Protection ZoneEcological Vegetation Classes

Plains Grassland (HeavierSoils)Plains Grassy WoodlandCurrent vegetation impacts

VicMap Data: The State of Victoria does not warrant the accuracy orcompleteness of information in this publication and any person using orrelying upon such information does so on the basis that the State of Victoriashall bear no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defectsor omissions in the information.

0 1,000500

Metres

11885_Fig02_EcolFeat_P_MB 18/07/2019 Melsley

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri,DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, EarthstarGeographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,

¹Figure 2aEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment

LegendCable routeConstruction corridorConstruction InvestigationZone



0 10050

Metres



¹Figure 2bEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment




0 10050

Metres



¹Figure 2cEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



0 10050

Metres



PGW1

PGW1

¹Figure 2dEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment


Ecological Vegetation ClassesPlains Grassy WoodlandCurrent vegetation impacts


0 10050

Metres



nm

nm

E

7

8

PGW1

PGW1

¹Figure 2eEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment




Plains Grassy WoodlandCurrent vegetation impacts


0 10050

Metres



nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nm

nm

E

E

E

1

23

4

56

7

PG1

PG1

PG1

¹Figure 2fEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment




Plains Grassland (HeavierSoils)Current vegetation impacts


0 10050

Metres



Sisters - Noorat Rd

Keilambete RdPG1

PG2

¹Figure 2gEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment


Ecological Vegetation ClassesPlains Grassland (HeavierSoils)Current vegetation impacts VicMap Data: The State of Victoria does not warrant the accuracy or

completeness of information in this publication and any person using orrelying upon such information does so on the basis that the State of Victoriashall bear no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defectsor omissions in the information.

0 10050

Metres



Keilambete Rd

PG2

¹Figure 2hEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment


Ecological Vegetation ClassesPlains Grassland (HeavierSoils)Current vegetation impacts VicMap Data: The State of Victoria does not warrant the accuracy or

completeness of information in this publication and any person using orrelying upon such information does so on the basis that the State of Victoriashall bear no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defectsor omissions in the information.

0 10050

Metres



Keilambete Rd

LakeKeilambete

¹Figure 2iEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



0 10050

Metres



Keilambete Rd

LakeKeilambete

¹Figure 2jEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



0 10050

Metres



Keilambete Rd

PGW2

PGW2

¹Figure 2kEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



Ecological Vegetation ClassesPlains Grassy Woodland


0 10050

Metres



Race

cours

e Rd

PGW2 PGW2

PGW2PGW2

¹Figure 2lEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment

LegendCable routeConstruction corridorConstruction InvestigationZoneRecommended location fordrift fencingPotential Growling GrassFrog habitat




0 10050

Metres



Race

cours

e Rd

PGW2

¹Figure 2mEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment





0 10050

Metres



PGW

¹Figure 2nEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment




0 10050

Metres



PGWPGW

PGW

PGWPGW

¹Figure 2oEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment




0 10050

Metres



Terang - Mortlake Rd

¹Figure 2pEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



0 10050

Metres



¹Figure 2qEcological featuresMortlake South WindFarm: UndergroundTransmission Line.EcologicalAssessment



0 10050

Metres



!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Mount Emu Cr eek

Blind Creek

Terang

HopkinsRi ver

Darlington - Camperdown RdTerang - Mortlake Rd

Princes Hwy

Mortl

ake -

Arara

t Rd

High St

Hopkins Hwy

Mackinnons Bridge Rd

Cobden - Terang Rd

Dunlop St

Ayre

sfor d

Rd

Hamilton HwyMortlakeCom m on

Lake Cobrico

LakeKeilam bete

Ewen HillReservoir

Lake Terang

Howards Rd

Erreys Rd

Mortlake-FramlinghamRd

BoorcanRd

Hoses Lane

Fram lingham -GarvocRd

Dalvui LaneKeilam bete Rd

Mccrae Rd

Fosters Lane

MaridaYallock Rd

Depot Rd

Terang - Fram lingham Rd

Pontings Rd

Naroghid Rd

Ellerslie-SistersRd

Timboon - Terang Rd

Batemans Rd

Glenorm iston Rd

Roycrofts Rd

PeterboroughRd

Cemeter

yRd

Castle Carey Rd

Baynes St

LaangRd

Kolora Lane

Sam psons Ford RdWarrum yea Rd

Harringtons Rd

Racecourse Rd

Darlington -TerangRd

Purcells Lan

e

Occupation Lane

Cross Forest Rd

Mclennons Lane

Bend Rd

Sisters - Noorat Rd

Sisters-GarvocRd

Connewarren Lane

Ellerslie-Panm ureRd

Spring Dam Rd

Naroghid School Rd

Wintons Lane

Wallaces Lane

BlacksRd

Grinters Lane

Moloneys Rd

Boonerah Estate Rd

Mortlake N17Lake Reserve

Cobrico SwampWildlife Reserve

(hunting)


Mortlake CommonFlora Reserve

Lake TerangLake Reserve

Lake MumblinLake Reserve


GlenormistonStreamsideReserve

2005

2007

2008

1983

1981

2006

2011

11885_Fig03_SigFlora 31/05/2019 psorensen

V BA 2018. V ictorian Biodiversity Atlas // Sourced from : ‘V BA_FLORA25’, ‘V BA_FLORA100’, ‘V BA_FAUNA25’ and‘V BA_FAUNA100’, March 2018 © The State of V ictoria, Departm ent of Environm ent, Land, Water and Planning.Records prior to 1949 not show n.V icMap Data: The State of V ictoria does not warrant the accuracy or com pleteness of inform ation in this publicationand any person using or relying upon such inform ation does so on the basis that the State of V ictoria shall bear noresponsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or om issions in the inform ation.

!(

_̂

Corangamite (S)Terang

Melbourne

¹

Figure 3Previously documented significantflora within 10km of the study areaMortlake South Wind Farm: UndergroundTransmission Line. EcologicalAssessment

LegendStudy Area

Significant flora!( Curly Sedge!( Grassland Sun-orchid!( Salt Blow n-grass!( Spiny Peppercress!( Thin Pondweed!( Water Parsnip!( Yellow Watercrown Grass

0 42

Kilom etres

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") Mount Emu Cr eek

Blind Creek

Terang

HopkinsRi ver

Darlington - Camperdown RdTerang - Mortlake Rd

Princes Hwy

Mortl

ake -

Arara

t Rd

High St

Hopkins Hwy

Mackinnons Bridge Rd

Cobden - Terang Rd

Dunlop St

Ayre

sfor d

Rd

Hamilton HwyMortlakeCom m on

Lak e Cob rico

LakeKeilam b ete

Ew en HillReservoir

Lak e T erang

How ards Rd

ErreysRd

Mortlak e-Framlingh amRd

Boorcan Rd

Hoses Lane

Fram ling h am -GarvocRd

Dalvui LaneKeilam b eteRd

Mccrae Rd

Fosters Lane

Marida Yallock Rd

Depot Rd

Terang - Fram ling ham Rd

Pontings Rd

Narog h id Rd

Ellerslie-SistersRd

Timb oon - Terang Rd

Batemans Rd

Glenorm iston Rd

Roycrofts Rd

Peterb oroug hRd

Cemeter

yRd

Castle Carey Rd

Baynes St

Laang Rd

Kolora Lane

Sam psons Ford RdWarrum yea Rd

Harring tons Rd

Racecourse Rd

Darling ton -T erang Rd

Purcells Lan

e

Occupation Lane

Cross Forest Rd

Mclennons Lane

Bend Rd

Sisters - Noorat Rd

Sisters-GarvocRd

Connew arren Lane

Ellerslie-Panm ureRd

Spring Dam Rd

Narog h id School Rd

Wintons Lane

Wallaces Lane

BlacksRd

Grinters Lane Moloneys Rd

Boonerah Estate Rd


Cobrico SwampWildlife Reserve

(hunting)


Mortlake CommonFlora Reserve

Lake TerangLake Reserve

Lake MumblinLake Reserve


GlenormistonStreamsideReserve

1992

1987

1987

2012

2012

20122012

2012

201220112011

2011

20112010

2010

2009

2009

2009

2009

2008

2007

19971993

1992

20101992

2004

1991

20102010

1986

2013

19872012

1986

2007

1990

1988

1986

1986

11885_Fig04_SigFauna 31/05/2019 psorensen

VBA 2018. Victorian Biodiversity Atlas // Sourced from : ‘VBA_FLORA25’, ‘VBA_FLORA100’, ‘VBA_FAUNA25’ and‘VBA_FAUNA100’, March 2018 © T he State of Victoria, Departm ent of Environm ent, Land, Water and Planning .Records prior to 1949 not show n.VicMap Data: T h e State of Victoria does not w arrant th e accuracy or com pleteness of inform ation in th is pub licationand any person using or relying upon such inform ation does so on the b asis that th e State of Victoria sh all b ear noresponsib ility or liab ility w h atsoever for any errors, faults, defects or om issions in th e inform ation.

!(

_̂

Corangamite (S)Terang

Melbourne

¹

Figure 4Previously documented significantfauna within 10km of the study areaMortlake South Wind Farm: UndergroundTransmission Line. EcologicalAssessment

LegendStudy Area

Significant fauna!( Australasian Shoveler!( Brolg a!( Com m on Greensh ank!( Curlew Sandpiper!( Eastern Great Eg ret!( Glossy Ib is!( Grow ling Grass Frog!( Gull-b illed Tern") Hardhead") Lath am 's Snipe") Little Galaxias") Musk Duck") Wh isk ered Tern

0 42

Kilom etres


APPENDICES


APPENDIX 1 - FLORA

Appendix 1.1 – Flora Results

Legend:

* Listed as a noxious weed under the CaLP Act;

w Weed of National Significance; and

# Planted Victorian and non-Victorian species.

Table A1.1. Flora recorded within the study area.

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation Status/Notes

INDIGENOUS SPECIES

Acacia dealbata Silver Wattle

Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood

Eucalyptus camaldulensis River Red-gum #

Eucalyptus globulus Southern Blue-gum #

Juncus holoschoenus Joint-leaf Rush

Juncus spp. Rush

Lachnagrostis spp. Blown Grass

Lythrum hyssopifolia Small Loosestrife

Oxalis perennans Grassland Wood-sorrel

Poa labillardierei Common Tussock-grass

Poa spp. Tussock Grass

Rumex brownii Slender Dock

INTRODUCED SPECIES

Acacia spp. Wattle #

Agrostis capillaris Brown-top Bent

Allocasuarina spp. Sheoak #

Avena barbata Bearded Oat

Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle *

Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn *

Dactylis glomerata Cocksfoot

Eucalyptus spp. Eucalypt #

Helminthotheca echioides Ox-tongue

Hordeum spp. Barley Grass

Hypochoeris radicata Flatweed

Lolium spp. Rye Grass


Scientific Name Common Name Conservation Status/Notes

Lycium ferocissimum African Box-thorn *w

Malva spp. Mallow

Mentha spp. Mint

Phalaris aquatica Toowoomba Canary-grass

Pinus spp. Pine

Rosa rubiginosa Sweet Briar *

Rubus fruticosus spp. agg. Blackberry *w

Salix spp. Willow *w

Scolymus hispanicus Golden Thistle *

Solanum spp. Nightshade

Sonchus asper s.s. Rough Sow-thistle

Trifolium spp. Clover

Ulex europaeus Gorse *w


Appendix 1.2 – Significant Flora Species

Table A1.2 Significant flora recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area

Likelihood: Habitat characteristics of significant flora species previously recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area, or that may potentially occur within the study area were assessed to determinetheir likelihood of occurrence. The likelihood of occurrence rankings are defined below.

1 - Known occurrence

- Recorded within the study area recently (i.e. within tenyears)

3 - Moderate Likelihood

- Limited previous records of the species in the local vicinity;and/or,

- The study area contains poor or limited habitat.

5 – Unlikely

- No suitable habitat and/or outside the species range.

2 - High Likelihood

- Previous records of the species in the local vicinity; and/or,- The study area contains areas of high quality habitat.

4 - Low Likelihood

- Poor or limited habitat for the species however otherevidence (such as a lack of records or environmentalfactors) indicates there is a very low likelihood of presence.

Scientific name Common nameTotal # of

documentedrecords

Lastdocumented

recordEPBC FFG DEPI

Likelyoccurrence in

study area

NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

Amphibromus fluitans # River Swamp Wallaby-grass - - VU - - 4

Dodonaea procumbens # Trailing Hop-bush - - VU - v 5

Glycine latrobeana # Clover Glycine - - VU L v 4

Lachnagrostis adamsonii # Adamson's Blown-grass - - EN L v 4

Lepidium aschersonii Spiny Peppercress 2 1983 VU L e 4

Leucochrysum albicans var. tricolor # Hoary Sunray - - EN - e 4

Pimelea spinescens subsp. spinescens # Spiny Rice-flower - - CR L e 4

Poa sallacustris # Salt-lake Tussock-grass - - VU L v 5

Prasophyllum frenchii # Maroon Leek-orchid - - EN L e 4


Scientific name Common nameTotal # of

documentedrecords

Lastdocumented

recordEPBC FFG DEPI

Likelyoccurrence in

study area

Prasophyllum spicatum # Dense Leek-orchid - - VU - e 5

Pterostylis tenuissima # Swamp Greenhood - - VU - v 5

Rutidosis leptorhynchoides # Button Wrinklewort - - EN L e 4

Taraxacum cygnorum # Coast Dandelion - - VU L e 5

Thelymitra epipactoides # Metallic Sun-orchid - - EN L e 5

Thelymitra matthewsii # Spiral Sun-orchid - - VU L v 5

Xerochrysum palustre # Swamp Everlasting - - VU L v 4

STATE SIGNIFICANCE

Berula erecta Water Parsnip 1 2006 - - k 4

Carex tasmanica Curly Sedge 1 2005 - L v 3

Ceratophyllum demersum Hornwort 1 1875 - - k 5

Lachnagrostis robusta Salt Blown-grass 1 2008 - - r 4

Potamogeton australiensis Thin Pondweed 2 1981 - - k 5

Thelymitra basaltica Grassland Sun-orchid 2 2007 - - e 4

Wolffia angusta Narrow Duckweed 1 1875 - - k 4

Notes: EPBC = Environm e ntProte c tiona nd Biod ive rsityConse rva tionAc t1999 (EPBC Act), FFG = Flora a nd Fa una G ua ra nte e Ac t1988 (FFG Act), DEPI= Advisory List of Rare or Threatened Plants inVictoria (DEPI 2014), L = Listed, # = Records identified from EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool, Data source: Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DELWP 2019d); Protected Matters Search Tool (DoEE2019). Order: Alphabetical.


Appendix 1.3 – Habitat Hectares

Table A1.3. Habitat Hectares results for remnant vegetation recorded within the study area .

Vegetation Zone PGW1 PGW2 PG1 PG2

Bioregion Victorian Volcanic Plain Victorian Volcanic Plain Victorian Volcanic Plain Victorian Volcanic Plain

EVC / Tree Plains Grassy Woodland Plains Grassy WoodlandPlains Grassland (Heavier

Soils)Plains Grassland (Heavier

Soils)

EVCNumber

55_61 55_61 132_61 132_61

EVC Bioregional Conservation Status Endangered Endangered Endangered Endangered

Large Old Trees /10 0 0 n/a n/a

Canopy Cover /5 0 0 n/a n/a

Under storey /25 10 5 5 5

Lack of Weeds /15 4 0 0 6

Patch Recruitment /10 0 5 6 3

Condition Organic Matter /5 5 4 3 3

Logs /5 0 0 n/a n/a

Treeless EVC Multiplier 1 1 1.36 1.36

Subtotal = 19.00 14.00 19.04 23.12

Landscape Value /25 3 2 3 2

Habitat Points /100 22 16 22 25

Habitat Score 0.22 0.16 0.22 0.25


Appendix 1.4 – Scattered Trees

Table A1.4. Remnant scattered trees recorded within the study area.

Tree # Species DBH (cm) Size Class Latitude Longitude Impacted

1 Stag 62 Small 662377.8318 5771381.472 No

2 Stag 70 Small 662379.8425 5771394.384 Yes

3 Stag 69 Small 662369.9484 5771403.463 No

4 Stag 53 Small 662358.2767 5771462.349 No

5 Stag 66 Small 662328.5044 5771587.28 Yes

6 Stag 53 Small 662312.6939 5771607.209 No

7 Stag 53 Small 662309.5012 5771688.498 Yes

8 Stag 37 Small 662270.6347 5771738.491 No


APPENDIX 2 - FAUNA

Significant Fauna Species

Table A2. Significant fauna within 10 kilometres of the study area.

Likelihood: Habitat characteristics of significant fauna species previously recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area, or that may potentially occur within the study area were assessed todetermine their likelihood of occurrence. The likelihood of occurrence rankings are defined below.

1 High Likelihood

Known resident in the study area based on site observations, database records, or expert advice; and/or,

Recent records (i.e. within five years) of the species in the local area (DELWP 2017d); and/or,

The study area contains the species’ preferred habitat.

2 Moderate Likelihood

The species is likely to visit the study area regularly (i.e. at least seasonally); and/or,

Previous records of the species in the local area (DELWP 2017d); and/or,

The study area contains some characteristics of the species’ preferred habitat.

3 Low Likelihood

The species is likely to visit the study area occasionally or opportunistically whilst en route to more suitable sites; and/or,

There are only limited or historical records of the species in the local area (i.e. more than 20 years old); and/or,

The study area contains few or no characteristics of the species’ preferred habitat.

4 Unlikely

No previous records of the species in the local area; and/or,

The species may fly over the study area when moving between areas of more suitable habitat; and/or,

Out of the species’ range; and/or,

No suitable habitat present.

-

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

FFG Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (FFG Act)

DSE Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria (DSE 2013); Advisory List of Threatened Invertebrate Fauna in Victoria (DSE 2009)

NAP National Action Plan (Cogger et al 1993; Duncan et al. 1999; Garnet et al 2011; Woinarski et al 2014; Sands and New 2002; Tyler 1997)

EX Extinct DD Data deficient (insufficiently or poorly known

RX Regionally extinct L Listed as threatened under FFG Act

CR Critically endangered EN Endangered


# Listed on the Protected Matters Search Tool NT Near threatened

VU Vulnerable CD Conservation dependent

LC least concern RA Rare

Common Name Scientific NameLast

DocumentedRecord (VBA)

#Records

(VBA)

EPBCAct

FFGACT

DSE(2013)

NationalAction

PlanLikelihood

NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

Australasian Bittern Botaurus poiciloptilus # 1 EN L EN VU 4

Australian Grayling Prototroctes maraena # 1 VU L VU VU 4

Australian Painted Snipe Rostratula australis # 1 VU L CR VU 4

Corangamite Water Skink Eulamprus tympanum marnieae # 1 EN L CR - 4

Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea 1992 3 CR - EN - 4

Dwarf Galaxias Galaxiella pusilla # 1 VU L EN VU 4

Eastern Barred Bandicoot Perameles gunnii 1951 2 EN L WX CR 4

Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis # 1 CR - VU - 4

Golden Sun Moth Synemon plana # 1 CR L CR - 4

Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus # 1 VU L VU VU 4

Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis 2010 5 VU L EN VU 3

Long-nosed Potoroo Potorous tridactylus tridactylus # 1 VU L NT EN 4

Macquarie Perch Macquaria australasica 1920 2 EN L EN DD 4

Murray Cod Maccullochella peelii # 1 VU L VU - 4

Painted Honeyeater Grantiella picta # 1 VU L VU NT 4

Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus # 1 CR L CR EN 4

Southern Brown Bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus # 1 EN L NT NT 4

Spot-tailed Quoll Dasyurus maculatus maculatus # 1 EN L EN VU 4

Swamp Antechinus Antechinus minimus maritimus # 1 VU L NT VU 4


Common Name Scientific NameLast

DocumentedRecord (VBA)

#Records

(VBA)

EPBCAct

FFGACT

DSE(2013)

NationalAction

PlanLikelihood

Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor # 1 CR L EN EN 4

STATE SIGNIFICANCE

Australasian Shoveler Anas rhynchotis 1992 5 - - VU - 4

Black Falcon Falco subniger 1978 1 - - VU - 4

Brolga Grus rubicunda 2012 62 - L VU - 3

Common Bent-wing Bat Miniopterus schreibersii GROUP 1965 1 - L - CD 4

Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia 2010 2 - - VU - 4

Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos # 1 - - VU - 4

Eastern Great Egret Ardea modesta 2004 4 - L VU - 4

Grey Goshawk Accipiter novaehollandiae novaehollandiae 1956 1 - L VU - 4

Gull-billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica macrotarsa 1986 1 - L EN - 4

Hardhead Aythya australis 2013 4 - - VU - 4

Musk Duck Biziura lobata 1990 5 - - VU - 4

Southern Toadlet Pseudophryne semimarmorata 1979 11 - - VU - 3

White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus 1903 2 - - VU - 4

REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus 1991 1 - - NT - 4

Latham's Snipe Gallinago hardwickii 2012 4 - - NT - 4

Nankeen Night Heron Nycticorax caledonicus hillii 1936 1 - - NT - 4

Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos # 1 - - NT - 4

Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybridus javanicus 1986 3 - - NT - 4

Data source: Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DELWP 2019d); Protected Matters Search Tool (DoEE 2019).


APPENDIX 3 - NATIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL (NVR)

REPORT

Native vegetation removal report

Page 1

This report provides information to support an application to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation in accordance

with the Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. The report is not an assessment

by DELWP of the proposed native vegetation removal. Native vegetation information and offset requirements have

been determined using spatial data provided by the applicant or their consultant.

Date of issue: 17/07/2019 Report ID: EHP_2019_157

Time of issue: 12:47 pm

Project ID EHP11885_MorthlakeSth_WF

Assessment pathway

Assessment pathway Detailed Assessment Pathway

Extent including past and proposed 4.677 ha

Extent of past removal 0.749 ha

Extent of proposed removal 3.928 ha

No. Large trees proposed to be removed 0

Location category of proposed removal Location 2

The native vegetation is in an area mapped as an endangered EcologicalVegetation Class (as per the statewide EVC map). Removal of less than 0.5hectares of native vegetation in this location will not have a significant impacton any habitat for a rare or threatened species.

1. Location map


Page 2

Offset requirements if a permit is granted

Any approval granted will include a condition to obtain an offset that meets the following requirements:

NB: values within tables in this document may not add to the totals shown above due to rounding

Appendix 1 includes information about the native vegetation to be removed

Appendix 2 includes information about the rare or threatened species mapped at the site.

Appendix 3 includes maps showing native vegetation to be removed and extracts of relevant species habitat importance maps

1 The general offset amount required is the sum of all general habitat units in Appendix 1.

2 Minimum strategic biodiversity score is 80 per cent of the weighted average score across habitat zones where a general offset is required

General offset amount1 0.888 general habitat units

Vicinity Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority (CMA) or Corangamite

Shire, Moyne Shire Council

Minimum strategic biodiversity value

score2

0.253

Large trees 0 large trees


Page 3

Next stepsAny proposal to remove native vegetation must meet the application requirements of the Detailed Assessment Pathway and it

will be assessed under the Detailed Assessment Pathway.

If you wish to remove the mapped native vegetation you are required to apply for a permit from your local council. Council will

refer your application to DELWP for assessment, as required. This report is not a referral assessment by DELWP.

This Native vegetation removal report must be submitted with your application for a permit to remove, destroy or lop native

vegetation.

Refer to the Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation (the Guidelines) for a full list of application

requirements This report provides information that meets the following application requirements:

' The assessment pathway and reason for the assessment pathway

' A description of the native vegetation to be removed (partly met)

' Maps showing the native vegetation and property (partly met)

' Information about the impacts on rare or threatened species.

' The offset requirements determined in accordance with section 5 of the Guidelines that apply if approval is granted to

remove native vegetation.

Additional application requirements must be met including:

' Topographical and land information

' Recent dated photographs

' Details of past native vegetation removal

' An avoid and minimise statement

' A copy of any Property Vegetation Plan that applies

' A defendable space statement as applicable

' A statement about the Native Vegetation Precinct Plan as applicable

' A site assessment report including a habitat hectare assessment of any patches of native vegetation and details of trees

' An offset statement that explains that an offset has been identified and how it will be secured.

© The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and PlanningMelbourne 2019

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Internationallicence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition thatyou credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to anyimages, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, theVictorian Government logo and the Department of Environment, Land, Waterand Planning logo. To view a copy of this licence, visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/34.0/au/deed.en

Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne.

For more information contact the DELWP Customer Service Centre 136 186

DisclaimerThis publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and itsemployees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or iswholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liabilityfor any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying onany information in this publication.

Obtaining this publication does not guarantee that an application will meet therequirements of Clauses 52.16 or 52.17 of the Victoria Planning Provisions andVictorian planning schemes or that a permit to remove native vegetation will begranted.

Notwithstanding anything else contained in this publication, you must ensure thatyou comply with all relevant laws, legislation, awards or orders and that youobtain and comply with all permits, approvals and the like that affect, areapplicable or are necessary to undertake any action to remove, lop or destroy orotherwise deal with any native vegetation or that apply to matters within thescope of Clauses 52.16 or 52.17 of the Victoria Planning Provisions andVictorian planning schemes.

www.delwp.vic.gov.au

Pag

e4

Ap

pe

nd

ix1

:D

escrip

tion

of

na

tive

ve

ge

tatio

nto

be

rem

ove

d

Th

esp

eci

es-g

ene

ralo

ffse

tte

stw

as

ap

plie

dto

you

rp

rop

osa

l.T

his

test

dete

rmin

es

ifth

ep

rop

osed

rem

ova

lofn

ative

veg

eta

tio

nh

as

ap

rop

ort

iona

lim

pa

cto

nan

yra

reo

rth

rea

tene

dsp

ecie

sha

bit

ats

ab

ove

the

spe

cie

so

ffse

tth

resh

old

.T

he

thre

sh

old

isset

at

0.0

05

pe

rce

ntof

the

map

ped

hab

ita

tva

lue

for

asp

ecie

s.W

hen

the

pro

po

rtio

na

lim

pa

ctis

abo

veth

esp

ecie

so

ffset

thre

sh

old

aspe

cies

off

set

isre

qu

ired

.T

his

testis

do

ne

for

all

spe

cie

sm

ap

ped

at

the

site

.M

ultip

lesp

ecie

so

ffse

tsw

illb

ere

quire

dif

the

sp

eci

es

off

set

thre

sho

ldis

exc

ee

de

dfo

rm

ultip

lesp

eci

es.

Where

azo

ne

req

uire

ssp

ecie

so

ffse

t(s),

the

specie

sh

ab

itat

un

itsfo

re

ach

spe

cies

inth

atzo

ne

iscalc

ula

ted

by

the

follo

win

ge

qu

atio

nin

accord

ance

with

the

Guid

elin

es:

Sp

ecie

sha

bita

tu

nits

=e

xte

ntx

con

diti

on

xsp

ecie

sla

ndsca

pe

fact

or

x2

,w

he

reth

esp

ecie

sla

ndsca

pe

fact

or

=0

.5+

(ha

bita

tim

po

rtan

cesc

ore

/2)

Th

esp

eci

es

offse

ta

mo

un

t(s)

req

uired

isth

esu

mo

fall

sp

ecie

sha

bita

tu

nits

pe

rzon

e

Where

azo

ne

do

es

no

tre

quire

asp

eci

es

offse

t,th

eg

ene

ralh

abita

tun

itsin

tha

tzon

eis

ca

lcu

late

db

yth

efo

llow

ing

eq

ua

tion

ina

cco

rda

nce

with

the

Gu

idelin

es:

Ge

ne

ralh

abita

tu

nits

=e

xte

ntx

co

nd

itio

nx

ge

nera

lla

ndsca

pe

fact

or

x1

.5,

wh

ere

the

ge

ne

ralla

ndsc

ap

efa

cto

r=

0.5

+(s

tra

teg

icbio

div

ers

ityva

lue

score

/2)

Th

eg

en

era

lo

ffse

ta

mo

un

tre

qu

ire

dis

the

sum

ofa

llg

ene

ralh

ab

itat

un

itsp

er

zon

e.

Na

tive

ve

ge

tati

on

tob

ere

mo

ve

d

Info

rma

tio

np

rovid

ed

by

or

on

be

ha

lfo

fth

ea

pp

lic

an

tin

aG

ISfi

leIn

form

ati

on

ca

lcu

late

db

yE

nS

ym

Zo

ne

Typ

eB

ioE

VC

Bio

EV

Cc

on

se

rva

tio

ns

tatu

s

La

rge

tre

e(s

)P

art

ial

rem

ova

lC

on

dit

ion

sc

ore

Po

lyg

on

Ex

ten

t

Ex

ten

tw

ith

ou

to

ve

rla

p

SB

Vs

co

reH

Is

co

reH

ab

ita

tu

nit

sO

ffs

et

typ

e

1-D

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.1

60

0.0

37

0.0

37

0.4

14

0.0

06

Ge

ne

ral

2-D

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.1

60

0.0

35

0.0

35

0.3

93

0.0

06

Ge

ne

ral

3-D

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.1

60

0.0

03

0.0

03

0.4

50

0.0

01

Ge

ne

ral

5-D

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.1

60

0.0

04

0.0

04

0.3

90

0.0

01

Ge

ne

ral

6-D

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.1

60

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.3

90

0.0

00

Ge

ne

ral

14

-BP

atc

hvv

p_

01

32

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

50

1.4

27

1.4

27

0.3

05

0.3

49

Ge

ne

ral

4-C

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

1.1

39

1.1

39

0.3

47

0.2

53

Ge

ne

ral

7-C

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.0

12

0.0

12

0.3

12

0.0

03

Ge

ne

ral

8-C

Pa

tch

vvp

_0

055

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.2

33

0.2

33

0.3

52

0.0

52

Ge

ne

ral

9-T

RS

ca

tte

red

Tre

evv

p_

00

55

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

00

0.0

31

0.0

31

0.2

90

0.0

06

Ge

ne

ral

Pag

e5

Info

rma

tio

np

rovid

ed

by

or

on

be

ha

lfo

fth

ea

pp

lic

an

tin

aG

ISfi

leIn

form

ati

on

ca

lcu

late

db

yE

nS

ym

Zo

ne

Typ

eB

ioE

VC

Bio

EV

Cc

on

se

rva

tio

ns

tatu

s

La

rge

tre

e(s

)P

art

ial

rem

ova

lC

on

dit

ion

sc

ore

Po

lyg

on

Ex

ten

t

Ex

ten

tw

ith

ou

to

ve

rla

p

SB

Vs

co

reH

Is

co

reH

ab

ita

tu

nit

sO

ffs

et

typ

e

10

-

TR

Sca

tte

red

Tre

evv

p_

00

55

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

00

0.0

31

0.0

31

0.2

80

0.0

06

Ge

ne

ral

11

-

TR

Sca

tte

red

Tre

evv

p_

00

55

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

00

0.0

31

0.0

31

0.2

80

0.0

06

Ge

ne

ral

12

-AP

atc

hvv

p_

01

32

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.0

59

0.0

59

0.2

86

0.0

12

Ge

ne

ral

13

-AP

atc

hvv

p_

01

32

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.3

93

0.3

93

0.2

85

0.0

83

Ge

ne

ral

15

-AP

atc

hvv

p_

01

32

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.2

82

0.2

82

0.2

87

0.0

60

Ge

ne

ral

16

-AP

atc

hvv

p_

01

32

_61

En

da

ngere

d0

no

0.2

20

0.2

09

0.2

09

0.2

80

0.0

44

Ge

ne

ral

Pag

e6

Ap

pe

nd

ix2

:In

form

atio

na

bo

ut

imp

acts

to\L

\PY

\^S

\PL

^PX

PO

]Z

PNTP

]gS

LM

T^L

^]Y

X]T^P

Th

ista

ble

lists

all

\L\P

Y\

^S\P

L^P

XP

O]ZP

NTP

]gS

LMT^L

^]W

LZ

ZPO

L^

^SP

]T^P

.

Sp

ec

ies

co

mm

on

na

me

Sp

ec

ies

scie

nti

fic

na

me

Sp

ec

ies

nu

mb

er

Co

ns

erv

ati

on

sta

tus

Gro

up

Hab

ita

tim

pa

cte

d%

hab

ita

tva

lue

aff

ec

ted

Cu

rly

Se

dg

eC

are

xta

sm

an

ica

50

06

50

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

002

Win

d-b

low

nT

usso

ck-

gra

ssP

oa

physo

clin

a5

07

791

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

001

Fra

gra

nt

Leek-o

rch

idP

raso

ph

yllu

msu

ave

ole

ns

50

45

67

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

001

Bu

tto

nW

rinkle

wo

rtR

utid

osis

lep

torh

ynch

oid

es

50

29

82

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

001

Clu

mpin

gG

old

en

Mo

ths

Diu

ris

gre

ga

ria

50

48

87

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

001

La

rge

-he

ade

dF

ire

we

ed

Se

ne

cio

ma

cro

carp

us

50

31

16

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

001

Sa

ltB

low

n-g

rass

La

chn

agro

stis

rob

usta

50

42

23

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Ba

sa

ltS

un

-orc

hid

Th

ely

mitr

ag

reg

aria

50

40

19

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Plu

mp

Sw

am

pW

alla

by-

gra

ssA

mp

hib

rom

us

pith

og

astr

us

50

36

24

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Bra

cki

sh

Pla

ins

Bu

tte

rcu

pR

an

un

culu

sdim

inu

tus

50

43

14

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sw

am

pE

ve

rla

stin

gX

ero

ch

rysu

mp

alu

str

e5

03

763

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

White

Su

nra

yL

eu

coch

rysu

ma

lbic

an

ssu

bsp.

tric

olo

r5

04

581

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sm

all

Scurf

-pe

aC

ulle

np

arv

um

50

27

73

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Wavy

Sw

am

pW

alla

by-

gra

ssA

mp

hib

rom

us

sin

ua

tus

50

36

25

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pla

ins

Ya

m-d

ais

yM

icro

seri

ssca

pig

era

s.s

.5

04

657

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Ma

tte

dF

lax-

lily

Dia

ne

llaa

moe

na

50

50

84

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pa

le-f

low

er

Cra

ne's

-bill

Ge

ran

ium

sp.

35

05

344

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sn

ow

yM

int-

bu

sh

Pro

sta

nth

era

niv

ea

va

r.n

ive

a5

02

746

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pag

e7

To

ug

hS

cu

rf-p

ea

Cu

llen

tena

x5

02

776

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

La

rge

White

Sp

ide

r-o

rch

idC

ala

den

iave

nu

sta

50

05

33

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pu

rple

Blo

wn

-gra

ssL

achn

agro

stis

pu

nic

ea

sub

sp.

pu

nic

ea

50

42

06

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Go

lde

nC

ow

slip

sD

iuri

sb

eh

rii

50

10

61

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Tra

ilin

gH

op

-bush

Do

do

nae

ap

rocu

mb

en

s5

01

090

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Arc

hin

gF

lax-

lily

Dia

ne

llasp

.a

ff.lo

ngifo

lia(B

en

am

bra

)5

05

560

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pa

leS

wa

mp

Eve

rlastin

gC

oro

nid

ium

gu

nn

ian

um

50

46

55

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pu

rple

Blo

wn

-gra

ssL

achn

agro

stis

pu

nic

ea

sub

sp.

filif

olia

50

42

22

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Bo

gG

um

Eu

ca

lyptu

skits

onia

na

50

12

90

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sw

am

pF

lax-

lily

Dia

ne

llaca

llica

rpa

50

50

86

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pu

rple

Diu

ris

Diu

ris

pun

cta

ta5

01

084

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sp

iny

Ric

e-f

low

er

Pim

ele

asp

ine

sce

ns

su

bsp

.sp

ine

sce

ns

50

48

23

En

da

nge

red

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Fin

e-h

air

yS

pea

r-g

rass

Au

str

ostip

apu

be

rula

50

39

88

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sm

all

Milk

wo

rtC

om

esp

erm

apo

lyg

alo

ides

50

07

98

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Bra

nchin

gG

rou

ndse

lS

en

eci

ocu

nnin

gh

am

iiva

r.cu

nnin

gha

mii

50

31

04

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Co

mm

on

Pip

ew

ort

Eri

ocau

lon

sca

rio

su

m5

01

218

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Bro

lga

Gru

sru

bic

un

da

10

17

7V

uln

era

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Fla

tB

luebe

llW

ah

len

berg

iap

lan

iflo

rasu

bsp.

pla

nifl

ora

50

40

64

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Ha

iry

Ta

ilsP

tilo

tus

eru

besce

ns

50

28

25

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Clo

ver

Gly

cin

eG

lycin

ela

tro

be

ana

50

14

56

Vu

lnera

ble

Dis

pers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Sm

all-

flo

we

rM

at-

rush

Lo

ma

ndra

mic

ranth

asu

bsp

.tu

be

rcula

ta5

04

711

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

So

uth

ern

Sw

ain

son

-pe

aS

wa

inson

ab

eh

ria

na

50

49

44

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Pag

e8

Le

afy

Tw

ig-s

ed

ge

Cla

diu

mp

roce

rum

50

07

86

Ra

reD

isp

ers

ed

Hab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

0.0

000

Ha

bit

at

gro

up

'H

igh

lylo

calis

ed

ha

bita

tm

ea

ns

the

reis

20

00

hecta

res

or

less

ma

pp

ed

ha

bita

tfo

rth

esp

eci

es

'D

isp

ers

ed

ha

bita

tm

ea

ns

the

reis

mo

reth

an

20

00

hecta

res

ofm

app

ed

ha

bita

tfo

rth

esp

eci

es

Ha

bit

at

imp

ac

ted

'H

ab

ita

tim

po

rtan

ce

map

sa

reth

em

ap

sd

efin

ed

inth

eG

uid

elin

es

tha

tin

clu

de

all

the

ma

pp

ed

habita

tfo

ra

rare

or

thre

ate

ned

spe

cie

s'

To

pra

nki

ng

ma

ps

are

the

maps

defin

ed

inth

eG

uid

elin

es

thatd

epic

tth

eim

po

rta

nt

are

as

ofa

dis

pe

rse

dsp

ecie

sh

ab

itat,

de

velo

ped

from

the

hig

hest

ha

bita

tim

port

ance

sco

res

ind

isp

ers

ed

sp

ecie

sh

abitat

ma

ps

an

dsele

cte

dV

BA

reco

rds

'S

ele

cte

dV

BA

reco

rdis

an

are

ain

Vic

tori

ath

at

rep

rese

nts

ala

rge

po

pula

tion

,ro

ostin

go

rb

ree

din

gsi

tee

tc.

Appendix 3 f Images of mapped native vegetation2. Strategic biodiversity values map

3. Aerial photograph showing mapped native vegetation

4. Map of the property in context

Yellow boundaries denote areas of proposed native vegetation removal.

Red boundaries denote areas of past removal.

biodiversity assessment: mortlake south wind farm underground … · 2019-08-13 · brisbane: level...

Documents