ecological assessment for the tramway oval and moore...
TRANSCRIPT
Ecological Assessment for the Tramway Oval and Moore Park Tennis Centre Work Sites, Moore Park
Prepared for
Laing O’Rourke
8 September 2014
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D ii
DOCUMENT TRACKING
Item Detail
Project Name Ecological Assessment for the Tramway Oval and Moore Park Tennis Centre Work Sites,
Moore Park
Project Number 14SUTECO-0063
Project Manager John Gollan
Prepared by John Gollan
Reviewed by Lucas McKinnon
Approved by Lucas McKinnon
Status Final
Version Number 3
Last saved on 8 September 2014
Cover
photographs
Two large figs (Ficus rubiginosa) and Castanospermum australe (Black bean) at the Moore
Park Tennis Centre Site (Photo by J. Gollan).
This report should be cited as „ELA 2014. Ecological Assessment for the Tramway Oval and Moore
Park Tennis Centre Work Sites, Moore Park. Prepared for Laing O‟Rourke by Eco Logical Australia,
Sutherland.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd.
Disclaimer
This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between
Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and the Western Sydney Parklands Trust. The scope of services was defined in consultation with
the Western Sydney Parklands Trust, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and
other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and
readers should obtain up to date information.
Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this
report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific
assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited.
Template 08/05/2014
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iii
Contents
Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. v
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Subject site ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Description of the proposed works ............................................................................................... 1
2 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Database and literature review ..................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Field survey .................................................................................................................................. 7
2.2.1 Impact assessment ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Survey limitations ......................................................................................................................... 8
3 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Database and literature review ..................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Field survey .................................................................................................................................. 9
3.2.1 Fauna ............................................................................................................................................ 9
3.2.2 Fauna habitats .............................................................................................................................. 9
4 Direct and indirect impacts ..................................................................................................... 11
4.1 Direct impacts ............................................................................................................................. 11
4.1.1 Loss of fauna habitat .................................................................................................................. 11
4.2 Indirect impacts .......................................................................................................................... 11
5 Avoidance and mitigation measures ...................................................................................... 12
6 Impact assessment .................................................................................................................. 13
6.1 State listings ............................................................................................................................... 13
6.2 Commonwealth listings ............................................................................................................... 13
7 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 14
References ............................................................................................................................................. 15
Appendix A : Threatened species likelihood of occurrence ............................................................. 16
Appendix B Impact assessments (TSC Act listed species) .............................................................. 26
Appendix C - Impact Assessments (EPBC Act listed species) ........................................................ 29
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iv
List of figures
Figure 1: Location of the subject site ......................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Feature trees lining a pedestrian walkway (Lophostemon confertus on left of pathway) at the
Tramway Oval Site ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 3: Feature trees (Araucaria cunninghamiana) delineated by bollards and among lawns at
Tramway Oval ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 4: A feature tree (Ficus macrophylla; Tree# 16 in Table 1) amongst lawn at Moore Park Tennis
Centre ......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 5 Feature trees adjacent to existing car park at the Moore Park Tennis Centre ............................ 5
Figure 6: Deep fissures and crevices on a Fig tree (Tree #13, Table 1) at the Moore Park Tennis Centre
provide potential roosting and shelter sites for microbats ........................................................................ 10
List of tables
Table 1: Trees recommended to be removed and retained by Bird (2014) at the subject site. Tree
numbers correspond to those of Bird (2014). ............................................................................................. 6
Table 2: List of fauna observed at the subject site ..................................................................................... 9
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D v
Executive summary
This report provides an ecological assessment of two small areas (2.49 ha) at Moore Park, south east
of the central business district (CBD) of Sydney, associated with the CBD and South East Light Rail
project (the Project), which was assessed as State Significant Infrastructure (DoP 2014). Although
Project Approval was received (SSI-6042), the original Environmental Impact Statement (CBD and
South East Light Rail Project, Environmental Impact Statement, TfNSW November 2013) and
associated Submissions Report (CBD and South East Light Rail Project, Submissions Report, TfNSW
March 2014) did not include an assessment for these ancillary work areas. The works at the subject
site includes reconfiguration of an existing parking lot and driveway, extension of existing turfed areas
and establishment of a temporary compound. The proposed works at the site will require removal of
native trees. These trees have been documented in a previous arborist report (the Moore Park Works
Tree Report, Bird, August 2014).
The impacts of the proposed development on those threatened entities considered known, likely or with
potential to occur at the subject site were analysed under Part 4.1 of the EP&A Act (provisions for State
Significant Development). Significant Impact Criteria (SIC) tests were undertaken for Matters of NES
listed under the EPBC Act that were known, likely or had the potential to occur in the study area.
A database search identified 32 threatened fauna that have been recorded or are likely to occur within a
10 x 10 km area of the subject site. The results of a likelihood of occurrence analysis identified two
threatened species that have the potential to use the subject site and may be impacted by the proposed
works. These species include:
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat)
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox)
The species are highly mobile and there are adequate forage trees in the adjacent area. The site visit
found no evidence of threatened fauna occupancy and reaffirmed that the site was within a highly
disturbed and urbanised zone. Any disturbance to fauna that may use the area is not likely to be any
more significant than what is already experienced at the site. No threatened flora and ecological
communities were recorded or considered to have the potential to occur within the subject site.
An assessment consistent with the Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment (DEC and DPI
2005) and the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 for Matters of National Environmental Significant (DoE
2013) revealed that these species are unlikely to be impacted by the proposed works.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – F l or a a nd F a u n a As s e s sm e nt
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 1
1 Introduction
This report has been commissioned by Laing O‟Rourke to provide an ecological assessment within two
sites at Moore Park, Sydney, New South Wales. The sites are situated within the development footprint
associated with the CBD and South East Light Rail (CSELR) Project. It is ELAs understanding that the
two sites, referred to as „Tramway Oval‟ and „Moore Park Tennis Centre‟, will be work areas during
construction phases (i.e. work compounds during construction) and/or be subject to upgrades of
existing driveways, parking areas and buildings.
The purpose of this report is to provide an ecological assessment of the two areas, reporting on the
ecological values of the two areas for threatened species, populations and ecological communities, the
likelihood of the areas to be utilised by threatened fauna and the potential impacts (if any) of the
proposed works to threatened fauna. A tree report (Bird2014) has been conducted for the site, which
identified trees that would be removed as part of the development. It is noted that the proposed car park
at the Tennis Centre site has been redesigned to allow for the retention of two large fig trees within the
site which is not currently reflected in the Tree Report.
As these trees are situated within a highly disturbed and managed landscape (lawns and ornamentals
gardens), it can be assumed that they represent the only habitat feature that could provide either forage
or roosting habitat for threatened fauna. Therefore this report focuses on the ecological value of these
trees.
1.1 Subject site
The subject site is defined as the area of „direct impact‟ from the proposal, and is located approximately
2.5 km southeast of Sydney‟s CBD (Figure 1). The sites are accessed on Anzac Parade, within the
area known as the Moore Park Precinct, which includes a mix of parklands, sports centres, transport
corridors and urban development. Tramway Oval is comprised of lawns and feature trees
(predominately Lophostemon confertus, Ficus rubiginosa, Phoenix canariensis and Araucaria
cunninghamii). The trees are demarcated with bollards and well-maintained with mulch (Figure 2 and
3). Most of the trees are around six metres tall with the exception of a few specimens of Canary Island
Date Palm (Phoenix canariensis) that reach around 10 metres. The Moore Park Tennis Centre consists
of lawns, feature trees and ornamental garden beds. Trees that are not maintained as hedges are
between three and 10 metres tall (Figure 4 and 5). Tree species include Ficus rubiginosa (Port
Jackson Fig), Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum), Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) and
Castanospermum australe (Black Bean). Tree locations and species are documented in Bird (2014).
The study area for the proposed works is defined as the area of direct and indirect impacts, and for the
purposes of this report the term is synonymous with subject site, as there are not considered to be any
indirect impacts.
1.2 Descript ion of the proposed works
It is ELAs understanding that works at the subject site includes reconfiguration of driveway and car
park, and replacement of existing amenities blocks (Moore Park Tennis Centre only). Works at the
Tramway Oval include an extension of the turfed area, a bus loop and turning circle, and establishment
and operation of a temporary compound to support the CSELR Moore Park works.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – F l or a a nd F a u n a As s e s sm e nt
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 2
A number of trees at the subject site, identified by Bird (2014), are to be removed to accommodate the
development, with the exception of the two figs (trees 13 and 14) which are proposed to be retained as
per the re-design of the car park currently being finalised by Laing O‟Rourke in consultation with
Centennial and Moore Park Trust. These are listed in Table 1.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 3
Figure 1: Location of the subject site
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 4
Figure 2: Feature trees lining a pedestrian walkway (Lophostemon confertus on left of pathway) at the Tramway Oval Site
Figure 3: Feature trees (Araucaria cunninghamiana) delineated by bollards and among lawns at Tramway Oval
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 5
Figure 4: A feature tree (Ficus macrophylla; Tree# 16 in Table 1) amongst lawn at Moore Park Tennis Centre
Figure 5 Feature trees adjacent to existing car park at the Moore Park Tennis Centre – including two large fig trees likely to be retained due to proposed car park re-design
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 6
Table 1: Trees recommended to be removed and retained by Bird (2014) at the subject site. Tree numbers correspond to those of Bird (2014).
Tree Number(s) Species Recommendation
1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11 Eucalyptus botryoides Required to be removed due to
development
2, 10 Eucalyptus saligna Required to be removed due to
development
5 Eucalyptus saligna Remove due to poor health
6 Corymbia maculata Required to be removed due to
development
9, 12, 16 Ficus macrophylla Required to be removed due to
development
33, 34 Ficus macrophylla Retain
13*, 15 Ficus rubiginosa Required to be removed due to
development
14* Ficus rubiginosa Not viable for retention
17, 18, 20, 22 Araucaria cunninghamiana Required to be removed due to
development
19, 21, 23, 24 Araucaria cunninghamiana Retain
25, 26, 27, 29 Lophostemon confertus Required to be removed due to
development
30 Lophostemon confertus Retain
28 Phoenix canariensis Required to be removed due to
development
31, 32 Castenospermum australe Retain
*at time of report, the development was being redesigned in order to retain these trees (pers. comm. Jason Ambler, Project
Environmental Manager, Laing O‟Rourke).
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 7
2 Methods
2.1 Database and literature review
The following datasets, literature, maps and interpretation guidelines were reviewed to evaluate the
ecological values for threatened species at the study area:
Aerial photographs of the study area were used to locate ecological features.
BioNet (Atlas of NSW Wildlife) using a 10 x 10 km search area around the subject site
EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool using a search area with a 10 km radius of the
subject site
Threatened species, populations, ecological communities (TECs) and migratory species recorded
during the database searches (excluding aquatic and wetland species) were combined into a likelihood
of occurrence table (Appendix A). This was assembled by:
reviewing historical and recent records (i.e. the last 15 years)
reviewing the available habitat at the study and surrounding areas
reviewing the ecological and biological literature pertaining to each species, and,
applying expert knowledge of each species.
This information was then used to define likelihood of occurrence as either:
“Known” = species that have been observed or are likely to occur on the site
“Likely” = a medium to high probability that a species uses the site
“Potential” = suitable habitat for a species occurs on the site, but there is insufficient
information to categorise the species as likely, or unlikely to occur
“Unlikely” = a very low to low probability that a species uses the site
“No” = habitat on site and in the vicinity is unsuitable for the species
2.2 Field survey
The subject site was visited by ELA ecologist Dr John Gollan on the 29th of August 2014. Survey was
undertaken over approximately two hours. Trees that were identified for removal (as in Bird 2014 and
Table 1) were inspected and identified for signs of occupancy by fauna. Trees at the Tramway Oval
Site and not targeted by Bird (2014) were also inspected. Inspection involved looking for: scratchings
on trunks of trees, fur/hair, and faecal pellets on the ground around the trees, and nesting birds. The
presence of trees with hollows was also searched for as these are considered critical and significant
habitat for owls, microbats and arboreal mammals. Opportunistic sightings for amphibians, reptiles and
mammals were also recorded.
2.2.1 Impact assessment
The impacts of the proposed development on those threatened entities considered known, likely or with
potential to occur at the subject site were analysed under Part 4.1 of the EP&A Act (provisions for SSI).
Significant Impact Criteria (SIC) tests were undertaken for Matters of NES listed under the EPBC Act
that were known, likely or had the potential to occur in the study area.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 8
2.2.2 Survey limitations
The survey aimed to record as many species as possible. However, it is acknowledged that this is not a
definitive list of fauna within the study area. More species would likely be recorded during a longer
survey over various seasons. Nevertheless, the techniques used in this investigation are considered
adequate to gather the data necessary to complete the project brief.
Full fauna survey following Threatened Species Survey and Assessment Guidelines were not
undertaken as sufficient detail to determine the likelihood of occurrence of threatened and migratory
species was achieved through habitat assessment. As such, further detailed fauna survey was not
considered necessary.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 9
3 Results
3.1 Database and literature review
Database searches identified 32 threatened fauna that have been recorded or are likely to occur within
a 10 x 10 km area of the subject site. The results of the likelihood of occurrence analysis identified four
threatened species that have the potential to use the subject site and may be impacted by the proposed
works (Appendix A). Following site assessment this was reduced to two, as there were no aquatic
habitats that might be used by Large-footed Myotis, which is an aquatic foraging specialist, and East
Coast Freetail Bat is considered very rare in Sydney urban areas (Basham et al. 2010). These
following two species are included as potentially utilising the site for foraging:
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat) – foraging habitat
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox) – foraging habitat
3.2 Field survey
3.2.1 Fauna
Only six species (all birds) were observed during the two hour survey. These species (Table 2) are all
natives and are typical of those encountered in highly urbanised landscapes. Of note was the presence
of noisy miners (Manorina melanocephala), which is an aggressive species thought to displace other
bird species. Moreover, they can be considered urban specialists as they have increased in abundance
in highly urbanised areas frequented by humans (Parsons et al. 2006). No threatened fauna were
observed and other signs (hair, scats, etc.) of fauna were not found.
Table 2: List of fauna observed at the subject site
Species Common Name
Manorina melanocephala Noisy Miner
Cacatua galerita Sulphur Crested Cockatoo
Corvus sp. Australian Raven
Trichoglossus haematodus Rainbow Lorikeet
Threskiornis molucca Australian White Ibis
Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow
3.2.2 Fauna habitats
There were no hollow bearing trees at the subject site, so the potential to support breeding and roosting
for fauna is limited. There were two trees (#13 and #14 in Table 1) that offer the most potential to
support roosting areas for microbats. These trees contain deep fissures and crevices that offer good
shelter potential for these fauna (Figure 6). At the time of survey, these trees were fruiting heavily, and
so also offer forage trees for the Grey-headed Flying Fox. However, it is noted that construction
designs are currently being modified to retain these trees. Retaining these two trees will be useful for
mitigating any potential impacts from the removal of other trees at the site. There were no aquatic
habitats or man-made structure present at the subject sites.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 10
Figure 6: Deep fissures and crevices on a Fig tree (Tree #13, Table 1) at the Moore Park Tennis Centre provide potential roosting and shelter sites for microbats
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 11
4 Direct and indirect impacts
This section outlines the anticipated direct and indirect impacts of the development on the ecological
values of the study area.
4.1 Direct impacts
4.1.1 Loss of fauna habitat
The study area provides potential habitat for a limited range of threatened and non-threatened fauna
species. The proposal will remove potential foraging, and roosting/sheltering habitat for fauna species
from the subject site.
Threatened and migratory fauna known or considered likely to utilise the subject site are:
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat)
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox)
In particular, Ficus spp., Eucalyptus spp. and Lophostemon confertus present at the site could provide a
food source for foraging Grey-Headed Flying Fox. However, these trees are common street trees in the
area and given that Flying Foxes are a very mobile, the impact of removing these trees at the subject site
is not considered significant. There are also no hollow bearing trees present at the study site that may be
used by East Coast Freetail Bat, although fissures in trees of the Ficus spp. may provide temporary
daytime refuge for this species. For, so there is no impact to roosting habitat for threatened microbats.
4.2 Indirect impacts
The proposed developments could indirectly impact on fauna species present in the study area through
changing noise and lighting levels, microclimates, increased human activity, introducing potential impacts
from rubbish, dumping and encouraging weed incursion through pedestrian traffic. However, given the
highly disturbed nature of the area and that the broader area is highly managed and maintained for
recreation, the proposed works are not expected to have indirect impacts above those already present at
the site.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 12
5 Avoidance and mitigation measures
It is recommended that trees are retained where possible, and it is understood that Laing O‟Rourke are
currently looking to achieve this in relation to the two fig trees within the Tennis Centre site through
redesign works. Given it is unlikely that that threatened microbats will be roosting onsite, and that Grey-
headed Flying Foxes will not be roosting onsite during the daytime (they will return to preferred camp
locations), no further mitigation measures are recommended. Should night work be necessary to clear
trees, all care should be taken ensure no roosting or foraging Flying Foxes are present in the trees and all
works should cease until such times as the animals have moved on. It is recommended that this be
included in the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the proposed works, including
consideration of a supervising ecologist being present during the soft felling of trees if undertaken at night
time to ensure the protection of any fauna and to undertake potential injured animal responses.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 13
6 Impact assessment
6.1 State l ist ings
Impact assessments in accordance with Part 4.1 of the EP&A Act was applied to the following species:
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat)
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox)
Individual assessments of the potential impacts of the proposal have been completed in accordance with
Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment (DEC and DPI 2005). These assessments are
included in Appendix B.
6.2 Commonwealth l ist ings
One matter of NES was assessed against the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 (DoE 2013) for:
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox)
The test concluded that significant impacts are unlikely to occur to this threatened species (Appendix C).
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 14
7 Conclusions
This assessment revealed: (1) there would be no significant direct or indirect impacts to threatened
species and (2) the ecological values at the subject are low. Because of the highly disturbed and
urbanised nature of the surrounding area, and the intensive management at the subject site, any
impacts to the ecological values are considered minimal. While the development requires the removal
of trees that could be used for roosting or foraging by microbats and Grey-headed Flying Foxes, there
are similar habitats and resources in the surrounding area. These areas are abundant and accessible
in the immediate and wider area. Furthermore, the retention of two trees at the subject site (#13 and
14) is considered a useful mitigation strategy to minimise any impact to the ecological values of the site.
It is recommended that if trees are proposed to be removed during the evening, that all works should
cease if Grey-headed Flying Foxes are foraging in the trees until such times as the animals have moved
on. The presence of a supervising ecologist may be considered during soft felling of trees if undertaken
at night time to provide advice on fauna management and respond to any potential fauna injuries. This
should be included in the CEMP.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 15
References
Basham, R., Law, B. and Banks, P. 2011. Microbats in a „leafy‟ urban landscape: are they persisting,
and what factors influence their presence? Austral Ecology, 36 (6), pp. 663-678.
Bird, G 2014. Moore Park Works Tree Report and Arboricultural Development Impact Assessment. A
report prepared for Laing O‟Rourke by Birds Tree Consultancy, www.birdstrees.com.au.
Churchill, S. 2008. Australian Bats. Reed New Holland, Sydney.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) 2007. Threatened species assessment
guidelines – The Assessment of Significance. DECC, Heathcote.
Department of the Environment (DoE) 2014. Protected Matters Search Tool. Online
http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/pmst/index.html. Accessed 28/08/2014
Hoye, G. A., and Hall, L. S. 2008. Little Bent-wing Bat Minopterus australis. Pp 503-504. In van Dyck,
S. and Strahan, R. (eds). The Mammals of Australia. Third Edition. Reed New Holland, Sydney.
Hoye, G. A., Law. B. S., and Allison. F. R. 2008. East-coast Free-tailed Bat Mormopterus norfolkensis.
Pp.491 - 492. In van Dyck, S. and Strahan, R. (eds). The Mammals of Australia. Third Edition. Reed
New Holland, Sydney.
NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (NSW OEH) 2014 BioNet the website for the Atlas of NSW
Wildlife. Online www://bionet.nsw.gov.au. Accessed 28/08/2014
Parsons, H., Major, R. E., and French, K. 2006. Species interactions and habitat associations of birds
inhabiting urban areas of Sydney, Australia. 31(2), pp. 217-227.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 16
Appendix A : Threatened species likelihood of occurrence
Summary of initial assessment to determine the likelihood of occurrence of threatened species,
populations and ecological communities in the proposal site.
An assessment of likelihood of occurrence was made for threatened and migratory species identified
from the database search within 5km radius of the subject site. These results are presented below.
Five terms for the likelihood of occurrence of species are used in this report. This assessment was
based on database or other records, presence or absence of suitable habitat, features of the proposal
site, results of the field survey and professional judgement. The terms for likelihood of occurrence are:
“yes” = the species was or has been observed on the site
“likely” = a medium to high probability that a species uses the site
“potential” = suitable habitat for a species occurs on the site, but there is insufficient
information to categorise the species as likely to occur, or unlikely to occur
“unlikely” = a very low to low probability that a species uses the site
“no” = habitat on site and in the vicinity is unsuitable for the species.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 17
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Amphibians
Litoria aurea
Green and
Golden Bell
Frog
E V
Inhabits marshes, dams and stream-sides, particularly those containing bullrushes (Typha
spp.) or spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.). Optimum habitat includes water-bodies that are
unshaded, free of predatory fish such as Plague Minnow (Gambusia holbrooki), have a
grassy area nearby and diurnal sheltering sites available. Some sites, particularly in the
Greater Sydney region occur in highly disturbed areas.
No No
Pseudophryne
australis
Red-
crowned
Toadlet
V
Occurs in open forests, mostly on Hawkesbury and Narrabeen Sandstones. Inhabits
periodically wet drainage lines below sandstone ridges that often have shale lenses or
cappings. Shelters under rocks and amongst masses of dense vegetation or thick piles of
leaf litter.
No No
Heleioporus
australiacus
Giant
Burrowing
Frog
V V
Forages in woodlands, wet heath, dry and wet sclerophyll forest (Ehmann 1997).
Associated with semi-permanent to ephemeral sand or rock based streams (Ehmann
1997), where the soil is soft and sandy so that burrows can be constructed (Environment
Australia 2000).
No No
Mixophyes
balbus
Stuttering
Frog E V
A variety of forest habitats from rainforest through wet and moist sclerophyll forest to
riparian habitat in dry sclerophyll forest (DECC 2007) that are generally characterised by
deep leaf litter or thick cover from understorey vegetation (Ehmann 1997). Breeding
habitats are streams and occasionally springs. Usually found fairly close to permanent
running water (Robinson 1998 ). Not known from streams disturbed by humans (Ehmann
1997) or still water environments (NSW Scientific Committee 2002).
No No
Birds
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 18
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Burhinus
grallarius
Bush
Stone-
curlew
E1 Inhabits open forests and grassy woodlands No No
Lathamus
discolor Swift Parrot E E
Swift Parrots breed in Tasmania between September and January and then migrates to
the mainland in autumn, where it forages on profuse flowering Eucalypts. This species
will occur in NSW during the autumn and winter eucalypt flowering period.
No No
Stictonetta
naevosa
Freckled
Duck V
Prefer permanent freshwater swamps and creeks with heavy growth of Cumbungi, Lignum
or Tea-tree. During drier times they move from ephemeral breeding swamps to more
permanent waters such as lakes, reservoirs, farm dams and sewage ponds
No No
Ninox strenua Powerful
Owl V
The Powerful Owl inhabits a range of vegetation types, from woodland and open
sclerophyll forest to tall open wet forest and rainforest. The Powerful Owl requires large
tracts of forest or woodland habitat but can occur in fragmented landscapes as well. The
species breeds and hunts in open or closed sclerophyll forest or woodlands and
occasionally hunts in open habitats. It roosts by day in dense vegetation comprising
species such as Turpentine (Syncarpia glomulifera), Black She-oak (Allocasuarina
littoralis), Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon), Rough-barked Apple (Angophora floribunda),
Cherry Ballart (Exocarpus cupressiformis) and a number of eucalypt species
Unlikely Unlikely
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 19
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Anthochaera
phrygia
Regent
Honey
Eater
E E, Mi
Regent Honeyeaters mostly occur in dry box-ironbark eucalypt woodland and dry
sclerophyll forest associations, wherein they prefer the most fertile sites available, e.g.
along creek flats, or in broad river valleys and foothills. In NSW, riparian forests containing
Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak), and with Amyema cambagei (Needle-leaf
Mistletoe), are also important for feeding and breeding. At times of food shortage (e.g.
when flowering fails in preferred habitats), Honeyeaters also use other woodland types
and wet lowland coastal forest dominated by Eucalyptus robusta (Swamp Mahogany) or
E. maculata (Spotted Gum) (Franklin et al. 1989; Geering & French 1998; Ley & Williams
1992; Oliver et al. 1999; Webster & Menkhorst 1992). Regent Honeyeaters sometimes
occur in coastal forest, especially in stands dominated by Swamp Mahogany and Spotted
Gum, but also in those with Southern Mahogany E. botryoides, and in those on sandstone
ranges with banksias Banksia in the understorey (Franklin et al. 1989; Higgins et al. 2001;
Menkhorst 1997c). They have been recorded in open forest including forest edges,
wooded farmland and urban areas with mature eucalypts (Garnett 1993). The Regent
Honeyeater primarily feeds on nectar from box and ironbark eucalypts and occasionally
from banksias and mistletoes (NPWS 1995). As such it is reliant on locally abundant
nectar sources with different flowering times to provide reliable supply of nectar
(Environment Australia 2000). In NSW, most records are scattered on and around the
Great Dividing Range, mainly on the North-West Plains, North-West Slopes and adjacent
Northern Tablelands, to west of Armidale; the Central Tablelands and Southern
Tablelands regions; and the Central Coast and Hunter Valley regions. The species is
concentrated around two main locations, the Capertee Valley and the Bundarra-Barraba
area, but Honeyeaters are also recorded along the coast in the Northern Rivers and Mid-
North Coast Regions, and in the Illawarra and South Coast Regions, from Nowra south to
Moruya, where small numbers are recorded in most years (D. Geering 1997, unpublished
data; Higgins et al. 2001; Webster & Menkhorst 1992).
No No
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 20
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Botaurus
poiciloptilus
Australasia
n Bittern E E
Terrestrial wetlands with tall dense vegetation, occasionally estuarine habitats (Marchant
& Higgins 1990). Found along the east coast and in the Murray-Darling Basin, notably in
floodplain wetlands of the Murrumbidgee, Lachlan, Macquarie and Gwydir Rivers
(Marchant & Higgins 1990; NPWS 1990). Reedbeds, swamps, streams, estuaries
(Simpson & Day 1999). Favours permananent shallow waters, edges of pools and
waterways, with tall, dense vegetation such as sedges, rushes and reeds on muddy or
peaty substrate. Also occurs in Lignum Muehlenbeckia florulenta and Canegrass
Eragrostis australasica on inland wetlands (NSW Scientific Committee, 2010). In WA it
probably occurs only on the western coastal plain between Lancelin and Busselton, in the
southern coastal region from Augusta to east of Albany and inland to some wetlands in
the jarrah forest belt, with small, isolated populations in swamps from west of Esperance
eastwards to near Cape Arid (Marchant & Higgins 1990). The largest concentration in WA
is said to occur in the Lake Muir wetlands complex (Jaensch & Vervest 1988a; Jaensch et
al. 1988).
No No
Dasyornis
brachypterus
Eastern
Bristlebird E E
Habitat is characterised by dense, low vegetation and includes sedgeland, heathland,
swampland, shrubland, sclerophyll forest and woodland, and rainforest, as well as open
woodland with a heathy understorey. In northern NSW occurs in open forest with tussocky
grass understorey. All of these vegetation types are fire prone, aside from the rainforest
habitatas utilised by the northern population as fire refuge. Age of habitat since fires (fire-
age) is of paramount importance to this species; Illawarra and southern populations reach
maximum densities in habitat that has not been burnt for at least 15 years; however, in the
northern NSW population a lack of fire in grassy forest may be detrimental as grassy
tussock nesting habitat becomes unsuitable after long periods without fire; northern NSW
birds are usually found in habitats burnt five to 10 years previously.
No No
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 21
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Neophema
chrysogaster
Orange-
bellied
Parrot
CE
Breeds only in coastal south-west Tasmania and spends the winter in coastal Victoria and
South Australia (March/April - October/November), mostly within 3 km of the coast (Starks
et al. 1992). It nests in hollows in eucalypt trees which grow adjacent to its feeding plains.
It feeds on the seeds of several sedges and heath plants, including buttongrass. Its main
food preferences are found in sedgelands which have not been burned for between 3-15
years. Also included in the diet are seeds of three Boronia species and the everlasting
daisy Helichrysum pumilum.Migrating birds usually feed in coastal saltmarshes and
dunes, on beach-front vegetation including salt tolerant species such as sea rocket Cakile
maritima. They also eat various coastal native and introduced grasses. Recent records of
this species in NSW are rare, but it has been recorded at Comerong Island, Shoalhaven
Estuary, June 1986 (Morris 1986b; Starks 1988), a single bird at Shellharbour (G.
Southwell pers. comm. in Starks & Holdsworth 2003) and at Maroubra (B. Henson pers.
comm. in Starks & Holdsworth 2003) in 2003, possibly the same bird (Starks & Holdsworth
2003).
No No
Rostratula
australis
Australian
Painted
Snipe
E
Prefers fringes of swamps, dams and nearby marshy areas where there is a cover of
grasses, lignum, low scrub or open timber (DECC 2007). Nests on the ground amongst
tall vegetation, such as grasses, tussocks or reeds (ibid.). Breeding is often in response to
local conditions; generally occurs from September to December (DECC 2007). Roosts
during the day in dense vegetation (NSW Scientific Committee 2004). Forages nocturnally
on mud-flats and in shallow water (DECC 2007). Feeds on worms, molluscs, insects and
some plant-matter (ibid.).
No No
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 22
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Mammals
Dasyurus
maculatus
Spotted-
tailed Quoll V E
The Spotted-tailed Quoll inhabits a range of forest communities including wet and
dry sclerophyll forests, coastal heathlands and rainforests, more frequently
recorded near the ecotones of closed and open forest. This species requires
habitat features such as maternal den sites, an abundance of food (birds and
small mammals) and large areas of relatively intact vegetation to forage in.
Maternal den sites are logs with cryptic entrances; rock outcrops; windrows;
burrows.
No No
Pteropus
poliocephalus
Grey-
headed
flying fox
V V
Inhabits a wide range of habitats including rainforest, mangroves, paperbark
forests, wet and dry sclerophyll forests and cultivated areas. Camps are often
located in gullies, typically close to water, in vegetation with a dense canopy.
Likely
Likely –
foraging
only
Miniopterus
schreibersii
oceanensis
Eastern
Bentwing
Bat
V
Associated with a range of habitats such as rainforest, wet and dry sclerophyll
forest, monsoon forest, open woodland, paperbark forests and open grassland. It
forages above and below the tree canopy on small insects. Will utilise caves, old
mines, and stormwater channels, under bridges and occasionally buildings for
shelter.
Potential
Potential –
foraging
only
Mormopterus
norfolkensis
East Coast
Freetail Bat V
Most records of this species are from dry eucalypt forest and woodland east of
the Great Dividing Range. Individuals have, however, been recorded flying low
over a rocky river in rainforest and wet sclerophyll forest and foraging in clearings
at forest edges. Primarily roosts in hollows or behind loose bark in mature
eucalypts, but have been observed roosting in the roof of a hut.
Unlikely Unlikely
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 23
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Myotis macropus
(formerly M.
adversus)
Large-
footed
Myotis
V
Large-footed Myotis is found in the coastal band from the north-west of Australia,
across the top-end and south to western Victoria. It is rarely found more than 100
km inland, except along major rivers. Will occupy most habitat types such as
mangroves, paperbark swamps, riverine monsoon forest, rainforest, wet and dry
sclerophyll forest, open woodland and River Red Gum woodland, as long as they
are close to water. This species forages over streams and pools catching insects
and small fish by raking their feet across the water surface
Potential No
Chalinolobus
dwyeri
Large-eared
Pied Bat V V
Roosts in caves (near their entrances), crevices in cliffs, old mine workings and in
the disused, bottle-shaped mud nests of the Fairy Martin (Petrochelidon ariel),
frequenting low to mid-elevation dry open forest and woodland close to these
features.
No No
Isoodon
obesulus
obesulus
Southern
Brown
Bandicoot
E E
Southern Brown Bandicoots are largely crepuscular (active mainly after dusk
and/or before dawn). They are generally only found in heath or open forest with a
heathy understorey on sandy or friable soils.
No No
Petrogale
penicillata
Brush-tailed
Rock
Wallaby
V V
Brush-tailed rock-wallabies live in highly rocky terrain such as escarpments,
boulder piles and rocky pinnacles. They generally prefer sites that are north-
facing and contain numerous ledges and crevices.
No No
Phascolarctos
cinereus Koala V V
Koalas are found between south-eastern South Australia and Queensland, but
only where enough suitable trees have been left. No No
Pseudomys
novaehollandiae
New
Holland
Mouse
V V
Known to inhabit open heathlands, woodlands and forests with a heathland
understorey and vegetated sand dunes
No No
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 24
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Reptiles
Hoplocephalus
bungaroides
Broad-
headed
Snake
V V
Shelters in rock crevices and under flat sandstone rocks on exposed cliff edges during
autumn, winter and spring. Moves from the sandstone rocks to shelters in crevices or
hollows in large trees within 500m of escarpments in summer
No No
Migratory Terrestrial Species
Haliaeetus
leucogaster
White-
bellied Sea-
Eagle
Mi
Found in coastal habitats (especially those close to the sea-shore) and around terrestrial
wetlands in tropical and temperate regions of mainland Australia and its offshore islands.
The habitats occupied by the sea-eagle are characterised by the presence of large areas
of open water (larger rivers, swamps, lakes, the sea). Birds have been recorded in (or
flying over) a variety of terrestrial habitats
No No
Hirundapus
caudacutus
White-
throated
Needletail
Mi
An aerial species, and while they occur over most types of habitat, they are probably
recorded most often above wooded areas, including open forest and rainforest, and may
also fly between trees or in clearings, below the canopy, but they are less commonly
recorded flying above woodland
No No
Merops ornatus Rainbow
Bee-eater Mi
The Rainbow Bee-eater occurs mainly in open forests and woodlands, shrublands, and in
various cleared or semi-cleared habitats, including farmland and areas of human
habitation. It usually occurs in open, cleared or lightly-timbered areas that are often, but
not always, located in close proximity to permanent water
No No
Monarcha
melanopsis
Black-faced
Monarch Mi
The Black-faced Monarch mainly occurs in rainforest ecosystems, including semi-
deciduous vine-thickets, complex notophyll vine-forest, tropical (mesophyll) rainforest,
subtropical (notophyll) rainforest, mesophyll (broadleaf) thicket/shrubland, warm
temperate rainforest, dry (monsoon) rainforest and (occasionally) cool temperate
rainforest.
No No
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 25
Scientific Name Common
Name
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act Habitat Associations*
Likelihood of Occurrence
Before site
visit
After site
visit
Monarcha
trivirgatus
Spectacled
Monarch Mi Wet forests, mangroves (Simpson and Day 1999). No No
Myiagra
cyanoleuca
Satin
Flycatcher Mi Satin Flycatchers mainly inhabit eucalypt forests, often near wetlands or watercourses. No No
Rhipidura
rufifrons
Rufous
Fantail Mi
In east and south-east Australia, the Rufous Fantail mainly inhabits wet sclerophyll
forests, often in gullies dominated by eucalypts. No No
Disclaimer: Data extracted from the Atlas of NSW Wildlife and DoE Protected Matters Report are only indicative and cannot be considered a comprehensive inventory.
„Migratory marine species‟, „listed marine species‟ listed on the EPBC Act (and listed on the DoE protected matters report), and migratory wetland species have not been
included in this table, since they are considered unlikely to occur within the study area due to the absence of marine habitat. Please note that all obligate marine species were
not included.
*All information taken from Threatened Species Profile Information of NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (www.
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/ ) and/or the Department of Environment (http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl)
Terms: CE = Critically Endangered; E = Endangered; E2 = Endangered Population; V = Vulnerable; M = Migratory.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 26
Appendix B Impact assessments (TSC Act listed species)
An assessment of the impacts of the proposal on species, populations and ecological communities
listed under Schedules 1 and 2 of the TSC Act was conducted. The Project will be assessed under Part
4.1 of the EP&A Act (provisions for SSD) and consequently this impact assessment was undertaken in
accordance with the Guidelines for threatened species assessment (DEC and DPI 2005).
The study area contains highly managed parkland area and so does not support areas of native
vegetation. Impacts to native flora have not been considered. The subject site does, however, contain
trees that could provide habitat and roosting structure for a number of threatened fauna species.
Potentially impacted species are listed below and a full list of species recorded within a 10 x 10 km area
of the study area is found in Appendix A. Each species has been assessed for potential impacts that
may result.
Threatened Ecological Community
None
Threatened Fauna
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat)
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey headed flying fox)
Migratory species
None
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 27
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bentwing Bat)
The species has recently been revised to Miniopterus orianae oceanensis (Churchill 2008), recognising
the subspecies to full species status. Eastern Bentwing Bat occupies a range of forested environments
(including wet and dry sclerophyll forests, monsoon forest, open woodland, Melaleuca forests and open
grasslands) that occur along the coastal portion of eastern Australia, from Cape York in north
Queensland to Castlemaine in Victoria (Churchill 2008).
This highly mobile species is capable of large regional movements in relation to seasonal differences in
reproductive behaviour and winter hibernation. Though individuals often use numerous roosts, it
congregates in large numbers at a small number of nursery caves to breed and hibernate (breeding or
roosting colonies can number from 100 to 150,000 individuals).
This species primary roost in caves but has been recorded in mines, culverts, stormwater channels,
buildings, and occasionally tree-hollows (Hoye and Hall 2008). This species occupies a number of
roosts within specific territorial ranges usually within 300 km of the maternity cave, and may travel large
distances between roost sites (Hoye and Hall 2008).
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
The subject site potentially provides foraging habitat for Eastern Bentwing Bat, but due to the absence
of caves and structures, roosting habitat is not present at the subject site. The loss of trees due to the
development (as listed in Table 1) is unlikely to affect the lifecycle of these species.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community?
As there are no caves at the subject site, the proposal would not impact on preferred roosting or
breeding habitat for the species (i.e. caves, culverts). The species are highly mobile and would be able
to access foraging resources in the locality.
How is the proposal likely to affect current disturbance regimes?
The entire subject site has been highly modified due to previous management as parkland, ornamental
garden beds and roadside verges. While the proposed works will not affect the current disturbance
regime.
How is the proposal likely to affect habitat connectivity?
The proposed development will not affect connectivity of habitat of the area. The Eastern Bentwing Bat
highly mobile and alternative habitat is available in the surrounding study areas.
How is the proposal likely to affect critical habitat?
Not applicable - critical habitat cannot be declared for vulnerable species.
Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying Fox)
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
The development at the subject site will not affect the lifecycle of this species. While the native trees at
the site are potential food/forage trees, the site does not support a camp (a roosting site).
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community?
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 28
The proposed development will remove native vegetation that is a potential food source for this species.
However, the Grey-headed Flying Fox is a mobile species and alternative forage trees are available in
the immediate and surrounding area.
How is the proposal likely to affect current disturbance regimes?
The proposal is not likely to affect current disturbance regimes. The subject site is within a highly
disturbed and urbanised area, and so disturbance regimes are not expected to be above what is
currently expected at the site.
How is the proposal likely to affect habitat connectivity?
The proposal is not likely to affect habitat connectivity. There are adequate and ample trees in the
surrounding area to compensate for any losses as a result of the proposed development.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E C O L O G I C A L A U S T R A L I A P T Y L T D 29
Appendix C - Impact Assessments (EPBC Act listed species)
The EPBC Act Administrative Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1. set out ‘Significant Impact Criteria’
that is used to assist in determining whether a proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on
matters of national environmental significance. Matters listed under the EPBC Act as being of having
national environmental significance include:
Listed threatened species and ecological communities
Listed migratory species
Wetlands of International Importance
The Commonwealth marine environment
World Heritage properties
National Heritage places
Nuclear actions
Specific Significant Impact Criteria are provided for each matter of national environmental significance
except for threatened species and ecological communities in which case separate criteria are provided
for species listed as endangered and vulnerable under the EPBC Act. The species subject to the
Significant Impact Criteria are:
• Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey headed flying fox)
Matters to be addressed Impact (Commonwealth legislation)
a. any
environmental
impact on a
World Heritage
Property;
No
No Commonwealth listed World Heritage Property will be directly or indirectly impacted
by the proposed works.
b. any
environmental
impact on
Wetlands of
International
Importance;
No
No RAMSAR or internationally important wetlands will be directly or indirectly affected
by the proposed works.
c. any impact on
Commonwealth
Listed Critically
Endangered or
No.
No Commonwealth Listed Critically Endangered or Endangered Species will be directly
or indirectly affected by the proposed works.
Tr am wa y O va l a n d M o or e P a r k T e n n is C e n t r e W or k S i te , M o or e P ar k – E c o l o g i c a l As s e ss m e n t
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 30
Matters to be addressed Impact (Commonwealth legislation)
Endangered
Species.
c. any impact on
Commonwealth
Listed threatened
Species.
Yes. The proposed works may impact the Grey-headed Flying Fox through the
removal of native vegetation trees. These trees are likely to be used as food resources
However, the impact is expected to be minimal as there are native trees in the
immediate area.
d. Any impact on
Commonwealth
Listed
Threatened
Ecological
Communities of
Critically
Endangered
Ecological
Community
No.
The project will not impact on Commonwealth Listed Threatened Ecological
Communities of Critically Endangered Ecological Community
e. any
environmental
impact on
Commonwealth
Listed Migratory
Species;
No.
The project does not include Commonwealth Listed Migratory Species
f. does any part of
the Proposal
involve a Nuclear
Action;
No
The project does not include a Nuclear Action.
g. any
environmental
impact on a
Commonwealth
Marine Area;
No
There are no Commonwealth Marine Areas within the subject site.
h. In addition, any
direct or indirect
impact on
Commonwealth
lands
No
The project does not directly or indirectly affect Commonwealth land.
Conclusion of EPBC Act Assessment
It is unlikely that the impact of the proposed work will result in a significant impact to Grey-headed
Flying Foxes. Therefore, referral to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act is not required.
P r o j ec t N am e
© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 31
HEAD OFFICE
Suite 4, Level 1
2-4 Merton Street
Sutherland NSW 2232
T 02 8536 8600
F 02 9542 5622
SYDNEY
Level 6
299 Sussex Street
Sydney NSW 2000
T 02 8536 8650
F 02 9264 0717
ST GEORGES BASIN
8/128 Island Point Road
St Georges Basin NSW 2540
T 02 4443 5555
F 02 4443 6655
CANBERRA
Level 2
11 London Circuit
Canberra ACT 2601
T 02 6103 0145
F 02 6103 0148
NEWCASTLE
Suites 28 & 29, Level 7
19 Bolton Street
Newcastle NSW 2300
T 02 4910 0125
F 02 4910 0126
NAROOMA
5/20 Canty Street
Narooma NSW 2546
T 02 4476 1151
F 02 4476 1161
COFFS HARBOUR
35 Orlando Street
Coffs Harbour Jetty NSW 2450
T 02 6651 5484
F 02 6651 6890
ARMIDALE
92 Taylor Street
Armidale NSW 2350
T 02 8081 2681
F 02 6772 1279
MUDGEE
Unit 1, Level 1
79 Market Street
Mudgee NSW 2850
T 02 4302 1230
F 02 6372 9230
PERTH
Suite 1 & 2
49 Ord Street
West Perth WA 6005
T 08 9227 1070
F 08 9322 1358
WOLLONGONG
Suite 204, Level 2
62 Moore Street
Austinmer NSW 2515
T 02 4201 2200
F 02 4268 4361
GOSFORD
Suite 5, Baker One
1-5 Baker Street
Gosford NSW 2250
T 02 4302 1220
F 02 4322 2897
DARWIN
16/56 Marina Boulevard
Cullen Bay NT 0820
T 08 8989 5601
F 08 8941 1220
BRISBANE
Suite 1 Level 3
471 Adelaide Street
Brisbane QLD 4000 T 07 3503 7191 F 07 3854 0310
1300 646 131 www.ecoaus.com.au