LandCorp Shotts Industrial Park. Response to Public Submissions

Transcription

1 LandCorp Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions January 2011

2 Contents 1. Introduction Overview Related Projects and Approvals Submissions Received 1 2. Proponent s Response to Submissions Issues Raised in Submissions 2 3. References 15 Table Index Table 1 Proponent s Response to Submissions 3 Appendices A Pubic Submissions 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions

3 1. Introduction 1.1 Overview LandCorp referred the proposed development of the Shotts Industrial Park (SIP) (the Site ) to the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC) 1 under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), in September LandCorp s referral related to the potential impacts of clearing of land within the SIP, however did not address other potential impacts associated with specific industries which may be established at the Site in the future by individual tenants. On 28 June 2010, SEWPAC formally advised LandCorp that the proposed action to re-zone and clear land to allow for development of the industrial park is a Controlled Action due to potential impacts on listed threatened species and communities. The assessment approach for the project is by assessment on preliminary documentation. The Preliminary Documentation, comprising referral information and additional information requested by the Minister, was published for public comment for a period of 13 business days between 16 December 2010 and 6 January 2011 at the direction of SEWPAC. 1.2 Related Projects and Approvals It is expected that developments proposed by individual tenants within the SIP are likely to require formal assessment and approval under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA). Requirements for additional approvals are likely to be dependent on the type and size of industry proposed within the SIP, and will be the responsibility of the individual tenant. 1.3 Submissions Received A total of nine submissions were received within the public comment period, including four submissions from members of the public, and five submissions from community groups and other organisations, including: Ngalang Boodja Council Aboriginal Corporation; WWF Australia; Birds Australia; and Bushland Native Seed Supply; and The Preston Environment Group. A copy of all submissions received is included in Appendix A. 1 Formerly the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 1

4 2. Proponent s Response to Submissions 2.1 Issues Raised in Submissions Public submissions received during the 13 day comment period raised a number of issues relevant to the assessment of impacts on Matters of National Environmental Significance, which are addressed in Table 1. In addition to those matters addressed in Table 1, a number of submissions raised issues relating to State (WA) legislation and approvals processes, including: Emissions from potential future industry within the SIP; Salinity and water quality; General impacts on fauna, other than those which are listed threatened species; and Impacts on species listed under the WA Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 and species listed on the WA Department of Environment and Conservation Priority fauna list. These issues have previously been addressed through the State approvals processes associated with the Scheme Amendment (rezoning) for the subject land. Some submissions also included comments relating to the assessment of Perdaman Chemical and Fertilisers Collie Urea Plant project under the Environmental Protection Act The Collie Urea Plant project is subject to separate formal assessments under both the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and is not directly related to this assessment. As previously stated, this assessment relates only to clearing of land within the SIP. Developments proposed by individual tenants within the SIP are likely to require formal assessment and approval under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA) and may also require referral and assessment under the EPBC Act. Two submissions received were seeking opportunities to undertake seed collection and plant salvage projects prior to clearing within the SIP site. LandCorp will liaise directly with these interested parties to determine how these requests can be met. One additional submission related to land available for acquisition as a potential offset site. As an offset site has already been identified for the project, this opportunity will not be pursued by LandCorp for this project. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 2

5 Table 1 Proponent s Response to Submissions Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response Black Cockatoos 1-1 Margaret Owen Birds Australia Two submissions raised concerns regarding the impacts of breeding hollows being lost through clearing and the ability of cockatoos to find an alternative nesting site. The SIP site is adjacent to and within close proximity to a number by State Forests, forest conservation zones, conservation parks, proposed conservation parks, and Crown reserves, which cover an area of approximately 31,057 ha (DEC, nd). The Site supports 121 ha of remnant vegetation, which represents 0.007% of the current extent of the medium forest: jarrah-marri vegetation association within the region. Literature suggests that Black Cockatoos do not necessarily return to the same nesting hollow each year. For example: The Cockatoo Black-Cockatoo Recovery Plan (Cale, 2003) states: At Coomallo Creek one third of nesting attempts were made in the same hollow that was used the previous season (Saunders 1982). The birds rarely use the same hollow if the breeding attempt the previous season was unsuccessful This statement suggests two-thirds of birds did not return to the same hollow that was used the previous season and indicates that Carnaby s Black-Cockatoos are capable of relocating to alternative nesting trees. The Recovery Plan also states: Carnaby s Black-Cockatoos display strong pair bonds throughout their adult life. From July to September birds move back to their breeding area and begin searching for suitable nesting hollows (Cale, 2003). This suggests that Carnaby s Black-Cockatoos return to the same area for breeding, however will not necessarily utilise the same nesting hollow each year. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 3

6 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response Saunders et al. (1985) suggests that there are sufficient quantities of nest sites to ensure the continued survival of the Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoo and suggests that there is no shortage of suitable nest sites throughout the jarrah forests. Saunders et al. (1985) noted that Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoos have a predicted home range of approximately ha and calculated that home ranges should have between 104 to 167 trees with at least one hollow suited for use by this species (DEC, 2010).This information suggests that Forest Redtailed Black Cockatoos are not restricted to one single nesting hollow and are able to relocate to alternative nesting trees. 1-2 Birds Australia WWF Two submissions expressed concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of clearing on threatened species, particularly Black Cockatoos. The SIP site is adjacent to and within close proximity to a number by State Forests, forest conservation zones, conservation parks, proposed conservation parks, and Crown reserves, which cover an area of approximately 31,057 ha (DEC, nd). The Site supports 121 ha of remnant vegetation, which represents 0.007% of the current extent of the medium forest: jarrah-marri vegetation association within the region. Other projects currently proposed within the region are not directly related to the SIP and are subject to separate assessments under the EPBC Act. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 4

7 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 1-3 Margaret Owen Birds Australia WWF A number of submissions raised concerns regarding the loss of potential cockatoo nesting trees as a result of clearing. Although no evidence of nesting by Black Cockatoos was identified during baseline fauna surveys, LandCorp acknowledges that the Site may be used by Black Cockatoos for both breeding and foraging. LandCorp has identified a number of strategies to minimise and mitigate against potential impacts to Cockatoo breeding and feeding habitat associated with the proposed clearing within the SIP. These include: Retention of 30.6 ha (25%) of vegetation within the SIP; Rehabilitation of 6.45 ha of degraded land within, and adjacent to the SIP site with the aim of providing alternative food sources through replanting of native prime feed species; Purchase of a 540 ha direct land offset (equivalent to six times the area of cockatoo habitat to be cleared) to be included in DEC conservation estate; Minimising clearing of habitat and severing of habitat linkages as far as practicable; Retention of individual trees or stags containing potential nesting hollows where practicable; Salvage of large trees containing hollows which are removed for donation to Cockatoo care groups to support captive breeding efforts or used in rehabilitation programs; and Avoiding clearing of potential nesting trees during the nesting season where practicable. The management and mitigation measures proposed for the project (including the direct land offset package) have been developed to meet the informal guidelines and expected outcomes communicated by SEWPAC with regards to managing impacts on Black Cockatoo habitat.it should also be noted that additional conditions relating to cockatoo habitat may be placed on individual proponents of the SIP as part of their State approvals. For instance, approval of the Perdaman and Chemicals Collie Urea Plant under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 included a number of conditions relating to the Black Cockatoos, including replacement of Black Cockatoo nesting trees removed during construction with artificial nesting boxes on a six-for-one basis. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 5

8 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 1-4 Margaret Owen Birds Australia WWF A number of submissions raised concerns regarding the quality of habitat within the offset site and the availability of nesting hollows in the near-term given the time required for suitable hollows to develop. LandCorp, in consultation with the WA DEC, has identified a proposed offset site, which is situated adjacent to the Harris River State Forest and Lane Poole Reserve, both of which are Class A reserves vested in the Conservation Commission and recognised as 'proposed National Parks'. The offset site supports old regrowth forest or woodland of Jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata), Marri (Corymbia calophylla) and Wandoo (Eucalyptus wandoo) over a low shrubland, which is considered to be in good condition. The offset site contains on average, a minimum of two potential nesting hollows per hectare and is therefore estimated to support a minimum of 1,080 existing hollows. The site also supports approximately 12 trees per hectare which meet the criteria for potential future cockatoo breeding habitat established by SEWPAC (woodland stands greater than 0.5 ha containing greater than 3 trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than 500 mm). In addition to provision of a direct land offset, LandCorp has identified 30.6 ha of vegetation within the SIP which will be protected. This area supports approximately 37% of breeding habitat areas identified within the Site. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 6

9 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 1-5 Margaret Owen Birds Australia Two submissions raised issues relating the timing and adequacy of fauna surveys in relation to Cockatoos. A Level 1 reconnaissance survey was undertaken over a four day period in October 2007 in conjunction with the botanical survey. The objective of this survey was to gain an appreciation of the flora and fauna value of the study area to determine any potential opportunities or constraints affecting the study area s suitability for industrial development. The spring 2007 survey highlighted the presence of the Baudin s Black Cockatoo and the possible usage by the Carnaby s Black Cockatoo and Forest Red-tailed Cockatoo within the site. A further targeted fauna assessment to determine habitat usage of the three species of cockatoo at the Site was undertaken by a qualified zoologist and experienced environmental scientist, over a three day period in June This survey also identified the evidence of Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) within the study area through the presence of scats. Both Level 1 surveys were conducted in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 56 Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia. Although no evidence of nesting by Black Cockatoos was identified during these surveys, LandCorp acknowledges that the Site may be used by Black Cockatoos for both nesting and foraging. The SIP site supports 121 ha of vegetation, of which 118 ha is considered Cockatoo breeding habitat or future potential breeding habitat. The remaining 3 ha of vegetation is recognised as feeding habitat however does not support plant species suitable for the establishment of breeding hollows. LandCorp have taken a conservative approach in assuming the site is used by cockatoos and that all but 3 ha of the site is Cockatoo breeding habitat. LandCorp has identified a number of strategies to minimise and mitigate against potential impacts to Cockatoo breeding and feeding habitat associated with the proposed clearing within the SIP. These management and mitigation measures are listed in the Proponent s Response to Issue /24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 7

10 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 1-6 WWF One submission referenced research undertaken by Saunders (1980, 1986) that suggests that Carnaby s Cockatoos require sufficient foraging resources within a km radium of their nesting hollows to successfully rear their chick to fledging. Vegetation within the SIP represents just 0.007% of the current extent of the medium forest: jarrah-marri vegetation association within the region. The SIP site is contiguous with, and within close proximity to a number by State Forests, forest conservation zones, conservation parks, proposed conservation parks, and Crown reserves, which cover an area of approximately 31,057 ha (DEC, nd). Given the large areas of similar vegetation available within the local and regional area, clearing of 90.4 ha of vegetation within the SIP is not considered likely to result in a significant reduction in the availability of foraging material for black cockatoos. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 8

11 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 1-7 WWF WWF commented that replacement of natural tree hollows with artificial hollows as required by conditions set by the WA EPA is not an acceptable offset for clearing of potential breeding trees. The use of artificial nesting hollows as a mitigation strategy is not proposed by LandCorp for this project. It is noted however, that approval of the Perdaman and Chemicals Collie Urea Plant under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 included a number of conditions relating to the Black Cockatoos, including replacement of Black Cockatoo nesting trees removed during construction with artificial nesting boxes on a six-for-one basis. LandCorp has identified a number of strategies to minimise and mitigate against potential impacts to Cockatoo breeding and feeding habitat associated with the proposed clearing within the SIP. These management and mitigation measures are listed in the Proponent s Response to Issue 1-3. Chuditch 2-1 Margaret Owen WWF Two submissions raised concerns regarding loss of Chuditch habitat. LandCorp acknowledge that clearing of the proposed SIP may cause population fragmentation and a minor reduction in the area of occupancy of this species. Similar habitats of over 30,000 ha, including State Forest, forest conservation zones, conservation parks, proposed conservation parks, and Crown reserves, are adjacent to and in close proximity to the project area. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 9

12 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 2-2 Preston Environment Group The Preston Environment Group commented on issues relating to the potential impacts on threatened fauna species known to occur within the area Much of the SIP site itself has been subject to a high level of previous disturbance. The site is traversed by a number of existing infrastructure corridors associated with nearby coal mining operations, including rail lines, conveyors and roads. These train and conveyor operations are run 24 hours per day. At the western end of the SIP area, large areas of vegetation have historically been cleared for agriculture and sand mining. Additional disturbances within the site include agricultural land use, an old sand quarry, the former Shotts townsite and school site, rubbish tips, access tracks, roads, overhead power lines and pipelines. Two existing open-cut coal mines are situated directly north and east of the proposed SIP, and operate haul roads, conveyors and rail operations through the proposed site. However, it is recognised that the ha Site supports approximately 121 ha remnant native jarrah-marri forest which may provide fauna habitat or refuge. Given the large areas of similar vegetation available within the local and regional area, clearing of 90.4 ha of vegetation within the SIP is not considered likely to result in a significant reduction in the availability of foraging material for black cockatoos. LandCorp has made the following commitments to minimise impacts of the proposed SIP development on listed threatened species: Retention of 30.6 ha of vegetation within the SIP, equating to approximately 25% of the total remaining vegetation within the Site; Rehabilitation of 6.45 ha of degraded land within, and adjacent to the SIP site with the aim of providing alternative food sources through replanting of native prime feed species; Purchase of a direct land offset equivalent to six times the area of cockatoo habitat to be cleared within the SIP; Minimising clearing of habitat and severing of habitat linkages as far as practicable; 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 10

13 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response General Fauna Impacts Where vegetation containing potential cockatoo nesting trees can not be avoided, individual trees or stags containing potential nesting hollows will be retained where practicable. Any large trees containing hollows which are removed will be salvaged and donated to Cockatoo care groups to support captive breeding efforts or used in rehabilitation programs; Clearing of potential nesting trees will be avoided during the nesting season where practicable; Large habitat features such as logs, branches and rock will be salvaged and used in rehabilitation areas or adjacent forest to supply hides and nest sites for Chuditch; and Ongoing sponsorship of the Western Shield Project will be provided to mitigate against any impact on the Chuditch. 3-1 John Vukovich One submission raised concerns regarding the susceptibility of the area to Dieback. 3-2 James Burgett One submission raised concerns regarding possible impacts on wetlands and creeklines and the importance of these ecosystems in preserving biodiversity. A preliminary Dieback assessment undertaken in 2008 indicates that Dieback is present and adjacent to numerous tracks. Proponents of the SIP will be required to undertake comprehensive Dieback interpretation and demarcation prior to commencement of clearing within their development area. If dieback is present, individual proponents will need to develop a dieback management plan prior to any land clearing being undertaken. LandCorp has adopted the principles of avoidance, minimization and mitigation to ensure wetlands in proximity to the SIP are adequately protected. During the early stages of the SIP design, the park boundary was modified to exclude wetlands. With the exception of a portion of degraded and highly modified wetland within the rail loop and small drainage line adjacent to Premier Road, all wetlands identified during the wetland assessment are outside of the proposed SIP boundary. Impacts on water quality and drainage management have been addressed through the State approvals processes. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 11

14 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 3-3 John Vukovich Habitat Linkages Margaret Owen WWF A number of submissions raised concerns regarding the ability of fauna to relocate to other areas. Black Cockatoos are expected to disburse during clearing and are not expected to be directly impacted (refer also to the Proponent s Response to Issue 1-1). Similarly, it is anticipated that Chuditch, being a highly mobile species, will move away from disturbance areas, however there may be some direct impacts during clearing. 4-1 John Vukovich One submission commented on the value of the subject land as a habitat linkage and fauna corridor between the northern and southern side of the Coalfields Highway The location of the SIP has been subject to a lengthy site selection study undertaken by the Shotts Steering Committee which was chaired by the South West Development Commission and included representation from the Collie Shire Council, the Department of Environment & Conservation, the Department of State Development and Wesfarmers Premier Coal. The SIP location was selected due to the high level of previous disturbance, its proximity to existing infrastructure, and compatibility of surrounding land uses. Two existing open-cut coal mines are situated directly north and east of the proposed SIP site. The Site has been subject to a number of previous disturbances including clearing for agriculture and sand mining, and was also the location of the former Shotts townsite and school site. The Site is traversed by a number of existing infrastructure corridors associated with nearby coal mining operations, including rail infrastructure, pipelines, overhead power lines, conveyors and haul roads. The initial concept plan for the SIP included an additional 155 ha of surrounding land, however the boundary has been refined to minimise potential impacts on areas of relatively intact vegetation, significant fauna habitat and wetlands. This includes approximately 35 ha of vegetation to the north of the proposed SIP and east of Premier Road, which was excluded from the park boundary on the request of the WA Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) due to the relatively undisturbed vegetation condition. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 12

15 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response Management and Mitigation 5-1 Birds Australia WWF Two submissions raised concerns that the proponents commitments are not sufficient to mitigate against the impacts of the proposed clearing and will not result in a net gain in habitat. LandCorp has proposed a number of management and mitigation strategies to minimise the impacts of the proposal on listed threatened species, including rehabilitation of degraded areas, retention of approximately 25% of vegetation within the Site and provision of an off-site offset equivalent to six times the area of clearing proposed within the Site. The management and mitigation measures proposed for the project (including the offset package) have been developed to meet the informal guidelines and expected outcomes communicated by SEWPAC with regards to managing impacts on Black Cockatoo habitat. 5-2 WWF WWF suggest that long term monitoring and management of rehabilitation sites is required to ensure a net increase in habitat. A Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan has been prepared for the areas identified for rehabilitation within and adjacent to the SIP. The key objective of this plan is to create a self-sustaining forest ecosystem by encouraging flora, faunal and soil characteristics similar to those present prior to clearing. The Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan identifies monitoring requirements and completion criteria for rehabilitation areas. Revegetated areas will be monitored on an annual basis, to identify the need for remediation works such as weed control and infill planting. LandCorp has committed to ensuring a minimum of 90% survivorship of the species planted as tube stock in the rehabilitation areas after the first three years. Monitoring and remediation works be undertaken for a period of five years following rehabilitation to ensure the success of the revegetation program. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 13

16 Reference Submission Issue Proponent s Response 5-3 Preston Environment Group The Preston Environment Group suggested LandCorp should compensate the loss of fauna habitat associated with the proposal by providing an offset to increase conservation estate in the region. LandCorp has committed to providing a 540 ha direct land offset, equivalent to six times the area of potential breeding and foraging habitat to be cleared within the SIP. A proposed offset site located approximately 35 km north-east of the SIP has been identified in consultation with the WA DEC. The offset property is situated adjacent to the Harris River State Forest and Lane Poole Reserve, both of which are Class A reserves vested in the Conservation Commission and recognised as 'proposed National Parks'. It is intended that the offset site will be formally reserved as a conservation park. 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 14

17 3. References Cale, B. (2003) Carnaby s Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) Recovery Plan Prepared for the Carnaby s Black-Cockatoo Recovery Team. Department of Environment and Conservation (2010) Karrak-watch: The Forest red-tailed black cockatoo. Available online: Accessed on 14 January Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) (nd), Wellington National Park Issues Paper. Saunders, D.A. (1982) The breeding behaviour and biology of the short-billed form of the White-tailed Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus funereus. Ibis 124, /24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions 15

18 Appendix A Pubic Submissions 61/24064/ Shotts Industrial Park Response to Public Submissions

19 G day Michael, As discussed could you please keep my contact details on record and pass onto any developers that will be clearing in Shotts industrial Park. Bushland Native Seed Supply s primary purpose is sourcing provincial seed and media requirements for various rehabilitation projects in the Collie area. Thank you. Tracey Widdup Bushland Native Seed Supply Mob: bnss@bigpond.com

20 Attention- Mr Michael Campi Senior Project Manager REGARDING Shotts Industrial Park Notice For Land Clearing Dear Sir, We spoke briefly about 4 weeks ago regarding salvaging grasstrees from Shotts Industrial Park, Collie. Just recently I have seen the clearing notice advert in the South Western Times and have read through some of the environmental reports on the Landcorp website. In particular, I was interested in the "Flora and Fauna and Wetland Assessment", section 6.2 "Offsets", page 57, and the reccommendation for purchase of like-for-like (or better) vegetation for conservation protection. We have 160 acres of ESA classified land (of 'pristine wetlands') near Harvey, which you may be interested in as a land offset. I would very much appreciate to be kept informed of the progression of Shotts Industrial Park, and of course your thoughts on the land aquistion reccommendation. Thankyou very much for your time, I appreciate the opportunity to comment. I look forward to hearing from you, I can be contacted anytime on my mobile , or by return . Yours Sincerely, Michael Lawler

21 Environment Group Peter Murphy Convenor Preston Environment Group 90 Old Meadow Rd Donnybrook WA 6239 Attention: Michael Campi Senior Project Officer Landcorp Re: Clearing of land at Shotts Industrial Park, Collie, WA. Dear Michael, On behalf of the Preston Environment Group, I wish to raise an objection under sections 18 and 18a of the EPBC Act in relation to the clearing of native jarrah/marri bushland on the proposed Shotts Industrial Park site at Collie, WA. Reasons for our objection are: The native jarrah/marri bushland on the proposed Shotts Industrial Park, is habitat to several threatened species of fauna and communities (see list below) that are protected under the WA Wildlife Act (1950) and the Commonwealth Environment and Biodiversity Conservation Protection Act (1999). Several known threatened fauna species and communities have been documented in the proposed SIP bushland zone. Those fauna species include: Brush tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa) (Sl) Western Brush Wallaby (Macropus irma) (P4) Southern Brown Bandicoot/Quenda (Isoodon obesulusfusciventer) (PS) Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) (P3) Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) (Sl) Barking Owl (Ninox connivens connivens) (P2) Western False Pipistrelle (Falsistrellus mackenziei) (P4) Baudin's Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii) (S1) Forest Red tailed Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso) (Sl) Carnaby's White tailed Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) (S1)

22 only 23.4% of the above fauna's habitat is protected in the Shire of Collie, as the remaining 50% is open to logging, gravel extraction, mining and development such as the proposed SIP. Furthermore, there have been no new conservation reserves proposed in the region for over a decade. Therefore, the clearing of native vegetation on the proposed SIP site will only further threaten the above fauna mentioned including their habitat in the long term. We request that Landcorp compensate for the loss of the above fauna's habitat lost during the land clearing on the SIP site by putting forward a proposal to the Commonwealth and State governments to increase the conservation estate in the region. Kind regards P~ter Murphy Dec i t~" 24/10 ~.t, ~,q ~

23 6 th January 2011 Mr Michael Campi Senior Project Manager LandCorp Locked Bag 5, Perth Business Centre, Perth WA 6000 ABN Suite 2-05, 60 Leicester St, Carlton VIC 3053 Tel (03) Fax (03) Website: CC: Referral Business Entry Point, EIA Policy Section (EPBC Act) Approvals and Wildlife Division Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT Dear Mr Campi, Re: EPBC Referral 2009/5086 LandCorp/Commercial development/collie/wa/proposed land clearing for Shotts Industrial Park Birds Australia is a national organisation working for the conservation and protection of Australia's native birds and their habitats. Birds Australia welcomes the opportunity to comment on the above referral. However, as a community-based organisation, we lament the fact that the public comment period, (which occurred over the Christmas period), was not extended to accommodate community input. Public participation is a critical process needed to inform high quality decisionmaking. The EPBC Act purports to provide for a high level of public involvement in decisionmaking and an open and transparent system (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 2011). However, an important part of engaging the community involves seeking community input in a meaningful way. Birds Australia feels that the timeframe for comment on this proposal was thus ill considered. Birds Australia believes that the land clearing proposed in EPBC Referral 2009/5086 (LandCorp/Commercial development/collie/wa/proposed land clearing for Shotts Industrial Park) should not be approved as it likely to have a significant impact on a number of Matters of National Environmental Significance. Reasons the proposed action should not be approved: 1. The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on a number of Matters of National Environmental Significance. The proponent proposes to clear of an area of approximately 90.4 Ha of habitat for at least four nationally-listed threatened fauna species: forest red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) and chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii). All of these species are threatened by habitat loss as a result of past and current land clearing.

24 The above-mentioned black cockatoos have not been particularly well studied in the local region specified. Given this uncertainty, we can infer from what is known of the species habitat requirements, ecology, population status and threats more generally what impacts clearing 90.4 Ha of foraging, breeding, and roosting habitat is likely to have on populations/ species. In fact, the draft Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos prepared by the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) defines the significant impact threshold of removal or degradation of >1ha of foraging habitat for black cockatoos. Thus, in the absence of scientific knowledge to the contrary, Birds Australia contend that: a) The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on the endangered species Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) as there is a real possibility that it will: i. adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species (that is an area that is necessary for activities such as foraging, breeding, roosting, and dispersal); ii. modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline; iii. contribute to a long-term decrease in the size of a population; and iv. interfere with the recovery of the species. The Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos prepared by the then Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) state, Throughout the breeding range, large hollow-bearing trees have been removed for timber or to make way for agriculture, roads or buildings. Because of the very limited number of suitable nesting trees remaining, and the very long time required for trees to produce hollows, all trees currently used for nesting are important for the continued survival of the species. In addition to currently used trees, it is important that a range of age classes of suitable tree species are maintained to ensure a supply of nest hollows for Carnaby s black-cockatoo into the future. Thus the removal of up to 110 potential nesting sites is likely to have a significant impact. b) The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on the vulnerable species Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii) as there is a real possibility that it will: i. lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species; and ii. disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population As the population is considered a single, contiguous population (Garnett & Crowley 2000) the population using the SIP site is an important one. For example, in the central and northern parts of the Darling Scarp, large flocks of birds (in excess of 600 individuals) are known to amalgamate and utilise traditional foraging roosts between April and September. A brief snapshot survey of the SIP site (as in the October spring survey) would have missed the importance of this area to the bird population. The SIP area could be important for pre-breeding conditioning for example, and thus represent habitat important to the population and necessary for the species long-term survival and recovery. Furthermore, given our lack of knowledge, it must be assumed that the development may: iii. adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species iv. modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline v. introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, and vi. interfere substantially with the recovery of the species 2

25 c) The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on the vulnerable species forest redtailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), as there is a real chance that it will: i. lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species ii. interfere substantially with the recovery of the species As less than 10% of the population is likely to breed in any one year and most birds only breed every two to three years; and, as it is as yet unclear which populations are key source populations for breeding; or, which populations are necessary for the long-term survival and recovery of forest red-tailed black cockatoos; it is prudent to evoke the precautionary principle and assume that all remaining populations are important and necessary for maintaining genetic diversity. Certainly, given that scarcity of suitable nesting hollows is limiting the population, the removal of 90.4 Ha of potential breeding habitat is likely to interfere substantially with the recovery of the species. Furthermore, given our lack of knowledge, it must be assumed that the development may: iii. reduce the area of occupancy of an important population; iv. adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species; v. disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population; vi. modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline; vii. result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species habitat; and viii. introduce disease that may cause the species to decline. 2. Cumulative Impact Birds Australia is concerned that the cumulative impact of clearing for Shotts Industrial Park and the associated proposals in the area, (such as the proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine - EPBC Reference 2009/ 5014) will result in an unacceptably high loss of habitat in the region for the already threatened populations of the above-mentioned threatened species. The full and cumulative impact of this proposal, and the associated proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine, and any other proposals associated with the Shotts Industrial Park, must be considered when assessing each of the proposals. 3. The survey methodology Given the available information, Birds Australia feels that the survey methodology was inadequate to assess the importance of the SIP site to threatened black cockatoos. The survey methodology is not described in any detail. Section 3.2 of the Fauna survey simply notes that 'A reconnaissance survey was undertaken with the botanical survey by a qualified zoologist and experienced environmental scientist' and... 'Opportunistic records of species were noted'. It also notes that the 'reconnaissance survey' was undertaken 'with regards to... EPA Guidance Statement No 56 where possible'. Birds Australia is concerned that the qualification suggests that the Guidance Statement (EPA 2004) was not utilised consistently. The Guidance Statement states that survey quality and methodology should be such that they enable the EPA to judge the impact of proposals (EPA 2004). We contend that the impact of the 3

26 actions cannot be adequately assessed by Birds Australia with the information provided by the proponent. The lack of adherence to the points contained in pages 8-9 of the Guidance Statement, including for example, the statement that the data should be capable of under-pinning long-term observation and measurement for later compliance, clearly demonstrate the inadequacy of the survey methodology and resulting data. The Guidance Statement also provides detail regarding survey planning and execution that have not been followed (see EPA 2004, pages 10+). While a Spring survey is an appropriate, even desirable, season in which to survey plants and some fauna taxa, this does not apply to all taxa and the seasonal movements of species of conservation significance should be taken into account when planning and implementing surveys that are critical to assess conservation significance of a site (as outlined in the Guidance Statement). The spring survey was conducted over only three days, 2-5 October, The survey period is inadequate to assess the conservation significance of a large site for a number of threatened fauna taxa. For example, most Baudin s that use the area to forage prior to breeding are either back in their breeding quarters or heading there in breeding condition in October. The proposal hasn't assessed the relationship of the development site to known roosts in the non-breeding season. Given that Baudin's is a highly mobile bird, and have breeding and non-breeding range, the site's value should have at least been assessed in the core part of the breeding and non-breeding seasons. Although there was also a brief June survey, Birds Australia feels that the proponent cannot meaningfully comment on the value of the site throughout the year, or over time. For example, extreme fluctuations are known to have occurred in regional population numbers, particularly on the eastern side of their range (TSSC 2009). The population fluctuations are due to seasonal movements, as well as movements in response to food availability and possibly the effect of fires. Given the complexity of these species habitat needs, the draft Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos prepared by the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) defines the significant impact threshold of removal or degradation of >1ha of foraging habitat for black cockatoos. Birds Australia supports this approach. As we consider the survey methodology used by the proponent for assessing the importance of the site to these Matters of National Environmental Significance inadequate, Birds Australia requests that the delegate evoke the precautionary principle and decide against approving destruction of 90.4 Ha of known foraging and potential breeding habitat. 4 The referral documentation contains irrelevant and/or incorrect information. The Supporting Documentation for Referral under the EPBC Act, 2009, provided by the proponent repeatedly emphasise irrelevant information, for example, regarding the history of the proposed site, surrounding land use, the potential need for fire brakes in the future and the location of completely degraded patches. Birds Australia vehemently disagrees with the statement by the proponent that is recognised that Black Cockatoos and potentially Chuditch do currently utilise the are. However, given the obvious mobility of the Cockatoos and the relatively large home ranges of the Chuditch, the loss of this relatively small, somewhat disturbed area in the context of the surrounding State Forest and National Parks is not considered significant. 4

27 Birds Australia considers the proposition of clearing over 90.4 Ha of EPBC listed threatened species habitat, including known foraging and potential breeding habitat, the pertinent information, regardless of surrounding qualifiers. Ultimately, regardless of the mobility of Black Cockatoos, loss of habitat has been, and continues to be, the key threat and driver of these species declines. In particular, the scarcity of suitable nest hollows is contributing to current and predicted future declines as well as restricting the ability of species to recover. Hence, removal of approximately 110 potential nest sites does not only have the potential to have an immediate significant impact on these bird populations, but if considered in light of the time taken for suitable replacement hollows to form, could significantly impact the populations for hundreds of years to come. Take for example a highly conservative estimate that suitable hollows take approximately 130 years to develop (Whitford and Williams 2002). Should 110 available and potentially suitable nest sites be destroyed, black cockatoos that could have bred in these available hollows annually equates to a potential 130 breeding events multiplied by the 110 potential hollows equating to approximately 14,300 potential breeding events lost until plantings or new habitat become available (presuming suitable hollows are actually created). This example serves to illustrate the importance of thinking about temporal scales when determining significant impact. Furthermore it is possible that the 110 identified by the proponent represents an underestimate of the number of available nest sites as some authors argue that counts of hollows made from ground level are inaccurate as estimates of the actual number of hollows in trees (Whitford 2002). Hollows are being destroyed faster than they are being created (Saunders 1979). As such suitable nest sites must be protected from clearing in order to maintain a continuing supply of hollows to allow threatened black cockatoos to persist, and ultimately recover. As described above, the draft Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos prepared by the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) defines the significant impact threshold of removal or degradation of >1ha of foraging habitat for black cockatoos. And that Because of the very limited number of suitable nesting trees remaining, and the very long time required for trees to produce hollows, all trees currently used for nesting are important for the continued survival of the species. In addition to currently used trees, it is important that a range of age classes of suitable tree species are maintained to ensure a supply of nest hollows for Carnaby s blackcockatoo into the future. Thus the removal of up to 110 potential nesting hollows is likely to have a significant impact. 5. Proponent Commitments are not sufficient to mitigate significant impact on threatened species. Whilst efforts to minimise impacts by retention of vegetation are recognised, rehabilitation of degraded land to providing alternative food sources and purchase of land to provide in perpetuity conservation of cockatoo habitat and sponsorship of the Western Shield Project are all compensation mechanisms rather than mitigation. Furthermore, the use of highly qualified phrases such as minimised as far as practicable and where practicable litter a number of the proponents commitments making them vague and meaningless. In any case the commitments are insufficient to prevent the likely significant impact of this proposal on the Matters of National Environmental Significance. 5

28 6. The proposed clearing will result in a significant net loss of threatened species habitat. The proposed Direct land offset does not in fact actually offset any of the proposed clearing as the 540 Ha of habitat that is to be purchased should already be protected under EPBC legislation if it is important habitat used by the listed threatened species. Thus the proposed actions will continue to result in net loss of black cockatoo habitat. Birds Australia does not consider a change in land tenure to offset the destruction of habitat, as it does not result in a net gain of habitat. In summary, the proposed action should not be approved, as it is likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance. Birds Australia appreciates the opportunity to provide comment. If you have any questions please contact me on or s.vine@birdsaustralia.com.au Yours sincerely, Samantha Vine Conservation Manager Birds Australia 6

29 References Commonwealth of Australia Background paper to EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.16 Nationally Threatened Species and Ecological Communities Significant impact guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos: Carnaby s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris (endangered), Baudin s blackcockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii (vulnerable), and forest red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso draft, February Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Commonwealth of Australia EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.16 Significant impact guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos: Carnaby s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris (endangered), Baudin s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii (vulnerable), and Forest Red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso draft, February Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Website accessed Wednesday 5th January, EPA Guidance Statement No 56. Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia. Western Australia. [Online]. Garnett, S.T. & G.M. Crowley The Action Plan for Australian Birds Canberra, ACT. Environment Australia and Birds Australia. Saunders, D. A The Availability of Tree Hollows for Use as Nest Sites by White-tailed Black Cockatoos. Australian Wildlife Research 6(2) Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) Commonwealth Listing Advice on Calyptorhynchus banksii naso (Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoo). [Online]. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Whitford, K. R Hollows in jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) and marri (Corymbia calophylla) trees: I. Hollow sizes, tree attributes and ages Forest Ecology and Management, Volume 160, Issues 1-3, 1 May 2002, Pages Whitford, K. R. and Williams, M. R Hollows in jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) and marri (Corymbia calophylla) trees: II. Selecting trees to retain for hollow dependent fauna. Forest Ecology and Management, Volume 160, Issues 1-3, 1 May 2002, Pages

30 Mr Michael Campi Senior Project Manager LandCorp Locked Bag 5, Perth Business Centre, Perth WA CC: Referral Business Entry Point, EIA Policy Section (EPBC Act) Approvals and Wildlife Division Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT January 2011 Dear Mr Campi, Re: EPBC Referral 2009/5086 LandCorp/Commercial development/collie/wa/proposed land clearing for Shotts Industrial Park 1. Introduction WWF-Australia refers to LandCorp s referral to the Minister under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) for approval to re-zone and clear native vegetation for the purpose of establishing the proposed Shotts Industrial Park near Collie, Western Australia. We thank the proponent and the Minister for this opportunity to comment on the proposed action. However we would like to express our disappointment that the public comment period for this referral was opened over the Christmas / New Year period. We appreciate the requirement for 10 business days has technically been met, but it can be assumed that many stakeholder groups or organisations will have been unavailable to provide comment during much of this time. If public consultation is to be meaningful an adequate time frame in which to provide comment must be given. WWF agrees with the declaration of the Minister s delegate dated 28 June 2010 that this proposal is a controlled action for the purposes of the EPBC Act. This is on the grounds the action is likely to have a significant impact on at least four Matters of National Environmental Significance, namely the forest red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) and chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii)]. WWF has provided comments on the proposed action in the following submission. All quotes in this document are taken from LandCorp s referral document and attachments unless otherwise indicated. Printed on FSC certified paper

31 2. Summary The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on Matters of National Environmental Significance because: - The action proposes to clear an area of approximately 90.4 hectares of native vegetation, currrently providing foraging and possibly breeding habitat to at least four nationally-listed threatened species: forest red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) and chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii). As acknowledged in the supporting documentation to the referral 1, all of these species are already threatened by habitat loss due to land clearing as well as other threatening processes. - The cumulative impacts of the Shotts Industrial Park and the associated proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine (EPBC Reference 2009/ 5014) if they are both approved will result in the eventual clearing of more than 1800ha of native vegetation 2. The full and cumulative impact of this and the associated proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine, and any other proposals associated with the Shotts Industrial Park, must be considered when assessing each of the proposals. The clearing of habitat for these nationallylisted threatened species should not be approved. 3. Description of proposed action LandCorp s referral describes the proposed action in the following terms: LandCorp proposes to develop the Shotts Industrial Park (SIP) near the former Shotts townsite, located approximately 7.5 km east of Collie in the south-west of Western Australia. The Site comprises approximately ha of land which currently forms part of the Collie State Forest. The site supports approximately 121 ha of remnant native vegetation and is known to be utilized by four species of threatened fauna listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act This referral relates to the land clearing aspect of the SIP development only (p1, Referral document). The Preliminary Documentation Report states that of the 121ha of remnant vegetation on site, 30.6ha is to be retained. WWF submits that the clearing of the remainder of 90.4ha of vegetation, currently providing habitat for four nationally-listed threatened species is likely to have a significant impact on all four threatened species. Controlled action decision Under s.75, when considering the impacts of an action, the Minister must only consider all adverse impacts the action is likely to have on the matters protected under Part 3 (s.75(2)). The Minister must not consider any beneficial impacts the action may have on the matters protected under Part 3 (s.75(2)). The Minister is also required to take into account the 2

32 precautionary principle, which states that lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing a measure to prevent degradation of the environment where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage (s.391). Exemptions There are a number of exemptions from this approval requirement. However, none of these appear to be applicable to this action. In particular, we note that this action is not a lawful continuation of a use of land that was occurring immediately before the commencement of the Act. 4. Significant impact of the proposed action on EPBC-listed threatened species The proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on at least four Matters of National Environmental Significance: 1. Forest red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), 2. Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), 3. Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) and 4. Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii). Impact of proposed action on these matters It is recognised that Black Cockatoos and potentially Chuditch do currently utilise the area. However, given the obvious mobility of the Cockatoos and the relatively large home ranges of the Chuditch, the loss of this relatively small, somewhat disturbed area in the context of the surrounding State Forest and National Parks is not considered significant, (p24 Attachment A). WWF disagrees with the proponent s assessment that the impact of this proposal will not be significant for the following reasons: - The populations of all four nationally-listed threatened species to be impacted by this proposal have already declined as a direct result of, and continue to be threatened by, habitat loss due to land clearing. Therefore the destruction of another 90.4ha of habitat for four species already threatened by historical and ongoing habitat loss is significant. - The proponent s description of the area to be cleared as relatively small ignores the potential cumulative impact of this plus the associated proposal to expand the Muja South Coal Mine which, if approved, increases the total area to be cleared to over 1800ha. 3

33 - The commonly-held belief that when mobile fauna lose their habitats they are able to successfully relocate to surrounding habitat is false. As discussed in two reports commissioned by WWF on the impacts of land clearing on the wildlife of Queensland 3 and New South Wales 4 by leading Australian scientists, The reality is starkly different: when native bushland is cleared and burnt, food and shelter habitats are destroyed, and displaced wildlife die immediately or soon after from starvation or by predation. Those that espcape to nearby remnant vegetation usually survive only at the expense of other wildlife, which are displaced and die. 5 As the 2006 State of the Environment Report also states, When land is cleared, everything that lives in it is killed. 6 Carnaby s Black Cockatoo, Baudin s Black Cockatoo and Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoo are all recorded as using the site as foraging with evidence found on feeding in Banksia sp., Marri, Jarrah and Allocasuarina sp. To date, no breeding has been recorded on the Site however there are 24 areas identified as having potentially suitable trees with 110 possible hollows available for use. 118 ha of vegetation on the site is considered potential future breeding habitat based on DEWHA s criteria of woodland stands greater than 0.5 ha containing 3+ trees with greater than 500 mm diameter at breast height (DBH), (p4 Attachment A). WWF submits that the clearing of approximately 90.4ha (of a potential total of >1800h, if the associated Muja South Coal Mine expansion is also approved) of known foraging and potential breeding habitat for threatened black cockatoos is an unacceptable impact of this proposal. Both foraging and potential breeding habitat are essential for the persistance of these species in the long term. The draft Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos 7 prepared by the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (February 2009) defines the significant impact threshold of removal or degradation of >1ha of foraging habitat for black cockatoos. There is at least one well-documented case of the extinction of a breeding population of Carnaby s cockatoos due to the loss of foraging habitat within sufficient proximity of the nesting hollows (rather than the loss of the nesting trees themselves (Saunders 1980, 1986) 8, 9. From Saunders'research, it is now considered to be essential that breeding Carnaby's cockatoos have sufficient foraging resources within a 12-15km radius of their nesting hollows to successfully rear their chick to fledging. WWF therefore recommends that the destruction of foraging habitat for Matters of National Environmental Significance not be approved. The destruction of hollow-bearing trees is also not acceptable. We draw your attention to this statement in the background paper to the draft Significant Impact Guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos 10 prepared by the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (draft dated February 2009, bold emphasis added by WWF): 4

34 Throughout the breeding range, large hollow-bearing trees have been removed for timber or to make way for agriculture, roads or buildings. Because of the very limited number of suitable nesting trees remaining, and the very long time required for trees to produce hollows, all trees currently used for nesting are important for the continued survival of the species. In addition to currently used trees, it is important that a range of age classes of suitable tree species are maintained to ensure a supply of nest hollows for Carnaby s black-cockatoo into the future. It can take over 130 years for a tree to develop natural hollows of a size suitable for black cockatoos 11 and for some tree species, it may take well over 200 years 12. Tree hollows are extremely important to the maintenance of biodiversity. There are over 300 vertebrate fauna species known to use tree hollows in Australia 13. Forty-two vertebrate fauna species are known to use tree hollows in the forests of Southwest Western Australia 14 or about 20% of all terrestrial vertebrates occurring in this region 7. Even if these hollows are not currently being used by listed threatened species such as black cockatoos, in fact even if they are never used by black cockatoos, they are undoubtedly providing vitally important habitat to other fauna species in the area. The proponent has committed to the establishment of an offsite offset site which is estimated to contain a minimum of 1,080 hollows, effectively providing replacement hollows at a ratio of almost 10:1 15. WWF contests the description of these hollows as being in any way a replacement for the destruction or removal of 110 natural hollows on the proposed site of the Shotts Industrial Park. Even if we disregard the fact that this number is an estimate only and may or may not be an accurate assessment of the potential of the offset site to provide breeding habitat for black cockatoos, these are pre-existing hollows. They are not new hollows to replace those that the proponent plans to remove. Further, it can be safely assumed that these offsite hollows are already providing vital habitat to other fauna species and potentially, other black cockatoos. Competition for available nest hollows from introduced European honey bees and other native birds is a key threat to all three species of black cockatoo to be impacted by this proposal 16 and the removal of any natural hollows has the potential to increase that level of competition, even if the hollows in question are not or not yet suitable breeding habitat for black cockatoos. WWF also submits that the replacement of natural tree hollows with artificial hollows, even at a ratio of six to one as has been required by conditions set by the Western Australia Environmental Protection Authority, is not an acceptable compensation or offset for the clearing of natural hollow-bearing trees. Goldingay and Stevens state in their paper Use of artificial tree hollows by Australian birds and bats: We stress that the potential value of artificial hollows should not be used to justify the removal of hollow-bearing trees. 17 In order to be of benefit to black cockatoos, artificial hollows must be built to particular specifications, hung in appropriate locations, and monitored and maintained indefinitely (the WA Department of Environment and Conservation is currently preparing advice notes on these matters) 18. 5

35 WWF therefore recommends that, given the incalculable value of natural hollows to threatened black cockatoos and a suite of other fauna species, that the destruction or removal of natural tree hollows is not approved. The clearing of approximately 90.4ha (of a potential total of >1800ha) of breeding and foraging habitat for at least four threatened species is an unacceptable impact of this proposal. The clearing of foraging, nesting, roosting or resting habitat for nationally-listed species should not be approved. Insufficient mitigation of the impacts to threatened species WWF acknowledges the proponent s commitments to reduce the potential impact of this proposal, but submits that these measures are not sufficient to mitigate the destruction of approximately 90.4ha (of a potential total of >1800ha) of habitat for three species of threatened black cockatoo and the threatened chuditch. LandCorp has made the following commitments to minimise impacts of the proposed SIP development on listed threatened species: Retention of 30.6 ha of vegetation within the SIP, equating to approximately 25% of the total remaining vegetation within the Site (Figure 2); Rehabilitation of 6.45 ha of degraded land within, and adjacent to the SIP site with the aim of providing alternative food sources through replanting of native prime feed species (see Section 3.2.1); and Purchase of a direct land offset equivalent to six times the area of cockatoo habitat to be cleared within the SIP (see Section 3.2.2); Minimising clearing of habitat and severing of habitat linkages as far as practicable; Where vegetation containing potential cockatoo nesting trees can not be avoided, individual trees or stags containing potential nesting hollows will be retained where practicable. Any large trees containing hollows which are removed will be salvaged and donated to Cockatoo care groups to support captive breeding efforts or used in rehabilitation programs; Clearing of potential nesting trees will be avoided during the nesting season where practicable; Large habitat features such as logs, branches and rock will be salvaged and used in rehabilitation areas or adjacent forest to supply hides and nest sites for Chuditch; and LandCorp is also proposing that ongoing sponsorship of the Western Shield Project will be provided to mitigate against any impact on the Chuditch, (pp7-8 Preliminary Documentation Report). These proposed mitigation activities are not sufficient to prevent the likely significant impact of this proposal on the four Matters of National Environmental Significance. Two of these commitments include an undefined qualifier of where practicable. 6

36 Purchase of an external offset site, rehabilitation of previously cleared areas and sponsorship of the Western Shield Project are not mitigation activities, rather these are all compensation activities or offsets. Off-site compensation measures such as increased protection for alternative existing habitat (or potential habitat) sites do not compensate for on-site habitat loss, as this still results in net habitat loss and a potentially significant impact on the species. Habitat creation or rehabilitation, while a necessary action for the recovery of these species, is not an adequate replacement for the loss of existing habitat as it still results in a net loss of habitat for the species in the interim while the new vegetation matures which may take years or decades. As described above, trees may take over 200 years to form hollows suitable for black cockatoos. The creation of 6.45ha of habitat is an uncertain future gain that is not sufficient compensation for the certain impact of the destruction of 90.4ha of habitat. Where revegetation or rehabilitation is deemed appropriate, long-term monitoring and management of these sites will be required to ensure the desirable result of a net increase in habitat for the Matters of National Environmental Significance. Notwithstanding the challenges to governmnents and industry that we know are inherent in such matters, when considering development proposals that may have a significant impact on nationally listed threatened species or any other Matter of National Environmental Significance, WWF believes that the only responsible course of action is to retain on-site habitat. WWF supports the statement in the draft EPBC Act Policy Statement for Western Australian Black Cockatoos (February 2009) 19 that mitigation and management actions must prioritise impact avoidance over impact reduction measures. The Policy Statement goes on to recommend: avoid clearing in areas supporting key ecological functions (breeding, foraging, roosting). 5. Concluding Remarks If approved, the cumulative impacts of the Shotts Industrial Park and the associated proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine will result in the clearing of more than 1800ha of native vegetation which is currently providing habitat to at least four nationally- and state-listed threatened species [forest red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso), Baudin s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), Carnaby s black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) and chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii)]. As acknowledged in the supporting documentation to the referral 20, all of these species are already threatened by habitat loss due to land clearing as well as other threatening processes. The proposed clearing of approximately 90.4ha of native vegetation for the establishment of the proposed Shotts Industrial Park is likely to have a significant impact on at least four Matters of National Environmental Significance and should not be approved. The full and cumulative impact of this and the associated proposal to expand the Muja South coal mine, and any other proposals associated with the Shotts Industrial Park, must be considered when assessing each of the proposals. The clearing of habitat for these nationallyand state-listed threatened species should not be approved. 7

37 I request the opportunity to provide comments on any further information that is provided to the Minister under s76 of the Act. Thank you for considering this submission. If you have any queries or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact either me or Katherine Howard on or Yours sincerely, Dr Gilly Llewellyn Manager, Conservation Programs 8

38 6. References 1 GHD Pty Ltd (2009) Report for Shotts Industrial Park: Supporting Documentation for Referral under the EPBC Act. EPBC Referral 2009/5086 Attachment A. GHD Pty Ltd, Perth. 2 Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd (2009) EPBC Reference 2009/5014 Referral document. Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd, Perth. 3 Cogger, H.G., Ford, H.A., Johnson, C.N., Holman, J. and Butler, D. (2003) Impacts of Land Clearing on Australian Wildlife in Queensland. WWF Australia, Brisbane. 4 Johnson, C., Cogger, H.G., Dickman, C. and Ford, H. (2007) Impacts of Landclearing: The Impacts of Approved Clearing of Native Vegetation on Australian Wildlife in New South Wales. WWF-Australia, Sydney. 5 Cogger, H.G., Ford, H.A., Johnson, C.N., Holman, J. and Butler, D. (2003) Impacts of Land Clearing on Australian Wildlife in Queensland. WWF Australia, Brisbane. 6 Australian Government (2006) State of the Environment Report Australian Government, Canberra. 7 Commonwealth of Australia (2009) EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.16 Nationally Threatened Species and Ecological Communities Significant impact guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos: Carnaby s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris (endangered), Baudin s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii (vulnerable), and forest red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso draft, February Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. 8 Saunders, D. (1980) The Breeding Behaviour and Biology of the Short-Billed Form of the White-Tailed Black Cockatoo Calypptorynchus funereus. Ibis 124, Saunders, D. (1986) Breeding Season, Nesting Success and Nestling Growth in Carnaby's Cockatoo, Calyptorhynchus funereus latirostris, over 16 Years at Coomallo Creek, and a Method for Assessing the Viability of Populations in other Areas. Aust. Wildl. Res. 13, Commonwealth of Australia (2009) Background paper to EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.16 Nationally Threatened Species and Ecological Communities Significant impact guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos: Carnaby s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris (endangered), Baudin s blackcockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii (vulnerable), and forest red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso draft, February Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. 11 Cale, B. (2003) Carnaby s Black-Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) Recovery Plan Department of Conservation and Land Management Western Australian Threatened Species and Communities Unit, Wanneroo, WA. 12 Johnstone, R.E. and Kirkby, T. (2008) Carnaby s Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) on the Northern Swan Coastal Plain (Lancelin Perth) Western Australia. Unpublished report to the Australian Government s Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. 13 Gibbons, P and Lindenmeyer, D. (2002) Tree Hollows and Wildlife Conservation in Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood VIC. 9

39 14 Abbott I, Whitford K (2002). Conservation of vertebrate fauna using hollows in forests of south-west Western Australia: strategic risk assessment in relation to ecology, policy, planning and operations management. Pacific Conservation Biology 7, pp D Raine, E. (2010). Report for Shotts Industrial Park Preliminary Documentation Appendix C: Cockatoo Breeding Habitat Assessment. GHD Pty Ltd, Perth. 16 SPRAT Species profiles for Carnaby s black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris), Baudin s black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii), and Forest Red-tailed black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii naso) Goldingay, R.L. and Stevens, J.R. (2009) Use of artificial tree hollows by Australian birds and bats. Wildlife Research 36, pp CSIRO Publishing. 18 DEC publications on artificial hollows for black cockatoos currently in preparation. Contact Peter Mawson. 19 Commonwealth of Australia (2009) EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.16 Significant impact guidelines for three threatened Western Australian black cockatoos: Carnaby s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris (endangered), Baudin s black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii (vulnerable), and Forest Red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso draft, February Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. 20 GHD (2009) Report for Shotts Industrial Park: Supporting Documentation for Referral under the EPBC Act. EPBC Referral 2009/5086 Attachment A. 10

40 January Daglish Street Wembley 6014 Mr Michael Sampi Senior Project Manager Landcorp Locked Bag 5 Perth Business Centre PERTH 6000 Michael.cam landcorp.com.au Shotts Industrial Park, Colllie ID No SEWPaC Dear Mr Sampi, I object to the proposed Shotts Industrial Park Collie, because of the very large proposed loss of habitat for feeding, roosting, nesting and other activities for the three species of black cockatoo and because of loss of habitat for the Chuditch. In regards to Carnaby's Cockatoos, it is not just the loss of this forest habitat but the cumulative loss through clearing, also occurring on the Swan Coastal Plain Of course many more species will be immediately destroyed if the project proceeds. 121 ha is a very, very large area of habitat to be destroyed. Offse~ I have read the letter from GHD Pty Ltd to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 10 August 2010, relating to the proposed offset. The concept of offsetting loss of habitat is norlsense as the net result is loss of habitat. I would argue that the proposed offset, adjacent to the Harris River State Forest and Land Poole Reserve, and 35 kms to the north east, should be protected in its own right. I question the assumptions of the statement in this letter on page 3; ". Therefore, 540 ha of the 1,069 ha site will be allocated as a direct land offset for clearing within the SIP. Based on this habitat assessment, it can be concluded that the 540 ha offset area contains a minimum of 1,080 hollows, effectively providing replacement hollows at a ratio of almost 10:1." This assumes that black cockatoos can transfer their allegiances to another area, 35 km away. I cannot find in the documents provided that surveys have been conducted at nesting times. If cockatoos do nest in trees with hollows at the proposed Shotts site, and if these trees are destroyed, cockatoos cannot transfer readily to a site we suggest is suitable for them as an alternative. There is competition for nesting hollows and if a tree hollow is not available due to destruction or because it has been taken over by another species, the ability to find and breed in another hollow is not immediate. It may take a couple of breeding seasons to

41 another suitable and available site. (pers comm.; Kim Sarti, volunteer working with Ron Johnstone, WA Museum and Tony Kirkby) Further, the sentence following the one quoted above does not inspire confidence, particularly in the light of earlier comments. The sentence is; "It should be noted that due to the history of logging within the offset site there is a larger proportion of younger trees than the SIP site and therefore in the future will have many more hollows suitable for Black Cockatoos." This is the voice of an environmental consultant putting a proponent friendly spin on the proposal. What do the black cockatoos do while they are waiting for hollows to form in these younger trees? Earlier in the letter it states that; ". the average age of trees across the site was estimated to be years old with an average height of approximately 12 15m. and Large hollows were observed more frequently in the older Wandoo trees as the majority of Marri and Jarrah trees are too young for hollow formation." and Although the site predominately contains relatively young Jarrah/Marri/Wandoo forest/woodland it has the potential to provide good cockatoo breeding habitat in the long term." These comments give cause for great concern. How long is 'in the long term'? Perhaps 150 or 200 years if we are waiting for hollows to form. In any event the proposal cannot offset loss of habitat already known to be used habitually for species listed under the EPBC Act 1999; that is Carnaby's Cockatoo, Baudin's Cockatoo, the Forest Red tailed Cockatoo and the Chuditch. Referral of the pro_dosed action Proponent Commitments: (page 14 ) Comments in this section such as 'as far as practicable' and 'where practicable' are worrying. In regards to dot point 4 (page 11) about avoiding clearing of potential nesting trees during the nesting season, where practicable, is astounding. Imagine a black cockatoo pair trying to nest while bushland is destroyed around the nesting tree. Then after the birds have vacated the tree it is destroyed and when the pair return the following season their nesting tree is no longer there. These three species of black cockatoos are in danger of becoming extinct. Projects such as this one contribute to the stress on vulnerable birds. In regards to the last dot point about Chuditch and mitigating the loss of their habitat by the ongoing sponsorship of the Western Shield Project, the habitat in which they are known to live will be destroyed. So the offset is not for them. Black Cockatoos

42 of breeding Habitat (page 11) "No breeding event of any cockatoo species were recorded during the field assessment; therefore it is difficult to determine if the area is being used in the rearing of chicks or as foraging areas outside of the breeding season." The assessment was done in June 2009 (pagel I). Carnaby's Cockatoos would still be in the non breeding areas at that time, most on the Swan Coastal Plain, so it would not be expected that breeding events or that foraging would be seen. The spring 2007 and 2008 surveys 'highlighted the presence of Baudin's Cockatoo and the possible usage by the Carnaby's Black Cockatoo and Forest Red tailed Cockatoo within the site.' So we have evidence that the three species Of Black cockatoos forage in the area and as far as I can gather, surveys have not been done in the breeding season. I am familiar with Carnaby's Cockatoo in the western suburbs around Perth and clearing of their habitat continues with no regard for the loss of food to the cockatoos. Already cleared or approved for clearing are AK Reserve and the site for the Autism building. Threatened are all the lots along Bedbrook Place, Underwood Avenue Bushland, bushland in Shenton College, Defence Department land, Health Department land and two areas in Monash Avenue, to name some of the sites. All these processes including the Shotts Industrial Park proposal threaten the existence of cockatoos. Identification of Key Environmental Factors; EPA Assessment 1784 In view of the assessment in this document of the factors considered relevant in the proposal it is very hard to understand how the EPA could approve the proposal. The clearing of 100ha of native vegetation is considered relevant to the following areas; vegetation and flora, fauna habitat, water supply, air quality, noise, waste disposal liquid and greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA noted that there was no consideration of why the proposal could not be constructed on previously cleared land. Of great concern is the effect of Greenhouse gas emissions, with the plant projected to emit 3.4 million tonnes of CO2 per year," a significant contribution to greenhouse gases produced in Australia." Documents on the web suggest that the total greenhouse emissions from Western Australia would be 133Mt pa if current proposals are approved, when 'the target should be as close to zero as possible by 2020'. We should be reducing our emissions with a fervour and yet we are like blind men blundering onwards to doomsday. Dr Vogel, EPA chairman said 'The Collie Urea Plant would be a minor contributor of emissions to the Collie airshed, however, the fact that there are predicted exceedances of national standards means the EPA's objectives will only be met provided the emissions from the Muja A/B powerstations are appropriately addressed during its refurbishment.