Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and
Communities
EPBC Act Listed Ecological Communities Mapping in the
Lower Hunter
PRN 1213-0236
19 December 2013
Document information
Client: Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities
Title: EPBC Act Listed Ecological Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter
Subtitle: PRN 1213-0236
Document No: 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Date: 19 December 2013
Rev
Date
Details
A
15/05/2013
Draft
B
07/06/2013
Final
C
19/12/2013
Final
Author, Reviewer and Approver details
Prepared by:
Selga Harrington,
Tanya Bangel
Date: 19/12/2013
Signature:
Reviewed by:
Alex Cockerill
Date: 19/12/2013
Signature:
Approved by:
Alex Cockerill
Date: 19/12/2013
Signature:
Distribution
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Parsons Brinckerhoff file
©Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited 2013
Copyright in the drawings, information and data recorded in this document (the information) is the property of Parsons
Brinckerhoff. This document and the information are solely for the use of the authorised recipient and this document may not
be used, copied or reproduced in whole or part for any purpose other than that for which it was supplied by Parsons
Brinckerhoff. Parsons Brinckerhoff makes no representation, undertakes no duty and accepts no responsibility to any third
party who may use or rely upon this document or the information.
The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the
Australian Government or the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. While
reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth
does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or
damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication.
Document owner
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited
ABN 80 078 004 798
Level 2 54 Marcus Clarke Street
Canberra ACT 2600
GPO Box 331
Canberra ACT 2601
Australia
Tel: +61 2 6281 9500
Fax: +61 2 6281 9501
Email: canberra@pb.com.au
www.pbworld.com
Certified to ISO 9001, ISO 14001, AS/NZS 4801
A GRI Rating: Sustainability Report 2011
Funded by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population, and Communities
through the Sustainable Regional Development Program
Creative Commons
This report is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en).
Recommended citation: Cockerill, A., Harrington, S and Bangel, T. (2013). EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter. Report funded by the Department of Sustainability, Environment,
Water, Population, and Communities through the Sustainable Regional Development Program. Parsons
Brinckerhoff, Canberra.
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Contents
Page number
Abbreviations
iii
Executive summary
v
1.
Introduction
1
1.1
Background
1
1.2
Matters of National Environmental Significance
1
1.3
Project aims
2
2.
3.
Methodology
3
2.1
Personnel
3
2.2
Desktop review
3
2.3
GIS
8
2.4
Expert workshop and stakeholder engagement
9
2.5
Limitations
9
Threatened Ecological Communities mapping
11
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native
Grassland
11
3.2
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
11
3.3
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
12
3.4
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
15
3.5
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
15
3.6
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
16
3.1
4.
Threatened species assessment
23
5.
Conservation values of region
25
5.1
Matters of National Environmental Significance
25
5.2
Wildlife corridors
26
6.
High priority conservation areas for TECs
29
7.
Key threatening processes
35
8.
Conclusions and recommendations
41
References
45
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC i
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
List of tables
Page number
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 3.3
Table 3.4
Table 3.5
Table 4.1
Table 6.1
Table 7.1
Study team
Existing vegetation mapping data reviewed
Threatened Ecological Communities
Species likelihood of occurrence categories
Parameters and weighting used for High Priority Conservation Areas mapping
Vegetation communities corresponding to Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine
Thickets of Eastern Australia
Vegetation communities corresponding to Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical
Australia
Vegetation communities corresponding to Subtropical and Temperate Coastal
Saltmarsh
Vegetation communities corresponding to Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and
Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Vegetation communities corresponding to Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and
Open Forests
Total number of EPBC Act - listed fauna and flora species recorded or predicted to
occur within Lower Hunter region and EPBC Act – listed ecological communities
Areas of Threatened Ecological Communities of high conservation areas within the
Lower Hunter region
EPBC Act - listed Key Threatening Processes (KTPs)
3
3
4
6
7
12
12
15
16
17
23
30
35
List of figures
Page number
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 5.1
Figure 6.1
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia – listed as
Critically Endangered under the EPBC Act
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia – listed as Critically Endangered under
the EPBC Act
Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh – nominated for listing under the
EPBC Act
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion –
nominated for listing under the EPBC Act
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests – nominated for listing under
the EPBC Act
Conservation values of the region
High priority conservation areas
List of appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Correlation assessment for EPBC Act communities
EPBC Listed species and communities
ii Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
13
14
19
20
21
28
34
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Abbreviations
CBMP
Cessnock Biodiversity Management Plan
GHM
Greater Hunter Native Vegetation Mapping (Sivertsen et al. 2011Sivertsen et al.
2011)
HPCA
High Priority Conservation Area
LHCCREMS
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy
(Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
KTP
Key Threatening Processes
LGA
Local Government Area
LHRS
Lower Hunter Regional Strategy
MNES
Matters of National Significance
OEH
The Office of Environment and Heritage
RCP
Regional Conservational Plan
RDP
Rapid Data Point survey
SEWPaC
The Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population
and Communities
TEC
Threatened Ecological Community – for the purposes of this report this includes
ecological communities listed or nominated under the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1995.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC iii
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
iv Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Executive summary
As part of the Australian Government’s sustainable population strategy, the Commonwealth Department of
Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) is undertaking the Sustainable
Regional Development program in high growth areas, including the Lower Hunter. The Lower Hunter region
covers 429,741 ha and encompasses five Local Government Areas (LGAs) (Cessnock, Newcastle, Port
Stephen, Lake Macquarie and Maitland), and is located within the broader Hunter Valley region,
approximately 120 km north-west of Sydney, NSW. This is one of Australia’s largest urban areas and a major
centre of economic activity with high levels of growth and development expected in the region in the coming
decades. This report describes the distribution of Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) listed and nominated ecological communities and high priority
conservation areas within the Lower Hunter region to assist in sustainable planning in the region.
Identification of EPBC Act listed or nominated ecological communities (Threatened Ecological Communities),
correlation of EPBC Act – listed species and identification of areas of conservation significance were based
on a desktop review of available information and mapping as well as stakeholder input (including an expert
workshop).
Mapping of Threatened Ecological Communities was achieved through the correlation of existing vegetation
mapping within the region with the characteristics of the Threatened Ecological Communities outlined in the
listing and conservation advice. This included assessment and mapping of:






White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland – listed as
Critically Endangered. This community was determined as unlikely to occur within the Lower Hunter
region.
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia – listed as Critically Endangered. This
community was found to occur in small patches within 2 km of the coast and cover 56 ha.
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia – listed as Critically Endangered. This community was
found to occur predominantly along the border of Lake Macquarie and Cessnock LGAs and cover
1760 ha.
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh – nominated for listing. This community was mapped as
occurring in estuarine areas of the Hunter River and wetlands and floodplains along the coast and
covers 6427 ha.
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion - nominated for listing.
Based on the current nomination and community definition this community is likely to be concentrated in
the Cessnock-Kurri Kurri region and cover approximately 4007 ha.
Hunter Valley Remnant Open Forests and Woodlands – nominated for listing. Based on the current
nomination and broad community definition this community is likely to cover approximately 60,568 ha
within the region.
For the latter two communities, the assessment of nomination and listing process is in the early stages and
as such the mapping provided is preliminary and may change significantly as the community definition
changes.
The mapping of the Threatened Ecological Communities is based on desktop review of available information
and is strongly reliant on the description of the communities provided in the listing advice or nomination form.
The mapping is indicative of where each community is likely to occur based on available information and
each site would need to be ground truthed to see that the vegetation meets the description and condition
thresholds in the listing/conservation advice for the Threatened Ecological Community.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC v
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Based on a review of species databases, 111 species have been assessed and are known to occur or are
predicted as likely to occur within the study area. Their likelihood of occurrence within each Threatened
Ecological Community was assessed based on species records and known habitat requirements.
High priority conservation areas for Threatened Ecological Communities within the region were modelled and
mapped based on a range of parameters including patch size, threatened biodiversity and connectivity.
Weightings were applied to each parameter to ensure the most important parameters were modelled as
higher priority in the mapping process. Other areas of high conservation priority were identified in existing
conservation plans for the region and through the expert workshop and consultation with key stakeholders.
Key threatening processes within the Lower Hunter region were identified, the principal threat being land
clearance. Other key threats within the region include: loss and degradation of native plant and animal
habitat by invasion of escaped garden plants, including aquatic plants; and loss of climatic habitat caused by
anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. Recommendations for the management of these threats
were provided.
This mapping will aid in filling the gaps of knowledge of the distribution of EPBC Act – listed ecological
communities within the Lower Hunter region. Through the identification and mapping of High Priority
Conservation Areas, including Threatened Ecological Communities, this project also provides a suitable
resource to support regional sustainability planning, particularly the preparation of the Lower Hunter Regional
Strategy and Regional Conservational Plan.
vi
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
1. Introduction
1.1
Background
The Lower Hunter region, encompassing five local government areas (Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Port
Stephens, Maitland and Cessnock) is one of Australia’s largest urban areas and a major centre of economic
activity. Continued growth and development in this area is expected and the NSW Government's 25 year
land use strategy for the region includes:




new urban areas for a projected population growth of 160,000 people
new commercial and industrial land to cater for up to 66,000 new jobs
creation, management and conservation of green corridors with high environmental value
protection of high quality agricultural land, and natural resources such as water aquifers and extractive
materials (NSW Department of Planning 2006).
As part of the Australian Government’s sustainable population strategy, the Commonwealth Department of
Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) is undertaking the Sustainable
Regional Development program in high growth areas, including the Lower Hunter.
The Sustainable Regional Development program aims to provide a comprehensive approach to planning and
development in the region which in turn will ensure the region develops in a strong and sustainable way.
Specifically, the program aims to protect Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) whilst
helping to streamline environmental approvals and thus provide greater certainty for businesses, and state
and local governments in development and investment in this high growth region.
As part of the Sustainable Regional Development program for the Lower Hunter region, a key knowledge
gap has been identified by local, state and Australian governments, namely data gaps in the mapping of
EPBC Act – listed or nominated Ecological Communities (henceforth referred to as Threatened Ecological
Communities). Correlation of the extant vegetation in the Lower Hunter with Threatened Ecological
Communities is needed to support the regional sustainability planning in the Lower Hunter region, in
particular the ability to identify MNES including threatened ecological communities and species.
1.2
Matters of National Environmental Significance
The Lower Hunter region contains a range of biodiversity values that are recognised as MNES. MNES
include matters that fit into one of the categories below:








listed threatened species and ecological communities
migratory species protected under international agreements
Ramsar wetlands of international importance
the Commonwealth marine environment
World Heritage properties
National Heritage places
Great Barrier Reef marine Park, and
nuclear actions.
The Lower Hunter region provides habitat for a number of threatened and migratory species, ecological
communities, World Heritage areas and National Heritage areas considered MNES. Mapping and correlating
these MNES will allow for High Priority Conservation Areas to be identified and will allow informed strategic
planning in this high growth region to occur.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 1
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
1.3
Project aims
The overall objective of this mapping project is to provide a suitable resource to support regional
sustainability planning, particularly the preparation of the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy (LHRS) and
Regional Conservational Plan (RCP). The primary objective of this project was to address the key gap in the
knowledge of the regions distribution and occurrence of Threatened Ecological Communities. Specifically,
the project aimed to:




map the extent of Threatened Ecological Communities within the Lower Hunter region (Cessnock,
Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Port Stephens and Maitland LGAs)
review and analyse the likelihood of occurrence of EPBC Act listed flora and fauna within the
Threatened Ecological Communities
identify and provide recommendations regarding High Priority Conservation Areas within the region
identify and provide recommendations regarding Key Threatening Processes that have the potential to
impact EPBC Act – listed ecological communities and threatened flora and fauna.
2 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
2. Methodology
The Threatened Ecological Communities mapping project included gathering data from external sources and
desk-based review of existing mapping data to assess and identify High Priority Conservation Areas and Key
Threatening Processes acting on EPBC Act – listed species and Threatened Ecological Communities. This
section outlines the specific methods used in mapping and assessment of the vegetation and conservation
values of the region.
2.1
Personnel
The contributors to the preparation of this paper, their qualifications and roles are listed in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Study team
Name
Qualifications
Position and role
Alex Cockerill
BSc (Hons)
Project Director – report review, consultation, expert
workshop
Selga Harrington
BSc (Hons)
Project Manager – report preparation, consultation, expert
workshop
Debbie Landenberger
BSc (Hons)
Botanist – mapping consolidation, report preparation
Allan Richardson
BEnvSc (Hons)
Ecologist – threatened species assessment
Tanya Bangel
BSc (Hons)
Ecologist – desktop review, report preparation
Sam Wilkin
Dip GIS
GIS team lead
Rob Suansri
BSc
GIS specialist
Ashley Trinder
BSc
GIS specialist
Emily Mitchell
BDevStud, Cert IV SIS
GIS specialist
2.2
Desktop review
A desktop review was undertaken of the vegetation mapping data, acquired from federal, state and local
government. The desktop review of vegetation mapping data included the vegetation mapping projects
outlined in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2
Existing vegetation mapping data reviewed
Mapping project
Reference
Vegetation Survey, Classification and Mapping Lower Hunter and
Central Coast Region (LHCCREMS)
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional
Environmental Management Strategy
(2003a)
Greater Hunter Native Vegetation Mapping (GHM)
Sivertsen et al. (2011)
Vegetation of the Cessnock-Kurri region, Cessnock LGA, New South
Wales: Survey, Classification and Mapping
Bell S and Driscoll C (2007)
State Forests Mapping of NSW State Forest
NSW State Forests (undated)
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 3
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Mapping project
Reference
The Native Vegetation of Yengo and Parr Reserves and Surrounds
Department of Environment & Climate
Change (2008)
Vegetation of the Tomago and Tomaree Sandbeds, Port Stephens,
New South Wales. Management of Groundwater Dependent
Ecosystems.
Bell S and Driscoll C (2006b)
The Natural Vegetation of the Maitland LGA
Hill L (2003)
Vegetation Mapping of the Lake Macquarie LGA: Stages 1-3
Bell S and Driscoll C (2012)
Vegetation of Werakata, National Park, Hunter Valley, New South
Wales
Bell S (2004)
Glenrock State Conservation Area and Awabakal Nature Reserve
Vegetation Survey
Bell S (2006)
Vegetation mapping of Watagans National Park and Jilliby State
Conservation Area
Bell S and Driscoll C (2006a)
Wollemi National Park Vegetation Survey (1998)
Bell S (1998)
Blue Gum Hills Vegetation
(Blue Gum Hills Vegetation' 1997)
Vegetation and floristics of Columbey National Park, lower Hunter
Valley, New South Wales
Bell S (2009)
Yengo National Park and Parr State Conservation Area Vegetation
Survey for use in fire management
Bell S et al. (1993)
2.2.1
Correlation assessment
The existing vegetation mapping projects within the Hunter Valley, outlined in Table 2.2, have been
assessed to determine the equivalency of mapped vegetation communities to Threatened Ecological
Communities. Threatened Ecological Communities assessed are provided below in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3
Threatened Ecological Communities
Ecological community name under EPBC Act
Conservation Status
Ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native
Grassland
Critically Endangered
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
Critically Endangered
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Critically Endangered
Ecological communities nominated for listing under the EPBC Act
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Nominated
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Nominated
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
Nominated
The correlation assessment was based upon key characteristics of Threatened Ecological Communities
contained in the conservation listing and other policy documents for each community. This included the
assessment of key criteria (such as soil substrate, vegetation composition and structure), size of polygons
and condition indices which determined the identity of each vegetation community. The key criteria for each
community are summarised in Appendix A. The map units in existing vegetation mapping were assessed
against these criteria and a short list of communities likely to correspond to each Threatened Ecological
4 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Community was produced. This draft list was then provided to key stakeholders for review and discussion at
the expert workshop (Section 2.4). This identification process for Threatened Ecological Communities is
provided in Section 3.2.
2.2.2
Threatened species assessment
A desktop assessment was undertaken to analyse the presence of EPBC Act - listed threatened flora and
fauna species within the Threatened Ecological Communities. The desktop study used the following
resources:







conservation listing advice and nominations for each of the ecological communities (Department of
Sustainability Environment Water Population and Communities 2013b)
ecological and threatened species recovery plans Department of Sustainability Environment Water
Population and Communities 2013b)
SEWPaC Protected Matters Search Tool (Department of Sustainability Environment Water Population
and Communities 2013a)
NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) Threatened species, populations and communities
database (Office of Environment and Heritage 2013b)
NSW OEH Bionet search (including Atlas of NSW Wildlife) (Office of Environment and Heritage 2013a)
PlantNet database (Royal Botanic Gardens 2013)
Council-sourced threatened species information.
A Commonwealth SEWPaC Protected Matter Search and Bionet Atlas of NSW Wildlife records were
conducted of the five Lower Hunter LGAs (Cessnock, Newcastle, Port Stephens, Lake Macquarie and
Maitland). The search identified threatened species known or considered likely to occur within the region.
These species were then assessed for their likelihood of occurrence within each of Threatened Ecological
Communities.
The likelihood of occurrence for this assessment were determined using known records of species combined
with their habitat requirements and information on the type of habitat within each of the ecological
communities. An assessment matrix, on the occurrence or likelihood of occurrence, of threatened species
within the region and each Threatened Ecological Community was developed (Table 2.4).
A species was determined to be unknown to occur within a community if:



it had not been recorded previously in the community
it is dependent on specific habitat types or resources that are not present in the community
species distribution is not within the study area.
2.2.3
Key Threatening Processes
Key Threatening Processes acting on Threatened Ecological Communities were determined in light of
threats identified in ecological recovery plans and conservation listing advice, in combination with our local
ecological knowledge of threats operating in the Hunter Valley region and discussions with key stakeholders
and at the expert workshop (see Section 2.4). This process was used to determine those threats most likely
to have an impact upon the ecological values in the region.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 5
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table 2.4
Species likelihood of occurrence categories
Occurrence
Occurrence in region
Occurrence in Threatened Ecological
Community
Known
Includes species that fit one or more of the
following criteria:
This includes species that fit one or more of the
criteria below:
Predicted

Species or species habitat have been
identified as being ‘Known’ to occur within
the region through EPBC searches
(Department of Sustainability Environment
Water Populations and Communities 2013).

Have been identified as being ‘Recorded’ or
‘Associated’ with the TECs in the community
profiles (Department of Sustainability
Environment Water Population and
Communities 2013).

Have been recorded as being ‘Known’ to
occur within the region by the species
Threatened Profile (Office of Environment
and Heritage 2013b).

Have been recorded as being ‘Known’ to occur
within the TEC by the species Threatened
Profile (Office of Environment and Heritage
2013b).

Have been recorded previously within the
region (Office of Environment and Heritage
2013a).

Mapped records of species occurs within
mapped occurrence of TEC

Have been infrequently recorded in the TEC or
surrounds (i.e. vagrant individuals)
Includes species that fit one or more of the
following criteria:


2.2.4
Species or species habitat have been
identified as being, ‘Likely’ or ‘May’ occur
within the region (Department of
Sustainability Environment Water
Populations and Communities 2013).
Have been identified as being ‘Predicted’ to
occur within the region by the species
Threatened Profile (Office of Environment
and Heritage 2013b).
This includes species not known to occur within
the TEC that fit one or more of the following
criteria:

May use habitat types or resources that are
present in the TEC.

Are known or likely to maintain resident
populations in surrounding areas

Are likely to visit the TEC during regular
seasonal movements or migration.

Are cryptic species whose distribution or
habitat is not entirely known and therefore may
still utilise the TEC.
High Priority Conservation Areas
The distribution of Threatened Ecological Communities in combination with the occurrence of other MNES
were analysed to determine High Priority Conservation Areas.
High priority conservation areas within the region were modelled and mapped based on a range of
parameters including patch size, threatened biodiversity and connectivity. Weightings were applied to each
parameter to ensure the most important parameters were modelled as higher priority in the mapping process
(Table 2.5). An Analytical Hierarchy Process was adopted to rank and weight each parameter used in the
model. The parameter was assigned individual values (e.g. 1 to 3) where sub criteria needed to be
considered or a true-false (0 or 1) classification. Following the ranking process each criteria was assigned a
multiplier value dependant on its relative importance in the model. The aggregate score was the combined
sum of the different criteria values. The criteria scores and associated weightings are provided in Table 2.5.
Other areas of high conservation priority were identified in existing conservation plans for the region and
through the expert workshop and consultation with key stakeholders (see Section 2.4).
6 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table 2.5
Parameters and weighting used for High Priority Conservation Areas mapping
Parameter
Description
Weighting
Approach
EPBC-listed or
nominated
Threatened
Ecological
Communities
A number of vegetation types are listed
or nominated at the Commonwealth
level as being threatened. .
10
Vegetation was scored as 10 (Listed), 7
(Nominated) or 5 (Further investigation
required). Rationale for not using a 3 to 1
range was to not over-inflate the
importance the EPBC listing in relation to
the other criteria. Where overlaps
occurred higher sensitivity areas took
precedence.
Connectivity
specifically to
nature
reserves
Direct connectivity of native vegetation
to existing nature reserves is
considered to be an important factor in
determining lands that may be priority
areas.
7
Extent of vegetated area in relation to
nature reserves was assessed. Only
vegetation patches that were overlapping
or adjoining were defined as being
connected. These patches were scored
as 1 (true) or 0 (false)
Threatened
flora habitat
value
The occurrence of threatened flora and
related habitat is considered of high
importance.
7
The NSW Atlas of Wildlife Database
records and any SEWPAC ERIN
datasets were used to identify patches
that are known to contain threatened flora
under the TSC and EPBC Acts. This was
modelled and scored as patches either
containing threatened flora or not
containing threatened flora. A recognised
limitation of this method is the intensity of
surveys being skewed towards populated
areas. These patches were scored as 1
(true) or 0 (false)
Threatened
fauna habitat
value
The occurrence of threatened fauna
and related habitat is considered of
high importance.
7
The NSW Atlas of Wildlife Database
records and any SEWPAC ERIN
datasets were used to identify patches
that are known to contain threatened
fauna under the TSC and EPBC Acts.
This would be modelled and scored as
patches either containing threatened
fauna or not containing threatened fauna.
A recognised limitation of this method is
the intensity of surveys being skewed
towards populated areas. These patches
were scored as 1 (true) or 0 (false)
Patch size
Patch size is a consideration when
considering integrity of native
vegetation within each patch.
Generally, the greater the patch size,
the greater the integrity or condition.
Vegetation integrity reflects general
biodiversity values of patches.
5
Patch sizes were categorised as over
500 ha (3), 100–500 ha (2) or <100 ha
(1).
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 7
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Parameter
Description
Habitat
Connectivity
Habitat connectivity is considered to be
important for native flora and fauna and
genetic exchange.
Weighting
5
Approach
The following corridor mapping was used
for determining habitat connectivity:

OEH regional north coast key
corridors

Lower Hunter Regional Strategy green
corridor

Cessnock Biodiversity Management
plan “Landscape Conservation
Corridors”.
Using spatial analysis the area of habitat
corridor for each overlapping TEC area
was determined. A coverage percentage
was calculated and any TEC area that
was covered by a percentage 50% or
more was scored as 1 (true). All other
areas were scored as 0 (false)
2.3
GIS
2.3.1
Preliminary work
Existing GIS vegetation data was identified and sourced by the project team from local, state and
Commonwealth governments. From these GIS data layers ecological communities correlated to Threatened
Ecological Communities were identified by the ecologists and supplied back the GIS team for data extraction.
After reviewing the listed communities and their associated vegetation data sources a methodology for
compiling the data was established, as well as a structure for the final Geodatabase to be supplied.
2.3.2
Geodatabase
A centralised GIS database (Geodatabase) was developed and used to store all relevant GIS data including
existing vegetation mapping, analysis and processing extents, as well as other relevant topographic
information. The Geodatabase was used throughout the life of the project for all GIS processing and
reporting purposes. The final vegetation feature class stored within the Geodatabase has been topologically
checked and attributed with associated metadata.
2.3.3
Data compilation
Once the ecology team had identified the map units that correlate to each Threatened Ecological Community
and what existing GIS data layers they originated from, the GIS team compiled the layers into the
Geodatabase and isolated the communities. As agreed in the expert workshop, the precautionary principle
was applied to ensure that all identified occurrences of map units correlated to Threatened Ecological
Communities are mapped without assessment of the accuracy of the mapping projects. In this way, the
maximum known extent of these Threatened Ecological Communities was identified.
The identified map units were then combined into a singular vegetation base layer using a GIS union
process. The union process allowed all communities to retain their extents without priority been given to any
sourced community, and it will allow data to be analysed extensively through various GIS methods in the
future. The attribute data structure has also tried to retain as much important data as possible across the 10+
existing vegetation layers used.
Once data was compiled topology rules were established across the consolidated vegetation layer to
eliminate overlapping and gap issues. Metadata was also added to the layer to explain the data compilation
process and associated GIS parameters.
8 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
2.4
Expert workshop and stakeholder engagement
An expert workshop was run on the 22 April. Attendees included representatives from SEWPaC Regional
Sustainability Planning, SEWPaC Environmental Resources Information Network, SEWPaC Ecological
Communities, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), Lake Macquarie City Council, Newcastle
City Council, the Hunter Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy team (HCCREMS) and
Stephen Bell (Eastcoast Flora Survey). Other key stakeholders unable to attend were invited to provide
comments and input.
The aims of the expert workshop were to revise the correlation assessment and mapping methodology for
determining Threatened Ecological Communities from existing mapping. Listing and mapping methodology
advice was sought from SEWPaC and experts present. Input from the attendees was also sought regarding
the desktop assessment findings on the likelihood of occurrence of threatened species and Key Threatening
Processes and conservation priority areas.
Outcomes of the expert workshop included:

agreement on taking a precautionary approach when identifying areas likely to include Threatened
Ecological Communities. All corresponding map units from each mapping project to be provided and
mapped without assessment of accuracy of mapping project

identified additional vegetation mapping projects to be incorporated

revised list of correlated mapping units from existing vegetation mapping projects with the EPBC Act –
listed ecological communities

identified additional information required to update threatened species likelihood of occurrence each of
the LGAs and ecological communities

identified additional High Priority Conservation Areas

identified and prioritised Key Threatening Processes relevant to the Lower Hunter Region.
Additional stakeholder engagement has occurred with the relevant Council, OEH and SEWPaC staff
throughout the project to ensure that the project outputs are fit for purpose.
2.5
Limitations
2.5.1
Ecological limitations
Parsons Brinckerhoff has relied upon data, surveys, analyses, plans and other information provided by the
client and key stakeholders. Except as otherwise stated in the study, Parsons Brinckerhoff has not verified
the accuracy or completeness of the data. To the extent that the statements, opinions, facts, information,
conclusions and/or recommendations in this study (conclusions) are based in whole or part on the data,
those conclusions are contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of the data. Parsons Brinckerhoff will
not be liable in relation to incorrect conclusions should any data, information or condition be incorrect or have
been concealed, withheld, misrepresented or otherwise not fully disclosed to Parsons Brinckerhoff.
This study provides a broad overview of the EPBC Act - listed ecological values of the region suitable for
regional planning. This study does not take into consideration biodiversity of local or state significance.
This study is a desk-based review with additional input from key local experts. No field surveys or verification
was undertaken and as such the findings of this report are based on current available information and is
strongly reliant on the description of the communities provided in the listing advice or nomination form.
Mapping of the Threatened Ecological Communities is only indicative of where it is likely to occur. Each site
needs to be ground truthed to see that the vegetation meets the description and condition thresholds in the
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 9
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
listing/conservation advice for the Threatened Ecological Community. The condition, extent and distribution
of MNES may differ from that described in this report and field verification is recommended where certainty is
required.
Three of the ecological communities assessed are currently only nominated for listing (Subtropical and
temperate coastal saltmarsh; Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion;
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests). For the latter two nominated communities, the
assessment of nomination and listing process is in the early stages. As such the mapping provided is
preliminary and may change significantly as the community definition changes.
2.5.2
GIS limitations
Data was combined through a union GIS process that allows the extents all identified ecological communities
to be retained for accurate investigation of the data. This follows the precautionary principle ensuring that all
identified occurrences of map unit correlated to Threatened Ecological Communities are identified in the
mapping. A consequence of conducting this process over the 10+ existing vegetation sources means that
the data will be complex in geographical structure. The reason for this is when you conduct a union with
multiple overlapping layers all meandering extents are retained, and their extents may become convoluted as
the layers intertwine. GIS methods of identifying certain feature attributes have ensured the data is more
than useable, but the detailed structure of the data must be acknowledged.
Due to the complexity of the attributes stored within each dataset, it would be unwise to retain all stored
attribute data for each existing vegetation dataset, as certain information is only relevant to certain features
and not for others. We have tried to retain as much common information across the datasets to give the most
detailed description of the data. Updating information to certain features (to maintain consistency) is a
complex and assumed process that is not included in the scope of this project.
Overlapping topology errors were identified within supplied data and as agreed upon with the SEWPaC
project team, we have not amended the supplied data.
10 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
3. Threatened Ecological
Communities mapping
The key characteristics of each of the Threatened Ecological Communities, used in the correlation
assessment, are provided in Appendix A. Based on these key characteristics, the correlation assessment
(Appendix A) identified the vegetation communities that are likely to correspond to Threatened Ecological
Communities. These were then discussed and revised during the expert workshop.
The mapping of the Threatened Ecological Communities is based on desktop review of available information
and is strongly reliant on the description of the communities provided in the listing advice or nomination form.
The mapping is indicative of where each community is likely to occur based on available information and
each site would need to be ground truthed if certainty is required to verify that the vegetation meets the
description and condition thresholds in the listing/conservation advice for the Threatened Ecological
Community.
The occurrence, distribution and correlated map units for each Threatened Ecological Community are
discussed below.
3.1
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy
Woodland and Derived Native Grassland
White Box-Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland is listed as a
Critically Endangered Ecological community under the EPBC Act. This community originally occurred along
the western slopes and tablelands of the Great Dividing Range, throughout Victoria, Australian Capital
Territory, western New South Wales and southern Queensland. The community now exists as isolated
patches throughout these areas, with less than 5% remaining in good condition as a result of clearing, over
grazing and weed invasion Department of Environment and Conservation 2005).
Based on the correlation assessment and consultation with local experts, it was concluded that White BoxYellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland is unlikely to occur within
the Lower Hunter Region. Justification for exclusion of map units is provided in Appendix A.
3.2
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of
Eastern Australia
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia is listed as a Critically Endangered
community under the EPBC Act. This community occurs close to the coast from northern Queensland and
extends southwards to eastern Victoria and on offshore islands. The community occurs naturally within a
range of landforms, as natural disjunct stands, that have been influenced by coastal processes such as on
headlands, dunes and flats (Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2009b).
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia occupies approximately 56 ha of the Lower
Hunter Region occurring within 2 km of the coast from Hawks Nest south to Gwandalan. Vegetation
communities corresponding to the EPBC Act – listed Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern
Australia are presented in Table 3.1. The distribution of this community is illustrated in Figure 3.1.
Justification for inclusion/exclusion of map units is provided in Appendix A.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 11
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table 3.1
Vegetation communities corresponding to Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of
Eastern Australia
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
Lake Macquarie LGA (Bell S & Driscoll C
2012)
4
Littoral Rainforest
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast
Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
4
Littoral Rainforest
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
19
Tuckeroo/Yellow Tulipwood/ Red fruited Olive Plum
Littoral Rainforest of the lower North Coast
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
18
Tuckeroo/Lilly Pilly/Coast Banksia Littoral Rainforest
Tomago and Tomaree (Bell S & Driscoll C
2006b)
14
Nerong Littoral Rainforest
Glenrock/Awabakal Bell S 2006)
8
Littoral Rainforest
3.3
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia is listed as a Critically Endangered community under the EPBC
Act. This community predominately occurs between Maryborough in Queensland to the Clarence River in
New South Wales and as isolated patches between the Clarence River and the Hunter region within NSW.
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia is differentiated from the Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine
Thickets of Eastern Australia (described above) by the level of coastal or estuarine influence. Typically the
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia occurs more than 2 km from the coast, however may intergrade
with Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia (TThreatened Species Scientific
Commitee 2011).
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia occupies approximately 1760 ha within the Lower Hunter Region
predominantly located in the south, within the Cessnock and Lake Macquarie LGAs. Vegetation communities
corresponding to the EPBC Act - listed Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia are presented in
Table 3.2. The distribution of this community is illustrated in Figure 3.2. Justification for inclusion/exclusion of
map units is provided in Appendix A.
Table 3.2
Vegetation communities corresponding to Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
1b
Bow Wow Subtropical Rainforest
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast
Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
1a
Coastal Warm Temperate – Subtropical Rainforest
Lake Macquarie LGA (Bell S & Driscoll C 2012)
1a
Coastal Warm Temperate – Subtropical Rainforest
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011
16
Black Booyong/Giant Stinging
Tree/Rosewood/Moreton Bay Fig lowland
subtropical rainforest of the lower north coast
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
17
Black Booyong/Brown Beech/Soft
Coachwood/Rosewood Subtropical Rainforest on
the escarpment of the lower north Coast
Watagans and Jilliby (Bell S & Driscoll C 2006a)
1a
Coastal Warm Temperate – Subtropical Rainforest
Watagans and Jilliby (Bell S & Driscoll C 2006a)
1b
Red Cedar – Stinging Tree Subtropical Rainforest
Wollemi National Park (Bell 1998)
12 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
RF3
Sandstone Gorge Sub-tropical Rainforest
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 3.1
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia – listed as Critically
Endangered under the EPBC Act
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 13
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 3.2
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia – listed as Critically Endangered under the EPBC
Act
14 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
3.4
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh is nominated for listing under the EPBC Act. This community is
largely restricted to the intertidal zone (including islands of the coast of Australia) within estuaries, estuarine
coastal lagoons, and sheltered embayments of subtropical and temperate areas (Department of the
Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2010a). This community typically occurs as small patches within a
mangrove/saltmarsh mosaic. As such, taking the precautionary approach, areas mapped as mangrove
estuarine complex have been included as they are likely to contain small patches of saltmarsh.
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh occupies approximately 6427 ha within of the Lower Hunter
Region predominantly within the east of Lake Macquarie, Newcastle and Port Stephens LGAs. Vegetation
communities corresponding to the EPBC Act – nominated Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh are
presented in Table 3.3. The distribution of this community is illustrated in Figure 3.3. Justification for
inclusion/exclusion of map units is provided in Appendix A.
Table 3.3
Vegetation communities corresponding to Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional
Environmental Management Strategy 2003b)
47
Mangrove Estuarine Complex
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011
228
Mangrove Estuarine Complex
Lake Macquarie LGA (Bell S & Driscoll C 2012)
47a
Saltmarsh
Lake Macquarie LGA (Bell S & Driscoll C 2012)
47
Mangrove Estuarine Complex
3.5
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the
Sydney Basin Bioregion
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion is nominated for listing under the
EPBC Act. This community consists of a number of existing ecological communities that occur predominantly
within the Cumberland Plain (Western Sydney – Castlereagh and Agnes Banks), Mellong Plateau and the
Lower Hunter Valley of NSW. These communities have been nominated together, as a single listing, due to
their similar characteristics. Approximately 44% of this community remains as highly fragmented remnants as
a result of land clearing (Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2010b).
The assessment of nomination and listing process for this community is in the early stages and as such the
correlation assessment and mapping provided is preliminary and based on definition at time of report
preparation and may change significantly as the community definition changes.
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion occupies approximately 4007 ha
of the Lower Hunter Region predominantly occurring within the Cessnock and Port Stephens LGAs.
Vegetation communities corresponding to the EPBC Act – nominated Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and
Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion are presented in Table 3.4. The distribution of this community is
illustrated in Figure 3.4. Justification for inclusion/exclusion of map units is provided in Appendix A.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 15
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table 3.4
Vegetation communities corresponding to Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the
Sydney Basin Bioregion
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35a
Kurri Sand Heath Woodland
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35b
Kurri Sand Dropping Red Gum – Stringybark Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35c(i)
Kurri Sands Shrub Forest (main variant)
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35c(ii)
Kurri Sands Shrub Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35d
Kurri Sands Stringybark Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35e
Kurri Sands Paperbark Heath
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35f(i)
Kurri Sand Claypan Scrub (E. parramattensis
variant)
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
35f(ii)
Kurri Sand Claypan Scrub (E. fibrosa variant)
LHCCREMS LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and
Central Coast Regional Environmental
Management Strategy 2003b)
35
Kurri Sand Swamp Woodland
Werakata National Park Bell S 2004)
4
Kurri Sand Swamp Woodland
Werakata National Park Bell S 2004)
5a
Kurri Sands Melaleuca Scrub Forest
Werakata National Park Bell S 2004)
5b
Kurri Sands Melaleuca Scrub Forest
3.6
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open
Forests
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests is nominated for listing under the EPBC Act. This
community consists of a number of existing ecological communities that occur within the northern, central or
southern areas within the Hunter Valley of NSW. These communities have been nominated together, as a
single listing, due to the small area that these communities now occupy. The communities now exist as
highly fragmented remnants as a result of land clearance for agriculture, mining and urban development
(Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2012).
The assessment of nomination and listing process for this community is in the early stages and as such the
correlation assessment and mapping provided is preliminary and based on definition at time of report
preparation and may change significantly as the community definition changes. The preliminary mapping and
consultation indicates that this community as currently defined is widespread and that the floristic description
does not restrict the community to the region.
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests occupies approximately 60,568 ha of the Lower
Hunter Region predominantly scattered throughout the Cessnock, Maitland and Port Stephens LGAs but
also present in the western sections of the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie LGAs. The definition of the
community was found to be broad and is also likely to be consistent with a range of widespread communities
including communities on the south coast. Vegetation communities occurring within the Lower Hunter region
that correspond to the EPBC Act – nominated Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests are
presented in Table 3.5. Four of the communities were specifically mentioned in the determination while an
additional 36 map units were determined to be likely to be consistent based on the floristic description
provided in the nomination. The latter require further investigation based on refinement of the community
description.
16 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
The distribution of this community is illustrated in Figure 3.5. This figure highlights the map units that are
specifically mentioned in the nomination and also identifies the additional map units that are likely to also be
consistent with the TEC. Justification for inclusion/exclusion of map units is provided in Appendix A.
Table 3.5
Vegetation communities corresponding to Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open
Forests
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
Map units specifically mentioned in the nomination
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
75
Narrow leaved Ironbark/ Grey Box/ Spotted Gum
shrub/ grass open forest
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
67
Spotted Gum/ Red Ironbark/ Large-fruited Grey
Gum shrub/ grass open forest
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011Sivertsen et al.
2011)
121
Grey Box/ Slaty Box shrub/ grass woodland
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011Sivertsen et al.
2011)
156
Narrow-leaved Ironbark/ Grey Box grassy woodland
Additional map units that are likely to be consistent with the TEC
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17(i)
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Red Ironbark Forest
(main variant)
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17a(ii)
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Red Ironbark Forest
(E. longifolia variant)
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17a(iii)
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Red Ironbark Forest
(E, placita variant)
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17c
Lower Hunter Beyer's Ironbark Low Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17i
Lower Hunter Grey Box Grassy Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
17 m
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18
Hunter Narrow-leaf Ironbark – Spotted Gum Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18a
Hunter Bulloak-Spotted Gum Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18b
Central Hunter Grey Box Grassy Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18c
Hunter Spotted Gum – Cypress Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18h
Hunter Red Ironbark – Spotted Gum Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
18i
Hunter Redgum – Ironbark Forest
Cessnock Kurri Kurri (Bell S & Driscoll C 2007)
110
Red Ironbark – Paperbark Forest
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
82
Spotted Gum/ Narrow-leaved Ironbark/ Grey Box
shrub/grass open forest of the lower Hunter
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
83
Spotted Gum/ Narrow-leaved Ironbark. Red
Ironbark shrub/ grass open forest of the central and
lower hunter
GHM Sivertsen et al. 2011)
85
Narrow-leaved Ironbark/ Bull Oak/ grey Box shrub/
grass open forest of the Central Hunter and lower
hunter
GHM (Sivertsen et al. 2011)
86
Narrow-leaved Ironbark/ Grey Box/ Spotted gum
shrub/ grass open forest of the central and lower
hunter
Lower Hunter Narrow-leaved Ironbark Forest
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 17
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Mapping project
Map unit
Community description
GHM Sivertsen et al. 2011)
172
Narrow-leaved Ironbark/Grey Box grassy Woodland
on the Central and Upper Hunter
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast
Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
16
Seaham Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast
Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
17
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest
LHCCREMS (Lower Hunter and Central Coast
Regional Environmental Management Strategy
2003b)
18
Central hunter Ironbark – Spotted Gum – Grey Box
Forest
Werakata National Park Bell S 2004)
1
Lower-Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest
Yengo (Department of Environment & Climate
Change 2008)
20
Hunter Range Ironbark Forest
Tomago and Tomaree (Bell S & Driscoll C
2006b)
1d
Spotted Gum-Ironbark-Stringybark Forest
Lake Macquarie LGA (Bell S & Driscoll C
2012)
17o
Hinterland Spotted Gum – Red Ironbark Forest
Blue Gum Hills (Blue Gum Hills Vegetation'
1997)
BH3
Dry Open forest
Blue Gum Hills (Blue Gum Hills Vegetation'
1997)
BH4
Dry Open forest – disturbed
Blue Gum Hills (Blue Gum Hills Vegetation'
1997)
BH5
Dry Open forest – regen
Blue Gum Hills (Blue Gum Hills Vegetation'
1997)
BH7
Dry Open forest – very disturbed
Columbey (Bell S 2009)
6
6 – Seaham Ironbark Forest
Columbey (Bell S 2009)
7
7 – Seaham Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest
Columbey (Bell S 2009)
8
8 – Lower Hunter Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest
Columbey (Bell S 2009)
9
9 – Red Ironbark Scrub-Forest
Wollemi National Park (Bell 1998)
F1
Wollemi National Park (Bell 1998)
W14
Goulburn Valley Alluvial Ironbark Woodland
Wollemi National Park (Bell 1998)
W1
Narrabeen Goulburn Ironbark Woodland
18 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Narrabeen Residual Spotted Gum Forest
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 3.3
Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh – nominated for listing under the EPBC Act
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 19
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 3.4
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion – nominated for
listing under the EPBC Act
20 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 3.5
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests – nominated for listing under the EPBC
Act
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 21
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
22 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
4. Threatened species
assessment
Threatened flora and fauna species identified as being known or considered likely to occur within the Lower
Hunter region (Cessnock, Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Port Stephens and Maitland LGAs) have been
assessed for their likelihood to occur within the region and Threatened Ecological Communities. The results
of this Threatened species assessment are presented in Appendix B.
Based on a review of species databases, a total of 118 Threatened species listed under the EPBC Act have
been recorded previously or predicted to occur within the Lower Hunter region (Table 3.6 and Appendix B)
according to database searches. Of these, 111 species have been assessed and are known to occur or are
predicted as likely to occur within the study area. Details of these species and their habitat requirements are
provided in Appendix B.
Table 4.1
Total number of EPBC Act - listed fauna and flora species recorded or predicted to occur
within Lower Hunter region and EPBC Act – listed ecological communities
Species Category
Plants
Amphibians
Birds
Fish
Mammals
Reptiles
67
6
20
2
9
7
Lower Hunter region
Lower Hunter region
EPBC Act - listed Endangered Ecological Community1,2
Littoral Rainforest
12
1
0
0
5
0
Lowland Rainforest
7
1
0
0
5
0
Saltmarsh
0
1
2
0
0
0
Sand Flats Forest
21
1
2
0
5
0
Remnant Open Forest
23
1
2
0
5
0
Notes:
1
EPBC Act - listed Ecological Communities:



Littoral Rainforest = Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thicket of Eastern Australia.
Lowland Rainforest = Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia.
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland has been excluded from the
threatened species assessment as it is unlikely to occur within the region.
Currently nominated Ecological Endangered Communities:

Saltmarsh = Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh

Sand Flats Forest = Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion.

Remnant Open Forest = Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests.
2
These communities also occur beyond the Lower Hunter region, however, the assessment of occurrence of threatened species is
restricted to occurrence within region.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 23
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
24 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
5. Conservation values of
region
The biodiversity within the Lower Hunter region has high conservation value as it is both diverse and
distinctive. The region contains a diverse range of fauna, fauna, communities and ecosystems that are
threatened by a range of threats principally land clearance (see Section 5). The assessment of conservation
value within the region is based on MNES, in particular EPBC Act – listed ecological communities.
5.1
Matters of National Environmental Significance
The Lower Hunter region or nearby areas contain a range of biodiversity that are recognised as MNES.
These are discussed below and illustrated in Figure 5.1.
5.1.1
Threatened species and Threatened ecological communities
Two Critically Endangered Ecological Communities listed under the EPBC Act occur within the Lower Hunter
region:


Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia.
Three ecological communities currently nominated for listing under the EPBC Act also occur within the
region:



Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Hinterland Sand flat Forests and Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Hunter Valley Remnant Open Forests and Woodlands.
The mapping provided as part of this assessment identifies the location and distribution of these
communities within the region (see Section 3.2).
The Lower Hunter region provides habitat for 111 Threatened species listed under the EPBC Act
(Appendix B). The records of threatened species and ecological communities, listed under the EPBC Act
(Appendix B), indicate that threatened species records are numerous and widespread across the region and
as such provide little information to distinguish areas of higher conservation value. However, record clumps
were observed surrounding the towns of Kurri Kurri, Cessnock, Kitchener and Pelton as well as within the
National Parks and State Forests located within the Cessnock LGA. Although the clumping of records could
be a result of survey effort and observations, such as by locals or roadside observations, these areas should
be considered when identifying high conservation priority areas.
Critical habitat is the whole or any part or parts of an area or areas of land comprising habitat critical to the
survival of an endangered species, population or ecological community. Critical habitats are listed under the
Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and the EPBC Act. No critical habitat has been listed
within the Lower Hunter region to date. However, critical habitat would occur where an area meets the
condition thresholds for critical habitat within an ecological community, these include:


habitat used during periods of stress for example during flood, drought or fire events
habitat used to meet essential life cycle requirements such as foraging, breeding, nesting, roosting,
social behaviour patterns or seed dispersal processes
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 25
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236




habitat used by important populations (population necessary for a species’ long-term survival and
recovery)
habitat necessary to maintain genetic diversity and long-term evolutionary development
habitat necessary for use as corridors to allow the species to move freely between sites used to meet
essential life cycle requirements
habitat necessary to ensure the long-term future of the species or ecological community through
reintroduction or re-colonisation (Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2009a).
5.1.2
Migratory species
Migratory species are protected under international agreements to which Australia is a signatory, including
the Japan Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (JAMBA), the China Australia Migratory Bird Agreement
(CAMBA), the Republic of Korea Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (ROKAMBA) and the Bonn Convention
on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals. Migratory species are considered to comprise
MNES and are protected under the EPBC Act.
There are 64 Migratory species known or predicted to occur within the Lower Hunter region (Appendix B). Of
particular importance to Migratory species within the region are the following areas:

Newcastle LGA:
 Hunter River estuary– this area is supports high number of migratory wading birds Kooragang, Ash
Island and Hexham Swamp.

Port Stephens LGA:
 estuarine habitats
 sand dunes in Stockton Bight – regularly used by small migratory waders for roosting.

Lake Macquarie LGA:
 estuarine habitats.
5.1.3
Wetlands of international importance
RAMSAR International Significance Wetlands are listed under the RAMSAR convention due to their high
conservation value for wetland species. This listing of significant wetlands aims to maintain their ecological
character and to plan their sustainable use. Two wetlands of international importance occur within the Lower
Hunter region:


the Hunter Estuary Wetlands, within the Newcastle LGA
Myall Lakes, within the Port Stephens LGA Environment Australia 2001a).
5.1.4
World Heritage and National Heritage
The Greater Blue Mountains was inscribed on the World Heritage list in 2000 and was included in the
National Heritage list in 2007. Yengo National Park in the south western section of the Cessnock LGA forms
part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area listing.
5.2
Wildlife corridors
Wildlife corridors can be defined as ‘retained and/or restored systems of (linear) habitat which, at a minimum
enhances connectivity of wildlife populations and may help them overcome the main consequences of
habitat fragmentation’ (Wilson & Lindenmayer 1995). Wildlife corridors comprised of remnant vegetation
within the Lower Hunter region, are of high conservation value.
The National Wildlife Corridors Plan (Department of Sustainability Environment Water Population and
Communities Department of Sustainability Environment Water Population and Communities 2012) supports
26 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
the development of a network of wildlife corridors across the continent at a range of scales, national, regional
and local-scale by:



identifying National Wildlife Corridors to create major landscape links
enhancing existing major corridor initiatives
supporting local- and regional-scale corridor initiatives.
Wildlife corridors, such as those within the Lower Hunter region, provide ecological functions at a variety of
spatial and temporal scales from daily foraging movements of individuals, to broad-scale genetic gradients
across biogeographical regions. The Lower Hunter Regional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning 2006)
identifies a key green corridor linking large vegetated areas allowing the movement and dispersal of
biodiversity within the region. This corridor links the Watagans and Yengo National Parks with the coastal
plains of the Tomago Sand beds, Stockton Bight and Port Stephens. The sections of this green corridor and
the conservation values within each are outlined below:



south-western section links the ranges and the wetlands
middle section contains koala habitat, heath and vulnerable aquifers that supply drinking water to the
region
north-eastern section contains wetlands and lowland coastal forests, fringing the shores of Port
Stephens and containing the surface water catchment for Grahamstown Dam.
Key Habitats and Corridors have also been mapped within northern NSW to provide a framework of key
fauna habitats and linking habitat corridors (Scotts 2001). These form a network across the region.
The Landscape Conservation Strategy developed as part of the Cessnock Biodiversity Management Plan
(Office of Environment and Heritage 2011) has identified a number of HPCA that are predominantly located
in the landscape conservation corridors listed below:





Bow Wow corridor
Molly Morgan corridor
Mount View corridor Ellalong corridor
National Park corridor
Richmond Vale corridor.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 27
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 5.1
Conservation values of the region
28 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
6. High priority conservation
areas for TECs
This project has identified areas of Threatened Ecological Communities of high conservation value within the
Lower Hunter region. High Priority Conservation Areas were identified through the modelling of key
parameters including:




patch size- larger patch size generally being of better condition and more resilient
connectivity to existing reserves
occurrence within wildlife corridor
presence of EPBC Act – listed species.
This modelling was based on the parameters and weighting outlined in Section 2.2.4 and the conservation
values outlined in Section 5 and mapped in Figure 5.1.
Through this process a number of High Priority Conservation Areas for Threatened Ecological Communities
were identified within the Lower Hunter region (Table 6.1 and Figure 6.1). These generally corresponded to
those high priority conservation areas identified during the expert workshop.
Due to the highly fragmented and isolated nature of the remnant vegetation within the Lower Hunter it is
important that the remaining wildlife corridors are conserved to ensure connectivity between remnants is
retained. In the case of Littoral Rainforest, which now only occurs as a few small isolated remnants,
connectivity is virtually non–existent and all remnants require protection. Buffer zones should also be
included for the High Priority Conservation Areas to reduce edge and barrier effects. Including buffer zones
within the conservation areas will provide the core habitat protection against the establishment and spread of
weeds species and predation of pest fauna species. In particular Threatened Ecological Communities, such
as the Lowland Subtropical Rainforest and Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia,
should include a buffer due to their susceptibility to invasive species and specific habitat requirements that
are essential for their survival. Buffers may include any remnant vegetation outside of existing reserves,
within private land or that located within road reserves.
High Priority Conservation Areas have been identified as priority areas for conservation of Threatened
Ecological Communities in the region and should be preserved and managed in order to maintain and
improve (through rehabilitation and revegetation) the biodiversity values within the Lower Hunter region.
Conservation efforts will be more efficient and effective if they are concentrated in these High Priority
Conservation Areas.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 29
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table 6.1
Areas of Threatened Ecological Communities of high conservation areas within the Lower Hunter region
Threatened
Ecological
Community
Lowland Rainforest
of Subtropical
Australia
Littoral Rainforest
Parameters used to identify High Priority Conservation Areas
High Priority
Conservation
Area
Connectivity to
nature reserves
Threatened
flora habitat
Threatened
fauna habitat
Patch size
Habitat
connectivity
Identified in
expert
workshop
N
Vegetation occurs
adjacent to and
forms part of
Watagans
National Park
Yes
Yes
Large patch
size
Occurs within the
Lower Hunter
Regional Green
Corridor
No
M
No
Yes, including
Callistemon
shiressii,
Eucalyptus
fergusonii ssp.
dorsiventralis,
acrozamia
flexuosa.
Yes, including
spotted-tail
quoll, Longnosed
Potoroo, Giant
Barred Frog
Moderate
Is within the Bow
Wow Corridor
Yes
Bow Wow Gorge is
listed on the Register of
the National Estate due
to its scientific
significance: the type
locality for five to six
Permian fossil species
and contains congested
masses of marine
fossils and stalactites
Not known.
Provides
potential habitat
for a range of
species (see
Appendix B)
Not known.
Provides
potential
habitat for a
range of
species (see
Appendix B)
Small
Yes
Only isolated, narrow,
restricted remnants of
Littoral Rainforest
remaining within the
region
All areas of
Littoral
Rainforest
No
P
(see Figure 3.1
for detailed
mapping)
30 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Links Heaton
and Aberdare
State Forests
Areas within Port
Stephens LGA
area within the
Lower Hunter
Regional Green
Corridor
Additional notes
Best examples are
found at Glenrock
Conservation Area,
Scobies, Green Point
and Wallarah Peninsula
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Threatened
Ecological
Community
Subtropical and
temperate coastal
saltmarsh
Parameters used to identify High Priority Conservation Areas
High Priority
Conservation
Area
Connectivity to
nature reserves
Threatened
flora habitat
Threatened
fauna habitat
Patch size
Habitat
connectivity
Identified in
expert
workshop
Additional notes
L
Contains and is in
proximity to
Hunter Estuary
National Park
Yes, Euphrasia
arguta
Yes,
specifically
migratory
wading birds
Large
Forms part of
Lower Hunter
Regional
Corridor
Yes
RAMSAR listed,
specifically due to their
triggering RAMSAR
threshold numbers for
migratory wading birds
Identified in expert
workshop as high
priority
Hunter River estuary
includes: Kooragang
Island, Ash Island
C
Yes, is adjacent
to and forms part
of Worimi Nature
Reserve
Not known
Yes, important
habitat for
migratory
species
Large
Forms part of the
Lower Hunter
Regional
Corridor
Yes
F
Yes, is adjacent
to and forms part
of Tilligery Nature
Reserve
Not known
Yes, important
habitat for
migratory
species
Large
Forms part of the
Lower Hunter
Regional
Yes
B
Yes, in proximity
to Karuah
National Park
Not known
Not known
Moderate
Corridor
No
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 31
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Threatened
Ecological
Community
Hinterland Sand
Flats Forest and
Woodland of the
Sydney Basin
Bioregion
Parameters used to identify High Priority Conservation Areas
High Priority
Conservation
Area
Connectivity to
nature reserves
Threatened
flora habitat
Threatened
fauna habitat
Patch size
Habitat
connectivity
Identified in
expert
workshop
J
Occurs in
proximity to
Werakata
National Park
Yes, including
Grevillea
parviflora ssp
parviflora,
Acacia
bynoeana,
Eucalyptus
glaucina,
Eucalytpus
parramattensis
ssp decadens,
Rutidosis
heterogama
Yes, including,
Swift Parrot,
Regent
Honeyeater,
Koala, Greyheaded
Flying-fox
Large
Forms part of the
Richmond Vale
Corridor
Yes
H
Yes, is adjacent
to and forms part
of Werakata
National Park
Yes, including
Grevillea
parviflora ssp
parviflora,
Acacia
bynoeana,
Eucalyptus
glaucina,
Eucalytpus
parramattensis
ssp decadens,
Rutidosis
heterogama
Yes, including
Swift Parrot,
Regent
Honeyeater,
Koala, Greyheaded
Flying-fox
Large
Forms part of the
Lower Hunter
Regional
Corridor
Yes
A
No
Yes, Critically
endangered
Persoonia
pauciflora
known from
only this
location. Also,
Macrozamia
flexuosa
Yes, including
Southern
Bent-wing Bat,
Swift Parrot
Large
Occurs within
Molly Morgan
Corridor
Yes
and
Hunter Valley
Remnant Woodlands
and Open Forests
Hunter Valley
Remnant Woodlands
and Open Forests
32 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Additional notes
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Threatened
Ecological
Community
Parameters used to identify High Priority Conservation Areas
High Priority
Conservation
Area
Connectivity to
nature reserves
Threatened
flora habitat
Threatened
fauna habitat
Patch size
Habitat
connectivity
Identified in
expert
workshop
E
No
Not known
Yes, including
Spotted-tail
Quoll,
Southern
Bent-wing Bat
Large
No
No
D
No
Yes, including
Macrozamia
flexuosa
Yes, including
Southern
Bent-wing Bat
Large
No
No
I
Yes, connected to
Werakata
Yes, including
Macrozamia
flexuosa
Yes, including
Helmeted
Honeyeater,
Grey-headed
Flying-fox
Large
Yes, occurs
within National
Park Corridor
No
O
Yes, Connected
to Watagan
National Park
Yes, including
Prostanthera
cineolifera
Yes, including
Regent
Honeyeater,
Swift Parrot,
Helmeted
Honeyeater,
Grey-headed
Flying-fox
Large
No
No
K
Connected to
Awaba State
Forest
Not known
Yes, including
Helmeted
Honeyeater,
Grey-headed
Flying-fox
Large
Yes, forms
No
Additional notes
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 33
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
This page should be replaced with the corresponding GIS figure once the
document has been pdf'd. This caption page must follow an even numbered page
if the figure is A3 size or larger.
Figure 6.1
High priority conservation areas
34 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
7. Key threatening processes
Key Threatening Processes (KTPs) are processes that threaten or potentially threaten the survival and/or
establishment of biodiversity. The Hunter Valley region is subject to a number of KTPs listed under the EPBC
Act that have the potential to impact threatened biodiversity (Table 7.1). The most threatening of these
processes is ‘Land Clearance’ which is contributing to habitat loss and fragmentation directly impacting
biodiversity. Land clearance and other KTPs can lead to consequences such as decreases in population
size, species diversity, and area of occupancy for threatened species and the resilience of species. Although
not listed as a KTP, infection and spread of Myrtle Rust is an emerging threat identified during the expert
workshop with potentially catastrophic consequences within the region.
KTPs impact biodiversity with the potential to reduce or even completely remove entire species, populations
or communities. The high diversity and distinct fauna, flora, ecological communities and ecosystems within
the Cessnock, Newcastle, Port Stephens, Lake Macquarie and Maitland LGAs are susceptible to a number
of these KTPs. In order to conserve the remnant biodiversity within the LGAs it is important that these KTPs
are managed, in particular land clearance.
Table 7.1
EPBC Act - listed Key Threatening Processes (KTPs)
Priority
EPBC KTPs
Importance
within region
Recommendations
Highest
Land clearance
Primary threat
within region
Conservation – conserve areas that contain high biodiversity
conservation value. Ensure these areas are protected in
reserves, national parks or under legislation.
Rehabilitation programs – rehabilitate and revegetate areas
that provide habitat for threatened species. Increase the
quality of remaining habitat and revegetate areas that have
been removed.
Threatened biodiversity – revise and assess species and
ecological communities within the region for listing under the
EPBC Act.
Community awareness – educate the community on the
impacts associated with land clearing. Involve them in the
rehabilitation programs such as Bushcare and Landcare
(Tischendorf & Fahrig 2000).
High
Loss and
degradation of
native plant and
animal habitat by
invasion of
escaped garden
plants, including
aquatic plants
Weed invasion
is second
greatest threat
within the
region,
particularly at
the interface of
urban areas and
native
vegetation.
Priority areas – identify areas that would best benefit from
coordinated weed control, specifically in areas with high
biodiversity conservation value (for example areas that
contain threatened species susceptible to weeds). Focus
weed control budgets in these areas that are likely to be most
effective, cost-efficient and protect threatened biodiversity.as
above.
Noxious weeds – identify weeds of greatest concern in the
region. Generate management plan to eradicate or limit the
spread of these species.
Research – determine the significance of invasion of
escaped garden and aquatic plants. Identify the level of
control required to manage these such as chemical, manual,
biological and/or mechanical controls.
Community awareness – educate community of the impacts
and weed controls associated with escaped garden and
aquatic plants (With 2004).
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 35
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Priority
EPBC KTPs
Importance
within region
Recommendations
High
Loss of climatic
habitat caused by
anthropogenic
emissions of
greenhouse
gases
Although effects
not currently
known, this has
potentially
drastic,
broadscale
impacts,
particularly for
saltmarsh and
littoral
rainforest.
Energy efficiency – promote and educate the community to
reduce the use of vehicles and machinery that emit large
volumes of greenhouse gases.
Competition and
land degradation
by rabbits
Not a major
issue in the
region,
however, main
threat to native
vegetation as
vectors to
weeds
Priority areas – identify areas that would best benefit from
coordinated rabbit control, specifically in areas with high
biodiversity conservation value (for example areas that
contain threatened species susceptible to rabbits). Focus
rabbit control budgets in these areas that are likely to be most
effective, cost-efficient and protect threatened biodiversity.
Moderate
Threatened species – adaptive requirements of species
likely to be affected should be given a greater priority (Gray &
Macnish 1985).
Research – conduct research on the benefits of different
rabbit control methods and the effects rabbit control has for
example on threatened species and communities.
Community involvement – educate the community and
relevant landowners of rabbit control methods. Coordinate
and integrated management between key groups.
Monitoring – undertake monitoring of strategies used to
identify native species recovery and effectiveness of
strategies. Modify management strategies according to
results (Orell & Morris 1994).
Moderate
Predation by
European red fox
Not a major
issue in the
region,
however, in
coastal areas
foxes are known
to predate on
coastal birds
and also act as
weed vectors,
particularly
asparagus
weed
Priority areas – identify areas that would best benefit from
coordinated fox control, specifically in areas with high
biodiversity conservation value (for example areas that
contain threatened species susceptible to foxes). Focus fox
control budgets in these areas that are likely to be most
effective, cost-efficient and protect threatened biodiversity.
Research – conduct research on the most cost-effective and
effective methods in controlling foxes for example on
threatened species and communities and within different
habitat types.
Community involvement – educate the community and
relevant landowners of fox control methods. Coordinate and
integrated management between key groups.
Monitoring – undertake monitoring of strategies used to
identify native species recovery and effectiveness of
strategies. Modify management strategies according to
results. (Thompson McRobert Edgeloe et al. 2009)
Low
Predation by feral
cats
Largely
unknown in
region, however
predation by
domestic cats
likely to occur
particularly at
interface of
urban and
conservation
areas.
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Priority areas – identify areas that would best benefit from
coordinated feral cat control, specifically in areas with high
biodiversity conservation value (for example areas that
contain threatened species susceptible to cats). Focus cat
control budgets in these areas that are likely to be most
effective, cost-efficient and protect threatened biodiversity.
Strategies – undertake appropriate management strategies
in the focus areas:

36 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Sustained management: controls implemented on a
continual basis; short term management to reduce impacts
to an acceptable level.
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Priority
EPBC KTPs
Importance
within region
Recommendations

Intermittent management: controls implemented during
critical periods of the year when damage is greatest.

Experimental control: using control methods as research
experiments.
Research – conduct research on management techniques
most suitable for feral cat eradication (best method of
controlling cats), impacts feral cats on native species.
Community involvement – educate the community and
relevant landowners of fox control methods. Coordinate and
integrated management between key groups.
Monitoring – undertake monitoring of strategies used to
identify native species recovery and effectiveness of
strategies. Modify management strategies according to
results (Thompson McRobert Edgeloe et al. 2009).
Low
Injury and fatality
to vertebrate
marine life caused
by ingestion of, or
entanglement in,
harmful marine
debris
Largely
unknown in
region, however
injuries and
fatality to
marine life likely
to occur within
the coastal
boundaries
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Research – conduct appropriate research including
degradable pathways of synthetic debris in the marine
environment. Monitor and investigate marine life harmed and
killed by marine debris. Coordinate abatement strategies and
recovery plans.
Waste management – promote best practise waste
management strategies on land and sea and implement
appropriate measures for waste management.
Community involvements – raise public awareness and
improve education campaigns about the prevention of littering
on land and at sea.
Evaluation – conduct an independent review of the plan’s
effectiveness in accordance with the EPBC Act. Review
should involve all key stakeholders and provide
recommendations to revise the plan.
Low
Predation, Habitat
Degradation,
Competition and
Disease
Transmission by
Feral Pigs
Largely
unknown in
region
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Research – identify the distribution of feral pigs within the
region and key management areas. These would include
areas with high conservation value and areas free of or
contain low numbers of feral pigs.
Collaborate current feral pig management with stakeholders
and assess the need for development of more effective and
humane techniques and strategies to manage feral pigs.
Management plans and natural resource planning –
identify key concerns, establish protocols and use available
funding to improve consistency and coordination of
management.
Education – assess and update existing information
regarding feral pigs, such as impacts and best management
techniques. Prepare and distribute appropriate material to
inform key groups concerned.
Monitoring – undertake monitoring of strategies used to
identify native species recovery and effectiveness of
strategies. Modify management strategies according to
results (Dominelli 2000).
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 37
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Priority
EPBC KTPs
Importance
within region
Recommendations
Low
Competition and
land degradation
by unmanaged
goats
Largely
unknown in
region
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Research – determine the significance of unmanaged goat
competition and land degradation. Identify the level of control
required to manage.
Control strategies – develop and implement control
strategies to manage goats such as:

Localised control: localised eradication in specific areas of
high conservation value; long term management.

Sustained management: controls implemented on a
continual basis; short term management to reduce impacts
to an acceptable level.

Intermittent management: controls implemented during
critical periods of the year when damage is greatest.

Buffer zones: buffer zones developed with aid of all
landowners to reduce or stop reinvasion of unmanaged
goats in small areas.

Adaptive management: experimental control techniques
used within a regional scale to integrate goat control with
other biodiversity conservation programs.
Monitoring – undertake monitoring of strategies used to
identify native species recovery and effectiveness of
strategies. Modify management strategies according to
results. (Environmental Risk Solutions 2010)
Low
Infection of
amphibians with
chytrid fungus
resulting in
chytridiomycosis
Largely
unknown in
region
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Research – identify any infections. If present, monitor
populations to gain a greater understanding of distribution
and incidences of the fungus and to identify outbreaks.
Focus species – identify key threatened species to
undertake management including restocking and treatment.
Education – educate community and promote research
programs and community programs to aid in the
management.
On-line database – developed and maintained to provide the
latest data on where the disease has been observed for
interested parties. (Department of the Environment and
Heritage 2006)
Low
Psittacine
Circoviral (beak
and feather )
Disease affecting
endangered
psittacine species
Largely
unknown in
region
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Education – education and materials are required for field
workers and wildlife managers to detect the presence of the
disease in the Cessnock LGA and priority psittacine species.
This will allow for the true impact of the disease, if any, to be
identified.
Protocols – develop and implement correct handling, postmortem, quarantine and transport of psittacine infected
individuals.
On-line database – develop and maintain an on-line
database to provide the latest data on where the disease has
been observed for interested parties (Department of the
Environment and Heritage 2005).
38 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Priority
EPBC KTPs
Importance
within region
Recommendations
Low
The reduction in
the biodiversity of
Australian native
fauna and flora
due to the red
imported fire ant,
Solenopsis invicta
(fire ant)
Largely
unknown in
region
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
Low
Dieback caused
by the root-rot
fungus
(Phytophthora
cinnamomi)
Largely
unknown in
region
Quarantine – monitor plant material entering NSW that has
the potential to be infected by the pathogen, specifically in
areas with high biodiversity and conservation value.
Environment Australia 2001b)
Low
The biological
effects, including
lethal toxic
ingestion, caused
by Cane Toads
(Bufo marinus)
Cane toads
uncommon in
region.
The following recommendations are provided in the case that
there is an increase in this KTP.
N/A
Invasion of
northern Australia
by Gamba Grass
and other
introduced
grasses
N/A
Not applicable. Outside Lower Hunter region
N/A
Incidental catch
(or bycatch) of
seabirds during
oceanic longline
fishing operations
N/A
Not applicable. Outside Lower Hunter region
N/A
Incidental catch
(bycatch) of Sea
Turtle during
coastal ottertrawling
operations within
Australian waters
north of 28
degrees South
N/A
Not applicable. Outside Lower Hunter region
N/A
Predation by
exotic rats on
Australian
offshore islands of
less than
1,000 km2
(100,000 ha)
N/A
Not applicable. Outside Lower Hunter region
N/A
Loss of
biodiversity and
ecosystem
integrity following
invasion by the
Yellow Crazy Ant
(Anoplolepis
gracilipes) on
Christmas Island,
Indian Ocean
N/A
Not applicable. Outside Lower Hunter region
Research – identify areas that are or are likely to be affected
by fire ants, specifically areas that have threatened
biodiversity susceptible to fire ants.
Control Strategies – identify areas that most require
management and select control strategies most effective to
eradicate (Serena & Soderquist 1995).
Research – conduct research into control methods (for
example biological) that will eradicate the Cane Toad and
reduce their rapid spread. (Department of Environment and
Resource Management 2011)
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 39
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
40 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
8. Conclusions and
recommendations
This project mapped Commonwealth EPBC Act - listed and nominated ecological communities (Threatened
Ecological Communities) and identified High Priority Conservation Areas within the Lower Hunter region
(Cessnock, Newcastle, Port Stephen, Lake Macquarie and Maitland LGAs).
Six Threatened Ecological Communities were assessed and mapped:






White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland – listed as
Critically Endangered. This community was determined as unlikely to occur within the Lower Hunter
region.
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia – listed as Critically Endangered. This
community was found to occur in small patches within 2km of the coast and cover 56 ha.
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia – listed as Critically Endangered. This community was
found to occur predominantly along the border of Lake Macquarie and Cessnock LGAs and cover
1760 ha.
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh – nominated for listing. This community was mapped as
occurring in estuarine areas of the Hunter River and wetlands and floodplains along the coast and
covers 6427 ha.
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodland of the Sydney Basin Bioregion – nominated for listing.
Based on the current nomination and community definition this community is likely to be concentrated in
the Cessnock – Kurri Kurri region and cover approximately 4006 ha.
Hunter Valley Remnant Open Forests and Woodlands – nominated for listing. Based on the current
nomination and broad community definition this community is likely to cover approximately 60,568 ha of
the region.
For the latter two communities, the assessment of nomination and listing process is in the early stages and
as such the mapping provided is preliminary and may change significantly as the community definition
changes.
The mapping of the Threatened Ecological Communities is based on desktop review of available information
and is strongly reliant on the description of the communities provided in the listing advice or nomination form.
The mapping is indicative of where each community is likely to occur based on available information and
each site would need to be ground truthed to see that the vegetation meets the description and condition
thresholds in the listing/conservation advice for the Threatened Ecological Community.
Threatened species were assessed for their likelihood to occur within the Lower Hunter region and
Threatened Ecological Communities based on species records and known habitat requirements. Based on
this assessment, 111 species are known to occur or are predicted as likely to occur within the study area.
The Threatened Ecological Communities in which they are known or predicted to occur were identified.
High priority conservation areas for Threatened Ecological Communities within the region were modelled and
mapped based on a range of parameters including patch size, threatened biodiversity and connectivity.
Weightings were applied to each parameter to ensure the most important parameters were modelled as
higher priority in the mapping process. Other areas of high conservation priority were identified in existing
conservation plans for the region and through the expert workshop and consultation with key stakeholders.
Specific conservation areas are identified within the report. Broadly, these focus on larger areas of good
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 41
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
condition remnants of EPBC Act – listed communities that maintain corridors and/or support threatened or
migratory species listed under the EPBC Act.
The identified High Priority Conservation Areas should be considered for preservation and appropriate
management to maintain and improve biodiversity values in the region, particularly in relation to Threatened
Ecological Communities. Conservation efforts would be more efficient and effective if they are concentrated
in these High Priority Conservation Areas.
Key Threatening Processes within the Lower Hunter region were identified, the principal threat being land
clearance which is contributing to habitat loss and fragmentation directly impacting biodiversity. The highest
priority threats in the region are:



Land clearance – key recommendations are to:

minimise further clearing of native vegetation in the region where possible, particularly within High
Priority Conservation Areas

ensure that listings under the EPBC Act of species and ecological communities are regularly
assessed and revised to take into consideration ongoing land clearance

educate the community on the impacts associated with land clearing. Involve the community in the
rehabilitation programs such as Bushcare and Landcare

provide long-term protection for suitable areas of native vegetation within the region, such as
through new national parks or under legislation.
Loss and degradation of native plant and animal habitat by invasion of escaped garden plants, including
aquatic plants – key recommendations are to:

identify areas that would best benefit from coordinated weed control with reference to High Priority
Conservation Areas

identify weeds of greatest concern in the region and generate management plan to eradicate or
limit the spread of these species

undertake research to identify significance of invasion and control methods

educate community of the impacts and weed controls associated with escaped garden and aquatic
plants.
Loss of climatic habitat caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases – key
recommendations are to:


promote and educate the community in energy efficiency
prioritise adaptive requirements of species.
As a result of this study, it is recommended that:

Refinement of this mapping be undertaken as resources allow including:

undertaking floristic analysis and ground truthing of mapping to verify this desk top based
assessment

undertaking additional review and correlation of existing vegetation mapping projects which were
not available at time of this assessment, including mapping of:
–
–
–
–
Wollemi conservation lands
Sugarloaf State Conservation Area
Singleton army base
Themeda Coastline Mapping - Bushland Inventory Quadrats, Creekline Vegetation Surveys
(Newcastle LGA)
42 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
–
–
Coal and Allied areas
Mapping the habitats of NSW estuaries (Creese et al. 2009).

The definition of Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests be refined to provide a more
specific floristic or regional definition as the description in the nomination is very broad and is likely to
correspond to a range of communities including widespread communities located outside the region.

Revise the High Priority Conservation Areas based on final definitions of Threatened Ecological
Communities, particularly the Hunter Valley Remnant Woodland and Open Forests.

Although not listed as a KTP, infection and spread of Myrtle Rust is an emerging threat with potentially
catastrophic consequences within the region. Consideration should be given to the listing of spread and
infection of Myrtle Rust as a Key Threatening Process.

The mapping of Threatened Ecological Communities and High Priority Conservation Areas be
considered for regional planning in the Lower Hunter.
This assessment was a desk-based review of available information with input from key stakeholders. This
mapping provides a sound baseline assessment for future refinement and will aid in filling the gaps of
knowledge of the distribution of Threatened Ecological Communities within the Lower Hunter region.
Through the identification and mapping of Threatened Ecological Communities and High Priority
Conservation Areas, this project also provides a suitable resource to support regional sustainability planning,
particularly the preparation of the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy and Regional Conservational Plan.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 43
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
44 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
References
Bell, S 1998, Wollemi National Park vegetation survey. A fire management document. Volumes 1 & 2.
Eastcoast Flora Survey. Report to NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Upper Hunter District.
Bell S 1998, Woolemi National Park Vegetation Survey- A Fire Management Document, NSW National Parks
and Wildlife Service Upper Hunter District, Hunter Valley.
Bell S 2004, 'Vegetation of Werakata National Park, Hunter Valley, New South Wales', Cunninghamia, vol. 8,
no. 3, pp. 331-47.
Bell S 2006, Glenrock State Recreation Area and Awabakal Nature Reserve Vegetation Survey.
Bell S 2009, 'Vegetation and floristics of Columbey National Park, lower Hunter Valley, New South Wales',
Cunninghamia, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 241-75.
Bell S & Driscoll C 2006a, Vegetation mapping of Watagans National Park and Jilliby State Conservation
Area Parks and Wildlife Division and Department of Environment and Conservation.
Bell S & Driscoll C 2006b, Vegetation of the Tomago and Tomaree Sandbeds, Port Stephens, New South
Wales. Management of Groundwater Ecosytems. Part 1-2., Eastcoast Flora Survey, September 2006,
Unpublished report to Hunter Water.
Bell S & Driscoll C 2007, Vegetation of the Cessnock-Kurri Region, Cessnock LGA, New South Wales:
Survey, Classification & Mapping, Unpublished report to the Department of Environment & Climate Change.
Bell S & Driscoll C 2012, Vegetation mapping of Lake Macquarie LGA: Stages 1-3, Lake Macquarie City
Council.
Bell S, Vollmer J & Gellie N 1993, Yengo National Park and Parr State Conservation Area Vegetation Survey
for use in fire management.
'Blue Gum Hills Vegetation', 1997.
Creese, RG, Glasby, TM, West, G & Gallen, CR 2009, Mapping the habitats of NSW estuaries, Report to the
Hunter Central Rivers Catchment Management Authority. HCRCMA project no. HCR 07_458.
Department of Environment & Climate Change 2008, The Native Vegetation of Yengo and Parr Reserves
and Surrounds, Department of Environment and Climate Change, Hurstville, NSW.
Department of Environment and Conservation 2005, White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland profile, Department of Environment and Conservation, viewed 9 August 2011,
<http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/profile.aspx?id=10837>.
Department of Environment and Resource Management 2011, Bell’s Turtle, Department of Environment and
Resource Management, viewed 21/12 2011.
Department of Primary Industries 2007, Current management and control options for Chilean needle grass
(Nasella neesiana) in Australia, State Government of Victoria,
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 2012, National Wildlife
Corridors Plan: A framework for landscape-scale conservation, Department of Sustainability Environment
Water Population and Communities, Canberra.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 45
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 2013a, Protected Matters
Search Tool
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 2013b, Species Profile and
Threats Database, Department of Sustainability Environment Water Population and Communities, viewed 15
March 2013, <http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl>.
Department of the Environment and Heritage 2005, Threat abatement plan for beak and feather disease
affecting endangered Psittacine species, Natural Heritage Trust and the Department of the Environment and
Heritage, Canberra.
Department of the Environment and Heritage 2006, Threat Abatement Plan for infection of amphibians with
chytrid fungus resulting in chytridiomycosis Department of Environment and Heritage, viewed 15 March
2013, <http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/chytrid/index.html>.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2009a, EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1:
Significant impact guidelines - matters of national environmental significance, Department of the
Environment Water Heritage and the Arts.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2009b, Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine
Thickets of Eastern Australia - A nationally threatened ecological community, Canberra.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2010a, Threatened Ecological Community
Nomination Form - for listing or changing the status of an ecological community under the Environment
Protection and Biodiveristy Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) - Subtropical and Temperate Coastal
Saltmarsh Canberra.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2010b, Threatened Ecologuical Community
nomination Form - for listing or changing the status of an ecological community under the Environemnt
Protection and Biodiveristy Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) - Hinterland sand flats and woodlands of the
Sydney Basin Bioregion, Canberra,
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2012, Thraetened Ecological Community
Nomination Form 2012 Assessment Period - Hunter Valley remnants woodlands/open forests.
Dominelli, S 2000, Distribution, roost requirements and foraging behaviour of the Greater Long-eared Bat
(Nyctophilus timoriensis) and the Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus) in the Bookmark Biosphere Reserve,
Unpublished report, Bookmark Biosphere Trust, South Australia,
Environment Australia 2001a, A directory of important wetlands in Australia third edition, Environment
Australia, Canberra.
Environment Australia 2001b, Threat Abatement Plan for Dieback Caused by the Root-rot Fungus
Phytophthora cinnamomi, Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra.
Environmental Risk Solutions 2010, Kemerton Industrial Park Quantitative Risk Assessment, Environmental
Risk Solutions, Applecross.
Gray, HJ & Macnish, SE 1985, Land Management Field Manual Wandoan District, Queensland Department
of Primary Industries.
Hill L 2003, The Natural Vegetation of the Maitland LGA, New South Wales, Maitland.
Hunter J & Alexander J 2000, Vegetation and Floristics of Myall Lakes National Park.
46 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
James, W 2007, Kemerton Strategy Plan Landscape Assessment Study - final report to Landcorp William
James Landscape Architect, Margaret River, WA.
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy 2003a, Lower Hunter and
Central Coast Regional Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Technical Report 2003, Digital Aerial Photo
Interpretation and Updated Extant Vegetation Community Map, Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional
Environmental Management Strategy, Callaghan, NSW.
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy 2003b, Lower Hunter
Central Coast Extant Vegetation Community Map, Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental
Management Strategy, Thornton.
NSW Department of Planning 2006, Lower Hunter Regional Strategy, NSW Department of Planning,
Sydney.
Office of Environment and Heritage 2011, Cessnock Biodiversity Management Plan.
Office of Environment and Heritage 2013a, 'Bionet Atlas of NSW Wildlife website'.
Office of Environment and Heritage 2013b, 'Threatened species, populations and ecological communities of
NSW online database'.
Orell, P & Morris, K 1994, Chuditch Recovery Plan 1992-2001. [Online], WA Government Department of
Conservation and Land Management, Wanneroo.
Royal Botanic Gardens 2013, 'PlantNet - The Plant Information Network System of Botanic Gardens Trust
(version 2.0)'.
Scotts, D 2001, Key habitats and corridors for fauna of north-east NSW limitations and decision rules
inherent within the mapping, NPWS, Coffs Harbour.
Serena, M & Soderquist, TR 1995, 'Western quoll', in R Strahan (ed.), The Mammals of Australia, Reed New
Holland, Sydney, pp. 62-4.
Sivertsen, D, Roff, A, Somerville, M, Thonell, J & Denholm, B 2011, Greater Hunter Native Vegetation
Mapping Geobase Guide (Version 4.0), Internal report for the Office of Environment and Heritage,
Department of Premier and Cabinet, Sydney, Australia.
Thompson McRobert Edgeloe, Coffey Environments & William James Landscape Architects 2009, Kemerton
Industrial Park Strategy Plan Report on Submissions, Prepared for LandCorp and the Department of State
Development.
Threatened Species Scientific Commitee 2011, Commonwealth Listing Advice on Lowland Rainforest of
Suptropical Australia, Canberra.
Tischendorf, L & Fahrig, L 2000, 'How should we measure landscape connectivity?', Landscape Ecology, vol.
15, pp. 633-41.
Vesk, PA & Mac Nally, R 2006, 'The clock is ticking--Revegetation and habitat for birds and arboreal
mammals in rural landscapes of southern Australia', Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 112, no. 4,
pp. 356-66.
Wilson, A & Lindenmayer, DB 1995, Wildlife Corridors and the Conservation of Biodiversity: A Review.,
National Corridors of Green Program, Green Australia Ltd., Canberra.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC 47
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
With, KA 2004, 'Metapopulation dynamics: perspectives from landscape ecology', in I Hanski & O Gaggiotti
(eds), Ecology, Genetics and Evolution of Metapopulations, Elsevier, San Diego, pp. 23-44.
48 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Appendix A
Correlation assessment for EPBC Act communities
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1. Correlation assessment of EPBC Act
communities
The correlation assessment for each of the Threatened Ecological Communities predicted to occur within the region is provided below.
A1.1
White Box–Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native
Grassland
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.1. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.2).
Table A.1
White Box–Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland key identifying characteristics
Identifying characteristics
White Box-Yellow Box- Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland
Size
If the community has a predominantly native understorey the patch has to be 0.1 ha.
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
If the community does not have a predominantly native understorey the patch has to be 2.0 ha.
Dominant canopy species
Eucalyptus albens (White Box), E. melliodora (Yellow Box) or E. blakelyi (Blakely’s Red Gum).
Dominant shrub layer species
Acacia implexa, Acacia paradoxa, Cassinia quinquefaria, Dodonaea viscosa, Exocarpus cupressiformis and Jacksonia scorparia.
Dominant groundcover species
Generally grasses and herbaceous species characterise the ground layer including Themeda australis, Poa sieberiana, Austrostipa
aristiglumis, Dianella revoltua, Aristida ramosa, Asperula conferta and Brunoniella australis.
Vegetation structure
Occurs as either woodland or derived grassland (a grassy woodland from which the trees have been removed). The community has a
sparse, scattered shrub layer and ground layer comprised of native tussock grasses and herbs.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-1
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Identifying characteristics
White Box-Yellow Box- Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland
Condition criteria
Areas of vegetation that from part of the listed EEC must contain at least one of the dominant tree species, be equal to or greater than 0.1
ha and have either:


an intact tree layer and a predominantly native ground layer; or
an intact native ground layer with a high diversity of native plants species but no remaining tree layer.
A patch with a continuous shrub layer of more than 30% is no longer considered part of a grassy woodland and is excluded from the
community.
Soil substrate
Occurs on relatively fertile soils.
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Occurs on tablelands and western slopes of NSW at altitudes between 170-1200 m.
Other
If a patch of vegetation contains less than 12 or more native understorey species, there must at least be one important species. The patch
must also be greater than 2 ha and have an average of 20 or more mature trees per hectare or have natural regeneration of the dominant
overstorey eucalypts.
Threatened species habitat
Superb Parrots, Regent honeyeaters, Squirrel Gliders
A-2 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table A.2
Correlation assessment of map units in existing mapping projects to White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived
Native Grassland
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al. 2011)
MU176
White Box grassy
woodland on
basalts of the
Hunter and
Liverpool Ranges
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Occurs on
tablelands
Not within study
area
No. Although likely to be
consistent, this
community does not
occur within the study
area
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al. 2011)
MU177
Yellow Box grassy
woodland on basalt
soils of the upper
Hunter
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Occurs on
tablelands
Not within study
area
No. Although likely to be
consistent, this
community does not
occur within the study
area
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al. 2011)
MU175
Yellow Box Roughbarked Apple
grassy woodland of
the upper Hunter
and Liverpool
ranges
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Occurs on
tablelands
Not within study
area
No. Although likely to be
consistent, this
community does not
occur within the study
area
Wollemi
National
Park (Bell
1998)
W21
Dry Basalt Cap
Woodland
No. Not
consistent with
listing
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes, occurs on
basalt caps
Not consistent
with listing
Not consistent
with TEC
No. Not consistent with
TEC
Wollemi
National
Park (Bell
1998)
F18
Dry Basalt Diatreme
Forest
No. Not
consistent with
listing
Yes. Likely to be
consistent
Yes, occurs on
basalt caps
Not consistent
with listing
Not consistent
with TEC
No. Not consistent with
TEC
Note: Size of community was assessed during the mapping process with polygons smaller than 0.1 ha filtered out.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-3
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1.2
Littoral Rainforest
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.3. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.4).
Table A.3
Key identifying characteristics of Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
Identifying characteristics
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
Size
Vegetation patch must be greater than 0.1 ha.
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
Dominant canopy species
Large diversity of species dependant on location may include Eugenia reinwarditana, Ficus sp. and Acacia sp. This community typically
has tall trees as part of its canopy but not always and may include species including Araucaria, Banksias or Eucalypts.
Dominant shrub layer species
Pittosporum revolutum, Livistona australis, Micromelum minutum and Morinda jasminoides.
Dominant groundcover species
Doodia aspera, Asplenium australasicum, Stephonia japonica, Smilax australis, Eustrephus latifolius and Hibbertia scandens.
Vegetation structure
The vegetation type appears to be a complex of rainforest and vine thickets with a structurally diverse range of native trees, shrubs, vines
and ground layers. This community generally has a closed canopy but may be more open in exposed situations or as a result of natural
disturbances (such as tree falls and storms).
Condition criteria
Areas of vegetation must be equal to or greater than 0.1 ha in size.
The cover of transformer weed species must be 70% or less as they have the potential to alter the function and structure of the community.
This threshold recognises the resilience and recoverability of the community.
At least 25% of the native plant species present within the vegetation must occur on the indicative plant Species List for the associated
bioregion of this community; or
At least 30% of the canopy cover in the patch must be from one or more of the rainforest canopy species (trees or shrubs) that are on the
indicative bioregional plant Species lists excluding Banksia and Eucalyptus species.
Soil substrate
Is not associated with any particular soil type however occurs on a variety of landforms including sand dunes and headlands.
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Occurs on coastal headlands, dunes, sea-cliffs or any other places influenced by the sea. Typically the ecological community occurs within
two kilometres of the coast or adjacent to a large salt water body, such as an estuary and thus is influenced by the sea.
Other
A patch has of vegetation can be excluded from the listed ecological community for being too heavily degraded. If this vegetation is suitably
managed and improved to a point that it fits the condition criteria can be regarded as part of the ecological community.
Threatened species habitat
Southern Cassowary, Grey-headed Flying-fox and Phaius australis.
A-4 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table A.4
Correlation assessment of map units in existing mapping projects to Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Lake
Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2012)
MU4
Littoral Rainforest
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003b)
MU4
Littoral Rainforest
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al. 2011)
MU019
Tuckeroo/ Yellow
Tulipwood/ Red
fruited Olive Plum
Littoral Rainforest of
the lower North
Coast
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al. 2011)
MU018
Tuckeroo/Lilly
Pilly/Coast Banksia
littoral Rainforest
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
Tomago and
Tomaree LGA
(Bell S &
Driscoll C
2006b)
MU14
Nerong Littoral
Rainforest
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
Glenrock/awab
akal (Bell S
2006)
8
Littoral Rainforest
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes, consistent with TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-5
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Glenrock/awab
akal (Bell S
2006)
7
Permian Coastal
Gully Forest
Some species
consistent
Yes. Consistent
with listing advice
No. Not
consistent with
listing advice
No. Not
consistent with
listing advice
Not consistent
with TECmostly
dominated by
angophora and
peppermint
No. Not consistent with
TEC
Tomaree (Bell
S & Driscoll C
2006b)
1
Depauperate relic
rainforest
Some species
consistent
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
No. Not
consistent with
listing advice
No. Not
consistent with
listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No. Not consistent with
TEC
A-6 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1.3
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.5. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.6).
Table A.5
Key identifying characteristics of Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Identifying characteristics
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Size
Vegetation patch must be greater than 0.1 ha (Condition A and B).
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
Vegetation patch must be greater than 2.0 ha (Condition C).
Dominant canopy species
Large diversity of species including Hoop pine, Ficus sp., Argyrodendron trifoliolatum/Heritiera trifoliolata (White booyong),
Castanospermum austral (Black bean), Cryptocarya (White walnut), Dendrocnide excels (Giant stinging tree), Diploglottis australis (native
tamarind), Dysoxylum fraserianum (rosewood), Dysoxylum mollissimum (red bean), Elattostachys nervosa (green tamarind), Endiandra
pubens (hairy walnut), Flindersia schottiana (bumpy ash, cudgerie, silver ash), Gmelina leichhardtii (white beech), Neolitsea australiensis
(bolly gum), Neolitsea dealbata (white bolly gum), Sloanea australis (maiden‟s blush), Sloanea woollsii (yellow carabeen), Toona ciliata
(red cedar), and epiphytes such as Platycerium spp. and Asplenium australasicum (bird‟s nest fern).
Can also include sub-emergent Eucalyptus spp. <30%).
Dominant shrub layer species
Cordyline stricta (Narrow-leaved palm lily), Linospadix monostachya (Walking Stick palm), Neolitsea dealbata (white bolly gum), Notelaea
johnsonii (veinless mock olive), Pittosporum multiflorum (orange thorn), Triunia youngiana (native honey-suckle bush), Wilkiea
austroqueenslandica (smooth wilkiea) and Wilkiea huegeliana (veiny wilkiea).
Dominant groundcover species
Calamus muelleri, Cissus antarctica, Cissus hypoglauca, Dioscorea transversa, Flagellaria indica, Morinda jasminoides, Pandorea
floribunda, Smilax australis, Adiantum hispidulum, Doodia aspera, Lastreopsis decomposita and Lastreopsis marginans.
Vegetation structure
Typically a tall (20-30 m) closed forest, often with multiple canopy layers with a discontinuous layer of emergent and a sparse shrub layer.
Condition criteria
Three patch types are identified, A, B & C. They are defined as follows: The vegetation must be a remnant evident by the persistence of
mature trees from the indicative species list (Condition A), some residual trees and/or evidence of natural regeneration (Condition B) or
supplementary plantings that have the structure and quality that is reflective of the community description (Condition C).
Be greater than 0.1 ha (Condition A and B) or greater than 2 ha (Condition C). The emergent/canopy/sub-canopy must be greater than
70%.
Must contain greater than 40 species (Condition A) or 30 species (Condition B and C) of native woody species from the indicative species
list.
Vegetation must be greater than 70% (Condition A) or 50% (Condition B and C) native.
Soil substrate
Occurs on basalt and alluvial soils, including sand and old or elevated alluvial soils as well as floodplain alluvia. Does also occasionally
occur on enriched rhyolitic soils and basaltically enriched metasediments.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-7
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Identifying characteristics
Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Generally occurs more than 2km from the coast unlike the ‘Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia’ community.
Generally occurs at altitudes less than 300 m.
Other
Occasionally integrates with ‘Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia’. Typically once the canopy is lower than
25% die to coastal or estuarine influences the Littoral Rainforest community typically replaces the Lowland Rainforest Community.
Threatened species habitat
Giant Barred Frog and Wompoo Fruit-dove.
Table A.6
Correlation assessment of map units in existing mapping projects to Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying
characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
MU1b
Bow Wow
Subtropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy 2003b)
MU1
Coastal Wet Gully
Forest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, not consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy 2003b)
MU1
Coastal Wet Gully
Forest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, not consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
A-8 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying
characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy 2003b)
MU1a
Coastal Warm
TemperateSubtropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
MU46a
Freshwater Carex
Rainforest
Sedgeland
No, dominated
by Carex and
other sedgeland
species
No, wetland
structure
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
MU46a
Freshwater Carex
Rainforest
Sedgeland
No, dominated
by Carex and
other sedgeland
species
No, wetland
structure
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
MU1a
Coastal Warm
TemperateSubtropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
MU1
Coastal Wet Gully
Forest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, not consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
GHM (Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
MU016
Black Booyong/
Giant Stinging
Tree/ Rosewood/
Moreton Bay Fig
lowland
subtropical
rainforest of the
lower north coast
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-9
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying
characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
GHM (Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
MU017
Black
Booyong/Brown
Beech/Soft
Coachwood/Rose
wood Subtropical
Rainforest on the
escarpment of the
lower North Coast
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
GHM (Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
MU009
Bangalow
Palm/Coachwood/
Sassafras gully
warm temperate
rainforest of the
Central Coast
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, vegetation
warm temperate
rainforest, not
consistent with
listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
GHM (Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
MU006
Socketwood/Lilly
Pilly dry
subtropical
rainforest in
Towarri NP and
Cedar Brush NR
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, not consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
GHM (Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
MU007
Sandpaper
Fig/Whalebone
Tree warm
temperate
rainforest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, vegetation
warm temperate
rainforest, not
consistent with
listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Yengo
(Department of
Environment &
Climate Change
2008)
MU02
Sydney Hinterland
Warm Temperate
Rainforest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, vegetation
warm temperate
rainforest, not
consistent with
listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
A-10 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying
characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Watagans and
Jilliby (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2006aBell S &
Driscoll C
2006a)
MU1a
Coastal Warm
Temperate –
Subtropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Watagans and
Jilliby (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2006aBell S &
Driscoll C
2006a)
MU1b
Red Cedar –
Stinging Tree
Subtropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Columbey (Bell
S 2009Bell S
2009)
MU1
Gully Rainforest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, not consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Wollemi
National Park
(Bell 1998Bell
1998)
RF3
Sandstone Gorge
Sub-tropical
Rainforest
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing
advice
Yes, consistent with
listing advice
Wollemi
National Park
(Bell 1998Bell
1998)
RF2
Sandstone Gorge
Warm Temperate
Rainforest
No, not
consistent with
listing advice
No, vegetation
warm temperate
rainforest, not
consistent with
listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Yes, consistent
with listing advice
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-11
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1.4
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh (nominated)
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.7. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.8).
Table A.7
Key identifying characteristics of Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Identifying characteristics
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Size
Vegetation patches greater than 0.4 ha in size.
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
Dominant canopy species
-
Dominant shrub layer species
Tecticornia pergranulata,
Dominant groundcover species
Sporobolus virginicus (Salt couch), Sarcocornia quinqueflora (beaded glasswort/samphire), Juncus kraussii, Samolus repens (Creeping
Brookweed), Suaeda australis (Seabite), Triglochin striata (three-ribbed arrowgrass) and Gahnia filum (Clumped sedge).
Vegetation structure
Is composed of mainly salt-tolerant vegetation including grasses, herbs, reeds, sedges and shrubs. Succulent herbs and grasses generally
dominate and vegetation is generally less than half a meter tall. The community also contains non-vascular plants including epiphytic algae,
diatoms and cyanobacterial mats.
Condition criteria
Ecotones: Must contain 50% or more of the groundcover/understorey coastal saltmarsh vegetation.
Patch definition: discrete and continuous area that may include bare patches of substrate (e.g. salt pans etc) or small-disturbances (e.g.
tracks, water courses) or variations in vegetation that do not influence the communities functionality.
Patch size: Must be greater than 0.4 ha. Patches that are a mosaic and within 30 m of each other, and are collectively 0.4 ha or more.
Tidal connection: Requires ongoing connection with the tidal regime. May occur in both surface/groundwater, intertidal/supratidal or
regular/periodic/ intermittent tides.
Exclusions include salt marsh:





occurring on in land soils with no tidal connection
occurring on seepage zones on seacliffs and elevated rock platforms above tide limit and on elevated headlands subject to aerosolic salt
patches that contain greater than 50% weeds
patches witin coastal margin that have become disconnected from a tidal regime but were once connected. If reconnected to the tidal
regime then the patch become the community once again.
land already permanently
A-12 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Identifying characteristics
Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Soil substrate
Generally associated with soft substrate shores of estuaries and embayments (sandy and/or muddy) and on some low wave energy coasts.
Occur on sediments consisting of poor-sorted anoxic sandy silts and clays which might have higher salinity levels that are much higher
than seawater due to evaporation. Tides can influence distribution of flora species within the community.
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Coastal areas under tidal influence. It is typically restricted to the upper intertidal environment, generally between the elevation of the mean
high tide and mean spring tide.
Table A.8
Correlation assessment of map units from existing mapping projects to Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Map
Community
description
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003bLower
Hunter and
Central Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy 2003b)
47
Mangrove
Estuarine
Complex
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, occurs in
coastal areas
under tidal
influence
A mosaic
community
including areas
that will be
consistent with
TEC
Yes. This map unit
includes patches that will
be consistent with TEC
GHM (Sivertsen
et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
228
Mangrove
Estuarine
Complex
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, occurs in
coastal areas
under tidal
influence
A mosaic
community
including areas
that will be
consistent with
TEC
Yes. This map unit
includes patches that will
be consistent with TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-13
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
Community
description
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2012Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
47a
Saltmarsh
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, occurs in
coastal areas
under tidal
influence
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with
TEC.
Lake Macquarie
LGA (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2012Bell S &
Driscoll C 2012)
47
Mangrove
Estuarine
Complex
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, occurs in
coastal areas
under tidal
influence
A mosaic
community
including areas
that will be
consistent with
TEC
Yes. This map unit
includes patches that will
be consistent with TEC
Myall Lakes
538
Sand/Rock/Bare
Ground/Water/Sal
tmarsh
In part, Vegetated
areas would be
dominated by
species
consistent with
TEC
Vegetated areas
would have
consistent
vegetation
strructure
In part, also
includes sand
and rock areas
and well as water
In parts. Also
includes beaches,
and rock
platforms away
from tidal
influence.
Other mapping
within region is
more accurate
and should
identify
saltmarsh in
this area.
No. Although may contain
some patches of
saltmarsh, map unit is too
broad and includes
unvegetated areas.
(Hunter J &
Alexander J
2000Hunter J &
Alexander J 2000)
Note: Size of community was assessed during the mapping process with polygons smaller than 0.4 ha filtered out.
A-14 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1.5
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
(nominated)
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.9. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.10).
Table A.9
Key identifying characteristics of Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Identifying characteristics
Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Size
Suggested that 0.5 ha should be the minimum patch size.
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
Dominant canopy species
Eucalyptus sclerophylla, Angophora bakeri and Eucalyptus parramattensis.
Dominant shrub layer species
Banksia aemula, Banksia serrata, Banksia oblongifolia, Banksia spinulosa, Conospermum taxifolium, Leptospermum trinervium, Dillwynia
sericea, Monotoca scoparia, Melaleuca linariifolia, Acacia longifolia, Melaleuca thymifolia, Pultenaea villosa and Platysace ericoides.
Dominant groundcover species
Lepidosperma urophorum, Leptospermum continentale, Lomandra longifolia, Entolasia stricta, Hemarthria uncinata, Cyathochaeta diandra,
Lepyrodia scariosa, Mitrasacme polymorpha, Trachymene incisa subsp. incisa and Stylidium graminifolium.
Vegetation structure
Is an open woodland, 10-20 m tall with a predominantly more shrubby understorey and a sparse to moderate graminoid groundcover.
Threatened species habitat
Squirrel Glider, Speckled Warbler, Brown Tree Creeper, Grey-headed Flying Fox, Acacia bynoeana, Acacia pubescens, Allocasuarina
glareicola, Dillwynia tenuifolia, Eucalyptus parramattensis subsp. parramattensis, Grevillea juniperina, Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora,
Micromyrtus minutiflora, Persoonia nutans, and Pultenaea parviflora.
Condition criteria
Inclusions: Remnants that have an understorey or reasonable prospects for regeneration of understorey, but lack canopy of have less
than 10% canopy.
Exclusions: Remnants that retain only the canopy and have no or negligible prospects for assisting natural regeneration of the
understorey.
Soil substrate
Occurs on primarily Tertiary sands and gravels which contain infertile soils of gravelly clay loams and sands. Secondary association with
Quaternary alluvium and has a very rare and highly localised association with Cretaceous sands.
The community occurs on the sandiest alluvium that have very good drainage and very low soil nutrient content
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Occurs at relatively low altitudes that are associated with form floodplains of hinterland rivers such as the Hawkesbury-Nepean and the
Hunter. The exceptions are Mellong Plateau (up to 340 m) and at Thirlmere Lakes NP (approximately 310 m).
Other
Previously known as Sydney Sand Flats Dry Sclerophyll Forest (Keith, 2004; subsequently Tozer, 2006) and Hinterland Sand Flats Dry
Sclerophyll Forest (Keith, 2002).
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-15
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Table A.10 Correlation assessment of map units in existing mapping projects to Hinterland Sand Flats Forest and Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil
Substrate
Landscape
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35a
Kurri Sand Heath
Woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35b
Kurri Sand
Dropping Red
Gum - Stringybark
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35c(i)
Kurri Sands Shrub
Forest (main
variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35c(ii)
Kurri Sands Shrub
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35d
Kurri Sands
Stringybark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35e
Kurri Sands
Paperbark Heath
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35f(i)
Kurri Sand
Claypan Scrub (E.
parramattensis
variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C 2007)
35f(ii)
Kurri Sand
Claypan Scrub (E.
fibrosa variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
A-16 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil
Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
LHCCREMS
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003bLower
Hunter and
Central Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy 2003b)
35
Kurri Sand Swamp
Woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Werakata
National Park
(Bell S 2004Bell
S 2004)
4
Kurri Sand Swamp
Woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Werakata
National Park
(Bell S 2004Bell
S 2004)
5a
Kurri Sands
Melaleuca Scrub
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Werakata
National Park
(Bell S 2004Bell
S 2004)
5b
Kurri Sands
Melaleuca Scrub
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
TEC
Yes. Consistent with TEC
Yengo (Bell S et
al. 1993Bell S
et al. 1993)
6a
Woodland on
Perched Sands
Broadly
consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
with TEC
Not consistent with
TEC
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Yengo (Bell S et
al. 1993Bell S
et al. 1993)
MU6b
Swamp Woodland
- Perched Sands
Broadly
consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
with TEC
Not consistent with
TEC
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-17
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil
Substrate
Landscape
Tilligerry (Bell S
& Driscoll C
2006bBell S &
Driscoll C
2006b)
MU43
Earp's Gum Sedge
Woodland
Broadly
consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
with TEC
Not consistent with
TEC
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
Tilligerry (Bell S
MU9
Earp's GumPeppermint
Scrubby Forest
Broadly
consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
with TEC
Not consistent with
TEC
Not consistent
with TEC
No, not consistent with
TEC
MU28
Mellong Sands
Scribbly Gum
Woodland
Broadly
consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Could be
consistent.
Need to
review
This map unit does not
occur within the study
area and has not been
mapped
& Driscoll C
2006bBell S &
Driscoll C 2006b)
Yengo
(Department of
Environment &
Climate Change
2008Departmen
t of
Environment &
Climate Change
2008)
A-18 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A1.6
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests (nominated)
The key identifying characteristics of this community are presented in Table A.11. These characteristics were then used to correlate map units from existing
vegetation mapping projects (Table A.12).
Table A.11 Key identifying characteristics of Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
Identifying characteristics
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
Size
N/A
(Minimum patch size to form the
community)
Dominant canopy species
Eucalyptus moluccana (Grey Box), Eucalyptus crebra (Narrow-leaved Ironbark) and Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum). Allocasuarina
luehmannii (Bull Oak) is also present in most communities aside from Lower Hunter Spotted-Gum- Ironbark sub-community.
Dominant shrub layer species
Shrub layer species vary greatly but is likely to include Bursaria spinosa subsp. spinosa.
Dominant groundcover species
Groundcover species varies greatly but is likely to include Cheilanthes sieberi subsp. sieberi, Microlaena stipoides subsp. stipoides,
Cymbopogon refractus, Lomandra multiflora subsp. multiflora, Dichondra repens, Desmodium varians and Eremophila debilis.
Vegetation structure
This community is an open forest or woodland dominated by Eucalyptus species with a middle shrub layer of variable densities and a
grassy understorey that occur in the Hunter Valley and in adjoining areas of the NSW Central Coast.
Condition criteria
Good condition: absence of significant disturbance from clearing and grazing resulting in the modification of the understorey. Absence of
weed invasion, minimal impact of inappropriate fire regimes and relatively intact and diverse tree, shrub and ground cover.
Exception: derived native grasslands that persist in the absence of tree cover. These should be considered in good condition if there are
few weeds and many native species on ground layer.
Medium condition: Either small isolated remnants in relatively good condition but vulnerable to the pressures of edge effects, or large
remnants that have been subject to grazing over long periods where the groundcover has been significantly modified. This condition has
the potential to recover is management is changed.
Poor condition: Patches are small, heavily fragmented as a result of clearing and understorey is heavily modified as a result of clearing,
inappropriate fire regimes or past logging. The community structure and function has been modified as a result of weed species incursions.
Soil substrate
Generally occurs on Permian sediments associated with rich deposits of coal, with the exception of Southern Hunter Escarpment Spotted
Gum Woodland (Department of Primary Industries 2007) which occurs on colluvium derived from Triassic sandstone, usually where it
interfaces with Permian sediments.
Landscape (e.g. floodplain)
Mostly occurs on hillslopes and valley floors in undulating country with the exception of Southern Hunter Escarpment Spotted Gum
Woodland which occurs on hot, dry, exposed slopes and ridges, mostly with a northern aspect.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-19
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Identifying characteristics
Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
Other
This broad community encompasses the existing communities:
1.
Central Hunter Grey Box-Ironbark Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion (also known as Central Hunter Box-Ironbark Woodland
(Department of Primary Industries 2007) and Narrow-leaved Ironbark-Grey Box Grassy Woodland (James 2007James 2007; Vesk &
Mac Vesk & Mac Nally 2006)).
2.
Central Hunter Ironbark-Spotted Gum- Grey Box Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion (also known as Barrington Slopes Dry Spotted
Gum Forest and Central Hunter Ironbark-Spotted Gum-Grey Box Forests (Department of Primary Industries 2007) and Narrow-leaved
Ironbark-Grey Box-Spotted Gum shrub/grass open forest (James 2007James 2007; Vesk & Mac Vesk & Mac Nally 2006)).
3.
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion (also known as Southern Hunter Escarpment Spotted
Gum Woodland and Lower Hunter Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest (Department of Primary Industries 2007) and Spotted Gum/Red
Ironbark/Large-fruited Grey Gum shrub/grass open forest (James 2007James 2007; Vesk & Mac Vesk & Mac Nally 2006)).
4.
Hunter Valley Footslopes Slatey Gum Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion (also known as Narrabeen Footslopes Slatey Box
Woodland (Department of Primary Industries 2007) and Grey Box-Slatey Gum shrub/grass Woodland (James 2007James 2007; Vesk
& Mac Vesk & Mac Nally 2006)).
Vegetation types targeted for coal extraction.
Table A.12 Correlation assessment of map units in existing mapping projects to Hunter Valley Remnant Woodlands and Open Forests
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17(i)
Lower Hunter
Spotted Gum - Red
Ironbark Forest
(main variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17a(ii)
Lower Hunter
Spotted Gum - Red
Ironbark Forest (E.
longifolia variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17a(iii)
Lower Hunter
Spotted Gum - Red
Ironbark Forest (E,
placita variant)
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
A-20 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17c
Lower Hunter
Beyer's Ironbark
Low Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17i
Lower Hunter Grey
Box Grassy Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
17 m
Lower Hunter
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18
Hunter Narrow-leaf
Ironbark - Spotted
Gum Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18a
Hunter BulloakSpotted Gum Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18b
Central Hunter Grey
Box Grassy Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18c
Hunter Spotted
Gum - Cypress
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18h
Hunter Red
Ironbark - Spotted
Gum Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-21
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
18i
Hunter Redgum Ironbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Cessnock Kurri
Kurri (Bell S &
Driscoll C
2007)
110
Red Ironbark Paperbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
82
Spotted Gum/
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/ Grey Box
shrub/grass open
forest of the lower
Hunter
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
83
Spotted Gum/
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark. Red
Ironbark shrub/
grass open forest of
the central and
lower hunter
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
85
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/ Bull Oak/
grey Box shrub/
grass open forest of
the Central Hunter
and lower hunter
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
75
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/ Grey
Box/ Spotted Gum
shrub/ grass open
forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, specifically
mentioned in
nomination
A-22 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
67
Spotted Gum/ Red
Ironbark/ Largefruited Grey Gum
shrub/ grass open
forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, specifically
mentioned in
nomination
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
121
Grey Box/ Slaty
Box shrub/ grass
woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, specifically
mentioned in
nomination
GHM
(Sivertsen et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
86
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/ Grey Box/
Spotted gum shrub/
grass open forest of
the central and
lower hunter
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
172
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/Grey Box
grassy Woodland
on the Central and
Upper Hunter
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
GHM
(Sivertsen et
al.
2011Sivertsen
et al. 2011)
156
Narrow-leaved
Ironbark/ Grey Box
grassy woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, specifically
mentioned in
nomination
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-23
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003bLower
Hunter and
Central Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003b)
16
Seaham Spotted
Gum - Ironbark
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003bLower
Hunter and
Central Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003b)
17
Lower Hunter
Spotted Gum Ironbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
A-24 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
LHCCREMS
(Lower Hunter
and Central
Coast Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003bLower
Hunter and
Central Coast
Regional
Environmental
Management
Strategy
2003b)
18
Central hunter
Ironbark - Spotted
Gum - Grey Box
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Werakata
National Park
(Bell S
2004Bell S
2004)
1
Lower-Hunter
Spotted Gum Ironbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Yengo
(Department of
Environment &
Climate
Change
2008Departme
nt of
Environment &
Climate
Change 2008)
20
Hunter Range
Ironbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-25
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Tomago and
Tomaree LGA
(Bell S &
Driscoll C
2006bBell S &
Driscoll C
2006b)
1d
Spotted GumIronbarkStringybark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Lake
Macquarie LGA
(Bell S &
Driscoll C
2012Bell S &
Driscoll C
2012)
17o
Hinterland Spotted
Gum - Red Ironbark
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Blue Gum Hills
('Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997'Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997)
BH3
Dry Open forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Blue Gum Hills
('Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997'Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997)
BH4
Dry Open forest disturbed
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
A-26 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Blue Gum Hills
('Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997'Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997)
BH5
Dry Open forest regen
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Blue Gum Hills
('Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997'Blue Gum
Hills
Vegetation'
1997)
BH7
Dry Open forest very disturbed
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Columbey (Bell
S 2009Bell S
2009)
6
Seaham Ironbark
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Columbey (Bell
S 2009Bell S
2009)
7
Seaham Spotted
Gum-Ironbark
Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Columbey (Bell
S 2009Bell S
2009)
8
Lower Hunter
Spotted GumIronbark Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Columbey (Bell
S 2009Bell S
2009)
9
Red Ironbark ScrubForest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
F1
Narrabeen Residual
Spotted Gum Forest
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Wollemi
National Park
(Bell 1998Bell
1998)
Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
A-27
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
Map unit assessed
Assessment of consistency against key identifying characteristics
Expert
advice
Inclusion in TEC
Mapping
project
Map
unit
Community
name
Dominant
species
Vegetation
structure
Soil Substrate
Landscape
Wollemi
National Park
(Bell 1998Bell
1998)
W14
Goulburn Valley
Alluvial Ironbark
Woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Wollemi
National Park
(Bell 1998Bell
1998)
W1
Narrabeen
Goulburn Ironbark
Woodland
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Consistent with
nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Broadly
consistent
Yes, based on current
broad definition.
Glenrock/Awab
akal (Bell S
2006Bell S
2006)
12
F4 Permian Macq.
shrubby forest
No, not consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
No. Not consistent with
nomination
Glenrock/Awab
akal (Bell S
2006Bell S
2006)
13
F5 Permian Macq.
grassy forest
No, not consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
No. Not consistent with
nomination
Glenrock/Awab
akal (Bell S
2006Bell S
2006)
14
F6 PermianKahibah coastal
forest
No, not consistent
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Yes, consistent
with nomination
advice
Not consistent
No. Not consistent with
nomination
4693
Dry Sclerophyll
Forest/Hardwood
Plantation
No. Vegetation
classification too
broad
Likely to be
consistent
Likely to be
consistent
Likely to be
consistent
Not consistent
with nomination
No. Not consistent with
nomination
Myall Lakes
(Hunter J &
Alexander J
2000Hunter J &
Alexander J
2000)
A-28 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC
Appendix B
EPBC Listed species and communities
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities EPBC Act Listed Ecological
Communities Mapping in the Lower Hunter - PRN 1213-0236
A-B-2 Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2117361B-ECO-REP-001 RevC