• No results found

PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (MINOR PROJECTS)

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2023

Share "PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (MINOR PROJECTS) "

Copied!
42
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Prepared by Matthew Oswald (Environment Officer) Gascoyne Region

May 2007

PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (MINOR PROJECTS)

MARRILLA STATION FENCING

(2)

CONTENTS

1 BACKGROUND ... 3

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ... 3

2.1 P

ROJECT

L

OCATION

... 3

3 METHODOLOGY ... 5

P

RELIMINARY

D

ESKTOP

S

TUDY

... 5

4 C

OMMONWEALTH

R

EFERRAL

... 6

4.1 S

ITE

I

NVESTIGATION

... 6

5 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ... 6

5.1 D

ESCRIPTION

... 6

6 CLEARING OF NATIVE VEGETATION ... 7

6.1 A

SSESSMENT AGAINST

C

LEARING

P

RINCIPLES

... 7

6.2 E

NVIRONMENTALLY

S

ENSITIVE

A

REA

(ESA) ... 7

7 ASSESSMENT OF ASPECTS AND IMPACTS ... 8

8 DECISION TO REFER ... 9

9 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ... 9

10 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ... 10

10.1 C

OMMUNICATION

P

LAN

... 10

11 CONTINGENCY MEASURES ... 12

12 AUDITING ... 12

13 REFERENCES ... 12

APPENDIX A LOW IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING CHECKLIST ... 13

APPENDIX B DEC’S THREATENED FLORA AND FAUNA DATABASE SEARCHES AND DAVID BAUER’S SPECIES LIST ... 15

APPENDIX C AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE PLACES INVENTORY, HERITAGE COUNCIL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA AND THE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE INVENTORY DATABASE SEARCHES ... 20

APPENDIX D DEPARTMENT OF INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS DATABASE SEARCH ... 25

APPENDIX E DEC’S SENSITIVE WATER RESOURCES DATABASE SEARCH ... 28

APPENDIX F WAPC’S ACID SULFATE SOILS MAPPING ... 29

APPENDIX G DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE DATABASE SEARCH ... 31

APPENDIX H SITE PHOTOS ... 36

APPENDIX I VEGETATION CLEARING ASSESSMENT REPORT ... 39

Page 2 of 42

(3)

PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (MINOR PROJECTS)

MARRILLA STATION FENCING

1 BACKGROUND

Main Roads Gascoyne Region over a number of years has progressively been fencing the Road Reserves along various roads in conjunction with Pastoralists via a cost sharing arrangement. The outcome of this fencing produces various positives for both Main Roads and the Pastoralist, being the removal of stock from the road reserve, better stock control and reduced losses from vehicular conflicts, together with the removal of stock grids from the road carriageway.

Main Roads Gascoyne Region proposes to fence Marrilla Station, which is located approximately 250 kilometres north of Carnarvon.

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

It is planned to fence sections of North West Coastal Highway, within Marrilla Station, between 723.81 – 749.14 SLK and a small section of Burkett Road between 0.00-2.53 SLK. The sections between 728.80-761.06 SLK on the left hand side and 749.14 – 761.06 SLK on the right hand side do not require fencing as the pastoralist has stated that these areas are not viable for grazing due to paddock sizes and availability of water.

The construction of the fencing will occur 100 meters from the centreline of the highway.

As per Main Roads’ Environmental Assessment and Approval process, the Low Impact Environmental Screening Checklist has been completed for the proposal, refer to Appendix A. As the proposed works involves clearing of native vegetation, the

preparation of a project specific Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (PEIA) and Environmental Management Plan (EMP) are required. This report fulfils this requirement.

2.1 Project Location

The location and boundaries of the study area are shown on Figure 1.

(4)

Fencing Works FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP OF MARRILLA FENCING

Burkett Road

N

Page 4 of 42

(5)

3 METHODOLOGY

Preliminary Desktop Study

A preliminary assessment of the project area and its potential constraints was undertaken by reviewing a number of government agency managed databases (and consulting where necessary).

3.1 Wetlands

The locations of wetlands within the project area was determined using the

Commonwealth Department of the Environmental and Heritage (DEH) mapping tool, Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) and Geographic Data Atlas mapping tool.

3.2 Threatened Flora, Fauna and Communities, Conservation Reserves and ESAs DEC’s database was searched for known populations of threatened flora, fauna and Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) and conservation reserves, refer to Appendix B.

3.3 Air Quality

The need for a local air quality assessment was determined using the criteria outlined in the MRWA environmental guideline, Air Quality.

3.4 Heritage

Non-indigenous heritage was examined utilising the Australian Heritage Places Inventory (http://www.heritage.gov.au), Heritage Council of Western Australia

(http://register.heritage.wa.gov.au/) and the Shire of Exmouth’s Municipal Heritage Inventory, refer to Appendix C.

3.5 Aboriginal Heritage

A Search of the Department of Indigenous Affairs’ (DIA’s)

(http://www.dia.wa.gov.au/Heritage/SitesSurveysSearch.aspx) database was undertaken to determine whether the project area contains any sites of Aboriginal heritage, refer to Appendix D.

3.6 Sensitive Water Resources

The locations of sensitive water resources within the project area was determined using the Commonwealth Department of the Environmental and Heritage (DEH) mapping tool, Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) and Geographic Data Atlas mapping tool, plus conducting a site visit.

3.7 Contaminated Sites

The reserve has been in Main Roads continual control, therefore no further work will be necessary/required.

3.8 Acid Sulfate Soils

The Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC’c) acid sulfate soils maps were reviewed and the self assessment done

(http://www.wapc.wa.gov.au/Publications/213.aspx) to determine what level of risk the

project area is exposed to, refer to Appendix F.

(6)

3.10 Dieback

Project receives <400 mm of rain so determined not to be an issue.

4 Commonwealth Referral

The decision whether to refer the project to the Commonwealth’s DEH was based upon whether the project would impact upon matters of national significance, e.g. World Heritage properties, protected wetlands and migratory species, Commonwealth marine areas, threatened species or communities or nuclear actions (refer to the Commonwealth webpage www.deh.gov.au/epbc/assessmentsapprovals/index.html for further information and the search tool page at http://www.deh.gov.au/erin/ert/epbc/imap/map.html), refer to Appendix I.

4.1 Site Investigation

A site visit was carried out by Paul Hoare (PM), Matt Oswald (GEO) and Dave Bauer (Consultant) on 12/02/07 to examine the general features of the area. The broad

vegetation types in the vicinity of the project area were identified. Other issues that were considered included topography, the impacts on creek lines, property access and the potential for noise and vibration impacts (dilapidation).

Site photos were taken and are included in Appendix J.

5 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 5.1 Description

According to the Native Vegetation Association Data (DEC & DAF) the fencing works occurs within vegetation association 2675 which is described as ‘Hummock grasslands, low tree & shrub steppe; scattered eucalypts, kanji over Triodia pungens & T. basedowii.’

This vegetation association is well represented in the region with 100% remaining. The condition of the vegetation is somewhat degraded due to cattle and goat grazing.

No mature trees will be cleared for the works.

No drainage regimes or values will be changed or impacted upon.

A complete list of species observed in the project area can be viewed in Appendix B. No rare or endanger species were identified.

Site Investigation Description/Comment

Total area (ha) of native vegetation to be cleared

32.85km X 5m = 16.425 (ha)

Total area (ha) of other vegetation, including regrowth, landscape areas, to be cleared

0

Weeds present None

Drainage areas or wetlands present None

Adjacent land uses Pastoral

Page 6 of 42

(7)

6 CLEARING OF NATIVE VEGETATION

Native vegetation describes all indigenous aquatic and terrestrial vegetation (living or dead). The term does not include vegetation that was intentionally sown, planted or propagated unless it was required under a statutory condition.

Apart from activities that are exempt under the clearing regulations, such as clearing vegetation that is less than 10 years old for maintenance, typically all Main Roads clearing will be undertaken using its Statewide Project Purpose Permit.

6.1 Assessment against Clearing Principles

In assessing whether the project is likely to have a significant impact on the environment, the project has been assessed against the DEC’s 10 principles of clearing, refer to Appendix K.

The project will not be at variance with the DEC’s 10 clearing principles.

6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)

Clearing within an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)

Yes/

No

Comments Does the area to be cleared occur within

an ESA where the vegetation is in good or better condition?

No

(8)

7 ASSESSMENT OF ASPECTS AND IMPACTS

Table 1: Aspects and Impacts – Marilla Station Fencing Aspect Evaluation of Potential Impacts

Air quality Not relevant to the proposed works. Local air quality assessment is not required for the project since residential and other sensitive receptors are not within 200 meters of the road centre

Dust Likely to be a minor issue during earthworks.

Fauna No significant fauna issues associated with any of the proposed fencing works. Fauna species identified in the DEC search were Mulgara, Bilby, Night Parrot, Lerista planiventralis maryani, Lakeland Downs Mouse and Australian Bustard. Due to the nature of the works having a small clearing footprint and the highly mobile nature of all species, no impacts are expected. Recommendations to minimise clearing will also serve to reduce impacts to fauna and remnant fauna habitat at the sites.

No Matters of National Environmental Significance as protected under EPBC Act (1999) will be impacted. The Mulgara was identified in the search, but being a highly mobile species, no impact is expected.

Vegetation – clearing

16.425 ha of native vegetation will be cleared.

The condition of the native vegetation to be cleared is Good but somewhat degraded in places due to cattle grazing.

The native vegetation will be cleared is well represented regionally. According to Native Vegetation Association Data (DEC and DAF), 100% of that vegetation type is still remaining.

The native vegetation to be cleared /does not occur within an ESA.

The native vegetation to be cleared will be done so using the purpose permit.

Vegetation – TECs/DRF

Consultation with DEC confirms that the proposal is not going to have a significant impact upon any DRF or TECs. Owenis acidula was identified in the DEC search, but an onsite investigation did not identify this species.

Vegetation – weeds

Based upon a site visit, there are no declared plants in the project area.

Vegetation – dieback

Not an issue given the project area receives less than 400 mm of average annual rainfall or is above the 26˚ parallel.

Reserves / Conservation areas

There are no conservation areas or reserves adjacent to the project area.

Heritage (non- indigenous)

A search of the Australian Heritage Places Inventory, Heritage Council of Western Australia and the Shire of Exmouth’s Municipal Heritage Inventory on-line databases has indicated that there are no heritage significance listed sites present in the currently proposed works areas.

Aboriginal heritage

A search of DIA database identified no known sites of Aboriginal heritage significance within the vicinity of the project area.

Surface water/drainage

The proposed works will not disturb or interrupt any natural drainage and surface run-off patterns.

Wetlands There are no wetlands within the vicinity of the project area.

Groundwater No dewatering nor drainage modifications are required, hence no change to groundwater level or quality.

Noise and vibration

No major sensitive local receivers within proximity of works. No impacts expected.

Page 8 of 42

(9)

Table 1: Aspects and Impacts – Marilla Station Fencing Aspect Evaluation of Potential Impacts

Visual amenity The proposed works will not impact on the visual amenity of the area. Works are well off the road network.

Public safety and risk

The proposed works will serve to enhance public safety.

Hazardous substances

Not relevant to the proposed works.

Contamination Given the relatively superficial nature of the required earthworks, there appears to be a low risk of any significant contamination issues.

Salinity Given the nature and scale of the project the impact is not relevant.

Acid Sulfate Soils

The WAPC’s self-assessment (Planning Bulletin 64) indicates that no further soil investigation is required for the project.

Statutory Land Use Planning

As the proposed works are entirely within the existing road reserve, no further amendments would be required to the Local Government Planning Scheme or Region Scheme.

8 DECISION TO REFER

Given the scale of the project, the low significance of its impacts to the surrounding environment and the environmental management measures proposed, the project does not require referral to the WA Environmental Protection Authority or the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Heritage.

9 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

Name Agency Date Comments

Ben Lulfitz (Flora) DEC 14/03/07

Kellie Mantle (Fauna) DEC 14/03/07

(10)

10 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

This section of the report (the EMP) has been developed for the project area following the completion of the above sections. The main aim of this EMP is to provide a management plan to assist in minimising the environmental impacts of the activities associated with the proposed works and identify who is responsible for the implementation of the

management strategies.

This EMP will only address the actions already listed as well as any site-specific issues that were identified during the PEIA. The project specific management measures

identified within this EMP are in addition to the standard specifications used for Category 2 projects. The environmental management measures/conditions in Main Road’s

Specifications 203, 204, 301, 302 and 304 are still to be followed where applicable.

The areas that require special management will be addressed in terms of:

• the timing of the various management actions;

• the topic (e.g. vegetation);

• the objectives for each area;

• the actions that are necessary to minimise the impact;

• the responsible party for implementing the action; and

• whether the action arose from external advice or is a Main Roads requirement.

10.1 Communication Plan

Environmental issues specific to the project will be communicated as follow:

Method Frequency Participants Reference Record

Project Site

Induction Prior to Work All personnel and subcontractors

EMP and Contractor Environmental Policy

Induction Meeting

Authority Consultation Department of Environment and Conservation

As required Main Roads’

Project Manager and Contractor Project Manager

- Minutes of meeting

10.1.1 External Communication and Complaints

A complaints register shall be maintained by the contractor. All complaints received shall be forwarded to the Main Roads’ Project Manager for action. Serious complaints shall be investigated within 24 hours of the complaint being received.

Page 10 of 42

(11)

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Timing Topic Objective Action Responsible Party Advice

All phases of Construction

Vegetation Clearing - Record-keeping

All projects should maintain the required records relating to clearing native vegetation under the purpose permit.

Clearing:

• a copy of the PEIA & EMP (Minor projects) for small projects;

• a map showing the location where the clearing occurred, recorded in an ESRI Shapefile;

• the size of the area cleared (in hectares); and

• the dates on which the clearing was done.

Project Manager DEC

Pre-Construction Vegetation - Clearing

Ensure that the overall objectives of the alignment and construction works are compatible with maintaining and, where possible, enhancing the biological integrity of the surrounding environment and minimising

vegetation loss and degradation; and Ensure the retention of as many habitat trees, shrubs and vegetated corridors for fauna as possible, particularly where associated with riparian zones.

Selection of designs/locations that minimise adverse impacts on the biological environment.

Project Manager Main Roads Construction works to be undertaken in summer to reduce the

potential for soil erosion and drainage line siltation due to vegetation removal and heavy rains.

Project Manager Main Roads

Any stockpiled vegetation from clearing works shall not be burnt. This vegetation shall be used during any rehabilitation works and either chipped or replaced according to the EMP.

Contractor Main Roads

Construction Noise, Vibration and Dust

Ensure that the construction of the proposal does not become a nuisance to the public.

Access to private property and appropriate traffic management measures should be planned and implemented prior to the construction of works.

Contractor Main Roads

Works associated with the construction of the development should not prevent public access along the adjacent reserve.

Public access should be maintained along the reserve at all times.

Contractor Main Roads

Any complaints regarding dust will be attended to as soon as possible.

Contractor/Project Manager

Main Roads Construction Fire Ensure that the fire risk associated

with the construction of the proposal is minimised.

No fires shall be lit within the project area. Contractor Main Roads

Construction Site

Management

Ensure that the site is managed to ensure that construction of the proposal will have minimal impact upon the surrounding environment.

Materials storage areas will be located on previously disturbed/

designated area.

Contractor Main Roads

All waste materials from the development are to be completely removed from the site upon completion of the development.

Contractor Main Roads

(12)

11 CONTINGENCY MEASURES

Given the scale and nature of the project, no contingency measures are identified as the inherent environmental risks are small.

12 AUDITING

Given the scale and nature of the project, there is no requirement for auditing the implementation of the EMP as the environmental risks are small.

13 REFERENCES

Mitchell, A. A. and Wilcox, D. G. (1994) Arid Shrubland Plants of Western Australia, Second and Enlarged Edition. University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands, Western Australia. ISBN 1-874460-22-X.

Page 12 of 42

(13)

Appendix A

Low Impact Environmental Screening Checklist

(14)

Page 14 of 42

(15)

Appendix B

DEC’s Threatened Flora and Fauna Database Searches

and David Bauer’s Species List

(16)

Page 16 of 42

(17)
(18)

Page 18 of 42

(19)
(20)

Appendix C

Australian Heritage Places Inventory, Heritage Council of Western Australia and the Municipal Heritage Inventory

Database Searches

Page 20 of 42

(21)
(22)

Page 22 of 42

(23)
(24)

Page 24 of 42

(25)

Appendix D

Department of Indigenous Affairs Database Search

(26)

Page 26 of 42

(27)
(28)

Appendix E

DEC’s Sensitive Water Resources Database Search

Page 28 of 42

(29)

Appendix F

WAPC’s Acid Sulfate Soils Mapping

(30)

Page 30 of 42

(31)

Appendix G

Department of the Environment and Heritage Database

Search

(32)

Page 32 of 42

(33)
(34)

Page 34 of 42

(35)
(36)

Appendix H Site Photos

Page 36 of 42

(37)

Photograph 1: Proposed Fencing Line.

724.0 SLK North West Coastal Highway Left Hand Side .North View

Photograph 2: Proposed Fencing Line

726.7 SLK North West Coastal Highway

(38)

Photograph 3: Proposed Fencing Line 1.0 SLK Burkett Road

Left Hand Side. North West View

Photograph 4: Proposed Fencing Line 749.0 SLK North West Coastal Highway

Right Hand Side. South View

Page 38 of 42

(39)

Appendix I

Vegetation Clearing Assessment Report

(40)

MRWA Vegetation Clearing Assessment Report

This report has been prepared to assist MRWA in addressing condition 7 “Assessment of Clearing Impacts” under Clearing Permit CPS 818/3.

For guidance on how to complete the form, refer to DEC completed reports (active permits) at http://203.20.251.100/cps_reports/.

AREA UNDER ASSESSMENT DETAILS Proponent details

Proponent’s name: Main Roads Western Australia

Contacts: Name:Matthew Oswald

Phone:08 9941 0713 Fax: 08 9941 0701

Email:[email protected]

Property details

Property: Marrilla Station – North West Coastal Highway Colloquial name:

Area under assessment

Clearing Area (ha) No. Trees Method of Clearing For the purpose of: Site Plan Attached

16.425 0 Mechanical Fence Construction Yes No

BACKGROUND

Existing environment and information

Description of the native vegetation under application

Vegetation Description

Hummock grasslands, low tree & shrub steppe; scattered eucalypts, kanji over Triodia pungens & T. basedowii.’

This vegetation association is well represented in the region with 100% remaining Clearing Description

The proposal includes clearing of vegetation for the purpose of fence construction. The proposed area is 18.03 hectares. The vegetation under application mainly consists of grasses with few scattered shrubs.

Vegetation Condition

Fairly Good but has been somewhat degraded due to cattle grazing Comment

(suggestion: To determine Vegetation Condition use - Keighery, B.J. (1994) Bushland Plant Survey: A Guide to Plant Community Survey for the Community. Wildflower Society of WA (Inc). Nedlands, Western Australia.

)

Site Visit Undertaken Yes No

Fauna / Flora Survey Undertaken Yes No Site Report Attached Yes No

Fauna / Flora Survey Report Attached Yes No Site Photos Attached Yes No

Other Relevant References Attached Yes No

Vegetation Complex Clearing Description Vegetation Condition Comment

662 Mechanical Fair

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION AGAINST CLEARING PRINCIPLES

(a) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises a high level of biological diversity.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The area under application predominantly consists of grasses and a few scattered shrubs. The condition of the vegetation is somewhat degraded and does not represent a high level of biodiversity. This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site visit (12/02/07) GIS Databases:

- Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia – 28/03/07.

40 of 42

(41)

(b) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of, a significant habitat for fauna indigenous to Western Australia.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The area under application predominantly consists of grasses and a few scattered shrubs. The condition of the vegetation is somewhat degraded and does not represent a significant habitat for fauna. The EPBC Protected Matters Report found that the Mulgara is likely to occur within area. Due to the small clearing footprint necessary for the fencing construction, habitat of the Mulgara will not be depleted. This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site visit (12/02/07) DEC advice – 16/02/07

(c) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it includes, or is necessary for the continued existence of, rare flora.

Comments Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle

DEC Threatened Flora Database search was conducted and Owenia acidula was identified as occurring within the area.

Based upon a site visit with David Bauer (Consultant), this species was not identified with the works area, and is not expected to be impacted upon. It is therefore unlikely that the vegetation under application is necessary for significant flora.

This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site visit (12/02/07) GIS Databases:

- Declared Rare and Priority Flora list – DEC 22/03/07

(d) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of a threatened ecological community.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

There are no records of Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC’S) for the area under application. This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology GIS Databases:

- Threatened Ecological Communities – DEC 22/03/07

(e) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it is significant as a remnant of native vegetation in an area that has been extensively cleared.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The vegetation under application is representative of Beard Vegetation Association 2675 (Hopkins et al. 2001) of which there is 100% of the pre-European extent remaining (Shepherd et al.2001). In addition the application falls within the Carnarvon IBRA Bioregion which has 100% of the pre-European extent remaining (Shepherd et al. 2001). Beard Vegetating Association 2675 and the Carnarvon IBRA Bioregion are therefore both of ‘least concern’ for biodiversity conservation. This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology GIS Databases:

- Interim Biogeographic Reginalisation of Australia – 28/03/07 - Pre-European Vegetaion

(f) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it is growing in, or in association with, an environment associated with a watercourse or wetland.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The area under application does not consist of a watercourse or wetland . This proposal is therefore not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site visit (12/02/07)

DEC’s web based Geographic Data Atlas mapping tool GIS Databaes:

- Hydrography, linear

- Hydrographic Catchments – Catchments

(g) Native vegetation should not be cleared if the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause

appreciable land degradation.

(42)

- Acid Sulphate Soil risk map

(h) Native vegetation should not be cleared if the clearing of the vegetation is likely to have an impact on the environmental values of any adjacent or nearby conservation area.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The proposed project is not near any conservation areas and therefore is not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site Visit (12/02/07)

DEC’s web based Geographic Data Atlas mapping tool

(i) Native vegetation should not be cleared if the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause deterioration in the quality of surface or underground water.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The area under application only receives approximately 300mm of annual rainfall. Due to the low rainfall rate, this proposal will not cause deterioration in the quality of surface or under ground water and therefore not a variance to this Principle.

Methodology Site Visit (12/02/07)

DEC’s web based Geographic Data Atlas mapping tool

(j) Native vegetation should not be cleared if clearing the vegetation is likely to cause, or exacerbate, the incidence or intensity of flooding.

Comments Proposal is not at variance to this Principle

The soil consists of heavy red clays with dune sands. In addition the area under application only receives approximately 300mm of annual rainfall. Due to the nature of the soil and the low rainfall rate, his proposal will not exacerbate the incidence of flooding and therefore is not at variance with this Principle.

Methodology Site Visit (12/02/07) GIS Databases:

- Rainfall, Mean Annual – BOM 28/03/07

Planning instrument, Native Title, RIWI Act Licence, EP Act Licence, Works Approval, Previous EPA decision or other matter.

Comments

There is no further requirement for a RIWI Act Licence, Works Approval or EP Act Licence for the area under application.

Methodology

SUBMISSIONS

If required have submissions been requested and addressed

Submission Requested from Request Sent (Date) Submission Received (Date)

Issues Raised / Comments Made

ASSESSOR’S RECOMMENDATIONS

OFFICER PREPARING REPORT

Matthew Oswald (Graduate Environment Officer) Gascoyne Regional Office MRWA

Phone 08 9941 0713

Date 29/03/0

42 of 42

Figure

Table 1: Aspects and Impacts – Marilla Station Fencing   Aspect  Evaluation of Potential Impacts
Table 1: Aspects and Impacts – Marilla Station Fencing   Aspect  Evaluation of Potential Impacts

References

Related documents

In conclusion, the proposed design concept and environmental management strategy for the site demonstrate that the areas proposed for ‘Special Use’ zoning on Lot 911 Midland Rd,