Ana səhifə

1. Application details Permit application details


Yüklə 60.8 Kb.
tarix07.05.2016
ölçüsü60.8 Kb.
Clearing Permit Decision Report




1.Application details

1.1.Permit application details


Permit application No.:

107/1

Permit type:

Area Permit

1.2.Proponent details


Proponent’s name:

MR Edward Rzemek

1.3.Property details


Property:

LOT 3462 ON PLAN 205129 (House No. 243 TANGLETOE MUCKENBURRA 6503)

Local Government Area:

Shire Of Gingin

Colloquial name:



1.4.Application


Clearing Area (ha)

No. Trees

Method of Clearing

For the purpose of:

5




Mechanical Removal

Cropping

7.05




Mechanical Removal

Horticulture

0.65




Mechanical Removal

Horticulture

2.Site Information

2.1.Existing environment and information

2.1.1.Description of the native vegetation under application


Vegetation Description

Clearing Description

Vegetation Condition

Comment

Low woodland of banksia, shrublands and tea tree thicket. Major species include Banksia menziesii, B. attenuata, Eucalyptus todtiana, Nuytsia floribunda, Casuarina sp, Hakea sp, Melaleuca preissiana, Melaleuca sp, Regelia sp, Xanthorrea sp

Low woodland of banksia, shrublands and tea tree thicket. Species as per the above list.

Excellent: Vegetation structure intact; disturbance affecting individual species, weeds non-aggressive (Keighery 1994)

The southern portion of the proposal is in Excellent condition. Some edges of the northern part of the proposal are in Good condition; away from the edges the vegetation is in Very Good condition.

3.Assessment of application against clearing principles

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


Comments







No field assessment was undertaken. No information was provided to enable an assessment against this Principle.


Methodology






  1. 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 likely to be at variance to this Principle




There appears to be a low probability of the proposed clearing to be at variance with this Principle based on minimal data available.


Methodology

GIS database: Threatened and Priority Fauna Database - CALM.

Zoologists/Regional advice.





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


Comments

Proposal may be at variance to this Principle




There is a reasonable likelihood of Priority flora occurring in the area. Two of the species are annual in nature, and hence a spring Flora survey is required to determine the occurrence and potential impact on the Priority flora (CALM 2004).


Methodology

GIS databases:

- Declared Rare and Priority Flora List - CALM 13/08/03.

- Threatened Flora Data Management System - CALM (CALM 2004) [The comprehensiveness of the database is dependent on the amount of survey carried out in the area and does not necessarily represent a current listing. The determination of the presence of rare or priority flora can only be made through appropriate flora survey; CALM 2004].

- Herbarium Specimen Collection Database - CALM (CALM 2004).





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


Comments

Proposal is at variance to this Principle




There is a medium to high probability of the proposed clearing to be in variance with this Principle (CALM 2004). CALM recommends that a habitat assessment, particularly of the adjacent lower area in the south, to determine the likelihood of the TEC being present. If there is a likelihood, then a survey be carried out to determine the presence of TECs that may occur at the site. TECs can either be inferred by comparison of characteristics of known TEC occurrences with this site or through analysis of plot-based floristic data. For plant-based TECs, survey will need to be undertaken at the appropriate time of year, and any plots scored at least twice - usually spring and late spring.


Methodology

GIS databases:

- Threatened Ecological Community Database - CALM 15/07/03.

Likelihood based on WATSCU/Regional Advice.




(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







Vegetation representation for the area is high.
Pre-European Current Remaining Conservation Reserves/CALM-

area (ha) extent (ha) %* status** managed land, % veg

IBRA Bioregion -

Swan Coastal Plain 1,498,297*** 626,512 41.8 Depleted 23.8

Shire - Gingin 315,560 177,688 56.3 Least Concern

Beard veg type - 1014 48,359 25,871 53.5 Least Concern 50.5

Heddle veg type -

Bassendean Complex North 74,147 53,384 72.0 Least Concern 38.2

* Shepherd et al. (2001)

** Department of Natural Resources and Environment (2002)

*** Area within the Intensive Landuse Zone


Methodology

Shepherd et al. (2001).

GIS databases:

- Pre-European Vegetation - DA 01/01.

- Heddle Vegetation Complexes - DEP 21/06/95.








(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 at variance to this Principle




There is a dampland on the southern edge of the area under application, which is evaluated as Conservation status. A buffer of 200m would affect most of this proposal.


Methodology

GIS databases:

- Hydrography, linear - DOE 01/02/04.

- Geomorphic wetlands - Swan Coastal Plain - DOE 15/09/04.

- EPP, Areas - DEP 06/95.

- EPP, Lakes - DEP 28/07/03.

- EPP, Wetlands (draft) - DEP 21/07/04.

- ANCA wetlands - CALM 08/01.




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


Comments

Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle




DAWA (2004) report:

Proposed clearing of 5 hectares of native vegetation on Swan Loc 3462 is not likely to cause appreciable on site and off site land degradation if appropriate management strategies are implemented to minimise the risk of eutrophication and wind erosion (DAWA 2004).




Methodology

Site assessment.

DAWA (2004).





(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 may be at variance to this Principle




CALM managed areas known to occur in the local area.
Swan Location 3462 (part of which is under this clearing proposal) is adjacent to lake Muckenburra (consisting of Crown Reserves 20366 and 25431) which is listed as a C14 System 6 recommended area (Conservation Reserves for Western Australia. The Darling System - System 6. Part I & II. 1983. Department of Conservation and Environment). Lake Muckenburra is known to contain an TEC occurrence, Priority flora and EPP Lakes. The potential impact of the proposed clearing on the environmental values of Lake Muckenburra is unknown.


Methodology

GIS database - CALM Managed Lands and Water – CALM 01/08/04.



(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 may be at variance to this Principle




No information has been presented to make a determination on this Clearing Principle. Local hydrology is complex and more information should be presented for further assessment on this issue.


Methodology






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


Comments

Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle




Not assessed.


Methodology






(k) Planning instrument or other matter.


Comments

Proposal is not at variance to this Principle





A Water Licence is required due to this being in the Gingin GWA. The Shire of Gingin advises that development approval is required for a commercial horticulture.

Methodology



4.Assessor’s recommendations


The recommendations of the Department of Environment to the CEO of the Department should be made consistent with the outcomes of the assessment by each of the agencies. Any conditions on the approval should also be outlined. These may be developed in consultation with such other agencies as required.

Purpose

Method

Applied

area (ha)/ trees

Decision

Comment / recommendation

Cropping

Mechanical Removal

5




Refuse

There is a reasonable likelihood of priority flora and a threatened ecological community in the area under application.
The Wetlands Conservation Policy requires a 200m buffer to conservation wetlands which prohibits the majority of the proposed clearing, allowing only 2.9ha that can be cleared. Since this policy prohibits the current proposal, and alternative arrangements are not suitable for the applicant, the application should be refused.
The proponent has indicated that he does not want to provide secondary assessment information of the remaining 2.9ha. [If a secondary assessment was to proceed, a flora survey should be conducted at an appropriate time of year to determine the existence of Priority Species. In addition a Habitat Assessment of the proposed area is required to determine the likelihood of Threatened Ecological Communities being present. This should occur twice, at an appropriate time of the year, being spring and late spring.]
In order to determine the likelihood of the effect of the proposal on the nearby Lake Muckenburra Reserve and other wetlands, further information is required to determine the effects of clearing on local wetlands with particular emphasis on the Lake Muckenburra Reserve and its associated TECs and priority Flora.


Horticulture

Mechanical Removal

7.05







This area is immediately to the east of the first and is primarily cleared. Proposal is to remove approx 6 or 7 paddock trees and about 60 grass trees spread over the 7.05ha. Above-mentioned comments are applicable to this area as the entire 12.7ha (5+7.05+0.65) proposal has been assessed as one.


Horticulture

Mechanical Removal

0.65







A triangular extension of the western portion of the native vegetation block that is to the north of the 5ha proposal. Above-mentioned comments are applicable to this area as the entire 12.7ha (5+7.05+0.65) proposal has been assessed as one.






































5.References


DEP (2002) Remnant vegetation of the Swan Coastal Plain Bioregion within the System 6 and System 1. Department of Environmental Protection, Perth.

CALM (2004) Land clearing proposal advice. Department of Conservation and Land Management Advice to A/Director General, Department of Environment (DoE). Department of Conservation and Land Management, Western Australia. DoE TRIM ref CEO1322/04.

DAWA (2004) Land degradation assessment report. Office of the Commissioner of Soil and Land Conservation, Department of Agriculture Western Australia. DoE TRIM ref CEO1165/04.

Department of Natural Resources and Environment (2002) Biodiversity Action Planning. Action planning for native biodiversity at multiple scales ; catchment bioregional, landscape, local. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria.

EPA (1992) Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) Policy 1992. Western Australian Government Gazette, 24 December , 1992, pp 6287-93

EPA (1999) Review of the Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plains Lakes) Policy 1992. Environmental Protection Authority.

EPA (2001) Environmental Protection of Wetlands. Preliminary Position Statement No.4. Perth, Western Australia.

EPA (2003) Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors -level of assessment of proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 Region. Report by the EPA under the Environmental Protection Act 1986. No 10 WA.

Government of Western Australia (1997) Wetlands Conservation Policy for Western Australia, Department of Conservation and Land Management and the Water and Rivers Commission, Perth WA.

Hill, A.L., Semenuik, C. A, Semenuik, V. Del Marco, A. (1996) Wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain. Volume 2b, Wetland mapping, classification and evaluation. Wetland Atlas. WRC and DEP. Perth WA.

Keighery, BJ (1994) Bushland Plant Survey: A Guide to Plant Community Survey for the Community. Wildflower Society of WA (Inc). Nedlands, Western Australia.

Shepherd, D.P., Beeston, G.R. and Hopkins, A.J.M. (2001) Native Vegetation in Western Australia, Extent, Type and Status. Resource Management Technical Report 249. Department of Agriculture, Western Australia.








Page


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©anasahife.org 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət