4. Environmental Aspects
4.3 Assessment Against Clearing Principles
Clearing of native vegetation in Western Australia requires a permit under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986, except where an exemption applies under Schedule 6 of the Act or is prescribed by regulation in theEnvironmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004, and it is not within an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
Consultation of the DEC’s web based Native Vegetation Map Viewer and field investigations confirmed that the upgrade project does not occur within an ESA.
Clearing applications are assessed against ten principles outlined in Schedule 5 of the Environmental Protection Amendment Act 2003. These principles aim to ensure that all potential impacts resulting from removal of native vegetation can be assessed in an integrated way. An examination of the “10 Clearing Principles” applied against the findings of this Preliminary EIA and Biological Survey has been completed below (Table 11).
Table 11 Assessment of Project against the 10 Clearing Principles Principle
Number
Principle Assessment Outcome
(a) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises a high level of Biological diversity
The study area contains a high level of biodiversity, with over 150 flora taxa recorded from transects along each side of the South Coast Highway.
The proposed clearing for passing lanes 5 and 6 (P5 and P6) will occur in sections where the vegetation condition ranges from degraded to completely degraded and will miss areas with good to better vegetation condition ratings.
Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle.
(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
Significant faunal habitat is present along sections of the highway on its northern side along P5 and approximately between SLK 401-401.37 for P6 6.
Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle.
Provided the current proposal to clear <1 ha on the southern side of the highway (P5); and
<1 ha on the northern side not before SLK 401.4 remains, there will be no significant impact to fauna habitat.
Principle Number
Principle Assessment Outcome
(c) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it includes, or is necessary for the continued existence of, rare flora
No known Declared Rare Flora (DRF) species were recorded within the study area during the biological survey.
Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle.
(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
The EPBC Act and DEC search showed there are no TEC’s in the project area. This was confirmed by the biological survey.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
(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
A total of approximately 2 ha of native vegetation clearing is proposed. The vegetation community present in the study area is represented at 35.6%
remaining that is above the EPA’s Position Statement No. 2 threshold of 30% pre-clearing extent of the vegetation type (EPA, 2000). This was confirmed in consultation with the Bunbury DEC Office (Native Vegetation and Wetland Branch).
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
(f) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it is growing in, or in association with, an environment associated with a watercourse or wetland
No work or development is planned in proximity to the Young River or its tributaries;
hence no impacts to it are likely. A number of small wetlands and dams also occur adjacent to the project study area. Appropriate mitigation strategies should minimise runoff and sedimentation to these wetlands.
No wetland dependent vegetation will be impacted by the current proposal.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
Principle Number
Principle Assessment Outcome
(g) Native vegetation should not be cleared if the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause appreciable land degradation
This project scope has been considered as not likely to cause or increase the risk of appreciable land degradation.
Alteration of landscape (clearing vegetation) will occur as part of project works, but this is considered minor and appropriate mitigation plans (rehabilitation) will minimise any impact.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
(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
The nominal clearing proposed in areas with degraded and completely degraded condition vegetation adjacent to the existing highway will not impact upon any conservation area.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
(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
This proposed clearing of approximately 2 ha of native vegetation along the existing highway is not likely to cause deterioration of surface or ground waters. The DoW confirmed there are no
sensitive water receivers in the area. Main Roads will ensure there is no deterioration in surface or underground water quality by adhering to a project specific EMP.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
(j) Native vegetation should not be cleared if the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause, or exacerbate, the incidence or intensity of flooding
This project scope and limited extent of work proposed is unlikely to cause or exacerbate the risk of flooding in adjacent areas.
Proposal not at variance to this Principle.
Assessment against the 10 Clearing Principles shows that the current clearing proposed for the road project work can be undertaken in accordance with Main Roads Statewide project
“Clearing Permit” (CPS 818/3).