Pilbara Bioregion - EPBC Act Policy Statement - Consultation - January 2024

Pilbara Bioregion: EPBC Act Policy Statement
Pilbara Bioregion: EPBC Act

Policy Statement
Expectations and avoidance requirements for
referral and assessment of proposed projects in the
Pilbara bioregion
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

1
© Commonwealth of Australia 2023
Ownership of intellectual property rights
Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights) in this publication is owned by the
Commonwealth of Australia (referred to as the Commonwealth).
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any
process without written permission from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. For more
information about this Draft Policy Statement, contact:

GPO Box 3090 Canberra ACT 2601
Telephone 1800 900 090
Web dcceew.gov.au
Email: pilbara@dcceew.gov.au.
Disclaimer
The Australian Government acting through the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water has
exercised due care and skill in preparing and compiling the information and data in this publication. Notwithstanding, the
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, its employees and advisers disclaim all liability,
including liability for negligence and for any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of
accessing, using or relying on any of the information or data in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.
Acknowledgement of Country
Our department recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to culture and country. We
acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living
culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.

2
Contents
1 Policy Statement ................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Policy Objectives.................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Pilbara Bioregion ................................................................................................................. 6
1.3 Policy Scope ......................................................................................................................... 8
1.4 Regulatory Pathways ........................................................................................................... 8
2 Regulatory Expectations .......................................................................................................11
2.1 Conservation Objectives .................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Mitigation Hierarchy.......................................................................................................... 11
2.3 Information Standards ...................................................................................................... 13
3 Pilbara EPBC Act Listed Threatened Species ..........................................................................16
3.1 Habitat Definitions ............................................................................................................ 16
3.2 Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) ............................................................................... 17
3.3 Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis) ........................................................................................ 23
3.4 Pilbara Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus barroni) .................................................................. 29
3.5 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (Rhinonicteris aurantia) (Pilbara form) ........................................ 34
3.6 Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas) ......................................................................................... 43
3.7 Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) ............................................................................... 52
3.8 Grey Falcon (Falco hypoleucos) ......................................................................................... 59
3.9 Princess Parrot (Polytelis alexandrae) ............................................................................... 65
3.10 Great Desert Skink (Liopholis kintorei) .............................................................................. 70
4 Environmental Offsets ..........................................................................................................76
4.1 Residual Significant Impacts .............................................................................................. 76
4.2 Commencement of Offsets ............................................................................................... 78
4.3 Offset Design ..................................................................................................................... 78
4.4 Offset Information Requirements ..................................................................................... 79
4.5 Pilbara Environmental Offsets Fund.................................................................................. 84
4.6 Advanced offsets ............................................................................................................... 86
4.7 Offset Pathways................................................................................................................. 87
5 Review and Evaluation .........................................................................................................91
5.1 Review of scientific literature............................................................................................ 91
5.2 Evaluating the Policy ......................................................................................................... 91
6 Attachments ........................................................................................................................93
7 References ...........................................................................................................................94
8 End Notes .......................................................................................................................... 103

3
Tables
Table 3-1 Listed threatened species included in the policy. ................................................................. 16
Table 3-2 Northern Quoll habitat definitions ........................................................................................ 18
Table 3-3 Northern Quoll: mitigation of impacts .................................................................................. 19
Table 3-4 Greater Bilby habitat definitions ........................................................................................... 24
Table 3-5 Greater Bilby: mitigation of impacts ..................................................................................... 25
Table 3-6 Pilbara Olive Python habitat definitions................................................................................ 29
Table 3-7 Pilbara Olive Python: mitigation of impacts .......................................................................... 31
Table 3-8 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat habitat definitions ............................................................................ 36
Table 3-9 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat mitigation of impacts ....................................................................... 39
Table 3-10 Ghost Bat habitat definitions .............................................................................................. 45
Table 3-11 Ghost Bat: mitigation of impacts......................................................................................... 47
Table 3-12 Night Parrot habitat definitions .......................................................................................... 53
Table 3-13 Night Parrot: mitigation of impacts ..................................................................................... 55
Table 3-14 Grey Falcon habitat definitions ........................................................................................... 60
Table 3-15 Grey Falcon: mitigation of impacts ..................................................................................... 61
Table 3-16 Princess Parrot habitat definitions ...................................................................................... 65
Table 3-17 Princess Parrot: mitigation of impacts ................................................................................ 67
Table 3-18 Great Desert Skink habitat definitions ................................................................................ 70
Table 3-19 Great Desert Skink mitigation of impacts............................................................................ 72
Table 4-1 Maximum research offset contribution for the nine listed threatened species ................... 81
Table 4-2 Priority threat matrix and offset pathways of impact pathways .......................................... 87
Figures
Figure 1-1 Pilbara IBRA region and subregions ....................................................................................... 8
Figure 3-1 Northern Quoll survey and avoidance areas (640 m radius/129 ha area) ........................... 19
Figure 3-2 Greater Bilby survey and avoidance areas (1.5 km radius) .................................................. 25
Figure 3-3 Pilbara Olive Python survey and avoidance areas (365 ha area) ......................................... 31
Figure 3-4 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat survey and avoidance areas (500 m area) ...................................... 38
Figure 3-5 Ghost Bat survey and avoidance areas (500 m area) ........................................................... 47
Figure 3-6 Night Parrot survey and avoidance areas ............................................................................ 54
Figure 3-7 Grey Falcon survey and avoidance areas ............................................................................. 61
Figure 3-8 Princess Parrot survey and avoidance areas ........................................................................ 66
Figure 3-9 Great Desert Skink survey and avoidance areas .................................................................. 72

4
1 Policy Statement
This policy identifies minimum avoidance requirements and recommended mitigation and offsetting
measures for proposed development in the Pilbara bioregion likely to significantly impact one or
more of the following listed threatened species protected under Part 3 of the Environment Protection
and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act):
• Northern Quoll
• Greater Bilby
• Pilbara Olive Python
• Pilbara Leaf-nosed bat
• Ghost Bat
• Night Parrot
• Grey Falcon
• Princess Parrot
• Great Desert Skink
The policy also sets species-specific minimum information requirements for developers and their
consultants when surveying for species habitat at proposed impact sites, preparing EPBC Act
referrals, environmental impact assessment documentation, and proposed offset strategies or
management plans.
This policy has been developed to inform persons proposing new or expanded developments in the
Pilbara bioregion to:
1. design and locate projects that avoid and minimise impacts to these listed threatened
species to an acceptable level, and
2. prepare good quality referral and assessment information that is relevant, reliable and
complete.
It is expected that all proposed developments in the Pilbara bioregion likely to have a significant
impact on one or more of these listed threatened species will be designed to include the avoidance
standards and recommended mitigation and offsetting measures set out in this policy.
1.1 Policy Objectives

Matters of national environmental significance (or protected matters) represent the elements of the
environment and heritage that the Australian, state and territory governments have all agreed are in
our national interest to protect, conserve and restore. The protection of these matters under the
EPBC Act is guided by the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
As a regulator, the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (the
department) has an important role to protect matters of national environmental significance and
ensure we are achieving the best possible environmental outcomes. We achieve this through the
assessment and regulation of proposed developments to ensure that impacts to matters of national

5
environmental significance are kept to an acceptable level for the matters’ ongoing persistence in the
region.
The key objectives of this policy are to:
1. achieve more efficient assessment of developments proposed in the Pilbara bioregion, and
2. promote ecologically sustainable development in the Pilbara bioregion, by requiring effective
application of the mitigation hierarchy.
Application of this policy is also expected to achieve the following outcomes.
1. Listed threatened species identified in this policy do not become more threatened, at the
regional level, as result of cumulative impacts of development in the Pilbara bioregion.
2. Promote effective engagement between the department and proponents prior to referral of
proposed developments in the Pilbara bioregion.
3. Avoidance measures in respect of impacts to critical breeding habitat and other ecologically
sustainable design measures are incorporated in early proposal design for projects in the
Pilbara bioregion.
4. Environmental assessment information submitted for projects proposed in the Pilbara
bioregion is relevant, reliable and complete.
5. Time taken by the department to assess proposed developments in the Pilbara bioregion is
reduced (and includes fewer requests for additional information).
6. More consistent, evidence-based decision-making and conditions of approvals for projects in
the Pilbara bioregion.
The department expects proponents to actively engage with, and support opportunities for working
with, First Nations peoples as early as possible. Appropriate stakeholder engagement is
fundamentally important to designing and delivering suitable avoidance, mitigation and offsetting
measures for any protected matters to be impacted.
1.2 Pilbara Bioregion

The Pilbara is a unique biogeographical region located in north-west Australia (Figure 1-1), which
hosts a wealth of ecosystems including terrestrial, aquatic, and marine environments. It supports
high value biodiversity including iconic and endemic species (McKenzie et al. 2009; Carwardine et al.
2014). Despite the Pilbara being an arid region of Australia, it supports an abundance of habitats
including rocky hills and mountain remnants, grassland savannahs, gorges, wetlands (including with
mangroves) and tropical woodlands along the coast (DBCA 2016).
Covering approximately 178,000 km2, the Pilbara bioregion is divided into four Interim Biogeographic
Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) subregions (Figure 1-1), comprising the Fortescue, Hamersley,
Chichester and Roebourne (Environment Australia 2000). These subregions are characterised by
dominant landscapes such as the coastal plains and offshore islands of the Roebourne subregion, the
ridges and tablelands of the Chichester and Hamersley subregions, and the low-lying alluvial flats of
the Fortescue subregion.

6
Figure 1-1 Pilbara IBRA region and subregions the geographic extent of the Pilbara Interim Biogeographic
Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) region outlined in black polygon and subregions outlined in yellow
polygons located within Western Australia of Australia.
The Pilbara bioregion has a rich and extensive First Nations cultural history, with some estimates that
the area was occupied 30–40,000 years before European colonisation (Wangka Maya 2021) and
others up to 50,000 or more (Dortch et al. 2019). The Pilbara bioregion has 31 Aboriginal cultural
groups that are mostly referred to as language groups. These cultural groups are considered highly
spiritual Peoples that are connected through and maintained by certain land features and areas
within the Pilbara. Custodianship is embedded into this connection to the Pilbara ‘country’ and
evidence of continuous ecosystem management (Dortch et al. 2019).
The Pilbara is hot and dry - evaporation exceeds rainfall by up to 3,000 mm/year across much of the
region. All surface streams other than parts of Fortescue Marsh are ephemeral, frequently flooding in
wet seasons and drying out over dry seasons. Groundwater is found in both perched and deeper
regional aquifers (DoW 2010; CSIRO 2015). Life in arid regions is frequently limited by water, and
sustained water sources, typically streams, springs and waterholes in the Pilbara, are highly valued by
all surrounding ecosystems. As discussed in Section 3, alterations of surface water and groundwater
systems, such as artificial water sources provided for cattle and dewatering of deeper mine pits, can
present direct and indirect threats (Mouritz et al. 2022) to the listed species considered in this
report.
Considered nationally and globally significant for its natural resources, the Pilbara bioregion is an
important area for conservation efforts for many reasons. The bioregion contains many native
species, some that are endemic to the Pilbara, which have adapted to the highly seasonal rainfall and
the unique geological and hydrological features.
The Pilbara bioregion is one of Australia’s development hotspots due to the volumes of iron ore, gas,
and other resources, and contributes substantial economic benefits both for Western Australia and
broader Australia (McKenzie et al. 2009). As stated in a report by the Western Australia (WA)
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) (EPA 2014), the cumulative impacts of project
development in the Pilbara bioregion have the potential to undermine the biodiversity of the region.

7
1.3 Policy Scope

This policy was informed by a review of scientific literature and studies of species’ ecology
predominantly from the Pilbara bioregion. This policy applies to projects occurring wholly or partly
within the Pilbara bioregion. A map of the Pilbara bioregion is available at Australia's bioregions
(IBRA) - DCCEEW.
Although most of the listed threatened species identified in this policy occur more broadly, this
policy is not intended to inform the design or assessment of projects outside the Pilbara bioregion.
Due to constraints in identifying survey and mitigation hierarchy requirements for all EPBC Act
protected matters in the Pilbara bioregion, this policy is limited to species that are commonly
impacted by development or at high risk of imminent extinction or highly restricted or limited in
distribution.
Future reviews of this policy may identify and include additional listed threatened species or other
matters protected under Part 3 of the EPBC Act in the Pilbara bioregion.
This policy does not replace the EPBC Act Significant Impact Guidelines and should be read in
conjunction with those Guidelines. Where proposed developments may impact on other protected
matters or controlling provisions of the EPBC Act, proponents should refer to relevant EPBC Act
policy statements and guidance, including:
• Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 – Matters of National Environmental Significance

• Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 – Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land and
Actions by Commonwealth Agencies
All of the department’s EPBC Act publications and resources are available from its website:
https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/epbc/publications.
1.4 Regulatory Pathways

The policy aims to support an efficient assessment of proposed developments in the Pilbara
bioregion that will have or are likely to have a significant impact on one or more of the nine species
identified in this policy.
Significant Impact Assessment
Direct and indirect impacts from mining and infrastructure development in the Pilbara bioregion
have extensively affected species populations across their range. The impact of development that
has already occurred, combined with the current and future development potential in the bioregion,
increases the risk of extinction for the listed threatened species identified in this policy.
In determining whether a proposed development is likely to be a controlled action, the Minister may
have regard to the cumulative effect of a proposal, and in combination with other developments, on
a species population, depending on the circumstances of the proposal. The Minister may decide that
a proposed development in the Pilbara bioregion is likely to have a significant impact on a matter
protected by Part 3 of the EPBC Act because the proposed development is likely to result in an
impact that is known to directly or indirectly lead to their decline (refer to Threat and Impact
Pathways tables for each species in Section 3).

8
Proposed developments that will result in an impact that is known to directly or indirectly lead to the
decline of one or more of the species identified in this policy, is likely to have a significant impact on
a matter of national environmental significance and should be referred for a decision on whether
assessment and approval is required under the EPBC Act.
To better understand the potential impact of your project and check whether your proposed
development needs to be referred for assessment, a self-assessment should be undertaken. The
self-assessment requires a developed understanding of the EPBC Act assessment process, the
ecology of relevant species, as well as broader ecological concepts. You may need to seek assistance
from suitably qualified or experienced people when undertaking a self-assessment.
Keep a record of your self-assessment to demonstrate your thinking on why you did or did not refer
your proposal. Note that the department may need to investigate, and it may be a serious offence, if
you start a proposed development without approval.
Early Engagement
Where you self-assess your proposed development as likely to have a significant impact on any of the
listed threatened species identified in this policy, you are strongly encouraged to discuss your
proposal with the department. Engage with us as early in the planning phase of your project as
possible. In some cases, this could be several years prior to referral of the proposed development for
assessment. Earlier engagement increases the chance of avoiding delays and information requests
during assessment.
Early engagement with the department can also assist you to understand, properly apply, and
incorporate the mitigation hierarchy into the design of the proposed development at the conceptual
and planning stages, potentially saving time and project redesign costs at later stages.
You should be aware that there may be obligations to consult with First Nations peoples and
communities in relation to, for example, Native Title and Indigenous Protected Areas. Relevant First
Nations peoples and communities should also be engaged appropriately and as early in the project
planning phase as possible to ensure that First Nations interests and cultural heritage can be
protected as projects are designed. You should keep a record of this engagement as the department
will require this information to be provided as part of the referral and assessment process. The
Interim Engaging with First Nations People and Communities on Assessments and Approvals under
the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (interim guidance) sets out the
department’s expectations of proponents engaging with First Nations people and communities under
the EPBC Act.
Referral of a proposed development

When referring a proposed development in the Pilbara bioregion, the department expects referral
documentation will address all surveying and mitigation hierarchy information requirements outlined
in Section 3 of this policy. This includes supporting spatial data in Shapefile format. The referral
documentation should clearly demonstrate application of this policy, including how the avoidance
standards and mitigation measures have been applied, and if appropriate, an environmental offsets
plan or strategy.

9
The Assessment Process

Where it is determined that a proposed development will have or is likely to have a significant impact
on any of the listed threatened species identified in this policy, the proponent or person proposing to
take the proposed development should ensure an environmental impact assessment is undertaken in
accordance with the information standards and survey guidelines, and mitigation hierarchy outlined
in Section 3 of this policy.
The department anticipates it will expedite the assessment process if:
• Early engagement with the department has taken place.

• The only controlling provision relevant to the proposed development is listed threatened
species and communities (Sections 18 and 18A of the EPBC Act).
• Listed threatened species that will be or are likely to be impacted include one or more of the
species in Section 3.
• Application of this policy to the proposed development is effectively demonstrated in

assessment documentation.
The full benefit of expedited assessments is expected when these criteria are met at the referral
stage. An expedited assessment will not be entirely achievable for development proposals
determined as likely to significantly impact migratory species or other protected matters not
identified in this policy. This is due to impact pathways, surveying, avoidance, mitigation or offsetting
measures specific to numerous other protected matters in the Pilbara bioregion not yet addressed in
this policy.

10
2 Regulatory Expectations
The Australian Government is committed to decision making that protects and prevents extinctions
of listed threatened species appropriately under Australian legislation. This includes halting
biodiversity loss, promoting environment-friendly development and using nature-based solutions to
protect, restore and manage our most precious habitats, places and species.1 The application of the
expectations outlined in this policy will result in better regulatory certainty for project development.
This will likely lead to faster assessments as proponents will have clear guidelines to follow that can
be incorporated into project plans, years ahead of referral submission if necessary.
This policy provides a strategic approach to managing project-by-project and cumulative impacts on
the listed threatened species within the Pilbara bioregion. Our analysis has confirmed that
cumulative impacts on, and survival requirements of, each of these listed threatened species are not
yet well quantified in the Pilbara. This policy aims to manage cumulative impacts by assessing all
impacts to listed threatened species and applying the mitigation hierarchy consistently.
Implementation of this policy, supported by monitoring of important species metrics will improve
our understanding of cumulative impacts on the listed threatened species.
2.1 Conservation Objectives

Application of the avoidance, mitigation and offset measures in this policy when designing proposed
developments and implementing approved projects and offsets in the Pilbara bioregion is expected
to contribute to the following conservation objectives:
1. Protect, repair and restore habitat and likely areas of occupancy for the target species.
2. Protect, repair and restore connectivity of habitat for the target species.
3. Improve scientific knowledge of the nine target species.
The department will consider how these conservation objectives will be achieved by each proposed
development when engaging and providing early advice to proponents, assessing development
proposals, applying the mitigation hierarchy, through offset management plans and strategies, and
conditions of approval.
Monitoring and reporting in relation to these objectives may be required as a condition of approval.
For example, you may be required to report on the area of habitat within or adjacent to a project and
whether it continues to be protected from impact over the life of the project. You may also be
required to monitor and report on the success of offsets e.g., to repair and restore connectivity or
increase the likely areas of occupancy of a species.
Evaluation of how successfully the regulated industry and the department is achieving these
conservation objectives is discussed in Section 5 Review and Evaluation.
2.2 Mitigation Hierarchy

The Mitigation Hierarchy framework (Mitigation Hierarchy) is a tool that is used to limit the amount
of damage an action, such as a development, will have on the environment. The Mitigation Hierarchy

11
is aimed at avoiding or, where this is not feasible, minimising the impacts that a proposed
development will or is likely to have, and to balance environmental impacts with offsets.
Applying the Mitigation Hierarchy aligns with the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
The hierarchy establishes avoidance of impacts as the priority, then to reduce remaining impacts
through mitigation measures. Only once these options are exhausted, any residual significant
impacts must be offset. The generic requirements for each of the Mitigation Hierarchy tiers are
explained in the following subsections. Section 3 of the policy sets out further detail of how the
Mitigation Hierarchy will generally be applied to activities affecting the nine targeted species in the
Pilbara bioregion.
2.2.1 Avoid
Avoiding direct and indirect impacts is one of the best ways to protect listed threatened species. It is
often the easiest, most cost effective and efficient approach to minimising negative impacts when
considered in project planning.
In Section 3 of this policy, avoidance standards are set out for each of the listed threatened species in
the Pilbara bioregion. These standards have been developed based on statutory documentation and
best available scientific information. The avoidance standards are species-specific because each
species requires particular habitat to support their survival, breeding success, and persistence in the
landscape.
The avoidance standards concern areas encompassing environmental features that are critical to the
survival of each species, for example, critical habitat features for breeding (e.g., dens, burrows,
roosts and nests), landscape features (e.g., foraging areas, waterholes, dispersal features) and areas
of species occurrence.
All development proposals must consider and maximise opportunities to avoid direct and indirect
impacts to these areas in the design of a proposed development to support the species’ survival.
Protection of avoidance areas from direct and indirect impacts are likely to be specified in conditions
of approval for approved developments in the Pilbara bioregion. Approval conditions are also likely
to require monitoring of these avoidance areas to demonstrate the ongoing effectiveness of the
required avoidance measures.
2.2.2 Mitigate
Mitigation measures are management actions that have been designed to minimise and reduce
direct and indirect impacts to protected matters.
Section 3 of this policy under ‘Mitigation measures’ sets out key impact pathways and suggested
mitigation measures for each of the nine listed threatened species identified in this policy. The
referred development proposal should fully characterise the extent of these impact pathways for
each of the species and provide suitable evidence of how the proposed mitigation measure will be
effective in reducing direct and indirect impacts to the listed threatened species for the duration of
the proposed development. Mitigation measures will likely need to be applied for the life of the
impact, across the development envelope and undertaken within any areas subject to avoidance
standards.

12
2.2.3 Offset
Environmental offsets can be considered for a proposed development only once higher tiers of the
Mitigation Hierarchy have been applied to the fullest extent possible. If there is a remaining residual
significant impact, offsets are required that ensure a conservation gain for the species and the
environment. In this policy, a range of priority offset activities are provided for each of the listed
threatened species in Section 4. These offset options may be delivered either through the Western
Australian government Department of Water and Environmental Regulation’s (DWER) Pilbara
Environmental Offsets Fund (the Fund) or delivered by the approval holder or a service supplier on
their behalf. These assessment expectations align with the key aims and principles of the EPBC
Environmental Offsets Policy (2012).
2.3 Information Standards

Where you self-assess that a proposed development will have or is likely to have a significant impact
on any of the listed threatened species identified in this policy, in addition to completing all
questions on the department’s referral form, you should provide supporting information when
referring the proposed development.
The department expects referral documentation will address all surveying and mitigation hierarchy
information requirements outlined in Section 3 of this policy. This includes supporting spatial data in
Shapefile format. The referral documentation should clearly demonstrate application of this policy,
including how the avoidance standards and mitigation measures have been applied, and if
appropriate, an environmental offsets plan or strategy.
The department strongly encourages outlining your proposed avoidance, mitigation and offsetting
measures at the referral stage, in accordance with this policy, as this will reduce the likelihood that
the department will need to request additional information and achieve a faster assessment.2
To avoid additional information requests and enable faster assessments, you must collect and submit
relevant environmental data that is robust, complete, accurate, clear, up to date and addresses the
requirements described in Subsections 2.3.1 – 2.3.3.
To ensure transparency and accountability, the department may conduct random audits to confirm
environmental information provided within environmental impact assessments is accurate.
2.3.1 Avoidance Information Requirements

Species-specific avoidance standards (or minimum avoidance requirements) are set out at
Subsection 2.2 and Section 3. Avoidance standards are informed by current scientific knowledge on
species’ ecological requirements to support its ongoing persistence.
To identify these habitat features and understand species presence in and around proposed
development sites (and therefore identify which areas must be avoided), you must undertake
surveys to fully characterise how each of the listed threatened species are permanently or
periodically using landscape features for breeding, foraging and dispersing across the development
envelope and the surrounding region in some cases. Historical survey data can also be used to inform
the species’ use of the development envelope. Specific information requirements for each of the
listed threatened species have been provided in Section 3.

13
Habitat and species-specific surveys will need to be undertaken at appropriate scale and in
appropriate timeframes to fully characterise how the listed threatened species are using the local
landscape. The size of the survey areas, and the amount of survey effort (e.g., methods for
identifying species detections and frequency of surveys) necessary for this purpose will vary for each
species.
As well as informing appropriate application of the Mitigation Hierarchy, the survey effort must be
designed to provide suitable baseline conditions for each of the species and habitat characteristics
that will be used to support on-going monitoring of avoidance areas.
The surveys should be used to inform how the avoidance standards have been applied for each
species likely to be present (see Section 3). All survey results should be provided as part of the
referred development information if an expedited approval is sought. Landscape characterisation
maps showing habitat and spatial data should be provided indicating how the avoidance standards
have been applied. All supporting information including species survey and habitat characterisation
data, should be provided in a clear manner, and should include Shapefiles defining specific avoidance
or activity-controlled zones. Guides to providing maps and boundary details and biological survey and
mapped data are available on the department’s website:
• Guide to providing maps and boundary data for EPBC Act projects - DCCEEW
• Guidelines for biological survey and mapped data - DCCEEW
2.3.2 Mitigation Information Requirements

To implement effective mitigation measures, each of the possible impact pathways must be fully
characterised within and adjacent3 to the development envelope for each of the project
components. These characterisations may be in the form of predictions based on evidence for each
of these direct and indirect impacts (e.g., blasting vibrations impacts on bat roosting caves) or
surveys (e.g., feral animal presence).
The information required to inform mitigation assessments will vary with each proposed
development and species affected, but as a minimum should include:
• Mitigation measures that will be applied for each of the direct and indirect impact pathways
with clear and detailed triggers, thresholds and management actions that will be
implemented. Each of the mitigation measures will need to be supported by on-going
monitoring for the life of an approval. Recommended mitigation measures have been
provided for each species in Section 3.
• Detailed analysis and discussion on how proposed mitigations will effectively reduce threats
or improve specific functional habitat characteristics impacting listed threatened species,
including proposed implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation indicators that will
be used to determine the effectiveness of the mitigations if enacted.
2.3.3 Offset Information Requirements

Any offset management plan or offset strategy should be provided at the time of the referral. It
should clearly outline the possible residual significant impact on each relevant species, the offset
pathway(s) that will be undertaken, and a discussion on how the proposed offset will meet the
conservation objectives for each species to be offset. Section 4 of this policy sets our recommended
priority offset pathways.

14
All offset proposals should provide the following minimum information with the referred
development proposal:
• The proposed scope, timeframe and milestones (e.g., commencement and completion) for
the offsets, and party or parties responsible for offset delivery.
• A discussion on how the offset will result in a conservation gain for the impacted species
within the Pilbara bioregion, relative to the impacts to species which are predicted to occur if
the proposed development is approved.
• Details of the proposed monitoring and evaluation approach for the offset measures, and
how success will be measured (see Section 4). These should include clear and measurable
triggers which can be used to monitor the effectiveness of each offset measure.
• Demonstrate how the offset actions leverage regional conservation efforts and support First
Nations objectives within the Pilbara bioregion.

15
3 Pilbara EPBC Act Listed Threatened

Species
As of January 2024, in the Pilbara there are total of 62 listed threatened species protected under
Sections 18 and 18A of the EPBC Act. Nine of the 62 listed threatened species have been considered
in this policy and have been listed in Table 3-1. Based on previously referred development proposals
within the Pilbara bioregion under the EPBC Act, these species are commonly impacted or at high risk
of imminent extinction or highly restricted or limited in distribution, therefore, the focus of this
policy.
Table 3-1 Listed threatened species included in the policy
Species Common Name Species Scientific Name EPBC Act Listing Status
Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus Endangered
Greater Bilby Macrotis lagotis Vulnerable
Pilbara Olive Python Liasis olivaceus barroni Vulnerable
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Rhinonicteris aurantia (Pilbara form) Vulnerable
Ghost Bat Macroderma gigas Vulnerable
Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis Endangered
Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucos Vulnerable
Princess Parrot Polytelis alexandrae Vulnerable
Great Desert Skink Liopholis kintorei Vulnerable
Source: Species Profile and Threats Database, Commonwealth of Australia 2023
3.1 Habitat Definitions

This policy uses the following definitions of home range and habitat types, which are based on how
these terms are used in relevant recovery plans and conservation advices. The following terms
should be used in the referred assessment documentation to ensure consistency in the application of
the policy and to support the assessment of the proposed development:
• Home range is the area used by a species that comprises known or potential breeding
habitat (e.g., nesting, burrowing, roosting, denning) required to support its ongoing
persistence, and foraging and water sources surrounding the breeding site required to
support breeding success.
• Critical habitat is habitat that is critical to the survival of a species and to maintaining their
persistence in the environment, and the protection of these habitats will aid in the recovery
of the species. Note: the definition of critical habitat in this policy is not limited to critical
habitat listed under section 207A of the EPBC Act.
• Key habitat is habitat outside of critical habitat types that is necessary to ensure a species
persistence and enable its recovery. Key habitat is important for supporting foraging,
dispersal and connectivity, or likely to provide breeding habitat in the future or allow for
species population expansion.

16
3.2 Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus)

3.2.1 Survey information standards
Survey Methodology
Surveys for the Northern Quoll should be conducted over a minimum of two breeding seasons prior
to referral of the proposed development. Surveys should be undertaken in accordance with the
Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals (DSEWPaC 2011a) and EPBC Act referral
guideline for the endangered northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus (DoE 2016).
Surveys must be undertaken within suitable denning4 habitat types outlined in Table 3-2. Pilbara-
specific survey methods must be undertaken in these habitat types to target female occurrences
using camera trap surveys (recommended survey method) from the end of October to February, to
avoid periods where male individuals are present in the population (semelparous life history; Moore
et al. 2020, 2023, unpublished). Use of camera traps is a non-invasive technique that can distinguish
individuals from their spots and identify the use of multiple dens and foraging habitat in the home
range. Elliot traps and pure meat baits should not be used in the Pilbara. Live traps are not a
preferred method due to possible stress on captured females carrying young in the pouch or having
dependent young in dens.
A minimum of seven consecutive nights of camera traps using non-replenishing food lures (e.g., bait
sprinkled in front of the trap once) or inaccessible scent lures (e.g., a perforated sardine tin, or a
perforated capsule containing bait or cotton soaked in tuna oil) is required. However, if during the
survey, there are early indications which establish a high-density presence of the Northern Quoll
(multiple unique individuals captured on the traps in the first few days), the survey can be ended
after four nights. The surveys should be appropriately scaled (Moore et al. 2023). For example, to
cover a 75 ha area a minimum of five vertically oriented cameras (1.5 m from the ground with baited
lure beneath) should be spaced a minimum of 200 m apart (Moore et al. 2020).
Survey Extent and Requirements

Surveys for the Northern Quoll must be undertaken within the defined development envelope and
within 640 m (female home range)5 outside the development envelope boundary (study area). The
surveys within the study area must:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Northern Quoll habitat definitions at
Table 3-2.
Should surveys identify Northern Quoll habitats in the study area, the following surveys must be
undertaken:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Northern Quoll individuals.
Should surveys detect Northern Quoll, the following impact assessments must be undertaken:
3. Key foraging habitat impact assessment to identify the core foraging habitats and the known
or possible dispersal corridors.
4. Hydrological assessment(s) (e.g., groundwater and surface water impact assessments) to
identify hydrological controls of, and potential impacts to Northern Quoll habitats and
species persistence.

17
3.2.2 Habitat definitions

Table 3-2 Northern Quoll habitat definitions
Habitat type Habitat Description
Critical Habitat Denning Habitat6 (Hill and Ward 2010; Moore et al. 2022; Cowan et al. 2023)
• Rocky hills, mesas, escarpments, ranges, breakaways, and rocky crevices in large boulder
fields including artificial habitats.
• Gorges and gullies with rocky creek lines and riverbeds.
• Major drainage lines with overstory and suitable vegetation cover.
• Offshore Islands.
Key Habitat Foraging habitat (Hill and Ward 2010; Hernandez
-Santin et al. 2018; Cowan et al. 2023; DCCEEW 2023a)
• Water sources in close proximity to denning habitat.
• Major drainage lines and tree lined creeks.
• Structurally diverse woodland or forest areas.
• Basalt hills, mesas (and buttes of limonites), high and low plateaus and lower slopes.
• Tor fields and stony plains supporting either hard or soft spinifex grasslands.
• Sandstone and dolomite hills and ridges, shrublands, sandy plains, clay plans and tussock
grasslands and coastal fringes including dunes islands and beaches.
3.2.3 Avoidance standards

The avoidance standards should be applied to all activities in the Pilbara bioregion where the
department’s species distribution model indicates that the Northern Quoll species or species habitat
is known, likely, or may occur.7
Any activities associated with a development should not be undertaken within avoidance areas and
corridors that need to be maintained for dispersal of the Northern Quoll. Appropriate action should
be taken to ensure any potential direct and indirect impacts (e.g., predation by feral cats and foxes,
feral herbivores, weed infestation, negative fire effects, changes to hydrology) on avoidance areas,
including corridors, are prevented and mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat
areas.
Avoidance Standards:
1. If the surveys for the Northern Quoll detect a female, all critical habitat and key habitat
within a 640 m radius, or within a 129 ha area (female home range)8 surrounding the
occurrence of the Northern Quoll female, should be avoided within the development
envelope.
2. To ensure avoidance areas do not become isolated and restrict dispersal of Northern Quolls
(including males and juveniles) to other denning and foraging habitat, dispersal corridors
should be maintained between the avoidance area and other critical habitat outside the
development envelope, if they do not already exist. 9 Dispersal corridors should prioritise
linkages with drainage lines and watercourses and avoid using bare ground habitats (e.g.,
alluvial, coastal, and hardpan plains).10 Linear infrastructure will need to ensure suitably
designed and placed culverts are constructed to facilitate Northern Quoll dispersal.11
Figure 3-1 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Northern Quoll avoidance standards.

18
3.2.4 Further Avoidance

Further avoidance of species-specific disturbance outside the avoidance areas described above
should be applied where possible (e.g., limiting activities within the species’ foraging habitat).
Figure 3-1 Conceptual example of Northern Quoll survey and avoidance areas (640 m radius/129 ha area)
3.2.5 Mitigation measures

Table 3-3 identifies mitigation measures that are recommended to reduce key threats and impacts to
the Northern Quoll at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
report their effectiveness, should be built into the proposed project design where appropriate and
included in project assessment documentation when referred under Part 7 of the EPBC Act.
Table 3-3 Northern Quoll: mitigation of impacts
Threat and impact pathways Recommended mitigation measures
Habitat Loss Minimise indirect loss of critical and key habitat as much as
Direct impacts to habitat will lead to the loss of practicable.
breeding and foraging habitat and will likely cause the Ensure clearing is undertaken progressively to minimise
degradation of surrounding habitat, increase fatalities of the species.
fragmentation risks, and possibly lead to an increase of Consider retaining suitably sized boulders during construction
predation by feral animals (Hill & Ward 2010; Cramer phases to be used in creating Northern Quoll rock piles in
et al. 2016b). adequate locations within the disturbance footprint during
progressive site rehabilitation.
Fragmentation and isolation Avoid direct and indirect impacts to dispersal corridors that
Due to its short breeding cycle and high adult link known Northern Quoll detections to areas outside the
mortality, Northern Quoll populations are particularly development envelope. These corridors should have suitable
vulnerable to local extinctions when isolated from habitat to facilitate dispersal and prioritise water courses and
other populations in the landscape as re-establishment riparian areas with high vegetation.
from other populations is unlikely (Hill and Ward 2010; Mitigation measures of feral predators and negative fire
Braithwaite and Griffiths 1994; Rankmore and Price effects are required within the dispersal corridors to minimise
2004; Oakwood 2000) these threats during the juvenile male dispersal periods and
Many Northern Quoll populations in the Pilbara are mating seasons (Autumn to Winter).
now smaller and more isolated, leading to inbreeding Ensure that suitably designed culverts (Creese 2012) are
and loss of genetic diversity, increasing their extinction implemented in dispersal corridors that intersect with linear
risk (Moore et al. 2022). infrastructure, especially in preferred drainage dispersal
Maintaining the genetic connectivity and supporting habitats.
high levels of gene flow is important to maintain the
Pilbara Northern Quoll metapopulation (Shaw et al.
2022).
Linear infrastructure such a roads and rail have the
potential to fragment and create barriers to the
movement of the Northern Quoll (Creese 2012).
Feral Predators Implement a feral cat or fox control program which aims to
Feral cats and foxes (potentially) impact Northern minimise feral predator numbers within and around the
Quolls by competing for the same food (prey) and development envelope, including known denning habitat

19

through direct predation. Predation may be (especially after mating period) and dispersal corridors (during
exacerbated in areas impacted by recent fires (Hill and the juvenile and male dispersal periods) for the Northern
Ward 2010; Cramer et al. 2016b). Quoll, over the life of the approval.
Feral control programs should be designed in accordance with
relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans and be informed by
contemporary findings on best practice feral predator
management. See National Environmental Science Program
Best-practice management for feral cats and red foxes
outcomes (NESP 2023).
Any baits used should be proven safe for Northern Quolls
(e.g., Eradicat not currently safe for Northern Quolls).
Engaging First Nations Ranger groups to undertake the works
or the use of Felixers, are the preferred methods of landscape
cat and fox management methods in the Pilbara. Novel and
innovative techniques are encouraged.
Monitor and report feral predator numbers around the impact
site compared to a pre-disturbance baseline. Baseline and
ongoing surveys should follow Pest animal monitoring
techniques (Pest Smart 2021b).
Feral Herbivores Fence off avoidance areas, including denning habitats and
Large herbivores, including cattle, impact Northern dispersal corridors, especially nearby watercourses (e.g., rivers
Quolls by degrading key habitats (especially and creek lines), from feral herbivores. Fencing should follow
watercourses) by trampling and grazing. The best practice exclusion fencing guidelines and allow ongoing
degradation of these habitats will lead to the loss of dispersal of the species. Manage potential increase in weed
vegetation cover and related prey items in these invasion as a result of removing grazing from the fenced areas.
habitat types. Feral herbivore control programs should be designed in
Grazing may also promote vegetation thickening and accordance with relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans
weed invasion, degrading preferred habitats and likely and be informed by contemporary findings on best practice
leading to larger fire risks (Hill and Ward 2010). feral herbivore management. For camels, this may include
management techniques outlined in the National feral camel
Loss of vegetation from degradation may increase
action plan Appendix A3 (Natural Resource Management
predation threat to the Northern Quoll (Hill and Ward
Ministerial Council 2010) and Pest Smart feral camel controls
2010).
(Sharp and Saunders 2012). Suitable control and fencing
measures for rabbits and goats are outlined in Background
document: Threat abatement plan for competition and land
degradation by rabbits (DEE 2016b), Threat abatement plan
for competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats –
Background (DEWHA 2008a) and Cost effective feral animal
exclusion fencing for areas of high conservation value in
Australia (Long and Robley 2004).
Monitor and report feral herbivore numbers around the
impact site compared to a pre-disturbance baseline. Baseline
and ongoing surveys should follow Pest animal monitoring
These measures should be implemented and maintained for
the lifetime of the approval.
Cane Toads Implement biosecurity protocols to minimise risk of
Cane toads are likely to invade the Pilbara and could introducing cane toads to the development area.
be consumed by Northern Quolls causing death Avoid the creation of habitat suitable for cane toads.
(Cramer et al. 2016b). Implement cane toad-proofing techniques that upgrade all
pastoral watering points, pivot irrigation and other artificial
watering points within the development envelope and use
troughs, containers or tanks inaccessible to cane toads rather
than the development of dams. All wastewater pond
developments should demonstrate best practice cane toad
aversion techniques are considered and will be implemented.
Cane toad control programs should be designed in accordance
with the Threat abatement plan for the biological effects,

20

including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads
(DSEWPaC 2011c) and be informed by contemporary findings
on best practice cane toad management, for example Pest
Smart cane toad tool kit (Pest Smart 2021a).
Monitor and report cane toad occurrence within the
development area compared to a pre-disturbance baseline,
following contemporary best practice survey techniques.
Weeds Implement a targeted weed hygiene and management
Weed invasion such as with exotic pasture grasses will program which aims to prevent the introduction and minimise
inhibit and limit the foraging and dispersal of the occurrence of weeds in avoidance areas and in other critical
Northern Quoll (Hill and Ward 2010). and key habitats within the development envelope, over the
life of the approval. Manage any increased fire risk as a result
Weed infestations will also likely increase the risk of
of weed invasion.
negative fire effects that will impact the Northern
Quoll habitats (Hill and Ward 2010). Weed management programs should be designed in
accordance with relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans
and be informed by contemporary findings on best practice
management of the weed species identified during baseline
surveys and in accordance with the Threat abatement plan to
reduce the impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the
five listed grasses (DSEWPaC 2012). This may include
guidelines for Buffel grass management for Central Australia
(Department of Environment and Natural Resources 2018) and
Gamba Grass (Weeds Australia 2023) as well as Integrated
weed management (Weeds Australia 2021a). Minimising the
risk of invasion of buffel grass in the development envelope
and avoidance areas should be a key priority.
Monitor and report weed occurrence within the development
envelope compared to a pre-disturbance baseline, following
contemporary best practice survey techniques such as those
outlined by Weeds Australia (2021b).
Other weed species management techniques can be found at
Weeds Australia (2021c).
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Implement a fire management program which aims to reduce
interactions (FHF) and fire effects on predator-prey the risk of uncontrolled fires within and around the avoidance
interactions (FPI) areas, including dispersal corridors, and in other critical and
Fire impacts the Northern Quoll through the loss of key habitats within the development envelope, over the life of
habitat structure and vegetation types that will change the approval.
prey availability through the reduction in the Fire management programs should be designed in accordance
abundance of food, particularly invertebrates if there with contemporary knowledge of species-appropriate fire
is insufficient time to complete their life cycles (Hill management practices. Prescribed burns should be
and Ward 2010). undertaken outside the Northern Quoll breeding season.
Fire will remove vegetation cover that will likely Manage potential increased predation by feral predators
increase predation from native and feral predators associated with prescribed burning.
(Moore et al. 2022; Cook 2010).
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity
(DAWE 2022) for information on types of fire-related
ecological processes.
Climate Change To support climate change resilience for Northern Quoll
The Northern Quoll will likely be impacted by climate populations, the main method applied is an adaptation
change due to increased temperatures, rainfall strategy to protect known occurrences of the species and
variability, increased proportion of extreme rainfall maintain landscape connectivity through implementing the
events, and less frequent cyclones. In the Pilbara, it is avoidance standards (Pavey 2014).
likely that there will be more extreme, frequent and As outlined in a recent review of the Northern Quoll (Moore et
hot fire events as a result of climate change. In al. 2022), identifying potential climate refuges is key for the
addition to changes in rainfall, average temperatures persistence of the species in the face of climate change.
across Northern Australia will continue to increase and Minimising the loss of habitat for the species and ensuring
there will be more days with extreme maximum that impacts from increased risk of cane toad invasion, fire
temperatures (Moore et al. 2022). risks and feral predators are mitigated to maintain habitats

21

where the species is known to occur will assist in creating
climate refuges until further information is known about the
species response to these changes (Pavey 2014).
Vehicle & Rail Strikes Implement and enforce dusk-to-dawn speed limits, in
The Northern Quoll Referral guidelines outline the accordance with contemporary knowledge of appropriate risk
need to reduce and enforce speed limits in the vicinity reduction measures (e.g., 40 km/hr speed limits
of Northern Quolls (DoE 2016). recommended by Johnson and Anderson 2014), of any roads
in close proximity to avoidance areas, and other critical and
Linear infrastructure such as roads and rail have the
key habitats which are fragmented by roads and fire breaks.
potential to increase road and train strikes on
Northern Quolls (Creese 2012). Use virtual fencing, such as reflectors, auditory, signs, rumble
strips and road slowing methods to mitigate the risk of vehicle
strikes.
Ensure that suitably designed culverts (Creese 2012) are
implemented in dispersal corridors that intersect with linear
infrastructure, especially in preferred drainage dispersal
habitats.
Hydrological Changes Surface water and connected groundwater regimes within the
Studies have demonstrated the importance of water habitats used by Northern Quolls within the development
for the Northern Quoll and permanent water sources envelope should be maintained.
as contributing to critical and key habitat for the
species and riparian areas which facilitate dispersal of
the species (Oakwood 2000; Woinarski et al. 2008;
Shaw et al. 2022)
3.2.6 Residual significant impact

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Northern Quoll habitat within the study area
should be used to quantify the extent of critical habitat and key habitat (refer to Table 3-2) that will
be directly or indirectly impacted by an activity following avoidance and mitigation efforts. These
areas will be used to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
Residual significant impact calculation
Any direct or indirect disturbance of critical habitat or key habitat outside of avoidance areas and
within the development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact where a Northern
Quoll occurrence has been recorded within the study area.
Refer to Section 4 for information on offsetting residual significant impacts.

22
3.3 Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis)

Survey Methodology
Surveys for the Greater Bilby should be conducted over a minimum of two years with suitable
seasonal coverage (every one to four months) undertaken as close to the date of referral of a
proposed development as possible. The survey data provided at the referral stage can contain
historical data in addition to the contemporary surveys of the Greater Bilby. Surveys for the Greater
Bilby should be undertaken in accordance with the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened
mammals (DSEWPaC 2011a).
Pilbara-specific survey requirements align with the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened
mammals (DSEWPaC 2011a) in undertaking targeted searches in preferred habitat types for burrows,
tracks, scats and diggings. However, as outlined in Greater Bilby survey methodology studies (e.g.,
Thompson and Thompson 2008; Skroblin et al. 2021; Northover et al. 2023), detection of Greater
Bilby tracks and diggings (at the base of plants to access root-dwelling larvae) is challenging and will
need to be undertaken by trained and experienced observers, including First Nations Ranger groups.
Determining the presence of the Greater Bilby within the study area requires a range of survey
approaches depending on the size of the Greater Bilby preferred habitats. It can include running
systemically designed transects, either on foot or aerially, to identify digging and burrowing activity.
Remote cameras, scat genetic analysis, or burrow system mapping can then be used to further refine
the habitats used by the Greater Bilby within the study area. For large areas see Appendix 2 of
Northover et al. (2023) and for small areas see Appendix 3 of Northover et al. (2023).

Surveys for the Greater Bilby must be undertaken within the development envelope and within
1.5 km (female home range)12 outside of the development envelope boundary (study area). The
surveys within the study area must:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Greater Bilby habitat definitions at
Table 3-4.
Should surveys identify Greater Bilby habitats in the study area, the following surveys must be
undertaken:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Greater Bilby occurrences (i.e., sightings, diggings,
scats, burrowing evidence).
Should surveys detect the Greater Bilby, the following impact assessments must be undertaken:
3. Key foraging habitat impact assessment to identify the core foraging habitats and the known
or possible dispersal corridors.
identify hydrological controls of, and potential impacts to Greater Bilby habitats and species
persistence.

23

Table 3-4 Greater Bilby habitat definitions
Critical Habitat Burrowing habitats (DCCEEW 2023b; Cramer et al. 2017)

• Plain habitat with isolated dunes and dune fields that support soils from coarse sand to
light medium clay, which has the following vegetation types:
o Woodlands of low trees (<10m) with Eucalyptus and Acacia spp.
o Shrub-steppe communities over Triodia hummock grasslands.
o Pindan woodland with hummock and tussock grasses.
• Rises, breakaways, plateaus, granitic hills and rises that support sandy soils, sandy
loams and red earths often with lateritic, small gravel, stony matrix, featuring vegetation
types of low shrub cover of Acacia spp. including mulga (A. aneura) over hummock and
tussock grasses.
• Creeklines and palaeodrainage systems that support sandy and sandy loam soils, alluvial
and calcareous areas, and salt channels and lakes, featuring vegetation types of Spinifex
grasslands (mainly Triodia basedowii, T. pungens and T. schinzii) with low shrub cover of
Acacia spp. and Melaleuca spp.
Key Habitat General foraging and dispersal habitats (DCCEEW 2023b; TSSC 2016c; Southgate et al. 2007)
• Open tussock grasslands on uplands and hills.
• Mulga (Acacia aneura) woodland/shrubland (both pure mulga and mixed stands of
mulga/witchetty bush) growing on ridges and rises.
• Hummock grassland growing on sand plains and dunes, drainage systems, salt-lake
systems, and other alluvial areas.
• Laterite and rock feature substrates that support Acacia kempeana, Acacia hilliana and
Acacia rhodophylla shrub species and spinifex hummocks with open runways between
the hummocks for easy movements.

The following avoidance standards should be applied to all activities in the Pilbara bioregion where
the department’s species distribution model indicates that the Greater Bilby or species habitat is
known, likely, or may occur.13
Any activities associated with a development should not be undertaken within avoidance areas,
including corridors maintained for dispersal. Appropriate action should be taken to ensure any
potential direct and indirect impacts (e.g., predation by feral cats and foxes, feral herbivores, weed
infestation, negative fire effects) on avoidance areas, which includes corridors, are prevented and
mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat areas.
1. If surveys for the Greater Bilby identify a single active burrow14, the single active burrow and any
habitat (i.e., all vegetation, topsoil, water sources) within a 1.5 km15 radius (female home range)
of the burrow should be avoided in the development envelope.
2. If surveys for the Greater Bilby identify multiple active burrows, all active burrows and all
habitat within a 1.5 km radius of the outermost active burrows should be avoided in the
development envelope.
3. To ensure avoidance areas do not become isolated and restrict dispersal of the Greater Bilby to
other burrowing and foraging habitat, a dispersal corridor should be maintained between the
avoidance areas and other habitat within and outside the development envelope if it does not

24
already exist.16 Dispersal corridors should consist of critical and key habitat types.
Linear infrastructure will need to ensure suitably built and placed culverts are constructed to
facilitate Greater Bilby dispersal. 17
Figure 3-2 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Greater Bilby avoidance standards.

Figure 3-2 Conceptual example of Greater Bilby survey and avoidance areas (1.5 km radius)

the Greater Bilby at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
report the effectiveness of these measures, should be built-in to the proposed project design where
appropriate and included in project assessment documentation when referred under Part 7 of the
EPBC Act.
Table 3-5 Greater Bilby: mitigation of impacts
Direct impacts to habitat will lead to the loss of practicable.
breeding and foraging habitat and will likely cause the
degradation of surrounding habitat, increase
fragmentation risks, and possibly lead to an increase of
predation by feral animals (DCCEEW 2023b).
Fragmentation and genetic isolation Locate infrastructure in ways that allow for dispersal of the
Development of roads, fences, dams, large-scale Greater Bilby within and beyond the development envelope.
agriculture irrigation, pipelines, industrial structures Ensure that suitably designed culverts (Creese 2012) are
and proposed activities with large footprints (e.g., implemented in dispersal corridors that intersect with linear
mines, solar salt, renewables) will create barriers to infrastructure, especially in preferred drainage dispersal
dispersal of the species and restrict their ability to habitats.
establish new populations and inhibit the roving of
males (DCCEEW 2023b).
Isolated populations are more susceptible to
extinction and less resilient to natural fluctuation,
there are reduced opportunities for evolutionary
adaptation to changes in the environment with
restricted genetic exchange across the populations
(DCCEEW 2023b).
Feral Predators Implement a feral cat and fox control program which aims to
Fox and feral cat predation are major factors minimise feral predator numbers within and around the
associated with the decline of Greater Bilbies

25

(DCCEEW 2023b) and are an impediment to development envelope, including known denning habitat for
reintroductions in areas (Moseby et al. 2011). the Greater Bilby, over the life of the approval.
Feral control programs should be designed in accordance with
relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans and be informed by
contemporary findings on best practice feral predator
management. Any baits used should be proven safe for the
Greater Bilby.
techniques (Pest Smart 2021b)
Feral herbivores Fence off avoidance areas, including denning habitats and
Feral herbivores remove ground cover, cause soil nearby watercourses, from feral herbivores. Fencing should
compaction and erosion, and degradation of riparian follow best practice exclusion fencing guidelines and allow
habitats in the Pilbara which is prime habitat for the ongoing dispersal of the species. Manage potential increase in
Greater Bilby (Bradley et al. 2015). Greater Bilby weed invasion as a result of removing grazing from the fenced
presence in the landscape is correlated with the areas.
absence to low density of rabbits and reduced stocking Feral herbivore control programs should be designed in
rates of livestock (cattle, sheep, and goats) (Cramer et accordance with relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans
al. 2017). and be informed by contemporary findings on best practice
feral herbivore management. For camels, this may include
action plan, Appendix A3 (Natural Resource Management
Ministerial Council 2010) and Pest Smart feral camel controls
Cane Toads Develop and implement an appropriate cane toad detection
Cane toads are likely to invade the Pilbara and could method, biosecurity protocols and a rapid response plan to
be consumed by Greater Bilbies causing death avoid introduction.
(DCCEEW 2023b). The extent of the threat to the Avoid the creation of habitat suitable for cane toads.
Greater Bilby in the Pilbara is currently unquantified. Implement cane toad proofing techniques that upgrade all
watering points within the development envelope and use
troughs, containers or tanks inaccessible to cane toads rather
Monitor regularly and report occurrence, and implement
control measures in accordance with the Threat abatement
plan for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion,
caused by cane toads (DSEWPaC 2011c) and managed through
best practices found at Pest Smart Cane Toad tool kit (Pest
Smart 2021a).
Weeds Implement a targeted weed hygiene and management
program which aims to prevent the introduction and minimise
occurrence of weeds in avoidance areas and in other critical

26

Weed infestation can lead to increased fire intensity and key habitats within the development envelope, over the
and competition with Greater Bilby food plants life of the approval. Manage any increased fire risk as a result
(DCCEEW 2023b). of weed invasion.
Weed management programs should be designed in
management of the weed species identified during baseline
surveys and in accordance with the Threat abatement plan to
reduce the impacts on northern Australia’s biodiversity by the
five listed grasses (DSEWPaC 2012). This may include
guidelines for Buffel grass management for Central Australia
(Department of Environment and Natural Resources 2018) and
Gamba Grass (Weeds Australia 2023) as well as Integrated
weed management (Weeds Australia 2021a).
Monitor and report weed occurrence within the development
envelope compared to a pre-disturbance baseline, following
contemporary best practice survey techniques such as those
outlined by Weeds Australia (Weeds Australia, 2021b).
interactions (FHF), fire effects on predator-prey the risk of uncontrolled fires within and around the avoidance
interactions (FPI) and fire effects on competitive areas and in other critical and key habitats within the
interactions (FCI) development envelope, over the life of the approval.
Large hot fires are likely to reduce the availability of Fire management programs should be designed in accordance
food sources, may cause impenetrable and unsuitable with contemporary knowledge of species-appropriate fire
regrowth, and can increase predation risks by management practices. Prescribed burns should be
removing vegetation cover (Southgate and Carthew undertaken outside the Greater Bilby breeding season.
2006; Southgate et al. 2007). Manage potential increased predation by feral predators
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity for associated with prescribed burning.
information on types of fire-related ecological
processes (DAWE 2022).
Climate Change To support climate change resilience for Greater Bilby
The Recovery Plan for the Greater Bilby (DCCEEW populations, the main method applied is an adaptation
2023b) has identified the effects of climate change on strategy to protect known occurrences of the species and
the Greater Bilby will be direct through changes to maintain landscape connectivity through implementing the
food sources and habitat suitability and indirect avoidance standards (Pavey 2014).
through likely increases to large scale fires, and feral As outlined in the Recovery Plan for the Greater Bilby
herbivores and predators. (DCCEEW 2023b) and other studies (Southgate and Carthew
2007; Southgate 2006; Southgate et al. 2007; Southgate and
Carthew 2006; Bradley et al. 2015) threatening processes
need to be mitigated to ensure that impacts from increased
fire risks, and feral herbivores and predators are managed to
maintain habitats where the species is known to occur to help
create climate refuges until further information is known
about the species response to these changes (Pavey 2014).
Vehicle Strike Implement and enforce dusk-to-dawn speed limits of 40
Greater Bilby are susceptible to being killed through km/hr of any roads in close proximity to avoidance areas and
vehicle strikes (Bradley et al. 2015). other critical and key habitats which are fragmented by roads
and fire breaks.
Use of virtual fencing such as reflectors, auditory, signage,
rumble strips and road slowing methods to mitigate the risk of
vehicle strikes.
Ensure that suitably designed culverts (Creese 2012) are
implemented in dispersal corridors that intersect with linear
infrastructure, especially in preferred drainage dispersal
habitats.

27
Hydrological Changes Surface water and connected groundwater regimes in Greater

Greater Bilby habitats may be groundwater Bilby denning and foraging habitats should be maintained
dependant. Creation of artificial watering points may within the development envelope.
contribute to the expansion of feral predators (James
et al. 1999; Davies et al. 2010). Changes to surface
water and groundwater may flood denning and
foraging habitats.

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Greater Bilby habitat within the study area should
be used to quantify the extent of critical habitat and key habitat (refer to Table 3-4) that will be
directly or indirectly impacted by an activity to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
1. Where a Greater Bilby occurrence has been recorded within the study area, any direct or
indirect disturbance of critical habitat and key habitat outside of avoidance areas and within
the development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact.
2. In the absence of Greater Bilby occurrence being recorded within the study area, any direct
or indirect disturbance of critical habitat within the development envelope will be considered
a residual significant impact.

28
3.4 Pilbara Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus barroni)

Survey methodology
Surveys for the Pilbara Olive Python should be conducted over a minimum of two years. The survey
data provided at the referral stage can contain historical data, but contemporary surveys of Pilbara
Olive Python should be undertaken as close to the date of referral of a development proposal as
possible. Surveys for the Pilbara Olive Python should be undertaken in accordance with Survey
guidelines for Australia’s threatened reptiles (DSEWPaC 2011b).
Currently, the most reliable method for detecting the Pilbara Olive Python is the use of
Environmental DNA (or eDNA) to monitor waterbodies for the Pilbara Olive Python (Ellis et al. 2023;
Mousavi-Derazmahalleh et al. 2023). Supplementary survey methods are also recommended to
improve detection probability such as active searches around water bodies during appropriate
conditions and seasons.
In study areas that lack surface water (e.g., rock piles and escarpments), alternative survey methods
will be necessary such as road transects when the Pilbara Olive Python is most likely to be active;
searching north-facing cliffs during cool months; and searches for scats (i.e., faeces and sloughed
skins).
Surveys for the Pilbara Olive Python should be undertaken within the development envelope and
within 1.1 km (female home range) 18 outside of the development envelope boundary (study area).
The surveys within the study area must:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Pilbara Olive Python habitat definitions at
Table 3-6.
If surveys identify Pilbara Olive Python habitats in the study area, the following surveys should be
undertaken:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Pilbara Olive Python individuals (i.e., sightings, scats,
skin shedding, environmental DNA from water sources).
If surveys detect the Pilbara Olive Python, the following impact assessments should be undertaken:
5. Hydrological assessment (e.g., groundwater and surface water impact assessments) to
identify hydrological controls of, and potential impacts to Pilbara Olive Python habitats.

Table 3-6 Pilbara Olive Python habitat definitions
Habitat Type Habitat Description

Critical Habitat Denning Habitat (Tutt et al. 2004; TSSC 2008)
• Caves amongst gorge, gully and breakaway habitats.
• Gorge and gully habitats with either permanent water sources or pooling following
rainfall events.
• Rocky outcrops.
• Granophyre rock-piles with neighbouring spinifex grasslands.

29

Key Habitat Foraging habitat (Tutt et al. 2004; TSSC 2008)
• Major and minor drainage lines supporting abundance of woody debris and vegetation
cover.
• Permanent, semi-permanent, and ephemeral water holes.
• Spinifex grasslands.
• Artificial watering sources such as water troughs (maintain where possible).

department’s species distribution model indicates that the Pilbara Olive Python species or species
habitat is known, likely, or may occur.19
Any activities associated with a development proposal should not be undertaken within avoidance
areas or corridors maintained for dispersal. Appropriate action should be taken to ensure any
potential direct and indirect impacts (e.g., predation by feral cats and foxes, feral herbivores, weed
infestation, negative fire effects, changes to hydrology such as surface-groundwater interactions,
changed flows, or chemistry) on avoidance areas, which includes dispersal corridors, are prevented
and mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat areas.
1. If surveys for the Pilbara Olive Python confirm an occurrence of the species (male or female),
an area of 365 ha (female home range)20 that contains a suitable composition of continuous
critical habitat and key habitat types (in close proximity to the occurrence) within the
development envelope must be avoided.
2. To ensure the avoidance area does not become isolated and restrict dispersal of Pilbara Olive
Python to other denning and foraging habitat within and outside the development envelope,
a dispersal corridor must be maintained between avoidance areas and other habitat within
and outside the development envelope, if it does not already exist.21 Dispersal corridors
should consist of critical and key habitat. Linear infrastructure will need to ensure suitably
built and placed culverts are constructed to facilitate Pilbara Olive Python dispersal.22
Figure 3-3 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Pilbara Olive Python avoidance
standards.


30
Figure 3-3 Conceptual example of Pilbara Olive Python survey and avoidance areas (365 Ha area)

the Pilbara Olive Python at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess
and report the effectiveness of these measures, should be built-in to the proposed project design
and included in project assessment documentation when referred under Part 7 of the EPBC Act.
Table 3-7 Pilbara Olive Python: mitigation of impacts
Habitat loss for the Pilbara Olive Python from habitat practicable.
disturbance and destruction occurs in two main ways. Ensure clearing is undertaken progressively to minimise
Firstly, from the clearing of rocky outcrops and gorges fatalities of the species.
to make way for mining and infrastructure
developments, directly reducing the availability of
suitable habitat for the species (TSSC 2008; Morris et
al. 2016). Secondly, livestock such as cattle and
increased levels of tourism may degrade the habitat
for the Pilbara Olive Python, especially around
waterbodies (Morris et al. 2016).
Fragmentation and isolation Locate infrastructure in ways that allows for dispersal of the
The risk of loss of genetic diversity due to Pilbara Olive Python within and beyond the development
fragmentation and prolonged isolation of populations envelope.
due to threatening processes such as habitat loss is a Ensure that suitably designed structures and culverts are
potential long-term threat to the persistence and implemented in dispersal corridors that intersect with linear
viability of the Pilbara Olive Python (Pearson et al. infrastructure, especially in preferred drainage habitats.
2013).
Feral Predators Implement a feral cat and fox control program which aims to
The predation of Pilbara Olive Pythons by foxes and minimise feral predator numbers within and around the
feral cats has the potential to impact the species, with development envelope, including known denning habitat for
juveniles being especially vulnerable (Carwardine et al. the Pilbara Olive Python, over the life of the approval.
2014). Foxes and cats also have the added impact of Feral control programs should be designed in accordance with
altering the prey availability to the species, as the relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans and be informed by
introduced predators directly prey on the same food contemporary findings on best practice feral predator
sources as the Pilbara Olive Python (Tutt et al. 2004; management. Any baits used should be proven safe for Pilbara
Carwardine et al. 2014; Morris et al. 2016). However, Olive Python.
the full extent of the threat to the species is Monitor and report feral predator numbers around the impact
unquantified. site compared to a pre-disturbance baseline. Baseline and
Feral Herbivores Fence off avoidance areas, including denning habitats and
Livestock such as cattle and feral camels will degrade nearby watercourses, from feral herbivores. Fencing should
riparian vegetation and the water quality of the water follow best practice exclusion fencing guidelines and allow
ongoing dispersal of the species. Manage potential increase in

31

sources that are critical and key habitats for the weed invasion as a result of removing grazing from the fenced
Pilbara Olive Python (Morris et al. 2016). areas.
Feral herbivore control programs should be designed in
feral herbivore management. For camels, this may include
action plan Appendix A3 (Natural Resource Management
Ministerial Council 2010), and Pest Smart Feral Camel controls
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Design and implement fire management practices for the life
interactions (FHF) and fire effects on predator-prey of the activity within and around avoidance areas and critical
interactions (FPI) and key habitats that reduce the risk of large hot fires that
Severe fire impacts Pilbara Olive Python key and would result in the reduction or loss of ground cover and
critical habitats that provide shelter and food shelter for the Pilbara Olive Python.
resources by removing and degrading riparian Species-appropriate fire management: prioritise small burns to
vegetation and waterholes water quality, removing provide a mosaic of habitat ages and densities and to reduce
vegetation for cover and hunting opportunities the intensity and size of fires.
(Carwardine et al. 2014; Morris et al. 2016). Fire management techniques should be implemented in
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity concert with feral animal control and habitat restoration
(DAWE 2022) for information on types of fire-related measures.
Vehicle strike Implement speed limits, in accordance with contemporary
The Pilbara Olive Python is known to be subject to knowledge of appropriate risk reduction measures, in
deliberate road kills due to increased road traffic avoidance areas and other critical and key habitats which are
associated with industry development and tourism fragmented by roads and fire breaks.
(Pearson 2003; TSSC 2008). Consider incorporating appropriate fauna underpasses into
roads.
Deliberate killing due to misidentification. Ensure that all site personnel are educated on the correct
The species resembles a venomous brown snake and identification of the Pilbara Olive Python and the legal
may be deliberately killed in the development obligations in not killing a threatened species. Prevent
envelope due to safety reasons for personnel (TSSC incidents that may lead to the species being killed or harmed.
2008).
Hydrological changes Avoid impacts to known water bodies, riparian habitats and
Changes to hydrology may result in changes to the groundwater-dependent vegetation, that may support the
water table levels, increased run-off, sedimentation or foraging of Pilbara Olive Python. This includes changes to the
pollution which may deter or otherwise impact permanency, level or water quality of water bodies due to
important foraging sites for the Pilbara Olive Python excess surface water run-off and pollution from the proposed
(TSSC 2008). activity.
Vibration Ensure the avoidance standards are implemented.

Pilbara Olive Python are likely sensitive to vibrations
and blasting activities. However, the full extent of this

32

impact on breeding success and foraging behaviours Avoid undertaking construction and blasting during the
has not been fully characterised. breeding season. Avoid the placement of habitation (e.g.,
camps) within close proximity to the avoidance areas.
Cane Toads Develop and implement an appropriate cane toad detection

Cane toads are likely to invade the Pilbara and could method, biosecurity protocols and a rapid response plan to
be consumed by Pilbara Olive Pythons. The extent of avoid introduction.
the threat to the Pilbara Olive Python in the Pilbara is Avoid the creation of habitat suitable for cane toads.
currently unquantified. Implement cane toad proofing techniques that upgrade all
watering points within the development envelope using
troughs, inaccessible containers or tanks to cane toads rather
Monitor regularly and report occurrence, and implement
control measures in accordance with the Threat abatement
plan for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion,
caused by cane toads (DSEWPaC 2011c) and managed through
best practices found at Pest Smart Cane Toad tool kit (Pest
Smart 2021a).
Climate Change Support climate change resilience for Pilbara Olive Python
Pilbara Olive Python critical and key habitats (e.g., populations via an adaptation strategy (Pavey 2014). This
water courses) will likely be impacted by climate includes protecting known occurrences of the species,
change effects, which will cause changes in water maintaining landscape connectivity to other more suitable
quality and levels, riparian vegetation persistence and habitats, and ensuring that water resources and riparian areas
prey availability. However, the full extent of this are not impacted.
impact on breeding success and foraging behaviours
has not been fully characterised.

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Pilbara Olive Python habitat within the study area
be directly or indirectly impacted by an activity to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
1. Any direct or indirect disturbance of critical habitat and key habitat outside of avoidance
areas and within the development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact
where a Pilbara Olive Python occurrence has been recorded within the study area, or
2. Any disturbance of critical habitat and waterholes within the development envelope will be
considered a residual significant impact even in the absence of Pilbara Olive Python
occurrence being recorded within the study area.

33
3.5 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (Rhinonicteris aurantia)

(Pilbara form)
Survey methodology
Surveys for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat should be undertaken over a minimum of two consecutive
years. The survey data provided at the referral stage can contain historical data, but contemporary
surveys of Pilbara Leaf-nose Bat should not be older than five years and should be undertaken as
close to the date of referral of an activity as possible. Surveys should be undertaken using a
combined methods outlined in the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened bats (DEWHA 2010a),
the revised survey guidelines outlined on the Species Profile and Threats Database for the Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bat, and A review of Pilbara leaf-nosed bat ecology, threats and survey requirements (Bat
Call WA 2021b).
Roost categorisation must be undertaken using a robust, well-documented and repeatable
methodology. Surveys should be undertaken for a minimum of two consecutive years, during which
they must capture, at minimum, two important seasonal periods: April to July (during mating) and
August to March (when the bats are in the later stages of pregnancy and nursing young). The surveys
will need to gather the following information:
• Diurnal use of the roosts, based on activity patterns, to provide evidence that
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats use the roosts during the day. The following information will need to
be gathered:
o The peak of activity that begins within an hour after sunset, beginning within an hour
before sunset and with a time of first detection within the 30 minutes after sunset,
or
o a time of last detection within the 30 minutes before sunrise or a time of last
detection within the 30 minutes after sunrise.
• Breeding activity use of the roost. Can be undertaken using capture methods (e.g., to detect
bats in breeding condition), detection of elevated levels of reproductive hormone
metabolites in validated species-specific scat material, observations of non-volant young in
the roost, recordings of young bat calls within the roost, or direct observations of mating.
• Colony size: can be determined using a valid counting method to assess the number of
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats using the roosts across seasons and years.
Landscape uses outside the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roost will need to be undertaken to identify core
foraging areas and water sources the species relies on within the development envelope. To obtain
this information you should deploy acoustic detection and video recording equipment across the
study area, at a suitable array of monitoring sites.
The regional context of the development envelope will also need to be understood for the Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bat, including all the known Category 1 and 2 roosts within 20 km of the development
envelope boundary. This can be undertaken using a desktop assessment.

34

You should undertake surveys for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat within the development envelope and
within 500 m outside the development envelope boundary (the study area). The surveys within the
study area must:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat habitat definitions
at Table 3-8.
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat occurrences (e.g., calls,
sightings, video recordings or scat DNA analysis) to categorise the roosts, identify the core
foraging habitats, and identify the water resources used by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats.
If surveys identify Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts or Category 3 or 4 in the Genetic Movement Corridor23,
you should undertake the following critical habitat surveys and impact assessments:
3. Foraging habitat impact assessment to identify the core foraging habitats.
4. Vibration impact assessment to identify and quantify potential impacts to Category 1, 2
and 3 roosts as a result of inground vibration from development, operation, closure and
rehabilitation of an activity.
5. Noise impact assessment to identify and quantify potential impacts of noise transmission to
the Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts during development, operation, closure, and rehabilitation of an
activity.
identify hydrological controls of, and potential impacts to:
o the microclimate (specifically a reduction in humidity) of a Category 1, 2 or 3 roost as
a result of dewatering or activities altering groundwater hydrology (if proposed),
o the hydrology, water quality and chemistry of any water sources within 6.1 km of a
Category 1, 2 or 3 roost as a result of the development, operation, closure and
rehabilitation of an activity, and
o Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat occurrences (e.g., calls, sightings, video recordings) at the
water sources within 6.1 km of the roosts.
7. Light pollution impact assessment to identify potential impacts of artificial light on the
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats utilising a Category 1, 2 or 3 roost during development, operation,
closure and rehabilitation of an activity.

35

Table 3-8 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat habitat definitions

Critical Habitat Category24 Roosts (TSSC 2016e; Bat Call WA 2021b)
• Category 1 Roost - Maternity/diurnal roosts occupied year-round where there is known
breeding and detection of young that is used for all or part of the breeding cycle.
• Category 2 Roost - Maternity/diurnal roosts regularly occupied year-round and/or used
during breeding cycle but do not have confirmation of breeding or detection of young.
• Category 3 Roost - Diurnal roosts not occupied year-round but may be used for part of
breeding cycle and also facilitate long-distance dispersal in region. These roosts are
considered satellite roosts due to association with nearby Category 1 and 2 roosts that
make up a colony or can be used to support dispersal in the Genetic Movement Corridor.
Foraging habitat (TSSC 2016e; Bat Call WA 2021b)
All habitats within 500 m of the Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts.
Water source (Bat Call WA 2021b)
Semi-permanent or permanent water sources up to 6.1 km of Category 1, 2 and 3 (when adjacent
to one or more Category 1 or 2) roosts.
Genetic Movement Corridor (Umbrello et al. 2022)
Category 3 and 4 roosts and productive ephemeral watercourses within the 75 km wide corridor
across the Fortescue subregion that provide genetic connectivity between Hamersley and
Chichester subregions.25 See Figure 6-1 for map of corridor.
Key Habitat Category 4 Roost (Bat Call WA 2021b)
Nocturnal refuges that are occupied at night for resting, feeding or other purposes, with perching
not a requirement, but are important for persistence in the area. Not used during sunrise to sunset
and detections unlikely at twilight.
Foraging habitats (TSSC 2016e; Bat Call WA 2021b) within the nightly flying range of 20 km of
known Category 1, 2 and 3 roosts
• Deep gorges (priority 1/ very high foraging rating)
o Gorges (i.e., ravines, box canyons) made by two escarpments (either wet ‘open’
gorge with hills to the side or ‘closed’ gorge with one or 2 vertical walls) with or
without ephemeral or perennial pools that also may contain complex 3-layer,
dense vegetation structure.
o Sections of bluffs with or without ephemeral or perennial pools.
o Wetlands at the base of relatively high hills with ephemeral waterfalls
(generally cascade or punchbowl type) that have a persistent plunge pool, or
other pools downstream surrounded by riparian and wetland vegetation
including large melaleuca.
o Pools that are relatively large and perennial (all seasons, several consecutive
years).
• Gullies, ridgelines and mesas (priority 2-3/ high foraging rating)
o High upland habitats consisting of ridges and mesas with escarpments and
rocky outcrops containing caves and overhangs.
o Mesa side or long ridge line with deeply incised gullies in weathered strata (45º
sloping walls) or long ridge line with simple geology and minimal caves and
overhangs present.
o Bluffs near upland water courses.
o Shrubs and spinifex on gully floor.
o Gullies containing minor upland ephemeral watercourses.
o Shallow non-incised gullies.
• Large riparian habitats (priority 4/ high to moderate foraging rating)
o Wide, open river channel of gravel or sand.

36

o Generally lowland areas, or amongst low rounded hills.
o Riparian vegetation of tall eucalypts, melaleuca and acacias.
o Pools ranging from small and ephemeral, to large and perennial (persist in all
seasons, and over several consecutive years), may have some relatively short
sections of bluff development.
• Plain and low hill habitat (priority 4-5/ moderate foraging rating)
o Low rounded hills adjacent to Triodia hummock and tussock grassland plains or
bare ground on claypan, salt pans, pasture lands.
o Minor watercourses with fringing tall shrubs and trees but also other sites with
little open water that is either semi-permanent, permanent, or surface water
(natural or anthropogenic).
o Three layers of complex vegetation structure containing (<10% overall cover)
sparse emergent shrubs and trees.

department’s species distribution model indicates that the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat species or species
areas. Appropriate action should be taken to ensure any potential direct and indirect impacts (e.g.,
noise, light, vibration, changes to hydrology, feral predation, artificial lighting, dust, human
disturbance) to avoidance areas are prevented and mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical
habitat areas.
Avoidance Standards
1. If surveys for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat identify a Category 1, 2 or 3 roost or roosts, you should
avoid impacts to the Category 1, 2 or 3 roost or roosts, in addition to the area within a 500 m27
radius of the roost or roosts, within the development envelope.
2. If surveys for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat identify multiple Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts in proximity
to one another (within 400 m), you should avoid impacts to all Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts and all
habitat within a 500 m radius of the outermost roosts in the development envelope.
3. If surveys for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat identify water sources within a 6.1 km radius of a
Category 1, 2 or 3 roost,28 all water sources with high levels of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat usage (and
at least one permanent water source) within 6.1 km of the roosts, in addition to all habitat
within a 200 m radius of the water source, should be avoided within the development
envelope.29
4. If surveys for Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat identify usage of roosts, foraging habitat, or water sources
within the Genetic Movement Corridor, the roosts, foraging habitat or water sources that are
repeatedly used by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat, in addition to the area within a 500 m radius of
the roost or foraging habitat, and all habitat within a 200 m radius of the water source, must be
avoided within the development envelope.
5. Additional avoidance should be provided for where a development is likely to result in
widespread clearing and degradation of key foraging habitats for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat
outside the avoidance areas but within a 20 km radius of the known Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts

37
within the development envelope. Suitably sized core foraging areas that support high Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bat foraging detections, with a preference for Priority 1 to 3 habitats, should be
avoided.
Maintaining the viability of roosts within avoidance areas
The sustained viability of Category 1, 2, 3 and 4 roosts must be achieved by meeting the following
two objectives:
1. Roost structural integrity is maintained for use by Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats, and changes that
prevent or reduce the quality of the habitat are avoided. These changes may include, but
are not limited to, collapse and blockages, flooding, changes to the internal microclimates,
increased exposure to intrusive disturbances from people and animals, and increased
likelihood of exposure to chemical agents or pathogens.
2. Roost usage by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat is sustained in the same way, the roost will
continue to be the focus of any breeding activity, and the colony will not diminish in terms
of overall size (numbers) throughout the year, change colony sex ratio, or change rates of
membership turnover. Closing a roost during construction, operation or rehabilitation to
prevent access by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat is not considered to be an appropriate
avoidance measure.
An increased avoidance area around a Category 1, 2 or 3 roost (greater than or less than 500 m) may
need to be applied, if geotechnical, ecological and hydrological studies demonstrate that a change in
the avoidance area is required to maintain the structural integrity, viability and use of a roost or
roosts.
Figure 3-4 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat avoidance
standards.

should be applied where possible (e.g., not removing highly used Category 4 roosts).
Figure 3-4 Conceptual example of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat survey and avoidance areas (500 m area)

the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat at the impact site. These measures, including ongoing monitoring to
assess and report their effectiveness, must be incorporated where appropriate into the proposed

38
project design and included in project assessment documentation when referred under Part 7 of the
EPBC Act.
Table 3-9 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat mitigation of impacts
Habitat Loss (Category 4 – nocturnal refuges) Design and locate proposed development to minimise loss of
key habitat as much as practicable.
Refuges used for night time resting and feeding are
important for the persistence of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Minimise impacts of blasting, drilling, earthworks, excavation,
Bat in a local area and may be destroyed as a result of clearing, construction, artificial light and haulage adjacent to
excavation and clearing activities (TSSC 2016e; Bat Call avoidance areas and key habitat types.
2021b). In-ground vibrations from nearby earthworks,
blasting, drilling and operation of heavy equipment
can also impact the structural integrity of nocturnal
refuges and lead to collapse (TSSC 2016e; Bat Call
2021b).
Habitat Loss (foraging)
Degradation or loss of vegetation that provides
foraging opportunities within the typical foraging
range (i.e., 20 km) of a category 1, 2 or 3 roost may
lead to localised reduction in prey for Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bats. Vegetation loss or degradation may
be caused by direct vegetation clearing for
construction of mines, roads, rail, solar photovoltaic,
wind farm or other infrastructure; storage of waste
soil, increased surface water discharge, grazing by
livestock or feral animals, fire, weed encroachment,
increased surface water discharge and other changes
in hydrology (where vegetation is groundwater
dependent).
Fragmentation and genetic isolation. Ensure that the avoidance standards are implemented to
Suitable roosting habitat is patchily distributed in the minimise impacts to known Category 1,2, and 3 roosts.
Pilbara, with only 48 confirmed roosts within the Maintain landscape connectivity through the protection of
Pilbara (Bat Call 2021a). Long-distance dispersal of the Category 4 roosts and water sources to support dispersal
species is anticipated to be infrequent, and gene flow within the Genetic Movement Corridor.
may be limited by the availability of suitable roosts
across the landscape (Umbrello et al. 2022). There is a
natural barrier of the Fortescue subregion that
impedes the easy mixing of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat
between the Hamersley and East Pilbara (Chichester)
subregions, with a narrow 75 km wide north to south
corridor used by Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat males crossing
the Fortescue subregion.
Feral predation Implement a feral cat control program which aims to minimise
Predation by feral cats has recently been identified as feral cat numbers within and around the development
a threat to Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats, particularly at envelope, particularly targeting Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roost
entrances to roosts (Curtin University 2022a, 2022b). entrances, over the life of the approval. The feral cat controls
in the avoidance areas should be implemented year-round
using a range of methods, with Felixers deployed at the roost
entrance being the preferred control method.
Feral cat control programs should be designed in accordance
with relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans and be
informed by contemporary findings on best practice feral
predator management.
Monitor and report feral cat numbers around the impact site
compared to a pre-disturbance baseline using camera traps
monthly. Baseline and ongoing surveys should follow Pest
animal monitoring techniques (Pest Smart 2021b).

39
Noise Noise levels should be kept at acceptable levels based on site-

Sounds produced by blasting and heavy machinery specific noise modelling and in accordance with current best
such as drill rigs, excavators, haul trucks used at practices (Bat Call WA 2021b).
various stages of mining and other infrastructure Monitor the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures (and
projects, may lead Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats to evacuate adapt as needed) for protecting the viability and ongoing use
their roosts (DCCEEW 2023c). Chronic noise-induced of critical diurnal Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roosts (Category 1, 2
stress may also impact their energy budget, and 3). Adaptive approaches should be presented in the
reproductive success and long-term survival (Bat Call monitoring and management plan to minimise noise impacts
WA 2021b:33). Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats may habituate on the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat activity and usage of the
to some sound, given a reasonable buffer, although roost(s).
further research is required to support this claim
(Bat Call WA 2021b:33).
Vibration Vibration levels should be kept at acceptable levels based on
In-ground vibrations, such as those produced by the vibration modelling undertaken for the activity and in
blasting activity in open-cut mining, heavy machinery, accordance with best practices. Underground vibration should
or exploration drilling may cause Pilbara Leaf-nosed strive to be below 10-15 mm/s peak particle velocity within
Bats to use valuable energy reserves and abandon the roost (Bat Call WA 2021b).
roosts. Monitor the effectiveness of vibration mitigation measures
Information on rock vibration transmission (and adapt as needed) for protecting the viability and ongoing
characteristics and the roost location(s) may be use of critical diurnal Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roosts (Category
required to adequately inform vibration impact 1, 2 and 3). Adaptive approaches should be presented in the
assessment, avoidance distances and blast planning. monitoring and management plan to minimise vibration
impacts on the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat activity and usage of the
roost(s).
Artificial lighting Avoid artificial night time lighting (including red-biased spectra
Artificial lighting spill on Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roost lighting) in direct view of entrances to diurnal roosts and
entrances will likely affect emergence behaviour and nocturnal refuges.
roost usage. Screening may be used to darken the roost entrances, if
Use of artificial light by night-time operations may lighting is required for safe mining operations and
impact Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats foraging behaviours in consideration should be given to the National Light Pollution
the area. guidelines for Wildlife, including marine turtles, seabirds and
migratory shorebirds (DEE 2020).
Red-biased spectra lighting at roost entrances may
increase predation on the species by Ghost Bats (Bat
Call WA 2021b:35).
Dust Implement dust suppression and minimising practices to avoid
High dust levels could reduce Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat impact to Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats accessing roosts on dusk
vision and foraging success. Oxides of nitrogen gases and dawn and in any areas known to be used by the Pilbara
from blasting may also impact the species (Bat Call WA Leaf-nosed Bat for foraging. Ensure that avoidance standards
2021b:34). have been implemented and other management measures are
put in place to reduce Nitrogen oxide gases from the blasting
reaching the roost entrance.
Exposure to pollution Implement pollution and waste management to regulatory
High levels of arsenic or cyanide in water discharged or standards. Avoid disposal of waste oils and other liquids down
stored in tailings dams from gold mining areas pose a exploration drill holes.
potential risk of poisoning when used for drinking by
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat. Disposal of waste liquids and
oils down ore body exploration drill holes has the
potential to seep into roosts via groundwater and may
cause roost abandonment (Bat Call WA 2021b).
Vehicle Strikes Implement and enforce speed limits of 60 km/hr (dusk to
The Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat has a habit of flying dawn) of linear infrastructure within the development
relatively low and has a curiosity for light (DCCEEW envelope that is within close proximity to avoidance areas.
2023c). Therefore, mortalities of the Pilbara Leaf-
nosed Bat due to vehicle collisions at night are known
to occur where roads intersect with foraging areas of
rocky ridge and gorge habitat, major drainage lines, or
near diurnal roosts (Bat Call WA 2021b:35).

40
Wind Turbine collisions Wind turbines should avoid and minimise the risk of collisions
The impact to Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat from collision and related effects (e.g., barotrauma) on the Pilbara Leaf-
with wind turbines is not fully known but is predicted nosed Bat. This will be informed by the surveys of flight height
to be a risk to the species (Curtin University 2022a, and movement patterns within the development envelope
2022b). and in relationship to key movement corridors across the
Pilbara.
Consider any recorded movement patterns of the species and
avoid locating wind turbines between Category 1, 2 and 3
roosts, water sources and foraging habitats.
Use best practice wind turbine deterrents or warning systems.
The use of reflective markers could also be trialled. Adaptive
approaches should be presented in the monitoring and
management plan for wind turbine strike impacts on the
Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat.
Human disturbance & cumulative effects of biological Limit access to diurnal roosts only to suitably qualified experts
investigations or trained personnel to undertake monitoring. Non-invasive
The Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat is highly sensitive to methods of monitoring should be prioritised during the
disturbance. People entering roosts (e.g., for surveying breeding and pupping seasons (between mid-March to end of
or monitoring the species) are likely to cause flushing October).
of bats from the roost and this poses a higher risk of Use appropriate signs to restrict vehicle public access to the
mortality if suitable roosts are not immediately roosts. Induct and enforce the prohibited entry of personnel in
available nearby (DCCEEW 2023c). Disturbance and the avoidance areas.
flushing of bats from diurnal roosts between Passive Integrated Transponder tagging, and radio tracking
November and mid-March also presents higher risk of procedures should only be undertaken with a scope of
abandonment, mortality and impact during important regional scale, which can be supported and coordinated by
parts of their reproductive cycle (Bat Call WA industry but should not be implemented for a single project
2021b:38). focus. This level of coordination will work to build a tracking
There has been an increase in Passive Integrated information database and monitoring system of the species
Transponder tagging in recent years for Pilbara Leaf- movements and roost usage at regional scale.
nosed Bat studies. While this has resulted in some
good outcomes for filling knowledge gaps for the
species, there has been no evaluation of the cost
versus the benefit. Therefore, the procedure should
only be undertaken after consideration of the relative
value of the technique from a regional perspective.
Hydrological changes Minimise hydrological changes (e.g., dewatering, increase in
Loss of permanent pools close to permanent diurnal surface water run-off and diversions) where these changes are
roosts (Category 1 and 2 roosts) may result in roost likely to:
abandonment (Bat Call WA 2021b:17, 31). - impact the water table if it intersects with a critical
Microclimate within caves or adits is essential to their diurnal roost (Category 1, 2 or 3),
viability as Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roosts. The water - impact permanent water bodies within 6.1 km of a
table rarely intersects with natural roosts and high critical diurnal roost,
humidity levels are believed to be maintained by water - degrade foraging habitats, and/or
seeping down the rocks overhead. Some roosts in
- decrease water quality due to run-off and pollution.
abandoned underground mines do intersect the water
table (Bat Call WA 2021b:17). Changes to the water
table in these cases may therefore impact humidity
and viability of these roosts (TSSC 2016e).
Diseases Ensure that proper hygiene is undertaken when conducting
Currently no known disease impacts the species. There surveys and monitoring at Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat roosts.
exists the potential for a future disease similar to Use appropriate signs to minimise public and personnel entry
White Nosed Syndrome (Pseudogymnoascus into avoidance areas.
destructans) to be introduced (Bat Call WA 2021b:32).
Climate change Support climate change resilience for Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat
The 2022 Workshop on the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and populations via an adaptation strategy (Pavey 2014). This
a world-wide review (Festa et al. 2023) have identified includes protecting known Category 1, 2 and 3 roosts of the
that due to the physiological requirements of the species, maintaining landscape connectivity through the

41

species, impacts from climate change may affect the protection of Category 4 roosts within the Genetic Movement
suitability of the roosts (e.g., changes to temperature, Corridor, protecting the microclimate of known roosts, and
rainfall, humidity), and impact foraging through implementing the avoidance standards to protect foraging
changes to habitats and prey items availability (Curtin habitats for the species.
University 2022a, 2022b). Create climate refuges for the species by protecting
underpinning hydrological regimes that will maintain
microclimates of the roosts and refuges in the landscape for
prey that will in turn support the persistence of the Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bat in the landscape. Undertake other mitigation
measures such as weed management, reduction of fire risks,
and other activities that maintain the quality and quantity of
habitats where the species is known to occur (Pavey 2014).

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat habitat within the study
area should be used to quantify the extent of critical habitat and key habitat (refer to Table 3-8) that
will be directly or indirectly impacted by an activity to inform calculation of residual significant
impact.
Residual significant impacts are calculated where the following habitats are to be disturbed:
1. Any indirect or direct disturbance to key habitat outside of avoidance areas and within the
development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact where a Pilbara Leaf-
nosed Bat occurrence has been recorded within the study area.
2. Any indirect or direct disturbance to key habitat outside of avoidance areas and within the
development envelope that overlaps with the 20 km radius foraging range of a known
Category 1 or 2 roost outside the development envelope will be considered a residual
significant impact.

42
3.6 Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas)

Survey methodology
Surveys for Ghost Bats should be conducted over a minimum of two consecutive years. The survey
data provided at the referral stage may contain historical data, but contemporary surveys of Ghost
Bats should not be older than five years and should be undertaken as close to the date of referral of
an activity as possible.
Surveys may consider the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened bats (DEWHA 2010a) for
suitable methods for surveys for bats (noting that there are no Ghost Bat-specific methods in the
Guidelines), but should use the techniques outlined in A review of Ghost bat ecology, threats and
survey requirements (Bat Call WA 2021a) and methods outlined below.
Roost entrance surveys of Ghost Bat echolocation and social calls are challenging to distinguish from
other bat species and cave insect sounds. Therefore, determination of survey outcomes needs to be
either undertaken by or confirmed by an experienced bat call practitioner.
Roost categorisation must be conducted using a robust, well-documented and repeatable
methodology. Surveys must be undertaken for a minimum of two consecutive years, to capture two
important seasonal periods: April to July (during mating) and August to March (when the bats are in
the later stages of pregnancy and nursing young). The following information will need to be
gathered:
• Diurnal use of the roosts: based on activity patterns, provide evidence that Ghost Bats use
the roosts during the day. This can be determined by a variety of methods, which include:
o non-invasive thermal or infrared video recordings that show first detection of exit at
dusk.
o acoustic observation of first detection within the 30 minutes after sunset time
and/or a time of last detection within the 30 minutes before sunrise time
o investigating the roost during the day by using ultrasonic recordings, video or
pictures to provide evidence of presence within the roost during the day.
• Breeding activity use of the roost: using either capture methods (e.g., to detect bats in
breeding condition), detection of elevated levels of reproductive hormone metabolites in
validated species-specific scat material, observations of non-volant young in the roost,
recordings of young bat calls within the roost, or direct observations of mating.
• Colony size: undertaken using valid counting method to assess the number of Ghost Bats
using the roosts across seasons and years.
Acoustic detection and video recordings will be needed to determine landscape uses outside the
roost(s) to inform core foraging areas and water sources the species rely upon within the
development envelope. However, Ghost Bat detections away from the roost entrance can be
challenging due to the sporadic number of calls the species makes while outside the roost (e.g.,
foraging). Therefore, acoustic lures (Ruykys et al. 2023) provide a good option in determining
landscape uses of the Ghost Bat.

43
The regional context of the development envelope will also need to be understood for the Ghost Bat,
including all the known Category 1 and 2 roosts within 12 km of the development envelope
boundary. This may be undertaken using a desktop assessment.
Surveys for the Ghost Bat must be undertaken within the development envelope and within 500 m
(identify any critical roosting habitats) outside of the development envelope boundary (the study
area). The surveys within the study area must:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Ghost bat habitat definitions at
Table 3-10.
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Ghost Bat occurrences (e.g., calls, sightings, video
recordings or scats) to categorise the roosts, identify the core foraging habitats, and identify
the water resources used by the Ghost Bats.
Should surveys identify Category 1, 2 or 3 (apartment block) bat roosts, the following critical habitat
surveys and impact assessments must be undertaken:
3. Foraging habitat impact assessment to identify the core foraging habitats.
4. Vibration impact assessment to identify and quantify potential impacts to Category 1, 2 and
3 (apartment block) roosts as a result of inground vibration from development, operation,
closure and rehabilitation of a development area.
5. Noise impact assessment to identify and quantify potential impacts of noise transmission to
the Category 1, 2 or 3 (apartment block) roost during development, operation, closure and
rehabilitation of a development area.
identify:
o potential impacts to the hydrology, water quality and chemistry of any water sources
within a 5 km radius of a Category 1, 2 or 3 (apartment block) roost as a result of the
development, operation, closure and rehabilitation of a development area, and
o Ghost Bat occurrences (e.g., calls, sightings, video recordings) at the water sources
within 5 km of the roosts.
7. Light pollution impact assessment to identify potential impacts of artificial light on the Ghost
Bats using a Category 1, 2 or 3 (apartment block) roost during development, operation,
closure and rehabilitation of a development area.

44

Table 3-10 Ghost Bat habitat definitions

Critical Habitat Category Roosts (TSSC 2016b; Bat Call WA 2021a) in geological formations of Brockman and Marra Mamba
banded iron formation, Robe Pisolite channel iron deposit, ironstone, and granite rockpiles. Roosts may also
occur in abandoned underground mines.
• Category 1 Roost – Maternity/Diurnal roost sites with proven permanent presence of Ghost
Bats with known (or highly likely) breeding and presence of young. These roosts may be
abandoned underground mines.
• Category 2 Roost – Maternity/Diurnal roosts are regularly occupied (but not continuous) with
presence over long periods (25 to 75% of days over several months) and then abandoned for
weeks or even months. These roosts are very likely to be capable of supporting breeding. These
roosts may be abandoned underground mines.
• Category 3 Roost – ‘Apartment block’ diurnal roosts that have occasional occupancy and are
normally less developed structures that are used as feeding sites or temporary refuges. Diurnal
roosts in close proximity (up to 500 m) to a Category 1 or 2 diurnal roost. This configuration of a
Category/Priority 3 roost is referred to as an ‘apartment block’.
Key Habitat Category Roosts (Bat Call WA 2021a)
• Category 3 Roost – Diurnal roosts with occasional occupancy that are isolated from Category 1
and 2 roosts.
• Category 4 Roost – Shallow cave, shelter or deep overhang that are opportunistically used for
foraging, resting and/or feeding.
Water sources (Bat Call WA 2021a)
Semi-permanent or permanent water sources within 5 km of Category 1, 2 and 3 (apartment block) roosts
that are being used by the Ghost Bats during foraging activity.
Foraging habitat (TSSC 2016b; Bat Call WA 2021a; Bullen et al. 2023) within 12 km of Category Roosts.
• Productive plain areas with thin mature woodland over patchy or clumped tussock or hummock
grass (Triodia species) on sand or stony ground.
• Gorge, gullies, breakaways, hill crests, hillslope areas.
• Woodlands with suitable trees (vantage points) along the edge of watercourses.
• Thinly wooded areas of Mulga, Acacia, and/or Eucalypt spp. with 30-70% open ground cover.
• Isolated trees on the edge of thin thickets on plains.

department’s species distribution model indicates that the Ghost Bat species or species habitat is
noise, light, vibration, changes to hydrology, collision with barbed wire, artificial lighting, dust, feral
predation, human disturbance) to avoidance areas, are prevented and mitigated to maintain the
viability of these critical habitat areas.
1. If surveys for the Ghost Bat identify a Category 1 or 2 or Category 3 (apartment block) roost or
roosts, these roosts, in addition to the area within a 500 m31 radius of the roost or roosts, must
be avoided within the development envelope.

45
2. If surveys for the Ghost Bat identify multiple Category 1 or 2 or Category 3 (apartment block)
roosts in proximity to one another (within 500 m), all Category 1 or 2 or Category 3 (apartment
block) roosts and all habitat within a 500 m radius of the outermost roosts must be avoided in
the development envelope.
3. If surveys for the Ghost Bat identify water sources within a 5 km radius of a Category 1, 2 or 3
roost, at least one permanent water source or multiple ephemeral and semi-permanent water
sources with high levels of Ghost Bat usage that will support the species year-round, in addition
to all habitat within a 200 m radius of the water source, must be avoided within the
development envelope.32
4. Additional avoidance requirements will be required in situations where a development is likely
to result in widespread clearing and degradation of key foraging habitats for the Ghost Bat
outside the avoidance areas but within a 12 km radius of the known Category 1, 2 or 3 roosts in
the development envelope. Suitably sized areas of foraging habitat (as defined under key
habitat definition at Table 3-10) that support high Ghost Bat foraging detections will need to be
avoided.33
Maintaining the viability of roosts within avoidance areas
The sustained viability of Category 1 and 2 and Category 3 (apartment block) roosts must be achieved
by meeting the following two objectives:
1. Roost structural integrity is maintained for use by Ghost Bats and changes that prevent or
reduce the quality of the habitat is avoided. These changes can include, but are not limited
to, collapse and blockages, flooding, changes to the internal microclimates, increased
exposure to intrusive disturbances from people and animals, and increased likelihood of
exposure to chemical agents or pathogens. This also includes maintaining the structural
integrity of abandoned underground mines.
2. Roost usage by the Ghost Bat is sustained in the same way, the roost will continue to be the
focus of any breeding activity, and the colony will not diminish in terms of overall size
(numbers) throughout the year, change colony sex ratio, or change rates of membership
turnover.
Closing a roost during construction, operation or rehabilitation to prevent access by the Ghost Bat
will not be a supported avoidance measure for Category 1 roosts. Closure of Category 2 and 3 roosts
may be considered, if there is evidence to demonstrate other potential roosts in the region are open
to support the Ghost Bat and these roosts will persist in the environment. To meet this requirement,
there will need to be a commitment to a coordinated regional tracking program that will adaptively
track and reopen roosts for the displaced Ghost Bats when appropriate.
A reduced avoidance area around Category 1 or 2 or Category 3 (apartment block) roosts of less than
500 m may be applied with suitable evidence from best practice geotechnical, ecological, and
hydrological studies that a smaller area can be applied to minimise impacts of noise and vibration on
the viability of the roost. However, the avoidance area surrounding a Category 1 or 2 or Category 3
(apartment block) roost cannot be smaller than 250 m for all project developments except for linear
infrastructure that may (in some circumstances) have a minimum of 50 m avoidance area (speed
restrictions will need to be implemented).
Figure 3-5 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Ghost Bat avoidance standards.

46

You should be applying further avoidance of species-specific disturbance outside the avoidance areas
described above where possible, e.g., avoiding highly used Category 4 roosts.
Figure 3-5 Conceptual example of Ghost Bat survey and avoidance areas (500 m area)

Table 3-11 identifies mitigation measures that are recommended to reduce key threats and impacts
to the Ghost Bat at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
report the effectiveness of these measures, should be built into the proposed project design where
EPBC Act.
Table 3-11 Ghost Bat: mitigation of impacts
Habitat Loss (Category 3 (isolated) or Category 4 – Design and locate proposed development to minimise loss of
nocturnal refuges) key habitat as much as practicable.
Many of the Ghost Bat Category 3 (isolated) and Minimise impacts of blasting, drilling, earthworks, excavation,
Category 4 – nocturnal refuge roosts in the Pilbara are clearing, construction, artificial light and haulage adjacent to
at risk of disturbance due to open-cut mining and avoidance areas and key habitat.
removal of old mine adits (TSSC 2016b). The loss of
Category 3 (isolated) roosts will impact the Ghost Bat
long-distance movements across the landscape (Bat
Call WA 2021a). The loss of Category 4 roosts will
impact on foraging, feeding, and resting for the Ghost
Bat (Bat Call WA 2021a).
Habitat Loss (foraging)
The Conservation Advice for the Ghost Bat (TSSC
2016b) states that impacts to foraging habitat such as
the loss of riparian habitat and vantage points in trees
will likely impact the species since suitable foraging
habitats outside of roosts are required to support the
persistence of the colony. In contrast, the Ghost Bat
Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states that broad scale
anthropogenic induced changes to foraging habitat
due to mining or pastoral projects are unlikely to cause
significant declines. However, broad scale clearing of
native vegetation and replacement by development
may result in declines of the species (Cramer et al.
2022).
Fragmentation and genetic isolation Design and locate proposed development to further avoid or
The Pilbara Ghost Bat subpopulation is genetically minimise impacts to remaining Ghost Bat Category 3 and 4
isolated from the other populations of Ghost Bat roosts and surrounding foraging habitat as much as
which persist in northern Australia (Armstrong and practicable.

47

Anstee 2000). The species is known to disperse
through the region in the winter, but the females will
aggregate in the summer to a variety of roosts
depending on prey availability and disturbance of
roosts within the region (Armstrong and Anstee 2000;
Bat Call WA 2021a). Genetic studies suggest that males
are more likely to be supporting the genetic flow and
mixing in the region, with dispersal distances of up to
100 km recorded (Worthington Wilmer et al. 1994).
Therefore, impacts and barriers to the dispersal
corridors throughout the Pilbara may limit the
dispersal across the region.
Habitat fragmentation (e.g., large developments,
roads, rail, wind turbines) that increase the distance
between the roosts, foraging habitats and dispersal
will increase the energic costs to the Ghost Bat,
especially critical for pregnant and lactating females
(Cramer et al. 2022).
Feral predation Implement a feral cat control program which aims to minimise
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a), Oedin et al. feral cat numbers within and around the development
(2021) and the recent Ghost Bat workshop (Cramer et envelope, particularly targeting Ghost Bat roost entrances,
al. 2022) suggest that feral cat predation is a likely over the life of the approval. The feral cat controls in the
threat to the species when exiting the roost entrances. avoidance areas should be implemented year-round using a
range of methods, with Felixers deployed at the roost
Introduced predators such as cats and foxes compete
entrance being the preferred control method.
for the same food sources as both hunt for small birds
and mammals (Armstrong and Anstee 2000; TSSC Feral cat control measures should be undertaken in
2016b). accordance with the Threat abatement plan for predation by
feral cats (DoE 2015), fox control measures should be
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states that
undertaken in accordance with the Threat abatement plan for
feral pigs and wild dogs likely shelter in the roosts
predation by the European Red Fox (DEWHA 2008b) and feral
during the heat of the day and will emerge at the same
pig control measures should be undertaken in accordance
time as the Ghost Bats, which may disturb the exiting
with the Threat abatement plan for predation, habitat
of the species from the roosts.
degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral
pigs (DEE 2017b) and Background document: Threat
abatement plan for predation, habitat degradation,
competition and disease transmission by feral pigs (Sus scrofa)
(DEE 2017a).
Cane Toads Implement cane toad biosecurity protocols to minimise the
The Conservation Advice for the Ghost Bat (TSSC risk of introducing cane toads to the development envelope.
2016b) identifies poisoning by cane toads as a threat Monitor regularly and report occurrence, implement control
to the species. A study done by White et al. (2016) measures in accordance with the Threat abatement plan for
concluded that the cane toads initially sheltered in the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused
Ghost Bat roosts, increasing their chances of being by cane toads (DSEWPaC 2011c) and managed through best
hunted and gradually poisoning the Ghost Bats, forcing practices found at Pest Smart Cane Toad tool kit (Pest Smart
them to move to less ideal roost sites. 2021a).
Noise Noise levels should be kept at acceptable levels based on the
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) confirms noise modelling undertaken for the development. Based on
that noise (e.g., blasting) within or in close proximity to these assessments the maximum allowable semi-continuous
the roosts can cause the species to abandon the or continuous sound levels from operational activities and/or
roosts. Both construction and operational noises heavy vehicle movements must be set at 70 dB(Z) year-round.
generated by blasting, haul trucks, loaders/excavators, Noise levels should be kept below 100 dB (peak) at the roost
dozers, drill rigs and service trucks, both intermittent entrance and not be continuous (Bat Call WA 2021a).
and continuous, can severely impact the species Avoid the use of low flying helicopters and aircraft above
physiology and behaviour. Importantly, loud noises avoidance areas.
such as blasts or low flying aircraft may disturb mother

48

bats causing them to take flight and potentially Monitor the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures (and
dislodge the pups (Bat Call WA 2021a; Cramer et al. adapt as needed) for protecting the viability and ongoing use
2022). of critical diurnal Ghost Bat roosts (Category 1 and2 and
Category 3 (apartment block)). Adaptive approaches should be
presented in the monitoring and management plan for noise
impacts on the Ghost Bat.
Vibration Vibration levels should be kept at acceptable levels based on
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) and the the vibration modelling undertaken for the development and
Ghost Bat workshop (Cramer et al. 2022) state that in accordance with best practices. The maximum allowable
vibrations from mining activities (e.g., blasting) may in-ground Peak Particle Velocity set is based on the vibration
cause the abandonment of the roost due to and blasting assessments but must be set at 10 mm/s from
disturbance or make the species move in the heat of October to December and 25 mm/s from January to
the day using valuable energy reserves. September to protect any reproducing females and their pups
in Category 1 or 2 roosts (Bat Call WA 2021a). If a full
assessment has not been undertaken, conservative PPV limits
of 20 and 50 mm/s will need to be applied to mitigate
vibration impacts.
Monitor the effectiveness of vibration mitigation measures
(and adapt as needed) for protecting the viability and ongoing
use of critical Ghost Bat roosts (Category 1 and 2 and Category
3 (apartment block)). Adaptive approaches should be
presented in the monitoring and management plan for
vibration impacts on the Ghost Bat.
Artificial lighting Avoid artificial night time lighting (including red-biased spectra
Artificial lighting spill on Ghost Bat roost entrances will lighting) in direct view of entrances to diurnal roosts and
likely affect emergence behaviour and roost usage (Bat nocturnal refuges.
Call WA 2021a). Screening could be used to darken the roost entrances if
lighting is required for safe mining operations and
consideration should be given to the National Light Pollution
guidelines for Wildlife, including marine turtles, seabirds and
migratory shorebirds (DEE 2020).
Dust Implement dust suppression and minimising practices to avoid
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) confirms impact to Ghost Bats accessing roosts on dusk and dawn and
that dust impacts on Ghost Bat foraging behaviours. in any areas known to be used by the Ghost Bat for foraging.
Exposure to pollution Implement pollution and waste management to required

The Conservation Advice for the Ghost Bat (TSSC regulatory standards. Prevent disposal of waste oils and other
2016b) states that contamination of roosts through liquids down exploration drill holes.
mining activities and associated pollution will reduce
survival rates and may impact reproductive success.
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states this
exposure will likely impact the species.
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Implement fire management practices for the life of the
interactions (FHF) and fire effects on predator-prey development within and around avoidance areas and critical
interactions (FPI) and key habitats to reduce the risk of large hot fires.
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states that Species-appropriate fire management: prioritise small burns to
large scale wildfires are likely to cause the species to provide a mosaic of habitat ages and densities and to reduce
disperse to other roosts for foraging due to the the intensity and size of fires. These prescribed burns should
disturbance, but full impacts are not known. occur outside of the breeding season of the Ghost Bat.
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity Fire management techniques can and should be implemented
(DAWE 2022) for information on types of fire-related in concert with feral animal control and habitat restoration
ecological processes. measures.
Vehicle strikes Implement and enforce speed limits of 60 km/hr (dusk to
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states that dawn) of linear infrastructure within the development
vehicle strikes may be likely but there is no direct envelope that is within close proximity to avoidance areas.
evidence.

49
Wind Turbine collisions Wind turbines should avoid and minimise the risk of collisions
The impact to Ghost Bat from collision with wind and related effects (e.g., barotrauma) on the Ghost Bat, which
turbines is not fully known but is predicted to be a risk is informed by the surveys of flight height and movement
to the species (Cramer et al. 2022). Ghost Bats are patterns within the development envelope and in relationship
considered to be at risk since the species is known to to key movement corridors across the Pilbara.
fly at the approximate blade sweep range. Consider any recorded movement patterns of the species and
avoid locating wind turbines between Category 1, 2 and 3
roosts, water sources and foraging habitats.
Use best practice wind turbine deterrents or warning systems.
The use of reflective markers could also be trialled. Adaptive
approaches should be presented in the monitoring and
management plan for wind turbine strike impacts on the
Ghost Bat.
Collision with barbed wire fences Avoid using barbed wire in the development envelope.
Due to the foraging technique of the Ghost Bat, the Replace all barbed wire fences that are currently in the
species is known to collide and get tangled in barbed development envelope in foraging range from each critical
wire fencing, which causes death through starvation diurnal roost with single-strand wire (TSSC 2016b; Bat Call WA
and dehydration (Armstrong and Anstee 2000; 2021b).
Woinarski et al. 2014; Bat Call WA 2021a; Cramer et al. Where barbed wire is required for safety reasons, replace the
2022). A study found that a single fence near a colony top wire with single strand and/or add adequate reflectors
will kill all the individuals over time (Armstrong and (i.e., metal disc 10 x 10 cm). Refer to barbed wire mitigation
Anstee 2000). measures in the Barbed Wire Action Plan (Booth 2007).
Human disturbance Limit access to diurnal roosts only to suitably qualified experts
The Ghost Bat is highly sensitive to disturbance, or trained personnel to undertake monitoring. Non-invasive
sometimes temporarily abandoning roosts or methods of monitoring should be prioritised during the
accidentally dropping new-born young when fleeing breeding and pupping seasons.
(Claramunt et al. 2019). Minor disturbances through Use appropriate signs to restrict vehicle public access to the
approaching vehicles or people may result in the roosts. Induct and enforce the prohibited entry of personnel in
species moving to alternative roosts (Bat Call WA the avoidance areas (TSSC 2016b).
2021a; Cramer et al. 2022). Larger disturbances, such Passive Integrated Transponder tagging, and radio tracking
as recreational cave usage or ecologists undertaking procedures should only be undertaken with a scope of
monitoring programs, may result in the loss of young regional scale, which can be supported and coordinated by
and/or abandonment of the roost (TSSC 2016b). industry but should not be implemented for a single project
Cave and mine tours in the Pilbara (Tom Price, Marble focus. This level of coordination will work to build a tracking
Bar, Rio Tinto) have allowed tourist groups to access information database and monitoring system of the species
and disturb potential ghost bat habitats. Recreational movements and roost usage at regional scale.
use of old mines and caves has also resulted in cave
entrances being widened for easier access, and the
installation of handrails, fences, concrete paths, stairs,
and lights (Tuttle 2013).
There has been an increase in Passive Integrated
Transponder tagging in recent years for Ghost Bat
studies. While this has resulted in some good
outcomes for filling knowledge gaps for the species,
there has been no evaluation of the cost versus the
benefit. Therefore, the procedure should only be
undertaken after consideration of the relative value of
the technique in a regional perspective.
Hydrological changes Minimise hydrological changes (e.g., dewatering, increase in
The Ghost Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021a) states the surface water run-off and diversions) where these changes are
use of water sources near roosts is not well likely to:
understood but that foraging near, and around - impact permanent water bodies within 5 km of a
riparian zones is common. critical diurnal roost,
Flooding of the roosts (both natural and artificial - degrade foraging habitats, or
mines) due to excess water disposal is also a possible - decrease water quality due to run off and pollution.
impact to the species.

50
Diseases Ensure that proper hygiene is carried out when undertaking

The Conservation Advice for the Ghost Bat (TSSC surveys and monitoring at Ghost Bat roosts.
2016b) states that there is a possible herpes-type virus Use appropriate signs to minimise public and personnel entry
that may impact the species, but the pathology needs into avoidance areas.
to be confirmed.
Climate change Support climate change resilience for Ghost Bat populations
The Ghost Bat Workshop (Cramer et al. 2022) and via an adaptation strategy (Pavey 2014). This includes
other studies (Thomson et al. 2012; Festa et al. 2023) protecting known Category 1 and 2 roosts by maintaining
have predicted that climate change will likely impact landscape connectivity, protecting the microclimate and avoid
roost microclimates (e.g., temperature and humidity), flooding known roosts, and by implementing the avoidance
cause changes to prey availability and quality of standards to protect foraging habitats for the species.
foraging habitats due to changes to rainfall and Create climate refuges for the species by protecting
temperatures. underpinning hydrological regimes that will maintain
microclimates of the roosts and refuges in the landscape for
prey items that will in turn support the persistence of the
Ghost Bat in the landscape. Undertake other mitigation
measures such as weed management, reduction of fire risks,
and other activities that maintain the quality and quantity of
habitats where the species is known to occur (Pavey 2014).

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Ghost Bat habitat within the study area should be
used to quantify the extent of critical habitat and key habitat (refer to Table 3-10) that will be directly
or indirectly impacted by a development to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
1. Any direct or indirect disturbance of key habitat outside of avoidance areas and within the
development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact where a Ghost Bat
occurrence has been recorded within the study area.
development envelope that overlaps with the 12 km radius foraging range of a known
Category 1 or 2 roost outside the development envelope, will be considered a residual
significant impact.

51
3.7 Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis)

Survey Methodology
Surveys for the Night Parrot should have a minimum of two years of suitable effort (dependent on
scale of habitat) across all suitable habitat types within the study area. The survey data provided at
the referral stage can contain historical data, but contemporary surveys of Night Parrot detection or
non-detection must not be older than five years and should be undertaken as close to the date of
referral of a development as possible.
Surveys for the Night Parrot should consider the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened birds
(DEWHA 2010b), but more recent methods can be found at the Guidelines for considering the
presence of night parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) in Western Australia (DPaW in preparation)
(summarised below). Further advice on appropriate survey methods for detecting the Night Parrot, if
required, should be sought from the Night Parrot Recovery Team.
Surveys for the Night Parrot must be undertaken within the development envelope and within 2 km34
outside the development envelope boundary (study area). The surveys within the study area should:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Night Parrot habitat definitions at
Table 3-12.35 Desktop and remote sensing are viable options for site characterisation to
determine if suitable habitat (Table 3-12) exists within the study area.
If preliminary surveys identify critical breeding and roosting habitat for the Night Parrot (i.e., old
growth, unburnt dense hummock-forming spinifex, lignum, or samphire surrounded by natural fire
breaks), and foraging habitats, the following surveys should be undertaken within the study area:
2. Autonomous Recording Units acoustic surveys using the appropriately scaled survey effort
(points a – b below), and survey for other evidence of Night Parrot occurrence (i.e., feathers,
sightings) within the study area.
a. If the Night Parrot habitat covers a small area within the study area, then an array of
Autonomous Recording Units should be placed a minimum of 200 m apart around
the suitable habitat types (Table 3-12), for a minimum of six nights (under good
recording conditions, otherwise more nights will be required) and set to record calls
emitted between (at least) 25 minutes after sunset until 25 minutes before sunrise
(see Leseberg et al. 2022). Acoustic surveys of all Night Parrot habitats within the
study area must be undertaken simultaneously.
b. If Night Parrot habitat is extensive within the study area, multiple Autonomous
Recording Units should be widely placed throughout areas of suitable habitats
simultaneously across the study area and left in place for several months. If Night
Parrots are detected using this method, then the Autonomous Recording Unit arrays
should be used for several further months to progressively close in and understand
which areas are being used by Night Parrots for what purpose, until the Autonomous
Recording Units have reached a spacing of no more than 200 m apart and a

52
reasonable understanding is gained of the core roost/breeding, foraging habitats and

dispersal areas used by the Night Parrot within the study area.
All call records must include the location of recording and estimated location of call.36 Survey data of
Night Parrot calls is critical in assessment of the importance of the site as it can improve
understanding of the role of the habitat, the number of birds, what they are doing (overflying, on
ground), and whether juveniles are present.
Should surveys detect the Night Parrot, the following impact assessments must be undertaken:
3. Hydrological assessment(s) (e.g., groundwater and surface water impact assessment) to
identify potential impacts to Night Parrot habitat from changes in surface water and impacts
to groundwater-dependent vegetation and water sources.
The use of radio tracking techniques can also be utilised, if fitted by suitably qualified experts and
taking all necessary care to protect species individuals, which would be beneficial in understanding
how Night Parrots are using the study area and surrounding landscapes.

Table 3-12 Night Parrot habitat definitions

Critical Habitat Breeding and roosting habitat (Murphy 2015; TSSC 2016d; Murphy et al. 2017b; Burbidge 2020)
Old growth (often >50 years unburnt) dense hummock-forming spinifex, thickets of lignum, or dense
shrubby samphire that is surrounded by firebreaks created by patches of ironstone, rocky bars, salt lakes or
samphire flats.
Foraging habitat (Murphy 2015; TSSC 2016d; Murphy et al. 2017b; Burbidge 2020)
Paleo-drainage lines, ephemeral grasslands, herb-fields or samphire, gilgais, run-on areas, floodplains, or
salt lake systems that support relatively high vegetative structure, seed productivity and floristic diversity
that are within 10 km of breeding and roosting habitats. Gastrolith sources to aid food digestion.
Water Sources (Murphy 2015; TSSC 2016d; Murphy et al. 2017b; Burbidge 2020)
Permanent/ephemeral water sources or areas of high soil moisture within close proximity or within 50 km
of known breeding/roosting habitats.
Key Habitat Flyways (Burbidge 2020)
Varying habitats from river and creek drainage systems, surrounding dune-fields, forb–grasslands on mainly
ironstone gravel-covered plains, low ranges and low dissected tablelands supporting sparse shrublands,
undulating stony clay plains supporting Mitchell Grass and Gidgee.
Other Foraging habitats (TSSC 2016d; Hamilton et al. 2017; Murphy et al. 2017b; Horton et al. 2021)
• Hummock grasslands (unburnt) in stony or sandplain environments. Spinifex shrublands in stony
or sandy areas.
• Paleo-drainage features in a landscape mosaic with Triodia spp., Astrebla spp. and Acacia aneura
(Mulga) woodland.
• Scattered trees and shrubs, mulga (Acacia aneura) woodlands, and in areas dominated by Triodia
longiceps, Scerolaena spp. Maireana spp. Ptilotus spp. with some Acacia cambagei.
• Lateritic rises, limestone deposits, or deep reticulated sands.
• Treeless areas and bare gibber.

53

the department’s species distribution model indicates that the Night Parrot species, or species’
habitat, is known, likely, or may occur.37
changes to hydrology, predation from feral predators, negative fire effects, increases in weeds and
feral herbivores) on avoidance areas, are prevented and mitigated to maintain the viability of these
critical habitat areas and functions.
1. If surveys for the Night Parrot confirm an occurrence of the species within the study area, all
critical habitat within the development envelope should be avoided.38
2. If surveys for the Night Parrot identify critical breeding and roosting habitat within the study
area, all breeding and roosting habitat of old growth dense hummock-forming spinifex within the
development envelope should be avoided, even in the absence of Night Parrot detection.
3. Additional avoidance should occur where a development is likely to result in widespread clearing
and degradation of key foraging habitats for the Night Parrot outside the avoidance areas but
within the development envelope. Suitably sized foraging areas that either support known
(through survey detections) or likely Night Parrot foraging should be avoided.
Figure 3-6 illustrates conceptual examples of application of the Night Parrot avoidance standards.

should be applied where possible (e.g., not fragment other foraging areas from critical habitat types).
Figure 3-6 Conceptual example of Night Parrot survey and avoidance areas

54

to the Night Parrot at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
report their effectiveness, should be incorporated where appropriate into the proposed project
design and included in project assessment documentation when referred under Part 7 of the EPBC
Act.
Table 3-13 Night Parrot: mitigation of impacts
Threat and Impact Pathways Recommended mitigation measures
Habitat Loss Ensure that direct and indirect impacts to critical habitat and
The Night Parrot are known to prefer specific habitat key habitat outside of the avoidance areas are avoided or
types and are considered to persist in the landscape if minimised.
these habitats remain stable and are not impacted
overtime (Murphy et al. 2018, Burbidge 2020).
Fragmentation and isolation Locate and build infrastructure in ways that do not restrict the
The Night Parrot habitat guidelines (Burbidge 2020) dispersal of Night Parrots, both within and beyond the
identify that flyways are important to support the local development envelope where feasible.
sedentary movements between preferred habitat
types and the migratory movements of the Night
Parrot. Fragmentation of the species is an inferred
limit to its long-term persistence, but further evidence
is sought to understand the full extent of
fragmentation effects on the species.
Feral predators Feral predation control and monitoring measures should be
Night Parrots are very susceptible to feral predator continuously implemented within the development envelope,
impacts due to their ground roosting and foraging and particularly within avoidance areas, for the life of the
behaviours. approval.
The Conservation Advice for the Night Parrot (TSSC Baseline feral animal surveys must be undertaken in
2016d) states that feral cats have caused declines in accordance with the Pest animal monitoring techniques (Pest
Night Parrot populations and may ultimately cause Smart 2021b) and then evaluated over time to ensure that
local extinctions of the species. baseline feral predator populations are substantially reduced
or eliminated within the avoidance areas, and preferably
Foxes are also considered to be a key threat to the
within the landscapes surrounding them.
species in Western Australia that will lead to local
extinctions (National Environmental Science Program Feral cat control measures should be undertaken in
Threatened Species Research Hub 2019). accordance with the Threat abatement plan for predation by
feral cats (DoE 2015) and fox control measures should be
undertaken in accordance with the Threat abatement plan for
predation by the European Red Fox (DEWHA 2008b).
The Resilient Landscapes Hub of the Australian Government’s
National Environmental Science Program is currently
investigating the Best practice management of feral cats and
red foxes (NESP 2023). The first phase of the project has

55

produced the Current and emerging feral cat management
practices in Australia (Dorph and Ballard 2022), which has
identified 15 management techniques and assessed them
across four different bioregions in Australia. Desert effective
management techniques should be employed, using a
combination of approaches to achieve the best results in
sustainably managing feral predators.
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Design and implement species-protective fire management
interactions (FHF) practices for the life of the development within and around
The Night Parrot prefers breeding and roosting in avoidance areas. This is particularly important for the Night
long-unburnt habitats that are protected by fire breaks Parrot since the core breeding/roosting habitat is long-
(Murphy 2015; TSSC 2016d; Murphy et al. 2017b; unburnt hummock-forming spinifex, thickets of lignum, or
Burbidge 2020). dense shrubby samphire. Maintenance of the naturally
occurring firebreaks surrounding the breeding/roosting should
The risk of fire degrading and impacting these habitat
also be undertaken.
types is inferred to be high and may significantly
inhibit or reduce the number of sites the Night Parrot Fire management practices should be undertaken in
populations could expand (National Environmental surrounding critical and key habitats to reduce the risk of large
Science Program Threatened Species Research Hub hot fires that would suddenly remove or reduce a large
2019). proportion of ground cover and shelter for the Night Parrot.
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity Fire management techniques should be implemented in
(DAWE 2022) for advice on fire-related ecological concert with feral animal control and habitat restoration
processes. measures.
Weeds Targeted weed control and monitoring measures should be

Night parrots require a specific set of habitat undertaken alongside fire management controls to ensure
conditions, such as old growth spinifex, to survive and that the avoidance areas are not at risk of large-scale fires due
thrive. to weed invasion at suitable intervals but at a minimum of
every six months. Targeted weed management should also be
Buffel grass has infested parts of the distribution range
undertaken in the other critical and key habitats within the
for the Night Parrot and has the potential to degrade
development envelope at a minimum of every six months.
critical habitat by outcompeting native grasses and
leading to more intense fires (TSSC 2016d). Weed hygiene measures should be implemented.
Baseline weed extent will need to be collected and then
tracked over the development to ensure that baseline weed
levels are not exceeded and weeds are controlled. An
Integrated weed management (Weeds Australia 2021a)
approach should be implemented that is appropriate to the
weed species found in the baseline surveys. Ongoing Weed
monitoring (Weeds Australia 2021b) should also be
undertaken to ensure that weed management is being
successfully implemented.
Where buffel and gamba grass need to be reduced within the
development envelope, the control should be undertaken in
accordance with the Threat abatement plan to reduce the
impacts on northern Australia’s biodiversity by the five listed
grasses (DSEWPaC 2012). The most relevant guidelines for
management are Buffel grass management for Central
Australia (Department of Environment and Natural Resources
2018) and Gamba Grass (Weeds Australia 2023).
Other potentially applicable weed species management
techniques can be found at Weeds Australia (2021c).
Feral herbivores Ensure that domestic stock is fenced out of known
Livestock degrade native habitats by reducing the Night Parrot occupation areas and critical habitat types within
quality and availability of suitable breeding, roosting the development envelope using best practice exclusion
and foraging habitat for the Night Parrot (TSSC 2016d; fencing guidelines. Barbed wire should not be used due to the
National Environmental Science Program Threatened risk of entanglement by the species.
Species Research Hub 2019). Baseline feral herbivore distribution surveys should be
Livestock and feral camels also degrade water sources undertaken in accordance with the Pest animal monitoring
that are used by the Night Parrot (TSSC 2016d). techniques (Pest Smart 2021b) and then evaluated over time
to ensure that baseline feral herbivore populations are

56

reduced or, at a minimum, not increased within the
Camel management measures should be undertaken in
accordance with the National feral camel action plan (Natural
Resource Management Ministerial Council 2010), which
outlines suitable control methods in Appendix A3. Further
management techniques for camels are available at Pest
Smart Feral Camel controls (Sharp and Saunders 2012). At a
minimum, if camels are present, exclusion fencing should be
erected around the avoidance areas.
Rabbit control, if required, should be undertaken in
accordance with the Threat abatement plan for competition
and land degradation by rabbits (DEE 2016b), which has a
Background document: Threat abatement plan for
competition and land degradation by rabbits (DEE 2016a) that
provides suitable control methods. If exclusion fences
techniques are implemented, these should be constructed and
developed in accordance with the Cost effective feral animal
Collision with barbed wire fences Replace barbed wire fences within the foraging range for the
Three Night Parrots have been reported to have died species in accordance with the Barbed Wire Action Plan
by colliding with fences and they are at risk of these (Booth 2007), with suitable fence alternatives and sufficient
collisions since the species tend to fly low to the reflectors to enable low-flying birds to avoid the fences. The
ground (TSSC 2016d; National Environmental Science placement of any type of wire fences and similar obstacles
Program Threatened Species Research Hub 2019) and should be designed to avoid spanning key flyways for the
have lower visual acuity that may increase the risk of species.
entanglement (Iwaniuk et al. 2020). All wire fences
may be a threat to the species.
Disease Ensure that proper hygiene is undertaken when undertaking
The Conservation Advice for the Night Parrot (TSSC surveys and monitoring of Night Parrot flocks and individuals.
2016d) has identified that Australian psittacine bird
species are susceptible to, and equally likely to be
infected by psittacine beak and feather disease.
Illegal collection Ensure site personnel are briefed on the risks of poaching and
There is a suspected threat that Night Parrots will be the implications of participating in wildlife trafficking of
illegally collected (TSSC 2016d). threated species, as outlined in Wildlife Trade and Law
(DCCEEW 2023d).
The public should have strictly limited access to the Night
Parrot habitats within the development envelope, and
particularly within avoidance areas.
Climate change To support climate change resilience for Night Parrot
Climate change will likely increase drought frequency populations, the main method applied is an adaptation
that will impact Night Parrot water and succulent food strategy (Garnett et al. 2013; Pavey 2014) to protect known
sources during the summer and will likely increase the occurrences of the species and maintain landscape
risk of fire impacts to preferred habitats (Kearney et al. connectivity through implementing the avoidance standards.
2016; National Environmental Science Program Other climate change mitigation measures that could be
Threatened Species Research Hub 2019). applied are enhancing water collection and permanence in the
landscape, weed management, reduction of fire risks, and
other activities that would help to maintain habitats where
the species is known to occur to help create climate refuges
until further information is known about the species response
to these changes (Garnett et al. 2013, Pavey 2014).
Hydrological Changes Surface water and connected groundwater regimes within the
habitats used by Night Parrot within the development

57

Studies have demonstrated the importance of water envelope should be maintained in as natural a state and as
to Night Parrots (Kearney et al. 2016) and as part of close to pre-development as possible.
the landscape as a critical habitat component for the
species persistence (Jackett et al. 2017; Murphy et al.
2017a; Burbidge 2020).
Noise and Vibration Avoid undertaking activities such as construction, haul roads,
Night Parrots have highly developed aural capabilities blasting and human habitation (e.g., camps) within close
suggesting that the species is likely sensitive to noise proximity to species-occupied areas.
and vibration impacts (Leseberg et al. 2019, 2022; Avoidance areas should be tailored in accordance with further
Shute et al. 2023). However, the full extent of the research on the effects of noise on the viability of Night Parrot
impact on the species is currently unquantified. roosting and breeding sites (noting the current knowledge
gap).
Vehicle Strike Ensure that any appropriate speed limits are implemented in
Night Parrots are susceptible to being killed through avoidance areas or critical and key habitat types. These should
vehicle strikes (Boles et al 1993). be implemented during foraging times for the Night Parrot
(sunset to sunrise) in areas where roads and fire breaks
fragment the breeding/roosting areas from key foraging areas.
Artificial lighting Restrict lighting to operational areas, minimising light spill into
Night parrots travel extensively at night and may be adjacent vegetated areas.
attracted to, or disoriented by, bright artificial light, Direct artificial lighting should not fall within the avoidance
causing collisions with fencing or other structures area and consideration should be given to the National Light
(Adams et al 2021). Pollution guidelines for Wildlife, including marine turtles,
seabirds and migratory shorebirds (DEE 2020)..

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Night Parrot habitat within the study area should
directly or indirectly impacted by an activity to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
1. Any direct or indirect disturbance of key habitats outside the avoidance areas and within the
development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact where a Night Parrot
occurrence has been recorded within the study area.
2. Any direct or indirect disturbance of critical water sources and critical foraging habitats
within the development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact even in the
absence of a Night Parrot occurrence being recorded within the study area.

58
3.8 Grey Falcon (Falco hypoleucos)

Survey Methodology
Surveys for Grey Falcon should be conducted over a minimum of three consecutive years during the
breeding season (July to October). The survey data provided at the referral stage can contain
historical data, but contemporary surveys of Grey Falcon should not be older than five years and
should be undertaken as close to the date of referral of a development as possible.
Surveys may refer to the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened birds (DEWHA 2010b) for
suitable methods for surveys for falcons (noting there are no Grey Falcon specific methods in the
Guidelines) but should use the techniques outlined below.
Grey Falcons will use the tallest trees or artificial structures in the landscape to nest and roost.
Surveys of suitable breeding and roosting habitats should be undertaken via direct observation
techniques using binoculars and telescopes. Video monitoring techniques may also be explored by
filming possible nesting sites for multiple days to capture Grey Falcons returning to the nesting site
with prey for the juveniles. The use of eDNA on nest scat can also be utilised. Drones are not feasible
due to the risk of disturbing the potential breeding event. Satellite tracking data is encouraged to
best understand the roosting and foraging areas that support the breeding success of the Grey
Falcon.
Surveys for the Grey Falcon must be undertaken within the defined development envelope and
within at least 500 m (breeding structure avoidance area) outside the development envelope
boundary (study area). The surveys within the study area should:
1. Identify and categorise habitat in accordance with Grey Falcon habitat definitions at
Table 3-14, and
If these preliminary surveys identify critical habitat for the Grey Falcon, the following further surveys
should be undertaken to:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of suitable nesting sites, Grey Falcon core foraging areas
and occurrences (i.e., visual identification, eDNA, video footage) over a consecutive
three-year period within the study area.
If surveys confirm the detection of Grey Falcon, the following additional surveys and impact
assessments should be undertaken:
identify potential impacts to Grey Falcon habitat from changes in surface water and impacts
on groundwater-dependent vegetation and water sources.
The regional context of the development envelope will also need to be understood for the
Grey Falcon, including all the known breeding structures of the species within 10 km of the
development envelope boundary. This may be undertaken using desktop surveys.

59

Table 3-14 Grey Falcon habitat definitions

Critical Habitat Breeding and roosting habitats (TSSC 2020; Schoenjahn 2013, 2018)
• Single or stands of tall trees, particularly Eucalyptus but also other tree species, including
but not restricted to River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Coolibah (Eucalyptus
coolabah), and Red Mulga/Miniritchie (Acacia cyperophylla).
• Major drainage lines.
• Artificial nesting structures such as powerline transmission towers, communications
towers, and other tall infrastructure (maintain where possible).
Key Habitat Foraging habitat types (TSSC 2020; Garnett et al. 2011; Watson 2011; Schoenjahn 2013, 2018;
Janse et al. 2015; Ley and Tynan 2016)
• Timbered and un-timbered lowland plains, particularly acacia shrublands that are crossed
by tree-lined water courses.
• Tussock grasslands.
• Open woodlands.
• Open treeless area.
Watercourses (TSSC 2020)
Semi-permanent and permanent water courses and water bodies that support suitable trees for
nesting and foraging opportunities that support avian prey.

department’s species distribution model indicates that the Grey Falcon species or species habitat is
feral predation, feral herbivores, negative fire effects) on avoidance areas are prevented and
mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat areas. Avoidance areas aim to minimise
impact on the core home range of the Grey Falcon since the species demonstrates a reluctance to
move from the home range.
1. If surveys for the Grey Falcon identify an active40 breeding structure (tree or artificial), the
breeding structure and all habitat within a 500 m radius of the breeding structure should be
avoided within the development envelope.
2. If surveys for the Grey Falcon identify an active breeding structure (tree or artificial), other
suitable breeding structures (that are inactive at the time of the survey) and all habitat within a
500 m radius of the suitable breeding structures should be avoided in the development
envelope. This will support changes of breeding location every three years41 for the life of an
approved development.
3. If surveys for the Grey Falcon identify an active breeding structure (tree or artificial), suitable
areas containing key foraging habitats42 for the Grey Falcon within a 10 km radius of the breeding
structure, should be avoided within the development envelope.43

60
If a breeding structure has been identified with a suitable nest, but there is no species occurrence,
evidence must be provided to confirm it is not an active breeding location. The surveys should be
from the most recent three years at time of referral.
A reduced avoidance area surrounding the breeding structure of 300 m for linear infrastructure
project developments may be appropriate in some circumstances.
Figure 3-7 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Grey Falcon avoidance standards.

should be applied where possible (e.g., not undertake blasting near the avoidance area).
Figure 3-7 Conceptual example of Grey Falcon survey and avoidance areas

to the Grey Falcon at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
EPBC Act.
Table 3-15 Grey Falcon: mitigation of impacts
Feral predators Implement a feral cat control program within and around the
The predation of Grey Falcons by feral cats, and development envelope, particularly targeting known Grey
potentially foxes, are a risk to the species due to the Falcon roosts, over the life of the approval.
Grey Falcon sometimes roosting on the ground at Feral control programs should be designed in accordance with
night (Schoenjahn 2018). When ground roosting relevant EPBC Act threat abatement plans and be informed by
occurs, the habitat is often in open environments contemporary findings on best practice feral predator
where feral cats are successful hunters. management.
Recently hatched chicks may also be vulnerable to cat Monitor and report feral predator numbers around the impact
predation in accessible nests (Schoenjahn 2018). site compared to a pre-disturbance baseline. Baseline and
Feral herbivores Camel management measures must be undertaken in
Feral camels (Camelus dromedarius) are a risk of accordance with the National feral camel action plan (Natural
causing degradation to Grey Falcon nesting trees and Resource Management Ministerial Council 2010), which
preferred prey habitat through destruction of arid outlines suitable control methods in Appendix A3. Further
watering places, and the prevention of regeneration of management techniques for camels are available at Pest
Smart feral camel controls (Sharp & Saunders 2012).

61

nesting trees through grazing saplings (Garnett et al. Monitor and report feral herbivore numbers around the
2011; TSSC 2020). impact site compared to a pre-disturbance baseline. Baseline
The extent of this threat has not been fully quantified and ongoing surveys should follow Pest animal monitoring
and is not well understood, as Grey Falcons also techniques (Pest Smart 2021b).
benefit from treeless grassland for hunting purposes These measures should be implemented and maintained for
(Schoenjahn 2018). the lifetime of the approval.
interactions (FHF) the risk of uncontrolled fires within and around the avoidance
The Conservation Advice for the Grey Falcon (TSSC areas and in other critical and key habitats within the
2020) identifies the need for improved fire development envelope, over the life of the approval.
management in areas where Grey Falcons are known Fire management programs should be designed in accordance
to occur. with contemporary knowledge of species-appropriate fire
See Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity management practices. Species-appropriate fire management:
(DAWE 2022) for information on types of fire-related prioritise small burns to provide a mosaic of habitat ages and
ecological processes. densities and to reduce the intensity and size of fires.
Prescribed burns should be undertaken outside the
Grey Falcon breeding season and implemented in concert with
feral animal control.
Habitat loss Ensure that direct and indirect impacts to critical habitat and
The Grey Falcon displays energy saving behaviours in key habitat outside of the avoidance areas are avoided and
raising young, foraging behaviours and roosting minimised to the greatest extent possible.
techniques. The species is considered to be a reluctant
nomad and only moves when absolutely necessary,
which commonly results in the species returning to the
core home range (Schoenjahn 2018).
Therefore, the loss of the home range for the species
will result in a huge expenditure of energy for the
family group/individual that may be detrimental to the
survival of the displaced family group/individual.
The availability of preferred prey determines the
Grey Falcon presence in the landscape or a breeding
site. Therefore, habitat loss is both the removal of
breeding/roosting trees/structures and foraging
habitat that supports preferred prey items
(Schoenjahn 2018).
Land clearing of the semi-arid zone and overgrazing of
arid zone rangelands have been identified as possible
threats to the availability of nesting trees for the
Grey Falcon (Garnett and Crowley 2000; Garnett et al.
2011; Schoenjahn 2013, 2018; TSSC 2020).
The loss of artificial structures (telecommunication
towers and repeaters) may also contribute to the
reduction of suitable nesting habitat (Schoenjahn
2018; TSSC 2020).
Fragmentation and isolation Ensure that direct and indirect impacts to critical habitat and
The Grey Falcon are estimated to have a limited key habitat outside of the avoidance areas are further avoided
number of mature individuals, approximately <1,000 and impacts minimised to the greatest extent possible.
to 5,000. Having such a small population means the
Grey Falcon will be more susceptible to demographic
and genetic stochastic events causing localised and
regional Pilbara extinctions of the species if there is
loss or shortage of breeding sites (Schoenjahn 2013,
2018; Garnett et al. 2011; BirdLife International 2023a;
TSSC 2020).
The loss of genetic variation in a finite population size
like the Grey Falcon will reduce the resilience of the
population to respond to changes (Schoenjahn 2018).

62

The Grey Falcon is a reluctant nomad and will move
through the landscape up to 1000 km in nine days to
find more suitable habitat. Barriers to these
movements and the effect on genetic flow through the
species distribution is not fully understood but is likely
a threatening process for the survival of the species.
Population expansion or recolonisation of areas that
have had an extinction event may also be limited due
to the species being a reluctant nomad.
Illegal collection Ensure that site personnel are briefed of the risks of poaching
Although collection and possession of eggs and empty and the implications of participating in wildlife trafficking of
eggshells without a permit is illegal in all Australian threated species as outlined in Wildlife Trade and Law
states and territories there is an international demand (DCCEEW 2023d).
from falconry for rare falcon species and colour The public should have limited access to the Grey Falcon
morphs (Schoenjahn 2018; TSSC 2020). habitats within the development envelope.
Human disturbance Use appropriate signs to minimise public and personnel entry
The Grey Falcon is a highly sought-after species by into known avoidance buffers for the species (TSSC 2020).
birdwatchers and photographers, who may visit active
nests in breeding seasons. Human disturbance of this
nature is considered to risk breeding success.
Vehicle strikes Ensure that appropriate speed limits are implemented in
A study (Schoenjahn 2018) documented six incidences avoidance areas, and in the critical and key habitat types.
of Grey Falcons being found injured or dead along These should be implemented in areas where roads and fire
roads between 2007 and 2017 (TSSC 2020). breaks fragment the breeding/roosting areas from key
foraging areas. Speed limits must be enforced during foraging
times for the Grey Falcon (0900–1500 hours).
Collision with barbed wire fences Replace the top-strand of all barbed wire fences within the
A study (Schoenjahn 2011) found reports of foraging range for the species with single-strand wire with
Grey Falcons receiving life-threatening injuries from adequate reflectors in accordance with the Barbed Wire
colliding with fences, and presumably powerlines Action Plan (Booth 2007).
(TSSC 2020).
Wind Turbines, powerlines and telecommunication Wind turbines should not be located in Grey Falcon key
towers movement corridors and patterns within the home range of
A review found that Grey Falcon are known to be the species.
susceptible to collisions with powerlines (Schoenjahn Knowledge of flight height and risks should be fully explored
2011). Given the species flight patterns, the and considered in wind turbine placement.
Grey Falcon may also be at risk of collisions with wind To minimise strike risk of breeding Grey Falcons by wind
turbines. turbines, remove all nests built by raptors, ravens and magpies
Given Grey Falcons use nests commonly built by on existing and newly-erected powerline pylons,
raptors, ravens and magpies on powerline pylons, telecommunication repeater towers and similar tall artificial
telecommunication repeater towers and similar tall structures within 10 km of the Grey Falcon home range of any
artificial structures that are often in the vicinity of wind turbines, each year before the breeding season (between
wind turbines, there is a risk of Grey Falcons colliding 1 January and 30 April i.e., during the non-breeding season).
with the wind turbines. Use best practice wind turbine deterrents or warning systems.
The use of reflective markers could also be trialled.
Climate Change To support climate change resilience for Grey Falcon
The Grey Falcon is considered to be susceptible to the populations, the main method applied is an adaptation
changes in climate, as the species occurs and is strategy (Garnett et al. 2013; Pavey 2014) to protect known
restricted to the arid/semi-arid zone, a hot occurrences of the species and maintain landscape
environment characterised by extreme and connectivity through implementing the avoidance standards.
unpredictable climatic events. The predicted changes Create climate refuges for the species by protecting
to climate include an increase in severity and underpinning hydrological regimes that will maintain refuges
frequency of maximum daily temperatures, heatwaves in the landscape for prey items that will in turn support the
and drought. Given the species is already restricted to persistence of the Grey Falcon in the landscape. Undertake
a specific climate and that its resilience to climate other mitigation measures such as weed management,
change is unknown but conceivably limited, the reduction of fire risks, and other activities that maintain the

63

predicted increases of temperature extremes may quality and quantity of habitats where the species is known to
exceed the physiological ability of the species to occur (Pavey 2014).
thermoregulate adequately and may affect adult and
chick survival (Schoenjahn 2013, 2018; TSSC 2020).
Hydrological changes Avoid impacts to known water bodies that support the
Grey Falcon relies on the tall trees in the landscape for breeding and foraging habitats of the Grey Falcon.
breeding and roosting, and foraging habitats include Management plans should be developed to minimise impacts
tree-lined (vegetated) water courses. Therefore, of changes to the water table of water bodies or water quality
changes in hydrology will likely impact the growth of due to run off and pollution from the proposed development.
trees suitable for nesting and supporting the
occurrence and persistence of prey items attracted to
permanent and semi-permanent water courses and
water bodies.
Noise and vibration Ensure the avoidance standards are implemented.
Grey Falcon breeding activities are likely to be Avoid undertaking construction and blasting during the
impacted by noise and vibration. However, the full breeding season. Avoid the placement of habitation (e.g.,
extent of the impact on the species is currently camps) within close proximity to the avoidance areas.
unquantified.
Artificial Lighting Avoid artificial night time lighting (including red-biased spectra
The Grey Falcon breeding activities are likely to be lighting) that spills on breeding structures and consideration
impacted by artificial lighting. However, the full extent should be given to the National Light Pollution guidelines for
of the impact on the species is currently unquantified. Wildlife, including marine turtles, seabirds and migratory
shorebirds (DEE 2020).

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Grey Falcon habitat within the study area should
directly or indirectly impacted by a development to inform calculation of residual significant impact.
where a Grey Falcon occurrence has been recorded within the study area.
2. Any direct or indirect disturbance of critical and key habitat outside of avoidance areas
within the development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact, where the
habitat is within 10 km of a known breeding structure located outside the development
envelope.

64
3.9 Princess Parrot (Polytelis alexandrae)

Survey Methodology
Surveys for the Princess Parrot should be conducted over a minimum of three consecutive years and
should contain a minimum of one year of high rainfall. The survey data provided at the referral stage
can contain historical data, but contemporary surveys of Princess Parrot detection or non-detection
should not be older than five years and should be undertaken as close to the date of referral as
possible. Surveys should be undertaken in accordance with the Survey guidelines for Australia’s
threatened birds (DEWHA 2010b).
Survey extent and requirements
Surveys for the Princess Parrot should be undertaken within the development envelope and within
500 m (breeding avoidance area) outside of the development envelope boundary (study area). The
surveys within the study area should:
1. Identify and categorise all habitat in accordance with Princess Parrot habitat definitions at
Table 3-16.
If surveys identify Princess Parrot habitats in the study area, the following surveys should be
undertaken:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Princess Parrot occurrence (i.e., by sightings or by
records of distinctive call in mornings and evenings).44
3. Be repeated for three consecutive years prior to referral to adequately determine whether
the Princess Parrot is returning to breeding sites or foraging locations.
If surveys for occurrence confirm the detection of the Princess Parrot and that Princess Parrots are
returning to the site (at least two of the three years surveyed), the following additional surveys and
impact assessments should be undertaken:

identify potential impacts to Princess Parrot habitat from changes in surface water and/or
groundwater including impacts to groundwater-dependent vegetation and water sources.

Table 3-16 Princess Parrot habitat definitions

Critical Habitat Breeding trees (Pavey et al. 2014; TSSC 2018)
Medium to large stands of tall trees, which may include:
• River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis)
• Marble Gum (Eucalyptus gongylocarpa), and/or
• Desert Oak (Allocasuarina decaisneana)
Key Habitat Foraging habitat (Pavey et al. 2014; TSSC 2018)
• Shrubland in swales between sand dunes, with occupied sites typically having a variety
of shrubs (including Grevillea, Hakea, Cassia and Eremophila species) among scattered
emergent trees, with a groundcover of spinifex Triodia species.

65

• Marble Gum woodlands of (Eucalyptus gongylocarpa) and/or Desert Oak (Allocasuarina
decaisneana) woodlands on undulating sandplain with sandy loam soil.
• Dune slopes, swales and crests with Desert Oak and eucalypts.
• Vegetated riverine and major drainage areas.
• Vegetated littoral areas.
• Permanent, semi-permanent, and ephemeral water holes.

the department’s species distribution model indicates that the Princess Parrot species or species
negative fire effects, weeds, predation by feral predators, habitat degradation from feral herbivores)
on the avoidance areas are prevented and mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat
areas.
1. If the surveys for the Princess Parrot identify breeding occurrence within the study area, all
critical habitat46 and key habitat within a 500 m radius of each breeding occurrence should
be avoided.
2. If surveys for the Princess Parrot identify multiple breeding occurrences in proximity (within
400 m) to one another, all breeding trees and all habitat within a 500 m radius of the
outermost trees47 should be avoided in the development envelope.
3. If surveys for the Princess Parrot identify recurring foraging occurrence within the study area,
suitable areas containing key foraging habitats, should be avoided within the development
envelope.
Figure 3-8 illustrates a conceptual example of the Princess Parrot avoidance standards.

should be applied where possible (e.g., limit impacts to other suitable foraging habitat).
Figure 3-8 Conceptual example of Princess Parrot survey and avoidance areas

66

Table 3-17 identifies mitigation measures recommended to reduce key threats and impacts to the
Princess Parrot at the impact site. Where appropriate, you should build these measures, as well as
ongoing monitoring to assess and report the effectiveness of these measures, into your proposed
project design and assessment documentation when referring your project under Part 7 of the
EPBC Act.
Table 3-17 Princess Parrot: mitigation of impacts
Habitat Loss and Fragmentation Ensure that indirect impacts to critical habitat and key habitat
The Conservation Advice for the Princess Parrot (TSCC outside of the avoidance areas are avoided and minimised to
2018) does not explicitly state that direct clearing of the greatest extent possible.
the breeding trees and foraging habitat is a key threat Ensure clearing is undertaken progressively to minimise
to the species. However, the primary conservation fatalities of the species.
action for the princess parrot under the Conservation
Advice is to maintain breeding habitat by undertaking
active fire management and control of domestic and
invasive species.
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Ensure that fire management risks to the avoidance areas,
interactions (FHF) critical and key habitat types (especially known breeding
Large-scale fires cause mortality to breeding trees and trees) are mitigated using appropriate fire management
reduced food availability for the Princess Parrot (TSSC techniques that are designed and implemented in accordance
2018; Pavey et al. 2014). with leading regional practices. Some of the leading practices
include Pilbara rangeland pastures and fire – Western
There are higher risk rates for large fires after years of
Australia (DPIRD 2023), Australian rangelands and climate
increased fuel loads due to significant rainfall events
change – fire (Bastin 2014), and Protocols for Indigenous fire
causing an increase in weed densities (TSSC 2018;
management (Robinson et al. 2016).
Pavey et al. 2014).
Weeds Baseline weed extent should be collected and then tracked
Buffel grass has been identified occurring in the over the action to ensure that baseline weed levels are not
distribution range for the Princess Parrot and has the exceeded and weeds are controlled. An Integrated weed
potential to invade preferred foraging habitats by management (Weeds Australia 2021a) approach should be
outcompeting native grasses (TSSC 2018). implemented that is appropriate to the weed species found in
the baseline surveys. Ongoing Weed monitoring (Weeds
Buffel grass may also alter fuel loads and increase the
Australia 2021b) should also be undertaken to ensure that
intensity and frequency of fire events (TSSC 2018).
weed management is being successfully implemented.
In the case managing Buffel and Gamba grass within the
impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the five listed
management are can be found for Buffel grass management
for Central Australia (Department of Environment and Natural
Resources 2018) and Gamba Grass (Weeds Australia 2023).
Feral herbivores Baseline feral herbivore distribution surveys should be
Rabbits, camels and livestock cause habitat undertaken in accordance with the Pest animal monitoring
degradation by reducing the quality and availability of techniques (Pest Smart 2021b) and then evaluated over time
suitable breeding and foraging habitat for the Princess to ensure that baseline feral herbivore populations are
Parrot (Garnett et al. 2011; BirdLife International reduced, or at a minimum not increased, within the
2023b). development envelope.
Ensure that domestic stock is fenced out of the known
Princess Parrot avoidance areas within the development

67

envelope using best practice exclusion fencing guidelines. The
top strand of the fence must not be barbed wire.
Camel management measures should be undertaken in
Smart feral camel controls (Sharp and Saunders 2012). At a
minimum if camels are present, exclusion fencing should be
Rabbit management measures should be undertaken in
Feral predators Feral predation control and monitoring measures
Cats and foxes are a key threat to the Princess Parrot implemented for the life of the approval.
due to the ground feeding behaviour of the species Baseline feral animal surveys should be undertaken in
(BirdLife International 2023b). accordance with the Pest animal monitoring techniques (Pest
Smart 2021b) and then evaluated over time to ensure that
baseline feral herbivore populations are reduced or, at a
minimum not increased, within the development envelope.
Feral cat control measures should be undertaken in
accordance with the Threat abatement plan for predation by
feral cats (DoE 2015) and fox control measures should be
undertaken in accordance with the Threat Abatement Plan for
predation by the European red fox (DEWHA 2008b).
The Resilient Landscapes Hub of the Australian Government’s
National Environmental Science Program is currently
investigating the Best practice management of feral cats and
red foxes (NESP 2023). The first phase of the project has
produced the Current and emerging feral cat management
practices in Australia (Dorph and Ballard 2022), which has
identified 15 management techniques and assessed them
across four different bioregions in Australia. Desert effective
management techniques should be employed, using a
combination of approaches used to achieve the best results in
managing feral predators.
Illegal collection Ensure that site personnel are briefed of the risks of poaching
Princess Parrots are known to be illegally collected to and the implications of participating in wildlife trafficking of
be used as pets or may be trafficked (Garnett et al. threated species as outlined in Wildlife trade and law
2011; TSSC 2018). (DCCEEW 2023d).
The public should have limited access to the Princess Parrot
habitats within the development envelope.

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Princess Parrot habitat within the study area
be directly or indirectly impacted by an action to inform calculation of residual significant impact.

68
Residual significant impact calculations

where a Princess Parrot breeding occurrence has been detected within the study area.
development envelope, will be considered a residual significant impact where a Princess
Parrot foraging occurrence has been detected within the study area.

69
3.10 Great Desert Skink (Liopholis kintorei)

Survey Methodology
Surveys for the Great Desert Skink should be conducted over a minimum of two breeding seasons
(September to October). The survey data provided at the referral stage can contain historical data,
but contemporary surveys of Great Desert Skink should be undertaken as close to the date of referral
of a development as possible. Surveys for the Great Desert Skink should be undertaken in accordance
with the Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened reptiles (DSEWPaC 2011b).
Surveys for the Great Desert Skink must be undertaken within the defined development envelope
and within 500 m (active burrow avoidance area) outside of the development envelope boundary
(study area). The surveys within the study area should:
1. Identify and categorise any habitat in accordance with Great Desert Skink habitat
definitions at Table 3-18.
If surveys identify Great Desert Skink habitats in the study area, the following surveys should be
undertaken:
2. Confirm detection or non-detection of Great Desert Skink individuals (i.e., camera traps,
scat analysis, sightings).
3. Determine and map the boundary of the Great Desert Skink burrow system.

Table 3-18 Great Desert Skink habitat definitions
Critical Habitat Active burrowing habitats (Dennison 2015; McAlpin et al. 2011; Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022)
• Sandplain habitat vegetated by spinifex (usually Triodia basedowii, but also Triodia
pungens and Triodia schinzii) with the hummocks scattered shrubs and occasional trees
from the genera Acacia, Eremophila, Grevillea, Hakea, Eucalyptus, and often the sub-shrub
Androcalva loxophylla.
• Swales of dunefields adjacent to sandplains.
• Palaeodrainage areas featuring slightly saline depressions or chains of dry salt lakes, with
soft spinifex (T. pungens), tea tree (Melaleuca spp.) shrubs and the salt tolerant sub-shrub
Pluchea ferdinandi-muelleri (Tanami Desert and parts of the Great Sandy Desert).
• Rira areas of gently undulating gravelly downs (buckshot plain), which have soil surface
characterised by a layer of small laterite pebbles and vegetated with hard spinifex
(T. basedowii) (Gibson Desert).
• Open woodlands of Mulga (Acacia aneura) and Minyura (Acacia minyura) over woollybutt
grass (Eragrostis eriopoda) and spinifex (Northern South Australia).
Foraging habitat termite mounds near active burrowing48
Key Habitat Potential Burrowing Areas (McAlpin et al. 2011; Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022)
• Possible burrowing area in the same habitats listed above to allow for the active burrows
and populations to expand within the area.
Potential Foraging habitat termite mounds within possible burrowing habitats

70

department’s species distribution model indicates that the Great Desert Skink or species habitat is
Any activities associated with a proposed development should not be undertaken within avoidance
areas including corridors maintained for dispersal of the Great Desert Skink. Appropriate action
should be undertaken to ensure any potential direct and indirect impacts (e.g., predation by feral
cats and foxes, feral herbivores, weed infestation, negative fire effects) on avoidance areas, including
corridors, are prevented and mitigated to maintain the viability of these critical habitat areas.
1. If the surveys for the Great Desert Skink identify an active burrow within the study area, the
active burrow and all habitat within 500 m radius of the active burrow should be avoided in the
development envelope.50
2. If surveys for the Great Desert Skink identify multiple active burrows, all active burrows and all
habitat within a 500 m radius of the outermost active burrows should be avoided in the
3. To ensure the avoidance area or areas do not become isolated and restrict movement of the
Great Desert Skink between key habitat within and outside the development envelope, a
dispersal corridor should be maintained between avoidance areas and other habitat if it does not
already exist.51
Figure 3-9 illustrates a conceptual example of application of the Great Desert Skink avoidance
standard.

should be applied where possible (e.g., not fragmenting active burrowing habitats from potential
burrowing areas).

71
Figure 3-9 Conceptual example of Great Desert Skink survey and avoidance areas

Table 3-19 identifies measures that are recommended to reduce key threats and impacts to the
Great Desert Skink at the impact site. These measures, as well as ongoing monitoring to assess and
EPBC Act.
Table 3-19 Great Desert Skink mitigation of impacts
Fire effects on habitat suitability and facilitation Design and implement fire management practices around
interactions (FHF) and Fire effects on predator-prey known Great Desert Skink burrow areas that maximise the
interactions (FPI) coverage of spinifex and native groundcovers around burrows.
Fire poses a significant threat to the Great Desert Skink Species-appropriate fire management: prioritise small winter
as it removes groundcover making the species more (or early dry season) burns to provide a mosaic of habitat ages
vulnerable to predation from feral predators. A study and densities and to reduce the intensity and area size of fires
found that the majority of burnt burrows become (Moore et al. 2015; Cadenhead et al. 2016).
inactive over a period of four months or more (Moore Burning activities around burrows and key habitats should not
et al. 2015), and that a major increase in size and be undertaken during the breeding season (September to
frequency of fires can drive subpopulations to October) (Dennison 2015).
extinction (Cadenhead et al. 2016).
Fire management techniques should be implemented in
Fire will also impact Great Desert Skink’s food sources, concert with feral animal control and habitat restoration
like small vertebrates and invertebrate prey that live in measures.
vegetation.
Feral predators Design and implement feral predation control and monitoring
Studies have demonstrated that feral predators (e.g., measures for the life of the approval.
cats, foxes) will target Great Desert Skinks, with Feral cat control measures should be undertaken in
predators recorded on camera traps visiting active accordance with the Threat abatement plan for predation by
burrows and findings of Great Desert Skinks in feral cats (DoE 2015) and fox control measures should be
stomach contents (Moore et al. 2017; Ridley 2015). undertaken in accordance with the Threat Abatement Plan for
Cats will prey on the Great Desert Skink by waiting for predation by the European red fox (DEWHA 2008b).
the species to emerge from the burrow entrance to The Resilient Landscapes Hub of the Australian Government’s
pounce and foxes are known to prey upon the Great National Environmental Science Program is currently
Desert Skink when the species is foraging at night investigating the Best practice management of feral cats and
(Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022). red foxes (NESP 2023). The first phase of the project has
The predation events are most impactful at the same produced the Current and emerging feral cat management
time as a fire event due to the loss of vegetation cover practices in Australia (Dorph and Ballard 2022), which has
(Moore et al. 2018; Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022). identified 15 management techniques and assessed them
Development will increase the risk of introducing across four different bioregions in Australia. Desert effective
and/or increasing predator activity in areas with management techniques should be employed, using a

72

increased human habitation (Indigenous Desert combination of approaches used to achieve the best results in
Alliance 2022). managing feral predators.
A study found that feral predators (especially cats) are known
target the family burrow entrances (Moore et al. 2018).
Therefore, the placement of cat control measures should
target the entrances of the burrow at a minimum.
A study found that feral predators (especially cats) are
particularly effective following large-scale fires (Moore et al.
2018). Therefore, the timing of the feral cat and fox
management actions should align with any large-scale fire
management or uncontrolled burns.
Habitat loss Minimise loss of critical and key habitat as much as
Habitat loss, including the removal of burrowing practicable.
systems and areas of preferred habitat, will directly
impact the Great Desert Skink (Indigenous Desert
Alliance 2022). The species is unlikely to move out of
the way during clearing events due to site fidelity of
the species attached to the protection of the burrow
system. Translocation could be a possibility (Dennison
et al. 2015), but success of this process is currently
unknown. Therefore, any direct impact to the burrows
for the species will likely result in the loss (death) of
the subpopulation of the Great Desert Skink.
Fragmentation and isolation Locate infrastructure in ways that allows for dispersal of the
Studies have found that repopulations of lost Great Desert Skink within and beyond the development
burrowing systems are slow to recolonise (low envelope.
dispersal capacity), and that genetic ‘erosion’ is
possible with the loss of multiple colonies within an
area (Dennison et al. 2015).
The Great Desert Skink is susceptible to habitat
fragmentation and genetic fragmentation (Dennison et
al. 2015). Habitat fragmentation could be a result of
roads or pipelines intersecting the burrow system or
inhibiting the species to move into other suitable
habitats within the development envelope.
Vehicle strike Outside the avoidance areas, roads and fire breaks should not
Vehicle strike has been identified as a key threat to the fragment the family burrowing systems and foraging habitats,
species in the draft Recovery Plan for the Great Desert which would increase risk for vehicle strikes.
Skink (Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022). Ensure that appropriate night-time speed limits are
implemented in areas within 4–9 km of the Great Desert Skink
burrow habitat. Use road signs in these slow zone areas to
raise awareness of Great Desert Skink strike risks.
Weeds Baseline weed extent will need to be collected and then
Spread of weeds such as fast-growing buffel grass tracked over the study area to ensure that baseline weed
would result in more frequent fires, causing the Great levels are not exceeded and weeds are controlled. An
Desert Skink to be exposed to predators and altering Integrated weed management (Weeds Australia 2021a)
food availability (Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022). approach should be implemented that is appropriate to the
weed species found in the baseline surveys. Ongoing Weed
monitoring (Weeds Australia 2021b) should also be
undertaken to ensure that weed management is being
successfully implemented.
In the case of managing buffel and gamba grass within the
impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the five listed

73

management are Buffel grass management for Central
Australia (Department of Environment and Natural Resources
2018) and Gamba Grass (Weeds Australia 2023).
Feral herbivores Baseline feral herbivore distribution surveys to be undertaken
Camels and livestock have been known to crush in accordance with the Pest animal monitoring techniques
burrows through trampling, causing the Great Desert (Pest Smart 2021b) and then evaluated over time to ensure
Skink to abandon the burrows (Partridge 2008). that baseline feral herbivore populations are reduced or, at a
minimum not increased, within the development envelope.
Rabbits have been recorded moving into an active
burrow system causing the Great Desert Skink to Ensure that domestic stock is fenced out of the known Great
abandon the system, but the full extent of the impact Desert Skink avoidance areas within the development
to the species is unknown (Indigenous Desert Alliance envelope using best practice exclusion fencing guidelines.
2022) Camel management measures should be undertaken in
Smart Feral Camel controls (Sharp and Saunders 2012). At a
minimum, if camels are present, exclusion fencing should be
Rabbit management measures should be undertaken in
Australia (Long & Robley 2004).
Climate change Climate change will likely increase the risk of weed invasion,
Climate change impacts are considered to cause more feral herbivores and fire risks. These risks can be managed
extreme fire-weather events (forecast from IPCC using the mitigation measures outlined in the table above.
Interactive Atlas), causing increased fire impacts
(above).
The draft Recovery Plan (Indigenous Desert Alliance
2022) outlined that reducing key threats to the
species, which includes weeds, feral herbivores, and
disease, will ensure that the Great Desert Skink is
more resilient to climate change.
A study undertaken on climate change impacts to the
Great Desert Skink found that increases to
temperature are unlikely to cause species extinction
due to the deep burrows providing a temperature
buffer and warmer outside temperatures provide
more opportunities for surface activity (Moore et al.
2017).

Survey data collected to identify and characterise Great Desert Skink habitat within the study area
be directly or indirectly impacted by an activity to inform calculation of residual significant impact.

74
Any direct or indirect disturbance of key habitat outside of avoidance areas and within the
development envelope will be considered a residual significant impact where a Great Desert Skink
occurrence has been detected within the study area.

75
4 Environmental Offsets
Environmental offsets are intended to compensate for residual adverse impacts of a proposal on a
matter of national environmental significance following application of adequate avoidance and
mitigation measures. In relation to the protected matters covered by this Policy Statement (Section
1.3), offsets will only be considered following application of all avoidance and mitigation standards
outlined in Section 3.
To effectively deliver conservation gains, environmental offsets should be calculated using species
persistence metrics commensurate with the proposed impacts and implemented effectively and
transparently to deliver measurable species benefit. Predictions of offset outcomes should be
provided with appropriate certainty and adaptability, acknowledging that uncertainties persist about
both ecosystem dynamics and intervention effectiveness and that some environmental functions and
values are not readily replaceable. This policy statement applies the principles set out in the
department’s Environmental Offsets Policy (DCCEEW 2012) to encourage offset designs which will
achieve conservation gains in the Pilbara bioregion.
While there is not yet a comprehensive regional recovery strategy for the nine species identified in
this policy, there are numerous efforts underway (Carwardine et al. 2014; DBCA 2016; Heydenrych
and Parsons 2018). The department will continue to work with the Western Australian government
and regional stakeholders to support and extend these initiatives to foster more strategically
effective conservation in the Pilbara bioregion.
Based on a review of species recovery plans, conservation advices, published and grey literature and
expert elicitation, offset pathways for the listed threatened species have been identified that will
focus offset investment on species-preserving actions and closing important knowledge gaps for each
species. These environmental offsets pathways are presented in Table 4-2 as direct (on-ground)
offset measures and indirect (research) offset measures (see DCCEEW 2012 for details and
terminology).
4.1 Residual Significant Impacts

Residual significant impacts are significant impacts on a matter of national environmental
significance that remain after all appropriate measures are taken to avoid and mitigate impacts of a
development. An impact which is unacceptable cannot be made acceptable through the delivery of
an offset activity or making of an offset payment through a fund.
4.1.1 Calculating residual significant impact for offset obligations

This section articulates standard expectations for proponents when calculating residual significant
impacts of development proposals on EPBC Act listed threatened species. These expectations are
consistent with the EPBC Act Significant Impact Guidelines (Section 1.3) and the principles set out in
the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (2012).
Compensating for residual significant impact to each impacted species
The EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (2012) states that:

76
• Offsets must directly contribute to the ongoing viability of the protected matter
impacted by the proposed action (p. 17); and
• Offsets must be proportionate to the size and scale of the residual impacts arising from
the action so as to deliver a conservation gain that adequately compensates for the
impacted matter (p. 20).
The size and scale of an offset required for each impact is determined by taking account of a range of
factors relevant to the matter of national environmental significance being impacted.
Departmental assessment officers currently use the EPBC Offsets Assessment Guide to assess the
suitability of proposed offsets to adequately compensate for predicted impacts to listed threatened
species or ecological communities. For each proposed development, the following matters are
calculated for each threatened species or ecological community:
• Residual significant impacts to the threatened species.
• Benefits for the threatened species from the proposed offset.

Calculations for residual impact and offset outcomes for each species use separate data from the
impact site and the proposed offset including area and quality of habitat for breeding, foraging and
other purposes, number of breeding features and individual flora or fauna, as well as predicted
changes to birth and mortality rates.
Although there are instances when a proposed offset site may naturally include habitat features
important for more than one impacted protected matter, the proposal must still demonstrate that
the proposed offset will adequately compensate for the residual significant impact to each species.
This may mean that a combination of offset measures is required to ensure that all matters of
national environmental significance are adequately accounted for.
Impact to suitable habitat where presence of species is not established

Listed threatened species habitat that is likely to be impacted within a species’ known, likely or “may
occur” range, but not avoided through a designated exclusion zone, should be included in residual
impact calculations. In some cases, this includes critical and/or key habitat for the species even
where species presence has not been established following contemporary survey efforts in
accordance with relevant survey guidelines and information standards set out in this policy.
For some species (e.g., Pilbara Olive Python, Night Parrot), even extensive survey efforts may still not
be enough to definitively determine the absence of the species from an area. Species-specific
requirements for including suitable habitat with and, in some cases, without detected presence of
species in residual significant impact calculations are summarised in Section 3.
Fully accounting for impacts to species’ habitat, including habitat not occupied by the species
immediately prior to impact, aims to provide appropriate incentives for avoidance and reduction of
impact as much as practicable, as well as to compensate for direct and cumulative impacts to each
species if unavoidable.
Threats predicted to increase in the future, such as climate change and hydrological impacts as well
as weed, feral predator and cane toad infestations, increase the importance of continued habitat
protection for future species habitation and dispersal.

77
Impacts to degraded habitat

Proposed impact and offset sites may include areas of degraded habitat. In some circumstances,
degraded habitat can be restored to provide foraging and breeding resources for species and should
therefore be appropriately considered in impact assessments. Impacts to degraded habitat should be
included within residual impact calculations to account for the loss of areas that have the potential to
provide habitat for listed threatened species. A description of the degraded habitat and cause of the
degradation should be included in assessment documentation, particularly in circumstances where
the degradation is due to the undertaking of a development already approved under the EPBC Act.
4.2 Commencement of Offsets

Direct offset measures and indirect offset measures are expected to be substantially commenced
prior to the imposition of an EPBC Act approved impact.
For direct offset projects, access and land tenure (if required) must be secured and initial rounds of
ground works should have commenced prior to impact. Planning and development of the offset
project should be undertaken prior to referral of a development and not during the assessment or
approval process.
For indirect offset projects, the research contract should be agreed and signed by relevant parties,
including project outcomes, scope of works, deliverable timeframes, and payment schedule, and the
research project commenced. Planning and development of a Research Offset Project should be
undertaken prior to referral of a development and not during the assessment or approval process.
4.3 Offset Design

Environmental offsets should:
a. Deliver an agreed conservation gain for the impacted protected matter relative to the
proposed impacts on matters of environmental significance and be one which contributes to
the long-term viability of the species within the Pilbara bioregion.
b. Prioritise restoration or protection that delivers substantial and demonstrable benefits to the
impacted protected matter, consistent with identified priorities in conservation planning
documentation or regional conservation plans for the species, where available.
c. Provide a direct offset unless conservation planning documentation or this policy identifies a
suitable indirect offset measure as having an equal or greater benefit for the listed
threatened species. Limits on the proportion of funds spent on indirect offsets are provided
in Table 4-1.
d. Demonstrate that appropriate efforts have been made to consult with, and that the offset
design is informed by feedback from, the department and all relevant regional stakeholders
and First Nations groups to achieve a valuable long-term conservation gain for the impacted
protected matter.
e. Be agreed and have substantially commenced the offset prior to commencement of the
approved impact (see Section 4.6).

78
f. Be additional to existing measures and regulatory obligations and be complementary and

environmentally consistent with existing conservation projects within the Pilbara bioregion.
g. Be consistent with a scientifically robust and adequately justified understanding of species
threats, habitat requirements and intervention effectiveness for delivering the proposed
conservation outcome.
h. Be securely protected from future disturbance for at least the duration of the impact where
impacts are temporary, until fully remediated to pre-impact habitat quality, or in perpetuity,
depending on the duration of the proposed impacts and the timeframe for conservation
gains to be realised.
Offset measures do not necessarily need to be undertaken or delivered by the entity proposing the
development. Offset measures may be contracted by the approval holder and delivered by a third-
party service provider and may be combined with other programs if strategically important. As set
out in the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (2012), the use of a third-party must be approved
by the decision-maker. Where it is proposed that a third-party undertake offset measures, you
should provide information to demonstrate that appropriate mechanisms are in place to ensure the
successful delivery of the offset and that the offset will meet the compliance requirements of any
conditions of approval.
4.4 Offset Information Requirements

Environmental offsets planning should be supported by sound information and knowledge both
about the threats to the protected matters and about the best ways to reduce them for long term
species persistence. The information should be suitable for informing responsible decision-making
and conservation design.
Where a residual significant impact to protected matters (see Section 3 for how these are calculated
for the nine threatened species identified in this Policy) remains after all avoidance and mitigation
measures have been applied, you should submit an environmental offsets strategy along with the
environmental impact assessment documentation.
4.4.1 Direct Offset Measures

Direct offsets identified in Table 4-2 are on-ground, local or landscape focussed projects which aim to
reduce key threatening processes or improve functional habitat conditions for listed threatened
species.
Information requirements for an Offset Management Strategy:
An appropriate offsets strategy establishes how the direct offset activities will result in a
conservation gain for the relevant species, and should include the following information as a
minimum:
a. A tabulated set of proposed minimum and maximum impacts, clearly setting out the
quantum and locations, with supporting spatial data in Shapefile format, of predicted
impacts to protected matters.
b. A tabulated set of offset measures which are proposed to provide a conservation gain
relative to the predicted impacts, including clear explanations of the quantum and scope of

79
proposed species benefitting activities as well as the known distribution and status of key
species, habitats and other relevant features with supporting spatial data in Shapefile
format.
c. How the planned measures will achieve the requirements set out under Section 4.3.
d. How the residual significant impact to be offset is calculated (Section 4.1.1), as well as clearly
articulating how the offset measures will measurably contribute to species conservation
outcomes prioritised in relevant guidance, recovery plans, regional threat abatement
strategies and/or species conservation plans.
e. Empirical evidence and interpretive justification that the predicted conservation benefits will
adequately improve local or regional persistence of the impacted species, e.g., the site
supports a significant colony of the threatened species or has the potential to host them
following restoration or threat abatement.
f. The parties responsible for implementing the proposed offset(s), including the approval
holder, and their capability to perform the proposed offset activities and achieve requisite
outcomes.
g. Detailed objectives, proposed outcomes (see Section 4.4), timeframes and milestones for
achieving proposed benefits which can be accurately tracked through an Offset Evaluation
Plan (Section 4.4.3).
h. Processes to evaluate and adaptively manage the proposed offset(s) to leverage project
learnings, related conservation initiatives, regional strategies and other learning sources.
i. Baseline conditions for all aspects which will assist in determining a net gain outcome,
preferably creating a “state of the environment” report of key conditions at the
commencement of interventions, as well as predictions about what the state of the
environment will be when the predicted offset outcome is achieved.
j. A risk analysis indicating the risks to successful implementation and how these will be
managed and mitigated. This will include a description of the contingency measures that will
be implemented if completion criteria are not met, or if understandings change, e.g.,
ensuring that proposed measures have no detrimental impact on any listed species under
the EPBC Act.
k. Evidence of adequate consultation and collaboration with regional stakeholders, including
consent and/or involvement from First Nations people or other landowners.
l. Discussion on how the proposed offset(s) achieves a strategic outcome and is consistent with
relevant guidance documents and regional priorities.
m. Findings of expert review (if requested by the decision-maker) to confirm the integrity of the
offset calculations and methodologies for establishing baseline, monitoring and reporting.
n. Details of the location and update frequency for offset monitoring data, noting that
evaluation outcomes and any relevant expert commentary will be made publicly available.

80
4.4.2 Indirect Offset Measures

The indirect offset measures prioritised in Table 4-2 identify the prioritised knowledge gaps for each
of the listed threatened species in order of the threats presented to each. The key objective for filling
these knowledge gaps is to identify the strategic offset activities that will most effectively contribute
to the recovery and conservation outcomes for the each of the listed threatened species.
As per the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (2012), deviation from the 90% direct offset
requirement will only be considered where it can be demonstrated that a greater benefit to the
protected matter is likely to be achieved through increasing compensatory measures in an offsets
package or scientific uncertainty is so high that it is not possible to determine a direct offset that is
likely to benefit the protected matter.
Recognising the scientific knowledge gaps for some of the threatened species in the Pilbara, the
maximum acceptable proportion allowable for indirect offsets is recommended in Table 4-1. The
proportions of approvable offset expenditure at Table 4-1 are calibrated to reflect the confidence in
the current state of knowledge about what the species needs to survive and how it uses the
landscape.
Table 4-1 Maximum research offset contribution for the nine listed threatened species
Species Common Name Research offset contribution

allowance
Northern Quoll 15%

Greater Bilby 10%
Pilbara Olive Python 50%
Pilbara Leaf-nose Bat 20%
Ghost Bat 20%
Night Parrot 50%
Grey Falcon 40%
Princess Parrot 50%
Great Desert Skink 10%
Information requirements for an indirect offsets management plan:

An indirect offsets management plan must clearly explain how residual impacts to matters of
national environmental significance will be offset through focussed and defensible research benefits
to species persistence, and must include the following information:
a. How the research activities will achieve the principles required under Section 4.3 ‘Offset
Design’.
b. Details of research objectives, including one or more testable “theories of change” which are
being investigated through the research.
c. How the proposed research outcomes will address knowledge gaps on the species, e.g., their
threats or habitat requirements, and how it will contribute to meeting the knowledge
priorities identified in conservation advices, recovery plans and threat abatement plans.

81
d. The parties responsible for implementing offset measures or evaluating their effectiveness in
meeting the research objectives. The information should include the approval-holder as well
as any other suitably qualified personnel engaged in planning, implementation and
evaluation.
e. Timeframes for delivering research outcomes, with proposed milestones.
f. Details of how the research will be financially supported, with payment expectations,
performance milestones, commencement and completion criteria for evaluating research
benefits for conservation outcomes.
g. Project evaluation, monitoring and reporting expectations consistent with Subsection 4.4.3
‘Offset Evaluation Plans’.
h. A research ethics and risk analysis, identifying any risks to species and stakeholders if
research does or does not confirm the theory of change identified in the Offset Evaluation
Plan.
i. Provide evidence of collaborative engagement with regional stakeholders, including written
acknowledgment and consent from First Nations people where appropriate.
j. Clarification of where and in what timeframe the data and findings of the research will be
made publicly available, along with expert commentary if appropriate.
k. Provide an Offsets Evaluation Plan in accordance with the requirements set out at subsection
4.4.3.
4.4.3 Offset Evaluation Plans

Regular offset project evaluation is essential not only for tracking progress of offset measures but for
shared learning and progressive improvement of conservation activity design. All projects approved
for offsets are required to develop and implement a comprehensive Offsets Evaluation Plan, which
should be comprehensively integrated with the Offsets Strategy discussed in Section 4.4.1.
The primary objective of these evaluation plans is to confirm whether agreed conservation outcomes
are being achieved in accordance with the commitments made in the referral or development
proposal.
The Offset Evaluation Plan should:
• Provide a clear statement, as a theory of change, of how activities will achieve proposed
conservation gains. E.g., reducing feral predation around the project boundaries will increase
Greater Bilby populations by at least 30% relative to baseline distributions of the species
within the project area.
• Include information on how these offset outcomes will be achieved, and how progress
towards these outcomes will be progressively measured and tracked using quantitative and
qualitative indicators.
• Clearly explain which factors will be periodically monitored and analysed, using an adaptive
framework which treats the intervention as an embedded experiment (Broadhurst et al.
2023).

82
• Enable intervention effectiveness and progress to be tracked through regular reporting and
publication of funded conservation projects. Effectiveness should be compared against the
conservation gain commitment relative to the predicted impacts on the species, as well as
against any interim milestone outcomes identified in the evaluation plan.
• Explain how progress towards meeting outcome commitments will be tracked, potentially
using proxy measurements (e.g., habitat quality improvements, reductions in feral species
numbers) during the initial (<5 year) period of the offset program where direct species
improvements cannot be reasonably inferred or measured.
• Detail contingency measures to be implemented in the event that the offset is not on track
to achieving the offset outcomes. If the offset is not meeting the required outcomes, a
process of re-evaluation to demonstrate how the quantum of species benefit will be met in
light of the updated cause-effect understandings will be required.
• At each evaluation stage, indicate which parties will be responsible for implementing the
offset. If the service providers change, the capacity of new service providers to meet the
offset commitments should be adequately demonstrated.
Annual reports must clearly explain which milestones have and have not been met relative to the
approved interim metrics and final outcome milestones. Any learnings about intervention
effectiveness and external factors affecting the offset outcomes should be provided to justify
recommendations for changing offset outcome success metrics (without reducing overall net
benefit for the species), or for informing future offset design.

83
Pilbara Strategic Policy: Assessment Expectations
4.5 Pilbara Environmental Offsets Fund

The Fund is an initiative of the Western Australian Government which aims to deliver environmental
offsets in the Pilbara through a strategic landscape-scale approach, building on regional programs
including First Nations conservation initiatives.
The Fund combines money from individual offset payments required under Part IV of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA) (EP Act (WA)), as well as contributions required under Parts
9 and 10 of the EPBC Act where such payments are included in approval conditions.
In November 2020, the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment and the Western Australian
Environment Minister signed the Pilbara Environmental Offsets Fund Memorandum of
Understanding. The Memorandum of Understanding is a commitment between the Commonwealth
and the State of Western Australia to make cooperative efforts to achieve a strategic
landscape-scale approach to environmental offsets in the Pilbara. This approach aims to achieve
biodiversity outcomes for protected matters that are greater than the sum of outcomes from
individual environmental offsets.
You should consider the following guidance if you are proposing to acquit your offset obligations
through the Fund. The use of this Fund to achieve an offset is optional and will be considered by the
Minister on a case-by-case basis when considering whether it is an appropriate mechanism to offset
impacts of a proposed development.
4.5.1 Offsets Contribution Calculation

An offsets contribution is required if the residual significant impact of an approved development will
be implemented through the Fund. If you propose to offset your impact by contributing to the Fund,
the following information should be submitted with the referral documentation.
a. Outline the listed threatened species to be offset by the Fund.
b. A calculation of the maximum residual significant impact on critical habitat and key habitat,
per species and per hectare, within the development envelope that will remain, and the
method used to calculate the maximum residual significant impact (see Section 3 for habitat
definitions and residual significant impact calculations for each species).
c. Total calculated cost of offsetting the residual significant impact on critical habitat and key
habitat using the offset rates provided at section 4.4.2.
d. Calculation of consumer price indexation through the application of the percentage changes
in the ‘All groups’ Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Perth, as published by the Australian
Bureau of Statistics.
e. Calculation of 80% of the total offset contribution (including CPI) that will be paid to the
Fund prior to the commencement of the approved development.
f. Expected timing of final impacts and submission of remaining 20% payment (including an
estimation of CPI).

84
g. Spatial data indicating clearing footprint and delineation of critical and supporting habitat
per species.
h. Justification for how the use of the Fund will be suitable to offset the residual significant
impact.
i. How using the Fund to offset your residual significant impact aligns with the principles set
out at Section 4.3 ‘Offset Design’.
j. If the proposed offset into the Fund overlaps with offset requirements under the EP Act
(WA) for listed threatened species habitat offset requirements under the EPBC Act, then the
higher EPBC Act protected matter offset rate should be applied. These areas of overlap and
rates per hectare amounts should be clearly outlined.
4.5.2 Offset rates

Offsets rates for developments approved under the EPBC Act to implement offset obligations
through the Fund are as follows:
Critical habitat $3,306/hectare (GST exclusive)

Supporting habitat $1,653/hectare (GST exclusive)
These offset rates are subject to revision by the department and annual adjustment to apply the
June quarter Consumer Price Index for Perth on or by 31 August each year. ‘Supporting habitat’ in
the context of offset rates would equate to the ‘key habitat’, as described for each of the nine listed
threatened species in this policy.
4.5.3 Timing of payment

Since the launch of the Fund by the Western Australian Government, EPBC Act approval holders that
have been approved to contribute to the Fund have been required to pay a minimum of 10% of the
total allowable payment (which corresponds with the total allowable clearing limit) as an upfront
payment prior to commencement of the impact. The remaining 90% payment is then to be made as
subsequent annual or biennial payments calculated on actual impact occurring over the life of the
project.
Upfront payment, prior to the commencement of impact, aims to minimise, as far as possible, any
delay between impact occurring and implementation of the compensatory measure. Delays in
offsets can have further significant adverse impacts to species’ protection.
From 1 September 2024, approval holders will be required to pay a minimum 80% of the total
allowable payment as an upfront payment to the Fund prior to commencement of impact. The
remaining 20% payment must be made immediately following finalisation or completion of the
impact. This revised requirement aims to:
• reduce significant administrative burden on proponents and fund administrators of
calculating actual impact every 1–2 years.
• reduce delays in achieving on-ground outcomes.

85
• provide greater incentive to avoid and minimise impacts, as far as practicable.
4.5.4 Suitability of the Fund for offsetting residual significant impact

Ongoing suitability of the Fund for the delivery of offsets for developments approved under the
EPBC Act is considered on a case-by-case basis. EPBC Act conditions of approval may require an
approval holder to remain responsible for delivery of the offset in the event the Fund fails to deliver
the required conservation outcome.
4.6 Advanced offsets

Advanced offsets are put in place before any impact occurs, aiming to increase the offset measure’s
environmental benefit. These types of offsets can reduce the time taken to complete the EPBC Act
assessment process as the availability and location of a suitable offset is known.
If designed well, advanced offsets provide an opportunity to innovate and demonstrate
effectiveness of future conservation activities and programs. Advanced offsets need to be well
planned and monitored over time to demonstrate their conservation benefit and net gain for the
species.
For example, prior to confirming the creation of an artificial bat cave as a viable offset measure to
offset Ghost Bat roost destruction or temporary closure, you must first be able to substantiate that
the artificial bat cave supports a viable population of the listed threatened species over a sustained
period of time. Similarly, the restoration of a mine site involving the establishment of roosting or
foraging habitat for a listed threatened species must demonstrate its ability to support a viable
population of a listed threatened species at a future point in time, e.g., through successful habitat
re-creation in the region. Note that in this example, the restoration would need to be additional to
what is required for mine closure outcomes under the Mining Act 1978 (WA), and any other
regulatory requirements, to be considered a suitable offset.
Information requirements for advanced offsets include planning, monitoring, and reporting remain
the same as for similar Direct (Subsection 4.4.1) and Indirect (4.4.2) offsets, but field experience and
conservation outcomes to date must also be included as part of the proposed offset management
planning.
As with all offset proposals, the suitability of an advanced offset can only be formally considered and
accepted through the EPBC Act assessment and approval process. The Minister will not be able to
approve an advanced offset separate from approving a development for which it will be used to
compensate for residual significant impact.
When considering advanced offsets for any of the nine listed threatened species discussed in
Section 3, you should refer to the Offset Pathways (Section 4.7) to identify suitable offset measures.

86
4.7 Offset Pathways

Table 4-2 Priority threat matrix and offset pathways of impact pathways
Offset pathways for the nine listed threatened species in the Pilbara with severity of perceived threat to that species in high (dark blue), moderate (mid-blue), low (light blue). A key threat that is not known to affect a species has been
left white. For each threat type, recommended offsets and performance measures are recommended in Table 4-2.
High Moderate Low Not an identified threat
Pilbara Pilbara Great

Northern Greater Night Grey Princess
KEY THREATS Olive Leaf- Ghost Bat Desert Offset Pathway Research pathway Performance objective/ conservation outcome
Quoll Bilby Parrot Falcon Parrot
Python nosed Bat Skink
Habitat Loss Design and implement habitat Determine the critical habitat characteristics Sufficient habitat protection and restoration
restorationlii, re-creationliii, required to sustain relevant species in current actions are implemented to support viable
rehabilitationliv, revegetationlv project(s) and potential future landscapes. relevant species populations to persist in the
to protect or otherwise restore critical Estimate regional baseline ecological condition Pilbara.
and key habitat for relevant species and distribution of key habitat elements Species populations are maintained, and their
populations. This must be adjacent to required by species. key habitat is restored and expanded across the
already established habitats or creating Pilbara bioregion.
Identify regionally important habitat restoration
corridors between existing habitats that
priorities and implement through a suitable
support species populations. Key habitat
recovery strategy for the impacted protected
features including hydrological/water
matter.
elements will need to be appropriately
characterised.
Acquire and/or provide additional
protection for species living on land with
long-term conservation tenure.
Develop restoration seed banks in the
Pilbara region that conserve seeds for
restoration of species habitats.
Fragmentation Design and implement habitat Understand the causes of fragmentation and Sufficient habitat protection and restoration
and Genetic restoration, recreation, rehabilitation, genetic isolation, including the habitat, actions are implemented to support viable
Isolation revegetation project(s) to protect or dispersal and connectivity requirements species populations to persist in the Pilbara.
otherwise restore critical and key habitat required for sustainable gene dispersal to Species home ranges are restored and
for the impacted species. This must be maintain viable species populations in the expanded across the Pilbara bioregion relative
adjacent to already established habitats Pilbara. to baseline observations.
or creating corridors between existing Identify which of the available interventions (or Species are able to move through previously
habitats that support species populations. set of interventions) would provide the most restricted areas of the landscape.
Create permanent structures outside of effective benefits to improve the relevant
Key movement corridors are identified and
the development envelope that aid in species’ ability to thrive and move naturally
protected from development and other threats.
reducing the barriers to species through the Pilbara bioregion and implement
movement and aid in connecting critical through a suitable strategy.
and key habitats and populations through
the landscape.
Feral Predators Establish or enhance protected Estimate baseline population and distribution of Feral predator interactions with species are
conservation refuges that support the threatened species, and the relevant reduced, leading to an increase in species
relevant species populations in the threatening predators and feral animals on a population numbers.
Pilbara. sub-regional or regional scale. Feral control programs are progressively
Undertake program(s) of monitored feral Identify the most effective feral animal control improved to meet regional strategy objectives
predator control, focussing on areas that measures required to ensure regional (e.g., increase range and resilience, provide
support the relevant species population persistence of the relevant species. First Nations employment, be consistent with
or has the potential to support regional plans etc).
populations (i.e., adjacent to known The area of species habitat managed under
conservation or breeding areas). secure tenure, conservation and sustainable
Offsets that target feral predators must management has increased.
be:

87

• Strategic (i.e., landscape scale,
collaborative planning and
implementation).
• Implemented long term (i.e.,
potentially longer than the life
of impact, efforts made to
transfer to another project or
entity on completion.
• At a scale that demonstrates a
conservation gain (this may be
local, or landscape based on the
species).
Feral Establish or enhance protected Understand the interactions and threats Feral herbivores are restricted from accessing
Herbivores conservation refuges that support the between the relevant species, feral herbivore key species habitat.
relevant species populations in the and other species (e.g., dingoes). Species populations and ranges are able to
Pilbara. Estimate baseline population and distribution of increase from baseline data.
Undertake program(s) of feral/domestic feral animals threatening species on a sub=
herbivore control, e.g., to exclude or regional or regional scale.
reduce camels, cattle, rabbits etc from Infer the most effective intervention strategy
species’ critical and key habitats. for minimising the matter of national
Offsets that reduce feral herbivore threats environmental significance species impacts
must be: from feral herbivores at landscape or regional
• Strategic (i.e., landscape scale, scales.
implementation).
longer than the life of impact,
transferred to another project,
to another entity).
species).
Fire regimes Undertake program(s) of fire Understand the interactions of fire frequencies Key habitats are effectively protected from
that cause management in areas that support and intensities on the relevant species habitat high intensity or large scale (widespread)
declines in impacted species colonies, with the aim of quality, food availability, competitors and bushfires.
biodiversity reducing the frequency of high intensity predators. Species populations and ranges are able to
fires and promoting mosaics of vegetation Compile Traditional Ecological Knowledge about increase from baseline data.
with heterogeneous structure and age links between habitat, fire behaviours and the
classes. relevant species habitat.
Offsets that improve fire management for
species habitat optimisation must be:
implementation) and effective
for improving species
persistence within bioregion.
to another entity).
species).

88

Weed Undertake program(s) of weed control Develop regional baseline estimates of species Sufficient habitat protection and restoration
Invasion trials with experimental controls in areas populations and threatening weed actions are implemented to support viable
that support relevant species or are distributions. relevant species populations to persist in the
expected to promote improved habitat Identify the most effective weed reduction or Pilbara.
for native species. mitigation measures for biodiversity benefit Species are preserved and expanded across
Develop restoration seed banks in the which should be prioritised across the region. Pilbara bioregion.
Pilbara region that focus on conserving
wild species.
Offsets that target weed invasion must
be:
implementation).
to another entity).
species).
Climate Design and implement habitat restoration Determine the habitat, dispersal and Key populations and habitats areas are
Change projects to create critical and key habitat connectivity requirements of the relevant protected and enhanced to mitigate the effects
that supports relevant species species that might be threatened by aspects of of climate change.
populations or have the potential to climate change. Populations and ranges are sustained in the
support (i.e., adjacent to existing Understand the range of potential climate long term.
populations) around the Pilbara region, change impacts to breeding viability and Clear metrics of climate change effects and
create pockets of diversity and building foraging habitats from changes to temperature, mitigation effectiveness to permanently sustain
resilience into the landscape. rainfall and humidity. the species are developed.
Develop restoration seed banks in the
Pilbara region that focus on conserving
wild species.
Offsets that target climate change must:
• Protect water sources.
• be developed in consultation
with species experts on climate
change through all stages of
design and implementation.
Hydrological Direct offsets for hydrological changes Investigate the interactions between water Interactions with water sources are well
Changes might include restoring natural resources and the relevant species related to understood so long term protection and
streamflow behaviours, but the changes in water regimes. mitigations can be designed with high
interconnections between hydrology and Understanding the role of water in supporting confidence of success.
ecological features must be adequately foraging, as a drinking resource and facilitating
understood. adequate microclimates needed by species.
If offset measures to restore hydrological
systems in dimensions valued by
impacted species are proposed, they must
be supported with evidence equivalent to
IESC (2018). These actions may be:
• Actions that ensure persistence of
water within the landscape.
• Acquire and protect land with
long-term conservation tenure.
• Design and implement habitat
restoration, recreation,
89

rehabilitation, revegetation
project(s) to protect or otherwise
restore critical and key habitat for
relevant species populations. This
may be habitat upstream from
water sources, ecosystems
surrounding a critical water
source. It may also be artificial
watering source recreation within
the landscape (not for impacts to
groundwater) to create key
deposition sites.
Offsets that target hydrology must:
• Have a secure tenure mechanism.
• Protect and stabilise surrounding
ecosystems.
• Be implemented for long-term
species benefit.
• Be at sufficient scale to achieve a
conservation gain for the species
at landscape or regional scale.
• Rely on benefits calculated using
up to date scientific knowledge.
• Include Evaluation by hydrological
and ecological experts in the
design and implementation.

90
5 Review and Evaluation

5.1 Review of scientific literature
Published scientific information on EPBC Act listed threatened species in the Pilbara, including
common impact pathways, will be reviewed every five years after initial release of the policy. These
reviews will focus on updated knowledge of species and their critical habitats. Review findings will be
considered by the department and may lead to updated habitat descriptions, avoidance and
mitigation measures, and to identification of additional or revised offset pathways.
Revising the Policy
The department may also review parts or all of the policy to ensure it remains relevant, effective, and
coherent with other policies. Examples of circumstances that may trigger a review and potential
revision of the policy include:
• new EPBC Act listing of a species commonly impacted in the Pilbara.
• release or adoption of endorsed monitoring protocols for one or more of the Pilbara listed
threatened species (e.g., protocols developed by Australia’s Terrestrial Ecosystem Research
Network: TERN)
• commencement of new Commonwealth environmental legislation.
• release of National Environmental Standards.
• development of a Regional Plan under State or Commonwealth environmental legislation for
the Pilbara bioregion.
5.2 Evaluating the Policy

To ensure the policy remains current and reflects any changes to legislation, policy, guidance or
scientific understanding of the listed threatened species, the policy will be evaluated three years
after its initial release, and every five years thereafter. The evaluation of the policy will ensure that:
• effectiveness of this policy, through the implementation of approved developments, is

tracked and published.
• evaluation of this policy is transparent and responsive, and implemented in a modern and
collaborative way.
• risks are managed proportionately while minimising regulatory burden.
• continuous improvement is sought to enhance performance, capability and culture that

builds trust and confidence in the regulated community.
Evaluation will assess the performance of the policy against its stated objectives. Evaluation may also
assess the extent to which the policy, and its implementation by the department over the previous
period has been relevant, effective, efficient, and coherent.

91
Specific evaluation methods will be set by the department prior to each evaluation. Example
questions that may be applied during evaluation include the following.
Relevance:
• Are the stated objectives still appropriate, desirable and achievable?
• Is the knowledge expressed in, or supporting, the policy still current?
Effectiveness:
• To what degree has the policy been implemented? Are developments proposed in the Pilbara
bioregion applying avoidance requirements during the design of their projects and prior to
referral to the department?
• Are the policy and conservation objectives being achieved?
Efficiency:
• Has adoption of the policy led to faster assessment times?
• Are proponents submitting well-developed offset plans at the referral stage?
• Were the costs involved in creating and implementing the policy justified, given the changes
and outcomes achieved?
Coherence:
• To what extent is the policy coherent with Commonwealth environmental legislation and
policies and relevant policies of external entities?
The department will seek feedback on implementation of the policy from key stakeholders as part of
each evaluation. Evaluation findings will be considered by the department to inform continuous
improvement and ongoing implementation of the policy.

92
6 Attachments
Figure 6-1 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat genetic movement constraints in the Pilbara bioregion demonstrated in
blue polygons. The gap between the Hamersly and Chichester subregions via the Fortescue subregion is
considered a Genetic Movement Corridor for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat.

93
7 References
Adams CA, Fernández-Juricic E, Bayne EM and St Clair CC (2021) ‘Effects of artificial light on bird movement and
distribution: a systematic map’, Environmental Evidence, 10:1–28.
Adaptive NRM (2018) Fortescue Metals Night Parrot Project: Final report against the approved research plan Fortescue
Metals.
Armstrong KN and Anstee SD (2000) The ghost bat in the Pilbara: 100 years on, Australian Mammalogy, 22(2):93–101.
Bastin G (2014) Australian rangelands and climate change – fire, Ninti One Limited and CSIRO.
Bat Call WA (2021a) A review of Ghost bat ecology, threats and survey requirements, report prepared for the Department
of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Canberra.
Bat Call WA (2021b) A review of Pilbara leaf-nosed bat ecology, threats and survey requirements, report prepared for the
Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment.
BirdLife International (2023a) Species factsheet: Falco hypoleucos, BirdLife International website, accessed 17 August 2023.
BirdLife International (2023b), Species factsheet: Polytelis alexandrae, BirdLife International website, accessed 17 August
2023.
Boles W, Longmore NW, Thompson MC (1993), A Recent Specimen of the Night Parrot Geopsittacus occidentalis, Emu -
Austral Ornithology, 94:1, 37-40, DOI: 10.1071/MU9940037
Booth C (2007) Barbed wire action plan, Queensland Conservation Council.
Booth C, V Adams B, Kruse L Douglass (2021) The enduring Pilbara: a conservation vision for a land rich in nature, culture
and resources, Centre for Conservation Geography and University of Tasmania.
Bradley K, Lees C, Lundie-Jenkins G, Copley P, Paltridge R, Dziminski M, Southgate R, Nally S and Kemp L (2015) Greater
Bilby conservation summit and interim conservation plan: an initiative of the Save the Bilby Fund, IUCN SSC Conservation
Breeding Specialist Group.
Braithwaite RW and Griffiths AD (1994) ‘Demographic variation and range contraction in the northern quoll, Dasyurus
hallucatus (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae)’, Wildlife Research, 21(2):203–217.
Broadhurst L, Prober SM, Boggs G, Bush D, Breed MF, Dickson F, Harrison PA, Jellinek S, Lynch AJJ, Rymer PD, Young RE and
Commander LE (2023) Guidelines for embedded experiments in ecological restoration and management in Australia, CSIRO
(Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation).
Bullen RD, Reiffer S, Trainer J (2023) ‘Satellite tracking Ghost Bats (Macroderma gigas) in the Pilbara, Western Australia’,
Records of the Western Australian Museum, 38:1–10.
Burbidge A (2020) Interim night parrot habitat statement, The Night Parrot Recovery Team, accessed 30 June 2023.
Cadenhead NC, Kearney MR, Moore D, McAlpin S and Wintle BA (2016) ‘Climate and fire scenario uncertainty dominate the
evaluation of options for conserving the great desert skink’, Conservation Letters, 9(3):181–190.
Carwardine J, Nicol S, van Leeuwen S, Walters B, Firn J, Reeson A, Martin TG and Chades I (2014) Priority threat
management for Pilbara species of conservation significance, CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences.
Carter, M (1993), ‘Alexandra's or Princess Parrot - Status and normal range’, Wingspan. 12:32-35.
Claramunt AMA, White NE, Bunce M, O’Connell M, Bullen RD and Mawson PR (2019) ‘Determination of the diet of the
ghost bat (Macroderma gigas) in the Pilbara region of Western Australia from dried prey remains and DNA metabarcoding’,
Australian Journal of Zoology, 66(3):195–200.
Cook A (2010) Habitat use and home-range of the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus: effects of fire [master’s thesis],
University of Western Australia.

94
Cowan MA, Dunlop JA, Turner JM, Moore HA, Nimmo DG (2020b) Artificial refuges to combat habitat loss for an
endangered marsupial predator: How do they measure up? Conservation Science and Practice, 2:6.
Cowan MA, Moore HA, Hradsky BA, Jolly CJ, Dunlop JA, Wysong ML, Hernandez-Santin L, Davis RA, Fisher DO, Michael DR,
Turner JM, Gibson LA, Knuckey CG, Henderson M and Nimmo DG (2023) ‘Non-preferred habitat increases the activity area
of the endangered northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) in a semi-arid landscape’, Australian Mammalogy, 45(2):138–150.
Cramer VA, Armstrong KN, Bullen RD, Cross SL, Gibson L, Hanrahan N, Knuckey CG, Ottewell K, Reiffer S, Ruykys L and Shaw
RE (2022) ‘Research priorities for the ghost bat (Macroderma gigas) in the Pilbara region of Western Australia’, Australian
Mammalogy, 45(1):1–12.
Cramer VA, Armstrong KN, Bullen RD, Ellis R, Gibson LA, McKenzie NL, O'Connell M, Spate A and van Leeuwen S (2016a)
‘Research Priorities for the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat (Rhinonicteris aurantia Pilbara form)’, Australian Mammalogy, 38(2):149–
157.
Cramer VA, Dunlop J, Davis R, Ellis R, Barnett B, Cook A, Morris K and van Leeuwen S (2016b) ‘Research priorities for the
northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus in the Pilbara region of Western Australia’, Australian Mammalogy, 38(2):135–148.
Cramer VA, Dziminski MA, Southgate R, Carpenter FM, Ellis RJ and van Leeuwen S (2017) ‘A conceptual framework for
habitat use and research priorities for the greater bilby (Macrotis lagotis) in the north of Western Australia’, Australian
Mammalogy, 39(2):137–151.
Creese S (2012) The use of rail culverts to facilitate the movement of fauna [master’s thesis], University of Queensland.
CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) (2015) Pilbara water resource assessment, report to
the Government of Western Australia and industry partners, CSIRO Land and Water.
Curtin University (2022a) Pilbara Leaf-Nosed Bat workshop TalkBook, outcomes of the 27 April 2022 workshop funded by
FMG Fortescue and Curtin University.
Curtin University (2022b) Pilbara Leaf-Nosed Bat BlueSheet, outcomes of the 27 April 2022 workshop funded by FMG
Fortescue and Curtin University.
Davies KF, Melbourne BA, James CD and Cunningham RB (2010) ‘Using traits of species to understand responses to land use
change: birds and livestock grazing in the Australian arid zone’, Biological Conservation, 143(1):78–85.
DAWE (Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment) (2022) Fire regimes that cause declines in biodiversity as a
key threatening process, DAWE, Australian Government.
DBCA (Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions) (2016) Pilbara conservation strategy, DBCA, Western
Australian Government, accessed 31 October 2023.
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water) (2012) EPBC Act environmental offsets
policy, DCCEEW, Australian Government
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water) (2023a) Species Profile and Threats
Database: Dasyurus hallucatus — Northern Quoll, Digul [Gogo-Yimidir], Wijingadda [Dambimangari], Wiminji [Martu],
DCCEEW, Australian Government, accessed 10 August 2023.
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water) (2023b) Recovery Plan for the Greater Bilby
(Macrotis lagotis), DCCEEW, Australian Government.
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water) (2023c) Species Profile and Threats
Database: Rhinonicteris aurantia (Pilbara form) — Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat, DCCEEW, Australian Government, accessed 10
August 2023.
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water) (2023d) Wildlife trade and the law,
DCCEEW, Australian Government, accessed 10 August 2023.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2016a) Background document: threat abatement plan for competition
and land degradation by rabbits, DEE, Australian Government.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2017a) Background document: threat abatement plan for predation,
habitat degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), DEE, Australian Government.

95
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2017b) Threat abatement plan for predation, habitat degradation,
competition and disease transmission by feral pigs, DEE, Australian Government.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2020) National Light Pollution guidelines for Wildlife, including marine
turtles, seabirds and migratory shorebirds, DEE, Australian Government.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2016b) Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by
rabbits, DEE, Australian Government.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2017b) Threat abatement plan for predation, habitat degradation,
competition and disease transmission by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), DEE, Australian Government.
DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy) (2018) Advanced offsets criteria, DEE, Australian Government.
Dennison S (2015) Social organisation and population genetics of the threatened great desert skink, Liopholis kintorei, [PhD
thesis], Macquarie University, accessed 17 August 2023.
Dennison S, McAlpin S, Chapple DG and Stow AJ (2015) ‘Genetic divergence among regions containing the vulnerable Great
Desert Skink (Liopholis kintorei) in the Australian arid zone’, PloS One, 10(6):e0128874.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (2018) Buffel grass management for Central Australia, Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Northern Territory Government.
DEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) (2008a) Background document: Threat Abatement
plan for competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats, DEWHA, Australian Government.
DEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) (2008b) Threat abatement plan for predation by
the European red fox, DEWHA, Australian Government.
DEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) (2010a) Survey guidelines for Australia’s
threatened bats: Guidelines for detecting bats listed as threatened under the EPBC Act, DEWHA, Australian Government,
accessed 30 June 2023.
DEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) (2010b) Survey guidelines for Australia’s
threatened birds: Guidelines for detecting birds listed as threatened under the EPBC Act, DEWHA, Australian Government,
accessed 30 June 2023.
DoE (Department of the Environment) (2015) Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats, DoE, Australian
Government.
DoE (Department of the Environment) (2016) EPBC Act referral guideline for the endangered northern quoll Dasyurus
hallucatus, DoE, Australian Government, accessed 30 June 2023.
Dorph A and Ballard G (2022) Current and emerging feral cat management practices in Australia, report to the Resilient
Landscapes Hub of the Australian Government National Environmental Science Program, University of New England.
Dortch J, Balme J, McDonald J, Morse K, O’Connor S and Veth P (2019) ‘Settling the West: 50 000 years in a changing land’,
Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 102:30–44.
DoW (Department of Water) (2010) Pilbara regional water plan 2010–2030, DoW, Western Australian Government,
accessed 30 October 2023.
DPaW (Department of Parks and Wildlife) (in preparation) Guidelines for considering the presence of night parrot
(Pezoporus occidentalis) in Western Australia, DPaW, Western Australian Government.
DPIRD (Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development) (2023) Pilbara rangeland pastures and fire – Western
Australia, DPIRD, Western Australian Government.
DSEWPaC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) (2011a) Survey guidelines for
Australia's threatened mammals, DSEWPaC, Australian Government, accessed 30 June 2023.
DSEWPaC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) (2011b) Survey guidelines for
Australia’s threatened reptiles, DSEWPaC, Australian Government, accessed 30 June 2023.

96
DSEWPaC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) (2011c) Threat abatement plan
for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads, DSEWPaC, Australian Government.
DSEWPaC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) (2012) Threat abatement plan
to reduce the impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the five listed grasses. DSEWPaC, Australian Government.
Dunlop JA, Cook A and Morris K. (2014). Pilbara northern quoll project - Surveying and monitoring Dasyurus hallucatus in
the Pilbara, Western Australia. Department of Parks and Wildlife, Kensington.
Ellis R, Gunawardene N, Knuckey C, Huey J, Dawkins K, Lines R and Herbert S (14–17 February 2023) ‘Detecting cryptic
terrestrial species in targeted eDNA sampling’, [conference abstract] 1st Australian and New Zealand Environmental DNA
(eDNA) Conference, Tasmania.
Environment Australia (2000) Revision of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) and the
Development of Version 5.1. - Summary Report, Department of Environment and Heritage, Australian Government.
EPA (Environmental Protection Authority) (2014) Cumulative environmental impacts of development in the Pilbara region,
EPA, Western Australian Government.
Fancourt BA, Zirbel C, Cremasco P, Elsworth P, Harry G and Gentle MN (2022) ‘Field assessment of the risk of feral cat baits
to nontarget species in eastern Australia’ Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 18(1):224–244.
Festa F, Ancillotto L, Santini L, Pacifici M, Rocha R, Toshkova N, Amorim F, Benítez-López A, Domer A, Hamidović D and
Kramer-Schadt S (2023) ‘Bat responses to climate change: A systematic review’, Biological Reviews, 98(1):19–33.
Garnett ST and Crowley GM (2000) The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000, Environment Australia, Canberra.
Garnett ST, Franklin DC, Ehmke G, VanDerWal JJ, Hodgson L, Pavey C, Reside AE, Welbergen JA, Butchart SHM, Perkins GC
and Williams SE (2013) Climate change adaptation strategies for Australian birds, National Climate Change Adaptation
Research Facility.
Garnett ST, Szabo JK and Dutson G (2011) The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.
Hamilton NA, Onus M, Withnell B and Withnell K (2017) ‘Recent sightings of the Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis from
Matuwa (Lorna Glen) and Millrose Station in Western Australia’, Australian Field Ornithology, 34:71–75.
Hernandez-Santin L, Fisher D, Goldizen A (2018) ‘Ecology and predator associations of the northern quoll in the Pilbara’,
Report of the National Environmental Science Program Threatened Species Recovery Hub.
Heydenrych B and Parsons B (2018) Pilbara bioregion conservation action planning process update: refined strategies and
actions, January 2018, Pilbara Corridors.
Higgins, P. J. (ed.) 1999. The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000: Taxon Summary - Princess Parrot (planetofbirds.com).
Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Vol. 4. Parrots to Dollarbird. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
Hill BM and Ward SJ (2010) National recovery plan for the Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus, Department of Natural
Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport, Northern Territory Government.
Horton P, Black A, Reid J and McAllan I (2021) ‘Records of the Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis in South Australia,
including its ‘rediscovery’ in the North East in 1979 and a review of its habitat use’, South Australian Ornithologist, 45:85–
117.
IESC (Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development) (2018) Information
guidelines for proponents preparing coal seam gas and large coal mining development proposals, IESC, Australian
Government.
Indigenous Desert Alliance (2022) Looking after Tjakura, Tjalapa, Mulyamiji, Warrarna. a national recovery plan for the
Great Desert Skink (Liopholis kintorei) [draft recovery plan], prepared for the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the
Environment and Water, accessed 11 August 2023.
Iwaniuk AN, Keirnan AR, Janetzki H, Mardon K, Murphy S, Leseberg NP and Weisbecker V (2020) ‘The endocast of the Night
Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) reveals insights into its sensory ecology and the evolution of nocturnality in birds’, Scientific
Reports, 10(12948):1–9.

97
Jackett NA, Greatwich BR, Swann G and Boyle A (2017) ‘A nesting record and vocalisations of the Night Parrot Pezoporus
occidentalis from the East Murchison, Western Australia’. Australian Field Ornithology, 34:144–150.
James CD, Landsberg J and Morton SR (1999) ‘Provision of watering points in the Australian arid zone: a review of effects on
biota’, Journal of Arid Environments 41(1):87–121.
Janse I, Kloecker U, Roshier D and Witte I (2015) ‘Breeding diet and behaviour of a pair of Grey Falcons Falco hypoleucos
and their offspring in north-western New South Wales’, Corella, 39:46–51.
Johnson B and Anderson H (2014) Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) baseline remote camera and trapping survey
throughout the central and eastern Chichester Ranges, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australian Government.
Kearney MR, Porter WP and Murphy SA (2016) ‘An estimate of the water budget for the endangered night parrot of
Australia under recent and future climates’, Climate Change Responses, 3(14):1–17.
Leseberg NP, Murphy SA, Jackett NA, Greatwich BR, Brown J, Hamilton N, Joseph L and Watson JE (2019) ‘Descriptions of
known vocalisations of the Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis’, Australian Field Ornithology, 36:79–88.
Leseberg NP, Venables WN, Murphy SA, Jackett NA and Watson JE (2022) ‘Accounting for both automated recording unit
detection space and signal recognition performance in acoustic surveys: A protocol applied to the cryptic and critically
endangered Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis)’, Austral Ecology, 47(2):440–455.
Leseberg NP, Kutt A, Evans MC, Nou T, Spillias S, Stone Z, Walsh JC, Murphy SA, Bamford M, Burbidge AH, Crossing K, Davis
RA, Garnett ST, Kavanagh RP, Murphy R, Read J, Reid J, van Leeuwen S, Watson AWT, Watson JEM and Maron M (2023)
‘Establishing effective conservation management strategies for a poorly known endangered species: a case study using
Australia’s Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis)’. Biodiversity and Conservation, 32:2869–2891.
Ley A and Tynan B (2016) ‘Observations on nesting Grey Falcons, Falco hypoleucos’, South Australian Ornithologist, 41:49–
64.
Long K and Robley A (2004) Cost effective feral animal exclusion fencing for areas of high conservation value in Australia,
report prepared for the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government, Department of
Sustainability and Environment, Victorian Government.
McAlpin S, Duckett P and Stow A (2011) ‘Lizards cooperatively tunnel to construct a long-term home for family members’,
PLoS ONE, 6(5):e19041.
McKenzie NL, van Leeuwen S and Pinder AM (2009) ‘Introduction to the Pilbara Biodiversity Survey, 2002–2007’, Records of
the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 78(1):3–89.
Moore, H.A., Michael, D.R., Ritchie, E.G., Dunlop, J.A., Valentine, L.E., Hobbs, R.J. and Nimmo, D.G., 2021. A rocky heart in a
spinifex sea: occurrence of an endangered marsupial predator is multiscale dependent in naturally fragmented
landscapes. Landscape Ecology, 36, pp.1359-1376.
Moore HA, Dunlop JA, Jolly CJ, Kelly E, Woinarski JCZ, Ritchie EG, Burnett S, van Leeuwen S, Valentine LE, Cowan MA and
Nimmo DG (2022) ‘A brief history of the northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus): a systematic review’, Australian Mammalogy,
44(2):185–207.
Moore HA, Dunlop JA, Geyle HM, Greenwood L and Nimmo DG (2023) ‘First you get the money, then you get the power:
Comparing the cost and power of monitoring programs to detect changes in occupancy of a threatened marsupial
predator’, Conservation Science and Practice, 5(2):e12881.
Moore HA, Kearney MR, Paltridge R, McAlpin S and Stow A (2015) ‘Is fire a threatening process for Liopholis kintorei, a
nationally listed threatened skink?’, Wildlife Research, 42(3):207–216.
Moore HA, Kearney MR, Paltridge R, McAlpin S and Stow A (2017) ‘Feeling the pressure at home: Predator activity at the
burrow entrance of an endangered arid-zone skink’, Austral Ecology, 43(1):102–109.
Moore HA, Stow A and Kearney MR (2018) ‘Under the weather?—The direct effects of climate warming on a threatened
desert lizard are mediated by their activity phase and burrow system’, The Journal of Animal Ecology, 87(3):660–671.
Moore HA, Valentine LE, Dunlop JA and Nimmo DG (2020) ‘The effect of camera orientation on the detectability of wildlife:
a case study from north-western Australia’, Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, 6(4):546–556.

98
Moore H, Cowan M and Dunlop J (unpublished) Recommended survey techniques for an endangered marsupial predator,
the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus.
Morris KD, Cowan MA, Angus GJ, Anderson H, Garretson SW, Palmer RA, Williams MR and Pearson DJ (2016) Baseline
monitoring for northern quoll and Rothschild’s rock-wallaby at Eradicat® baited and unbaited sites, Pilbara Region WA,
Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australian Government.
Moseby KE, Read JL, Paton DC, Copley P, Hill BM and Crisp HA (2011) Predation determines the outcome of 10
reintroduction attempts in arid South Australia, Biological Conservation, 144(12):2863–2872.
Mouritz M, Hightower O, Cabula H, Harris B, Joll C, van Leeuwen S, Heckenberg R, Dockery M, Dowding A (2022) Pilbara
water resources background review for water resources situational analysis, report prepared for BHP, Curtin University.
Mousavi-Derazmahalleh M, Ellis RJ, D’Rozario BL, Berry TE, Peverley G, Dawkins KL, Campbell M, White NE and Allentoft ME
(2023) Rock pools as a source of environmental DNA for the detection of the threatened Pilbara olive python (Liasis
olivaceus barroni), Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11:1187545.
Murphy S (2015) ‘Shining a light: the research unlocking the secrets of the mysterious Night Parrot’, Australian Birdlife,
4(3):30–35.
Murphy SA, Austin JJ, Murphy RK, Silcock J, Joseph L, Garnet ST, Leseberg NP, Watson JEM and Burbidge AH (2017a)
‘Observations on breeding Night Parrots (Pezoporus occidentalis) in western Queensland’, Austral Ornithology, 117(2):107–
113.
Murphy, S.A., Paltridge, R., Silcock, J., Murphy, R., Kutt, A.S. and Read, J., 2018. ‘Understanding and managing the threats to
Night Parrots in south-western Queensland’, Emu-Austral Ornithology, 118(1), pp.135-145.
Murphy SA, Silcock J, Murphy R, Reird J and Austin JJ (2017b) ‘Movements and habitat use of the night parrot Pezoporus
occidentalis in south-western Queensland’, Austral Ecology, 42(7):858–868.
National Environmental Science Program Threatened Species Research Hub (2019) Threatened Species Strategy Year 3
Scorecard – Night Parrot, NESP, Australian Government.
Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council (2010) National feral camel action plan, Department of Sustainability,
Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Australian Government.
NESP (National Environmental Science Program) (2023) Best-practice management for feral cats and red foxes, Resilient
Landscapes website, NESP, Australian Government.
Northover A, Dziminski M, Moore H, Palmer R, Ottewell K, Carpenter F and Gibson L (2023) The Pilbara Bilby (Macrotis
lagotis) research program: a review of progress (2013-2023), DBCA, Western Australian Government.
Oakwood M (2000) ‘Reproduction and demography of the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus, in the lowland savanna of
northern Australia’, Australian Journal of Zoology, 48(5):519–539.
Oakwood M (2002) ‘Spatial and social organization of a carnivorous marsupial Dasyurus hallucatus (Marsupialia:
Dasyuridae)’, Journal of Zoology, 257(2):237–248.
Oedin M, Brescia F, Millon A, Murphy BP, Palmas P, Woinarski JC and Vidal E (2021) ‘Cats Felis catus as a threat to bats
worldwide: a review of the evidence’, Mammal Review, 51(3):323–337.
Pavey CR (2014) Australian rangelands and climate change – native species, Ninti One Limited and CSIRO.
Pavey CR, Nano CEM, Cole JR, McDonald PJ, Nunn P, Silcocks A, and Clarke RH (2014) ‘The breeding and foraging ecology
and abundance of the Princess Parrot (Polytelis alexandrae) during a population irruption’, Emu, 114(2):106–115.
Partridge T (2008) Tjakura Antunymanutjaku: looking after Tjakura in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands, a
recovery plan, Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Management.
Pearson D (2003) ‘Giant pythons of the Pilbara’, Landscope, 19(1):32–39.
Pearson D, Spencer P, Hillyer M, How RA (2013) Final report: genetic survey of the Pilbara Olive Python (Liasis olivaceaus
barroni), Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australian Government.

99
Pepper M, Doughty P and Keough JS (2013) ‘Geodiversity and endemism in the iconic Australian Pilbara region: a review of
landscape evolution and biotic response in an ancient refugium’, Journal of Biogeography, 40(7):1225–1239.
Pest Smart (2021a), Cane Toad tool kit, Pest Smart website, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions.
Pest Smart (2021b), Pest animal monitoring techniques, Pest Smart website, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions.
Pillans B (2007) ‘Pre-Quaternary landscape inheritance in Australia’, Journal of Quaternary Science, 22:439–447.
Prober S, Hoffmann B, Pettit M and Boggs G (2020) ‘Background paper for the Strategy Stream to evaluate ecological
outcomes of the Pilbara Environmental Offsets Fund’, report prepared for the Department of Water and Environmental
Regulation, Western Australian Government, CSIRO.
Rankmore BR and Price OF (2004) ‘Effects of habitat fragmentation on the vertebrate fauna of tropical woodlands,
Northern Territory’, in Lunney D (ed) Australian Forest Ecology, 2nd edn, Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales,
Sydney.
Ridley J (2015) Distribution, habitat associations and activity of great desert skinks (tjakuṟa; Liopholis kintorei) in relation to
fire and vegetation cover [honours thesis], Charles Darwin University.
Ridley JCH, Schlesinger CA and Bull CM (2020) ‘Location of long-term communal burrows of a threatened arid-zone lizard in
relation to soil and vegetation’, Austral Ecology, 45(4):444–453.
Robinson CJ, Barber M, Hill R, Gerrard E and James G (2016) Protocols for Indigenous fire management partnerships, CSIRO.
Ruykys L, Hanrahan N and Stokeld D (2023) Novel acoustic lure methodology facilitates detection of the cryptic ghost bat at
a landscape scale’, Wildlife Research.
Schoenjahn J (2011) ‘Morphometric data of recent specimens and live individuals of the Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucos’,
Corella, 35(1):16–22.
Schoenjahn J (2013) ‘A hot environment and one type of prey: investigating why the Grey Falcon (Falco hypoleucos) is
Australia's rarest falcon’, Emu, 113(1):19–25.
Schoenjahn J (2018) ‘Adaptations of the rare endemic Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucos that enable its permanent residence in
the arid zone of Australia’ [PhD thesis], University of Queensland.
Sharp T and Saunders G (2012) Model code of practice for the humane control of feral camels, Pest Smart website, Centre
for Invasive Species Solutions, accessed 9 August 2023.
Shaw RE, Spencer PB, Gibson LA, Dunlop JA, Kinloch JE, Mokany K, Byrne M, Moritz C, Davie H, Travouillon KJ and Ottewell
KM (2022) ‘Linking life history to landscape for threatened species conservation in a multiuse region’, Conservation Biology,
37(1):e13989.
Shute ER, Clement AM and Prideaux GJ (2023) ‘Cranial adaptations of the Night Parrot (Psittaculidae: Pezoporus
occidentalis), a cryptic nocturnal bird’, Emu 123(2):129–139.
Skroblin A, Carboon T, Bidu G, Chapman N, Miller M, Taylor K, Taylor W, Game ET and Wintle BA (2021) ‘Including
indigenous knowledge in species distribution modeling for increased ecological insights’, Conservation Biology, 35(2):587–
597.
Southgate R and Carthew S (2006) ‘Post-fire ephemerals and spinifex-fuelled fires: a decision model for bilby habitat
management in the Tanami Desert, Australia’, International Journal of Wildland Fire, 16(6):741–754.
Southgate R and Carthew S (2007) Post-fire ephemerals and spinifex-fuelled fires: a decision model for bilby habitat
management in the Tanami Desert, Australia. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 16(6):741–754
Southgate R, Paltridge R, Masters P and Carthew S (2007) ‘Bilby distribution and fire: a test of alternative models of habitat
suitability in the Tanami Desert, Australia’, Ecography, 30:759–776.
Southgate R (2006) The suitability of habitat for greater bilby (Macrotis lagotis) in the Tanami Desert and the relationship
with fire [PhD thesis] University of Adelaide.

100
Thomson VA, Armstrong KN, Medlin G and Cooper A (2012) ‘A ghost of chance? Evolutionary history of the Ghost Bat
(Macroderma gigas) and its chances of surviving future climate change’, in Thomson VA, Ancient DNA in the Australian
context: investigating evolutionary and ecological responses to environmental change [PhD thesis], University of Adelaide.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2020) Conservation Advice: Falco hypoleucos Grey Falcon, Department of
the Environment and Energy, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2008) Conservation Advice: Liasis olivaceus barroni Olive Python (Pilbara
subspecies), Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2016a) Conservation Advice: Liopholis kintorei Great Desert Skink,
Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2016b) Conservation Advice: Macroderma gigas Ghost Bat, Department of
the Environment and Energy, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2016c) Conservation Advice: Macrotis lagotis Greater Bilby, Department of
the Environment, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2016d) Conservation Advice: Pezoporus occidentalis Night Parrot,
Department of the Environment, Australian Government.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2016e) ‘Conservation Advice: Rhinonicteris aurantia (Pilbara form) Pilbara
Leaf-nosed Bat’, Department of the Environment, Canberra.
TSSC (Threatened Species Scientific Committee) (2018), Conservation Advice: Polytelis alexandrae Princess Parrot,
Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Government.
Toledo L, Asmüssen M and Rodríguez J (2012) Track illegal trade in wildlife, Nature, 483:36.
Thompson GG and Thompson SA (2008) ‘Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis) burrows, diggings and scats in the Pilbara’, Journal
of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 91:21–25.
Tutt M, Fekete S, Mitchell S, Brace P and Pearson D (2004) Unravelling the mysteries of Pilbara Olive Python ecology, Nickol
Bay Naturalists’ Club, accessed 30 June 2023.
Tuttle MD (2013) ‘Threats to bats and educational challenges’, in Adams RA and Pedersen SC (eds), Bat Evolution, Ecology,
and Conservation, Springer, New York.
Umbrello L, Bullen R, Shaw R, McArthur S, Byrne M, van Leeuwen S and Ottewell K (2022) ‘Extensive gene flow in a
threatened bat (Rhinonicteris aurantia) in an arid landscape’, Global Ecology and Conservation, 37:e02154.
Wangka Maya (2021) Pilbara Aboriginal Cultures, Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Centre, accessed 24 March
2021.
Watson C (2011) ‘A failed breeding attempt by the Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucos near Alice Springs, Northern Territory’,
Australian Field Ornithology, 28(4):167–179.
Weeds Australia (2021a) Integrated weed management, Weeds Australia website, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions,
accessed 17 August 2023.
Weeds Australia (2021b) Weed monitoring, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions, Weeds Australia website, accessed 17
August 2023.
Weeds Australia (2021c) Weed profiles, Weeds Australia website, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions, accessed 17 August
2023.
Weeds Australia (2023) Gamba Grass, Weeds Australia website, Centre for Invasive Species Solutions, accessed 17 August
2023.
White AW, Morris I, Madani G and Archer M (2016) ‘Are cane toads Rhinella marina impacting ghost bats Macroderma
gigas in Northern Australia?’, Australian Zoologist, 38(2):183–191.
Woinarski JCZ, Oakwood M, Winter J, Burnett S, Milne D, Foster P, Myles H and Holmes B (2008) Surviving the toads:
patterns of persistence of the northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus in Queensland, report to the Natural Heritage Trust,
Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, Northern Territory Government.

101
Woinarski JCZ, Burbidge AA and Harrison PL (2014) The Action Plan for Australian Mammals 2012, CSIRO Publishing,
Melbourne.
Worthington Wilmer J, Moritz C, Hall L and Toop J (1994) Extreme population structuring in the threatened ghost bat,
Macroderma gigas: evidence from mitochondrial DNA, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences,
257(1349):193–198.

102
8 End Notes
1DCCEEW 2022, Nature Positive Plan: better for the environment, better for business, Department of Climate Change,
Energy, the Environment and Water, Canberra, December. CC BY 4.0.
2 The Minister or their delegate’s determination of likely significant impact to matters of national environmental
significance (and need for further assessment and approval) at the referral stage cannot include consideration of proposed
avoidance, mitigation and offsetting measures.
3 The area to be surveyed is species-specific and described within Section 3.
4 In the Pilbara there are landscape features that are generally associated with critical female denning habitat which include
topographical ruggedness (e.g., slope), narrow crevices entrances (e.g., 5-20 cm), high cover of embedded rocks (e.g., 25-
100%), range of rock sizes with preference of large boulders (e.g., 0-50 cm, 50-200 cm, >200 cm), presence of ground cover
(e.g., 15-75%) but not dense spinifex, and the presence of Ficus species and other small potential prey species (Cowan et al.
2020b, Moore et al. 2021, Dunlop et al. 2014).
5Spatial movement patterns undertaken across four studies in the Pilbara has identified home range sizes to be up to 129
ha (640 m radius) for Northern Quoll females (Cowan et al. 2023).
6 In the Pilbara there are landscape features that are generally associated with critical female denning habitat which include
topographical ruggedness (e.g., slope), narrow crevices entrances (e.g., 5-20 cm), high cover of embedded rocks (e.g., 25-
100%), range of rock sizes with preference of large boulders (e.g., 0-50 cm, 50-200 cm, >200 cm), presence of ground cover
(e.g., 15-75%) but not dense spinifex, and the presence of Ficus species and other small potential prey species (Cowan et al.
2020b, Moore et al. 2021, Dunlop et al. 2014).
7The species distribution models are available at Species Profiles (SPRAT) (environment.gov.au) and can be viewed spatially
using the Protected Matters Search Tool
8Spatial movement patterns undertaken across four studies in the Pilbara has identified home range sizes to be up to 129
ha (640 m radius) for Northern Quoll females (Cowan et al. 2023). Applying this avoidance standard for the Northern Quoll
will ensure the overall objective of the Recovery Plan for the Northern Quoll (Hill and Ward 2010) to minimise the rate of
decline of the northern quoll in Australia and ensure that viable populations remain in each of the major regions of
distribution into the future is met by protecting the area of occupancy for the species.
9 The Northern Quoll are susceptible to habitat fragmentation and genetic isolation (Hill and Ward 2010), with studies
demonstrating the species is at risk of becoming locally extinct without the ability to disperse and move through the
landscape surrounding home ranges or be able be able to expand in populations (Braithwaite and Griffiths 1994; Oakwood
2000, 2002). At metapopulation level across the Pilbara bioregion, the resilience of the Northern Quoll is dependent on
ensuring the genetic connectivity is maintained through suitable dispersal corridors (Shaw et al. 2022).
10 The Northern Quoll prefer to disperse using drainage lines and watercourses but are resistant to low vegetated habitats
that have high contents of silt and clay (e.g., alluvial, coastal, and hardpan plains) likely due to the increase of predation
risks (Shaw et al. 2022).
11The Northern Quoll will use suitability designed and placed culverts especially in areas that intersect with preferred
drainage line dispersal habitats (Creese 2012).

103
12The foraging and dispersal of the females is 1.5 km and males 2-3 km (average) through the landscape (Southgate
2006:171).
13Species distribution models are available at Species Profiles (SPRAT) (environment.gov.au) and can be viewed spatially
using the Protected Matters Search Tool.
14 An
active burrow is defined a burrow used by a Greater Bilby individual at any time in the past 2 years as defined by
Thompson and Thompson (2008).
15 The forging and dispersal of the females is 1.5 km and males 2-3 km (average) through the landscape (Southgate
2006:171). Applying this avoidance standard for the Greater Bilby will meet Objective 2 of the Recovery Plan for the Greater
Bilby (DCCEEW 2023b) to ensure the area occupied by the Greater Bilby has been maintained or increased.
16 Applying this avoidance standard to dispersal corridors will limit habitat fragmentation and potential fragmentation risks
for the Greater Bilby to meet Objective 3 of the Recovery Plan for the Greater Bilby (DCCEEW 2023b) to ensure the genetic
diversity of the Greater Bilby has been maintained and retains the potential for evolutionary change through adaption and
selection. Greater Bilbies are likely to prefer dispersal through alluvial plain and drainage lines.
17The Greater Bilby will use suitability designed and placed culverts especially in areas that intersect with preferred
drainage line dispersal habitats (Creese 2012).
18 The home range of the Pilbara Python female was found to be up to 365 ha (radius of 1.1 km) (Tutt et al. 2004:25).
20A study found the home range of the Pilbara Python female was up to 365 ha (Tutt et al. 2004:25). Home range sizes for
the species are poorly known but are currently considered to be a minimum of 365 ha. Implementing a local radio-tracking
and/or long-term mark-recapture program will provide greater clarity about local home range sizes and habitats used by
the species. Applying this avoidance standard for the Pilbara Olive Python will meet the conservation priority action to
ensure development activities in areas where the Olive Python (Pilbara subspecies) occurs do not adversely impact on known
populations.
21The Pilbara Olive Python is likely to be susceptible to habitat fragmentation and genetic isolation (Pearson et al. 2013).
The application of the dispersal corridors will limit the potential fragmentation of the species by maintaining connectivity
within the landscape.
22The Pilbara Olive Pythong will use suitability designed and placed culverts especially in areas that intersect with preferred
habitat types such as drainage lines (Creese 2012).
23As outlined as critical habitat in Table 3-8, the Genetic Movement Corridor area is bounded by Fortescue crossing north
of Munjina and bounded in the west by Wittenoom Gorge in the Hamersley Ranges to the Chichester Ranges north-east of
Mulga Downs homestead and in the east by Gudai-Darri mine site to the Chichester Ranges north of Cloudbreak mine site.
See Figure 6-1 for map of corridor.
24Identified as Priority Roosts in the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Conservation Advice (TSSC 2016e) and Permanent, Semi-
permanent in the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Review (Bat Call WA 2021b).
25Genetic Movement Corridor area bounded by Fortescue crossing north of Munjina and bounded in the west by
Wittenoom Gorge in the Hamersley Ranges to the Chichester Ranges north-east of Mulga Downs homestead and in the east
by Gudai-Darri mine site to the Chichester Ranges north of Cloudbreak mine site. See Figure 6-1 for map of corridor.
27The application of the avoidance area around these roosts will align with the primary objective for preventing decline of
the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (TSSC 2016e:8) to protect known and suspected diurnal roost sites, and avoiding activities within

104
close proximity that could cause roost abandonment and fatalities of individuals. A 500 m avoidance area would minimise
impacts to the Category 1, 2 and 3 roosts by applying best practices to mitigate impacts from noise (several hundred
metres), vibration (>150 m if all parameters are known), and artificial lighting impacts (>500 metres: Bat Call WA 2021b).
The 500 m avoidance area will also avoid impacts to critical foraging habitat directly outside the roosts for the Pilbara Leaf-
nosed Bat (TSSC 2016e:5; Bat Call WA 2021b:20).
28 Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats will visit water resources up to 6.1 km after the post-sunset emergence from the Category 1, 2
and 3 roosts and is a known requirement to support the ongoing persistence of permanent and natural roosts within the
Pilbara (Bat Call WA 2021b). The Conservation Advice for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (TSSC 2016e:8) outline a core
avoidance measure to maintain existing natural water pools to encourage long term persistence in a project area.
29Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat will visit water sources within 6.1 km after leaving the roosts and water sources are critical in
supporting the viability of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat colony using the roosts (Bat Call WA 2021b).
31A 500 m avoidance area would minimise impacts to the Category/Priority 1, 2 and 3 roosts by applying best practice to
mitigate impacts from noise (several hundred metres), vibration (>150 m if all parameters are known), human disturbance
(200-250m), dust (few hundred meters), and artificial lighting impacts (>500 metres) (Bat Call WA 2021a). The avoidance
buffer is not to avoid impacts to foraging habitats directly outside the roosts since the species will commence foraging 400-
750m from the roost entrance (Bullen et al. 2023). Applying the avoidance buffer to these roosts will align with the primary
conservation action for the Ghost Bat (TSSC 2016b) to protect roosting sites from mining, human disturbance and collapse.
32Semi-permanent and permanent water sources within 5 km of the roosts are also considered to be important in
supporting the viability of the Ghost Bat roosts (Bat Call 2021a). However, Ghost Bats drinking water has not been observed
but the species will access water sources during nightly foraging.
33 The Ghost Bat will travel up to 12 km to forage over areas of maximum areas of 450 ha (Bullen et al. 2023).
34Preferred Night Parrot sites need to be assessed as a combination of habitats on a landscape scale. Night Parrots are
thought to move across the landscape from tens to hundreds of kilometres (Burbidge 2020). Therefore, it may be necessary
to broaden the study area to greater than 2 km outside of the development envelope.
35Interim night parrot habitat statement (Burbidge 2022) may also be used to assist habitat characterisation and
identification of critical landscape features for the Night Parrot.
36Exact locations of the Night Parrot detections must be provided to the department to support the referral and
assessment but may need to be redacted for public review to ensure confidentially and reduce the risk of illegal collection
of the species.
38The home range of the Night Parrot is dependent on landscape composition, quality, and scale of critical habitat types
that will be location specific. Applying this avoidance standard for the Night Parrot for known populations will align with the
conservation strategy (TSSC 2016d) to … identify and secure further populations across its former range. Protecting and
maintaining existing habitat is more beneficial for this species than offsetting or attempting to restore degraded habitat
(Leseberg et al. 2023).
39Species distribution models are available at Species Profiles (SPRAT) (environment.gov.au), and can be viewed spatially
40 Active breeding structure means the detection of a used nest tree or artificial structure by the Grey Falcon.

105
41The Grey Falcon will use a breeding structure for 1-3 years to raise young (yearlings from previous year alongside new
hatchling in some cases) and will move to a different breeding structure within the home range after 2-3 years, only if
foraging remains viable and breeding structures are present (Schoenjahn 2018).
42 The foraging habitat must align with habitats in Table 3-14 and be able to support avian prey.
43Grey Falcon will remain within a 10-20 km radius circle home range of a breeding/roosting as long as the area continues
to support the persistence of avian prey and contains potential breeding structures for future use by the species.
44Princess Parrots are active, noisy and conspicuous in the morning and evening but difficult to observe in the middle of the
day when they rest quietly amongst foliage to escape the heat (Carter 1993; Higgins 1999). It is usually somewhat wary
(Carter 1993; Higgins 1999), but at times it may tolerate close approach (Forshaw 2002).
46Princess Parrots are known to congregate and breed within the same stand of trees (but in separate nest hollows). These
trees may be used in subsequent years to support breeding by the species (Pavey et al. 2014). Therefore, without further
evidence of patterns of habitat use and migration movements (i.e., return to the same breeding habitat), all nesting trees
within a grove will need to be avoided. Applying the avoidance standard will align with the primary conservation action for
the Princess Parrot (TSSC 2018) to maintain breeding habitat.
47Princess Parrots are known to congregate and breed within the same stand of trees (but in separate nest hollows). These
trees may be used in subsequent years to support breeding by the species (Pavey et al. 2014). Therefore, without further
evidence of patterns of habitat use and migration movements (i.e., return to the same breeding habitat), all nesting trees
within a grove will need to be avoided. Applying the avoidance standard will align with the conservation priority for the
Princess Parrot (TSSC 2018) to maintain breeding habitat.
48A study found a strong association between active burrows of the Great Desert Skink with active termite nests with
preference for higher ground cover (Dennison 2015:109).
50The home range for the Greater Skink is dependent on landscape variables and the number of burrows in the area.
Applying this 500 m buffer to active burrows will ensure that the draft recovery objective (Indigenous Desert Alliance 2022)
to ensure range of the Tjakura remains stable will be met.
51The Greater Skink has been known to disperse to develop new burrows from 0 to 4 km (but up to 9 km) from a family
burrow system (Dennison 2015, McAlpin 2011). By applying this applying this avoidance standard will meet the
conservation objective (TSSC 2016a) to increase the extent of suitable habitat for the species and retain its evolutionary
potential across its range.
lii
Restoration: aims to return an ecosystem to its original state before impact or to the same standard as an ideal reference
site.
liii Recreation: recreates elements of an ecosystem (e.g., artificial habitat structures).
liv
Rehabilitation: aims to restore elements of an ecosystem, acknowledging there has been permanent alteration and
complete restoration to a specific prior condition is not possible.
lv Revegetation: replanting vegetation (may be part of restoration or rehabilitation).

106

Pilbara Bioregion - EPBC Act Policy Statement - Consultation - January 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pilbara Bioregion - EPBC Act Policy Statement - Consultation - January 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pilbara Bioregion: EPBC Act Policy Statement

Pilbara Bioregion: EPBC Act

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

© Commonwealth of Australia 2023

Ownership of intellectual property rights

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

1.1 Policy Objectives

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

1.2 Pilbara Bioregion

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

1.3 Policy Scope

• Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 – Matters of National Environmental Significance

1.4 Regulatory Pathways

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Referral of a proposed development

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

The Assessment Process

• Early engagement with the department has taken place.

• Application of this policy to the proposed development is effectively demonstrated in

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

2.1 Conservation Objectives

2.2 Mitigation Hierarchy

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

2.3 Information Standards

2.3.1 Avoidance Information Requirements

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

2.3.2 Mitigation Information Requirements

2.3.3 Offset Information Requirements

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3 Pilbara EPBC Act Listed Threatened

Source: Species Profile and Threats Database, Commonwealth of Australia 2023

3.1 Habitat Definitions

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3.2 Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus)

Survey Extent and Requirements

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3.2.2 Habitat definitions

Habitat type Habitat Description

3.2.3 Avoidance standards

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3.2.4 Further Avoidance

3.2.5 Mitigation measures

Threat and impact pathways Recommended mitigation measures

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Threat and impact pathways Recommended mitigation measures

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Threat and impact pathways Recommended mitigation measures

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

Threat and impact pathways Recommended mitigation measures

3.2.6 Residual significant impact

Residual significant impact calculation

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3.3 Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis)

Survey Extent and Requirements

Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

3.3.2 Habitat definitions

Habitat type Habitat Description

Critical Habitat Burrowing habitats (DCCEEW 2023b; Cramer et al. 2017)