Hello all
My sincerest apologies for the length of this “manuscript” but these are
serious issues and I hope I’ll be forgiven for drawing this material out in so
much detail.
I’m seeking to alert birding-aus people to the state of play regarding a
residential subdivision application concerning a 9hectare block of bushland at
Buttaba, in the south-western Lake Macquarie area on the central coast of New
South Wales. I have followed all the procedures for raising objections to the
proposal, including making submissions during an exhibition period for a
development control plan that had to be endorsed by the local council before
any development application concerning the land could be determined. I believe
the reason why the development control plan was considered necessary by the
council, under its Local Environment Plan 2004 (recently gazetted) was because
of a range of threatened species and environmental issues, in particular but
not limited to Swift Parrot, Regent Honeyeater, Glossy Black Cockatoo, Powerful
Owl, Masked Owl, Squirrel Glider, among other animals, and also, centrally,
Black-eyed Susan, Tetratheca juncea, a threatened plant listed under federal
legislation. Unfortunately I do not appear to have had much in the way of
success with my objections and the development application is close to final
approval from the local council. I feel I lack the expertise necessary to do
much in the way of further challenges to the proposal, but this as you might
expect does not make me feel any better about the matter.
I would like to present some brief background material to the birding list for
informational purposes, but I would also greatly appreciate and advice or
assistance anyone can offer in relation to a number of threatened species and
bushland conservation issues as I’m very confused about some aspects of this
matter. Consequently I’m feeling somewhat despondent and I have to say that
although I have tried very very hard to think the whole matter through, there
are a number of elements that I just cannot seem to make sense of in spite of
all my efforts. I’m not at all opposed to development per se, and I have the
utmost sympathy for the developer/landholder in this case as it seems to me
that they have landed themselves an especially significant chunk of bushland in
an area where there are no conservation management plans in effect designed to
secure conservation outcomes for the locality. So if anyone can clarify any of
my points/question, it would be greatly appreciated, and I hope this material
will prove useful for those of you facing similar situations in other parts of
Australia, and in other parts of New South Wales coastal districts.
The subject land of 9 hectares is part of a larger area of land and is divided
into two “catchments”: the northern (the subject land of 9 hectares), and
southern (of an area of more than 25 hectares). These two areas are adjacent,
separated by a fairly narrow sealed road, and feature surprisingly diverse and
intact vegetation communities, though there is some degradation of areas in the
northern catchment due to trail bike and 4wd activity.
Both catchments connect directly and are part of parcels of bushland to the
west zoned appropriately for conservation purposes, and the northern catchment
also adjoins another parcel of bushland to the north which unfortunately is
also zoned for future residential development. Altogether there is an area of
bushland that is diverse in terms of significant habitat, and very rich in
botanical terms, making up more than 50 hectares. In combination with the
western areas of Crown Land zoned for conservation, this represents a crucial,
quite extensive area of remaining natural bushland in an area where there has
been excessive and damaging residential development in close proximity to the
lake over many years.
I’m wondering if anyone out there can tell me whether the species and
vegetation communities in the area of any real importance in terms of Swift
Parrot and Regent Honeyeater, among others. For example, in the area of Crown
Land zoned for conservation adjacent and to the west of the southern catchment
there is a moist gully area with some cave-like rock structures and overhangs,
and some very large, very old, hollow-supporting trees: brown stringybark, a
number of angophora (smooth barked apple) the size of whales, some big,
hollow-ridden scribbly gum, among other species, and a somewhat different
understorey and mid-storey structure to the other connected areas of bushland.
I recently found a feather in this area with a distinctive chevron pattern
which I associate with Powerful Owl, and in April of 2003 I heard night birds
calling to one another which sounded like the birds in question. I have no
means however of proving the origins of the feather, but the Flora and Fauna
Assessments, though they agree that Powerful Owl may forage in the subject
land, suggest that there are no areas nearby with the “correct” vegetation
structures likely to support roosting and nesting sites for Powerful Owl. As
you can see, I’m inclined to disagree and still feel very strongly that the
Flora and Fauna Assessment should have noted this location and the possibility
that it may very well support Powerful Owls roost/nest requirements. But it’s
not on the subject land of course. In any case my concerns have not appeared
to make much of an impact! Anyone good with feathers? I mean it could be from
a Kookaburra I suppose, but I can’t test this story out.
There are extensive areas dominated by scribbly gum, bloodwood and a range of
different banksia species that are spectacular when flowering at various points
in the year, including winter. I’ve not trespassed of course, so I’ve only
been able to closely inspect areas of Crown Land, or make observations of the
subject land from the road areas, but what I’ve noted seems very rich indeed.
Towards and along the lower riparian areas there are a few huge swamp mahogany
and smaller specimens, and various creek bank sedges and paperbarks. Are these
vegetation types important in terms of Swift parrots and Regent Honeyeaters?
In some places there are groves of Allocasuarina species with chewed seed cones
beneath them: is it only Glossy Black Cockatoos that eat Allocasuarina seeds,
or do yellow-tailed black cockatoos eat them too?
There are also extensive ranges of native grasses, and in some places the
grasses are so thick and twisted and shrouded in leaf litter that they form
thick domes, providing shelter and protection for a range of birds and other
animals. I have pictures if anyone’s interested. I recently had a close look
at some spring flowering orchids in the area and snapped one flower that an
authority on the subject suggests is an unidentified Caladenia (aff) catenata,
but I don’t know how to go about having this sighting registered in the
National parks and Wildlife Atlas (no GPS for example, and I’m not so clever at
detailed map coordinates!) On another occasion in the early evening I heard a
great deal of wing flapping going on under one such grass/shrub dome but was
not able to get a fix on the bird as it flew off into more dense grass/shrub a
short distance away! I thought it was some ground dwelling owl, but apparently
there are none likely in this region. Again, my lack of expertise is glaringly
obvious here, but you should be able to see why I remain very concerned.
This area is also unique in that it is within 1km of the lakeshore, and forms
an important bushland connection from the lake to forests towards the mountains
to the west. I am still very confused as to why this area was zoned from rural
to residential by the council in 2000, considering all the issues of
biodiversity, conservation and connectivity, and what I thought was an
obligation of councils to preserve as far as possible remaining natural
vegetation, especially that which may be of importance in sustaining viable
populations/communities of threatened species. I’m no expert as I said, but
cannot quite understand how this matter has come to pass. For example, I
thought that the New South Wales government had introduced a statewide planning
instrument, called SEPP 71, under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
1979, which links several pieces of legislation, notably coastal zone
environmental protection, and which applies to land within 1km of sensitive
coastal locations – in this case Lake Macquarie. But I have heard that this
SEPP 71 has not yet come into effect in the local government area because the
minister has not “signed off” the maps showing the coastal zones around the
lake, and this means that instead of the minister, it is still the council who
is the consent authority, and the council can lawfully approve the development
at this point in time. This confuses me considerably, as, again my sense is
that a range of issues need to be more fully investigated in terms of
possible/likely overall long term impacts on the subject land and adjoining
land zoned for conservation. I’m really worried that there is considerable
likelihood of resultant intensification of key threatening processes (clearance
of vegetation, weed invasion and destruction of vegetation due to and
associated with trail bike and 4wd activity, more pressure on remaining
bushland due to removal of trees for firewood, which has already had some
impact on adjoining areas, among other things). I am not a lawyer!!!
Another point I’m confused about involves how development applications are
dealt with in terms of state and federal legislation dealing with threatened
species and key threatening processes. In the course of this development
application negotiations between the council and developers resulted in a trade
off whereby, as the developers’ initial Flora and Fauna Assessment (there have
been at least three amendments to their Flora and Fauna Assessments) which
covered both the north and south catchments and indicated threatened species
issues in line with Eight part test requirements under the state-based
Threatened Species Conservation Act in NSW. The council however agreed to
support the submission of the development application covering the northern
catchment without the need for a species impact statement because the developer
agreed to retain the southern catchment for conservation purposes to offset the
impact on Black-eyed Susan removed from the northern catchment. A practical
outcome perhaps! But at a later point there was some attempt to sell off
blocks that had been surveyed in the southern catchment, so the offset factor
no longer seems to apply, yet there does not appear to be any scope for
requiring a new species impact statement in support of the development
application for the northern catchment. The council are acting on the original
application submitted in early 2002, with amendments made over the past two
years. I still don’t quite understand why the focus is for the most part only
on the plant Tetratheca juncea, given that there is some likelihood that other
threatened species, including a number of birds are present in and around the
area, and therefore there seems some prospect of impacts deriving from this
development affecting adjoining bushland areas, some of which are zoned for
conservation but are already subject to threatening processes traditionally
very difficult to manage/eliminate/police (trail bikes, removal of firewood,
weed invasion, feral honeybee activity, rubbish dumping among others).
The developers did the right thing early on in February 2002 under federal
legislation, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act,
where they applied successfully for referral to have the proposal deemed as not
being a controlled action on the basis that only a small percentage of
Black-eyed Susan would be affected, less than 10% of the local population: this
document is available from the Department of Environment and Heritage site
listing all applications and referrals under the Act. But I’m still confused:
I can’t see how this point makes sense given that the southern catchment of
some 25 hectares and more, and the area to the north of the northern catchment
of similar or larger area, are zoned for future residential development which
means that the local population of the plant is likely to suffer dire
consequences, as will birdlife once all of these areas are subdivided and
developed.
So, I am now at a loss as to what I can do to have my concerns fully
investigated, and I guess I should throw in the towel so to speak, but I've
lived in this area all my life – I’ve watched as the local environment has
deteriorated, I used to have to duck to avoid Latham’s snipe in areas around a
swamp at Toronto for instance, but now they no longer visit - and find it very
hard to let it go! I would prefer to be able to have the council defer giving
development consent until all the above issues are investigated in more detail,
but I fear time for such action has passed.
Anyone interested in this matter or with any advice are welcome to email me at
any time for more information, and again I hope this material is useful for
some of you out there facing similar issues.
Thanks all
Craig Williams
--------------------------------------------
Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
www.birding-aus.org
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
