AQUATIC ECOLOGY TECHNICAL REPORT - Arrow Energy

180 Pages·2012·9.23 MB·English

O
AQUATIC ECOLOGY
TECHNICAL REPORT
ENTER HERE
BACK TO CONTENTS
Technical Report
Arrow Energy Bowen Gas Project
Surface Water and Aquatic Ecology
Assessment

October 2012

Arrow Energy Pty Ltd
Contents
Executive Summary vii
Glossary of Terms x
Abbreviations/Acronyms xi
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Objectives 1
1.3 Project Overview 2
2 Relevant Legislation 3
2.1 Relevant Commonwealth Legislation 3
2.2 Relevant State Legislation 3
2.3 Regional Guidelines 7
2.4 Other Relevant Guidelines, Strategies and Plans 7
3 Assessment Methods 9
3.1 Study Area 9
3.2 Desktop Study 11
3.3 Field Surveys 11
3.4 Impact Assessment Methodology 22
4 Description of Existing Aquatic Ecosystems 26
4.1 Locality Description 26
4.2 Results of Desktop Study 26
4.3 Results of Field Surface Water and Sediment Quality 29
4.4 Results of Field Aquatic Ecology Surveys 55
4.5 Summary of Existing Aquatic Ecosystems 72
4.6 Sensitivity of Aquatic Environmental Values 74
5 Baseline Impact Assessment 77
5.1 Application of Impact Magnitude Criteria 77
5.2 Summary of baseline impact assessment 89
6 Avoidance, Mitigation and Management Measures 90
6.1 Avoidance Measures – Project Constraints 90
6.2 Generic Mitigation Measures 91
6.3 Specific Mitigation Measures 104
7 Residual Impact Assessment 108
7.1 Application of Specific Mitigation Measures 108
8 Cumulative Impact Assessment 115
8.1 LNG Projects 116
8.2 Transport Infrastructure Projects 117
8.3 Resource Development Projects 117
8.4 Infrastructure and Energy Projects 120
8.5 Summary of Cumulative Impact Assessment on Aquatic Environments 121
9 Inspection and Monitoring 124
9.1 Monitoring 124
9.2 Inspection 125
10 Conclusions 127
11 References 129
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au ii
Appendix A – Survey Sites 132
Appendix B – Macroinvertebrate Assemblages 137
Appendix C – Fish Assemblages 142
Appendix D – Ecological characteristics of fish species recorded from the
Bowen sites 144
Appendix E – Ecological characteristics of turtle species potentially existing
within the study area 153
Appendix F – Details of database searches 158
Appendix G – Threatening processes and potential issues 166
List of Tables

Table 3-1 Aquatic ecology sampling sites during the 2011-12 field surveys. 13
Table 3-2 Fish species previously recorded within the study area based on
desktop reviews. Fish species naturally restricted to the Fitzroy River
Basin are highlighted in grey and those naturally restricted to the
Buredekin River Basin highlighted in orange. 18
Table 3-3 Fish sampling techniques deployed at each site during the early wet
2011 surveys. 20
Table 3-4 Fish sampling techniques deployed at each site during the late wet
2012 surveys. 20
Table 3-5 Turtles species previously recorded within the study area based on
desktop reviews. Turtle species naturally restricted to the Fitzroy
River Basin are highlighted in grey. 21
Table 3-6 Criteria used to evaluate the sensitivity of aquatic ecosystems and the
magnitude of impacts potentially arising from the Bowen Gas
Project. 25
Table 4-1 Available meteorological data for the study area. 27
Table 4-2 Water quality guidelines applicable to each of the sites in this study. 30
Table 4-3 Water quality objectives applicable for each site under the relevant
guidelines. 30
Table 4-4 ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) Interim sediment quality guidelines for
relevant parameters 46
Table 4-5 Predictor variables used in AusRivAS modelling of invertebrate data,
Combined early wet 2011 and late wet 2012 surveys. 58
Table 4-6 Species richness thresholds for AusRivAS assigned OE scores. 59
Table 4-7 OE50 scores, OE50 Signal scores and AusRivAs risk bands for sample
sites, Combined early wet 2011 and late wet 2012 surveys. 60
Table 4-8 Crustaceans caught during early wet 2011 and late wet 2012 surveys
of the study area. 62
Table 4-9 Turtles caught during early wet 2011 and late wet 2012 surveys of the
study area. 71
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au iii
Table 4-10 Aquatic macrophyte species recorded across the sampling sites
during the early wet October 2011 and late wet 2012 surveys. 72
Table 5-1 Baseline impact of site clearing and levelling 78
Table 5-2 Baseline impact track construction. 79
Table 5-3 Baseline impact of vehicles and machinery. 81
Table 5-4 Baseline impact of waste on aquatic ecosystems. 82
Table 5-5 Baseline impact of gathering and gathering line trenching. 84
Table 5-6 Baseline impact of drilling operations. 85
Table 5-7 Baseline impact of emergency releases. 86
Table 5-8 Baseline impact of operation and maintenance. 87
Table 5-9 Maintenance of access tracks and overhead power lines 88
Table 5-10 Summary of pre-mitigation significance assessment. 89
Table 6-1 Constraints framework. 91
Table 6-2 Buffer zone designations. 104
Table 7-1 Residual impacts of site clearing and levelling on aquatic ecosystems. 108
Table 7-2 Residual impacts of construction of access tracks on aquatic
ecosystems. 109
Table 7-3 Residual impacts of vehicles/plant/machinery near waterways on
aquatic ecosystems. 109
Table 7-4 Residual impacts of waste management on aquatic ecosystems. 110
Table 7-5 Residual impacts of gathering line and gathering line trenching on
aquatic ecosystems. 110
Table 7-6 Residual impacts of gathering line/access road creek crossings on
aquatic ecosystems 110
Table 7-7 Residual impacts of drilling operations on aquatic ecosystems. 111
Table 7-8 Residual impacts of altered surface water hydrology on aquatic
ecosystems. 112
Table 7-9 Residual impacts of operation and maintenance activities on aquatic
ecosystems. 112
Table 7-10 Residual impacts of maintenance of access tracks and overhead
power lines on aquatic ecosystems. 113
Table 7-11 Summary of pre-mitigation and residual impacts 114
Table 8-1 Potential impacts of significant projects within and adjacent to the
study area. 122
Table 11-1 Abundance of macroinvertebrate taxa recorded at the sampling
sites, early wet (October) 2011. 137
Table 11-2 Abundance of macroinvertebrate taxa recorded at the sampling
sites, late wet (April-May) 2012. 139
Table 11-3 Abundance of fish taxa across the Bowen Basin study area, early wet
(October) 2011. 142
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au iv
Table 11-4 Abundance of fish taxa across the Bowen Basin study area, late wet
(April-May) 2012. 143

List of Figures
Figure 3-1Bowen Gas project study area 10
Figure 3-2 Aquatic ecology sampling sites. 14
Figure 3-3 Significance Impact assessment matrix for freshwater aquatic
ecosystems within the freshwater aquatic ecology study area. 23
Figure 4-1 Dissolved oxygen concentrations (% saturation) during early and late
wet field surveys. 33
Figure 4-2 Electrical conductivity across the survey sites during early and late
wet season sampling. 34
Figure 4-3 Field turbidity across the sampling sites during early and late wet
season surveys. 34
Figure 4-4 pH during early and late wet field surveys 35
Figure 4-5 Electrical conductivity across the study area during the early wet
season 2011 and late wet season 2012 survey period. Note: During
late wet sampling, water level had fallen to near baseflow
conditions, hence the baseflow EC guidelines from the FBWQO’s 36
Figure 4-6 Suspended solids across the study area during the early wet season
2011 and late wet season 2012 field surveys 36
Figure 4-7 Turbidity across the study area during the early wet season 2011 and
late wet season 2012 field surveys. 37
Figure 4-8 Total hardness across the study area during the early wet season
2011 and late wet season 2012 field surveys. 38
Figure 4-9 Total alkalinity across the study area during the early wet season 2011
and late wet season 2012 field surveys. 38
Figure 4-10 Ternary diagrams of major anions (left) and major cations (right) at
each of the sampling sites during the Early wet season 2011 (blue
data) and Late wet season 2012 (brown data) field surveys. Note
that the scale is a relative (%) comparison 39
Figure 4-11 Sulphate concentrations across the sampling sites during the early
wet season 2011 and late wet season 2012 field surveys 40
Figure 4-12 Box and whisker plots for key soluble metals 41
Figure 4-13 Box and whisker plots for key total metals species 43
Figure 4-14 Total nitrogen concentrations in water samples 45
Figure 4-15 pH of sediments across the study area during early and late wet
sampling 47
Figure 4-16 Moisture content of sediments across the study area during early
and late wet season sampling. 48
Figure 4-17 Nickel concentrations in sediments within the study area, as
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au v
compared with the ISQG trigger value 49
Figure 4-18 Aluminium concentrations in sediments 50
Figure 4-19 Arsenic concentrations in sediments within the study area, as
compared with the ISQG trigger value 50
Figure 4-20 Barium concentrations in sediments, early and late wet seasons. 51
Figure 4-21 Chromium concentrations in sediments, early and late wet seasons. 52
Figure 4-22 Iron concentrations in sediments early and late wet seasons 52
Figure 4-23 Manganese concentrations in sediments, early and late wet seasons 53
Figure 4-24 Vanadium concentrations in sediments, early and late wet seasons 54
Figure 4-25 Zinc concentrations in sediments, early and late wet seasons. 54
Figure 4-26 Macroinvertebrate species family richness for all sites. 56
Figure 4-27 Classification analysis of sites for each sampling season in the Bowen
Basin based on similarities calculated from abundance data. The
4 different Clusters with Bray-Curtis similarities less than 30% have
been identified using different colours. 57
Figure 4-28 Relative proportion of fish species recorded across the sampling sites
early wet (October 2011). 64
Figure 4-29 Relative proportion of fish species recorded across the sampling sites
late wet (April/May 2010). 64
Figure 4-30 Number of fish species by site during the early wet (October 2011)
and late wet (April-May 2012) field surveys. 65
Figure 4-31 Abundance of fish by site during the early wet (October 2011) and
late wet (April-May 2012) field surveys. 66
Figure 4-32 Classification analysis of fish assemblages between sampling sites
based on similarities calculated from abundance data. The 5
different Clusters with Bray-Curtis similarities less than 40% have
been identified using different colours. 67
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au vi
Executive Summary
Background
Arrow Energy Pty Ltd (Arrow) is preparing a voluntary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Bowen Gas Project under the Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994 which
has been determined to be a controlled action under the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the Commonwealth assessment being completed
under the Bilateral Agreement.
Ecosure Consulting Pty Ltd have been engaged by Arrow Energy Pty Ltd (Arrow) to
undertake an aquatic ecology and surface water quality assessment as part of the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed development of
the Bowen Gas Project (the Project).
Study Methods
The Project commenced with an intensive review of existing data and information for the
whole of the study area. The study area includes the Project area as well as selected
surrounding catchments to enable comparison of aquatic habitat within and adjacent the
Project area. This comparative analysis is integral to quantifying and understanding changes
over time, if any, on aquatic habitats associated with project activities.
Twenty five potential aquatic ecosystem sampling sites were initially identified within or
adjacent to the project area. Following field reconnaissance, the number of sites to be
physically sampled was reduced to a final 10 sites (based on accessibility, presence of
water and representativeness of sites to those within or adjacent to the project area) that
were sampled during early wet (October) 2011 surveys. Following the acquisition of the Bow
Energy lease areas in January 2012 an additional five sites were included within the late wet
(April-May) 2012 surveys. However, one site previously surveyed in October 2011 was omitted
in April-May 2012, due to land access constraints. The 15 sites selected are considered
representative of ecological conditions across the study area.
Field surveys included physico-chemical water quality, sediment sampling and analysis, fish
and macroinvertebrate surveys, aquatic vegetation audits, rapid assessment techniques for
riparian health and geomorphological processes. Data interpretation included modelling,
univariate and multivariate statistical analyses.
Study Findings
Field surveys confirmed the desktop assessment findings that aquatic ecosystems within the
study area are moderately modified by agriculture and mining activities and are in
moderate health. One species, Rheodytes leukops (Fitzroy River Turtle), listed under
Commonwealth environmental legislation was not recorded in the surveys but is known to
exist within the area. Three fish species of conservation interest, Macquaria ambigua oriens
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au vii
(Fitzroy River subspecies of Golden Perch), Scleropages leichardti (Southern Saratoga) and
Scortum hillii (Leathery Grunter) were recorded in the study area.
Statistical analyses of the field data confirm that the ecological communities (fish,
macroinvertebrates and aquatic flora) were similar at most sites within the study area.
Habitat type and quality was also relatively uniform across the study area, with differences
between stream size the main distinguishing factor between sites.
Project Constraints
A significance assessment approach has been used to determine the sensitivity of aquatic
ecology values within the project development area and the resulting levels of constraint
that should be placed on various project activities. This assessment involved intensive
literature and database reviews to identify aquatic species, communities or habitats of
conservation significance that are likely to be present within the study area, with targeted
field surveys to fill knowledge gaps in relation to identified values.
On the basis of this assessment, the areas of environmental sensitivity and the associated
degree to which the project activities should be constrained by aquatic ecosystem values
were determined as:
· No aquatic ecosystems of particularly high sensitivity designated “no go” zones as
part of this project scope were identified.
· Areas containing significant aquatic ecosystems that may be impacted upon by
some aspects of the construction and operations have been designated “highly
constrained”. Lower impact activities such as wells, gathering and access
infrastructure may be undertaken in these areas, under appropriate environmental
controls. Short-term impacts associated with construction are acceptable in these
areas, with environmental controls such as strategic selection of disturbance
locations and timing of works to avoid wet periods in addition to normal
environmental controls.
· Aquatic ecosystems of moderate sensitivity are designated “moderately
constrained”. Higher impact activities (e.g. construction of water treatment facilities)
may be undertaken in these areas provided appropriate environmental controls are
in place.
· Aquatic ecosystems of low sensitivity are designated “moderately constrained”. The
rationale is that because of the connectivity of water flowing down stream networks,
every site is linked to every other site, so activities at one site can affect other sites,
especially downstream areas.
· Areas of land beyond the immediate vicinity of streams and their associated riparian
zones are generally considered to be of low sensitivity and construction and
operations are permissible in compliance with standard environmental procedures.
As construction activities will require small scale clearing of vegetation to facilitate well or
gathering line installation, the adoption of appropriate riparian buffer zones along all
Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au viii
watercourses is essential. These are intended to protect water quality, aquatic habitat and
riparian habitat values. This incorporates a 100m exclusion zone with an additional 100m for
5th or higher order streams designated as restricted to low impact activities.
Riparian Bank Buffer Watercourse Sample Site
Stream Order Definition
Width (m) Stream Order Examples
5th or higher Convergence of two 4th 100 Mackenzie River (7th), Isaac
order streams or higher. River (5th), Suttor River (5th)
3rd or 4th Convergence of two 2nd 100 Bee Creek (3rd), Scotts Creek
order (3rd order) or two (3rd), Stephens Creek(4th)
3rd order streams (4th
order).
1st or 2nd Streams with no 100 Sagittarius Creek (2nd), Suttor
tributaries (1st order) or Creek (2nd), Taurus Creek (2nd)
convergence of two 1st
order streams (2nd order)
Remaining aquatic ecosystems associated with ephemeral, semi-permanent and
permanent waterways are moderately sensitive. Higher impact activities (e.g. construction
of water treatment facilities) may be undertaken in these areas provided site specific
environmental controls are in place.
With the exception of one turtle species (Rheodytes leukops - Fitzroy River Turtle), aquatic
ecosystem values pose few constraints on the construction and operation of the project.
Throughout most of the project development area the construction and operation of the
Project as currently proposed will have minimal impact on aquatic ecosystems at a local,
regional, national or international scale, provided a common set of environmental
management standard operating procedures are implemented.
This report excludes assessment of hydrological and/or water quality impacts associated
with beneficial use of treated or untreated coal seam water. These considerations are
outside the scope of this specific EIS study and have therefore not been considered as part
of this assessment.

Aquatic Ecology Technical Report ecosure.com.au ix