WAlls Upgrades

Document Set ID: 1169481
Version: 1, Version Date: 01/03/2019

From: Buck, Robert (Parks)
Sent: 3 Mar 2019 23:04:00 +0000
To: Leanne Rabjohns
Subject: FW: PA\19\0176 - Walls of Jerusalem toilet and car park
Attachments: Attachment 1 North Barker NVA Report 2.pdf
Hi Leanne,
I understand Ian has provided the appropriate proof of delegations.
The boot wash stations already exist at most track heads throughout the TWWHA and is in place at this
site. The station consists of a 20 litre tank constructed within the frame and plumbed into a fine spray
nozzle that directs approx. 15 ml of spray into the soles of peoples boots as they scrub them on the
stations boot brushes. This is repeated for each boot. Users generally squeeze the applicator bulb twice
per boot with a total of 60ml used per person. There is no run off from these stations.
Attached is the North Barker report.
If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact me on the numbers below.
regards
Robert Buck
Parks and Reserve Manager (GWT / Mersey)
Northern Region
Tasmania Parks and Wildlife Service
PO Box 46 Kings Meadows TAS 7249
General Enquiries: 1300 TASPARKS (1300 827 727)
Desk: 61(0) 3 67772206
Facsimile: 61 (0) 3 63448109
Mobile: 0427 328 973
Email: Robert.Buck@parks.tas.gov.au
Web: www.parks.tas.gov.au
From: Colley, Chris (Parks)

Sent: Friday, 1 March 2019 1:52 PM
To: Leanne Rabjohns <Leanne.Rabjohns@mvc.tas.gov.au>
Cc: Sather, Ian (Parks) <Ian.Sather@parks.tas.gov.au>; Flood, Paul (Parks)
<Paul.Flood@parks.tas.gov.au>; Buck, Robert (Parks) <Robert.Buck@parks.tas.gov.au>
Subject: RE: PA\19\0176 - Walls of Jerusalem toilet and car park

Walls of Jerusalem car park upgrade
Walls of Jerusalem
Natural Values Assessment

18th October 2018
For Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service

PWS011
Andrew North anorth@northbarker.com.au Philip Barker pbarker@northbarker.com.au

163 Campbell Street Hobart TAS 7000 Telephone 03. 6231 9788 Facsimile 03. 6231 9877
Walls of Jerusalem carpark upgrade - Natural Values Assessment
1. Project Details
Background: The Parks and Wildlife Service Tasmania (PWS) are planning to extend and
upgrade the Walls of Jerusalem carpark, including the construction of a toilet, bootwash
station, and walker registration booth. The Tasmanian PWS have commissioned North
Barker Ecosystem Services (NBES) to undertake a survey of natural values on the site to
inform the Reserve Activity Assessment process, and to advise on how to minimise
impacts to threatened species and communities.
Since the initial survey, an overflow car park area has been included in the development.
Importantly, both this area and the original survey area are the same vegetation
community, and given that the survey did not reveal any threatened species, or
potential for threatened species, it was reasonably assumed that the overflow area was
equivalent in this regard. Furthermore, the overflow car park area was cleared for the
original car park and consists of regrowth vegetation (primarily Leptospermum lanigerum
and Acacia dealbata) that is highly unlikely to contain values for threatened species. It
was therefore decided that this area not warrant an additional on-ground survey.
Date of Field Survey: 29th March 2018.

Field Survey, Report and Photos: Richard White and Don Thomson
Methods: Plant species composition of the potential impact footprint was surveyed using
an area search based on the Timed Meander Search Procedure1. Vegetation was
classified according to TASVEG 3.0 units2.
The Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas database was searched for records of threatened
species and vegetation types within a 5 km radius. The possibility of threatened values
known from within this radius occurring within the impact area has been considered in
the interpretation of results.
The impact assessment of the overflow car park area was based on the information
gathered during the initial survey and aided by aerial imagery and images supplied by
Don Thomson, the project landscape architect.
Limitations: The field survey was undertaken in early autumn. Values that are seasonal
may have been overlooked or absent; the potential for this is considered where relevant
in the discussion. The survey for fauna habitat, including tree hollows and raptors nests,
was done from ground level only.
2. Site Values
Site Characteristics
The site occurs within the Tasmanian Central Highlands3. The elevation of the study area is
approx. 720 m asl. The proposed upgrade is mostly within the footprint of the existing car
park, and the original (and now overgrown) carpark to be used as an overflow car park.
A new entrance road connecting the current car park to the existing road that connects
to the overflow car park is planned, as are a bootwash, registration booth and toilet.
The study area is native forest and the vegetation is in good condition with no declared
or environmental weeds.
Vegetation
The vegetation of the study area is Eucalyptus delegatensis wet forest over
Leptospermum (WDL). The canopy is dominated by regrowth Eucalyptus delegatensis at
~30 m, with E. dalrympleana sub-dominant. The occasional E. amygdalina is also present.
1Goff et al. 1982

2
Kitchener and Harris 2013
3 IBRA7 - Peters & Thackway 1998
1 North Barker Ecosystem Services

18_10_2018 PWS011
Most canopy trees are relatively small (< 40 cm diameter at breast height), but a number
of larger trees are present. The understorey is at ~12 m, and is dominated by
Leptospermum lanigerum, Acacia dealbata, and Pomaderris apetala. Dominant ground
cover species are Gahnia grandis, Blechnum nudum and Dianella tasmanica.
WDL is not a listed threatened community under the Tasmanian Nature Conservation Act
2002 (NCA) or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999 (EPBCA).
Figure 1: Location of the study area

18_10_2018 PWS011
Plate 1: WDL vegetation on the eastern boundary of the current car park
Plate 2: WDL understorey

18_10_2018 PWS011
Plant Species of Conservation Significance

Thirty-eight vascular plant taxa were recorded within the study area (Appendix A), all of
which were native species. No threatened flora species were observed.
The Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas indicates no records of threatened flora within 500
metres of the site, and four species are within 5 km (Table 1)4. It is highly unlikely that any
of these four species occur in the study area, or were overlooked in the field survey; see
below for comments on the likelihood of occurance for each species:
Table 1: Known threatened flora observations within 5000 m of the proposed site – SS = Tasmanian Threatened Species
Protection Act 1995, NS = Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, r = rare, e =
endangered
Agrostis australiensis has been recorded from alpine fjaeldmark, damp sclerophyll forests
on moist well-drained soils and from intermittent wetlands in the Central Highlands. The
distribution and habitats of native species of Agrostis are poorly understood because of
recent taxonomic changes. While this species is known from the Walls of Jerusalem (Zion
Vale area), the habitat in that area is markedly different from the study site. It is highly
unlikely that this species occurs in the study area or was overlooked in the field survey.
Amphibromus neesii is found in damp ground around marshes, lagoons, river flats, pools
and streams. There is no chance that this species occurs in the study area as there is no
suitable habitat.
Hovea montana occurs in subalpine grasslands and grassy woodlands, occasionally
extending to grassy/heathy subalpine forests dominated by E. delegatensis, E. pauciflora,
E. gunnii, E. coccifera and E. dalrympleana. While the study area may qualify as
marginally suitable for this species, it is a distinctive plant and is highly unlikely to have
been overlooked during the field survey.
Rhytidosporum inconspicuum occurs in open grassy heath at several montane sites in the
Central Highlands and in wetter grassy, sedgy or heathy areas, sometimes in eucalypt
woodland, at lower altitudes in the Eastern Tiers. In the Walls of Jerusalem this species
occurs in markedly different habitat to that of the study area; it is highly unlikely that this
species occurs in the study area or was overlooked in the field survey.
Threatened Fauna Habitat
The fauna habitat assessment established that the proposed impact footprint does not
contain any observable habitat elements that could be considered critical to the
persistence of threatened fauna species at a local level or higher. A number of trees with
relatively small hollows were observed (< 15 cm diameter); these are unsuitable for
masked owl - the only threatened, hole-nesting species in the area. No ground dens or
burrows were observed.
4
DPIPWE 2018

18_10_2018 PWS011
Figure 2: Map of the study area

18_10_2018 PWS011
Species known within 500 m

The Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas5 lists the TSPA or EPBCA threatened species previously
recorded from within 500 m of the study area (Table 2).
Table 2: Threatened fauna previously recorded within 500 m of the study area – SS = Tasmanian Threatened
Species Protection Act 1995, NS = Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act
1999
The study area is likely to provide foraging habitat for these species; no suitable denning
habitat was observed.
Species within habitat range
The Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas6 lists the TSPA or EPBCA listed species in Table 3 below
as having potential to occur based on habitat range.
Table 3: Potential threatened fauna habitat based on habitat range within 500 m of the study area – SS =
Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995, NS = Commonwealth Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
Comments on these species are as follows:

• Dasyurus maculatus spotted-tailed quoll: The study area is likely to provide foraging
habitat for this species; no suitable denning habitat was observed.
• Aquila audax subsp. fleayi tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle: While the study area may
form part of the foraging range for this species, no nests are known within 5 km of the
study area or considered likely to be impacted by this action. No nests were located
during the survey.
• Tyto novaehollandiae masked owl: Large, mature trees were present within the WDL
community, and while tree hollows were observed in a number of trees, none were
suitable for this species (all observed hollows were < 15 cm diameter). No nests are
known within 5 km of the study area. The core range for this species is below 600 m in
dry sclerophyll forest; the study area is located in wet sclerophyll forest above this
elevation.
• Dasyurus viverrinus eastern quoll: The study area is likely to provide foraging habitat
for this species; no suitable denning habitat was observed.
• Accipiter novaehollandiae grey goshawk: No suitable nesting habitat was observed.
Although the area may occasionally be used for foraging, in most areas the
understorey is too dense.
• Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil: While the study area may form part of the
foraging range for this species, no suitable denning habitat was observed.
• Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle: The study area offers no suitable
foraging habitat, no nests were found, and no nests are known within 5 km of the
study area.
5
DPIPWE 2018
6
DPIPWE 2018

18_10_2018 PWS011
Weeds
No species listed as declared weeds under the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999
were observed on site.
3. Impact Assessment and Scope for Mitigation
Vegetation Communities
The proposal will have no impact to threatened vegetation communities listed under the
Tasmanian NCA or Commonwealth EPBCA.
The existing vegetation community is E. delegatensis wet forest over Leptospermum. The
approximate extent of vegetation clearing, and the potential loss of trees > 40 cm DBH is
as follows7 (see Appendix B for images):
• New entrance road, car park and toilet – 420 m2
• New overflow car park – 842 m2 (Appendix B - Plate 3)
• 1 x Eucalyptus dalrympleana (111 cm DBH) for the new entrance road (Appendix
B - Plate 4)
• 3 x Eucalyptus delegatensis (41 to 103 cm DBH) at the north east entrance to the
existing car park that may need to be removed for safety reasons – the current
design does not impact these trees (Appendix B - Plate 5).
The minor scale of vegetation clearing for this development is insignificant given the
extent of this community in the vicinity.
While the overflow car park area was not surveyed, this area was cleared for the original
car park, and consists of regrowth dominated by Leptospermum lanigerum and Acacia
dealbata, and no large trees (> 40 cm DBH) are expected to be cleared.
Threatened Flora Species
The proposed development is highly unlikely to impact on any threatened flora.
Threatened Fauna Habitat and Trees
The proposed development is highly unlikely to have any meaningfully impact on
threatened fauna habitat.
A number of mature trees with trunk diameters of ~ 1m were located on the site. At this
size they will inevitably provide some fauna habitat although no obvious sizeable tree
hollows were discerned that were suitable for masked owl. Most of these larger trees will
not be affected by the development but one tree with a DBH of 111 cm may be
impacted by the new entrance road. Given no suitable nesting hollows were observed in
this tree, nor any of the other larger trees, the impact is not expected to constitute a
‘significant impact’ under the guidelines of the Commonwealth EPBCA (in relation to the
masked owl), nor to require action under State legislation.
The development is proposed for a site already in use as a car park, or areas that have
been previously cleared, so the proposed extension to the current infrastructure and
vegetation clearing will not result in novel use of the area. Consequently, fauna species
will already be adapted to the presence of the site. The construction phase will bring
short term increase, and a small area of vegetation will be removed; however, this is
unlikely to impact on wide ranging fauna species listed above.
Weeds and plant pathogens
Earthworks on site are likely to stimulate germination of any soil seed present. The use of
machinery and vehicles during construction also brings an increased risk of introducing
others. It is recommended that monitoring for new weed incursions is undertaken on a
7
email on 17/10/2018 from Don Thomson (project landscape architect)

18_10_2018 PWS011
regular basis and appropriate control implemented if introductions are considered a

serious environmental or declared species.
All earth moving machinery should be washed down prior to being brought on site in
accordance with standard wash-down guidelines. This is especially important as the
presence of weeds or pathogens in the car park could provide a source for bushwalkers
to spread them to more susceptible habitats elsewhere in the National Park.
4. Legislative Implications
Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

None, no action required.
Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995

Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1995

Meander Valley Interim Planning Scheme 2013

The site is located in Rural Resource Zone with a Priority Habitat overlay, and is therefore
subject to the Biodiversity Code (E8).
The development does not qualify for exemption under section E8.4 of the code.
Under Habitat and Vegetation Management (section E8.6.1) in the Development
Standards section (E8.6), the following Acceptable Solutions and Performance Criteria
are relevant:
Acceptable Solution
A1.1 Clearance or disturbance of priority habitat is in accordance with a certified
Forest Practices Plan or;
A1.2 Development does not clear or disturb native vegetation within areas identified as
priority habitat.
These are not met by the current development. Comments on the Performance Criteria
are follows:
P1 Clearance or disturbance of native vegetation within priority habitat may be allowed

where a flora and fauna report prepared by a suitably qualified person demonstrates
that development does not unduly compromise the representation of species or
vegetation communities in the bioregion having regard to the:
a) quality and extent of the vegetation or habitat affected by the proposal, including the
maintenance of species diversity and its value as a wildlife corridor; and
The area of disturbance on site is expected to be <0.5 ha; the clearing of an area this size
will not compromise the representation of WDL in the bioregion.
b) means of removal; and
We are not aware to the means of removal on site.
c) value of riparian vegetation in protecting habitat values; and

18_10_2018 PWS011
No riparian vegetation is present on site.
d) impacts of siting of development (including effluent disposal) and vegetation

clearance or excavations, in proximity to habitat or vegetation; and
We are not aware of these details. However, we understand that the indicative location
of the registration booth, and the toilet are in areas that are currently disturbed/cleared.
e) need for and adequacy of proposed vegetation or habitat management; and
Given the small scale of the development it is anticipated that minimal habitat will be
required.
f) conservation outcomes and long-term security of any offset in accordance with the
General Offset Principles for the RMPS, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and
Environment.
No offsets are required for this development.
5. References
Goff, F.G, Dawson, G.A. and Rochow, J.J. (1982). Site examination for threatened and
endangered plant species. Environmental Management 6 (4) pp 307-316.
Kitchener, A. and Harris, S. (2013). From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s

Vegetation. Edition 2. Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and
Environment, Tasmania.
Peters, D. & Thackway, R. (1998). A New Biogeographic Regionalisation for Tasmania.

Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, Hobart.
DPIPWE (2018). Natural Values Report_21_March_2018, DPIPWE, Natural Values Atlas,

Threatened Species Section, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and
Environment, Hobart.

18_10_2018 PWS011
6. Appendix A: Vascular Plant Species list

Status codes:
ORIGIN NATIONAL SCHEDULE STATE SCHEDULE
i - introduced EPBC Act 1999 TSP Act 1995
d - declared weed WM Act CR - critically endangered e - endangered
en - endemic to Tasmania EN - endangered v - vulnerable
t - within Australia, occurs only in Tas. VU - vulnerable r - rare
Sites:
1 WDL - E436377, N5374801 27/03/2018 Richard White
Site Name Common name Status

DICOTYLEDONAE
APIACEAE
1 Hydrocotyle hirta hairy pennywort
ASTERACEAE
1 Bedfordia salicina tasmanian blanketleaf en
1 Cassinia aculeata subsp. aculeata dollybush
1 Euchiton japonicus common cottonleaf
1 Olearia lirata forest daisybush
1 Olearia stellulata sawleaf daisybush
1 Olearia viscosa viscid daisybush
1 Senecio linearifolius var. linearifolius common fireweed groundsel
CAMPANULACEAE
1 Wahlenbergia sp. bluebell
FABACEAE
1 Pultenaea juniperina prickly beauty
LAMIACEAE
1 Prostanthera lasianthos var. lasianthos christmas mintbush
MIMOSACEAE
1 Acacia dealbata subsp. dealbata silver wattle
1 Acacia melanoxylon blackwood
MYRTACEAE
1 Eucalyptus amygdalina black peppermint en
1 Eucalyptus dalrympleana subsp. mountain white gum
dalrympleana
1 Eucalyptus delegatensis subsp. gumtopped stringybark en
tasmaniensis
1 Leptospermum lanigerum woolly teatree
OXALIDACEAE
1 Oxalis sp. woodsorrel
PITTOSPORACEAE
1 Billardiera longiflora purple appleberry en
1 Pittosporum bicolor cheesewood

18_10_2018 PWS011
PLANTAGINACEAE
1 Plantago paradoxa hairtuft plantain en
PROTEACEAE
1 Hakea lissosperma mountain needlebush
1 Lomatia tinctoria guitarplant en
RHAMNACEAE
1 Pomaderris apetala common dogwood
ROSACEAE
1 Acaena sp. sheep's burr
RUBIACEAE
1 Coprosma nitida mountain currant
THYMELAEACEAE
1 Pimelea drupacea cherry riceflower
VIOLACEAE
1 Viola hederacea ivyleaf violet
MONOCOTYLEDONAE
CYPERACEAE
1 Gahnia grandis cutting grass
JUNCACEAE
1 Juncus bassianus forest rush
LILIACEAE
1 Dianella tasmanica forest flaxlily
1 Drymophila cyanocarpa turquoise berry
POACEAE
1 Australopyrum pectinatum prickly wheatgrass
1 Poa sp. poa
PTERIDOPHYTA
BLECHNACEAE
1 Blechnum nudum fishbone waterfern
1 Blechnum wattsii hard waterfern
DENNSTAEDTIACEAE
1 Pteridium esculentum subsp. esculentum bracken
DICKSONIACEAE
1 Dicksonia antarctica soft treefern

18_10_2018 PWS011
7. Appendix B: Additional images
Plate 3: This area of regrowth is the site of the original carpark. This vegetation will be removed for the overflow car park (image and text annotation is by Don
Thomson the project landscape architect).

18_10_2018 PWS011
Plate 4: Eucalyptus dalrympleana of 111 cm DBH (on left) that may need to be removed for the new entrance road. The tree on the right is < 40 cm DBH (image
and text annotation is by Don Thomson the project landscape architect)

18_10_2018 PWS011
Plate 5: These Eucalyptus delegatensis range from 41 to 103 cm DBH. They are not scheduled for removal as part of the design but may need to be assessed for
safety reasons and removed (pers. comm Don Thomson the project landscape architect, image and text annotation is by Don Thomson the project landscape
architect).

18_10_2018 PWS011

WAlls Upgrades

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

WAlls Upgrades

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Document Set ID: 1169481

Version: 1, Version Date: 01/03/2019

Attached is the North Barker report.

From: Colley, Chris (Parks)

Document Set ID: 1169775

Natural Values Assessment

For Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service

Andrew North anorth@northbarker.com.au Philip Barker pbarker@northbarker.com.au

Date of Field Survey: 29th March 2018.

1Goff et al. 1982

1 North Barker Ecosystem Services

Figure 1: Location of the study area

2 North Barker Ecosystem Services

Plate 2: WDL understorey

3 North Barker Ecosystem Services

Plant Species of Conservation Significance

4 North Barker Ecosystem Services

Figure 2: Map of the study area

5 North Barker Ecosystem Services

Species known within 500 m

Comments on these species are as follows:

6 North Barker Ecosystem Services

3. Impact Assessment and Scope for Mitigation

7 North Barker Ecosystem Services

regular basis and appropriate control implemented if introductions are considered a

Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995

Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1995

Meander Valley Interim Planning Scheme 2013

P1 Clearance or disturbance of native vegetation within priority habitat may be allowed

b) means of removal; and

We are not aware to the means of removal on site.

c) value of riparian vegetation in protecting habitat values; and

8 North Barker Ecosystem Services

No riparian vegetation is present on site.

d) impacts of siting of development (including effluent disposal) and vegetation

e) need for and adequacy of proposed vegetation or habitat management; and

No offsets are required for this development.

Kitchener, A. and Harris, S. (2013). From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s

Peters, D. & Thackway, R. (1998). A New Biogeographic Regionalisation for Tasmania.

DPIPWE (2018). Natural Values Report_21_March_2018, DPIPWE, Natural Values Atlas,

9 North Barker Ecosystem Services

6. Appendix A: Vascular Plant Species list

Site Name Common name Status

10 North Barker Ecosystem Services

11 North Barker Ecosystem Services

7. Appendix B: Additional images

12 North Barker Ecosystem Services

13 North Barker Ecosystem Services

14 North Barker Ecosystem Services

You might also like