Significant Species Management Plan

Significant Species Management Plan

Sanjiv Ridge

20/09/2021

179-EN-PLN-0002 v4


Sanjiv Ridge

This document is the property of Atlas Iron Pty Ltd (ABN 63 110 396 168) and must not be copied, reproduced, or passed onto any other party in any way without prior written authority from Atlas Iron Pty Ltd. Uncontrolled when printed. Please refer to Atlas Document Control for the latest revision.

Level 17, Raine Square 300 Murray Street Perth WA 6000

T +61 8 6228 8000

E [email protected] W atlasiron.com.au

Authorisation

Version Reason for Issue Prepared Checked Authorised Date

1 Draft for review D. Gleeson C. Knuckey

S. Shute D. Morley

06/08/2021


S. Shute D. Morley

30/08/2021


S. Shute D. Morley

14/09/2021

4 Issued for use D. Morley S. Shute K. Stanbury

E. Gibbens

H. Nielssen 20/09/2021


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v 4 20/09/2021 ii Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version

Executive Summary

Proposal name

Sanjiv Ridge Project:

Stage 1: Sanjiv Ridge Project (formerly Corunna Downs DSO Project) Stage 2: Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 Project

Proponent name Atlas Iron Pty Ltd

Approval references

Stage 1:

Ministerial Statement 1125 EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

Ministerial Statement xxxx – approval pending EPBC 2021/8885 – approval pending

Purpose of the SSMP To avoid where possible, and otherwise minimise, direct and indirect impacts to fauna of conservation significance and their habitats.

Key environmental factor/s, outcome/s and objective/s

This Significant Species Management Plan (SSMP) relates to the factor Terrestrial Fauna, specifically fauna of conservation significance and their habitats. This SSMP has both outcome-based and objective-based management strategies.

The overarching outcome presented in this SSMP is to minimise significant impacts to significant species and their habitats. The specific outcome-based indicators proposed to achieve this are:

Limits on clearing of conservation significant fauna habitat Persistence of conservation significant fauna species Protection of roost sites for conservation significant bat species The specific objective-based indicators proposed to achieve this are: No roadkill incidents of conservation significant fauna No records of introduced fauna within the Development Envelope No record of project-related fires Minimise weeds

Condition clauses

Stage 1:

Ministerial Statement 1125 – no conditions relate to this SSMP

EPBC 2017/7861 – conditions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7

Stage 2:

Ministerial Statement – approval pending EPBC 2021/8885 – approval pending

Key components in the EMP

This SSMP covers management and monitoring commitments for significant fauna across Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Project.

Proposed construction date

Stage 1: commenced April 2020

Stage 2: commencing Q2 2022

EMP required pre-construction?

Stage 2: Yes


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v 4 20/09/2021 iii Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... ii

1 Context, Scope and Rationale ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Proposal ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Key Environmental Factors .................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Condition Requirements ........................................................................................................................ 1

1.4 Rationale and Approach ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.4.1 Survey and Study Findings ................................................................................................................. 5

1.4.2 Key Assumptions and Uncertainties ............................................................................................... 11

1.4.3 Management Framework ............................................................................................................... 12

1.4.4 Rationale for Choice of Indicators and/or Management Actions.......................................... 12

2 Provisions of this SSMP .............................................................................................................................. 13

2.1 Outcome-based Provisions ................................................................................................................. 14

2.2 Objective-based Provisions ................................................................................................................. 21

3 Adaptive Management and Review of EMP ......................................................................................... 25

3.1 Adaptive Management Process ........................................................................................................ 25

3.2 Review ..................................................................................................................................................... 25

3.3 Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................................................... 25

4 Stakeholder Consultation ........................................................................................................................ 26

5 Changes to SSMP ..................................................................................................................................... 27

6 References ................................................................................................................................................ 28


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v 4 20/09/2021 iv Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version

List of Tables

Table 1-1: Key Conditions of EPBC 2017/7861 Relating to this SSMP (Stage 1 only) .................................... 2

Table 1-2: Caves Recorded in the Study Area and their Distance to Nearest Proposed Pit .................... 6

Table 1-3: Conservation Significant Species Confirmed Present .................................................................... 8

Table 1-4: Overview of Management Frameworks in This SSMP ................................................................... 12

Table 2-1: Outcome-based Provisions of This SSMP ......................................................................................... 14

Table 2-2: Objective-based Provisions of This SSMP ......................................................................................... 21

Table 3-1: Roles and Responsibilities for SSMP Implementation .................................................................... 26

Table 4-1: Stakeholder Consultation in Relation to the SSMP ........................................................................ 27

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: Project Location ................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 1-2: Sanjiv Ridge Project Layout ................................................................................................................ 4

Figure 1-3: Fauna Values of the Sanjiv Ridge Study Area .............................................................................. 10

List of Appendices

Northern Quoll Monitoring Procedure

Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring Procedure

Ghost Bat Monitoring Procedure


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v 4 20/09/2021 v Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version

Abbreviations

Atlas Atlas Iron Pty Ltd

BC Act Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

Biologic Biologic Environmental Survey Pty Ltd

DAWE Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

DBCA Department of Biodiversity and Conservation and Attractions

DMIRS Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety

DWER Department of Water and Environment Regulation

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986

EPA Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

GDP Ground Disturbance Permit

GIS Geographic Information System

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance

SSMP Significant Species Management Plan

Glossary

Proposal Stage 2 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project

Stage 1 Project Stage 1 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project (formerly known as the Corunna Downs Project)

Study Area The area over which field surveys for terrestrial fauna have been conducted, includes both Stage 1 and Stage 2 (>15,000 ha), as depicted in Figure 1-2

Development Envelope

The area within which all ground disturbance must occur: Stage 1 (2,263.19 ha) (as approved under EPBC 2017/7861), Stage 2 (246 ha) (Figure 1-2)

Disturbance Footprint

The area of ground disturbance: Stage 1 (423.19 ha) (as approved under EPBC 2017/7861), Stage 2 (125 ha) (Figure 1-2)


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v4 20/09/2021 1 Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version

1 Context, Scope and Rationale

1.1 Proposal

Atlas Iron Pty Ltd (Atlas) is currently operating Stage 1 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project (formerly known as

the Corunna Downs Project) (the Stage 1 Project), an iron ore mine located in the Pilbara region of

Western Australia, approximately 33 kilometres (km) south of Marble Bar (Figure 1-1). Mining is via

conventional open cut, crushing and screening mining methods above the groundwater table.

Associated infrastructure will include open pits, waste rock dumps, mine infrastructure, a borefield

and an accommodation camp.

Atlas is proposing Stage 2 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project (the Proposal), a satellite operation to Stage 1.

The Proposal will involve the above water table mining of approximately 9.45 Mt of iron ore from the

Glen Herring deposit located on an adjacent range 3 km west of Stage 1. The Proposal will consist of

three new pits, four waste rock dumps and a 4 km haul road connecting to Stage 1, where ore will

be hauled for processing. No additional groundwater abstraction is anticipated as water for

activities such as dust suppression will be supplied from Stage 1 using existing infrastructure.

This Significant Species Management Plan (SSMP) covers both Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Project.

Stage 1 of the Project was approved under the Western Australian Environmental Protection Act

1986 (EP Act) (Ministerial Statement No. 1125) and the federal Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (EPBC 2017/7861). Stage 2 (the Proposal) is currently

undergoing assessment under the EP Act and EPBC Act.

1.2 Key Environmental Factors

The key environmental factor considered in this SSMP is terrestrial fauna, specifically ‘fauna of

conservation significance and their habitats’.

1.3 Condition Requirements

Stage 1 of the Project was approved under the EPBC Act in February 2018 and approved under the

EP Act in March 2020. The key conditions of EPBC 2017/7861 relating to this SSMP are shown in

Table 1-1. This SSMP also reflects the performance objectives contained within the Corunna Downs

CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020a) required by condition 4 of EPBC

2017/7861. These performance objectives do not form part of this SSMP, however have been

included to provide an overview of all monitoring for Stage 1 of the Project. The EP Act approval

(Ministerial Statement No. 1125) does not require this SSMP, although condition 6 contains

requirements that will be satisfied incidentally through the implementation of this SSMP. Refer to the

approvals documents and instruments for specifics and definitions of particular terms.

Stage 2 of the Project (the Proposal) is currently under assessment under both the EPBC Act and EP

Act. Accordingly, there are currently no condition requirements for the Proposal.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 1-1: Key Conditions of EPBC 2017/7861 Relating to this SSMP (Stage 1 only)

No. Condition Text

EPBC 2017/7861

1 For the protection of EPBC Act listed species the approval holder must:

(a) Clear no more than 423.19 ha within the disturbance footprint

(b) Clear no more than two nocturnal refuge caves for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat within the disturbance footprint

(c) Implement the Significant Species Management Plan

2 For the protection of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat the approval holder must:

(a) maintain at least a 340 metre buffer around the lateral extent of cave CO-CA-01

(b) maintain at least a 25 metre buffer around the lateral extent of cave CO-CA-03.

3 The approval holder must demonstrate that, both during and after mining ceases at the Razor Back Pit, cave CO-CA-03 and waterhole CO-WS-14 remain suitable habitat available for use by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat.

4 The approval holder must develop and submit a Monitoring Strategy to the Minister for approval. The Monitoring Strategy must be based on:

mapping and monitoring of cave CO-CA-03 by an independent scientific expert(s); and

the collection of at least 12 months of baseline humidity and temperature recordings inside cave CO-CA-03; and

12 months of baseline water quality sampling of waterhole CO-WS-14 for physical and chemical water quality parameters.

The Monitoring Strategy must be designed to demonstrate that the structure of cave CO-CA-03 remains unchanged from the pre-mining structure during mining of the Razor Back Pit. The monitoring strategy must also be designed to demonstrate, unless otherwise justified and approved by the Minister, that:

(a) without anthropogenic supplementation of its water level, waterhole CO-WS-14 has water in it during and continuously for three consecutive years following the cessation of mining of Razor Back Pit; and

(b) the water quality of waterhole CO-WS-14 remains suitable for Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat during and continuously for three consecutive years following the cessation of mining of Razor Back Pit; and

(c) cave CO-CA-03 maintains:

i. humidity between 85–100 per cent relative humidity; and

ii. temperature between 28 and 32 degrees Celsius

during and continuously for five years following cessation of the mining of Razor

Back Pit.

The approval holder must not commence mining in Razor Back Pit until the Monitoring Strategy has been approved by the Minister. The approval holder must implement the approved Monitoring Strategy

7 The person taking the action must maintain accurate records substantiating all activities associated with or relevant to the conditions of approval, including measures taken to implement the Significant Species Management Plan, Offset Strategy and Monitoring Strategy required by this approval, and make them available upon request to the Department. Such records may be subject to audit by the Department or an independent auditor in accordance with section 458 of the EPBC Act or used to verify compliance with the conditions of approval. Summaries of audits will be posted on the Department'swebsite. The results of audits may also be publicised through the general media.

Shaw

Rive

r

Yu le River

Turner Rive r

Coo

ngan

Riv

er

Pear Creek

Six M

ileCree

k

Pardoo Creek

Turner River East

DeGr

eyRi

ver

Beabea Creek

Coonarrie Creek

Miralga Creek

Tab ba Tabba Creek

Wes

t Strelley River

Edgi n a Creek

Emu Creek

TalgaR

iver

Beebin garra Creek

Pinga Creek

Pilb

addy

Cre

ek

Ridley River

West Yule

River

East Stre

lle

y River

Camel Creek

Mcphee Creek

WarralongC

reek

Cockeraga River

Yule

Riv

er

De Grey River

Turner River

P ear C

reek

Miralga Creek

East Strelley River

Coc

kera

ga R

iver

Marble Bar

Port Hedland

Great

No

rthernH

wy

Marble Bar Rd

Gold

sworthy

Rd

Hillsid

e-M

arbl

eB

arRd

North

P ole Rd

Hills ide-Woodstock Rd

Yandeyarra Rd

Lalla

Roo

khR

d

Marble Bar - Woodstock R d

Goldsworthy-Shay Gap Rd

Shay G

ap Rd

Pardoo R

d

BonneyD

owns-Hillside

Rd

W

him

Creek Rd

Tabba Tabba Rd

7,75

0,00

0 m

N7,

700,

000

mN

7,65

0,00

0 m

N7,

600,

000

mN

7,75

0,00

0 m

N7,

700,

000

mN

7,65

0,00

0 m

N7,

600,

000

mN

750,000 mE700,000 mE

750,000 mE700,000 mE

0 10 205

kilometres

File Name: GIS_3264.aprx

Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 31/08/2021

Projection: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50

Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-1Project Location 1-1

Figure No:

Page size: A3Scale 1:550,000

SANJIV RIDGE ATLAS IRON

Copyright:(c) 2014 Esri

Sanjiv Ridge Stage 1 Development Envelope


Atlas Iron Project Tenements

Towns

Railway Line

Highways

Main Roads

Minor Roads

Maxar

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

786,000 mE784,000 mE782,000 mE780,000 mE778,000 mE776,000 mE774,000 mE772,000 mE770,000 mE




Stage 1 Indicative Footprint


0 1 20.5

Kilometers


Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 20/09/2021


Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-2 Sanjiv Ridge Project Layout 1-2

Figure No:




Sanjiv Ridge


1.4 Rationale and Approach

The implementation of a SSMP for the Project is a direct condition (1c) of EPBC Approval Notification

2017/7861. A SSMP was previously developed, approved and implemented for Stage 1 of the Project

(the existing SSMP) in line with this condition. The Proposal (Stage 2 of the Project) is currently

undergoing assessment under the EP Act and EPBC Act.

An updated SSMP (this document) was developed to replace the existing SSMP and provide

mitigation measures that span both Stages of the Project. Additionally, this SSMP includes references

to the relevant management and monitoring measures outlined in the Corunna Downs CO-CA-03

and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020a), which is a strategy required by condition 4 of

EPBC 2017/7861. The specific objective of this SSMP is to avoid where possible, and otherwise

minimise, direct and indirect impacts to significant fauna and their habitat.

This SSMP has been prepared with reference to the ‘Instructions on how to prepare Environmental

Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans’ (EPA, 2020). The fauna of

conservation significance that are the focus of this SSMP are those which the Project has the most

potential to impact, namely, the northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus), Pilbara leaf-nosed bat

(Rhinonicteris aurantius), ghost bat (Macroderma gigas) and Pilbara olive python (Liasis olivaceous

barroni). It is important to note that the controls to be implemented as part of this SSMP are

expected to also mitigate impacts to other species of conservation significance which are not

expected to be significantly impacted by the Project.

1.4.1 Survey and Study Findings

Eleven field assessments focussed on terrestrial vertebrate fauna (including MNES) have been

undertaken for the Project since 2014 (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b, 2019c, 2019d, 2020b, 2021a, 2021b,

2021c, 2021e; MWH, 2018a, 2018b). All of these field assessments were undertaken within the Study

Area, which is a larger area encompassing the Stage 1 Project Development Envelope and the

Proposal Development Envelope. Additionally, two vertebrate fauna impact assessments have been

completed for the Project, one that covers Stage 1 (MWH, 2016) and one that covers Stage 2

(Biologic, 2021d), as well as a monitoring strategy completed to satisfy condition 4 of EPBC

2017/7861. Of the 11 field assessments completed, seven represent monitoring surveys undertaken to

satisfy requirements under the existing SSMP, three represent baseline surveys used to identify

significant fauna occurring within the Project area, and one represents a detailed analysis used to

inform the Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020a).

1.4.1.1 Habitats

Eleven broad habitat types have been identified and mapped over the Study Area, comprising

Rocky Ridge and Gorge; Drainage Line; Riverine; Granite Outcrop; Stony Rises; Rocky Foothills;

Spinifex Stony Plain; Ironstone Ridgetop; Granitic Uplands; Calcrete; and Spinifex Sandplain (MWH,

2018b) (Figure 1-3). All bar one of these habitat types (Granite Outcrops), are located in the Stage 1

Development Envelope. Four of these habitat types are mapped across the Stage 2 Development

Envelope: Ironstone Ridgetop; Rocky Ridge and Gorge; Stony Rises and Rocky Foothills.

1.4.1.2 Habitat Features

Numerous key habitat features, in the form of water features and caves, have been recorded within

the Study Area. Many of these provide high value habitat to species of conservation significance.

A total of 14 water features have been recorded in the Study Area, including four within the Stage 1

Development Envelope and four within or immediately adjacent to the Stage 2 Development


Sanjiv Ridge


Envelope (Figure 1-3). Six of these are groundwater fed and provide significant foraging habitat for

multiple species occurring in the Study Area, including the northern quoll, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and

Pilbara olive python.

A total of 41 caves have been recorded within the vicinity of the Project, including 11 within the

Stage 1 Development Envelope and 11 within the Stage 2 Development Envelope (Figure 1-3). Three

of these caves will be cleared for the Project. Of the caves to remain, several are recognised as

providing roosting habitat for the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and the ghost bat (Table 1-2). For the

Pilbara leaf-nosed bat this comprises one permanent diurnal roost (CO-CA-01), one non-permanent

breeding roost (CO-CA-03) and one transitory diurnal roost (CO-CA-05) (Table 1-2). For the ghost bat

this comprises three potential maternity roosts (CO-CA-24, CO-CA-33, CO-CA-35) and 15 day roosts

or potential day roosts (Table 1-2). The remaining caves are, or are likely to be, used as nocturnal

refuges by each species.

Table 1-2: Caves Recorded in the Study Area and their Distance to Nearest Proposed Pit

Cave Habitat Value to and Use by

Ghost Bat Habitat Value to and Use by Pilbara

Leaf-nosed Bat

Distance From Cave Entrance to Nearest Proposed

Pit

Stage 1 Development Envelope

CO-CA-02 Potential night roost Nocturnal refuge 111 m

CO-CA-03 Day roost Non-permanent breeding roost* 26 m

CA-CO-05 Day roost Transitory diurnal roost 149 m


CO-CA-08 Night roost Potential nocturnal refuge Removed

CA-CO-10 Potential night roost Nocturnal refuge 270 m



CO-CA-14 Potential night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 219 m

CO-CA-15 Night roost Nocturnal refuge Removed


CO-CA-17 Night roost Nocturnal refuge 242 m

Stage 2 Development Envelope

CO-CA-20 Day roost Nocturnal refuge 53 m^

CO-CA-21 Day roost Nocturnal refuge 30 m^

CO-CA-22 Day roost* Nocturnal refuge 28 m


CO-CA-24 Potential maternity roost* Nocturnal refuge 24 m

CO-CA-25 Potential day roost Potential nocturnal refuge 6 m


CO-CA-27 Day roost* Nocturnal refuge 90 m^

CO-CA-28 Potential day roost Nocturnal refuge 119 m^

CO-CA-29 Potential day roost Nocturnal refuge 144 m^

CO-CA-34 Day roost Potential nocturnal refuge 10 m

Outside Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Envelopes

CO-CA-01 Day Roost Permanent diurnal roost* 344 m



Sanjiv Ridge


Cave Habitat Value to and Use by

Ghost Bat Habitat Value to and Use by Pilbara

Leaf-nosed Bat

Distance From Cave Entrance to Nearest Proposed

Pit



CO-CA-11 Potential night roost Nocturnal refuge 1.5 km

CO-CA-18 Potential day roost Nocturnal refuge 4.9 km

CO-CA-30 Day roost Nocturnal refuge 318 m

CO-CA-31 Day roost Nocturnal refuge 922 m

CO-CA-32 Day roost Nocturnal refuge 1.6 km

CO-CA-33 Potential maternity roost Nocturnal refuge 4.9 km

CO-CA-35 Potential maternity roost Nocturnal refuge 6.0 km

CO-CA-36 Potential night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 1.7 km

CO-CA-37 Night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 960 m

CO-CA-38 Night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 1.6 km

CO-CA-39 Potential night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 2.6 km



CO-CA-42 Day roost Potential nocturnal refuge 5.2 km

CO-CA-43 Potential night roost Potential nocturnal refuge 785 m

* Considered critical habitat ˆ Measured from front of cave only

1.4.1.3 Conservation Significant Species

Seven vertebrate fauna species of conservation significance have been confirmed present in the

Study Area, comprising the northern quoll, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat, ghost bat, Pilbara olive python,

peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), spectacled hare-wallaby (Lagorchestes conspicillatus

leichardti) and western pebble-mound mouse (Pseudomys chapmani) (Table 1-3). Based on

regional records and habitats identified within the Study Area, MWH (2018b) concluded that an

additional two species of conservation significance were considered Likely to occur (Anilios ganei -

DBCA Priority 1; and Long-tailed Dunnart Sminthopsis longicaudata – DBCA Priority 4) and 11 were

assessed as Possible to occur.

Three species were recognised as having the potential to be significantly impacted (as defined by

DAWE) by the Project across the Stage 1 (northern quoll, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Pilbara olive

python) (MWH, 2016) and Stage 2 (northern quoll) (Biologic, 2021d) developments. Biologic (2021d)

concluded that significant impacts to ghost bats could be avoided with the implementation of

suitable management practices. For this reason, ghost bats are included in this SSMP. Further detail

on these four species is below.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 1-3: Conservation Significant Species Confirmed Present

Common Name (Species Name) Conservation Status

EPBC Act In WA1

Northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) Endangered Endangered

Pilbara leaf-nosed bat (Rhinonicteris aurantius) Vulnerable Vulnerable

Ghost bat (Macroderma gigas) Vulnerable Vulnerable

Pilbara olive python (Liasis olivaceus barroni) Vulnerable Vulnerable

Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) - Specially Protected

Spectacled hare-wallaby (Lagorchestes conspicillatus leichardti)

- Priority 4

Western pebble-mound mouse (Pseudomys chapmani) - Priority 4 1 Western Australian conservation status codes.

Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) (Endangered – EPBC Act; Vulnerable – BC Act)

The species has consistently been recorded in the Study Area since 2014 (MWH, 2018b). The species

is likely to occur as a resident, utilising suitable denning sites within Rocky Ridge and Gorge habitat,

and foraging/ dispersing more broadly across other habitats (i.e. Rocky Foothills, Riverine and Major

Drainage Line habitats). Additional breeding/ shelter habitat is also occasionally present within small

instances of the Rocky Foothills habitat (i.e. in small rocky breakaways). Habitats such as these form

part of the core habitats critical to the survival of northern quoll (DoE, 2016).

Follow up monitoring surveys were undertaken within the Study Area in 2018 (Biologic, 2019b), 2019

(Biologic, 2019c) and 2020 (Biologic, 2021b). During the 2020 monitoring, it was determined that

approximately 47 individuals occurred across the eight monitoring sites.

Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas) (Vulnerable – EPBC Act / BC Act)

The ghost bat has been recorded from two clusters of caves recorded in the Study Area, one at

Glen Herring (Stage 2) and the other along the main ridge approximately 3 km to the east (Stage 1).

Due to the proximity of the caves, all are likely to form part of a wider home range and be used by

the same individuals. MWH (2018b) recorded the ghost bat on ten occasions from six locations within

the Study Area. Since that time, caves CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03 and CO-CA-05 have been

demonstrated as day roosts for the species (Biologic, 2019a) and are considered of significant value

to the local population.

A targeted survey focussed on the Stage 2 Development Envelope (Biologic, 2021c) later recorded

11 caves which hold potential value for the species, including cave CO-CA-24, which is recognised

as a potential maternity roost, and eight day roosts/ potential day roosts. A regional survey (Biologic

(2021e), later recorded the presence of two additional potential maternity roosts in the Study Area,

but outside of the Stage 1 Development Envelope or Proposal Development Envelope, caves CO-

CA-33 and CO-CA-35.

Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (Rhinonicteris aurantia) (Vulnerable – EPBC Act / BC Act)

Cave CO-CA-01 has been identified in previous surveys as a permanent diurnal roost for the Pilbara

leaf-nosed bat (MWH, 2018b). The population of Pilbara leaf-nosed bats at this cave was estimated

to be approximately 400 to 600 individuals at the time of survey although population size is likely to

fluctuate seasonally. Cave CO-CA-01 is of high conservation value as it is confirmed as a breeding

site for the species (Biologic, in prep.). Cave CO-CA-03 has high conservation value as it has been


Sanjiv Ridge


identified as a non-permanent breeding roost for the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat (MWH, 2018b).

Monitoring conducted in 2017 (MWH, 2018a), 2018 (Biologic, 2019d), 2019 (Biologic, 2019a) and 2020

(Biologic, 2021a) has shown that Pilbara leaf-nosed bat activity at CO-CA-01 and CO-CA-03 has

remained consistently high.

The Pilbara leaf-nosed bat has been recorded from the Stage 2 Development Envelope; however

these individuals are likely to have originated from cave CO-CA-01 or CO-CA-03. Five of the caves in

the Stage 2 Development Envelope were confirmed as nocturnal refuges for the Pilbara leaf-nosed

bat while the remaining four were classed as potential nocturnal refuges for the species.

This species forages within and in the vicinity of roost caves and more broadly along waterbodies

with suitable fringing vegetation supporting prey species (TSSC, 2016). Five priority foraging

categories exist for the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat, namely ‘Gorges with pools (Priority 1)’; ‘Gullies (Priority

2)’; ‘Rocky Outcrop (Priority 3)’; ‘Major watercourses (Priority 4)’ and ‘ Open grassland and

woodland (Priority 5)’ (TSSC, 2016). The Rocky Ridge and Gorge habitat within the Study Area

provides foraging and dispersal habitat for this species and can be considered a Priority 1 habitat.

However, based on the foraging categories above (TSSC, 2016) foraging is likely to occur regularly

within all fauna habitats within the Study Area, particularly where occurring adjacent to or close to

roosting habitat and water features such as pools. All the natural water features both inside and

outside of the Study Area are considered important foraging resources for the Pilbara leaf-nosed

bat.

Pilbara Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus barroni) (Vulnerable – EPBC Act / BC Act)

The Pilbara olive python has previously been recorded on six occasions within the Study Area

(Biologic, 2019b; MWH, 2018b). The first four records were recorded during the time of the baseline

assessment (MWH, 2018b), whilst the remaining two records were obtained during a monitoring

survey focussed on the northern quoll in 2018 (Biologic, 2019b). The majority of records are from with

the Rocky Ridge and Gorge habitat, though one was recorded within Ironstone Ridgetop and the

another in Drainage Line habitat.

Juveniles have been recorded in the Study Area and the population occurring within the Study Area

is recognised as a source population to the surrounding area. The species is likely to be a resident in

the Rocky Ridge and Gorge, Ironstone Ridgetop, Drainage Line and Riverine habitats, where

breeding habitat and shelter sites are available via rocky crevices and tree hollows in some areas,

and where long-term pooling of water occurs. The species may also occur within the Rocky Foothills

habitat to forage or disperse where suitable microhabitats occur or during suitable conditions which

aid foraging and/or dispersal (i.e. following rainfall events when water is likely to be more abundant

throughout the Study Area). Additionally, the 14 water features recorded in the Study Area, are likely

to provide foraging locations for the species.

CO-WS-13CO-WS-14

CO-WS-09

CO-WS-02

CO-WS-03

CO-WS-01

CO-WS-10CO-WS-12

CO-WS-11

CO-WS-05

CO-WS-15

CO-WS-06

CO-WS-08

CO-WS-04 CO-WS-16

CO-WS-17 & 18

CO-CA-15

CO-CA-08CO-CA-01

CO-CA-03

CO-CA-04

CO-CA-18

CO-CA-06

CO-CA-17CO-CA-09

CO-CA-05CO-CA-10

CO-CA-19

CO-CA-07

CO-CA-13

CO-CA-11

CO-CA-12

CO-CA-02

CO-CA-16

CO-CA-20

CO-CA-21

CO-CA-22

CO-CA-23CO-CA-24

CO-CA-25

CO-CA-27

CO-CA-29CO-CA-26 CO-CA-28

CO-CA-30

CO-CA-31

CO-CA-32

CO-CA-34

CO-CA-35

CO-CA-36

CO-CA-37

CO-CA-38

CO-CA-39

CO-CA-40

CO-CA-43

CO-CA-42

Maxar

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN



Caves

WaterFeatures

Fauna Survey Area



Stage 1 Disturbance Footprint


Habitat

Calcrete

Drainage Line

Existing Cleared Areas

Granitic Uplands

Ironstone Ridge Top

Riverine

Rocky Foothills

Rocky Ridge and Gorge

Sandy Plain

Spinifex Stony Plain

Stony Rise

0 1 20.5

Kilometers


Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 16/09/2021


Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-3 Fauna Values of the Sanjiv Ridge Study Area 1-3

Figure No:




Sanjiv Ridge


1.4.2 Key Assumptions and Uncertainties

The key elements within this SSMP (including trigger criteria, threshold criteria, response actions,

monitoring indicators, timing/ frequency of monitoring and management actions) have been based

upon best available expert knowledge and opinion.

General uncertainties applicable to this SSMP include:

The nature of natural fluctuations of the populations of key species, which makes it more difficult

to determine whether population changes are due to natural causes or the Project. Baseline

studies and monitoring will be undertaken at both impact and reference sites to help mitigate

against this uncertainty.

The key assumptions and uncertainties specific to each of the key species considered in this SSMP

are discussed below.

Northern quoll

Consistent timing of baseline studies/ monitoring can be important for this species as northern

quoll populations fluctuate throughout the year. Survival of northern quoll males drops abruptly

post-breeding season from ~75 % to 5.2 % after September (Hernandez-Santin et al., 2019). As

breeding is recorded as occurring in late July to August in the Pilbara (Hernandez-Santin et al.,

2019), surveys should be undertaken prior to complete male die-off. Inconsistent timing of

monitoring between years can add uncertainty when interpreting the results.

A drop in captures of northern quolls can be mistaken for a downwards trajectory when it is

actually within the normal range of population size for that particular population (Thomas, 2020).

This may trigger a threshold criterion even though the drop in captures was not due to the

Project.

Pilbara leaf-nosed bat

Activity is measured by the number of ultrasonic calls detected, and whilst the number of calls

can indicate the number of individuals, this is variable depending on individual movements at a

site.

Consistent timing of monitoring surveys is important because Pilbara leaf-nosed bat activity is

correlated with time of year (particularly in regard to breeding season) and moon phase.

Consistent timing of monitoring surveys which consider the moon phase and time of year can

reduce uncertainty when interpreting the results of monitoring.

Population fluctuations can be caused by natural occurrences such as changes in the humidity

of their roosts due to changes in temperature and rainfall.

Physical access to Pilbara leaf-nosed bat roosts for monitoring purposes can be complicated by

mining activity and the presence of bats within caves. Human access to caves may not always

be possible due to the position of caves with respect to mining operations, or due to the setup of

devices installed to temporarily close caves to bats. Human access can also have the side effect

of disturbing and flushing bats that may be roosting in cave during the day. The proposed

monitoring attempts to balance the desired monitoring outcomes against the impracticalities

and undesired effects of frequent bat roost visits. The Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring

Procedure (Appendix B) contains a cave entry protocol with further detail.


Sanjiv Ridge


Ghost bat

It is difficult and inaccurate to rely on ultrasonic and acoustic recordings of the species to infer

absence and/or activity because, unlike the majority of microbats, ghost bats are proficient in

navigating and hunting visually without needing to constantly echolocate. The deployment of

black sheets for scat monitoring helps to mitigate this uncertainty.

Consistent timing of monitoring surveys with regard to time of year (particularly breeding season)

and moon phase is important to reduce uncertainty when interpreting the reason for differences

in abundance between years. The level of moonlight has the potential to impact ghost bat

behaviour by influencing the time they leave a roost to forage as well as the availability and

behaviour of prey species (Armstrong, 2010; Milne et al., 2005).

Ghost bats move between a number of caves seasonally, or as dictated by weather conditions,

and require a range of cave sites (Hutson et al., 2001), with presence ranging from occasional

visitation to persistence over a long period. Previous studies have suggested that ghost bats

occur in small family groups that move from cave to cave (Armstrong & Anstee, 2000). This

natural movement makes it difficult to determine whether any absence of ghost bats at

monitoring sites between years is due to natural movements or to anthropogenic impacts.

Physical access to ghost bat roosts for monitoring purposes can be complicated by mining

activity and the presence of ghost bats within caves. Human access to caves may not always

be possible due to the position of caves with respect to mining operations, or due to the setup of

devices installed to temporarily close caves to bats. Human access can also have the side effect

of disturbing and flushing bats that may be roosting in cave during the day. The proposed

monitoring attempts to balance the desired monitoring outcomes against the impracticalities

and undesired effects of frequent bat roost visits. The Ghost Bat Monitoring Procedure (Appendix

C) contains a cave entry protocol with further detail.

1.4.3 Management Framework

To ensure that management provisions are proportionate to the risk, Atlas has developed an

outcome-based management framework and an objective-based framework. This SSMP contains

both outcome-based and objective-based elements.

Outcome-based elements are performance-based. They focus on monitoring and evaluating

specific measurable outcomes, usually driven by trigger and threshold criteria. Objective-based

elements relate to monitoring and management actions that are required to achieve an objective.

Table 1-4 briefly lists the key elements of these two frameworks.

Table 1-4: Overview of Management Frameworks in This SSMP

Management Framework

Key Elements of Framework

Outcome-based Trigger criteria, threshold criteria, response actions (trigger level actions and threshold contingency actions), monitoring (including indicators), timing/ frequency of monitoring, and reporting.

Objective-based Management actions, management targets, monitoring and reporting.

1.4.4 Rationale for Choice of Indicators and/or Management Actions

1.4.4.1 Indicators for Outcome-based Provisions of this SSMP

Indicators are the measurable or quantifiable characteristics which are selected for specific

purposes to indicate the health or condition of the environment (EPA, 2020). The indicators used in


Sanjiv Ridge


this SSMP were selected because they were the best available practical measures to determine

whether or not the outcome is being achieved. Two levels of indicators, a) criteria relating to trigger

levels and b) criteria relating to threshold levels are used here.

Indicators were developed specifically for the species of conservation significance with the

potential to be impacted by the Project, specifically the northern quoll, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and

ghost bat. Furthermore, indicators were developed to address, where applicable, conditions set for

the Project (and detailed in Section 1.3) and best management practice for species of conservation

significance in the Pilbara region. This includes:

Key conditions of Ministerial Statement 1125;

Key conditions of EPBC 2017/7861 relating to this SSMP (Stage 1 only); and

The Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020a), which is

required by condition 4 of EPBC 2017/7861.

The outcome-based provisions of this SSMP are set out in Table 2-1.

1.4.4.2 Management Actions for Objective-based Provisions of this SSMP

Management actions are targeted at addressing the identified potential impacts, which includes

key threats. The potential impacts addressed here are those specifically recognised and assessed

within the Corunna Downs project: Vertebrate fauna impact assessment (MWH, 2016) and the Sanjiv

Ridge Stage 2 vertebrate fauna impact assessment (Biologic, 2021d). They have been developed in

consideration of the conservation significant species present or potentially present and potential

impacts of the Project, specialist advice and industry best practices.

The objective-based provisions of this SSMP are set out in Table 2-2.

2 Provisions of this SSMP

The outcome-based provisions of this SSMP are set out in Table 2-1 while the objective-based

provisions of this SSMP are set out in Table 2-2.


Sanjiv Ridge


2.1 Outcome-based Provisions

Table 2-1: Outcome-based Provisions of This SSMP

EPA Factor: Terrestrial Fauna.

EPA Objective: To protect terrestrial fauna so that biological diversity and ecological integrity are maintained.

Outcome: To minimise significant impacts to significant species and their habitats.

Key Environmental Values: conservation significant fauna and their habitats.

Key impacts and risks: Removal, fragmentation or modification of habitat, vehicle strike, introduced species, increased light, increased noise and vibration, dust, altered fire regimes, modification of water regimes

No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:

Trigger Level Actions

Threshold Contingency Actions

Monitoring Indicators, Methods and Locations

Monitoring Timing and Frequency

Reporting Applicable Approvals

Limits on clearing of conservation significant fauna habitat

1 Trigger:

Actual and planned clearing within the Stage 1 Development Envelope exceeds 90% (380.9 ha) of the approved clearing limit

Trigger level actions:

Confirm extent of existing approved ground disturbance via audit of clearing records.

Do not authorise any further GDPs if threshold criterion would be exceeded.

Notify Registered Manager for forward planning purposes.

Indicator:

Actual clearing (i.e. existing ground disturbance).

Clearing authorised by a GDP but not yet undertaken.

Clearing under GDP application.

Methods:

For actual clearing – determine extent of ground disturbance.

For planned clearing – using GIS, determine (i) extent of clearing authorised by GDPs but not yet undertaken, plus (ii) extent of clearing under pending GDP application(s).

Locations:

Within the Stage 1 Development Envelope.

For actual clearing – monthly survey of cleared areas.

For planned clearing – each time a Ground Disturbance Permit (GDP) is applied for or closed out.

Performance against criteria – annually in EPBC compliance report.

Exceedance of threshold criteria – notify DAWE and DWER within 7 days, and report to DAWE and DWER within 21 days.

Clearing – submit an Impact Reconciliation Procedure upon completion of clearing.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Threshold:

Actual clearing within the Stage 1 Development Envelope exceeds the approved clearing limit (423.11 ha)

Threshold contingency actions:

Cease all clearing activities. Check demarcation of areas to be cleared/ not

cleared has been undertaken and is obvious to those on the ground.

Identify likely cause of incident. Report to relevant government authorities (DWER

and DAWE). Undertake corrective rehabilitation, and/or seek

amendment to approvals, in consultation with DWER and DAWE.

Undertake further education and awareness training.

2 Trigger:

Actual clearing within the Stage 2 Development Envelope exceeds 90% (112.5 ha) of the approved clearing limit


Confirm extent of existing approved ground disturbance via audit of clearing records.

Do not authorise any further GDPs if threshold criterion would be exceeded.

Notify Registered Manager for forward planning purposes.

Indicator:

Actual clearing (i.e. existing ground disturbance).

Clearing authorised by a GDP but not yet undertaken.

Clearing under GDP application.

For actual clearing – monthly survey of cleared areas.

For planned clearing – each time a GDP is applied for or closed out

Performance against criteria – annually in EPBC compliance report and Compliance Assessment Report (CAR).

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






Threshold:

Actual clearing within the Stage 2 Development Envelope exceeds the approved clearing limit (125 ha)


Cease all clearing activities. Check demarcation of areas to be cleared/not


Identify likely cause of incident. Implement relevant corrective actions. Report to relevant government authorities (DWER




Methods:

For actual clearing – determine extent of ground disturbance.

For planned clearing – using GIS, determine (i) extent of clearing authorised by GDPs but not yet undertaken, plus (ii) extent of clearing under pending GDP application(s).

Locations:

Within the Stage 2 Development Envelope.

Exceedance of trigger criteria – annually in EPBC compliance report and CAR.


Clearing – every two years in accordance with the Impact Reconciliation Procedure.

Persistence of conservation significant fauna species

3 Trigger:

Northern quoll numbers at an impact site are less than half of the baseline numbers for that site


Identify likely cause. Identify whether trigger criteria exceedance is due to

sampling variability (e.g. influence of variations in numbers recorded against low baseline numbers).

Compare results with control sites or other impact sites where mining is not occurring to determine if decline may be attributable to the project.

Review monitoring procedure, frequency and methods.

Review the implementation of northern quoll management actions within this plan.

Review training and induction programs (inductions will provide detailed information about the northern quoll, including identification of employee and contractor responsibilities).

Review number and locations of fauna signposts.

Indicator:

Northern quoll presence, recorded via:

Camera traps. Scats and tracks. Visual observations.

Methods:

Refer to the Northern Quoll Monitoring Procedure for detailed method and locations (Appendix A).

Locations:

6 impact sites (5 at Stage 1, 1 at Stage 2) and 3 control sites (Appendix A).

Operations – annually during mining.

Post-mining – for a minimum of 3 monitoring events, the first event being in the first year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events occurring every 2 years thereafter.

Performance against criteria – annually in EPBC compliance reports and CAR.

Exceedance of trigger criteria – annually in EPBC compliance reports and CAR.


Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx

Threshold:

Northern quoll are absent from 50% (or more) of impact monitoring sites for more than two consecutive annual monitoring periods


Review and implement trigger level actions where applicable.

Investigate the likely cause. Compare results with control sites or other impact

sites where mining is not occurring to determine if decline may be attributable to the project. If triggered, but the change is recorded regionally (across both impact and non-impact/control sites) and found to be indicative of a regional rather than project related change/impact (e.g. influencing environmental factor) no further corrective action is required.

Undertake any corrective rehabilitation. Investigate whether additional actions could lead to

an increase in northern quolls (e.g. adding habitat features that could function as daytime den sites).


Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






4 Trigger:

A greater than 25% decline of the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat activity levels in CO-CA-01, over two consecutive monitoring periods compared to the average baseline level (2014 to 2018).


Identify whether trigger criteria exceedance is due to sampling variability (e.g. influence of variations in numbers recorded against low baseline numbers).

Identify likely cause. Compare results with control sites or other impact

sites where mining is not occurring to determine if decline may be attributable to the project.

Review monitoring procedure, frequency and methodology.

Review the bat management within this plan. Review training and induction programs . Review number and locations of fauna signposts.

Indicator:

Pilbara leaf-nosed bat presence, recorded via:

Ultrasonic recording. Visual observations.

Methods:

Refer to the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring Procedure for detailed method and locations (Appendix B).

Locations:

13 impact sites and 7 control sites (Appendix B).

Operations – annually during mining.



Exceedance of threshold criteria – notify DAWE within 7 days, and report to DAWE within 21 days.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Threshold:

A greater than 50% decline of the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat activity levels in CO-CA-01 over two consecutive monitoring periods compared to the average baseline level (2014 to 2018).



Investigate the likely cause. Compare results with control sites or other impact

sites where mining is not occurring to determine if decline may be attributable to the project. If triggered, but the change is recorded regionally (across both impact and non-impact/control sites) and found to be indicative of a regional rather than project related change/impact (e.g. influencing environmental factor) no further corrective action is required.

Review blasting requirements near impacted sites.

5 Trigger:

CO-CA-03 is not used as a diurnal roost by Pilbara leaf-nosed bat at least once in the three years following the cessation of mining of Razorback Pit.


Where any of these trigger values are recorded, Atlas will, within one month, review the likely cause (with input by suitably qualified specialists as required) and implement the following corrective actions as appropriate (Biologic, 2020a):

Undertake any practical corrective rehabilitation (e.g. removal of rockfall or sealing of significant fractures), where any identified damage is considered to have the potential to affect ongoing use by bats (i.e. damage which may prevent exit/entry or alter microclimate).

Indicator:

Pilbara leaf-nosed bat presence, recorded via:

Ultrasonic recording; Visual observations.

Methods and Locations:

Cave CO-CA-03 and water feature CO-WS-14. Ultrasonic recordings are analysed quarterly during mining and annually after mining ceases.

Refer to the Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy for detailed method and locations (Biologic, 2020a).

During mining at Razorback pit– continuously.

Post-mining at Razorback pit – continuously for 5 years following the cessation of mining at Razorback pit, or until it can be successfully demonstrated that CO-CA-03 is used as a diurnal roost by the species.



Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Threshold:

CO-CA-03 is not used as a diurnal roost by Pilbara leaf-nosed bat at least once in the five years following the cessation of mining of Razorback Pit.



Investigate the likely cause. Report to relevant Commonwealth and state

agencies (DWER and DAWE).


Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






Protection of roost sites for conservation significant bat species

6 Trigger:

Minor damage to cave CO-CA-03 (i.e. does not impede bat movements/entrance into the cave and rear chamber).


Where any of these trigger values are recorded, Atlas will, within one month, review the likely cause (with input by suitably qualified specialists as required) and implement one or more of the following corrective actions as appropriate (Biologic, 2020a):

Review relevant Blast Management Plan. Commission additional laser scan of cave. Undertake a geotechnical assessment to reassess the

structural integrity and the susceptibility of the cave to structural changes, in light of blast monitoring details and laser scans.

Indicator:

Rockfall.

Changes to structure (i.e. blocked entrance, new entrance created, cave collapsed).

Monitoring:

Visual inspection of caves. Inspections may be conducted in person or remotely (e.g. via cameras) and will look for changes in rockfall on the cave floor as well as any other damage incurred.

Refer to the Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020a) for detailed methods.

Locations:

Cave CO-CA-03.

During mining of Razorback pit

Visual inspection – monthly.

Laser scan – annually between October and March.

Post-mining at Razorback pit

Visual inspections – for a minimum of 3 monitoring events, the first event being in the first year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events occurring every 2 years thereafter. Inspections to be conducted between October and March.

Laser scan – once between October and March in the year following the cessation of mining.

Performance against criteria – annually in the EPBC compliance report.


Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Threshold:

Significant structural damage to cave CA-CO-03 that would prevent ongoing use by Pilbara Leaf-nosed bats.



Investigate the likely cause of damage. Undertake any practical corrective rehabilitation

(e.g. removal of rockfall or sealing of significant fractures), where any identified damage is considered to have the potential to affect ongoing use by bats (i.e. damage which may prevent exit/entry or alter microclimate).

Report to relevant Commonwealth and state agencies (DWER and DAWE).

7 Trigger:

Minor to moderate rockfall within cave CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24, or CO-CA-27 such that the caves remain viable as ghost bat habitat, in the future once mining has ceased.


Review relevant Blast Management Plan. Commission additional laser scan of cave. Undertake a geotechnical assessment to reassess the

structural integrity and the susceptibility of the cave to structural changes, in light of blast monitoring details and laser scans.

Investigate extent and severity of rock fall. Review observed rock fall or other damage against

predicted and recorded blast vibration. Inspect cave for any signs of significant deterioration

in potential value to Ghost Bat. Review and, if necessary, recalibrate blast vibration

model. Recalibrate blast vibration model and/or design next

blast to achieve lower blast vibration at relevant caves.

Indicators:

Rockfall. Changes to cave structure (i.e. blocked entrance, new entrance created, cave collapsed).

Monitoring:

Visual inspection of caves. Inspections may be conducted in person or remotely (e.g. via cameras) and will look for changes in rockfall on the cave floor as well as any other damage incurred.

Locations:

Caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 and CO-CA-27.

Operations –

Before the first blast in Glen Herring pit.

After each blast in the top bench of Glen Herring pit.

After any blast in Glen Herring pit where no inspection has otherwise occurred in the previous 3 months.

Post-mining – for a minimum of 3 monitoring events, the first event being in the first year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events

Performance against criteria – annually in.



Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






Threshold:

Significant structural damage to cave CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24, or CO-CA-27 that would prevent ongoing use by ghost bat as a diurnal roost.


Investigate the likely cause. Undertake any practical corrective rehabilitation

(e.g. removal of rockfall or sealing of significant fractures), where any identified damage is considered to have the potential to affect ongoing use by bats (i.e. damage which may prevent exit/entry or alter microclimate).

Cease blasting near the relevant cave and review blasting parameters.

occurring every 2 years thereafter.

8 Blast vibration at cave CO-CA-03.

Various. Monitoring of blast vibrations from blasting in Razorback pit.

Operations – during each blast in Razorback pit.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Note: this item has been included for visibility but is not intended as a requirement of this SSMP. Refer to the Cave CO-CA-03 and Pool CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy for details.

Refer to the Cave CO-CA-03 and Pool CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy for response actions.

Refer to the Cave CO-CA-03 and Pool CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy for monitoring details.


Refer to the Cave CO-CA-03 and Pool CO-WS-14 Monitoring Strategy for reporting details.

9 Trigger:

Blast vibration at cave CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 or CO-CA-27 is more than 85 mm/s.


Review against predicted and recorded blast vibration.

Recalibrate blast vibration model and/or design next blast to achieve lower blast vibration at relevant cave(s).

Review relevant Blast Management Plan.

Indicator:

Blast vibration velocity (measured as peak component particle velocity or PCPV).


Blast vibration measured at whichever of the following caves is closest to each blasting activity in Glen Herring pit:

CO-CA-22 CO-CA-24 CO-CA-27

Operations – during each blast in Glen Herring pit.

Performance against criteria – annually in EPBC compliance report and CAR.



Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx

Threshold:

Blast vibration at cave CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 or CO-CA-27 is more than 100 mm/s.



Identify likely cause. Cease blasting near the relevant cave and review

blasting parameters prior to further blasting.

10 Trigger:

Ground disturbance occurs within 360 m of cave CO-CA-01 or 70 m of cave CO-CA-03.


Ensure buffers have been demarcated.

Indicator:

Ground disturbance.


Inspection of the following roosts and their buffers:

CO-CA-01 – 340 m CO-CA-03 – 50 m

Operations – monthly survey of cleared areas.


Exceedance of threshold criteria – report to DAWE and DWER within 7 days.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

MS 1125

Threshold:

Ground disturbance occurs within the 340 m buffer for cave CO-CA-01 or the 50 m buffer for cave CO-CA-03.









Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






11 Trigger:

Ground disturbance approaches within 10 m of exclusion areas around Stage 2 ghost bat caves.


Ensure exclusion areas have been demarcated.

Indicator:

Ground disturbance.


Inspection of the following roosts and avoidance buffers:

CO-CA-20 – 50 m CO-CA-21 – 30 m CO-CA-22 – 28 m CO-CA-23 – 25 m CO-CA-24 – 23 m CO-CA-25 – 25 m CO-CA-26 – 25 m CO-CA-27 – 50 m CO-CA-28 – 50 m CO-CA-29 – 50 m

Operations – monthly survey of cleared areas.




Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx

Threshold:

Ground disturbance occurs within avoidance buffers around Stage 2 ghost bat caves.








Quality of habitat for conservation significant bat species

12 Maintenance of water level and quality at pool CO-WS-14.

Various. Monitoring of pool levels and various water quality parameters.

During and after mining. Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861






13 Maintenance of microclimate of Pilbara leaf-nosed bat roosts CO-CA-03.

Various. Monitoring of temperature and relative humidity.

During and after mining. Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861






14 Trigger:

Microclimate (temperature and/or humidity) of caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 or CO-CA-27 falls outside of the 5th and 95th percentile of baseline levels for the cave.


Investigate the likely cause. Review microclimate data in relation to monitoring

data from other regional caves. Review relevant Blast Management Plan. Commission additional laser scan of cave. Review observed rock fall or other damage against

predicted and recorded blast vibration. Inspect cave for any signs of significant deterioration

in potential value to Ghost Bat. Review and, if necessary, recalibrate/revise blast

vibration model and Blast Management Plan.

Indicator:

Microclimate, measured as temperature and relative humidity.

Method:

Measurements of temperature and relative humidity within cave chambers. Results are analysed quarterly during mining and annually after mining ceases.

During mining – every 12 hours.

Post-mining – every 12 hours, for 3 years after mining ceases.



Exceedance of threshold criteria – notify DAWE and DWER within 7 days,

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge


No.

Indicators:

Trigger Criteria

Threshold Criteria

Response actions:






Threshold:

Microclimate (temperature and/or humidity) within caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 or CO-CA-27 falls outside of baseline levels for more than 25% of the time, averaged annually



Report to relevant Commonwealth and state agencies (DWER and DAWE).

Locations:

Caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24 and CO-CA-27.

and report to DAWE and DWER within 21 days.


Sanjiv Ridge


2.2 Objective-based Provisions

Table 2-2: Objective-based Provisions of This SSMP

EPA factor: Terrestrial Fauna.

EPA Objective: To protect terrestrial fauna so that biological diversity and ecological integrity are maintained.

Objective: to ensure that impacts of the Project are minimised, as far as practicable.

Key environmental values: fauna species of conservation significance and their habitats.

Key impacts and risks: habitat loss and degradation, vehicle strike, introduced species, light emissions, noise and vibration, dust, fire and modifications of water regimes.

No. Management Target Management Actions Monitoring Indicators, Methods and Locations



1 No roadkill incidents of conservation significant fauna

Signage identifying the presence of conservation significant fauna will be installed along the roads, where they intersect suitable habitat (specifically Drainage Line Habitat; Riverine Habitat; and Rocky Ridge and Gorge habitat).

The following vehicle speed limits will be imposed and enforced on Project roads: 80 km/ hr north of the Run-of mine pad and 50 km/ hr south of the Run-of-mine pad.

Off-road driving will be prohibited unless otherwise authorised by senior management to minimise potential vehicle strikes.

Night-time vehicle movements will be restricted where possible to minimise potential vehicle strikes.

Indicator:

Road kill incident of conservation significant fauna.

Method:

Visual observation of selected indicators. Photographic record of road kill.

Location:

Project area

Ongoing reporting of vehicle collisions with fauna or observations of dead/injured fauna (all Atlas personnel)

All fauna mortalities and injuries will be reported to the Sanjiv Ridge Environmental Advisor within 24 hours and recorded within Atlas’s incident reporting system.

The Sanjiv Ridge Environmental Advisor will report all conservation significant fauna injuries and mortalities to DBCA within one week.

Performance against management target – annually in the CAR and the EPBC compliance report.

Exceedance of management target – annually in the CAR and the EPBC compliance report.

Reporting on the review and revision of management actions – annually in the CAR and the EPBC compliance report.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge





2A No records of introduced fauna within the camp, landfill and administrative facilities due to poor waste management

For introduced fauna:

All bins storing putrescible waste will have tightly secured lids to avoid fauna attraction and entry.

Domestic pets are prohibited to avoid interactions with or disturbance to conservation significant fauna.

The landfill will be operated and managed in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002. This will include fencing to reduce the potential for attracting fauna.

Implementation of Atlas’s Waste Management (950-EN-PRO-0013) and Landfill Management (950-EN-PRO-0010) Procedures.

Implementation of Atlas’s Introduced Fauna Control Procedure (950-EN-PRO-0009) at all times, including recording all introduced fauna sightings and the implementation of a feral animal control program, as required (i.e., where sightings are regular, if nuisance or dangerous individuals are recorded and/or evidence that species of conservation significance have been preyed on by introduced predators is found).

Indicator:

Sighting of a feral animal presence, recorded via:

Camera traps. Scats and tracks. Visual observations.

Method:

Inspection of Project area for feral animals.

Inspections may be conducted in person or remotely (e.g. via cameras) and will look for evidence of feral animals.

Location:

Project area

Opportunistic reports of introduced fauna sightings.

Monthly inspections of Project area.

Further action and/or monitoring may also be initiated on an as required basis when there have been two consecutive reports of feral animals.

Performance against management target – annually in the EPBC compliance report.

Exceedance of management target – annually in the EPBC compliance report.

Reporting on the review and revision of management actions – annually in the EPBC compliance report.

Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

2B Minimise the number of introduced fauna attracted to the Development Envelope


Exceedance of management target – annually in the CAR and the EPBC compliance report.


Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx

3 No record of project-related fires

Implementation of the following procedures to ensure weeds are controlled, as far as practicable: Ground Disturbance Permit Procedure (950‐EN‐PRO‐

0006). Weed Hygiene Procedure (950‐EN‐PRO‐0015). Hydrocarbon Management Procedure (950-EN-PRO-

0008). Implementation of the following procedures to reduce risk

of fire from project-related activities: Hydrocarbon (and Chemical) Spill Management

Procedure (950‐EN-PRO‐0007). Hot Work Guideline (950-HS-STA-0018).

Indicator:

Record of a project-related fire.

Monitoring:

Review of incident reports for fires.

Locations:

Project area

Monthly inspections of project area and incident reports


Exceedance of management target – in the CAR and the EPBC compliance report.


Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge





4 No new species of weeds recorded within the Development Envelope

Implementation of the following procedures to ensure weeds are controlled, as far as practicable: Ground Disturbance Permit Procedure (950‐HSE‐EN‐

PRO‐0001). Flora Management Procedure (950‐EN‐PRO-0005). Weed Hygiene Procedure (950‐HSE‐EN‐PRO‐0002).

Disturbed areas will be progressively rehabilitated as soon as practicable.

Indicator:

Area of weed infestation in the Project Area.

Monitoring:

Visual Inspection of selected indicators.

Inspections may be conducted in person or remotely (e.g. via drones) and will look for areas of weed infestation.

Locations:

Project area

Biannual check within the Project area for areas of weed infestation.




Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx

5 Persistence of the ghost bat across the Study Area

Implementation of the Sanjiv Ridge Ghost Bat Monitoring Procedure (Appendix C).

Bat roosts will be recorded in a site database and mapped on all mine plans. The database will be accessible to all Atlas departments.

Access to caves known to be occupied by the ghost bat will be restricted.

Atlas will not install barbed-wire fences or other fences that could cause bat entanglements.

Blasting techniques will be implemented to lower vibration levels in the vicinity of sensitive areas. This may include: minimising the number of holes being detonated at any one time within each blast; increasing initiation delays between holes; lowering hole charge weights; and firing to free faces or into broken material where practicable.

Mine site inductions will provide detailed information about ghost bats and employee and contractor responsibilities.

If blasting is to take place between October and February (inclusive), critical habitat caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-23, CO-CA-24, CO-CA-25 and CO-CA-27 will be temporarily closed to ghost bats for the duration of the breeding season (October to December) as recommended by Bat Call (2021) by closing all five caves during September.

Indicator:

Absence of ghost bat activity

Monitoring:

Annual monitoring program (refer to Appendix C)

Locations:

Study area

Annual monitoring program




Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge





6 Minimise impacts of the Project to the Pilbara olive python

Pilbara Olive Pythons will be captured and relocated to suitable habitat by trained personnel should they be encountered during ground disturbance or operational activities.

Inductions will provide detailed information about the Pilbara Olive Python and employee and contractor responsibilities.

Indicator:

Visual observation of the species throughout the Project area.

Opportunistic sightings All fauna mortalities and injuries will be reported to the Sanjiv Ridge Environmental Advisor within 24 hours and recorded within Atlas’s incident reporting system.

The Sanjiv Ridge Environmental Advisor will report all conservation significant fauna to DBCA within one week.


Stage 1:

EPBC 2017/7861

Stage 2:

EPBC 2021/8885

MS xxxx


Sanjiv Ridge


3 Adaptive Management and Review of EMP

3.1 Adaptive Management Process

Adaptive management in relation to the SSMP will include the following:

Monitor and evaluate performance against the outcome-based triggers and thresholds.

Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the management actions against the management

targets.

In the event one or more of the triggers, thresholds or management targets has not been met, or

is considered at risk of not being met, review and adjust the management measures and

monitoring to ensure the objectives are met, based on what is learned from evaluation of the

monitoring data, or any new data that becomes available.

Review any assumptions in light of the monitoring data or any new data that becomes

available.

3.2 Review

Atlas will undertake an initial review of the SSMP once the Proposal has received final environmental

approvals to ensure all approval conditions and commitments are captured in operational

procedures. The SSMP will then be reviewed every 12 months and as required.

All reviews will consider:

Outcomes of monitoring programs.

Implementation and effectiveness of management measures and monitoring programs.

Threshold/trigger criteria and threshold/trigger level actions.

Changes to relevant legislation, policy, guidelines, management plans and industry practices.

Changes to the conservation status of fauna species.

The identification of a conservation significant fauna species not previously confirmed within the

Project area.

Recurring incidents of death/injury to a conservation significant fauna species.

Specialist advice.

Stakeholder consultation.

The current version of the SSMP will continue to be implemented until the relevant authorities

approves the revised version, after which time the revised SSMP must be implemented.

3.3 Roles and Responsibilities

Atlas is committed to managing its activities in an environmentally and socially responsible manner,

as reflected in Atlas’s Health, Safety and Environment Policy (950-HSE-POL-0001). This policy is based

on the recognition that though mining projects affect the environment, prudent planning and

excellence in management can result in most significant impacts being avoided or effectively

mitigated.

Atlas’s indicative roles and responsibilities for the implementation of this SSMP are outlined in

Table 3-1.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 3-1: Roles and Responsibilities for SSMP Implementation

Role Responsibility

Senior Environmental Advisor

Implement and maintain the SSMP.

Review the SSMP.

Annual Audit of Compliance.

Review and update, where applicable, the conservation status of fauna occurring within the Study Area annually.

Sanjiv Ridge Environmental Advisor

Implement monitoring programs.

Maintain monitoring records.

Deliver monitoring/reporting data to the DAWE, DBCA, DMIRS and DWER.

Implement and deliver awareness training programs to personnel, contactors, and visitors.

Record all sightings of or incidents involving conservation significant fauna.

Assess ground disturbance and access applications.

Ensure all personnel involved in fauna surveys are appropriately licensed and qualified.

Investigate any incidents involving conservation significant species and implement findings where relevant.

Construction and Operations Managers

Endorse implementation of the SSMP by Project personnel and contractors.

All personnel, contractors and visitors

Participate in awareness training prior to commencing duties.

Implement SSMP in daily activities, where relevant.

Report all sightings and/or incidents involving conservation significant fauna.

4 Stakeholder Consultation

Extensive stakeholder engagement has been undertaken during the planning, assessment,

consultation and operation of the Sanjiv Ridge Project, with stakeholders including:

Indigenous community groups (Njamal Native Title Claimant Group).

Neighbouring pastoral lease owners (Panorama, Eginbah).

Government agencies (EPA; DMIRS; Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

(DWER); Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH); Main Roads Western Australia

(MRWA); Pilbara Ports Authority; Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE)).

Local Government (Shire of East Pilbara and Town of Port Hedland).

Local community members and organisations (Marble Bar and Nullagine Community Resource

Centre, Marble Bar Progress Association).

Consultation regarding the Sanjiv Ridge Project has included both the Stage 1 Project and the

Proposal. In addition to the consultation completed in relation to the Stage 1 Project, additional

consultation has more recently been undertaken with key stakeholders in relation to the Proposal,

and will continue throughout the life of the Proposal. A limited number of stakeholders have an

interest in the SSMP. A summary of the stakeholder consultation undertaken in relation to the

management of impacts to terrestrial fauna is provided in Table 4-1.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 4-1: Stakeholder Consultation in Relation to the SSMP

Stakeholder Date Issues/Topics Atlas Response

Bob Bullen (bat expert)

1/7/2021

27/8/2021

Potential impacts to Ghost bat from the Proposal, and potential management measures

Management recommendations adopted within SSMP

Njamal Traditional Owners

31/8/2021 to 3/9/2021

Key values within Proposal Development Envelope, involvement in ongoing management and monitoring of impacts

Atlas will aim to maximise the involvement of Traditional Owners in ongoing monitoring activities required under the SSMP

5 Changes to SSMP

All measures of the Corunna Downs SSMP approved for the Stage 1 Project (EPBC 2017/7861) have

been incorporated into this SSMP.

A summary of changes to this SSMP will be provided in this section for any future revisions.


Sanjiv Ridge


6 References

Armstrong, K. N. (2010). Assessing the short-term effect of minerals exploration drilling on colonies of bats of conservation significance: A case study near Marble bar, Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 93(4), 165-174.

Armstrong, K. N., & Anstee, S. D. (2000). The Ghost Bat in the Pilbara: 100 years on. Australian Mammalogy, 22, 93-101.

Bat Call. (2021). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 review. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Bat Call WA, Hillarys, WA.

Biologic. (2019a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and ghost bat monitoring survey 2019. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2019b). Corunna Downs project, northern quoll monitoring survey 2018. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2019c). Corunna Downs project, northern quoll monitoring survey 2019. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2019d). Corunna Downs project, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and ghost bat monitoring survey 2018. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2020a). Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 monitoring strategy. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2020b). Corunna Downs Pilbara leaf-nosed bat roost analysis. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and ghost bat monitoring survey 2020. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021b). Corunna Downs project, northern quoll monitoring survey 2020. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021c). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 development area consolidated terrestrial fauna report. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021d). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 vertebrate fauna impact assessment. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021e). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2: Ghost bat and Pilbara leaf-nosed bat monitoring and regional survey. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (in prep.). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 1: Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and ghost bat monitoring 2021. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

DoE, Department of the Environment. (2016). EPBC Act referral guideline for the endangered northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory: Department of the Environment.


Sanjiv Ridge


EPA. (2020). Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans. Environmental Protection Authority.

Hernandez-Santin, L., Dunlop, J., Goldizen, A., & Fisher, D. (2019). Demography of the northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) in the most arid part of its range. Journal of Mammalogy, 100(4), 1191–1198. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyz092

Hutson, A. M., Mickelburgh, S. P., & Racet, P. A. (2001). Microchiropteran Bats: Global Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN Publication Services Unit,

Milne, D. J., Fisher, A., Irene, R., & Pavey, C. R. (2005). Temporal patterns of bats in the top end of the Northern Territory, Australia. Journal of Mammalogy, 86(5), 909-920.

MWH. (2016). Corunna Downs project: Vertebrate fauna impact assessment. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. MWH Australia, Jolimont, WA.

MWH. (2018a). Corunna Downs project: Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and ghost bat baseline monitoring survey. Prepared For Atlas Iron Limited. MWH Australia, Jolimont, WA.

MWH. (2018b). Corunna Downs project: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. MWH Australia, Jolimont, WA.

Thomas, J. (2020). The ecology of an insular population of northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. (Doctor of Philosophy), Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia.

TSSC, Threatened Species Scientific Committee. (2016). Conservation advice: Rhinonicteris aurantia (Pilbara form), Pilbara leaf-nosed bat. Australian Government, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyz092


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PLN-0002 v4 20/09/2021 Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas ECMS for the latest version



Sanjiv Ridge

17/09/2021

179-EN-PRO-0001 v2


Sanjiv Ridge



T +61 8 6228 8000


Authorisation


1 Issued for review D. Gleeson B. Downing C. Knuckey

31/08/2021

2 Issued for use D. Morley K. Stanbury H. Nielssen 17/09/2021


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PRO-0001 v2 17/09/2021 ii Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas Iron ECMS for the latest version

Table of Contents

1 Background ................................................................................................................................................ 1

2 Overview and Timing ................................................................................................................................. 1

3 Monitoring Method..................................................................................................................................... 2

3.1 Timing ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

3.2 Sites............................................................................................................................................................. 2

3.3 Motion Cameras ...................................................................................................................................... 3

3.4 Active Searching ..................................................................................................................................... 3

3.5 Habitat Assessments ............................................................................................................................... 3

4 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

5 References .................................................................................................................................................. 5

List of Tables

Table 1: Northern Quoll Monitoring Sites .............................................................................................................. 3

List of Figures

Figure 1: Northern Quoll Monitoring Locations ................................................................................................... 4


Sanjiv Ridge

179-EN-PRO-0001 v2 17/09/2021 1 Uncontrolled when printed. Refer to Atlas Iron ECMS for the latest version

1 Background

This Northern Quoll monitoring procedure applies to Stages 1 and 2 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project

(formerly known as the Corunna Downs Project) (the Project).

Monitoring of the Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) for Stage 1 has been underway since 2018.

Prior to this, a two-phase terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey was conducted across the Study Area in

2014 and 2016 (MWH, 2016) (Figure 1); the Northern Quoll was recorded on 38 occasions, indicating

that the species is relatively common in the local area (Atlas Iron, 2017). Follow up monitoring surveys

were undertaken within the Study Area in 2018 (Biologic, 2019a), 2019 (Biologic, 2019b) and 2020

(Biologic, 2021a). During the 2020 monitoring, an estimated 39 individual Northern Quolls were

detected in the Study Area (Biologic, 2021a). Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that a healthy and

consistent population of Northern Quolls has existed in the Study Area since at least 2014.

Furthermore, the monitoring suggests that the Northern Quoll occurs in a high density with a

permanent breeding population occurring across the Study Area.

The features of the Study Area hold significant value to the Northern Quoll (MWH, 2018). The species

is likely to occur as a resident, utilising suitable denning sites within Rocky Ridge and Gorge habitat,

and foraging/dispersing more broadly across other habitats (i.e. Stony Rises, Rocky Foothills, Major

Drainage Line and Riverine habitats). Additional breeding/ shelter habitat is also occasionally

present within small instances of the Rocky Foothills habitat (in small rocky breakaways). These

habitats form part of the core habitats critical to the survival of Northern Quoll (DoE, 2016).

An impact assessment report for Stage 1 indicated that impacts of the Project on the Northern Quoll,

at the local scale, were expected to be moderate (i.e. a permanent population decline is expected

but no there is perceived threat to the population’s persistence) (MWH, 2018). Similarly, the impact

assessment for Stage 2 indicated that the Northern Quoll population occurring within the Project

Area was likely to experience a low to moderate level of impact, primarily from removal,

fragmentation and modification of habitat; vehicle strike; the increased threat of introduced

species. Low level impacts may also be experienced from increased light, noise, dust, altered fire

regimes and modification of water regimes.

One of the outcomes from the impact assessments for Stages 1 and 2 was the recommendation for

the SSMP and the monitoring of species likely to be significantly impacted by the Sanjiv Ridge

Project. Atlas Iron Pty Ltd (Atlas) will therefore implement the following monitoring procedure for

Northern Quoll.

Note that Atlas is proposing an updated version of the SSMP that will result in this monitoring

procedure superseding the Northern Quoll Monitoring Program as contained within the previous

SSMP (Atlas Iron, 2017).

2 Overview and Timing

This monitoring program aims to monitor the presence of Northern Quoll throughout the life of the

Project (including Stages 1 and 2 and its post-mining phase) and to ensure the effectiveness of

Atlas’s management measures for the species. The program will also assist Atlas to build on the

knowledge of the species across its operations for future management planning and approvals.

This monitoring program comprises three components:

Baseline monitoring: The aim of this component is to establish the monitoring program,

monitoring sites and, in conjunction with the results of the baseline survey (MWH, 2018) define the


Sanjiv Ridge


pre-mining population against which the results of the operational monitoring can be

compared. Baseline monitoring surveys have already been conducted in the Study Area in 2018

and 2019, prior to the commencement of mining related activities (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b).

Operational monitoring: The aim of this component is to monitor Northern Quoll population

trends during the operational life of the Project. Results of the operational monitoring are to be

compared with the results of the baseline monitoring and measured against the performance

criteria defined in the SSMP. Operational monitoring will be undertaken annually during mining, in

line with survey recommendations specified by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the

Environment (DAWE) (DoE, 2016). The first operational monitoring was completed in 2020

(Biologic, 2021a).

Opportunistic monitoring: The aim of this program is to provide additional data collected by site

personnel to supplement the annual monitoring program and further the protection of the

Northern Quoll.

Post-mining monitoring: This component will monitor Northern Quoll population trends once

mining activity has ceased and the Project is considered to be in the closure phase. Results of

the post-mining monitoring will be compared with the baseline and operational monitoring and

measured against the threshold criterion defined in the SSMP. The aim of this component is to

assess the long-term viability of the Northern Quoll population within the Study Area. Post-mining

monitoring will be undertaken for at least three monitoring events, the first event being in the first

year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events occurring every two years thereafter. Note: post-mining monitoring of Northern Quoll was formerly presented as rehabilitation monitoring in Atlas Iron (2017).

3 Monitoring Method

3.1 Timing

Monitoring will be undertaken between April and September in line with relevant guidelines (DoE,

2016). The timing (i.e. the month) of the monitoring surveys should be aligned between monitoring

years, where possible.

3.2 Sites

Five ‘impact’ sites have already been used for monitoring in Stage 1 (Figure 1). The five Impact sites

are considered Impact sites as they are within proximity (less than 1 km) to current and anticipated

mining disturbance. The three ‘control’ sites have already been used for monitoring for Stage 1

(Figure 1). These are considered control sites as they are located away (greater than 1 km) from

current and anticipated mining disturbance. The control sites will provide regional and contextual

information against which results from the impact sites can be compared, specifically changes in

estimated population size.

Impact and control sites are located where Northern Quoll have previously been recorded and/or

within core breeding habitat (Rocky Ridge and Gorge, Major Drainage Line, Riverine and Rocky

Foothills as defined by (MWH, 2018) and (Biologic, 2021b)

Where possible, the same sampling sites should be monitored each monitoring survey to maximise

consistency between monitoring events. In the event the original sites cannot be adequately

surveyed (e.g. due to access limitations, recent fire), suitable alternatives meeting the criteria above

will be identified.

The implementation of Stage 2 will result in one of the previous control sites, NQ-TR-01, becoming an

impact site. An additional control site will be established near CO-WS-08 to replace NQ-TR-01 as a


Sanjiv Ridge


control site. NQ-TR-01 will be retained as an impact site. Monitoring sites are listed in Table 1 and

shown in Figure 1.

Table 1: Northern Quoll Monitoring Sites

Site Site Type Habitat

NQ-MC-01 Impact Rocky Ridge and Gorge

NQ-MC-02 Impact Rocky Ridge and Gorge

CO-WS-01 Impact Drainage Line

NQ-SY-SL Impact Riverine

CO-SY-OM Impact Rocky Foothills

NQ-MC-03 Control Rocky Ridge and Gorge

NQ-MC-07 Control Rocky Ridge and Gorge

NQ-TR-01* Control – before Stage 2 commences

Impact – after Stage 2 commences Rocky Ridge and Gorge

CO-WS-08* Control – from 2021 onwards Rocky Ridge and Gorge

* CO-WS-08 will replace NQ-TR-01 as a control due to the latter being impacted by Stage 2.

3.3 Motion Cameras

Ten motion cameras, spaced approximately 100 m apart following the contours of suitable habitat,

will be deployed for a period of four consecutive nights at each site. Each camera will be mounted

on a permanent post, setup during the baseline monitoring survey, ensuring consistent camera

locations between each monitoring survey. Each motion camera will be baited with a non-reward

lure containing universal bait as the attractant. Cameras will be oriented to allow for the

differentiation of individuals using spot patterning (Hohnen et al., 2012). Spot analysis will be used to

differentiate individuals and determine a population estimate for each site. Population estimates

obtained at each site will be compared against the average of the baseline monitoring survey’s to

ensure adherence with the performance criteria defined in the SSMP.

3.4 Active Searching

Active searching (targeted searching and opportunistic observations) will be undertaken at each of

the monitoring sites for a total of one person-hour to obtain supplementary information of Northern

Quoll occurrence. Such data will include direct visual records of Northern Quolls, or indirect records

such as bones, carcasses, tracks and scats. Other species of conservation significance or introduced

predators will also be recorded, if observed.

3.5 Habitat Assessments

Two photo points will also be established at each monitoring site to document any changes to

habitat over time, should information be required to investigate population fluctuations. Photos will

be collected at the time of monitoring. The following parameters will be assessed and measured,

where present:

Vegetation cover, condition and species composition.

The presence or absence of habitat structures.

The presence or absence of water.

Types and level of disturbance.

CO-SY-OM

CO-WS-01

NQ-MC-01

NQ-MC-02

NQ-MC-03

NQ-MC-07

NQ-SY-SL

NQ-TR-01

CO-WS-08

Maxar

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN



Northern Quoll Monitoring Sites

Control Site

Impact Site

Fauna Survey Area



0 1 20.5

Kilometers


Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 31/08/2021


Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-NQ Northern Quoll Monitoring Locations 1

Figure No:




Sanjiv Ridge


4 Reporting

A standalone report at the conclusion of each annual monitoring period will be prepared

documenting the status of Northern Quoll occurrence and abundance within the Study Area. This

report will include the following sections: methods, results, discussion and recommendations.

5 References

Atlas Iron, Limited. (2017). Significant species management plan Corunna Downs. Unpublished report

prepared by Atlas Iron Pty Ltd.

Biologic. (2019a). Corunna Downs project, Northern Quoll monitoring survey 2018. Unpublished report

prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2019b). Corunna Downs project, Northern Quoll monitoring survey 2019. Unpublished report


Biologic. (2021a). Corunna Downs project, Northern Quoll monitoring survey 2020. Unpublished report


Biologic. (2021b). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 vertebrate fauna impact assessment. Biologic Environmental

Survey, East Perth, WA.

DoE, Department of the Environment. (2016). EPBC Act referral guideline for the endangered

Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory: Department of the

Environment.

Hohnen, R., Ashby, J., Tuft, K., & McGregor, H. (2012). Individual identification of Northern Quolls

(Dasyurus hallucatus) using remote cameras. Australian Mammalogy, 35(2), 131-135.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AM12015

MWH. (2016). Corunna Downs project: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey. Unpublished report

prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. MWH Australia, Jolimont, WA.

MWH. (2018). Corunna Downs project: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey. Unpublished report


http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AM12015


Sanjiv Ridge




Sanjiv Ridge

17/09/2021

179-EN-PRO-0002 v2


Sanjiv Ridge



T +61 8 6228 8000


Authorisation


1 Issued for review D. Gleeson, C. Knuckey

31/08/2021

2 Issued for use D. Morley K. Stanbury H. Nielssen 17/09/2021


Sanjiv Ridge


Table of Contents

1 Background ................................................................................................................................................ 1



3.1 Ultrasonic Recordings ............................................................................................................................. 5

3.2 Microclimate Recording ........................................................................................................................ 5

3.3 Habitat Assessments ............................................................................................................................... 5

4 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................... 6

5 References .................................................................................................................................................. 6

List of Tables

Table 1: Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring Sites ............................................................................................... 3

List of Figures

Figure 1: Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring Locations .................................................................................... 4


Sanjiv Ridge


1 Background

This Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat monitoring procedure applies to Stages 1 and 2 of the Sanjiv Ridge

Project (formerly known as the Corunna Downs Project) (the Project).

The Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat has been recorded on multiple occasions throughout the Sanjiv Ridge

area since a detailed baseline survey was completed in 2014 (MWH, 2018b). Many records were

obtained during the subsequent surveys and monitoring completed over the Study Area (Biologic,

2019a, 2019b, 2021a, 2021b, 2021d; MWH, 2018a, 2018b). The monitoring of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed

Bat has been underway since 2017 (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b, 2021a; MWH, 2017).

A total of 14 water features have been recorded in the Study Area, including four within the Stage 1

Development Envelope and four within the Stage 2 Development Envelope. Six of these are

groundwater fed and provide significant foraging habitat for multiple species occurring in the Study

Area, including the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat. These water features will not be cleared.

A total of 42 caves provide value to the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat are known to occur within the Study

Area. Twelve of these are located within the Stage 1 Development Envelope, 11 are located within

the Stage 2 Development Envelope and 19 are located outside both (see Table 1-2 in the SSMP). Of

the caves known, one represents a permanent diurnal roost (CO-CA-01), one represents a non-

permanent breeding roost (CO-CA-03) and one represents a transitory diurnal roost (CO-CA 05). The

remaining caves represent nocturnal refuges or potential nocturnal refuges. Two caves will be

cleared as part of Stage 1 (CO-CA-08 and CO-CA-15) and one will be cleared as part of Stage 2

(CO-CA-34).

One cave (CO-CA-03; non-permanent breeding roost) and one water feature (CO-WS-14; likely

important drinking source) are being monitored as part of the Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-

WS-14 Monitoring Strategy (Biologic, 2020). This monitoring strategy aims to document changes to

the suitability of CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 as habitat for the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat, in line with

condition 4 of EPBC 2017/7861, during and following the cessation of mining at Razorback pit.

One of the outcomes from the impact assessment for Stage 1 was the recommendation for the

SSMP and the monitoring of species likely to be significantly impacted by the Sanjiv Ridge Project.

Atlas Iron Pty Ltd (Atlas) will therefore implement the following monitoring procedure for the Pilbara

Leaf-nosed Bat.


procedure superseding the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and Ghost Bat Monitoring Program as contained

within the previous SSMP (Atlas Iron, 2017).


This monitoring program aims to document changes to the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat population over

the life of the Project and assess the effectiveness of Atlas’ management measures. The program will

also assist Atlas to build on the knowledge of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat across its operations for

future management planning and approvals.

This monitoring program comprises four components:

Baseline monitoring of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat: The aim of this component is to establish the

monitoring program, monitoring sites and, in conjunction with the results of the baseline surveys,

define the pre-mining activity patterns at monitoring caves against which the results of the


Sanjiv Ridge


operational monitoring can be compared. Three baseline monitoring surveys for Pilbara Leaf-

nosed Bat have already been completed in 2017, 2018 and 2019, prior to the commencement

of mining related activities (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b; MWH, 2017).

Operational monitoring of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat: The aim of this component is to monitor Pilbara

Leaf-nosed Bat activity throughout the operational life of the Project. Results of the operational

monitoring are to be compared with the results of the baseline monitoring and measured

against the threshold criterion defined in the SSMP. Operational monitoring will be undertaken

annually during mining. The first operational monitoring survey was conducted from 18 to 30 June

2020 (Biologic, 2021a) in accordance with the Project’s Significant Species Management Plan:

Corunna Downs and associated Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and Ghost Bat Monitoring Program

(Atlas Iron, 2017).

Opportunistic monitoring of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat: The aim of this program is to provide

additional data and information collected by site personnel to supplement the annual

monitoring program, and to generate interest amongst site personnel in the protection of the

Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat.

Post-mining monitoring of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat: This component will monitor Pilbara Leaf-nosed

Bat activity at the Project once mining activity has ceased and the Project is considered to be in

the closure phase. Results of the post-mining monitoring will be compared to the baseline and

operational monitoring and measured against the performance criteria defined in the SSMP. The

aim of this component is to determine Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat recolonisation in cave CO-CA-03

post-mining. Post-mining monitoring will be undertaken for at least three monitoring events, the

first event being in the first year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events occurring

every two years thereafter. Note: post-mining monitoring of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat was formerly presented as rehabilitation monitoring in Atlas Iron

(2017).

3 Monitoring Method

Monitoring will be undertaken between April and September to align with the Northern Quoll

Monitoring Procedure and Ghost Bat Monitoring Procedure. The timing (i.e. the month) of the

monitoring surveys should be aligned between monitoring years, where possible.

Monitoring is currently being undertaken at 11 monitoring sites, comprising six impact sites and five

control sites. The six Impact sites comprise four caves (CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03, CO-CA-05 and CO-CA-

10) and two water sources (CO-WS-01 and CO-WS-03). Control sites comprise three caves (CO-CA-

18, MW-CA-02 and LR-MI-01) and two water sources (CO-WS-08 and CO-WS-13). All have previously

been confirmed to be utilised by the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat.

Ultrasonic recording is the primary monitoring technique that will be used to monitor Pilbara Leaf-

nosed Bats. Monitoring sites are listed in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1. Note control sites LR-MI-01

and MW-CA-02 are not shown on Figure 1; they are approximately 54 km northwest and 45 km west

respectively.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 1: Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Monitoring Sites

Monitoring Site Category Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat Roost Classification

Stage 1

CO-CA-01 Impact Permanent Diurnal Roost*

CO-CA-03 Impact Non-permanent Breeding Roost*

CO-CA-05 Impact Transitory Diurnal Roost

CO-CA-10 Impact Nocturnal Refuge

CO-WS-01 Impact Foraging/ Drinking Source

CO-WS-03 Impact Foraging/ Drinking Source

CO-WS-08 Control Foraging/ Drinking Source

CO-WS-13 Control Foraging/ Drinking Source

CO-CA-18 Control Nocturnal Refuge

Regional Sites

LR-MI-01 (Lalla Rookh) Control Permanent Diurnal Roost

MW-CA-02 Control Permanent Diurnal Roost

* Critical habitat

CO-CA-01

CO-CA-03

CO-CA-10

CO-CA-18

CO-CA-05

CO-WS-01

CO-WS-03

CO-WS-08

CO-WS-13

Maxar

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN



Pilbara Leaf-Nosed Bat Monitoring Sites

Impact Site

Control Site

Fauna Survey Area



0 1 20.5

Kilometers


Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 31/08/2021


Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-PNLB Pilbara Leaf-Nosed Bat Monitoring Locations 1

Figure No:




Sanjiv Ridge


3.1 Ultrasonic Recordings

Ultrasonic sampling will be completed at each monitoring site for Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bats. Ultrasonic

sampling will be completed at the monitoring sites for a total of seven nights each to account for

the high nightly fluctuation in activity. Attempts will be made to align the sampling nights across all

sampling sites.

3.2 Microclimate Recording

Microclimate (i.e. temperature and relative humidity) of each accessible monitoring cave will be

recorded, comprising four impact caves (CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03, CO-CA-05 and CO-CA-10) and one

control cave (CO-CA-18). A microclimate logging device will be installed at each monitoring site at

a position within the roosting chamber, preferably on the cave roof or wall near the roosting area.

Microclimate data will be recorded at six-hourly intervals to provide four readings per day. Baseline

monitoring should cover a continuous period of at least 12 months so as to be as representative as

possible of natural conditions across all seasons. When comparing operational and post-mining

microclimate with baseline microclimate, a number of factors may be relevant in the interpretation

of results, including:

The representativeness of the baseline dataset.

Prevailing weather/climate during the relevant period.

Microclimate data available from any other comparable caves.

Nearby project activities and their potential effects on the microclimate of the cave.

Whether the cave is or has recently been artificially closed to bats.

3.3 Habitat Assessments

Formal cave and habitat assessments have already been conducted at each monitoring site to

characterise the quality and complexity of habitat provided for Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat. The 11

monitoring sites will be revisited during subsequent surveys and assessed for disturbance and

condition (e.g. fire, cracking, rock falls and/or dust accumulation).

Assessments will be undertaken at each monitoring site each survey to document changes at and

surrounding the monitoring site, which may explain changes to Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat presence and

activity. The location of the assessment (including photo points) will be established and permanently

marked during the baseline monitoring survey. This location will be revisited each monitoring survey

thereafter to allow comparisons between surveys to be made. Each assessment will record the

characteristics set out below.

At the entrance of each monitoring site:

Entrance photographs (taken from two established photo monitoring points).

Evidence of structural damage, if any, with reference to the following questions:

o Are there any new open or intersecting joints or fractures along the roof, wall or bedding

planes of the cave?

o Are there any loose rocks or signs of fresh rock fall within the cave? If yes, make notes about

the amount of dust, debris and/or fallen rocks, including an estimation of the size of the

largest rock.

Presence of water.

Presence of target species, including number of individuals and/or secondary evidence such as

scats, evidence of foraging, etc.


Sanjiv Ridge


In the landscape surrounding each monitoring site:

Condition of vegetation.

Presence of water.

Presence of any artificial light sources or other disturbances.

4 Reporting

A standalone report at the conclusion of each monitoring period will be prepared documenting the

occurrence and status of the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat at monitoring sites within the Study Area. This

report will include the following sections: methods, results, discussion and recommendations.

5 References

Atlas Iron, Limited. (2017). Significant species management plan Corunna Downs. Unpublished report

prepared by Atlas Iron Pty Ltd. Atlas Iron,, Limited,

Biologic. (2019a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and ghost bat monitoring survey

2019. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2019b). Corunna Downs project, Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and ghost bat monitoring survey

2018. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. Biologic Environmental Survey, East

Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2020). Corunna Downs CO-CA-03 and CO-WS-14 monitoring strategy. Unpublished report


Biologic. (2021a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and ghost bat monitoring survey

2020. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas Iron Limited. Biologic Environmental Survey, East

Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021b). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 development area consolidated terrestrial fauna report.

Unpublished report prepared for Atlas. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth, WA.

Biologic. (2021d). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2: Ghost bat and Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat monitoring and

regional survey. Unpublished report prepared for Atlas. Biologic Environmental Survey, East Perth,

WA.

MWH. (2018a). Corunna Downs project: Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and ghost bat baseline monitoring

survey. Prepared For Atlas Iron Limited. MWH Australia, Jolimont, WA.

MWH. (2018b). Corunna Downs project: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey. Unpublished report


MWH, Australia. (2017). Corunna downs project: Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and ghost bat baseline

monitoring survey. Prepared For Atlas Iron Limited.


Sanjiv Ridge




Sanjiv Ridge

17/09/2021

179-EN-PRO-0003 v2


Sanjiv Ridge



T +61 8 6228 8000


Authorisation


1 Issued for review D. Gleeson

C. Knuckey

31/08/2021

2 Issued for use D. Morley S. Shute K. Stanbury

H. Nielssen 17/09/2021


Sanjiv Ridge


Table of Contents

1 Background ................................................................................................................................................ 1



3.1 Baseline, Operational and Post-mining Monitoring of Ghost Bat .................................................. 2

3.1.1 Ghost Bat Scat Counts ....................................................................................................................... 5

3.1.2 Ultrasonic Recordings ......................................................................................................................... 5

3.1.3 Habitat Assessments ........................................................................................................................... 5

3.1.4 Microclimate Recording .................................................................................................................... 6

3.1.5 Censuses ............................................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Blast Monitoring........................................................................................................................................ 6

4 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................... 7

5 References .................................................................................................................................................. 8

List of Tables

Table 1: Ghost Bat Monitoring Sites ...................................................................................................................... 3

Table 2: Blast Monitoring ......................................................................................................................................... 7

List of Figures

Figure 1: Ghost Bat Monitoring Locations ............................................................................................................ 4

List of Appendices

Cave Disruption Protocol


Sanjiv Ridge


1 Background

This Ghost Bat monitoring procedure applies to Stages 1 and 2 of the Sanjiv Ridge Project (formerly

known as the Corunna Downs Project) (the Project).

The Ghost Bat has been recorded on numerous occasions throughout the Sanjiv Ridge Project area

since an initial detailed baseline survey in 2014 (MWH, 2018b). Many records were obtained during

subsequent surveys and monitoring completed over the Study Area (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b, 2021a,

2021b, 2021c; MWH, 2018a, 2018b). Monitoring of the Ghost Bat has been underway since 2017

(Biologic, 2019a, 2019b, 2021a; MWH, 2017).

A total of 42 caves providing value to the Ghost Bat are known to occur within the Study Area.

Twelve of these are located within the Stage 1 Development Envelope, 11 are located within the

Stage 2 Development Envelope and 19 are located outside of both (see Table 1-2 in the Significant

Species Management Plan (SSMP) (179-EN-PLN-0001)).

Of the 12 caves in the Stage 1 Development Envelope, two are regarded as diurnal roosts (CO-CA-

03 and CO-CA-05), three are regarded as night roosts (CO-CA-08, CO-CA-15, CO-CA-17), and

seven are considered potential night roosts. Of the eleven caves in the Stage 2 Development

Envelope, one was identified as a potential maternity roost (CO-CA-24), five were identified as

diurnal roosts (CO-CA-20, CO-CA-21, CO-CA-22, CO-CA-27 and CO-CA-34), three were identified as

potential diurnal roosts (CO-CA-25, CO-CA-28, CO-CA-29), and two were identified as night roosts

(CO-CA-23 and CO-CA-26). Two caves will be cleared as part of Stage 1 of the Project (CO-CA-08

and CO-CA-15) and one will be cleared as part of Stage 2 (CO-CA-34).

One of the outcomes from the impact assessment for Stage 2 was the recommendation for the

SSMP and the monitoring of species likely to be significantly impacted by the Sanjiv Ridge Project.

Atlas Iron Pty Ltd (Atlas) will therefore implement this monitoring procedure for the Ghost Bat.


procedure superseding the Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat and Ghost Bat Monitoring Program as contained

within the previous SSMP (Atlas Iron, 2017).


This monitoring program aims to monitor the presence of the Ghost Bat throughout the life of the

Project (including its post-mining phase) to support and confirm the effectiveness of Atlas’s

management measures for the species. The program will also assist Atlas to build on its knowledge of

the Ghost Bat across its operations, to aid in future management planning and approvals.

This monitoring program comprises four components:

Baseline monitoring of Ghost Bats: The aim of this component is to establish the monitoring

program, monitoring sites and, in conjunction with the results of the baseline surveys, define the

pre-mining activity patterns of Ghost Bats at monitoring sites against which the results of the

operational monitoring can be compared. For Stage 1 of the Project, three baseline monitoring

surveys for the Ghost Bat were completed in 2017, 2018 and 2019 prior to the commencement of

mining related activities (MWH 2017, Biologic 2019a, b). Impact and control sites have been

identified for Stage 2 of the Project; baseline monitoring surveys were undertaken for these sites

in January and July 2021 (Biologic, 2021c, in prep.).

Operational monitoring of Ghost Bats: The aim of this component is to monitor Ghost Bat activity

throughout the operational life of the Project. Results of the operational monitoring are to be


Sanjiv Ridge


compared with the results of the baseline monitoring and measured against the performance

criteria defined in the SSMP. Operational monitoring will be undertaken annually during mining.

The first operational monitoring survey for Stage 1 of the Project was conducted in June 2020

(Biologic, 2021a) in accordance with the Project’s Significant Species Management Plan:

Corunna Downs and associated Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat monitoring program (Atlas

Iron, 2017).

Opportunistic monitoring of Ghost Bats: The aim of this program is to provide additional data and

information collected by site personnel to supplement the annual monitoring program, and to

generate interest amongst site personnel in the protection of the Ghost Bat.

Post-mining monitoring of Ghost Bats: This component will monitor Ghost Bat activity at the

Project once mining activity has ceased and the Project is considered to be in the closure

phase. Results of the post-mining monitoring will be compared to the baseline and operational

monitoring and measured against the performance criteria defined in the SSMP. The aim of this

component is to determine whether the Project area still supports a viable Ghost Bat population

once mining has ceased. Post-mining monitoring will be undertaken for at least three monitoring

events, the first event being in the first year after mining of pits ceases, and subsequent events

occurring every two years thereafter. Note: post-mining monitoring of Ghost Bats was formerly presented as rehabilitation monitoring in Atlas Iron (2017).

At certain times, monitoring may be at different phases (i.e. baseline, operational or post-mining) for

Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Project.

3 Monitoring Method

3.1 Baseline, Operational and Post-mining Monitoring of Ghost Bat

Monitoring will be undertaken between April and September to align with the Pilbara leaf-nosed bat

and northern quoll monitoring procedures. This timing also ensures minimal disturbance to

reproducing Ghost Bat females and their young during the most important part of their reproductive

cycle (October to December). The timing (i.e. the month) of the monitoring surveys should be

aligned between monitoring years, where possible. Guidelines on cave entry are provided in

Appendix A. Due to the variability frequently recorded in the Ghost Bat’s use of caves (Armstrong &

Anstee, 2000), an array of caves will be monitored to demonstrate presence across the Project Area.

Monitoring of Ghost Bats for Stage 1 is currently being undertaken at six monitoring sites, comprising

four impact sites (caves CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03, CO-CA-05 and CO-CA-10) and two control sites

(caves CO-CA-18 and LR-MI-01) (Table 1, Figure 1).

Monitoring of Ghost Bats for Stage 2 will be undertaken at nine monitoring sites, comprising six

impact sites (CO-CA-20, CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24, CO-CA-25, CO-CA-27 and CO-CA-30) and three

control sites (CO-CA-33, CO-CA-35, CO-CA-42) (Table 1, Figure 1).

As data on Ghost Bat activity and roosting is collected over time, it may be desirable to add

monitoring sites adaptively to account for new information or changes in roost usage by these

species in future. Data from all control sites may be pooled for use with monitoring for either Stage 1

or Stage 2.

A combination of monitoring techniques will be used to monitor the Ghost Bat, including scat counts

and ultrasonic recordings (discussed further in Sections 3.1.1 to 3.1.3). Monitoring of Ghost Bat roosts

(structural integrity and microclimate) is also proposed to assess any impacts of blasting (discussed

further in Section 3.1.4). Monitoring sites are listed in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1. Note control site

LR-MI-01 is approximately 54 km northwest and is not shown on Figure 1.


Sanjiv Ridge


Table 1: Ghost Bat Monitoring Sites

Monitoring Site Category Ghost Bat Roost Classification

Stage 1

CO-CA-01 Impact Diurnal roost




Stage 2


CO-CA-22 Impact Diurnal roost*

CO-CA-24 Impact Potential maternity roost*

CO-CA-25 Impact Potential diurnal roost

CO-CA-27 Impact Diurnal roost*


Regional Sites

CO-CA-18 Control Potential diurnal roost

LR-MI-01 (Lalla Rookh) Control Maternity roost

CO-CA-33 Control Potential maternity roost

CO-CA-35 (Mt Ada) Control Potential maternity roost

CO-CA-42 (Mt Florence) Control Diurnal roost

* Critical habitat

CO-CA-20

CO-CA-22

CO-CA-24CO-CA-25 CO-CA-27

CO-CA-30

CO-CA-33

CO-CA-35

CO-CA-42

CO-CA-01

CO-CA-03

CO-CA-05

CO-CA-18

CO-CA-10

Maxar

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,62

0,00

0 m

N7,

618,

000

mN

7,64

4,00

0 m

N7,

642,

000

mN

7,64

0,00

0 m

N7,

638,

000

mN

7,63

6,00

0 m

N7,

634,

000

mN

7,63

2,00

0 m

N7,

630,

000

mN

7,62

8,00

0 m

N7,

626,

000

mN

7,62

4,00

0 m

N7,

622,

000

mN

7,62

0,00

0 m

N7,

618,

000

mN

786,000 mE784,000 mE782,000 mE780,000 mE778,000 mE776,000 mE774,000 mE772,000 mE770,000 mE768,000 mE

786,000 mE784,000 mE782,000 mE780,000 mE778,000 mE776,000 mE774,000 mE772,000 mE770,000 mE768,000 mE

Ghost Bat Monitoring Sites

Impact Site

Control Site

Fauna Survey Area



0 1 20.5

Kilometers


Drawn: Chris.Maude

Date: 20/09/2021


Layout: GIS_3264_Fig1-GB Ghost Bat Monitoring Locations 1

Figure No:




Sanjiv Ridge


3.1.1 Ghost Bat Scat Counts

Black sheets were deployed on top of Ghost Bat middens or scat piles within Stage 1 impact sites

CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03, CO-CA-05 and CO-CA-10 during the baseline monitoring survey to allow the

collection of Ghost Bat scats during subsequent surveys (Biologic, 2019a, 2019b). This technique will

be repeated at the Stage 2 impact sites.

As Ghost Bats are known to use the same roosting spot within a cave, the sheets aim to collect all

scats deposited between monitoring surveys. During each monitoring survey, the number of scats on

the sheets within a cave will be counted, and the sheets cleared, or replaced. The number of scats

recorded within a cave can be used to determine a scat deposition rate (the number of scats

recorded divided by the number of days since sheets were last cleared) that can be compared

between caves and monitoring surveys.

3.1.2 Ultrasonic Recordings

Ultrasonic recording will be completed at each monitoring site for Ghost Bats to supplement the

data obtained from the scat counts. Ultrasonic recording will be completed at the monitoring sites

for a total of seven nights each monitoring event. Attempts will be made to align the sampling nights

across all sampling sites. Ultrasonic recordings at cave CO-CA-24 (a potential maternity roost) will be

year-round, deployed for several months at a time to determine the usage of this cave.

3.1.3 Habitat Assessments

Formal cave and habitat assessments will be conducted at each monitoring site to characterise the

quality and complexity of habitat provided for the Ghost Bat. The monitoring sites will be revisited

during subsequent surveys and assessed for disturbance and condition (e.g. fire, cracking, rock falls

and/or dust accumulation).

Assessments will be undertaken at each monitoring site each survey to document changes at and

surrounding the monitoring site, which may explain changes to Ghost Bat presence and activity. The

location of the assessment (including photo points) will be established and permanently marked

during the baseline monitoring survey. This location will be revisited each monitoring survey

thereafter to allow comparisons to be made over time. Each assessment will record the

characteristics set out below.

At the entrance of each monitoring site:

Entrance photographs (taken from two established photo monitoring points).

Evidence of structural damage, if any, with reference to the following questions:

o Are there any new open or intersecting joints or fractures along the roof, wall or bedding

planes of the cave?

o Are there any loose rocks or signs of fresh rock fall within the cave? If yes, make notes about

the amount of dust, debris and/or fallen rocks, including an estimation of the size of the

largest rock.

Presence of Ghost Bat, including number of individuals and/or secondary evidence such as

scats, evidence of foraging, etc.

In the landscape surrounding each monitoring site:

Condition of vegetation.

Presence of water.

Presence of any artificial light sources or other disturbances.


Sanjiv Ridge


3.1.4 Microclimate Recording

Microclimate (i.e. temperature and relative humidity) of each accessible monitoring cave will be

recorded, comprising Stage 1 impact caves (CO-CA-01, CO-CA-03, CO-CA-05 and CO-CA-10),

Stage 2 impact sites (CO-CA-20, CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24, CO-CA-25, CO-CA-27 and CO-CA-30) and

two control sites (CO-CA-18 and CO-CA-33). A microclimate logging device will be installed at each

monitoring site at a position within the roosting chamber, preferably on the cave roof or wall near

the roosting area. Microclimate data will be recorded at six-hourly intervals to provide four readings

per day. Baseline monitoring will cover a continuous period of at least 12 months so as to be as

representative as possible of natural conditions across all seasons. When comparing operational and

post-mining microclimate with baseline microclimate, a number of factors may be relevant in the

interpretation of results, including:

The representativeness of the baseline dataset.

Prevailing weather/climate during the relevant period.

Microclimate data available from any other comparable caves.

Nearby project activities and their potential effects on the microclimate of the cave.

Whether the cave is or has recently been artificially closed to bats.

Ghost Bat presence and activity, particularly if the species is recorded occupying caves with

microclimate outside the ranges referenced in the Conservation Advice (TSSC, 2016).

3.1.5 Censuses

A census will be completed at Lalla Rookh each monitoring survey. This method is the most accurate

method to indicate the likely colony size inhabiting the structure. Censuses can be completed by

field personnel manually counting bats as they leave the roosting structure soon after dusk and/or

via infrared lit video camera. Results from the census will be used to indicate regional population

fluctuations and to help explain results in lieu of presence and activity changes at other monitoring

sites.

3.2 Blast Monitoring

Blast monitoring was recommended for Stage 2 by Blast It Global (2021) to measure vibration

received at Ghost Bat caves and validate predicted vibration. Key monitoring elements are shown

in Table 2.

A permanent location for monitoring will be established for each of caves CO-CA-22, CO-CA-24

and CO-CA-27 as close as possible (ideally within 10 m) to the nearest part of the cave to the pit. For

each blast, only the monitoring location nearest to the blast source will be monitored. A surveyor

must use the surveyed location of the cave void to determine the closest blast monitoring location

to the cave.

The desktop blast modelling and predictions will require calibration for actual on-site conditions. This

will be achieved by the blasting engineer comparing the results of initial blasts with the predictions of

the model. The various inputs to the model will then be adjusted based on monitoring results, so that

the model more closely replicates the recorded results. Adjustments are applied iteratively with

successive blasts. The calibrated site-specific version of the model is also known as the ‘site law’ or

‘site prediction equations’. A reasonable degree of confidence in the site law is achieved when the

blasting engineer is satisfied that the model is reliably predicting (and not underestimating) the blast

vibrations as measured.

Personnel using and installing blast monitoring equipment, and the blast designers and shotfirers in

charge, should hold industry training for blast monitoring to ensure sufficient competency to


Sanjiv Ridge


undertake the requirements of this specific blasting scenario. All blasting practices should adhere to

documented procedures and design standards to achieve above average confinement of the

explosives’ charge.

Table 2: Blast Monitoring

Monitoring Location Method Timing

Vibration monitoring


Vibration monitor installed in (or close to) the nearest cave to the blast location. Permanent monitoring blocks (a fixture installed in the ground to which a vibration monitor can be affixed, allowing the monitor to be moved between several sites) may be used.

During each blast in Glen Herring pit.

Cave inspection


Inspection of cave to assess whether any damage has been sustained in the cave and, if so, an estimate of the extent of the damage using the evidence of structural damage criteria in Section 3.1.3. The preferred inspection method is visual and in-person, e.g. by entering the cave. However it is recognised that unlimited access may not always be possible, e.g. for safety reasons, or to comply with the Ghost Bat cave entry guidelines set out in Appendix A.

Operations –

Before the first blast in Glen Herring pit.

After each blast in the top bench of Glen Herring pit.

After any blast in Glen Herring pit where no inspection has otherwise occurred in the previous 3 months.


4 Reporting

A standalone report at the conclusion of each monitoring period will be prepared documenting the

occurrence and status of the Ghost Bat at monitoring sites within the Study Area. This report will

include the following sections: methods, results, discussion and recommendations.


Sanjiv Ridge


5 References

Armstrong, K. N., & Anstee, S. D. (2000). The Ghost Bat in the Pilbara: 100 years on. Australian

Mammalogy, 22, 93–101. doi:https://doi.org/10.1071/AM00093

Atlas Iron, Limited. (2017). Significant species management plan Corunna Downs.

Bat Call WA. (2021). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 Ghost Bat Review. September. Prepared for Atlas Iron Pty

Ltd.

Biologic. (2019a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat monitoring survey

2019. East Perth, WA:

Biologic. (2019b). Corunna Downs project, Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat monitoring survey


Biologic. (2021a). Corunna Downs project Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat monitoring survey


Biologic. (2021b). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 development area consolidated terrestrial fauna report. East

Perth, WA:

Biologic. (2021c). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2: Ghost Bat and Pilbara leaf-nosed bat monitoring and

regional survey. East Perth, WA:

Biologic. (in prep.). Sanjiv Ridge Stage 1: Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat monitoring 2021. East

Perth, WA:

Blast It Global. (2021). Blast impact assessment report for Bat Caves at Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2.

MWH. (2018a). Corunna Downs project: Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat baseline monitoring

survey. Jolimont, WA:

MWH. (2018b). Corunna Downs project: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna survey. Jolimont, WA:

MWH, Australia. (2017). Corunna downs project: Pilbara leaf-nosed bat and Ghost Bat baseline

monitoring survey. Prepared for Atlas Iron Limited:

https://doi.org/10.1071/AM00093


Sanjiv Ridge


Cave Disruption Protocol

A conservative protocol is recommended to protect reproducing Ghost Bat females and their

young during the most important part of their reproductive cycle. This covers the periods when:

Gravid females are subject to premature birth due to either capture and handling or repeated

flushing the bats from their diurnal roost caves.

Females carrying newborns are subject to dropping them due to capture or disturbance.

Non-volant young in nurseries are subject to abandonment due to repeated disturbance of the

mothers.

Newly volant young during the early adolescent period are subject to premature abandonment

due to repeated disturbance of the mothers and/or young.

For Ghost Bat category 1, category 2, and category 3 roost caves (see Appendix A of Bat Call

(2021) for definitions) that are part of an important cave grouping, it is recommended that

restrictions tighter than Governmental licencing limitations be applied:

1. Surveys with higher disturbance to Ghost Bats (i.e. when Ghost Bats are captured, or are present

and are disturbed) should be limited to once per cave during August, September, and January.

2. Multiple lower disturbance survey entries per cave are allowed in August, September, and

January. The surveys should be done by one ecologist working quietly to minimise stressing the

bats present and hopefully not flushing them. If a Ghost Bat(s) is disturbed and flushed, the caves

and their entrance areas should be vacated to allow the bat(s) to return and settle. Restrictions

per item 1 above then apply.

3. No cave entries should be carried out in October, November and December inclusive into caves

at Stage 2 that are not temporarily sealed. Any damage assessments required during blasting

operations in this time period should be carried out from the cave entrance.

4. Survey entries in accordance with Governmental licencing limitations should be allowed outside

these periods.

5. Where category 2 and 3 caves are within the impact zone of a drilling/blasting program for

Stage 2, and after it is proven that there are no Ghost Bats inside, the caves may be temporarily

sealed prior to 1 October and remain inaccessible to Ghost Bat throughout the female’s

reproductive period.

References

Bat Call. 2021. Sanjiv Ridge Stage 2 Ghost Bat review, July 2021. September. Prepared for Atlas Iron

Pty Ltd by Bat Call WA, Hillarys, Western Australia.

Documents

Significant Species Management Plan