Original source · versioned page text
2015-10-13 Planning & Organisation Agenda Attachment 1 to Item 6 Draft Flying Fox Management Plan
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
This document appears to be plans or drawings. Its page text below holds only the words printed on the drawings, without the drawings themselves, so it may be jumbled or hard to follow. To see the plans as drawn, choose Original above or download the file (both need you to log in).
Log in to see the plans as drawn draft
• Low impact activities must immediately cease, and EHP be immediately notified, if a
flying-fox appears to have been killed or injured.
• Where low impact activities are required to be undertaken during the day time,
works must immediately cease and EHP be immediately notified if 30% or more of
the adult flying-foxes leave the roost for five minutes or more.
It is important to note that neither COP provides exemptions to other legislation and provisions
that are likely to be relevant to flying-fox management activities, such as the Queensland
Vegetation Management Act 1999, Fisheries Act 1994, the Commonwealth Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and various state and local
planning provisions. They also do not provide exemptions for all vegetation under the NC Act.
3.4 Commonwealth
The GHFF is listed as a vulnerable species under the EPBC Act, meaning it is considered to
be a matter of national environmental significance (MNES).
A referral to the Australian Department of the Environment (DoE) may be required under the
EPBC Act for any action that has the potential to significantly impact on a MNES.
The Referral guideline for management actions in GHFF and SFF3 camps (DoE 2015) defines
a nationally important GHFF camp as those that have either:
· contained ≥ 10,000 GHFF in more than one year in the last 10 years, or
· have been occupied by more than 2,500 GHFF permanently or seasonally every year
for the last 10 years.
As detailed in Table 1, the Wallace Park roost meets the first criteria and is considered a
nationally important camp. As such, provided that management follows the below mitigation
standards as outlined in the referral guideline, referral to the DoE will not be required for
activities recommended in Section 6.
Mitigation standards
• The action must not occur if the camp contains females that are in the late stages of
pregnancy or have dependent young that cannot fly on their own.
• The action must not occur during or immediately after climatic extremes (heat stress
event4, cyclone event5), or during a period of significant food stress6.
• Disturbance must be carried out using non-lethal means, such as acoustic, visual
and/or physical5 disturbance or use of smoke.
3
Spectacled flying-fox (P. conspicillatus)
4
A ‘heat stress event’ is defined for the purposes of this document as a day on which the maximum temperature does (or is
predicted to) meet or exceed 38°C.
5
A cyclone event is defined as a cyclone that is identified by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/
index.shtml).
6
Food stress events may be apparent if large numbers of low body weight animals are being reported by wildlife carers in the
region.
Flying-fox roost management options ecosure.com.au | 10
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLarge file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.