2016-12-12 General Committee - Attachment 1 to Item 6 - Biodiversity Assessment Report

                                                Noosa Biodiversity Plan – Biodiversity Assessment Report



      5.1.1    Methodology for biodiversity significance assessment
Previous fine scale vegetation desktop mapping and recent validated vegetation survey results were
integrated with the current Regulated Vegetation (remnant) and regrowth mapping to produce an
ecological condition GIS layer. This layer was further refined and validated utilising current (2016) LiDAR
data and detecting any recent changes in vegetation extent both from regeneration and clearing.

This ecological condition GIS layer served as a basis for assigning other biodiversity values and assessing
biodiversity significance. Latest RE and pre-clearing RE mapping (version 9.0) was used to attribute the
base layer with the RE types that occur across Noosa as well as their associated conservation status.
The RE and pre-clear RE mapping was also utilised as a surrogate to attribute the base layer with TEC
or potential TEC presence, regionally significant RE types and RE types that are under-represented
across Noosa’s protection reserves (determine through separate analyses). Other datasets utilised to
derive additional biodiversity values included records of significant species observations, and
Commonwealth and State wetland mapping.

Assessment of landscape connectivity was also undertaken as an additional biodiversity value by utilising
the ecological condition GIS layer and applying a modified version of the Queensland Offsets Policy –
Landscape Fragmentation tool. Landscape elements including habitat nodes, patches and corridors as
well as their degree of connectivity were identified and attributed in the ecological condition GIS layer.

The scoring of each biodiversity value within the base ecological condition layer was applied, with scores
attributed to each separately mapped polygon. Scoring was based on the value being present and the
degree of significance of the value at a local, regional or State scale. For example the scoring of
significant species habitat was based on the presence of a significant species and its level of conservation
significance i.e. Near Threatened, Vulnerable or Endangered. The scoring schema sought to maintain
similar numbers of classes, maximum values, and interval sizes between scores. This prevented a single
value becoming inherently weighted within the consolidated biodiversity layer.

A consolidated biodiversity significance value was developed by adding individual biodiversity value
scores at a location, using equal weighting for each value (refer to diagram below). This yielded a total
maximum score of 39, in which the highest score for actual locations was 38 and the medium score was
7 (n = 198,359). Scores were split into five intervals based on a percentile scoring system. The scoring
range of each interval was based on the assessment of 20th percentile values returned from the scored
data.

Minimum values rules were incorporated following the scoring to provide weighting to important values
such as TEC, remnant vegetation, riparian vegetation and threatened species habitat.

Further details on the data sources, analyses and scoring for all biodiversity values are provided in
Appendix F.




  © ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD                                                                        73