2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report - Diversified Mineralsdivminerals.com.au/.../2013-Aquatic-Ecology-Monitoring.pdf · 2017-06-14 · 2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report Dargues

2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report

Dargues Gold Mine NA49913133

Prepared for Unity Mining Pty. Ltd. 6 January 2014

2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report

Dargues Gold Mine NA49913133

2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report Dargues Gold Mine

6 January 2014 Cardno Ecology Lab ii

Document Information Prepared for Unity Mining Pty. Ltd. Project Name Dargues Gold Mine File Reference NA49913133_Dargues Gold Mine 2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring

Report_FINAL.docx Job Reference NA49913133 Date 6 January 2014

Contact Information Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd Level 9, The Forum 203 Pacific Highway St Leonards NSW 2065 Telephone: 02 9496 7700 Facsimile: 02 9499 3902 International: +61 2 9496 7700 www.cardno.com.au

Document Control Version Date Author Author

Initials Reviewer Reviewer

Initials

1 28/10/2013 Max Best MB Theresa Dye TD

2 26/11/2013 Max Best MB Theresa Dye TD

3 06/01/2014 Max Best MB James Dornan JD

© Cardno 2014. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with Cardno.

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement. Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.


6 January 2014 Cardno Ecology Lab iii

Executive Summary Unity Mining Pty. Ltd. is in the process of constructing the Dargues Gold Mine near Braidwood, NSW. Work commenced in early 2013. This report describes the results of the biannual aquatic ecology monitoring for the mine undertaken by Cardno at potential impact sites on Spring Creek and Majors Creek and control sites on upper Majors Creek between spring 2011 and autumn 2013.

The aquatic habitat at sites furthest upstream in the Spring Creek and Majors Creek catchments was more degraded than at sites further downstream. This is due to substantial geomorphic and hydrological changes associated with historical land use including alluvial mining activities. Sites further downstream show less obvious disturbance, but were still considered degraded.

The water quality data reflects the catchment degradation, with elevated salinity and nutrient concentrations and reduced dissolved oxygen concentrations being recorded in the baseline measurement phase. The measurements collected in 2013 show that further water quality degradation has not occurred since project related construction work began.

The Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS) protocol was used to sample aquatic macroinvertebrates associated with riffle and edge habitats. Comparison of the AUSRIVAS outputs between the baseline and construction phase indicated an overall improvement in aquatic health for both habitats. Stream Invertebrate Grade Number Average Level (SIGNAL2) scores indicated a slight decline in aquatic health for edge habitat but similar scores for riffle habitat between the baseline and construction phases. These observations suggest that the mine construction has not had a negative impact on aquatic ecology to date.

Multivariate statistical comparisons of the macroinvertebrate data from the potential impact sites on Spring Creek and the control sites on Majors Creek, upstream of its confluence with Spring Creek indicates that no change has occurred in the macroinvertebrate assemblage along Spring Creek as a result of the ongoing construction activities.

Statistically significant differences in the multivariate structure of the macroinvertebrate assemblage in Majors Creek downstream of the mine construction were found between years and seasons. This difference was attributed to natural temporal variability. An improvement in some univariate indices was also found in parallel with the findings of the multivariate analysis.

Two new fish species were observed, Common Galaxias at the site furthest downstream on Majors Creek and Eastern Gambusia at the site furthest upstream on Majors Creek. Eastern Gambusia is classified as a noxious species and requires NSW DPI (Fisheries) notification. The recent observation of Eastern Gambusia is not considered a mining related impact, as these were found upstream of the Spring Creek catchment where construction activities for the mine are occurring.

It is recommended that aquatic ecology monitoring be continued using the methods currently employed and that multivariate statistical comparisons of macroinvertebrate data be undertaken in addition to AUSRIVAS and SIGNAL2 scores. It is also suggested that the existing fish survey methods be supplemented by the use of baited traps to target Eastern Gambusia in areas where backpack electrofishing cannot be undertaken effectively.

The 2013 monitoring did not find any obvious adverse impacts on local aquatic ecosystems attributable to the construction of the Dargues Gold Mine to date.


6 January 2014 Cardno Ecology Lab iv

Table of Contents Executive Summary iii 1 Introduction 6

1.1 Overview of Existing Information 6 2 Study Methods 7

2.1 Sampling Dates 7 2.2 Sampling Sites 7 2.3 Aquatic Habitat Assessment 9 2.4 Rainfall and Stream Flow 9 2.5 Water Quality 9 2.6 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates 10

2.6.1 SIGNAL2 10 2.6.2 AUSRIVAS 10 2.6.3 Multivariate statistical analysis 11

2.7 Fish 12 3 Results 14

3.1 Description of Habitats 14 3.1.1 Site 1 - Mountain Road Downstream 14 3.1.2 Site 2 – Mountain Road Upstream 14 3.1.3 Site 3 – Escarpment Downstream 17 3.1.4 Site 4 – Escarpment Upstream 17 3.1.5 Site 5 – Spring Creek Downstream 20 3.1.6 Site 6 – Spring Creek Upstream 20 3.1.7 Site 7 – Majors Creek Downstream 23 3.1.8 Site 8 – Majors Creek Upstream 23

3.2 Rainfall and Stream Flow 26 3.3 Water Quality 27 3.4 Macroinvertebrates 30

3.4.1 SIGNAL2 and AUSRIVAS 30 3.4.2 Multivariate Analysis 33

3.5 Fish 35 4 Discussion 37

4.1 Aquatic Habitat and Environmental Conditions 37 4.2 Macroinvertebrates 37 4.3 Fish 38

5 Conclusions and Recommendations 39

6 References 40


6 January 2014 Cardno Ecology Lab v

Tables Table 2-1 Dates and information on aquatic ecology monitoring events completed for the Mine 7 Table 2-2 Site locations and descriptions 7 Table 2-3 ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger values for south east Australian upland rivers 10 Table 2-4 AUSRIVAS OE50 band boundaries for different seasonal and habitat models 11 Table 3-1 Number of fish captured and catch per unit effort for the autumn 2013 sampling event 36 Table 3-2 Number of fish captured and catch per unit effort for the spring 2013 sampling event 36

Figures Figure 2-1 Project area and sampling locations 8 Figure 3-1 Daily rainfall, temperature and sampling event dates for 2012-2013 26 Figure 3-2 Daily flow at the SW-6, SW-4 and SW-2 v-notch weirs, September to October 2013 26 Figure 3-3 Electrical conductivity measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events 27 Figure 3-4 pH measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events 28 Figure 3-5 Dissolved oxygen measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events 28 Figure 3-6 Turbidity measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events 29 Figure 3-7 Ex-situ total nitrogen measurements collected in 2012 and 2013 29 Figure 3-8 Ex-situ total phosphorus measurements collected in 2012 and 2013 30 Figure 3-9 Mean taxa richness for all seasons and habitats sampled to date (grouped by location) 31 Figure 3-10 Mean SIGNAL2 scores for all seasons and habitats sampled to date (grouped by location) 31 Figure 3-11 Mean AUSRIVAS OE50 scores for edge habitat samples (grouped by location) 32 Figure 3-12 Mean AUSRIVAS OE50 scores riffle habitat samples (grouped by location) 33 Figure 3-13 Outputs of the MDS conducted for the main BACI design 33 Figure 3-14 Outputs of the MDS conducted on edge samples using the Before-After design 34 Figure 3-15 Outputs of the MDS conducted on riffle samples using the Before-After design 35

Appendices Appendix A Habitat Description Information Appendix B Raw Water Quality Data Appendix C Raw Macroinvertebrate Data Appendix D Multivariate Statistical Analysis Appendix E Electrofisher information


6 January 2014 Cardno Ecology Lab 6

1 Introduction

Unity Mining Pty. Ltd. (Unity) are in the process of constructing the Dargues Gold Mine (the Mine), near Braidwood, NSW. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty. Ltd., trading as Cardno Ecology Lab (Cardno), prepared the aquatic ecology component of the environmental assessment for the Mine in 2011 (Cardno Ecology Lab, 2011) and have undertaken biannual aquatic ecology monitoring since then (Cardno Ecology Lab 2013b and this report). Cardno has also completed a study of the aquatic ecosystem in relation to a sediment mobilisation event (Cardno Ecology Lab 2013a) and an investigation of groundwater dependent ecosystems (Cardno Ecology Lab 2012 and 2013b).

This report describes the results of the aquatic ecology monitoring done between 2011 and 2013. The aims of the ongoing aquatic ecology monitoring project are to:

> Assess changes in the aquatic ecosystem over time by comparing baseline data with monitoring data collected during the construction phase ;

> Assess spatial and temporal variability in the dataset that may be relevant to future investigations;

> Identify and discuss any relationships between the environmental and ecological data and the relevance of these relationships to the Mine;

> Provide recommendations on improvements to data collection and interpretation;

> Assess the effectiveness of environmental management actions that are being undertaken for the Mine.

1.1 Overview of Existing Information The initial aquatic ecology assessment undertaken for the Mine in 2011 (Cardno Ecology Lab, 2011) identified several issues that had the potential to impact upon aquatic ecosystems around the Mine, including:

> Abstraction of groundwater;

> Reduced environmental flows;

> Sedimentation;

> Contamination.

During the construction phase of the Mine, sedimentation and contamination are the impacts more likely to be observed in the downstream aquatic ecosystem. The initial aquatic ecology assessment report concluded that these would not have significant impacts on aquatic ecology, threatened species, populations or communities, providing they were managed through:

> Appropriate design and operation of the Mine and ancillary facilities;

> Erosion and sediment controls;

> Development and implementation of the Water Management Plan (WMP).

The WMP has been developed and is being revised as the Mine develops (R.W. Corkery, 2012). The WMP describes management actions required to prevent degradation of the local surface water ecosystem that may arise as part of the Mine. These include, but are not limited to:

> A site water balance to control water movements around the site;

> Surface water, groundwater and aquatic ecology monitoring requirements;

> A surface water and groundwater response plan;

> Compliance guidelines, incident reporting and evaluation requirements.



2 Study Methods

2.1 Sampling Dates The dates and phases of the aquatic ecosystem monitoring completed to date are outlined in Table 2-1. Note that the baseline autumn sampling completed on 19-21 June 2012 was just outside the designated AUSRIVAS sampling season (March 15 to June 15). The late timing of this event may have implications for the comparison of some pre- and post-event biological data due to different climatic conditions at the time of sampling.

Table 2-1 Dates and information on aquatic ecology monitoring events completed for the Mine Project Phase Event Date Comments

Pre-Baseline Spring 2011 Sampling

28-30 September 2011 Sites 1-6 sampled only

Baseline Autumn 2012 Sampling

19-21 June 2012 Sampling completed 1 week outside designated AUSRIVAS season due to prior rainfall

Baseline Spring 2012 Sampling

23-24 October 2012

Construction Autumn 2013 Sampling

25-27 March 2013 Four weeks after construction related sediment discharge event. Riffle at site AE2 not sampled.

Construction Spring 2013 Sampling

1-3 October 2013

2.2 Sampling Sites Site names, descriptions and GPS coordinates are provided in Table 2-2 and their relative position is illustrated in Figure 2-1. The site groups used throughout this report are based on sampling location. Group 3 (Spring Creek) sites are in the potentially impacted area immediately downstream of the Mine, while Group 4 (Majors Creek) sites are intended as control sites upstream of the Mine, and are unlikely to be affected. The groups also allow means and standard errors to be produced to assist in the data interpretation. On-site water quality and flow monitoring sites are also illustrated in Figure 2-1 with the prefix SW (Surface Water) as opposed to AE (Aquatic Ecology).

Table 2-2 Site locations and descriptions

Site Name Site Code Site Group Description Easting (UTM 56H)

Northing (UTM 56H)

Majors Creek at Mountain Road DS

AE 1 Group 1 (Araluen)

Majors Creek near Araluen, downstream site

750664 6056581

Majors Creek at Mountain Road US

AE 2 Majors Creek near Araluen, upstream site

750509 6056807

Majors Creek at Escarpment DS

AE 3 Group 2 (Escarpment)

Majors Creek above escarpment, downstream site

749895 6060888

Majors Creek at Escarpment US

AE 4 Majors Creek above escarpment, upstream site

749555 6061449

Upper Spring Creek DS

AE 5 Group 3 (Spring Creek)

Spring Creek near township, downstream site

749164 6062675

Upper Spring Creek US

AE 6 Spring Creek near township, upstream site

748846 6063534

Upper Majors Creek DS

AE 7 Group 4 (Majors Creek)

Upper Majors Creek, downstream site

748567 6061393

Upper Majors Creek US

AE 8 Upper Majors Creek, upstream site

748157 6060705

GPS Datum is WGS84



Figure 2-1 Project area and sampling locations



2.3 Aquatic Habitat Assessment The condition of the aquatic habitat at each site was assessed using a modified version of the Riparian, Channel and Environmental (RCE) inventory method. This assessment involves evaluation and scoring of the characteristics of the adjacent land, the condition of riverbanks, channel and bed of the watercourse, and degree of disturbance evident at each site (Appendix A1). The maximum score (52) indicates a stream with little or no obvious physical disruption and the lowest score (13) indicates a heavily channelled stream without any riparian vegetation. This methodology was developed by Peterson (1992) and modified for Australian conditions by Chessman et al. (1997) by combining some of the descriptors, modifying some of the associated categories and simplifying the classifications from 1 to 4.

The RCE scoring system provides a simplified description of the aquatic habitat and does not fully represent its complex and changing nature. The inventory also gives equal weightings to each of the descriptors and may therefore mask certain elements and differences in the habitat of each site. The scores should therefore be used as a generalised assessment only.

The condition of aquatic habitat at each site was also assessed according to the NSW Department of Primary Industries Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (NSW DPI 2013). This document specifies two key indices: habitat type and class and builds on previous fish habitat classification criteria developed by NSW DPI (Fairfull and Witheridge 2003). Information on this classification is provided in Appendix A2 and A3.

The in-stream and emergent aquatic macrophytes within the riparian zone at each site were surveyed to provide an indication of the species present and their indicative cover. Species were identified in the field by an experienced aquatic ecologist. Specimens of plants that could not be identified in the field were pressed, dried and retained for later identification at Cardno Ecology Lab or the National Herbarium in Sydney.

2.4 Rainfall and Stream Flow Unity Mining Ltd has collected stream flow data from v-notch weirs at Surface Water (SW) monitoring sites SW-2, SW-4 and SW-6 on Spring Creek, upper Majors Creek and downstream of the Spring Creek confluence respectively, since September 2012. These data are presented in this report to assist with interpretation of biological and water quality data. Rainfall data from the site weather station at Majors Creek has been used to complement creek flow data.

2.5 Water Quality In-situ water quality was measured using a YeoKal 611 water quality probe in spring 2011 and autumn 2012 and a YSI 6920 water quality probe subsequently. Both probes were calibrated for all parameters before deployment, with the exception of temperature and Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP), which are factory calibrated.

The following variables were recorded at each site:

> Temperature (°C);

> Electrical Conductivity (EC) (µs/cm);

> pH (pH units);

> Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (mg/L and % saturation);

> Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) (mV); and,

> Turbidity (NTU).

Two replicate readings of most variables were taken in accordance with Australian Guidelines (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000). Six replicate readings, however, were taken for turbidity as this measure tends to be more variable. The total alkalinity (mg/L CaCO3) of the water at each site was measured using a CHEMetrics field titration kit.

Data from external laboratory analyses of water samples collected at Surface Water (SW) monitoring locations, close to several of the Aquatic Ecology (AE) sites between May 2012 and October 2013 by Unity



Mining Ltd., have also been used in this report. It should be noted that these datasets represent slightly different time ranges within each year (May to December in 2012 and January to October in 2013). Data from sites SW-7, SW-6, SW-3 and, SW5 have been used to represent water quality for the aquatic ecology site groups 1 (Araluen), 2 (Escarpment), 3 (Spring Creek) and 4 (Majors Creek), respectively. Comments on individual parameters have also been made where relevant. All ex-situ water quality data are available on the Unity Mining website (Unity Mining 2013).

Water quality data were compared to the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger values for slightly disturbed upland rivers (Table 2-3), where appropriate guidelines exist. These values provide a point of reference for aquatic ecosystem protection and are derived from eco-toxicology investigations.

Table 2-3 ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger values for south east Australian upland rivers Parameter Trigger value Comments

Physicochemical

DO 90-110% Daytime measurements

pH 6.5-8

EC 350 µS/cm High values in NSW

Turbidity 25 NTU Higher in high flow

Nutrients

TP 0.02 mg/L

TN 0.25 mg/L

2.6 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates Samples of aquatic macroinvertebrates were collected at each site using the NSW AUSRIVAS method (Turak et al. 2004). The ‘edge’ habitat was sampled at every site while ‘riffle’ habitat was sampled at Sites 1, 2, 3 and 4 only. Samples were collected with dip nets (250 µm mesh) over a period of 3-5 minutes from a 10 m length of the specified habitat at each site. Each sample was rinsed from the net onto a white sorting tray from which animals were picked using forceps and pipettes. Each tray was picked for a minimum period of forty minutes, after which they were picked at ten minute intervals for a total of one hour or until no new specimens had been found. Care was taken to collect cryptic and fast moving animals in addition to those that were conspicuous or slow. The animals collected at each site were placed into a labelled jar containing 70% alcohol.

In the laboratory, each sample was sorted under a binocular microscope (at 40 X magnification), macroinvertebrates were extracted and identified to family level using standard references and up to ten animals of each family counted, in accordance with the latest NSW AUSRIVAS protocol (Turak et al. 2004). Identifications were confirmed using standard references. After confirmation of sample identifications, samples were stored in 70% alcohol in containers appropriate for long-term archiving.

2.6.1 SIGNAL2

The revised SIGNAL2 biotic index (Stream Invertebrate Grade Number Average Level) developed by Chessman (2003) was used to determine the “environmental quality” of sites on the basis of the presence or absence of families of macroinvertebrates. This method assigns grade numbers to each macroinvertebrate family or taxa found, based on their responses to chemical pollutants. The sum of all grade numbers for that habitat was divided by the total number of families recorded in each habitat to calculate the average SIGNAL2 score. The SIGNAL2 index therefore uses the average sensitivity of macroinvertebrate families to present a snapshot of water pollution issues at each site.

2.6.2 AUSRIVAS Macroinvertebrate data were analysed using the AUSRIVAS predictive models for the NSW spring and autumn seasons (Coysh et. al. 2000). The AUSRIVAS model generates the following key indices:

> OE50Taxa Score - This is the ratio of the number of macroinvertebrate families with a greater than 50% predicted probability of occurrence that were actually observed at a site (i.e. collected) to the number of



macroinvertebrate families expected with a greater than 50% probability of occurrence. OE50 taxa values range from 0 to >1 and provide a measure of the impairment of macroinvertebrate assemblages at each site, with values close to 0 indicating an impoverished assemblage; values close to 1 indicating that the condition of the assemblage is similar to that of the reference streams; and values exceeding 1 indicating a richer condition than AUSRIVAS reference streams.

> Overall Bands - These indicate the level of impairment of the assemblage and are derived from OE50 Taxa scores. The bands for spring and autumn edge and riffle samples are graded as follows:

Table 2-4 AUSRIVAS OE50 band boundaries for different seasonal and habitat models Band Description Spring Edge Spring Riffle Autumn Edge Autumn Riffle

X Richer than reference

Greater than 1.16 Greater than 1.18 Greater than 1.17 Greater than 1.13

A Reference condition

0.84 to 1.16 0.81 to 1.18 0.82 to 1.17 0.87 to 1.13

B Significantly impaired

0.52 to 0.83 0.44 to 0.80 0.47 to 0.81 0.61 to 0.86

C Severely impaired

0.20 to 0.51 0.07 to 0.43 0.12 to 0.46 0.35 to 0.60

D Extremely impaired

Equal to or below 0.19




2.6.3 Multivariate statistical analysis

Multivariate analysis of data was undertaken to investigate spatial and temporal variability in the macroinvertebrate taxa using a ‘Before-After Control-Impact’ (BACI) experimental design. This design was used to assess whether there was any difference between control (upstream) and impact (within/downstream) groups, both before (baseline) and after (construction).

In this analysis, the Majors Creek group (Site 7 and 8) which is upstream of any construction related impact is used as the control, while the Spring Creek group (Site 5 and 6) within the catchment area of potential impact is used as the impact group. Sites 1, 2, 3 and 4 were not used in the analysis because of differences in the habitat between these sites and the control group. Similarly, data from 2011 was not used in the analysis as only Sites 5 and 6 were sampled in spring.

The BACI analysis therefore used the following design:

PERMANOVA, a permutational analysis of variance, was used to test for significant differences in the structure of macroinvertebrate assemblages within and/or between the factors Treatment, Year and Season as follows:

> Treatment – a fixed factor with two levels (Control and Impact);

> Year – a fixed factor with two levels (2012 and 2013); and

> Season – a fixed factor with two levels (spring and autumn).



The data from the two sites within each group were treated as random replicates. (

The variability in the macroinvertebrate assemblage within the potential downstream impact sites (Sites 1, 2, 3 and 4) before and after construction was also assessed using the following design:

Edge and riffle data were analysed separately.

In this PERMANOVA analysis, the factors of interest were:

> Year – a fixed factor with two levels (2012 and 2013); and

> Season – a fixed factor with two levels (spring and autumn).

Site was again treated as a random replicate.

For each analysis, taxon presence/absence data were used and the relationships between each site were estimated by calculating their respective Bray-Curtis similarity coefficients.

Patterns in the composition of the assemblages were examined using non-metric Multi-Dimensional Scaling (MDS) (Clarke 1993) and Group Average Cluster Analysis (CLUSTER). MDS provides a graphical representation of assemblages based on their similarity within and among places or times sampled. In MDS plots, samples which have similar sets of organisms are grouped closer together than ones containing different sets of organisms. It should be noted that ‘stress’ values in the 2-D MDS plots indicate accuracy in the depiction of relationship between samples and that ‘stress’ values greater than 0.2 indicate a poor representation of relationships and should be interpreted with caution. CLUSTER analysis performs a similar function to the MDS with graphical output represented as a dendrogram depicting the similarity/dissimilarity between samples. Outputs of CLUSTER analysis were overlayed on the MDS diagram to show similarity/dissimilarity clustering where present.

Additionally, Similarity Percentages analysis (SIMPER) was used to investigate the individual taxa that contributed most to the variability observed in the assemblage data, where there was a statistically significant difference observed between factors.

These analyses were undertaken using the software package Primer (Plymouth Routines in Multivariate Ecological Research) version 6.1.1.1 (Clarke and Gorley 2006) and PERMANOVA + Version 1.0.1 (Anderson et al. 2008).

The null hypothesis (H0) was that no difference exists between any of the factors analysed at a 95% probability level.

2.7 Fish Fish and mobile invertebrates were surveyed using a Smith-Root LR24 backpack electrofisher along the 100 m reach of each site. Electrofishing is a commonly used, non-destructive technique for sampling fish in freshwater habitats such as creeks, drainage ditches and streams. The technique involves discharging an electric pulse into the water which stuns fish, allowing them to be easily netted, counted, identified and released. Electrofishing was done in riffles, shallow pools and beneath overhanging banks and vegetation. The electrofisher on-time (time that the electrical circuit is open) was recorded at each site to provide an indication of sampling effort. The fish sampling effort (area covered and time spent) at Site 6 and Site 8 was approximately half that of other sites due to restricted access to sections of the creek, because of deep water or densely vegetated swamp at these locations.



Captured fish were placed into a container filled with aerated stream water for handling. At the end of sampling of each site, all fish caught were identified, measured, counted and any abnormalities noted, before being released as quickly as practicably possible. The numbers of each species of fish captured at each site were recorded on data sheets. Non-native species were humanely disposed of, as per DPI guidelines. All fish captured and their fates are reported to the DPI and the Director General’s Ethics Committee as per the conditions of our permit to sample fish.



3 Results

3.1 Description of Habitats Aquatic habitat descriptions are provided for each site under the headings below. Information on the Riparian, Channel and Environmental (RCE) inventory scores and data for each of the sampling sites are provided in Appendix A along with descriptions of the DPI (2013) fish habitat assessment criteria.

3.1.1 Site 1 - Mountain Road Downstream

This site on Majors Creek was located in a broad valley surrounded by previously cleared land, which was in the process of regeneration, albeit with evidence of grazing. A long riffle zone interspersed with small pools made up the majority of aquatic habitat of the site, with a large pool present at the downstream boundary (Plate 3-1). The riffle zones were on average around 10 cm deep, while the pool had a maximum depth greater than 1 m. The wetted-width of the creek was between 1 m and 6 m, with an average of approximately 2 m along the riffle zone and the maximum being in the pool. The banks were approximately 3 m high and bank-full width was approximately 20 m. The substratum consisted mainly of cobble and boulder, with finer pebble, gravel, sand and silt also present. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 46 on both sampling occasions in 2013.

The water appeared clear during the 2013 surveys, with no visible signs of water pollution (i.e. foaming or algae proliferation). In autumn, the water level in the large pool appeared to be lower than previous visits, allowing electrofishing to be done more readily. An eastern water dragon was observed around the pool in autumn.

No in-stream macrophytes were observed at this site during either sampling event. The riparian zone was dominated by a canopy of tall Casuarina sp. (>10 m) and several smaller trees and shrubs, such as Pittosporum undulatum and Bursaria spinosa. The ground cover was dominated by Tradescantia fluminensis and a variety of other weedy herbs, including Galium aparine, Solanum sp. and Oplismenus sp.

3.1.2 Site 2 – Mountain Road Upstream This site was located approximately 300 m upstream of Site 1 and had similar surrounding landform to the downstream site. Approximately 50 cattle were observed grazing around the site in spring near an old ford. Slow flowing, shallow riffle habitat made up a large proportion of the reach with small pools interspersed (Plate 3-2). The riffle zones had dried to a trickle during the autumn 2013 sampling event, preventing sampling of this habitat, but contained sufficient flow for sampling in spring. Moderate- sized pools were present near the upstream (Plate 3-2) and downstream boundaries of the site. The riffle zones were around 5-10 cm deep on average, while the pools had a maximum depth of approximately 30-60 cm. The wetted-width was between 1 m and 6 m, with an average of approximately 2 m along the riffle zone and was widest in the pools. The banks were approximately 2 m high and bank-full width was approximately 20 m. The substratum was predominantly cobble and boulder, with finer pebble, gravel, sand and silt also present, as at Site 1. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 45 in autumn and 46 in spring 2013.

The water was clear during the 2013 surveys. In the area where creek flow was diminished in autumn, a dry silt crust was observed on top of a bed of dry coarse sand and gravel. No in-stream macrophytes or macroalgae were observed in 2013. Riparian vegetation was similar to that at the site downstream, being dominated by a canopy of tall Casuarina sp. and other smaller trees and shrubs including Pittosporum undulatum, Bursaria spinosa, Dodonaea sp. and Acacia sp. The riparian groundcover was less dense than at Site 1 and consisted of a mixture of herbs and grasses including Tradescantia fluminensis, Rubus sp., Sida rhombifolia and a variety of grasses.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-1 Majors Creek at Mountain Road DS (Site AE1): a) autumn 2013 looking upstream at riffle habitat; b) spring 2013 looking upstream at riffle habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking downstream at large pool; and d) spring 2013 looking downstream at large pool.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-2 Majors Creek at Mountain Road US (Site AE2): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; b) spring 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream.



3.1.3 Site 3 – Escarpment Downstream

This site was located in a steep sided valley above the escarpment, approximately 300 m upstream of the precipitous waterfall on Majors Creek. A large deep pool was present at the downstream end of the site, with pool and riffle sequences extending upstream through the site (Plate 3-3). The average depth was around 0.2 m, with the riffle zones around 0.05 cm deep on average and the large pool having a depth greater than 1 m. The wetted-width varied from 0.5 m to 5 m, with an average of around 2 m. Bank heights ranged from about 0.5 m to greater than 4 m at the constricted meander near the middle of the site, where erosion was occurring. The substratum was predominantly cobble and boulder in the riffle habitat, while that in the pools consisted of a larger quantity of silt, sand and bedrock. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 41 on both sampling occasions.

The water was clear during the 2013 surveys. There were no obvious signs of water pollution during either survey.

No submerged macrophytes were observed, except for some small patches of the macroalgae Chara sp. and Nitella sp. A sparse cover of the emergent Juncus sp. was observed in the littoral zone along the creek banks. Other plants in the riparian zone included Salix sp., Mentha sp., Rubus sp. and Blechnum sp. Numerous other unidentified species were observed in the riparian fringe and terrestrial habitat including Eucalyptus sp., Acacia sp., Broom, Tree ferns, and Bryophyta (mosses and liverworts).

3.1.4 Site 4 – Escarpment Upstream

This site was located on relatively flat land in a broad valley, approximately 300 m downstream of the Majors Creek Road Bridge and approximately 500 m upstream of Site 3. Water was impounded in a large pool across the centre of the site, downstream of which there was a riffle and another small tributary joining the creek from the northeast (Plate 3-4). The water depth was shallowest (approximately 0.05 m) in the riffle areas but reached over 1 m in the pool. The average depth was approximately 0.3 m. The wetted-width was between 0.5 m and 4 m but averaged around 2 m. Creek banks were approximately 0.5 m high. A prominent side channel existed on the right bank of the pool, which evidently receives water during periods of elevated flow. The substratum in the pool was predominantly silt and sand, while the riffle consisted of a larger proportion of cobble and boulder. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 32 in autumn and 31 in spring.

The water appeared relatively clear, with some foam accumulation and anoxic sediment odours in the pool.

The right bank appeared to have been historically cleared for a distance of approximately 50 m from the water and was dominated by grasses, sedges and other low herbs and devoid of large trees.

Emergent macrophytes were moderately abundant along the banks and through the side channel and included Typha sp., Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum, Juncus sp. and Isotoma fluviatilis. Dense Rubus sp. was present along the upper banks and upstream of this site. Other plants observed included Salix sp., Blechnum sp., Acacia sp. and Broom. The submerged macroalgae Chara sp. and Nitella sp. were also observed at this site.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-3 Majors Creek at Escarpment DS (Site AE3): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; b) spring 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream at pool and riffle habitat; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream at pool and riffle habitat.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-4 Majors Creek at Escarpment US (Site AE4): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream at riffle habitat; b) spring 2013 looking downstream at riffle habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream at pool habitat; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream at pool habitat.



3.1.5 Site 5 – Spring Creek Downstream

This site in the heavily disturbed channel of Spring Creek was located within the Mine site boundary, near the location of the old site office. The surrounding landform along this stretch of the creek has been disturbed historically, most likely due to previous alluvial mining activity. The creek flowed slowly through long shallow pools (Plate 3-5) but faster-through short rocky areas. The average depth was approximately 0.2 m, but reached a maximum of approximately 0.5 m in the pools. The wetted-width was 2 m at maximum, with an average of around 1 m. Creek banks were up to 4 m high and were eroding on the bends in constricted areas (Plate 3-5). The substratum consisted primarily of silt and sand, with some larger boulders and cobbles also present in-stream. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 28 on both sampling events in 2013.

The water appeared slightly turbid on both visits in 2013 and there was a moderate amount of surface scum present.

A dense patch of Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum was present in shallow water along an approximately 5 m stretch in the middle of the site. Paspalum sp. was relatively dense along the banks. Other emergent macrophytes including Cyperus lucidus, Juncus sp. and Persicaria sp. were also present. The fern Blechnum sp. was found along the banks. No submerged macrophytes were observed at this site. The riparian zone consisted of tussock grass and various grass species with a sparse canopy of trees and shrubs including Acacia sp. and Eucalyptus sp.

3.1.6 Site 6 – Spring Creek Upstream

This site was located in the upper catchment of Spring Creek in an area that had been obviously affected by historical mining operations. There was a 5 m concreted section of channel in the middle of the site, with water dropping over a 1.5 m fall into a pool at its downstream end. Downstream of the concrete channel, the creek cascaded through small pools in a deeply incised channel (Plate 3-6). The creek above the concrete channel opened into a broad swamp covered in emergent macrophytes (Plate 3-6). The average depth was approximately 0.3 m, but increased to greater than 1 m in the pool below the fall. The wetted-width of the swamp area was around 12 m, while downstream of the fall the width was approximately 1 m on average. The banks were steep and approximately 4 m high downstream of the fall, while those upstream were of a similar height but with a more variable gradient and distance from the creek. The substratum outside of the artificial concrete channel was predominantly silt, with some larger boulders. This site was classified as Class 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification, although was not considered a key fish habitat Type due to its catchment size (1st order creek). The site received an RCE score of 23 on both sampling occasions in 2013.

The water appeared slightly turbid on both visits in 2013 and there was a moderate amount of surface scum present. Some iron flocculent, algae and surface scum were observed in the swamp area. In spring, frogs were heard calling and a tadpole was captured in the macroinvertebrate sweep net. A dead eastern long-neck turtle (Chelodina longicollis) was also observed in spring.

Myriophyllum sp. was the only submerged macrophyte observed in the open water of the swamp. The Potamogeton sp. observed previously was not recorded in 2013. The freshwater macroalgae Chara sp. was also observed in this area. Dense emergent growth of Typha sp., Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum, Eleocharis sp., and Juncus spp. covered the surrounding swamp. Downstream of the concrete channel and fall, Rubus sp. became dominant along the banks, with Typha sp. and Blechnum sp. also present. The upper banks were dominated by grasses and a sparse canopy of trees and shrubs, including Acacia sp. and Eucalyptus sp.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-5 Upper Spring Creek DS (Site AE5): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; b) spring 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream at pool habitat; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream at pool habitat.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-6 Upper Spring Creek US (Site AE6): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream; b) spring 2013 looking downstream; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream at swamp area; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream at swamp area.



3.1.7 Site 7 – Majors Creek Downstream

This site was located approximately 1 km upstream of the Spring Creek confluence, at the location of the v-notch flow measurement weir and a small ford. The creek consisted of long shallow pools punctuated by short flowing water sections. Upstream of the crossing, the topography was dominated by rocky outcrops that defined the channel morphology while downstream the creek ran more gradually through the surrounding grassed hills (Plate 3-7). Mounded earth and small excavations indicated large scale historical alluvial mining had been undertaken in the area. The average stream depth was approximately 0.2 m, with a maximum depth of approximately 0.5 m in the larger pools. Creek width was approximately 1 m on average, but <0.5 m in the flowing sections and approximately 3 m in the larger pools. The banks rose gradually to a height of around 5 m on both sides, being predominantly silt, sand and rock. The substratum was dominated by silt and sand and also contained pebble, cobble and bedrock. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification and received an RCE score of 26 in autumn and 27 in spring.

The water was slightly turbid on both visits, with some surface scum present.

Emergent macrophytes, including Typha sp., Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum, Juncus sp., Cyperus lucidus, Ranunculus sp. and Paspalum sp., were moderately abundant in-stream and along the banks. The fern Blechnum sp. was observed along the banks but no submerged macrophytes were observed. The riparian zone and terrestrial margins were dominated by tussock grass and some patches of Rubus sp., with sparse Acacia sp. also present.

3.1.8 Site 8 – Majors Creek Upstream This site was located at the Red Hill Road causeway, close to the Majors Creek pub. Upstream of the causeway the creek widened significantly due to impoundment from the causeway, resulting in a large swamp/pool covered by dense emergent Typha sp. and a small open water section on the northern boundary (Plate 3-8). Downstream of the causeway, the creek passed through a small swamp amongst dense Salix sp. that had a small deep pool at its downstream end and a more defined channel with dense Typha sp. cover further downstream. The average stream depth was approximately 0.3 m with a maximum depth of approximately 1 m in the open pools. Stream wetted-width was approximately 3 m on average, with a minimum of 0.5 m but reached around 40 m in the swamp area upstream of the causeway. The banks were about 1 m high and were heavily disturbed by historical alluvial mining works. Substratum was almost entirely silt, with very little coarser material observed. This site was classified as Class 1, Type 1 fish habitat according to the NSW DPI (2013) classification, although was observed as degraded by the presence of impoundment at the causeway and by historical mining disturbance. This site received an RCE score of 23 on both sampling visits in 2013.

The water was moderately turbid and relatively dense iron flocculent and/or diatom cover was observed on both occasions. Algae growth was observed as floating scum in the open water of the swamp upstream of the causeway and the substratum had an anoxic odour when disturbed.

Dense emergent growth of Typha sp. dominated the swamp upstream of the causeway, with some Myriophyllum sp. also observed around the open water area. The small pool directly downstream of the causeway was covered in a dense mat of roots from a stand of Salix sp. Other macrophytes observed included Paspalum sp., sparse Juncus spp. and Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-7 Upper Majors Creek DS (Site AE7): a) autumn 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; b) spring 2013 looking downstream at pool habitat; c) autumn 2013 looking upstream at V-notch weir; and d) spring 2013 looking upstream at V-notch weir.



a) b)

c) d)

Plate 3-8 Upper Majors Creek US (Site AE8): a) autumn 2013 looking upstream at impounded area; b) spring 2013 looking upstream at impounded area; c) autumn 2013 looking downstream swamp area; and d) spring 2013 looking downstream swamp area.



3.2 Rainfall and Stream Flow Daily rainfall from the site weather station at Majors Creek between January 2012 and October 2013 is presented in Figure 3-1, with the spring and autumn sampling events for both years indicated. Flow data from the v-notch weir gauging stations at site SW-6, SW-4 and SW-2 between 1 September and 31 October 2013 are presented in Figure 3-2.

Figure 3-1 Daily rainfall, temperature and sampling event dates for 2012-2013

Approximately 75 mm of rainfall was recorded between 17-18 September 2013, two weeks prior to the spring 2013 sampling event (1-3 October) (Figure 3-1). Moderate to heavy rainfall was also recorded several weeks prior to the autumn and spring 2012 sampling events. Relatively little rainfall occurred in the weeks prior to the autumn 2012 sampling event (Figure 3-1).

Figure 3-2 Daily flow at the SW-6, SW-4 and SW-2 v-notch weirs, September to October 2013

Stream flows at sites on Spring Creek (SW-2), upper Majors Creek (SW-4) and downstream of the Majors Creek-Spring Creek confluence (SW-6) before, during and after the spring 2013 sampling event, are illustrated in Figure 3-2. Light rainfall (less than 5 mm per day) on 14-15 September produced a flow of approximately 16 L/sec at SW-6 on 14 September. Flow from the Majors Creek catchment (SW-4) contributed the majority of total flow downstream of Spring Creek confluence at this time (Figure 3-2).

Flow at all v-notch weirs exceeded the maximum limit of recording after 25 mm of rain on 17 September (Figure 3-2). Peak flow at the SW-6 site is likely to have exceeded 50 L/sec following the 50 mm of rain on 18 September. Flow stabilised in Spring Creek (SW-2) several days after this heavy rainfall event and after



approximately one week in Majors Creek (SW-4). Flow at all sites had returned to near base flow conditions at the time of the autumn sampling event (Figure 3-2). Flow in Spring Creek (SW-2) exceeded the flow measured downstream at SW-6 for several days around 20 October 2013 and may represent highly localised rainfall in the Spring Creek catchment or water discharge and transfer around the Mine site (Figure 3-2).

3.3 Water Quality The electrical conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen and turbidity data from the spring and autumn sampling events in 2012 (before construction) and 2013 (after construction) for the site groups detailed in Table 2-2 are presented in Figures 3-3-3-6, respectively. Nutrient data (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) for sites SW-3, SW-5, SW-6 and SW-7 during 2012 and 2013 are depicted in Figures 3-7 and 3-8 respectively. All raw water quality data for 2013 are presented in Appendix B. In all figures, the green and red dashed lines indicate the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger values for south-east Australian upland rivers.

All water quality data are presented as box and whisker plots. The top and bottom of each box represents the 1st and 3rd quartile (25th and 75th percentiles) and the top and bottom ‘whiskers’ represent the 95th and 5th percentile, respectively. The middle horizontal line represents the median value. The number of samples (n) is 4 for all site groups except in Figure 3-6 where n=9 for Group 1 (Araluen) in autumn 2013 and n=12 for all other groups and seasons. For the nutrient data, n=8 for all sites in 2012 and n= 10 for all sites in 2013. Note that the median is calculated as the mean of the middle two values in cases where there is an even number of samples.

Figure 3-3 Electrical conductivity measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events

Electrical conductivity was much higher in the Spring Creek group (Sites 5 & 6) during all monitoring events, this being due to consistently greater readings at Site 5 which exceeded the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) trigger value before and after construction commenced (Figure 3-3). Electrical conductivity at all site groups was lower during the autumn 2012 sampling event than in subsequent events and was likely to be associated with prior rainfall that persisted to within several days of sampling. Electrical conductivity at the site groups downstream of the Mine was marginally above the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger value, before and after construction commenced, except in 2012, as previously noted (Figure 3-3).



Figure 3-4 pH measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events

All pH measurements were within the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger values with the exception of low (more acidic) values recorded at Site 8 during spring 2013. No consistent differences between the pH measurements taken before and after construction commencement were observed (Figure 3-4).

Figure 3-5 Dissolved oxygen measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events

The majority of the dissolved oxygen measurements were below the lower ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) default trigger value. The sites in the upper catchment (Spring Creek and Majors Creek groups) have consistently had the lowest values (Figure 3-5).



Figure 3-6 Turbidity measurements collected during 2012 and 2013 sampling events

Turbidity measurements were higher at all site groups during the autumn 2012 sampling event than in subsequent events, this being this being associated with increased stream flows after a significant rainfall event (Figure 3-6). Turbidity measurements recorded at the Escarpment and Araluen Groups, downstream of the Mine in 2013 were above those collected in spring 2012, although are each representative of a single point in time only (Figure 3-6).

Figure 3-7 Ex-situ total nitrogen measurements collected in 2012 and 2013

The median total nitrogen concentration was above the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) guideline at all sites assessed in 2012 and 2013, except for the furthest downstream site (SW-7) (representing the Araluen group) in 2013 (Figure 3-7). The 95th percentile value was much higher at sites SW-5 and SW-6 in 2013 compared with the 2012 data for these sites, this being due to elevated concentrations at these sites on 16 July 2013, several weeks after a period of intense rainfall (Figure 3-7).



Figure 3-8 Ex-situ total phosphorus measurements collected in 2012 and 2013

The concentration of total phosphorus was generally below the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) guideline at most sites and was commonly at the limit of reporting (0.02 mg/L). In 2012, total phosphorus concentrations at site SW-5 (representing the Majors Creek group) were more often above the guideline than below, as indicated by the median value, 75th and 95th percentiles (Figure 3-8). The highest concentrations were observed at sites SW-5 and SW-6 on 15 January and 19 February 2013, respectively (Figure 3-8). These dates were preceded by periods with low intensity rainfall.

3.4 Macroinvertebrates

3.4.1 SIGNAL2 and AUSRIVAS The mean taxa richness, SIGNAL2 scores and AUSRIVAS OE50 scores and Bands for edge and riffle habitats for all the surveys to date are presented in Figure 3-9 to Figure 3-12, respectively. In all figures, the means and standard errors for the upper Majors Creek (Group 4) and Spring Creek (Group 3) groups are presented on the left and the Escarpment (Group 2) and Araluen (Group 1) groups on the right. Any comparisons between the groups of samples depicted in Figure 3-11 and Figure 3-12 should consider that AUSRIVAS outputs for spring and autumn, edge and riffle samples are produced by four separate models, outputs for which are described in Table 2-4. Raw data and summary statistics are provided in Appendix C.

A total of 79 macroinvertebrate taxa were collected across habitats and seasons in 2012, while 75 taxa were collected in 2013. The taxon richness was greater in spring 2012, autumn 2013 and spring 2013 than in spring 2011 and autumn 2012 (Figure 3-9). Taxa richness in edge habitat samples was greater or equal to that of riffle habitat samples in all seasons of all years (Figure 3-9), this being typical of the family level diversity expected for these habitats.

Taxon richness ranged from 11 to 37, with an average of 25.4 for the control sites (Majors Creek group in 2012 and 2013) and from 25 to 39, with an average of 31.0 for the impact sites (Spring Creek group in 2012 and 2013). Average taxon richness was therefore higher in the impact sites than the control sites, this being the case in both 2012 and 2013.



Figure 3-9 Mean taxa richness for all seasons and habitats sampled to date (grouped by location)

SIGNAL2 scores for all edge habitat samples ranged from 3.6 to 5.8, with an average of 4.7 in 2012 and from 3.8 to 5.0, with an average of 4.3 in 2013. Average SIGNAL2 scores for edge habitat were therefore slightly greater overall in the 2012 baseline phase than the 2013 construction phase samples (Figure 3-10).

SIGNAL2 scores for all riffle habitat samples ranged from 4.9 to 6.4, with an average of 5.6 in 2012 and from 5.2 to 6.3, with an average of 5.6 in 2013. Average SIGNAL2 scores for riffle habitat were similar for the 2012 baseline phase and the 2013 construction phase samples, but the range in 2012 was greater (Figure 3-10). SIGNAL2 scores for the 2011 samples were lower than those collected in 2012 and 2013.

SIGNAL2 scores ranged from 3.8 to 4.6, with an average of 4.1 for the control sites (Majors Creek group in 2012 and 2013) and from 3.6 to 4.9, with an average of 4.3 for the impact sites (Spring Creek group in 2012 and 2013) (Figure 3-10). Average SIGNAL2 scores were therefore slightly higher and had a greater range at the impact sites than the control sites, this being the case both before and after construction.

Two organisms with SIGNAL2 grades of 9 or higher (indicative of minimal water pollution) were found in 2013, which had not been recorded previously. These were the Coleoptera (beetle) family Ptilodactylidae found in the Site 3 riffle habitat in autumn 2013, and the Trichoptera (caddisfly) Glossosomatidae found in the Site 1 riffle in spring 2013.

Numerous other organisms with high SIGNAL2 grades ( 8) were found in samples collected from 2011, 2012 and 2013, including Leptophlebiidae, Telephlebiidae, Gripopterygiidae, Hydrobiosidae, Philopotamidae, Helicopsychidae and Philorheithridae. Another with a high grade, Tasimiidae was found in 2012 and 2013 but not in 2011.

Figure 3-10 Mean SIGNAL2 scores for all seasons and habitats sampled to date (grouped by location)

Site

7 &

8 n

ot s

ampl

ed in

201

1 Si

te 7

& 8

not

sam

pled

in 2

011



AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa scores for edge samples ranged from 0.48 to 1.20, with an average of 0.86, in 2012 and from 0.77 to 1.30 with an average of 1.00 in 2013. In both years, that fauna ranged from Band B to Band X. Edge samples collected during the 2013 construction phase therefore scored better overall than those collected in the 2012 baseline phase (Figure 3-11). In particular, sites at Araluen (Group 1) and the Escarpment (Group 2) consistently achieved Band A or Band X in 2013, whereas Site 3 in the Escarpment group was placed in Band B in both spring and autumn 2012.

AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa scores for the edge habitat samples in 2011 ranged from 0.58 to 1.16, with an average of 0.94, these falling within Band A and B. The smaller number of sites sampled (6) and lack of autumn sample in 2011 limits comparison with the subsequent years. The samples from the Araluen and Escarpment groups (Group 1 and 2 respectively) in 2011, however, compare favourably to the spring samples of 2012 and are similar to those of 2013, but the 2011 Spring Creek group samples (Group 3) were in a poorer condition than the proceeding spring samples of both 2012 and 2013 (Figure 3-11).

AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa scores for edge habitat samples ranged from 0.48 to 1.03, with an average of 0.83 for the control sites (Majors Creek group in 2012 and 2013), and from 0.59 to 0.99, with an average of 0.88 for the impact sites (Figure 3-11). Average AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa scores were therefore greater for the impact sites than the control sites, this being the case both before and after construction.

Edge samples collected from Site 8 generally received the lowest AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa score, while those from Sites 1, 2, 3 and 4 usually scored most favourably.

*Note that the bands displayed are relevant to spring edge habitat, these differing slightly to those for autumn

Figure 3-11 Mean AUSRIVAS OE50 scores for edge habitat samples (grouped by location)

AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa scores for riffle samples ranged from 0.72 to 0.99, with an average of 0.80 in 2011, from 0.60 to 0.94, with an average of 0.73 in 2012 and from 0.60 to 1.14, with an average of 0.98 in 2013. In 2011, the riffle fauna fell within Bands A or B, however, in 2012 and 2013, the condition ranged from Band A to Band C. Samples collected during the 2013 construction phase therefore had better overall OE50 taxa on average than the baseline samples collected in 2011 and 2012 (Figure 3-12).

Site

7 &

8 n

ot s

ampl

ed in

201

1 A

B

X

C



*Note that the bands displayed are relevant to spring riffle habitat, these differing slightly to those for autumn

Figure 3-12 Mean AUSRIVAS OE50 scores riffle habitat samples (grouped by location)

3.4.2 Multivariate Analysis The PERMANOVA analysis indicated that the variation in macroinvertebrate assemblages was not statistically significant between Treatments, Years or Seasons, nor were there any significant interactions between these factors (Appendix D). This analysis therefore implies that there is no statistical difference between the control and impact groups considering temporal variability across the years and seasons sampled. The power of the sampling design for this analysis is relatively low, which affects the ability of the test to detect significant differences in the levels of factors.

The two dimensional MDS plot (Figure 3-13) shows no distinct grouping of samples based on the factors assessed. In particular, samples from the After-Impact groups (spring and autumn 2013) are not distinct from samples of other groups, these being within the larger 60% similarity cluster containing Before-Control and Before-Impact samples (Figure 3-13).

Figure 3-13 Outputs of the MDS conducted for the main BACI design

The second PERMANOVA indicated statistically significant differences between Years and Seasons, but no significant interaction between these factors (Appendix D). This analysis therefore indicates that a statistically significant difference exists for the edge habitat macroinvertebrate assemblage downstream of the Majors and Spring Creek confluence between 2012 and 2013 and between spring and autumn.

Site

1 o

nly

X

A

B

C



The two dimensional MDS plot (Figure 3-14) illustrates the distinction between the 2012 (green symbols) and 2013 (blue symbols) samples and shows a greater level of within-group similarity in the 2013 than 2012 samples. Samples collected in spring 2013 show the highest level of within group similarity, with three of the four samples falling within the 80% cluster.

SIMPER analysis showed that the top ten taxa which contributed most to the difference in the edge assemblage between 2012 and 2013 were Notonectidae (+), Synlestidae (-), Scirtidae (-), Psephenidae (-) and Tasimiidae (-), Ostracoda (+), Hydroptilidae (+), Hydrobiosidae (-), Oligochaeta (~) and Calamoceratidae (+), these taxa showing an increase (+), decrease (-) or no change (~) in occurrence between 2012 to 2013. It should be noted that each of these ten taxa contributed between 2-3% of the variability only and that their combined contribution was just over 25%.

Figure 3-14 Outputs of the MDS conducted on edge samples using the Before-After design

PERMANOVA analysis based on riffle sample data also indicated statistically significant differences for the factors of Year and Season, but no significant interaction between factors (Appendix D). This analysis again indicates a statistically significant temporal difference in riffle habitat macroinvertebrate assemblages for sites downstream of the Majors and Spring Creek confluence, although the variation between 2012 and 2013 is less pronounced than that of the edge habitat data.

The two dimensional MDS plot (Figure 3-15) shows that most samples collected in 2013 are grouped together within the larger 60% cluster, with the exception of two of the autumn samples. One of these, the Site 1 autumn 2013 sample, is distinct from all other samples below the 60% similarity cluster and is depicted on the top left of the MDS plot. This was the only riffle habitat sampled in autumn 2013 in the Araluen group (Group 1) due to limited flow at that time.

For riffle samples, the SIMPER analysis indicated the following top ten taxa contributed to the difference in the macroinvertebrate assemblage: Telephlebiidae (+), Philopotamidae (+), Stratiomyidae (+), Hydracarina (+), Corydalidae (+), Simuliidae (-), Gomphidae (+), Psephenidae (-), Polycentropodidae (+) and Hydrophilidae (+) these taxa showing an increase (+) or decrease (-) in occurrence between 2012 to 2013. Each taxon again contributed a relatively small (around 3-4%) amount to the total variability between 2012 and 2013. Their combined contribution was just under 35%.



Figure 3-15 Outputs of the MDS conducted on riffle samples using the Before-After design

3.5 Fish The number of fish and the catch per unit effort for each species recorded in autumn and spring 2013 are presented in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2, respectively. Details on the electrofisher settings and run times are provided in Appendix E.

A total of 140 individual fish from five native species were captured during autumn 2013 and 97 individual fish from four native and one introduced species were captured in spring 2013. The unidentified Anguilla sp. captured in autumn 2013 is likely to be A. australis, but this could not be confirmed in the field at the time of capture. The total catch was therefore 237 individuals from six species in 2013, while 107 individuals from four species were captured in 2012 (Cardno 2013).

Two of the species captured in 2013, the native Common Galaxias and the introduced Eastern Gambusia, had not been captured in previous surveys. The four Common Galaxias captured in autumn at Site 1 were 14 to 17 centimetres long and therefore most likely adults (Allen and Midgley 2003). A single three centimetre long Eastern Gambusia was captured at Site 8 in spring only. Eastern Gambusia is listed as a noxious species under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 and grows to around 3.5 and 6 cm for males and females, respectively (Allen and Midgley 2003).

Mountain Galaxias, the most abundant species captured in both seasons of 2013, were caught at Sites 3, 4 and 7 only. This was also the case in 2012, except that one individual was found at both Site 5 and Site 8 in autumn (Cardno 2013). The abundance of this species appears to have increased between the two years, with the total number and the catch per unit effort increasing for both seasons in 2013 when compared to that of 2012 (Cardno 2013), while there distribution remained relatively stable.

The majority of Mountain Galaxias captured during the 2013 sampling were between three to five centimetres long, although several larger individuals, with a maximum length of seven centimetres, were also caught. This species is reported to attain a maximum length of 13.5 centimetres, but are more commonly recorded at between six to eight centimetres (Allen and Midgley 2003), suggesting that the majority of Mountain Galaxias captured may have been juveniles or small adults.

Eels, the second most abundant fish captured in 2013, were caught at all sites except Site 2 in spring and were mostly Short-finned Eels. Long-finned Eels were captured at Site 6 in autumn and Site 1 in spring 2013. Eels were slightly more abundant in 2012 than 2013 as indicated by the total capture and catch per unit effort between the two years (Cardno 2013).



Coxs Gudgeon were captured at Site 1 and/or Site 2 only during the 2011, 2012 and 2013 sampling events, but one individual was also captured in 2011 at Site 5. This species was more abundant in autumn 2013, with 17 individuals captured across two sites (Table 3-1), but fewer than ten individuals were captured on other sampling occasions and only two during the autumn 2012 (Cardno 2013) and spring 2011 (Cardno 2011) sampling events. Coxs Gudgeon captured in 2013 were between five to ten centimetres long, with the longest individuals all captured in autumn. Coxs Gudgeon are reported to grow to 19 centimetres but are more commonly recorded to 15 centimetres (Allen and Midgley 2003).

Table 3-1 Number of fish captured and catch per unit effort for the autumn 2013 sampling event Site Code

Common Name Scientific Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Short-finned Eel Anguilla australis 2 (0.2) 1 (0.1) 4 (0.5) 1 (0.1) 3 (0.5) 1 (0.5) 1 (0.1) 1 (0.4)

Long-finned Eel Anguilla reinhardtii 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.5) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Eel Anguilla sp. 2 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 6 (0.8) 5 (0.8) 1 (0.5) 2 (0.3) 3 (1.3)

Common Galaxias Galaxias maculatus 4 (0.5) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Mountain Galaxias Galaxias olidus 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 23 (3.0) 30 (3.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 32 (4.3) 0 (0.0)

Coxs Gudgeon Gobiomorphus coxii 11 (1.4) 6 (0.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) * Numbers in brackets are catch per unit effort as number per minute

Table 3-2 Number of fish captured and catch per unit effort for the spring 2013 sampling event Site Code

Common Name Scientific Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Short-finned Eel Anguilla australis 1 (0.1) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 4 (0.6) 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) 3 (0.6) 4 (1.1)

Long-finned Eel Anguilla reinhardtii 1 (0.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Mountain Galaxias Galaxias olidus 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 23 (2.9) 12 (1.7) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 36 (6.6) 0 (0.0)

Coxs Gudgeon Gobiomorphus coxii 7 (1.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Eastern Gambusia Gambusia holbrooki 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) * Numbers in brackets are catch per unit effort as number per minute



4 Discussion

The aquatic ecology assessment completed for the Mine (Cardno 2011) identified three potential impacts that may occur during the construction phase, with input of sediment from surface earthworks being the only one having the potential to impact aquatic ecosystem receptors. The threat from the other potential construction related impacts identified was considered to be negligible, these being disruption of the movement of aquatic fauna by in-stream works and impacts to threatened and protected species.

In 2013, heavy rainfall led to the mobilisation of sediments from construction works at the Mine that was observed as a plume entering Majors Creek via Spring Creek. Civil works were subsequently undertaken to improve erosion and sediment controls at the construction site to prevent a reoccurrence of the event. Monitoring data collected before and after the sediment mobilisation did not identify a major change in the aquatic ecosystem in response to this event (Cardno 2013a). It is, however, possible that short-term, localised impacts occurred, but could not be detected.

The potential for effects on key threatening processes was also identified in the aquatic ecology assessment, including: Predation by Gambusia holbrooki (Eastern Gambusia), listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995; and degradation of native riparian vegetation along NSW water courses and removal of large woody debris from NSW rivers and streams, listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994. These potential key threatening processes are also discussed below with respect to the ongoing aquatic ecology monitoring, where appropriate.

4.1 Aquatic Habitat and Environmental Conditions The condition of the aquatic habitat in 2013 was similar to that observed during 2012, in that the sites furthest upstream in the Spring Creek and Majors Creek catchments were in a more degraded state than those further downstream. Sites 5, 6, 7 and 8 in the upper catchment had evidently undergone substantial geomorphic change from historical alluvial mining activities and were also subject to hydrological disturbance due to impoundment from in-stream structures such as the causeway at Red Hill Road (Site 8) and the concrete structure on upper Spring Creek (Site 6). Sites further downstream on the escarpment showed less obvious geomorphic disturbance, although substantial disturbance and weed infestation was evident in the riparian zone, particularly at Site 4 immediately downstream of the Majors Creek road bridge. Sites furthest downstream around Araluen showed the least geomorphic and hydrological disturbance, although they were subject to the pressures of farming and agriculture, particularly further downstream towards Araluen.

Water quality measurements collected during the biological sampling provide a snapshot of quality at the time of sampling under the prevailing flow conditions. The baseline water quality data, particularly the elevated salinity and nutrient concentrations and reduced dissolved oxygen concentrations, reflect the condition of the catchment, which has been degraded by historical land use, including deforestation, agriculture, rural development and alluvial mining. The measurements taken so far in 2013 show that additional degradation of water quality has not occurred since the Mine related construction work began. Routine monthly sampling undertaken by Unity Mining Ltd. provides a better indication of the seasonal variability in water quality, although it does not represent water quality under peak flow conditions. Historical changes to water quality are evident from the spike in salinity at Spring Creek (Site 5) near the old Dargues Reef mine shaft (R. W. Corkery, 2012).

4.2 Macroinvertebrates The multivariate statistical comparison of the macroinvertebrate assemblages along Spring Creek and control sites on Majors Creek upstream of its confluence with Spring Creek does not provide any evidence of changes as a result of the ongoing construction activities. The AUSRIVAS and SIGNAL2 indices for the impact sites (Group 3, Sites 5 and 6) also do not show any obvious signs of increasing biological degradation between the baseline and construction phase monitoring, when compared with the control sites (Group 4, Sites 7 and 8). These observations suggest that the Mine construction to date has not had a negative impact on aquatic ecology.

A statistically significant difference in the macroinvertebrate assemblage downstream of the Spring Creek confluence was observed between the baseline and construction phase. This was evident in both edge and



riffle habitat, but was more marked in the edge fauna between 2012 and 2013. In both cases, the absence of a control group means that the difference cannot be attributed to an effect associated with the construction activity. The difference is likely to be largely, if not entirely, due to natural variability.

The mean AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa score for the edge habitat samples from the Escarpment (Group 2) and Araluen (Group 1) groups increased between 2012 and 2013, whereas the mean SIGNAL2 score decreased. The increase in the AUSRIVAS OE50 taxa score indicates that more of the macroinvertebrate taxa expected to occur in an otherwise undisturbed system with similar environmental characteristics were found on average in 2013 compared with 2012. The decrease in SIGNAL2 score suggests that more pollution tolerant taxa were found on average in 2013 compared with 2012.

The trend in the AUSRIVAS indices for riffle and edge habitat fauna was similar to that of the edge habitat, with an increase in the OE50 taxa score being found between 2012 and 2013. SIGNAL2 scores were highest in the autumn 2012 for riffle habitat, although both spring and autumn 2013 scored higher on average than the spring 2012 scores.

The variability in these indices does not provide evidence of any construction related impact on aquatic ecology. Although there appears to be no evidence of an impact, this possibility cannot be entirely discounted, because of the low statistical power of the multivariate analyses at this stage. This will improve as more data are collected. It should also be noted that the late timing of the autumn 2012 sampling may have influenced the macroinvertebrate data obtained and could have influenced the results of statistical analysis.

Further monitoring of the aquatic ecosystem using the established techniques and appropriate analysis of the data obtained should continue throughout the life of the Mine.

4.3 Fish Eastern Gambusia are the more significant of the two previously unobserved species of fish captured in 2013, being listed as a Class 1 noxious species outside of the Sydney Metropolitan Area (Fisheries Management Act, 1994). Within the Sydney Metropolitan Area, these fish have become common and well established, and their status has been downgraded to Class 3. It is an offence under the Fisheries Management Act to knowingly possess, sell, distribute or release declared Class 1 noxious fish. As notification of their presence or suspected presence to a fisheries officer is required under the Fisheries Management (General) Regulation it is recommended that this be done as soon as possible. Failure to notify may result in a penalty in the event that it has not already occurred and/or is not actioned as soon as practicable. All fish captured are reported annually to the NSW DPI (Fisheries) by Cardno as a condition of our permit to sample fish. This notification will occur in January 2014. .

Eastern Gambusia may have been present in the impounded water upstream of the Red Hill Road causeway (Site 8) prior to their capture in spring 2013, as favourable habitat exists here that is not accessible for backpack electrofishing. The presence of this species in the channel downstream of the causeway may have been due to previous flushing of the impounded water following elevated rainfall or may have been due to release by a member of the public. It is highly unlikely that the presence of this species is linked to any activities associated with the Mine, due to the location of its capture.

The other previously unobserved fish species found in 2013 were the relatively large Common Galaxias captured at the furthest downstream site. This species migrates down to estuaries to spawn during high ‘spring’ tides in autumn (Allen and Midgley 2003). The mature individuals observed in autumn are likely to have swam upstream to the below the escarpment waterfall and subsequently moved back downstream before the spring sampling.

There is no conclusive evidence of any impact on fish populations as a result of Project construction. Abundance of the native Coxs Gudgeon, Mountain Galaxias and Common Galaxias had increased, whereas that of native eels had decreased between the 2012 baseline monitoring and the 2013 construction phase monitoring. The variability in fish communities observed is likely to be due to natural variability and/or an artefact of the sampling rather than a Project related effect.



5 Conclusions and Recommendations

The aquatic ecology monitoring undertaken during the baseline and construction phase periods 2011 has provided measures of spatial and temporal variability in several environmental and biological parameters. There is no conclusive evidence of any impact on these parameters as a result of Project construction. The following recommendations for ongoing monitoring have been made to ensure continuity of the program and to add value to aquatic ecology monitoring and management:

> Continuation of the aquatic ecology monitoring using the methods employed for baseline and construction phase surveys.

> Continued analysis of macroinvertebrate data to aid interpretation.

> Use of baited traps upstream of Site 8 to target Eastern Gambusia. This is a simple passive method for fish sampling involving the deployment of small collapsible baited traps into areas too deep to be reached with the backpack electrofisher. This method could be effectively and economically used in association with the use of the backpack electrofisher. Bait trapping could also be employed at Site 6 on Spring Creek, where deep water and blackberry overgrowth has prevented access to some areas of the site.



6 References Allen, G. R., Midgley, S. H. and Allan, M. (2003) Field Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Australia. West Australian Museum.

Anderson, M.J., Gorley, R.N. and Clarke, K.R. (2008) PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to Software and Statistical Methods. Primer-E, Plymouth.

ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000) Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, National Water Quality Management Strategy No. 4. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, October 2000.

Boulton, A.J. and Brock, M.A. (1999) Australian Freshwater Ecology - Processes and Management. Gleneagles Publishing

Cardno Ecology Lab (2011) Dargues Reef Gold Project Aquatic Ecological Assessment. Prepared for R.W. Corkery & Co Pty Ltd. November 2011

Cardno Ecology Lab (2012) Dargues Reef Gold Project Stygofauna Assessment. Prepared for R.W. Corkery & Co Pty Ltd. September 2012

Cardno Ecology Lab (2013) Dargues Reef Gold Project Aquatic Ecological Monitoring. Prepared for Unity Mining. February 2013

Cardno Ecology Lab (2013a) Dargues Gold Mine Aquatic Habitat Assessment Report. Prepared for Unity Mining. May 2013

Cardno Ecology Lab (2013b) Dargues Reef Gold Project Round 2 Stygofauna Assessment. Prepared for Unity Mining. February 2013

Chessman (2003) SIGNAL 2.iv A Scoring System of Macroinvertebrates (Water Bugs) in Australian Rivers – User Manual, Monitoring River Health Initiative Technical Report No. 31. Department of the Environment Heritage

Chessman, B. C., Growns, J. E. and Kotlash, A. R. (1997) Objective derivation of macroinvertebrate family sensitivity grade numbers for the SIGNAL biotic index: Application to the Hunter River system, New South Wales. Marine & Freshwater Research 48, pp. 159-172.

Clarke K. R. (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in assemblage structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18, pp. 117-143.

Clarke K.R. and Gorley R.N. (2006) Primer V6: User Manual/Tutorial. Primer-E, Plymouth.

Corkery, R. W. & Co. (2012) Water Management Plan for the Dargues Reef Gold Project. Prepared for Big Island Mining.

Coysh, J.L., Nichols, S.J., Simpson, J.C., Norris, R.H., Barmuta, L.A., Chessman, B.C. and Blackman, P. (2000) Australian River Assessment System (AusRivAS). National River Health Program, Predictive Model Manual. Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia.

Jones, G. and Orr, P. in Sainty (2003) Waterplants in Australia – A Field Guide 4th edition. Sainty and Associates Pty Ltd.

Turak, E., Waddell, N. and Johnstone, G. (2004) New South Wales (NSW) Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS). Sampling and Processing Manual. Environmental Protection Authority. pp. 45.

Unity Mining (2013) Dargues Reef – Environment – Monitoring <http://www.unitymining.com.au/monitoring/> Accessed 12 November 2013

http://www.unitymining.com.au/monitoring/



Dargues Gold Mine

APPENDIX A HABITAT DESCRIPTION INFORMATION



1. Modified version of the RCE inventory (Chessman et al. 1997)

Descriptor and category Score Descriptor and category Score

1. Land use pattern beyond the immediate riparian zone 8. Riffle / pool sequence

Undisturbed native vegetation 4 Frequent alternation of riffles and pools 4

Mixed native vegetation and pasture/exotics 3 Long pools with infrequent short riffles 3

Mainly pasture, crops or pine plantation 2 Natural channel without riffle / pool sequence 2

Urban 1 Artificial channel; no riffle / pool sequence 1

2. Width of riparian strip of woody vegetation 9. Retention devices in stream

More than 30 m 4 Many large boulders and/or debris dams 4

Between 5 and 30 m 3 Rocks / logs present; limited damming effect 3

Less than 5 m 2 Rocks / logs present, but unstable, no damming 2

No woody vegetation 1 Stream with few or no rocks / logs 1

3. Completeness of riparian strip of woody vegetation 10. Channel sediment accumulations

Riparian strip without breaks in vegetation 4 Little or no accumulation of loose sediments 4

Breaks at intervals of more than 50 m 3 Some gravel bars but little sand or silt 3

Breaks at intervals of 10 - 50 m 2 Bars of sand and silt common 2

Breaks at intervals of less than 10 m 1 Braiding by loose sediment 1

4. Vegetation of riparian zone within 10 m of channel 11. Stream bottom

Native tree and shrub species 4 Mainly clean stones with obvious interstices 4

Mixed native and exotic trees and shrubs 3 Mainly stones with some cover of algae / silt 3

Exotic trees and shrubs 2 Bottom heavily silted but stable 2

Exotic grasses / weeds only 1 Bottom mainly loose and mobile sediment 1

5. Stream bank structure 12. Stream detritus

Banks fully stabilised by trees, shrubs etc. 4 Mainly unsilted wood, bark, leaves 4

Banks firm but held mainly by grass and herbs 3 Some wood, leaves etc. with much fine detritus 3

Banks loose, partly held by sparse grass etc. 2 Mainly fine detritus mixed with sediment 2

Banks unstable, mainly loose sand or soil 1 Little or no organic detritus 1

6. Bank undercutting

13. Aquatic vegetation

None, or restricted by tree roots 4 Little or no macrophyte or algal growth 4

Only on curves and at constrictions 3 Substantial algal growth; few macrophytes 3

Frequent along all parts of stream 2 Substantial macrophyte growth; little algae 2

Severe, bank collapses common 1 Substantial macrophyte and algal growth 1

7. Channel form

Deep: width / depth ratio < 7:1 4

Medium: width / depth ratio 8:1 to 15:1 3

Shallow: width / depth ratio > 15:1 2

Artificial: concrete or excavated channel 1



2. NSW DPI fish habitat assessment criteria (DPI 2013)

Type Characteristics of waterway type

Type 1 - Highly sensitive key fish habitat:

Freshwater habitats that contain in-stream gravel beds, rocks greater than 500 millimetres in two dimensions, snags greater than 300 millimetres in diameter or three metres in length, or native aquatic plants.

Any known or expected protected or threatened species habitat or area of declared ‘critical habitat’ under the FM Act.

Mound springs.

Type 2 – Moderately sensitive key fish habitat:

Freshwater habitats and brackish wetlands, lakes and lagoons other than those defined in Type 1.

Weir pools and dams up to full supply level where the weir or dam is across a natural waterway.

Type 3 – Minimally sensitive key fish habitat may include:

Coastal and freshwater habitats not included in Types 1 or 2. Ephemeral aquatic habitat not supporting native aquatic or wetland vegetation.

Not considered key fish habitat1

First and second order gaining streams (based on the Strahler method of stream ordering).

Farm dams on first and second order streams or unmapped gullies Agricultural and urban drains.

Urban or other artificial ponds (e.g. evaporation basins, aquaculture ponds) Sections of stream that have been concrete-lined or piped (not including a waterway crossing).

Canal estates.

1 Note that if any of these habitats are found to be habitat of a listed threatened species, population or ecological community or ‘critical habitat’, then they would be considered ‘key fish habitat’ for the purposes of Tables 1 and 2 and these policies and guidelines



3. Classification of waterways for fish passage (NSW DPI 2013)

Classification Characteristics of waterway type Minimum recommended crossing type

Additional design information

Class 1 – Major fish habitat

Marine or estuarine waterway or permanently flowing or flooded freshwater waterway (e.g. river or major creek), habitat of a threatened or protected fish species or ‘critical habitat’.

Bridge, arch structure or tunnel.

Bridges are preferred to arch structures.

Class 2 – Moderate fish habitat

Non-permanently flowing (intermittent) stream, creek or waterway (generally named) with clearly defined bed and banks with semi-permanent to permanent waters in pools or in connected wetland areas. Freshwater aquatic vegetation is present. Type 1 and 2 habitats present.

Bridge, arch structure, culvert or ford 2.

Bridges are preferred to arch structures, box culverts and fords (in that order).

Class 3 – Minimal fish habitat

Named or unnamed waterway with intermittent flow and sporadic refuge, breeding or feeding areas for aquatic fauna (e.g. fish, yabbies). Semi-permanent pools form within the waterway or adjacent wetlands after a rain event. Otherwise, any minor waterway that interconnects with wetlands or other Class 1 - three fish habitats.

Culvert3 or ford. Box culverts are preferred to fords and pipe culverts (in that order).

Class 4 – Unlikely fish habitat

Waterway (generally unnamed) with intermittent flow following rain events only, little or no defined drainage channel, little or no flow or free standing water or pools post rain events (e.g. dry gullies or shallow floodplain depressions with no aquatic flora present).

Culvert4, causeway or ford.

Culverts and fords are preferred to causeways (in that order).

2 High priority given to the ‘High Flow Design’ procedures presented for the design of these culverts—refer to the “Design Considerations” section of Fairfull and Witheridge (2003). 3 Minimum culvert design using the ‘Low Flow Design’ procedures; however, ‘High Flow Design’ and ‘Medium Flow Design’ should be given priority where affordable—refer to the “Design Considerations” section of Fairfull and Witheridge (2003). 4 Fish friendly waterway crossing designs possibly unwarranted. Fish passage requirements should be confirmed with NSW DPI.



Dargues Gold Mine

APPENDIX B RAW WATER QUALITY DATA



1. Raw water quality data for autumn 2013

Site Code

Site Name Date Time (24h) Replicate No. Depth (m) Temperature C)

Conductivity (µS/cm)

Salinity (ppt) pH (units) ORP (mV)

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 11:20:00 1 0.4 17.36 412 0.2 7.26 64.4

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 11:20:00 2 0.1 17.99 409 0.2 7.24 28.1

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 13:45:00 1 0.2 19.81 413 0.2 7.52 68.6

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 13:45:00 2 0.35 18.61 412 0.2 7.28 72

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek)

27/03/2013 09:00:00 1 0.2 14.53 375 0.18 7.74 96.5

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek)

27/03/2013 09:00:00 2 0.1 15.54 376 0.18 7.72 93.8

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek)

27/03/2013 10:20:00 1 0.5 15.44 382 0.18 7.55 105.7

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek)

27/03/2013 10:20:00 2 0.1 15.44 380 0.18 7.45 109.6

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek)

25/03/2013 16:00:00 1 0.1 17.33 903 0.45 7.63 141.4

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek)

25/03/2013 16:00:00 2 0.2 16.72 901 0.45 7.43 108.4

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek)

25/03/2013 14:00:00 1 0.05 18.35 372 0.18 7.41 129.5

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek)

25/03/2013 14:00:00 2 0.2 15.31 395 0.19 7.07 395

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 07:20:00 1 0.1 14.75 221 0.11 7.75 113.9

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 07:20:00 2 0.05 14.74 218 0.1 7.6 113

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 10:00:00 1 0.2 13.17 212 0.1 7.18 -42.6

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek)

26/03/2013 10:00:00 2 0.1 13.3 210 0.1 6.84 -29.3



Raw water quality data for autumn 2013 (cont.)

Site Code Site Name Date Time (24h) Replicate No. Depth (m)

Dissolved Oxygen (% sat.)

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

Turbidity (NTU) #1

Turbidity (NTU) #2

Turbidity (NTU) #3

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 11:20:00 1 0.4 79.1 7.59 -5.9 -5.9 -5.9

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 11:20:00 2 0.1 86.1 8.13 -6.6 -6.6 -6.6

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 13:45:00 1 0.2 78 7.1 -6.9 -6.9 -7

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 13:45:00 2 0.35 47.4 4.42 -6.1 -6.1 -6.1

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 27/03/2013 09:00:00 1 0.2 85.3 8.68 -4.7 -4.8 -4.8

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 27/03/2013 09:00:00 2 0.1 87.3 8.87 -4.6 -4.5 -4.6

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 27/03/2013 10:20:00 1 0.5 72.8 7.26 -3.8 -3.7 -3.7

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 27/03/2013 10:20:00 2 0.1 72.5 7.22 -4 -4 -4

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 25/03/2013 16:00:00 1 0.1 110.6 10.61 7.7 7.6 11.5

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 25/03/2013 16:00:00 2 0.2 85.1 8.25 1.1 1.1 1.1

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 25/03/2013 14:00:00 1 0.05 60.8 5.67 5.7 5.3 5.2

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 25/03/2013 14:00:00 2 0.2 67.6 6.77 4.1 3.2 2.9

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 07:20:00 1 0.1 54.8 5.56 -5 -5.1 -5.1

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 07:20:00 2 0.05 64.5 6.51 -5 -5 -5

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 10:00:00 1 0.2 26.3 2.71 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 26/03/2013 10:00:00 2 0.1 25.3 2.63 202 209 186



2. Raw water quality data for spring 2013


Temperature C)

Conductivity (µS/cm) Salinity (ppt) pH (units) ORP (mV)

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 15:30 1 0.05 14.36 378 0.18 7.23 62.8

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 15:30 2 1 13.91 377 0.18 7.18 41.1

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 9:45 1 0.2 12.73 367 0.18 7.48 106

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 9:45 2 0.05 12.86 367 0.18 7.49 107.5

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 13:30 1 0.3 13.58 360 0.17 7.64 38.4

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 13:30 2 0.2 13.58 360 0.17 7.66 59.7

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 14:50 1 0.3 13.03 356 0.17 7.63 98

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 14:50 2 0.05 12.98 355 0.17 7.58 101

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 10:15 1 0.3 10.18 830 0.41 6.86 108.3

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 10:15 2 0.1 10.23 836 0.41 6.99 76.2

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 8:30 1 0.05 9.35 337 0.16 6.59 123.2

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 8:30 2 0.3 9.12 375 0.18 6.77 103.3

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 13:00 1 0.3 11.67 198 0.09 7.57 73.8

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 13:00 2 0.2 11.31 197 0.09 7.56 73.7

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 1/10/2013 15:00 1 0.3 11.8 185 0.09 6.33 55.3

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 1/10/2013 15:00 2 0.1 12 108 0.05 6.24 25.9



Raw water quality data for spring 2013 (cont.)


Dissolved Oxygen (% sat.)

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

Turbidity (NTU) #1

Turbidity (NTU) #2

Turbidity (NTU) #3

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 15:30 1 0.05 85.3 8.71 -1.4 -1.4 -1.4

1 Downstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 15:30 2 1 85.8 8.86 -0.6 -0.7 -0.8

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 9:45 1 0.2 88.2 9.34 -0.5 -0.4 -0.4

2 Upstream Mountain road (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 9:45 2 0.05 88.4 9.33 -1.1 -1.1 -1.1

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 13:30 1 0.3 92.9 9.67 1.3 1.3 2.4

3 Downstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 13:30 2 0.2 93.3 9.69 9.6 6.1 4.7

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 14:50 1 0.3 99.5 10.47 1.7 1.6 1.6

4 Upstream Escarpment (Majors Creek) 3/10/2013 14:50 2 0.05 99.3 10.47 1.9 2 1.9

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 10:15 1 0.3 89.2 9.98 5 4.9 4.9

5 Downstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 10:15 2 0.1 88.2 9.88 3.7 3.7 3.8

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 8:30 1 0.05 27.7 3.15 6.2 6 5.8

6 Upstream (Upper Spring Creek) 2/10/2013 8:30 2 0.3 66.6 7.68 6.1 6 6.2

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 13:00 1 0.3 106.3 11.55 1.8 1.8 1.8

7 Downstream (Upper Majors Creek) 2/10/2013 13:00 2 0.2 111 12.15 1.9 1.9 1.9

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 1/10/2013 15:00 1 0.3 46.3 4.98 14.2 13.7 13.7

8 Upstream (Upper Majors Creek) 1/10/2013 15:00 2 0.1 49.3 5.28 11 11.2 11.2



Dargues Gold Mine

APPENDIX C RAW MACROINVERTEBRATE DATA



1. Raw macroinvertebrate data autumn 2013

Order or Family SITE_1 Autumn 2013 Edge

SITE_1 Autumn 2013 Riffle

SITE_2 Autumn 2013 Edge









Dugesiidae X X X X

Nematoda X

Hyriidae

Corbiculidae/ Sphaeriidae X X X X

Hydrobiidae X X

Lymnaeidae

Ancylidae X X X

Planorbidae

Physidae X X X X X

Planorbidae/Physidae

Glossiphoniidae X

Hirudinidae

Oligochaeta X X X X X X X X X X X

Cladocera X X X

Copepoda X X X

Ostracoda X X X X X X X X

Ceinidae

Talitridae X X

Oniscidae

Atyidae X X X X X X

Araneae X X X X X X

Hydracarina X X X X X X X X X

Hypogastruridae X X

Entomobryidae X














Caenidae X X X X X X X

Baetidae X X X X X X X X

Leptophlebiidae X X X X X X X X X X X

Coenagrionidae X X X X X

Protoneuridae

Lestidae X

Megapodagrionidae X X X X X X X

Synlestidae X X X

Diphlebiidae

Gomphidae X X X X X X X

Aeshnidae X X X

Telephlebiidae X X X X X X X

Cordulephyidae

Hemicorduliidae X X X X

Synthemistidae X X X

Gripopterygiidae X X X X X X X X X X

Notonemouridae

Aphididae

Hebridae

Veliidae X X X X X X X

Gerridae

Gelastocoridae X X X X

Corixidae X X X X X X X X

Notonectidae X X X X X X

Corydalidae X X

Sialidae X














Dytiscidae X X X X X X X X X

Gyrinidae X

Hydrochidae

Hydrophilidae X X X X X X X X X

Hydraenidae X X X X X

Scirtidae X X X

Elmidae X X X X

Psephenidae X X X X

Ptilodactylidae X

Brentidae

Dixidae X X X X X

Culicidae X

Chironomidae/Chironominae X X X X X X X X X X X

Chironomidae/Orthocladiinae X X X X X X

Chironomidae/Podonominae

Chironomidae/Tanypodinae X X X X X X X X X X

Ceratopogonidae X X X X X X X

Simuliidae X X

Psychodidae X X X

Tipulidae X X X X X

Tabanidae

Stratiomyidae X X X X X X X X

Empididae

Hydrobiosidae X X X

Glossosomatidae

Hydroptilidae X X X X X














Philopotamidae X X X X

Hydropsychidae X X X X

Polycentropodidae X X X X

Ecnomidae X X X

Tasimiidae

Conoesucidae X X X

Helicopsychidae X

Odontoceridae

Atriplectididae X

Philorheithridae X X X

Calamoceratidae X X X

Leptoceridae X X X X X X X X X X X

Pyralidae

Taxa Richness 31 21 26 31 23 30 29 38 27 31 27

SIGNAL2 4.2 5.5 4.0 4.6 6.3 4.8 5.2 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.0

AUSRIVAS OE50 Taxa 1.14 0.60 0.87 1.11 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.90 0.83

AUSRIVAS Band A C A A A A A A A A A



2. Raw macroinvertebrate data spring 2013

Order or Family SITE_1 Spring 2013 Edge

SITE_1 Spring 2013 Riffle

SITE_2 Spring 2013 Edge










Dugesiidae X

Nematoda X

Hyriidae

Corbiculidae/ Sphaeriidae X X X X X

Hydrobiidae X X X

Lymnaeidae

Ancylidae

Planorbidae X

Physidae X X X

Planorbidae/Physidae

Glossiphoniidae

Hirudinidae

Oligochaeta X X X X X X X X X

Cladocera X X X X X X

Copepoda X X X

Ostracoda X X X X X X

Ceinidae

Talitridae

Oniscidae

Atyidae X X X X X X X X X

Araneae

Hydracarina X X X X X X X X X X X

Hypogastruridae

Entomobryidae















Caenidae X X X X X X X X X

Baetidae X X X X X X X

Leptophlebiidae X X X X X X X X X X X X

Coenagrionidae X X X X

Protoneuridae

Lestidae X

Megapodagrionidae X X X X X X X

Synlestidae X X X X X X

Diphlebiidae

Gomphidae X X X X X X X X

Aeshnidae X X X X X X X

Telephlebiidae X X X X

Cordulephyidae X

Hemicorduliidae X

Synthemistidae X X

Gripopterygiidae X X X X X X X X X X

Notonemouridae X

Aphididae

Hebridae

Veliidae X X X X X X X X X

Gerridae X

Gelastocoridae X X

Corixidae X X X X X X

Notonectidae X X X X X X

Corydalidae X X X















Sialidae

Dytiscidae X X X X X X X X X X

Gyrinidae X

Hydrochidae

Hydrophilidae X X X X X X X X X X

Hydraenidae X X X

Scirtidae X X X X X X

Elmidae X X X X X X

Psephenidae X

Ptilodactylidae

Brentidae

Dixidae X X X X X X

Culicidae

Chironomidae/Chironominae X X X X X X X X X X X X

Chironomidae/Orthocladiinae X X X X X X X X X X X

Chironomidae/Podonominae

Chironomidae/Tanypodinae X X X X X X X X X X

Ceratopogonidae X X X X X X X X X X X

Simuliidae X X X X

Psychodidae

Tipulidae X X X X X X X

Tabanidae

Stratiomyidae X X X

Empididae X

Hydrobiosidae X X X X X X















Glossosomatidae X

Hydroptilidae X X X X X

Philopotamidae X X X X X

Hydropsychidae X X

Polycentropodidae X

Ecnomidae X X X X

Tasimiidae X X X

Conoesucidae X X X X X X

Helicopsychidae X X X X

Odontoceridae X X X

Atriplectididae X

Philorheithridae X

Calamoceratidae X X X X X X X

Leptoceridae X X X X X X X X X X X

Pyralidae X X

Taxa Richness 31 25 33 26 25 27 27 30 25 29 30 21

SIGNAL2 5.0 5.4 4.6 5.3 4.4 5.9 4.5 5.2 4.0 4.9 3.8 4.4

AUSRIVAS OE50 Taxa 1.15 1.14 1.15 1 1.3 0.99 1.04 1.12 0.97 0.9 0.97 0.77

AUSRIVAS Band A A A A X A A A A A A B



Dargues Gold Mine

APPENDIX D MULTIVARIATE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS



PERMANOVA outputs performed using the BACI experimental design

Source of Variation df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) # unique permutations

Treatment (TT) 1 1552 1552 1.768 0.125 9914

Year (YR) 1 1132 1132 1.289 0.272 9912

Season (SN) 1 1207 1207 1.374 0.231 9902

TTxYR 1 1181 1181 1.345 0.254 9908

TTxSN 1 596 596 0.679 0.662 9908

YRxSN 1 1009 1009 1.149 0.345 9914

TTxYRxSN 1 289 289 0.329 0.917 9932

Residual 8 7024 878

Total 15 13989

PERMANOVA outputs performed using Before-After experimental design on edge data


YR 1 2473 2473 3.177 0.002** 9934

SN 1 1524 1524 1.958 0.024* 9933

YExSN 1 771 771 0.991 0.469 9897

Res 12 9339 778

Total 15 14107 * indicates a statistically significant result, ** indicates a highly significant result

PERMANOVA outputs performed using Before-After experimental design on riffle data


YR 1 1544 1544 2.435 0.016* 9927

SN 1 1667 1667 2.628 0.013* 9924

YExSN 1 1135 1135 1.790 0.104 9947

Res 11 6977 634

Total 14 11344 * indicates a statistically significant result



Dargues Gold Mine

APPENDIX E ELECTROFISHER INFORMATION



1. Electrofisher information for autumn 2013

Site Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

On time (sec) 485 412 465 465 384 120 445 136

On time (min) 8.1 6.9 7.8 7.8 6.4 2.0 7.4 2.3

Voltage (V) 250 250 240 240 250 250 300 300

Frequency (A) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Duty Cycle (%) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

2. Electrofisher information for spring 2013

Site Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

On time (sec) 436 535 483 412 312 152 326 212

On time (min) 7.3 8.9 8.1 6.9 5.2 2.5 5.4 3.5

Voltage (V) 300 300 300 300 150 150 150 250

Frequency (A) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Duty Cycle (%) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Documents

2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report - Diversified Mineralsdivminerals.com.au/.../2013-Aquatic-Ecology-Monitoring.pdf · 2017-06-14 · 2013 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Report Dargues