2. Methodologies Ecological surveys were initially conducted by GHD in early 2025, including a desktop assessment. Field surveys were undertaken in the wet season from the 7 th – 9 th of April 2025 and involved a combination of RE verification, including Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) assessments, protected plant surveys which also provided incidental observations of invasive flora species, habitat assessments for threatened species identified during desktop assessment, active searches, camera trapping, and opportunistic searches. In depth methodologies and survey effort are discussed in Sections 2.3.2 and 4.2 respectively of GHD’s Ecological Assessment Report (GHD, 2025). The results of GHD’s ecological surveys are discussed in Sections 4.3 and 4.4 of the same report for flora and fauna respectively. Deviations from guidelines by GHD are summarised below: While the survey guidelines recommend pitfall and Elliott trapping for reptiles, these methods typically have a low likelihood of detecting the relevant target species. Active searches are considered a more reliable method and are also recommended in the guidelines were undertaken for reptile detection. Call playback was deemed unnecessary and based on indirect evidence for koala, yellow-bellied glider, and greater glider, we conservatively assessed these species as likely or having potential to occur within the Project area. Grant Paterson (Managing Director and Principal Ecologist of GAP Tree Change Pty Ltd, contracted by WTS) and Lachlan McQuire (Principal Environmental Advisor at WTS) conducted a site visit on the 13 th of June 2025 with the aim of verifying GHD’s ecological observations and subsequently reviewing/revising their conclusions following analysis of the project area context. Grant Paterson has over 30 years’ botanical experience working both in government and in industry and is a suitably qualified person for the purposes of undertaking protected plant surveys. WTS undertook a two-stage process for terrestrial ecological surveys, following the Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey Guidelines for Queensland (Eyre, et al., 2022), which included an initial desktop assessment followed by field surveys. 2.1.Updated Desktop Assessment An updated desktop assessment was undertaken by WTS in September 2025 and the resources used are summarised in Table 2. The central point (-23.6325, 150.3636) was used across all searches a 10km buffer to ensure that all conservation significant matters relevant to the site were identified.
Table 2. Search tools used to conduct desktop analysis. Search/Resource Source
Search Criteria
Output
Date of Retrieval / Accessed September 2025
https://www.awe.gov.au/en vironment/epbc/protected- matters-search-tool
10 km radius from central point of Project area 10 km radius from central point of Project area
Possible presence of species or species habitats for MNES
Protected matters search tool (PMST) *Last updated 22 Nov 2024 Wildlife online database (WO) *Last updated 09 Dec 2024
https://apps.des.qld.gov.au /report-request/species-list
Point records for species
September 2025
6 Wulguru Technical Services Pty Ltd – Heritage Minerals Upper Mundic Gully TSF – Fauna Survey Assessment Report
Powered by FlippingBook