Public Environment Report Tarkine Forest Drive ... - Transport

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. Feasible alternativesAny feasible alternatives to the action to the extent reasonably practicable,including:If relevant, the alternative of taking no actionA comparative description of the impacts of each alternative on the NESmatters protected by controlling provisions of Part 3 of the EPBC Act for theaction, including alternative road design options for areas of known risk tolisted threatened speciesSufficient detail to make clear why any alternative is preferred to another.Short, medium and long-term advantages and disadvantages of the options must bediscussed.There are no feasible technical alternatives to the current proposal. The proposalinvolves sealing of existing roads. There are no other alternative existing routespossible to achieve the project objectives and a new greenfield road developmentwould be unacceptable from an environment and also economic perspective.The Tasmanian Government has previously described an opportunity to improvetourism access to the Tarkine area through the development of a sealed 131 km touristroad connecting Myalla Road with the Arthur River Township (EPBC 2009/5169).However, that project was abandoned due to a number of circumstances and is not afeasible alternative. The original proposal is briefly discussed below for backgroundpurposes only.3.1 Original proposal - Tarkine RoadThe Tasmanian government previously proposed this as an action.The project sought to develop the tourist potential of the North West region bycreating a self-drive experience for visitors and facilitating the subsequentdevelopment of commercial tourist ventures.An extensive series of background surveys and monitoring programs had beenundertaken commensurate with the environmental and heritage values present. Theproject was referred to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act and was deemed a“Controlled Action” requiring full assessment via an Environmental Impact Statement.When the then Premier, the Hon David Bartlett MP, announced a $6.7 M investment ininfrastructure in the North West from the original $23 M allocated for the Tarkine RoadProject, it was necessary to re-scope the project.In early December 2010, the then Minister for Infrastructure, the Hon Lara GiddingsMP, announced that Cabinet had approved a revised project. This decision was basedon strong support from key stakeholders, such as the Cradle Coast Authority TarkineDiscussion Group. The revised project is the Tarkine Forest Drive, which is the subjectof this PER.An overview of potential impacts on Matters of NES associated with the original TarkineRoad proposal is provided in Table 3.1.Ref: HB09080H001 PER Tarkine Drive 33P Rev 00/DL/CL/jw 30
Table 3.1 - Overview of potential impacts on matters of NES in relation to the originalproposal - Tarkine RoadMatters of NationalEnvironmentalSignificanceEastern-barredbandicootPerameles gunnii gunniiSpotted-tail quollDasyurus maculatussubsp. maculatusTasmanian devilSarcophilus harrisiiTasmanian azurekingfisherCeyx azureusdiemenensisGiant freshwatercrayfishAstacopsis gouldiArthur River greenhoodPterostylis rubenachiiShortspike midge orchidCorunastylisbrachystachyaWindswept spider orchidCaladenia dienemaEPBC Act StatusVulnerableVulnerableEndangeredEndangeredVulnerableEndangeredEndangeredEndangeredPotential Impacts onMatters of NESElevated risk of roadkill onMawbanna Road.Elevated risk of roadkill.Elevated risk of roadkill. Minor riskof disturbance to den sites in thevicinity of new (currently unroaded)sections in the east. A newcrossing of the Arthur River mighthave increased movement of thespecies from the east, facilitatingthe rate of Devil Facial TumourDisease (DFTD).Minor impacts of disturbance tonesting birds in the vicinity ofbridge crossings of Rapid River,Lyons River and Arthur River.River disturbance for constructionof new crossings, provision ofpublic access facilitating poachinginto areas currently restricted tothe public, increased potential riskin roadkill at crossings not suitedto crayfish passage.Minor losses to outlying plants in aroadside population (Segment B).Minor impacts to potential habitatin immediate vicinity of SegmentsA and B.Minor impacts to potential habitatin immediate vicinity of SegmentsA and B.3.2 Taking no actionTaking no action would:Not satisfy the significant community expectation that the allocated funds wouldbe spent in the regionNot achieve any of the previously demonstrated benefits of proceeding with theproposal such as increased employment in the region and expected growth intourism numbersResult in the loss of valuable planning and design works already completed toprepare the original project, which can be readily used to support a re-scopedTarkine ProjectBe seen by the public as a waste of the significant investment in planning anddesign works.For these reasons, this option is not favoured.Ref: HB09080H001 PER Tarkine Drive 33P Rev 00/DL/CL/jw 31
Page 1: Public Environment ReportTarkine Fo
Page 4: Figure 4.8 - Distribution of pretty
Page 7 and 8: 1. General informationFor convenien
Page 9 and 10: 1.5 Background to the development o
Page 11 and 12: Extended visitor stays - most visit
Page 13 and 14: Tarkine tourism development strateg
Page 15 and 16: For example:The Tarkine has been id
Page 17 and 18: Current mining leasesTasmanian Adva
Page 19 and 20: The objectives of conservation area
Page 21 and 22: 2. Description of the actionIn rela
Page 23 and 24: 2.1 Construction programming approa
Page 25 and 26: IDFGHIJKLSectionDescriptionBlackwat
Page 27 and 28: 2.3.1 Construction methodWorker ind
Page 29 and 30: Equipment and machineryThe specific
Page 31 and 32: Figure 2.3 - Proposed bridge replac
Page 33 and 34: Precast concrete piers and abutment
Page 35: 2.5 Tourism infrastructure worksThe
Page 39 and 40: 4.1 AltitudeThe Tarkine Forest Driv
Page 41 and 42: 722131 TrowuttaThis land system has
Page 43 and 44: 4.8 Other important or unique value
Page 45 and 46: All potential habitats were inspect
Page 47 and 48: Eagle nest habitatForestry Tasmania
Page 49 and 50: Table 4.3 - Summary of the survey r
Page 51 and 52: PERReferenceNo furtheranalysis inPE
Page 53 and 54: Eight EPBC Act listed threatened fl
Page 55 and 56: Figure 4.2 - Distribution of Arthur
Page 57 and 58: Figure 4.4 - Threatened flora from
Page 59 and 60: Figure 4.5 - Distribution of large
Page 61 and 62: The potential for stochastic risk,
Page 63 and 64: Figure 4.7 - Distribution of northe
Page 65 and 66: The species potentially flowers fro
Page 67 and 68: Figure 4.9 - Distribution of short
Page 69 and 70: Figure 4.10 - Distribution of weste
Page 71 and 72: 4.10.8 Windswept Spider Orchid (Cal
Page 73: Known threatsThe key threat to wind

Public Environment Report Tarkine Forest Drive ... - Transport

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?