Zieria granulata (Illawarra Zieria) Recovery Plan

NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, 2005
ISBN: 1 7412 2143 9

Appendix 8: Summary of advice from the NSW Scientific Committee

Under Section 66A of the NSW TSC Act (1995), recovery plans must include a summary of any advice given by the NSW Scientific Committee, details of any amendments made to the plan to take account of that advice and a statement of reasons for any departure from that advice. The Scientific Committees comments on the draft Zieria granulata Recovery Plan and details of the amendments made are tabled below.

Section Comment Response
- Replace NVC Act with NV Act Amended
Section 6 There is good distributional data in the plan but virtually no biological data. No amendment necessary. All known biological data for the species is included in the plan. Actions 6.1 & 6.2 aim to improve knowledge of the biology and ecology of the species.
6.3.1 Given the rate of change in the Illawarra it is a concern that many sites have not been surveyed for over 10 years. It would have assisted the process if it were known how many of the populations/sub-populations were extant. No amendment necessary. Available resources limited the amount of field work that could be undertaken during the preparation of the plan. Actions 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.8 aim to ensure that this information is gathered during the implementation of the plan.
8.2 Knowledge of genetic structure will be extremely important in the event of replanting proposals (noting however that 8.6.1 would not favour translocation). No amendment necessary. No planting of the species is proposed in the plan. The stated overall objective of the plan is to promote the in-situ conservation of the species across its natural range.
8.3.5 Duke Energy is required to restore habitat and population numbers. Given the reported problems during construction what oversight of the operation occurs. In the case of increasing numbers - where do the additional plants come from? (and does this conflict with 8.6.1?) No amendment necessary. Under Action 2.7, the DEC will liaise with DIPNR and Duke Energy to ensure that the approval conditions for the Eastern Gas Pipeline that relate to Duke Energy are complied with. Habitat manipulation through controlled disturbance (following seed dispersal) would be the preferred means of increasing plant numbers where required.
8.3.8 Roadside verge maintenance is not covered by routine agricultural activity so presumably licensing is required. No amendment necessary. Licensing under the NSW TSC Act will be required for these activities if no Part 4 or Part 5 approval under the EP&A Act exists.
8.4 Relative conservation significance. This is potentially a dangerous concept which could lead to pressure for the loss of these sites apparently of low conservation significance. Site significance would need to be assessed holistically to include other matters such as presence of other listed species, EECs etc. Amended. Section 8.4 and Appendix 5 have been altered to clarify that the interim assessment of conservation significance is intended for use only in determining priorities for the allocation of the limited resources associated with the implementation of this plan. The assessment is not to be used in statutory environmental impact assessment processes.
8.6.2 Where would any seed collection be maintained? Action 6.2 specifies the Botanic Gardens but what is Gardens policy do they have the resources there is no indication of funding to meet costs. No amendment necessary. The seed collection is to be maintained at the Mount Annan Botanic Gardens. Table 7 details the DECs $17,000 in-kind commitment over five years to fund Action 5.2 (investigate basic seed biology) and Action 6.2. (long term seed storage).
Table 13 In light of DEC budget stringency, are the proposed budgets feasible? No amendment necessary. The proposed budget is feasible provided that external funds can be secured to implement the actions identified in Table 13 as having unsecured funds.