Wambo Coal AEMR 2011-2012 - Peabody Energy

• Ground cover characteristics;
• Introduced species presence;
• Feral animal activity;
• Surface stability;
• Riparian microhabitat presence; and
• Disturbance levels.
» Visual assessment field sheets were updated in 2010 and 2011 to remove
inconsistencies in the weighting of scores. Negative attributes were given
negative scores in 2010 and 2011.
» Due to the change in the weighting of scores in 2010 and 2011, comparison
between 2010 and 2011 results and previous results cannot be made.
Field Sheet Scoring System
Transects and sections are awarded different colours according to their total score
condition rating. Sites ranked as poor are colour coded red, moderate as yellow, good as
green, and excellent as blue. The maximum possible score is 54 and the minimum
possible score is -51. Total score categories are as follows:
• Greater than 33 – Excellent condition (blue);
• 28 to 33 – Good condition (green);
• 14 to 27 – Moderate condition (yellow);
• Less than 14 – Poor condition (red).
The above condition rating score ranges are not equally weighted and were determined
by an assessment of the maximum possible score for each assessed component at each
condition level.
Poor condition sites are likely to be highly degraded and/or missing significant vegetation
structural components. Active management would likely be required to improve the scores
of poor condition sites. Moderate condition sites are considered relatively satisfactory and
require varying degrees of land management (to be considered on a site by site basis).
Good condition sites are considered in relatively good health and may only require
maintenance works such as weed control. Excellent condition sites are considered
unlikely to require any maintenance.
4.2 Results
Figures 4-1 and 4-2 show the results of the riparian condition assessments along South
Wambo Creek, North Wambo Creek and Stoney Creek. Appendix F lists the individual
transect and section scores for each creek line. Appendix G shows the 2011 photographs
of each transect site.
2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report, Final Report, May 2012 Page 30