Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2023L01713:body:0:p48
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2023L01713
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 206251–211260

4.1, 4.6 and 4.7) – alone or in conjunction with other activities – must be referred to the Commonwealth for assessment and the assessment must be reviewed by a member of the Water Mouse Recovery Team with expertise in water mouse ecology and threats.   Proportion of proposed and approved coastal developments within the modelled water mouse distribution that are reviewed by a member of the Water Mouse Recovery Team.
            Responsibility:                                                                                                                                                  Adequate assessment and approval condition-setting of coastal developments requires an intricate understanding of water mouse ecology and threats. In some locations this information is sparse and a precautionary approach is required until further surveys and targeted research programs are completed. The Water Mouse Recovery Team is best placed to analyse potential development impacts using the most up-to-date water mouse ecology and threat information.                                                                                                                                                                            Proportion of proposed and approved coastal developments within the modelled water mouse distribution that appropriately consider each of the knowledge gaps outlined and condition the development accordingly using a precautionary approach.
            • Local, State & Commonwealth planning departments                                                                                                               Referral guidelines were developed for the water mouse in 2015 to support developers and assessors. While still relevant to supporting referral development, all referred actions within the modelled water mouse distribution must now be assessed against the information and actions outlined in this recovery plan. The water mouse recovery plan supersedes the referral guidelines. Under section 139 of the EPBC Act, the Minister must not act inconsistently with a recovery plan when deciding whether or not to approve the taking of an action.
            •Local, State & Commonwealth, environment departments                                                                                                            The cumulative impacts of coastal development (see Section 4.1) must be addressed when considering potential impacts on the water mouse, and sufficient consideration must be given to the following knowledge gaps about the water mouse:
            •Ecological experts within the Water Mouse Recovery Team                                                                                                         • Occurrence outside southeast Qld (Section 3.3).
                                                                                                                                                                             • Habitat attributes outside southeast Qld (Section 3.4).
                                                                                                                                                                             • Detectability, intermittent occupancy and areas supporting recovery (Sections 3.4, 3.11, 3.12, 4.3 and 4.4).
                                                                                                                                                                             • Dispersal and capacity to maintain gene flow (Section 3.8).
                                                                                                                                                                             • Susceptibility or resilience to increased cyclone and storm activity (Section 4.4).
                                                                                                                                                                             • The predicted migration, viability, and connectivity of coastal habitat as sea-levels rise (Section 4.2).
                                                                                                                                                                             • The capacity for inland and degraded areas to become habitat in the future (Sections 3.4 and 4.2).
                                                                                                                                                                             Where there is uncertainty, a precautionary approach must be implemented until knowledge gaps can be addressed.
1.2         Adequately account for detrimental impacts of offsets when considering how to mitigate coastal development impacts.                                              Offsets are unlikely to be a viable option to address impacts to the national water mouse population in most circumstances due to the linear coastal distribution of this species, its