1. We have already made comment that the original application material was inadequate and that Council and residents were justified in opposing an application based on that information. The revised plans requiring less removal of the steep south/south eastern slope of the hill are a significant improvement over the original proposal. So too is the realignment of the access road through largely cleared farmland rather than along the heavily treed alignment of the existing Quarry Road.

1. The site contains three Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs). The first covers the majority of the site and is known as Granitic Grassy Woodland. The second and much smaller area of EVC occurs along Blackfellows Head Creek and is known as Creekline Grassy Woodland. The third is the Escarpment Shrubland which only occurs on the steep southern and eastern slopes of Blackfellows Hill. Mr Mueck and Ms Ablitt provided us with evidence about the EVCs and other environmental matters, including an assessment against the Native Vegetation Framework (Victoria's Native Vegetation Management; A Framework for Action). The assessment undertaken by Mr Mueck (Biosis Research Pty Ltd) identified three quality zones of Escarpment Shrubland and four of Grassy Woodland within the footprint of the proposed quarry and associated infrastructure. One of the Escarpment Shrubland and three of the Grassy Woodland quality zones were assessed to be of Very High conservation significance. In addition, six Old Large Trees (OLT) occur in and around the quarry infrastructure.
2. Without detailing all the material presented by Mr Mueck, it was his assessment that under the Native Vegetation Framework, the total habitat hectare offset for the proposed design including the new access road alignment is 1.04ha. Sites to cater for this habitat hectare offset have been identified and we accept that if a permit was being granted, then these offset requirements could be accommodated. However other environmental issues are much less well resolved.

1. Although we had the benefit of expert evidence reports and a great deal of additional information, we remain unconvinced that the permit applicant has fully comprehended that a quarry on this site requires a much more sophisticated approach than has been presented to date. We give just one example of why we have formed this view. The original Work Plan approved in July 2006 included the following three short paragraphs under the heading Existing Environmental Values:

The quarry is surrounded by cleared farming land used for grazing on all sides. The western boundary adjoins the un-named access road that has significant native vegetation. There are a few mature eucalypt trees on the land within the site area.

An ephemeral stream runs through the southern edge of the site that is a tributary to the Seven Creeks. The Seven Creeks is 400m to the east and downstream of the site.

Material has been previously won from a small part of the site and there is very little topsoil on the remaining land as the site is a point of eruption with exposed rock at the surface. This gives the site a low environmental site value.

1. Despite all the research that has been undertaken since July 2006, the revised work plan (marked 'Draft Update') presented to us in the evidence statement of Mr Dunn, included only one change to the description of existing environmental values by deleting the last sentence: This gives the site a low environmental site value and instead replacing it with the following new sentence: Although the site has been cleared and grazed some of the site contains very important/endangered Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs), with a diversity of plant species with significant conservation value on the southern steep face of site.
2. Apart from the original statement being misleading in stating that the site has a low environmental value, the new sentence does not do justice to the range of environmental issues raised in the evidence of Mr Mueck and Ms Ablitt, particularly the highly valued and very sensitive aquatic habitat in Blackfellows Head Creek and Seven Creeks.
3. Let us be clear about what that means. Seven Creeks is a waterway of national environmental significance. It contains the only known self supporting population of the Trout Cod which is classified as critically endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth). In addition, the waterway supports two other listed fish species - Macquarie Perch and Flathead Galaxias. One of the most critical threats to aquatic habitat, and recognised as such in the Victorian Fauna and Flora Guarantee Act 1988, is an increase in sediment input into Victorian rivers and streams due to human activities. Although the Trout Cod has been recorded upstream of the confluence of Seven Creeks and Blackfellows Head Creek, it seems to us, based on evidence and information we have been given, that this whole reach of Seven Creeks should be considered as potential habitat for this critically endangered species.
4. The problems we have identified in the previous section concerning the operational aspects of the quarry site, do not reassure us that the potential impacts on the aquatic habitat will be within acceptable bounds. We emphasis that this is not a 'normal' site. Because of the proximity to, and potential impacts on, habitat for three critically endangered and listed fish species, there can be no risk of polluted runoff reaching the steam environment. We are not convinced that the permit applicant, and the primary consultant engaged to obtain necessary approvals, fully comprehend this necessity. While it does necessarily rule out a quarry on this site, it does require a much more sophisticated approach to the layout and operational aspects than has been demonstrated to date.[9]

1. Our site inspection enabled us to gauge at first hand the relationship between the review site and neighbouring properties, to understand the impact of the proposed quarry in the site context and to assess the matters raised in evidence and in submissions.
2. Once again it demonstrates the importance of a site visit; it became immediately apparent to us that the use and operation of a quarry is in principle an acceptable activity. However we remain unconvinced about a number of the operational aspects of the proposal and in particular the impact on streams and the environment more generally. This is not just another quarry site, but is instead one that has the potential to impact directly on the habitat of critically endangered and listed fish species.
3. But let us be very clear. We are not necessarily rejecting quarrying on this site, rather the specific proposal which in our view fails, for the reasons previously given, to respond appropriately to its unusual site context and to satisfactorily address a number of critical environmental impacts.

1. Having regard to the above, we will order that no permit issue.

[1] A permit is required in the Farming Zone to use of the land for extractive industry, for buildings and works and for certain earthworks. A permit is also triggered under the Erosion Management Overlay for buildings and works and for vegetation removal. Permit requirements are also triggered for extractive industry (52.09), native vegetation removal (52.17) and creation/alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1 (52.29).

[2] Relevant Planning Scheme provisions include Clauses 11, 15.01, 15.05, 15.09, 17.09, 21 (various), 22.02, 22.03, 22.06 and 65.

[3] [2007] VCAT 766

[4] We distinguish here land around the subject site that contains dwellings and land, such as Mr Walters, which immediately adjoins the subject site, does not contain a dwelling but may be used for agricultural purposes. Views of the site from such adjoining open farm land are likely. We do not import, and we do not consider that the objectors meant to do so either, the same landscape value to the site when observed from essentially a workplace area as compared to a dwelling.

[5] Ml = mega litre or 1,000,000 litres.

[6] Notably directions of flow indicating diversions of water flow up slopes rather than down slope.

[7] Noise Control Guidelines EPA Publication TG 302/92 dated July 1992.

[9] An issue raised at the hearing, but one not directly impacting on this proposal is the existing practice of allowing cattle to graze unconstrained right up to and within the flowing Blackfellows Head Creek. We are amazed that in 2007, after decades of information disseminated to land holders about protecting the riparian environment to minimise soil erosion, improving water quality and quantity in streams and retaining and re-establishment of riparian vegetation and habitats, that some landowners are still allowing uncontrolled access to streams. Even aside from the environmental issues we have already discussed, fencing off and limiting stock access to the riparian zone has major land management benefits.