Component A – Koala population

The overall baseline koala population condition (Component A) for the Koala Asset Account has an Econd® of 6. This is a low Econd® considering at least three individual koalas have been observed within the Asset Account. There were also widespread signs of presence recorded during both Component A SAT surveys and the supplementary field investigation (Ecoteam Scientific, 2024).

An interrogation of the raw data, the ICS and the sub-asset Econds® indicates the following factors are the main drivers of the low overall Econd®:

• The SAT survey includes searching the next closest (up to) 29 trees to the ‘start tree’. Many of the remnant condition samples, especially AU_1, had a high density of white cypress pine. White cypress pine is not a food tree species (noting it is potentially a shelter tree) and scat was generally not found under this species. The quantity of trees searched (1 to 30 trees) contributes to the ICS, and the high number of white cypress pine is negatively impacting the ICS

• The greatest number of SAT surveys from which koala scats were recorded were in AUs 2a and 2b. This AU supports one of the favoured food tree species in the region (E. camaldulensis) (Ecoteam Scientific 2024). The component RE with E. camaldulensis (11.3.25) likely has the greatest carrying capacity of the REs in the Asset Account due to its association with relatively higher productivity riparian zones - a notion  supported by the supplementary survey data results recorded by Ecoteam Scientific (2024). While AUs 2a and 2b have the greatest carrying capacity, they contribute the least to the areas of the Asset with woody vegetation. As the Econd®  is area-weighted, the raw Econd®  for AUs 2a (Econd® 34) and 2b (Econd® 21) contribute less than 5% of the total area-weighted Koala Population Asset Econd®.

• The majority (66%) of the Asset Account is composed of pre-clear AUs (cleared), and at many of the randomly selected sample sites, there were no koala food trees (or no trees at all) from which to assign as a SAT survey centre tree, and no SAT survey could be completed. These survey sites received an ICS of zero, and the areas contributing the most to the total area-weighted Koala Population Asset Econd® (1c, 2c, 3c) have a raw Econd® of zero.

Despite the low overall Econd®, the results of the SAT surveys undertaken per the F-04 Method to produce the Component A Econd, and supplementary surveys (Ecoteam Scientific 2024) indicate the remnant and regrowth/regenerating condition AUs are generally occupied koala habitat. Ecoteam Scientific recorded at least three individual koalas in these parts of the Koala Asset Account Area in October 2024, while 2rog (2024) detected a koala in remnant woodland in October 2023.

These areas likely hold the greatest potential for positive management outcomes, including an increase in koala occupancy via habitat enhancement and threat abatement. Connection and augmentation of current habitat associated with these areas is possible and will be a focus of planned restoration within the Koala Asset Account Area. Ongoing tracking of the Component A Econd will help to establish whether and to what extent management of habitat is correlating with changes in Econd.

Component B – Koala habitat

The overall baseline koala habitat quality condition (Component B) for the Koala Asset Account has an Econd® of 43. The majority of the Asset Account (66% - i.e. pre-clear (cleared) condition AUs) is largely lacking key koala habitat attributes (e.g. mature feed trees). AU1c, 2c and AU3c cover 66 % of the Koala Asset Account and have raw Econd® scores of 41, 22, 34 respectively. Applying an area-weighting however, reduces the Econds® to 24, 19 and 17. The smaller areas of remnant AUs (1a, 2a, 3a) have raw Econds® of 66, 66 and 65, reduced to 8, 7, and 9 with area-weighting applied.

While AUs 1c, 2c, and 3c are predominantly cleared, the total ICSs for the AUs are kept relatively high due to:

• High score for a lack of non-native shrubs, contributing 13% to total ICS

• High score for Landscape ‘Extent’, contributing 7% to total ICS

• High score for not having close proximity to sealed roads or urban areas (combined score contributes 13% to total ICS)

These ‘relatively high-scoring’ indicators are suggestive of a good foundation from which to conduct habitat management and enhancement at targeted areas of the Koala Asset Account. The AU with the greatest scope for improvement is 2c. AU_2c is located along the higher order waterways within the northern and central portions of the Koala Asset Account. This AU contributes 26% to the Asset area but currently has an average ICS of zero for the site-based habitat quality (i.e., food tree species richness, large trees, food tree age structure, and food tree recruitment). This low ICS is likely an indication of an area that has been historically valuable for livestock and more intensively cleared and grazed. Management of grazing pressure will be key to improving environmental condition of the Koala Asset Account and deliver co-benefits for the other Asset Accounts established on the property (i.e., native vegetation and woodland birds).

Non-native predators retain the same score across all AUs, with a relatively low impact value. However, this element is highly weighted which will ensure future management of non-native predators shows clearly in the overall Econd score.

Tracking of environmental condition through future monitoring as per the F-04 Method will be instructive for QIC’s ongoing and adaptive management of the Asset Account. For example, if 29 of 30 trees searched were white cypress, a lower potential ICS would be expected than if searching 30 E. camaldulensis. Within the constraints of the soils asset and the associated soil carbon project’s grazing requirements