5 pages not counting executive summary, table of contents, references and appendices Upper Hunter Fieldtrip and Alternative Fieldtrip Assignment GEOS2121/2921 Environmental and Resource Management Phil McManus 14 September 2017 This is a hypothetical exercise that does not reflect the past actions or the future intentions of any individual or organisation. You are employed as a consultant by the NSW State Government to advise them on the following proposal. Black Diamond Mining Pty Ltd is a long-established coal mining company formed in Newcastle in the 19th Century. They have mines in the Lower Hunter region, and are now proposing to develop an open cut coal mine west of Scone, on the existing Scone airfield. This site is on Satur Road/Bunnan Road – https://www.google.com/maps/@-32.0406834,150.8415474,2698m/data=!3m1!1e3 The mine is proposed to produce 6 million tonnes per annum (6 MTPA) for 25 years, with most of this black coal to be exported through the port of Newcastle. Vehicular access to the mine site from the east is proposed by extending and widening Cliftlands Road north of Moobi Road, to connect with Satur Road south of Seward Avenue. The connection to the rail network to transport the coal is proposed via a spur line from just north of Turanville Road (about 5km south of Scone). The railway line is proposed to run about 3 ½ km west crossing over Parson Gully, Kingdon Ponds and Dartbrook and then follow Nandowra Road/Moobi Road north for about 5 ½ km, before cutting through Noogee directly to the proposed mine site. You are to write a 1500 word Upper Hunter Field report that advises the government how to handle this proposal. You are asked to ignore any geological information about the commercial viability of mining this coal (please assume it is viable), but to include in your report the following information; • a brief description and analysis of various land uses and industries in the local area • a recommendation on how this proposed mine may relate to the concept of sustainability • a recommendation about factors to be considered given your understanding of the area, the population and industries and the nature of the project proposal. • a recommendation for NSW government action. Your 1500 word report (not essay) should include the following; • title page, • executive summary, • table of contents, • numbered report sections, • pagination • a reference list. • Maps, tables& figures where appropriate (they help with the word limit and if done well, they enhance your report). • Appendices are optional. Your 1500 word report (not counting executive summary, table of contents, references and appendices) is worth 20% of the semester mark. Your report should draw upon the following sources of information; GEOS2121 lecture material, Upper Hunter Fieldtrip readings listed in the Unit of Study Reader, 2016 ABS statistics about Scone and earlier to show changes over time (particularly the Basic Community Profiles) and your Virtual Fieldtrip which is available at http://10.83.64.100/GEOS2121-VFT-2016.html GEOS2121 Hunter Valley Marking Sheet Grade HD D Cr P F N/A Mark (%) 85-100 75-84 65-74 50-64 0-49 1. Aim* 2. Organisation of text* 3. Writing* 4. Use of Figures & Tables* 5. Presentation* 6. Content* 7. Referencing* 8. Length* 1. Aim: Did the work include a clearly stated aim that explained the intended purpose and main argument of the report? Did it answer the set question? 2. Organisation of text: Was the work logically organized to address the research aim? 3. Writing: Was the report well written? Was the language ‘academic’ in tone and content? Was the writing concise, yet sharp and specific? Was it free of spelling and grammatical errors? 4. Use of Figures & Tables: Were figures and tables used effectively to support the main argument? Did tables and figures have appropriate captions? Were sources cited appropriately? Were all tables and figures referred to directly in the text immediately prior to the insertion of the table and/or figure? 5. Presentation: Did the report look professional? Did it include an executive summary, table of contents, pagination, etc. as stated in the requirements? 6. Content: Did the content of the work effectively address the research aim? Did the content demonstrate a thorough understanding of the key issues? Was the report well researched? 7. Referencing: Was the literature appropriately cited in the text? Was the Reference list appropriately organised? Did the report make use of a diversity of reference sources, including refereed publications? Were the sources published by credible organisations? Were the references contemporary and, if relevant, were historical references used appropriately? 8. Length: Was the report of an appropriate length (ie. not too long, not too short that it missed vital information)? High Distinction: This report includes industry data as specified in the question, and both identifies and prioritises issues to be considered. It has a wide range of contemporary sources, referenced appropriately and it would be a report that a policy-maker could read, understand and use as a basis to make an informed decision about the proposal. There should be clear recommendations on how this proposed mine may relate to the concept of sustainability, about factors to be considered given your understanding of the area, the population and industries and the nature of the project proposal and for NSW government action. There should be a “brief description and analysis of various land uses and industries in the local area” – this should not be the major component of the report. The HD level reports ‘shine’ because of their innovative, original and highly analytical abilities, and are at a standard that could potentially be published for a broader public readership. They show evidence of research, critical thinking skills, excellent use of tables and figures, a clear and logical organisation, appropriate referencing, compliance with the conventions of a report and are virtually free of grammatical and spelling errors. Approximately 5% of students are expected to obtain this grade. Distinction: meets ‘Credit’ expectations but builds on these with high‐level interpretive abilities. The defining difference between ‘credit’ and ‘distinction’ reports is a powerful and original argument binding the report together and the absence of errors. These reports generally fall below the HD reports in terms of research and addressing all parts of the research questions at the same standard of excellence. Approximately 10% of students may be expected to fall into this grade. Credit: meets ‘Pass’ expectations but without any of the limitations. These reports generally fall short of Distinction reports in their research, consistency and level of sophistication. Approximately 35% of students may be expected to fall into this grade. Pass: submits a report that addresses the question and complies with the basic requirements of the task, but; answers the question only indirectly; or contains no argument or an illogical argument; or indicates an incomplete understanding of the key theoretical concepts required by the task; or does not structure the report in an acceptable way (with no other redeeming features to warrant a higher grade); or suggests a limited exploration of the literature or a high dependence on less reputable sources of information where better quality resources are appropriate; or contains several factual errors; or contains a number of spelling or grammatical mistakes; or includes inaccurate or incomplete referencing. Approximately 50% of students may be expected to fall into this pass grade. Fail: submits a report that does not answer the question or is otherwise deemed inadequate for intermediate‐level undergraduate studies; or has not fully complied with academic expectations with regard to referencing (depending on the extent of this issue); or contains an unacceptably high number of spelling or grammatical mistakes.