DOCSLIB.ORG

An Assessment of the Saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Assessment of the Saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour An Assessment of the Saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour J. Kelleway, R.J. Williams and C.B. Allen# NSW Department of Primary Industries Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence PO Box 21, Cronulla, NSW, 2230 Australia #Royal Botanic Gardens Mrs Macquaries Road, Sydney, NSW, 2000 Australia August 2007 NSW Department of Primary Industries – Fisheries Final Report Series No. 90 ISSN 1449-9967 An assessment of a the saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour August 2007 Authors: J. Kelleway, R.J. Williams and C.B. Allen Published By: NSW Department of Primary Industries Postal Address: PO Box 21 Cronulla NSW 2230 Internet: www.dpi.nsw.gov.au © NSW Department of Primary Industries This work is copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act (Cth), no part of this reproduction may be reproduced by any process, electronic or otherwise, without the specific written permission of the copyright owners. Neither may information be stored electronically in any form whatsoever without such permission. DISCLAIMER The publishers do not warrant that the information in this report is free from errors or omissions. The publishers do not accept any form of liability, be it contractual, tortuous or otherwise, for the contents of this report for any consequences arising from its use or any reliance placed on it. The information, opinions and advice contained in this report may not relate to, or be relevant to, a reader’s particular circumstance. ISSN 1449-9967 Contents i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................I LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................................... II LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................................ II LIST OF PLATES.........................................................................................................................................III LIST OF APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................III PREFACE .............................................................................................................................................IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................................................................................IV NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. V 1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................7 1.1. Background...................................................................................................................................7 1.2. Need..............................................................................................................................................8 2. METHODS ........................................................................................................................................12 2.1. Study Site ....................................................................................................................................12 2.2. Pilot study – South side ..............................................................................................................14 2.3. Remaining south side sites and north side..................................................................................15 2.4. Data consolidation .....................................................................................................................16 3. RESULTS...........................................................................................................................................18 3.1. Number, area and size of patches...............................................................................................18 3.2. Species composition....................................................................................................................26 3.3. Condition of saltmarshes............................................................................................................31 4. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................................................33 4.1. Background: History of saltmarsh in the Parramatta River-Sydney Harbour ...........................33 4.1.1. Geomorphology and natural history.................................................................................................... 33 4.1.2. Human modifications.......................................................................................................................... 33 4.2. Technical implications of mapping saltmarsh ............................................................................34 4.2.1. Comparison with previous studies ...................................................................................................... 34 4.2.2. Geomorphic zones .............................................................................................................................. 36 4.3. Threats to saltmarsh ...................................................................................................................37 4.3.1. Recreational access ............................................................................................................................. 37 4.3.2. Dumping, mowing and pollution ........................................................................................................ 39 4.3.3. Engineering works .............................................................................................................................. 39 4.3.4. Stormwater.......................................................................................................................................... 39 4.3.5. Incursion of mangrove ........................................................................................................................ 40 4.3.6. Incursion of freshwater/brackish species ............................................................................................ 40 4.3.7. Weeds ................................................................................................................................................. 41 4.3.8. Rise of sea level .................................................................................................................................. 43 4.4. Other management issues...........................................................................................................43 4.4.1. Reserves.............................................................................................................................................. 44 4.4.2. Sensitive species ................................................................................................................................. 45 4.4.3. Condition of sensitive sites ................................................................................................................. 49 4.4.4. Hypersaline flats ................................................................................................................................. 49 4.4.5. Legislative requirements and planning ............................................................................................... 49 4.4.6. Constructed wetlands.......................................................................................................................... 50 4.4.7. Education ............................................................................................................................................ 50 4.5. Final remarks .............................................................................................................................50 5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................51 5.1. Relevant to present distribution of saltmarsh:............................................................................51 5.2. Relevant to the historical distribution of saltmarsh: ..................................................................51 5.3. Relevant to the future distribution of saltmarsh: ........................................................................51 Saltmarsh of the Parramatta River/Sydney Harbour (Kelleway, Williams & Allen) ii Contents 6. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................. 53 7. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................. 55 8. APPENDICES................................................................................................................................... 59 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Characteristic saltmarsh plant species along the central coast of New South Wales ............. 9 Table 2. Area and foreshore length of the estuary of the Parramatta River. ......................................13 Table 3. Correspondence between the API analysis of 2003 and field survey. .................................19 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Figure S1: Map of Sydney Harbour and the Position of the Hawkesbury and Georges Rivers
    10.1071/MF09263_AC © CSIRO 2010 Marine and Freshwater Research 2010, 61(10), 1109–1122 Figure S1: Map of Sydney Harbour and the position of the Hawkesbury and Georges Rivers. Circles and diamonds indicate locations sampled in the Parramatta and Lane Cover Rivers, respectively. Running east to west, the locations within the Parramatta River were: Iron Cove (33°52'14"S 151° 9'2"E), Five Dock Bay (33°51'10"S 151° 8'32"E), Hen and Chicken Bay (33°51'37"S 151° 7'7"E), Morrisons Bay (33°49'49"S 151° 6'43"E), Majors Bay (33°50'33"S 151° 6'4"E), Brays Bay (33°49'53"S 151° 5'33"E) and Duck Creek (33°49'49"S 151° 6'4"E). Running north to south, the locations within the Lane Cove river were: Field of Mars (33°49'3"S 151° 8'35"E), Boronia Park (33°49'37"S 151° 8'38"E), Tambourine Bay (33°49'43"S 151° 9'40"E) and Woodford Bay (33°49'51"S 151°10'24"E). The coordinates for the locations within the other estuaries were: Hawkesbury River (Cogra Bay 33°31'23"S 151°13'23"E; Porto Bay Bay 33°33'51"S 151°13'17"E) and Georges River (Kyle Bay 33°59'28"S 151° 6'8"E and Coronation Bay 33°59'54"S 151° 4'38"E). 10.1071/MF09263_AC © CSIRO 2010 Marine and Freshwater Research 2010, 61(10), 1109–1122 Table S1. Organic contaminants analysed in sediments Class LOD, mg/kg Method Specific chemicals or fractions Polycyclic aromatic 0.01 USEPA methods Naphthalene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene, hydrocarbons (PAHs) 3550/8270 phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b)-fluoranthene, benzo(k)-fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene, dibenz(ah)anthracene, and benzo(ghi)perylene).
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to Australia's Faunal Extinction Crisis Inquiry
    Supplementary to my submission of the 5th September 2018 I would appreciate it if the panel would take the following information into account most of the local information has been taken from the web site: Campbelltown Koala Research and Database.com. which is Report undertaken by Prof. Robert Close and his team over a 27 year period.. www.campbelltown research and database.com 13th August 2019 Submission to Australia’s Faunal Extinction Crisis Inquiry Patricia Durman 28th July 2019 Thank you for allowing us to submit a submission into the state of koalas in NSW, my knowledge is mainly restricted to the local koala population and I have aimed this submission to the protection of these animals, but regard all native animals including koalas as part of the ecosystem that is required to keep the planet healthy. It is unfortunate that unless the panel has the power to delay development until they have made their report and it has been accepted by the government the Campbelltown koala population will have been seriously endangered by subdivision and the installation of new roads. I have referred to the koala population as the Campbelltown population, but this, of course, refers to all koalas living in the South West region of Sydney including Sutherland. HISTORY Although there were a few extinctions of native flora and fauna once the Aboriginal people had landed in Australia 40,000 years ago, perhaps even longer in the Cape York region, it wasn’t until Europeans arrived and cleared vast areas of bushland that the extinction of native animals escalated and in only 200 years we have become the continent with the most amount of extinction in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Sydney Harbour a Systematic Review of the Science 2014
    Sydney Harbour A systematic review of the science 2014 Sydney Institute of Marine Science Technical Report The Sydney Harbour Research Program © Sydney Institute of Marine Science, 2014 This publication is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material provided that the wording is reproduced exactly, the source is acknowledged, and the copyright, update address and disclaimer notice are retained. Disclaimer The authors of this report are members of the Sydney Harbour Research Program at the Sydney Institute of Marine Science and represent various universities, research institutions and government agencies. The views presented in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of The Sydney Institute of Marine Science or the authors other affiliated institutions listed below. This report is a review of other literature written by third parties. Neither the Sydney Institute of Marine Science or the affiliated institutions take responsibility for the accuracy, currency, reliability, and correctness of any information included in this report provided in third party sources. Recommended Citation Hedge L.H., Johnston E.L., Ayoung S.T., Birch G.F., Booth D.J., Creese R.G., Doblin M.A., Figueira W.F., Gribben P.E., Hutchings P.A., Mayer Pinto M, Marzinelli E.M., Pritchard T.R., Roughan M., Steinberg P.D., 2013, Sydney Harbour: A systematic review of the science, Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Sydney, Australia. National Library of Australia Cataloging-in-Publication entry ISBN: 978-0-646-91493-0 Publisher: The Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Available on the internet from www.sims.org.au For further information please contact: SIMS, Building 19, Chowder Bay Road, Mosman NSW 2088 Australia T: +61 2 9435 4600 F: +61 2 9969 8664 www.sims.org.au ABN 84117222063 Cover Photo | Mike Banert North Head The light was changing every minute.
    [Show full text]
  • Estuary Surveillance for QX Disease
    Estuary surveillance Student task sheet for QX disease The following tables show data collected Estuary Surveillance 2002: during estuary surveillance from 2001– During the 2002 sampling period a total of 2004 for New South Wales and 5250 oysters were received and processed Queensland. N is the number of oysters from 18 NSW estuaries and three tested in a random sample of the oyster Queensland zones using tissue imprints. population. Dr Adlard used two methods of disease detection in surveillance — tissue imprint and PCR. Table 2A: Tissue imprints used to detect the QX disease parasite Estuary Surveillance 2001: 2002 Survey results Table 1: Tissue imprint results for 2001 N 2001 Survey Results Estuary N infected % N Northern Moreton Bay 250 0 0 Estuary N infected % Central Moreton Bay 250 0 0 Tweed River 316 0 0 Southern Moreton Bay 250 2 0.8 Brunswick River 320 0 0 Tweed River 250 0 0 Richmond River 248 0 0 Brunswick River 250 0 0 Clarence River 330 5 1.52 Richmond River 250 102 40.8 Wooli River 294 0 0 Clarence River 250 55 22 Kalang /Bellinger 295 0 0 Wooli River 250 0 0 Rivers Kalang /Bellingen Rivers 250 0 0 Macleay River 261 0 0 Macleay River 250 0 0 Hastings River 330 0 0 Hastings River 250 0 0 Manning River 286 0 0 Manning River 250 0 0 Wallis Lakes 271 0 0 Wallis Lakes 250 0 0 Port Stephens 263 0 0 Port Stephens 250 0 0 Hawkesbury River 323 0 0 Hawkesbury River 250 0 0 Georges River 260 123 47.31 Georges River 250 40 16 Shoalhaven/ 255 0 0 Crookhaven Shoalhaven/Crookhaven 250 0 0 Bateman's Bay 300 0 0 Bateman's Bay 250 0 0 Tuross Lake 304 0 0 Tuross Lake 250 0 0 Narooma 300 0 0 Narooma 250 0 0 Merimbula 250 0 0 Merimbula 250 0 0 © Queensland Museum 2006 Table 2B: PCR results from 2002 on Estuary Surveillance 2003: oysters which had tested negative to QX During 2003 a total of 4450 oysters were disease parasite using tissue imprints received and processed from 22 NSW estuaries and three Queensland zones.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 3 – Maps Part 5
    LEGEND LGAs Study area FAIRFIELD LGA ¹ 8.12a 8.12b 8.12c 8.12d BANKSTOWN LGA 8.12e 8.12f 8.12i ROCKDALE LGA HURSTVILLE LGA 8.12v 8.12g 8.12h 8.12j 8.12k LIVERPOOL LGA NORTH BOTANY BAY CITY OF KOGARAH 8.12n 8.12o 8.12l 8.12m 8.12r 8.12s 8.12p 8.12q SUTHERLAND SHIRE 8.12t 8.12u COORDINATE SCALE 0500 1,000 2,000 PAGE SIZE FIG NO. 8.12 FIGURE TITLE Overview of Site Specific Maps DATE 17/08/2010 SYSTEM 1:70,000 A3 © SMEC Australia Pty Ltd 2010. Meters MGA Z56 All Rights Reserved Data Source - Vegetation: The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment LOCATION I:Projects\3001765 - Georges River Estuary Process Management Authority Area (Draft) (2009). NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change PROJECT NO. 3001765 PROJECT TITLE Georges River Estuary Process Study CREATED BY C. Thompson Study\009 DATA\GIS\ArcView Files\Working files and Water. Hurstville, NSW Australia. LEGEND Weed Hotspot Priority Areas Study Area LGAs Riparian Vegetation & EEC (Moderate Priority) Riparian Vegetation & EEC (High Priority) ¹ Seagrass (High Priority) Saltmarsh (High Priority) Estuarine Reedland (Moderate Priority) Mangrove (Moderate Priority) Swamp Oak (Moderate Priority) Mooring Areas River Area Reserves River Access Cherrybrook Park Area could be used for educational purposes due to high public usage of the wharf and boat launch facilities. Educate on responsible use of watercraft, value of estuarine and foreshore vegetation and causes and outcomes of foreshore FAIRFIELD LGA erosion. River Flat Eucalypt Forest Cabramatta Creek (Liverpool LGA) - WEED HOT SPOT Dominated by Balloon Vine (Cardiospermum grandiflorum) and River Flat Eucalypt Forest Wild Tobacco Bush (Solanum mauritianum).
    [Show full text]
  • City of Canada Bay Dramatically Improves Their Communications Capability with Microsoft Skype for Business and Enghouse Interactive Communications Centre
    City of Canada Bay Dramatically improves their communications capability with Microsoft Skype for Business and Enghouse Interactive Communications Centre City of Canada Bay is a council located in the suburbs of Sydney, Australia. In late 2015 the Council chose to deploy Enghouse Interactive Communications Centre and TouchPoint, integrated with Microsoft Skype for Business, as their customer service communications infrastructure across the entire Council. As a result, the Council dramatically improved their communications capability, and put in place a solution that will service them for at least the next ten years. Background City of Canada Bay is a Council within the Sydney metropolitan area, serving over 75,000 residents. Their legacy customer service communications solution had been in place for over nine years and had reached the end of its life-cycle. City of Canada Bay’s Information Systems and Customer Services teams decided to roll out a total solution across the entire Council, from top to bottom, to ensure all staff in the business benefited from the new communications infrastructure. In the contact centre, the customer services agents were only able to manage calls and could not service channels like webchat, which Canada Bay residents wanted to use to communicate with the Council’s contact centre. Also, the reporting functionality did not allow the managers in the Customer Services department to have any oversight on agents, and therefore were not able to identify where service improvements were needed. Council had explored the option of upgrading the legacy solution, but it was simply not an option. A full upgrade would still not provide all the capabilities and functionality that was needed, and even then, it would still not be a cutting edge solution, future- proofed to meet the Council’s needs in the years ahead.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Submission on Exhibition of Carter St Urban Activation Precinct
    Submission on Carter St Urban Activation Precinct Auburn City Council SUBMISSION PUBLIC EXHIBITION CARTER ST URBAN ACTIVATION PRECINCT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council appreciates the opportunity to comment on the exhibition of the proposed Carter Street Urban Activation Precinct (UAP). It is acknowledged that this exhibition follows a number of meetings with a Council working group, at which various issues were discussed. Some of the key issues in this submission have previously been raised by Council. In other cases, the exhibition gives Council the opportunity to view a number of more detailed reports for the first time, so many of the detailed comments have not previously been raised through the working group. Council supports a number of key aspects of the proposal. The inclusion of a primary school, community facilities and a new local centre to provide for the new residential area is supported. The retention of employment lands adjoining the M4 Motorway is also supported, as it recognises the role this land can continue to play, not only in providing jobs, but also in contributing to the productivity of this LGA. However, the planning for the Carter Street UAP needs to address the very low level of infrastructure available to support the local communities north of Parramatta Road within Auburn LGA. More information is also required to enable the development of a contributions plan. This will also require the involvement of SOPA. Council requests that the proposed 578m 2 community facility be increased to 1,000m 2 to meet the needs of the Carter Street community. The proposed increase in size is based on best practice and a dwelling occupancy rate that recognises the high average household size in Auburn LGA.
    [Show full text]
  • The March 1978 Flood on the Hawkesbury and Nepean
    ... I'., The March, 1978 flood on the Hawkesbury and Nepean River between Penrith and Pitt Town S. J. Riley School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, - North Ryde. N. S.W. 2113 .. ,.. ... .. ... ..... .. - ~ . .. '~,i';~;: '~ It'i _:"to "\f',. .,.,. ~ '.! . I .... I ,', ; I I ' }, I , I , I The March, 1978 flood on the I Hawkesbury and Nepean River I .. between PenDth and Pitt Town I I I I S.J. Riley 1 f I :''',i I I School of Earth Sciences, I Macquarie University, ·1 North Ryde. N.S.W. 2113 I I',.. , ··1 " " ., ~: ". , r-~.I··_'~ __'_'. ~ . '.," '. '..a.w-.,'",' --~,~"; l .' . - l~' _I,:.{·_ .. -1- Introduction As a result of three days of heavy rainfall over the Hawkesbury c:ltchment in March, 1978 floods occurred on all the streams in the Hawkesbury system. These floods caused considerable property damage and resulted in morphological changes to the channels and floodplains 1 of, the Hawkesbury system. This paper describes the flodd in the Hawkesbury-Nepean system in the reach'extending from Penrith to Pitt Town •. Storm Pattern An intense low pressure cell developed over the Coral Sea on the 16th March, 1978. This low pressure system travelled southeast towards the Queensland coast and gained in intensity (Fig.l). On the 18th March it,appeared that the cell would move eastwards away from Australia. However, the system reversed its direction of travel and moved inland. Resultant wind systems brought warm moist air from ,the east onto the .. " coast of New South Wal,es. Consequently, heavy rainfall$ occurred from f I .. the 18th to 24th March over the whole of eastern New South Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • Government Gazette No 164 of Friday 23 April 2021
    GOVERNMENT GAZETTE – 4 September 2020 Government Gazette of the State of New South Wales Number 164–Electricity and Water Friday, 23 April 2021 The New South Wales Government Gazette is the permanent public record of official NSW Government notices. It also contains local council, non-government and other notices. Each notice in the Government Gazette has a unique reference number that appears in parentheses at the end of the notice and can be used as a reference for that notice (for example, (n2019-14)). The Gazette is compiled by the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and published on the NSW legislation website (www.legislation.nsw.gov.au) under the authority of the NSW Government. The website contains a permanent archive of past Gazettes. To submit a notice for gazettal, see the Gazette page. By Authority ISSN 2201-7534 Government Printer NSW Government Gazette No 164 of 23 April 2021 DATA LOGGING AND TELEMETRY SPECIFICATIONS 2021 under the WATER MANAGEMENT (GENERAL) REGULATION 2018 I, Kaia Hodge, by delegation from the Minister administering the Water Management Act 2000, pursuant to clause 10 of Schedule 8 to the Water Management (General) Regulation 2018 (the Regulation) approve the following data logging and telemetry specifications for metering equipment. Dated this 15 day of April 2021. KAIA HODGE Executive Director, Regional Water Strategies Department of Planning, Industry and Environment By delegation Explanatory note This instrument is made under clause 10 (1) of Schedule 8 to the Regulation. The object of this instrument is to approve data logging and telemetry specifications for metering equipment that holders of water supply work approvals, water access licences and Water Act 1912 licences and entitlements that are subject to the mandatory metering equipment condition must comply with.
    [Show full text]
  • Parramatta River
    anchorage anchorage ail far enough along the Parramatta River held at Homebush Bay in 2000, there has wetlands, vast stretches of open space, sailing Sand you can’t fail to notice a broken white been a dramatic rise in activity on the river. and rowing clubs, unit blocks and posh parramatta column mounted on a rock near the water’s On any given day, it bustles with yachts and waterfront mansions. Yaralla House, in Concord edge at Henley. powerboats, tinnies, canoes, kayaks and (pictured here) is one of the oldest and largest This simple monument is dedicated to the RiverCat ferries (seven low-wash catamarans and has considerable historical significance. short but spectacular life of Henry Searle, one of named after famous Australian sportswomen). There are four islands along the river: Australia’s greatest scullers, who died in 1889 at The river, which is tidal to Charles Street Rodd Island in Iron Cove, and Cockatoo, just 23. The column also marks the finish line Weir at Parramatta, is jam-packed with things to Spectacle and Snapper islands huddled between where, a year earlier, Searle comprehensively see – if you know what to look for. Woolwich and Birchgrove. In the late 19th defeated the world rowing champion. century, Rodd Island was used as a biological Searle’s Monument is one of the landmarks colonial History laboratory by a team from the Pasteur Institute along the Parramatta River, which officially As a key link between the settlements of Sydney in France, and also as a temporary quarantine merges with Sydney Harbour at Longnose Point, and Parramatta, the Parramatta River played an area for a pet dog that French actress Sarah Birchgrove and Manns Point, Greenwich.
    [Show full text]
  • Contaminant Chemistry and Toxicity of Sediments in Sydney Harbour, Australia: Spatial Extent and Chemistry–Toxicity Relationships
    Vol. 363: 71–87, 2008 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published July 15 doi: 10.3354/meps07445 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Contaminant chemistry and toxicity of sediments in Sydney Harbour, Australia: spatial extent and chemistry–toxicity relationships Gavin F. Birch1,*, Stephanie McCready1, Edward R. Long2, Stuart S. Taylor1, 3, Gina Spyrakis1 1School of Geosciences, Environmental Geology Group, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, 2006, Australia 2ERL Environmental, 3691 Cole Road South, Salem, Oregon 97306, USA 3URS, 116 Miller St., North Sydney, New South Wales, 2060, Australia ABSTRACT: The spatial distribution of chemical contamination and toxicity of surficial sediments in Sydney Harbour, Australia, was investigated in a 3-tiered, hierarchical approach. An initial chemical investigation throughout the entire estuary (Stage 1) indicated wide ranges and different spatial patterns in sediment chemical concentrations. Sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) were used as a preliminary estimate of possible toxicity in Stage 2 of the investigation. Assessment of chemical mixtures indicated that sediments in a small part (~2%) of the harbour had the highest probability of being toxic (~75%), whereas sediment in almost 25% of the port was estimated to have an inter- mediate (~50%) probability of being toxic. The SQG assessment in Stage 2 enabled careful stratifica- tion of the harbour into areas with different toxicity risks, reducing cost and time commitments in the final tier of assessment. The spatial survey carried out in Stage 3 involved concurrent chemical and ecotoxicological analyses. In this final stage, the degree of response in tests of amphipod survival in whole sediment samples, as well as in tests of microbial metabolism (Microtox©) and sea urchin egg fertilisation and embryo development in pore waters, generally increased with increasing chemical concentrations.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet — Parklands
    Fact Sheet — Parklands The parklands at Sydney Olympic Park provide 430 hectares of open space, recreation areas, wetlands and waterways for the people of Sydney located in the heart of the growing metropolitan Sydney. • One of Australia’s largest urban parklands, Sydney Olympic Park is a diverse and special place where protected remnant woodlands, rare saltmarshes, waterbird refuge and mangroves stand alongside places of heritage significance to create a unique parkland setting. • A lasting legacy of the Sydney 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the parklands have been designed and built on land formerly used by government industries including the State Abattoirs, State Brickworks and Commonwealth Department of Defence, and are the result of remediating industrial land — an internationally recognised leading environmental remediation and urban renewal project. • Today, the parklands are playing an increasingly important role as both a local park and as a significant regional park destination as Sydney grows. The parklands are an association of many different parks and places brought together as a single entity for management purposes. • The suburb of Sydney Olympic Park covers an area of 640 hectares, of which 430 hectares are parklands. • There are now over 2.7 million visits to the parklands annually, representing 27.5 percent of Sydney Olympic Park total visitation. • The parklands include the leisure and play areas of Bicentennial Park, Wentworth Common and Blaxland Riverside Park; the sporting grounds at Wilson Park and Archery Park, and Monster and Mountain X facilities; the state heritage listed Newington Armory; the more natural areas of Newington Nature Reserve and Badu Mangroves; the Brickpit and 100 hectares of wetlands and waterways.
    [Show full text]