Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases Jervis Bay, NSW

Response to Submissions Report

Prepared By: Aquaculture Management Unit (NSW Department of Primary Industries)

Prepared For: NSW Department of Primary Industries Port Stephens Fisheries Institute Taylors Beach Road, Taylors Beach NSW 2316

May 2014

Cover Image: Plate of cooked mussels (Source: FRDC, 2012).

© State of New South Wales through Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services 2013. This publication is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in an unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal use or for non-commercial use within your organisation. To copy, adapt, publish, distribute or commercialise any of this publication you will need to seek permission from the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services.

For updates to this publication, check www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries. Published by the NSW Department of Primary Industries, a part of the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services.

First published April 2014, INT14/33239 ISBN: 978-1-74256-625-2

DISCLAIMER The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (April 2014). However, because of advances in knowledge, users are reminded of the need to ensure that information on which they rely is up to date and to check the currency of the information with the appropriate officer of the NSW Department of Primary Industries or the user’s independent advisor. Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ...... III LIST OF TABLES ...... V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... VI 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...... 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Legislative Context ...... 2 1.3 Exhibition Stage ...... 2 1.4 Pre-exhibition Notifications ...... 5 1.5 Purpose of the Response to Submissions Report ...... 6 2 RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS ...... 7 2.1 Respondents ...... 7 2.1.1 NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (NSW OEH) ...... 7 2.1.2 NSW Marine Parks (NSW MP) ...... 7 2.1.3 NSW Trade and Investment - Crown Lands ...... 7 2.1.4 NSW Office of Water ...... 7 2.1.5 Shoalhaven City Council ...... 7 2.1.6 NSW Aquaculture Association Inc (NSW AA) ...... 8 2.1.7 Regional Development Australia ...... 8 2.1.8 Jervis Bay Regional Alliance ...... 8 2.1.9 Sydney Fish Market ...... 8 2.1.10 Select Oyster Company ...... 8 2.1.11 Eden Sea Farms ...... 8 2.1.12 Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice ...... 9 2.1.13 Sapphire Coast Marine Discovery Centre ...... 9 2.1.14 NSW Farmer's Association (Oyster Committee) ...... 9 2.1.15 Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association ...... 9 2.1.16 Callala Beach Progress Association ...... 9 2.1.17 Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club ...... 10 2.1.18 Vincentia Sailing Club ...... 10 2.1.19 Community Stakeholders ...... 10 2.2 Overview of Support Submissions ...... 10 2.3 Overview of Issues Raised ...... 13 2.3.1 Visual Amenity ...... 13 2.3.2 Navigation Hazards - Recreational Use ...... 28 2.3.3 Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values ...... 43 2.3.4 Social Concerns - Noise, Odours and Product Availability .... 58 2.3.5 Land Based Infrastructure ...... 64 2.3.6 Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris ...... 68 2.3.7 Marine Park Zoning and Strategic Planning ...... 71 2.3.8 Water Quality, Sedimentation and Biofouling ...... 81 2.3.9 Genetics, Disease and Introduced Pests ...... 94 2.3.10 Marine Fauna Interactions - Entanglement, Marine Debris, Behavioural Changes and Impacts on Marine Ecology ...... 99 2.3.11 Management, Monitoring and the EIS Process ...... 109 3 REFERENCES ...... 115

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 i Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

4 APPENDICES ...... 119 Appendix 1 Visual Impact Assessment Appendix 2 Revised Draft Environmental Management Plan

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 ii Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases and the former Blue Mussel leases in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 1 Figure 2: Demonstration buoys placed on the proposed Vincentia and Callala Leases...... 3 Figure 3: Sign on the side of the road at Callala Beach and display at the 'drop-in' day (source Fisheries NSW 2013)...... 4 Figure 4: Attendees at the Callalla Beach “drop in” day viewing using binoculars to view the demonstration longline setup located approximately were the yellow arrow indicates (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 5 Figure 5: Images of two types of support buoys (cylindrical and elongated). (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014)...... 15 Figure 6: Indicative diagram on the difference between Pearl Oyster and mussel culture and the buoys required (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014)...... 17 Figure 7: Typical view of mussel longlines in South Australia (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009)...... 18 Figure 8: Typical view of mussel longlines in Twofold Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2010)...... 18 Figure 9: Typical view of mussel buoys supporting stocked longlines (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009)...... 19 Figure 10: Diagram and photograph of SLB1250 type navigation buoys (Source: Sealite, 2014)...... 32 Figure 11: Cardinal marks for corner navigation buoys (Source: NSW RMS, 2014)...... 33 Figure 12: Location of aquatic licences (sailing courses) in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014)...... 37 Figure 13: Indicative vessel tracks, Naval areas and moorings within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW; 2014) ...... 38 Figure 14: Recreational boating use in and around mussel leases in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria. (Source: James Ray, 2014)...... 39 Figure 15: Indicative path of vessels servicing the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Google Earth, 2013)...... 40 Figure 16: Near shore track of tourist vessel moving between Huskisson and Callala Bay. The movement of such vessels would not be hindered by the proposed leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 40 Figure 17: Singaporean tourists enjoying oysters at Jim Wilds Oyster Service, Greenwell Point, NSW (Source: Jim Wild, 2014)...... 54 Figure 18: Opinion of the effect of fish farm structures on the landscape in Scotland (Source: Scottish Government, 2008)...... 55 Figure 19: Woollamia boat ramp, carpark (left) and wharf facilities (right) (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 66 Figure 20: Callala Bay boat ramp and parking area (insert) (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 66 Figure 21: Location of the zones within JBMP relative to the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012)...... 75 Figure 22 Location of some of the matters protected by the EPBC Act relative to the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012)...... 76

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 iii Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 23: Location of Naval Trace and Commonwealth Waters restricted areas (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 76 Figure 24: Benthic habitat types present within Jervis Bay. (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012)...... 77 Figure 25: Benthic habitat and sediment types present in Jervis Bay (Source: CSIRO, 1994, Joyce et al., 2010)...... 77 Figure 26: Location of bait gathering areas, dolphin aggregation areas and Commonwealth Waters within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009). ... 78 Figure 27: Plane and shipwrecks in Jervis Bay that are in close proximity to proposed leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012)...... 78 Figure 28: Indicative vessel tracks, Naval areas and moorings within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014)...... 79 Figure 29: Location of aquatic licences (sailing courses) in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014)...... 80 Figure 30: Potential ecological issues associated with shellfish farming (Source: Keeley et al., 2009)...... 82 Figure 31: Aerial photograph of Twofold Bay - coloured arrows mark the location from which photos of beaches were taken (Source: Google Earth, 2013)...... 91 Figure 32: Keith’s Pinch Beach (red arrow) looking in a northerly direction towards Eden (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 91 Figure 33: Cocora Beach (blue arrow) looking in a southerly direction (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 92 Figure 34: Aslings Beach (green arrow) looking in a southerly direction towards Eden (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 92 Figure 35: Somatic (solid circles) and gamete (open circles) production as a function of age and shell length in low shore Mytilus edulis from Long Island, New York, North America (Source: Rodhouse et al., 1986)...... 97 Figure 36: Pictures of commercial and recreational vessels that currently use Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013)...... 108

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 iv Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Visual Impact of lighting in the existing nightscape (Source: O'Hanlon Design, 2014)...... 22 Table 2: Summary of the visual impact assessment from the various view points (VP) around Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014; data from O'Hanlon Design, 2014)...... 23

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 v Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

EPBC Act Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

IALA International Association of Lighthouse Authorities

ICZP Integrated Coastal Zoning Planning

NPWS National Parks and Wildlife Service

NSW MP New South Wales Marine Parks

NSW OEH New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage

NSW DPI New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

NSW DoPI New South Wales Department of Planning and Infrastructure

PSFI Port Stephens Fisheries Institute

JBMP Jervis Bay Marine Park

NSW RMS New South Wales Roads and Maritime Services

VSC Vincentia Sailing Club

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 vi Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Project Description

Fisheries NSW, a division of the Department of Primary Industries, is seeking approval for the establishment of Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases within the open marine embayment of Jervis Bay.

Three leases are proposed, including: two 20 hectare areas 1.5 and 1.9 km off Callala Beach; and a 10 hectare site 0.7 km off Vincentia over an area previously leased for mussel aquaculture (Figure 1). Only species native to Jervis Bay waters such as Blue Mussels, scallops and oysters, would be grown.

Figure 1: Location of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases and the former Blue Mussel leases in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

In response to interest from potential investors in shellfish aquaculture received by Fisheries NSW and Shoalhaven City Council (Economic Development Office) and a request from NSW Marine Parks to develop a sustainable aquaculture plan for Jervis Bay to ensure consistency

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 1 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

between aquaculture development and the management plans for JBMP, Fisheries NSW commenced the planning process to establish commercial shellfish leases.

Due to the interest in Jervis Bay from local and interstate shellfish growers and local Indigenous groups, it is timely to have a coordinated approach to assess the potential for aquaculture in Jervis Bay. Fisheries NSW has developed an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and draft Environmental Management Plan to accompany an application for three Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases that if approved, would be tendered to shellfish growers.

The project would also provide the opportunity for Fisheries NSW, the Shoalhaven Campus of the University of Wollongong and other organisations to undertake aquaculture and other applied marine research.

1.2 Legislative Context

Under the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development 2011) the proposal is classified as State Significant Infrastructure (c.14 (1)(b) and Schedule 3 (1)(1)) and requires approval from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure under s.115W of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Assessment guidelines were issued to meet the requirements of State legislation.

1.3 Exhibition Stage

The EIS was publicly displayed between 10 October 2013 to 13 November 2013 with exhibition at the following locations:

. NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure - Information Centre (23-33 Bridge Street, Sydney, NSW);

. NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure – Regional Office (Level 2, 84 Crown Street, Wollongong, NSW);

. Shoalhaven City Council (36 Bridge Road, Nowra, NSW);

. NSW Department of Primary Industries – Huskisson Office (4 Woollamia Road, Huskisson, NSW);

. Nature Conservation Council (Level 2, 5 Wilson Street, Newtown NSW); and

. Fisheries NSW - Port Stephens Fisheries Institute (Taylors Beach Road, Taylors Beach, NSW).

NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure sent 500 letters to local residents and advertisements notifying the exhibition period were placed in the following publications:

. South Coast Register (9 October 2013); and

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 2 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. Shoalhaven Nowra News (10 October 2013).

An electronic copy of the EIS was available on the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure website at: http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=5657

An electronic copy of the EIS was also available on the NSW Department of Primary Industries website (along with an EIS Summary document and Question and Answer document) at:

http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/aquaculture/info/commercial-shellfish-aquaculture-leases- jervis-bay,-nsw

'Drop-in' information sessions were held at the following locations during the EIS exhibition period:

. Huskisson Community Centre on 23 October 2013 from 2:00pm to 7:00pm; and

. Callala Beach Community Hall on 24 October 2013 from 2:00pm to 7:00pm.

Fisheries NSW also placed mussel culture support buoys on two of the proposed lease sites (Callala and Vincentia) to help the community better understand where the proposed leases were located and what the infrastructure may look like (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Demonstration buoys placed on the proposed Vincentia and Callala Leases.

The Minister for Primary Industries - Katrina Hodgkinson MP, and local member for South Coast - Shelley Hancock MP, released two media releases advising the EIS exhibition and the placement of mussel buoys in Jervis Bay on 10 and 22 October 2013 which resulted in the following media exposure:

. 11/10/2013 – South Coast Register;

. 11/10/2013 – ABC Illawarra (Minister Interview);

. 14/10/2013 – South Coast Register;

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 3 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. 14/10/2013 – Goulburn Town and Country;

. 14/10/2013 – 2ST radio;

. 23/10/2013 – South Coast Register;

. 25/10/2013 – South Coast Register; and

. 25/10/2013 – 2ST radio.

More than 100 stakeholders were emailed a copy of the EIS Summary Document by Fisheries NSW, as well as details of the submission process at the start of the exhibition period. These contacts were emailed again and provided with information about the mussel buoys on display and a reminder about the ‘drop-in’ information sessions.

It was also noted that the community was made aware of the proposals through local community group web links (Callala Beach Progress Association and Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice), newsletters (Callala Beach Progress Association) and mail drops. These groups were also provided with information about the respective 'drop-in' days. A large sign was erected by the Callala Beach Progress Association to advise the community of the 'drop- in' sessions (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Sign on the side of the road at Callala Beach and display at the 'drop-in' day (source Fisheries NSW 2013). During the week of 21 October 2013, Fisheries NSW provided briefings to Shoalhaven City Councillors and Council staff; Captain Brett Chandler (HMAS Creswell and Superintendent of

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 4 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Jervis Bay Naval Waters), and attended a public meeting of the Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association, Vincentia Sailing Club and Vincentia residents. The ‘drop-in’ information sessions at the Huskisson Community Centre and the Callala Beach Community Hall (Figure 4) were attended by 15 and 62 people, respectively.

Figure 4: Attendees at the Callalla Beach “drop in” day viewing using binoculars to view the demonstration longline setup located approximately were the yellow arrow indicates (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

1.4 Pre-exhibition Notifications

Starting in August 2012, Fisheries NSW began the consultation process with the community which led to the exhibition of the EIS for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project. This consultation included placing relevant information on the Fisheries NSW website, consulting with 58 key contacts, holding 27 face to face meetings and providing information to the local media. A press release from the Minister for Primary Industries also resulted in local press including: the South Coast Register, Australian Fishing, The Fish Site, The Daily Telegraph and Win TV, as well as radio interviews on ABC Illawarra and 2ST.

In addition, a number of community groups provided further information about the proposal through articles on their respective websites and newsletters. These informal community notifications about the proposal included:

 Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association noted the proposal in their February 2013 meeting minutes;

 Huskisson Woollamia Voice Community Voice noted the proposal in their November 2012, February 2013 and June 2013 meeting minutes, and also placed links to the proposal on their news web page; and

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 5 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

 Callala Beach Progress Association's monthly newsletter published articles relating to the proposal in November 2012, February to July 2013 and October 2013, as well as having an article relating to the proposal on their web page.

1.5 Purpose of the Response to Submissions Report

In response to the public exhibition period, submissions were received by the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure (NSW DoPI) and copies were provided to Fisheries NSW for review. Under s.115Z of the EP&A Act, the Director-General may require the proponent to submit a response to the issues raised in submissions and prepare revised reports (i.e. preferred infrastructure reports) which outline any proposed changes to the project to minimise potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. If the Director-General considers that significant changes are proposed to the nature of the project, the proponent may be required to make the revised reports available to the public.

The Response to Submissions Report outlines the issues raised in the submissions that were received and the response of the proponent to these issues. The draft Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been revised in response to some of these submissions (Appendix 2).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 6 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2 RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS

2.1 Respondents

NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure (NSW DoPI) received 133 submissions including submissions from government agencies and community stakeholders. These submissions can be viewed on the Department of Planning and Infrastructure's website (http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=5657).

Each submission was reviewed and the issues that were raised were extracted with the relevant responses provided in Section 2.3. Where similar issues were raised by different respondents, only one response is provided to avoid duplication.

2.1.1 NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (NSW OEH)

NSW OEH indicated that previous concerns have been adequately addressed in the EIS but provided recommendations for monitoring, audits and clean up responsibilities, which are addressed in Section 2.3.6 (Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris) and Section 2.3.11 (Management, Monitoring and the EIS Process).

2.1.2 NSW Marine Parks (NSW MP)

NSW MP stated comments that the proposal is consistent with the Marine Parks (Zoning Plans) Regulation 1999 which states that aquaculture is permissible in the Habitat Protection Zone of Jervis Bay Marine Park and is limited to extensive shellfish aquaculture with a maximum area of 440 hectares.

2.1.3 NSW Trade and Investment - Crown Lands

NSW Trade and Investment - Crown Lands raised no objections or concerns in relation to the proposal.

2.1.4 NSW Office of Water

NSW Office of Water raised no objections to the proposal but provided a comment on the land based approval, which is addressed in Section 2.3.5 (Land Based Infrastructure).

2.1.5 Shoalhaven City Council

Shoalhaven City Council supports the proposal for 50 hectares of shellfish aquaculture in Jervis Bay. A number of comments were provided, including that the land water interface impacts would not be able to be adequately assessed until successful tenderers submit the relevant planning documentation. It was noted that the Council advised that it has suitable land available for industrial activities at Woollamia Industrial Estate.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 7 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Shoalhaven City Council submitted additional comments and recommendations to NSW DoPI (March 2014) to address and/or incorporate into the notice of approval if issued. The issues raised included land based approvals and zoning, use of Huskisson Wharf, launching and storing vessels and trailers, navigation hazards, impacts on recreational users, monitoring and waste management.

2.1.6 NSW Aquaculture Association Inc (NSW AA)

NSW Aquaculture Association strongly supports the proposal and no objections or concerns were raised.

2.1.7 Regional Development Australia

Regional Development Australia - South Coast supports the establishment of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay.

2.1.8 Jervis Bay Regional Alliance

Jervis Bay Regional Alliance provided comments on the proposal and these issues are discussed in Section 2.3.1 (Visual Amenity), Section 2.3.7 (Marine Park Zoning and Strategic Planning), Section 2.3.9 (Genetics, Disease and Introduced Pests), Section 2.3.10 (Marine Fauna Interactions - Entanglements, Marine Debris, Behavioural Changes and Impacts on Marine Ecology) and Section 2.3.11 (Management, Monitoring and the EIS Process).

2.1.9 Sydney Fish Market

Sydney Fish Market supports the development of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay.

2.1.10 Select Oyster Company

Select Oyster Company supports the establishment of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay.

2.1.11 Eden Sea Farms

Eden Sea Farms supports the establishment of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 8 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.1.12 Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice

Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice supports the proposal for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay. No objections or concerns were raised in their submission.

2.1.13 Sapphire Coast Marine Discovery Centre

Sapphire Coast Marine Discovery Centre supports the development of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay. Comments were provided about the mussel farms in Twofold Bay but no objections or concerns were raised in their submission.

2.1.14 NSW Farmer's Association (Oyster Committee)

NSW Farmer's Association (Oyster Committee) provided comments on the proposal, noting that it is consistent with the Oyster Industry Sustainable Aquaculture Strategy. The Oyster Committee also queried the claims in the EIS that the aquaculture activities in Twofold Bay had reported no signs of deleterious effects, notably issues with marine debris. This issue is addressed in Section 2.3.6 (Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris).

2.1.15 Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association

Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association objects to the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. The issues of concern are addressed in Section 2.3.2 (Navigation Hazards - Recreation Use), Section 2.3.3 (Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values), 2.3.4 (Social Concerns - Noise, Odours and Product Availability), 2.3.5 (Land Based Infrastructure) and 2.3.7 (Marine Park Zoning and Strategic Planning).

2.1.16 Callala Beach Progress Association

Callala Beach Progress Association objects to the development of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. The issues of concern are addressed in Section 2.3.1 (Visual Amenity), Section 2.3.3 (Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Employment, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values), Section 2.3.6 (Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris), Section 2.3.8 (Water Quality, Sedimentation and Biofouling), Section 2.3.9 (Genetics, Disease and Introduced Pests), Section 2.3.10 (Marine Fauna Interactions - Entanglements, Marine Debris, Behavioural Changes and Impacts on Marine Ecology).

Callala Beach Progress Association stated that a preferred outcome would be for the leases to be relocated to the other side of Jervis Bay away from residential areas. Two petitions (i.e. a hard copy and online version) have been developed to have the leases moved away from

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 9 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

the beaches with 120 and 267 signatures, respectively (note: Callala Beach has a total of 774 residents).

2.1.17 Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club

Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club objects to the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases and the issues of concern are addressed in Section 2.3.1 (Visual Amenity), Section 2.3.2 (Navigation Hazards - Recreation Use) and Section 2.3.6 (Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris).

2.1.18 Vincentia Sailing Club

Vincentia Sailing Club objects to the proposal and have raised a number of issues relating to potential social and economic impacts of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

The issues raised by Vincentia Sailing Club are addressed in Sections 2.3.1 (Visual Amenity), 2.3.2 (Navigation Hazards - Recreational Use), 2.3.3 (Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values).

2.1.19 Community Stakeholders

An additional 115 individual community stakeholders provided a submission for the proposal which consisted of four in support of the project, 106 that object to the project and four provided comments but did not specifically indicate their stance on the project.

The issues raised are addressed in Sections 2.3.1 (Visual Amenity), 2.3.2 (Navigation Hazards - Recreational Use), 2.3.3 (Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values), 2.3.4 (Social Concerns - Noise and Odours), 2.3.5 (Land Based Infrastructure), 2.3.6 (Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris), 2.3.7 (Marine Park Zoning and Strategic Planning), 2.3.8 (Water Quality, Sedimentation and Biofouling), 2.3.9 (Genetics, Disease and Introduced Pests), 2.3.10 (Marine Fauna Interactions - Entanglement, Marine Debris, Behavioural Changes and Impacts on Marine Ecology) and 2.3.11 (Management, Monitoring and the EIS Process).

2.2 Overview of Support Submissions

A number of submissions have indicated their support or provided positive comments towards the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases which Fisheries NSW has noted. The respondents comments included:

. Regional Development Australia stated "in a region with above average unemployment the introduction of aquaculture to Jervis Bay would provide tourism

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 10 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

opportunities associated with food trails or linked to restaurants and food security that would in turn provide full and part time employment".

. Sydney Fish Market (SFM) stated that "given the fact that Australia and NSW in particular are net importers of seafood the potential for such growth in local shellfish production is strongly supported by SFM. The detailed EIS and draft EMP you have tabled details that this can be done in an environmentally favourable manner whilst creating much needed local employment for a regional area".

. NSW Aquaculture Association stated that "NSW needs more aquaculture to increase its seafood security and this proposal will contribute towards this aim. Once approved these three leases will not only provide an opportunity to increase our seafood security which is so desperately needed, but provide an opportunity to increasing local employment with immense benefit for the local community generally".

. NSW Aquaculture Association also stated that "the NSW Aquaculture Industry is regulated to employ “Aquaculture Best Industry Practice” to ensure the environment of NSW is protected and the aquacultured produce from NSW is the cleanest, greenest, safest, sustainable seafood that money can buy".

. Shoalhaven City Council stated that "there have been numerous studies and research programs conducted in Jervis Bay that demonstrate the feasibility of establishing a sustainable aquaculture industry". "The operation of Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will result in direct benefits to the local economy of Jervis Bay and the Shoalhaven LGA through activities such as the purchase of goods (i.e. fuel and materials) and the use of services (i.e. vessel and vehicle servicing)". Shoalhaven City Council also noted that it "does have suitable land available for industrial activities at Woollamia Industrial Estate".

. Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice stated that "the proposal would create local jobs and economic activity" and that "there are potential synergies with local tourism, especially the bay cruising industry, as demonstrated at Twofold Bay with the Cat Ballou cruise charter". They stated that they "feel that the impacts are manageable, including via regular targeted monitoring".

. Sapphire Coast Marine Discovery Centre (Jenny Robb) stated that "there have been no records of whale, dolphin or seal entanglements" associated with the mussel farm in Twofold Bay. "There has been some episodes of mussel farm infrastructure (mainly buoys) washing onto local beaches after storm events" but there has been "no report of changes to shark numbers, shellfish faeces or similar on beaches".

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 11 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. The Director (Chris Boyton) of Eden Sea Farms stated that "we would welcome expansion of our industry within NSW where in general marine aquaculture has been neglected to the detriment of the State and Australia. Most other states have a thriving diverse aquaculture industry and while NSW has been a leader in oyster farming, inertia has prevented us developing other marine aquaculture undertakings especially those of an economic and environmentally sustainable nature". "There is a considerable demand from tourists for our product and interest in the process when they visit the wharf where mussels are cleaned for market with significant numbers of visitors saying they cannot get quality mussels at home".

. A community stakeholder (Andrew Harvey - former Jervis Bay mussel farmer) stated that "we have a collective responsibility to feed our community sustainably and Jervis Bay is an ideal site as long as it does not get over-run with aquaculture. Longline culture methods are much better than the old raft method I used. Indigenous communities should be included as there is a cultural responsibility in safe-guarding the wild resource. Pressure from local seafood retailers needs to be managed so the public can receive aquaculture products direct from the producers".

. A community stakeholder (Pia Winberg - University of Wollongong) stated that "sustainable seafood production is something that NSW should start to lead with by good example and that is exactly what this process is contributing to. NSW is not large in scale regarding aquaculture, but it can become a leader in good standards of aquaculture and quality product. Shellfish aquaculture when managed properly has minimum local impact and potentially larger regional benefits in terms of nutrient remediation and sustainable local industry development".

. A community stakeholder (Gisela Zealand - local oyster industry) stated that "having well maintained aquaculture activities in any bays and rivers is the best indicator of the health of that water. It also provides places for juvenile fish and other marine life to shelter". "The importance of sustainable food production is going to be ever more important all over the world. Oyster farming is one of the cleanest forms of producing a food product that does not have any negative effects on the marine environment".

. A community stakeholder (anonymous) stated that "commercial development of aquaculture is an important step for the seafood industry in the progression of food production to support the increased demand for healthy and fresh seafood products".

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 12 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3 Overview of Issues Raised

2.3.1 Visual Amenity

Submissions

Jervis Bay Regional Alliance, Callala Beach Progress Association, Community Stakeholders (64)

Summary of Issues Raised

. It is the pristine views of Jervis Bay that attracts people to the region and the reason for many current residents for purchasing properties in this area.

. The proposal is in direct and/or partial view from many properties along Callala Beach and Vincentia. Why would you put aquaculture leases directly in front of two residential areas?

. The views of the natural environment would be replaced by an industrial zoned area with ropes, buoys, water plumes and industrial working punts. No amount of "design features" and use of "dark coloured buoys" will reduce the significant visual impact given its extremely close proximity to residential areas.

. Despite the buoys being a dark colour and sitting low in the water, there will be a very large number of buoys spread over 20 hectares, and it is believed (despite being told otherwise) that these will be visible from the shoreline. The navigation markers and large 12-15 m vessels (usually fitted with cranes to lift the lines) will also be highly visible.

. The visual impact has been under-estimated. It is incorrect to say that there would not be a significant visual impact due to the low profile of topography of the western side of the Jervis Bay and that only elevated residences have views over the bay. Also, many residents and visitors use the elevated coastal sand dunes along the beach front of Callala Beach and would clearly see the leases from shore.

. Local residents who utilise Callala Beach every day to enjoy its unspoilt beauty will be greatly disadvantaged. Many of the locals are already dismayed with the visual impact of the zoning markers installed by NSW Marine Parks.

. The visual impact photos in the EIS taken from Callala Beach do not give the reader a true perspective of what will be seen from land. Most houses along the dune foreshore will be visually impacted, including from windows at ground level, not just from windows on second stories as is claimed in the EIS. The photos are deficient and should have been taken from higher vantage points with the project superimposed on the photos to give a true assessment of the visual impact.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 13 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. Views from the beaches along the western shore will also be impacted and thereby also affecting the large visitor/holiday population.

. No consideration has been given to the number of properties that are within a 3 km distance from the navigation lights and whether the flashing lights will contribute to a lessening of the visual amenity of Jervis Bay at night.

. Natural wave motion will cause the buoys to move in the waters continually exposing them to the view of bay users.

. I have seen the mussel leases in Twofold Bay - it definitely gave it a very industrial `look'. It was simply unsightly and the infrastructure was visible from a great distance.

. Commercial aquaculture is not appropriate for Jervis Bay Marine Park. The future for this area is recreation and tourism and not industrial aquaculture.

Response

Visual impacts are subjective and difficult to quantify as perceptions and attitudes vary considerably (O’Hanlon, 2004). Many submissions expressed concerns about the impact of the proposed aquaculture infrastructure, notably the buoys, service vessels and navigation lights, on the visual amenity of Jervis Bay. The majority of the submissions expressed concerns about visual amenity impacts at both locations (i.e. 53 submissions). Nine submissions expressed concerns about the visual amenity impact specifically to the Callala region, while two submissions expressed concerns specific to Vincentia.

Existing Visual Pollution

There are a number of marine based activities and existing infrastructure that impacts on the visual amenity of Jervis Bay. Existing water based activities create visual pollution, including sailing vessels, recreational boats, commercial tourism vessels and Australian Navy activities such as vessel and aircraft movements. Notably, large cruise liners ranging from 100 to 400 m in length will be periodically mooring off Callala Beach for several days at a time. The waters of Jervis Bay also contain man made infrastructure, such as moorings, navigation markers and lights, jetties, wharves and boat ramps.

Quantity of Buoys on Leases

The main issue regarding the potential impact on visual amenity is the deployment of support buoys along the backbone of the longline systems. To mitigate visual impacts Fisheries NSW has replaced the raft system previously used in Jervis Bay and Twofold Bay with the longline system, which is markedly less visible. The Draft Operational Plan for Jervis Bay (October 2001) stated that in order to minimise the visual impacts it is preferred that longline infrastructure replace the current raft infrastructure. This is reiterated under Part 3 of

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 14 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

the Marine Parks (Zoning Plans) Regulation 1999 which outlines the statutory requirements of the Jervis Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan. In Clause 3.7 of the Marine Parks (Zoning Plans) Regulation 1999 it states that aquaculture is not permissible in the habitat protection zone of the marine park, except extensive aquaculture of shellfish on longlines.

Support buoys play an important role in keeping the lines taut and the backbones near the water's surface so the culture apparatus remains suspended in the water column. If the cultured stock is too close to the sea floor, it can be subject to greater predation from mollusc eating shark species, rays and octopuses. Pest species found in the benthos (e.g. flat worms and mud worms) may infest stock if the culture apparatus is too close to the seabed. Also, infrastructure can be damaged if it is permitted to make contact with the sea floor.

Support buoys are important in maintaining the integrity of the longline system. The size and profile of the buoys on the water surface will determine the level of visual impact created. To minimise potential impacts on the visual amenity of Jervis Bay, the lease infrastructure needs to be designed to fit into the surroundings as much as possible. A unified appearance helps to reduce potential impact. Contrasting elements that vary in height, angle, material finish, colour or reflectivity, draw the attention of viewers and may lead to unacceptable visual impacts.

Aquaculture buoys are generally black to reduce their visibility on the water and can range from 45 cm cylindrical buoys to large mussel buoys, which can be 1 m wide and 1.5 m in length. Figure 5 illustrates two types of buoys that may be used on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. The larger elongated buoys are typically used on mussel farms. The larger buoys have connection points at each end for attachment to the lines which results in the maximum height above the water surface of generally less than 1 m when deployed. Fisheries NSW does not currently permit other coloured buoys to be used unless required by RMS for navigational safety.

Figure 5: Images of two types of support buoys (cylindrical and elongated). (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014).

When buoys are viewed from the end of a longline system they appear in a neat and unified line. The proposed alignment of the longlines on the Callala Leases is perpendicular to the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 15 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. shore (angled to the entrance to Jervis Bay), which would reduce their visual profile. The Vincentia Lease can be viewed from a number of different angles and therefore at some angles may not be seen as a unified line of buoys.

The number and type of buoys on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will vary greatly at anytime depending on:

. spacing used between the longlines; . length of the longline used in each run of a line; . species being cultivated; . culture apparatus employed; . growth stage of the cultivated species; and . biofouling growth rate.

The spacing between the longlines and their length is governed by the hydrological processes in the locality and the species being cultivated. The sea state and the currents in a locality can cause the longlines to bow from the normal straight line that they would be under calm conditions. This movement can, if the spacing is not appropriate, result in the longlines interacting causing damage to infrastructure and stock losses. If bowing of lines is an issue on a site then the length of the lines may be reduced by employing additional anchoring systems along the particular run. Longlines culturing mussels are typically deployed at about 20 m apart as outlined in Figure 18 of the EIS.

The species proposed to be cultured and their respective biological requirements can result in different levels of biomass on the leases. Mussels tend to have a higher biomass than scallops, Pearl Oysters and algae. The total weight of scallop and Pearl Oyster culture represents about 75% and 50% respectively of that of mussel culture. Therefore, scallop, Pearl Oyster and algae culture would require less buoys, or alternatively smaller buoys could be used to keep the culture apparatus in the correct position in the water column. If mussels were cultured, buoys may need to be positioned every 10 m for example, during the final stages of the culture cycle. However, it is in the interest of shellfish farmers to keep the number of buoys used to a minimum to reduce installation and maintenance costs.

Figure 6 provides an indicative representation of the differences in the number of buoy in relation to the species cultured. As the cultured species and biofouling grow, their respective biomass will increase creating a burden on the backbone and buoys. This will require additional buoys to be placed along the backbone to maintain its correct position in the water column.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 16 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 6: Indicative diagram on the difference between Pearl Oyster and mussel culture and the buoys required (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014).

Surface energy in a marine environment, such as wind and wave action, can be harsh on aquaculture infrastructure. To mitigate the impacts of wind and waves it is general practice to ensure support buoys are not high on the water's surface but sit partly or neutrally buoyant. However, buoys with neutral buoyancy (sitting below the water surface) have a limited ability to accommodate any rapid increase in biomass (i.e. stock or biofouling) so it is important to have some buoys partially above the water's surface. Stress on the infrastructure and stock is minimised by reducing the surface area of the buoys exposed to wind and waves. This positioning of the buoys also aids in cleaning bird faeces off their surfaces which if left, could make them more visible.

The demonstration buoys placed on proposed lease sites during the public exhibition period in late 2013 were sitting high on the water's surface and represented a “worst case” example (Figure 2). The buoys would normally be partially to fully submerged. Despite this, the display buoys on the Callala Lease were only just visible with the naked eye from Callala Beach and Callala Point. The buoys on the Vincentia Lease were visible to a limited extent from surrounding vantage points, such as Plantation Point, Orion Beach and Collingwood

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 17 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Beach. The display buoys on the Callala Lease however, could not be seen with the naked eye or with binoculars from an area close to the Huskisson Pub.

During the installation of infrastructure or after the harvesting of stock, the buoys will be more buoyant so a greater portion (i.e. about three quarters) will be visible for a short period of time. When the stock (spat) is initially loaded onto the backbone, about half of each buoy is likely to be visible above the water's surface. As the stock grows, the percentage of each buoy that is visible will continue to decrease. Figure 7, 8 and 9 illustrate the typical view of a mussel farm and the portion of the culture support buoys that protrude above the water's surface under normal crop loads. The buoy on the left in Figure 9 depicts the original support buoy which has become submerged due to the increased biomass of stock, while the buoy on the right depicts a partially submerged buoy.

Figure 7: Typical view of mussel longlines in South Australia (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009).

Figure 8: Typical view of mussel longlines in Twofold Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2010).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 18 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 9: Typical view of mussel buoys supporting stocked longlines (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009).

Not all of the lines on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases would be loaded with stock all of the time. Similar to land based farming, stock requires less space during the juvenile life stages so less longlines and buoys would be used during this period. Similarly, during the harvesting stage many longlines and buoys would be removed along with the stock to undergo maintenance.

For example, on the Twofold Bay aquaculture leases the typical growing cycle for mussels starts with the deployment of mussel spat collection ropes during August to October. The spat collection ropes are placed on about five to ten percent of the lease area. The number of buoys required at this time is determined by the seasonal fluctuations in spat production and settlement. By May these spat lines are relayed over much of the lease area with up to 50% of the buoys required at full production (marketable size mussels) being deployed to maintain the integrity of the longlines. As the crop biomass increases additional buoys are added to the longline. Then by November the crop is starting to reach marketable size and the number of buoys would then reach approximately their maximum. However, also at this time about 60 to 70% of the stock is reaching marketable size and being harvested and as such the number of support buoys for this crop would be reducing. The festive season of December and January are generally a high demand period for seafood and as such much of the crop is harvested in this period. Easter is another traditionally high demand period for seafood and the majority of the remaining stock will be harvested at this time. Any remaining stock will then be used to meet demand until the next crop reaches harvestable size.

As outlined in the EIS, the previous Jervis Bay mussel producers sourced their mussel spat for many years from Twofold Bay. If this practice was to also occur for the proposed commercial shellfish aquaculture leases, under strict translocation protocols, then the following production cycle is likely to occur. Between November and December mussel spat would be harvested in Twofold Bay and in line with translocation protocols relayed to Jervis Bay. Fisheries NSW observations and previous discussion with mussel farmers in Twofold Bay and Jervis Bay would indicate that mussels tended to have a higher growth rate in

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 19 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Jervis Bay. This may result in the mussels reaching a marketable size earlier than November and therefore an earlier reduction in the number of support buoys.

The following example provides an indication of the worst case scenario regarding the number of buoys that may be used on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. It is based on the pre-harvesting stage of mussel culture with longlines spaced at 10 m intervals. However, this scenario is highly unlikely due to the number of variables that are likely to decrease the total number of buoys in the water on the three leases at any given time e.g. species cultured and development stage (i.e. juvenile and post-harvesting versus pre-harvesting).

All lease infrastructure must be maintained within the lease boundaries. To make allowances for the installation of the anchoring systems and for any bowing of the lines, the distances of 60 m and 40 m have to be subtracted from the overall length and width of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. Also, a central anchoring point has been proposed which will result in a further deduction of 40 m (See Figure 18 - EIS). It is likely that more anchoring points will be required for the Callala Leases. Considering the area occupied by the anchoring systems, the area available to install longlines would be about 260 x 240 m on the Vincentia Lease and 500 x 300 m on the Callala Leases. If a spacing of 20 m was to be used between each longline system this would result in about 13 or 15 lines respectively, per lease. If an average buoy spacing of 10 m is used then the number of buoys would be about 312 for the Vincentia Lease and about 750 for each of the Callala Leases.

These numbers are comparable to those as outlined in Figure 18 of the EIS. The figure was prepared by Marine Pollution Research in 2008 as part of the former mussel farmer’s application to consolidate and expand the former leases at Vincentia.

As outlined in the growing cycle example for Twofold Bay, the number of buoys deployed on the leases at any given time will vary and therefore the extent of the visual impact may also vary throughout the year.

Jervis Bay Regional Environmental Plan 1996, Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 1985 and the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014

Fisheries NSW has taken account the Jervis Bay Regional Environmental Plan 1996 (JBRP) and the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 1985 (SLEP) regarding visual impact. It is noted that the JBRP has been repealed with the gazettal of the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014. Matters relating to the NSW Coastal Policy 1997 and State Environmental Planning Policy No 71 – Coastal Protection have been previously addressed in the EIS.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 20 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

The proposed water based Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases do not fall within the boundaries of the JBRP or SLEP. Consent is not required from Shoalhaven City Council for the lease based activities proposed. However, it is noted that both planning instruments refer to the visual quality of Jervis Bay and surrounds. The rock shelf at Plantation Point is listed as a heritage item under Schedule 7 of the SLEP as is the Tapalla Point geological rock platform at Huskisson. In order to address the issue of visual amenity of the proposed leases on Jervis Bay and the heritage listed rock shelf at Plantation Point, a Visual Impact Assessment was undertaken by O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd (Appendix 1).

Visual Impact Assessment

O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd (O’Hanlon Design) was contracted by Fisheries NSW to conduct a visual impact assessment on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay (See Appendix 1). O’Hanlon Design (2014) adapted the scenic assessment method used by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. The USDA Forest Service system has become a benchmark for the qualitative measurement and assessment of the visual impact. Adaptations and derivations of this method have been in use in Australia by a variety of consultants for over two decades.

The USDA Forest Service method assesses the influence of landform, vegetation, water and other landscape factors on scenic quality with refinement applied for the sensitivity levels and number of viewers from various viewpoints.

Local Landscape Character

The local landscape character of the areas proposed for the leases in Jervis Bay as defined by O'Hanlon Design (2014) is described below. With the exception of an out of character three/four storey commercial development at Callala Beach the fringe suburban development is generally limited to two storeys and low density suburban forms. The density of vegetation and dominance of the houses along the beachfronts varies; residences along Orion beaches, south of Barfleur and Plantation Point Parade are almost completely screened, some houses behind Collingwood Beach are more visible and dominant with minimal or moderate screening and most houses have a vegetated background. The residences along Callala Beach are generally elevated on the dunes as part of the skyline with minimal or moderate screening. The eastern end of Vincentia features houses terracing up amongst the bushland when viewed from the middle distance.

Jervis Bay itself has few cultural modifications. Moorings in the bay are limited to a very small number located off both Vincentia and Huskisson (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). Fisheries NSW is also aware of a large number of moorings located off Callala Beach. Most of the waterside interface maritime elements are recessed in Currambene Creek at Huskisson. A

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 21 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

limited number of navigation markers identify the boundaries of the JBMP sanctuary zones and hazards (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Overall, Jervis Bay's visual character is based around the dominance of the waterway, the lineal quality of the beach and low background vegetation, the differentiation of shoreline materials and the enclosed form of the bay to create the highly natural quality of the bay as distinct from the low density character of the developed areas (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Impact of Night Lighting

O'Hanlon Design (2014) assessed the impact of night lighting from a number of foreshore viewing locations in Vincentia, Huskisson and Callala Beach looking along the beaches or across the bay. The assessment of the existing nightscape and night lighting impact was broken into several assessment units to reflect the potentially different levels of impacts due to the intensity of the lighting impacts and the distance of the viewer (Table 1).

Table 1: Visual Impact of lighting in the existing nightscape (Source: O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

O'Hanlon Design (2014) stated that the visual impacts are limited in number as lighting is restricted to cardinal markers at the corners of each lease and midpoint markers on the Callala leases. However, the effect of lighting would have a significant impact on the perception of the wildness of Jervis Bay. The visual impact is usually heightened at night by the lack of fine detail and visible cultural modification. The cardinal marker lights are likely to blend into the background lighting environment for viewers at levels close to the high water mark with a background of foreshore lights behind the leases. The cardinal lights will be more discordant with the darker backgrounds for more elevated viewers and those with dark undeveloped backgrounds (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Visual Impact Rankings

O'Hanlon Design (2014) based the assessment of the degree of visual impact of the proposed shellfish aquaculture leases on the visibility and perceived severity of the infrastructure within the landscape from selected viewpoints and the number of viewers expected to experience the visual changes. For this assessment visual impact ratings were

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 22 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

ranked as follows: Severe, High, Moderate, Low, Very Low, Minimal and Nil (O'Hanlon Design, 2014) (Table 2).

Table 2: Summary of the visual impact assessment from the various view points (VP) around Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014; data from O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Vincentia Lease Callala Leases

Rock platform: Low - Moderate VP1 - Plantation Point Park Areas: Low - Moderate Nil

Beach: Low - Moderate VP2 - Barfleur Beach and Walkway: Low Nil along Orion Beach Residences: Low

Beach: Moderate VP3 - Collingwood Beach Walkway: Minimal Nil Residences: Low - Moderate

Beaches: Low - Moderate Tapalla Point rock platform: Minimal VP4 - Ilfracombe St, Nil - Minimal Vincentia Public spaces behind beach: Low Residences: Low - Moderate

VP5 - Huskisson Nil Minimal - Very Low

Beach: Very Low - Low VP6 - Callala Beach Nil Residences: Very Low - Low

VP7 - Callala Point Nil Very Low

Visual Representation of Impacts

Photographs of similar aquaculture installations at equivalent distances were considered to provide a more realistic representation of the lease infrastructure. Fisheries NSW commissioned a series of photographs in both Port Phillip Bay and Twofold Bay of similar lease infrastructure (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). See Appendix 1 for a selection of photographs taken from varying distances and angles to the lease areas.

Residential Areas

The number of residences with potential visual impacts precludes individual assessment of every residence and individual viewing locations. It is reasonable to assume that most residences with views will focus the design of the residence and associated outdoor spaces on the water views available (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). The most affected residential areas

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 23 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. are generally located close to beaches and public areas. As a result views of the leases will be similar to the public views with some variations due to potential elevations of some viewers in second storey viewing locations and additional screening provided in some cases by dune revegetation. O'Hanlon Design (2014) concluded that the likely impacts on those residences will closely match the impacts identified in the public spaces adjacent. Sensitivity levels of individual owners to those impacts are often heightened due to the nature of the impacts on private spaces.

Residents on the elevated hillside facing north in Vincentia with underlying levels around relative level 50 are slightly different from those closer to the water level. Potential views from these residences are more elevated although many are partially or wholly screened by vegetation and intervening development (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). A number of views from these residences could therefore be tightly focused through small viewing corridors with an elevated viewer location. In a select number of cases the focus of the view could be located on the Vincentia Lease at distances around 750 m to 800 m. This would result in buoys and markers being individually more prominent than buoys viewed at the same distances from close to water level. The resultant impact was determined to be Low to Moderate (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

The relative number of responses to public exhibition and public meetings indicate a higher level of concern for potential visual impact for residents along Callala Beach than those along Collingwood Beach and around Vincentia. This is in contrast to the findings from O'Hanlon Design (2014), which suggest that Vincentia residents are likely to be more affected than those along Callala Beach due to the proximity of the Vincentia Lease to the beach. The reasons for this higher sensitivity are not clear, however possible explanations suggested by O'Hanlon Design's (2014) include:

. less permanent residents in Vincentia, or

. a more active environmental protection group in Callala Beach, or

. familiarity with the potential impacts in Vincentia due to previous lease activities.

O'Hanlon Design (2014) findings indicate relatively low levels of visual impact for the Callala Beach foreshore and adjacent residences that do not appear to match the level of resident sensitivity.

Cumulative Visual Impacts

Previous aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay, were located in a similar location to the Vincentia Lease. As there are no current operational leases in Jervis Bay there are no direct cumulative impacts from the original leases. It is however relevant that the proposed lease replicates the original operational lease and there is no indication that the previous lease

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 24 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. diminished the high scenic quality or iconic status of Jervis Bay held while the previous lease was operational (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). Some minor cumulative night lighting impacts occur due to the additional lighting of associated navigational markers adding to the number of existing markers. These are particularly relevant for viewers with views of a dark background (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

O'Hanlon Design (2014) stated that it is important to note the dynamic and ephemeral nature of the proposed visual impacts of the leases. The impacts will vary over time and are most pronounced when the lines have no culture material attached. If the lease expires and the lines are removed, no residual visual impact remains. This is unusual as most cultural elements are more permanent in nature and when removed leave at least short term visible scars on the original landscape. In this case as the cultural modifications are located on water removal allows a full and immediate rehabilitation

Mitigation Measures

O'Hanlon Design (2014) stated that due to the nature of the aquaculture infrastructure and the proposed location in open water on Jervis Bay, very few opportunities exist for mitigation of the impacts. Overall volumes and numbers of buoys are unlikely to potentially be reduced as the volume is tied to the performance capacity of the buoys and the total system.

O'Hanlon Design (2014) suggests that buoys could be slightly camouflaged by use of a mid- grey or dark grey-green colour rather than black. However, it was concluded that camouflage using colour would be of only limited success due to the changing colour of the water in differing climatic conditions, the potentially different backgrounds visible to viewers at differing relative levels and the potential to view from many different locations. Black is generally considered a non obtrusive colour due to its lack of reflectivity and colour emitance (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Other potential mitigation measures proposed by O'Hanlon Design (2014) include:

. removal of buoys when lines are not in use;

. cleaning of guano from buoys (if present); and

. minimising buoy numbers where possible.

Impacts on Water Users

There are an almost infinite number of potential viewing locations on the waters of Jervis Bay, some of which would place the lease areas in the close foreground of the view of water users. Recreational users of the waterway generally have the capacity to adjust their location on the waterway and proximity to the lease areas if they find the visual impacts of concern (O'Hanlon Design, 2014).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 25 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Several eco-tourism boat charters and general boat charter operations are based around Huskisson. The straightest course from Huskisson to the mouth of Jervis Bay almost bisects the distance between the Vincentia Lease and the southern Callala Lease. Viewers on tourist boats travelling toward the open sections of the bay to the southeast are likely to have a very short duration view of the leases in transit at distances around 800 to 1000 m (O'Hanlon Design, 2014). The degree of sensitivity of those viewers is likely to be heightened in proportion to the value the individual tourist places on wildness and natural landscapes. Given that those viewers are likely to be on a high powered recreational boat, O'Hanlon Design (2014) concluded that it was reasonable to assume that their sensitivity to change in the visual environment will not result in concern over the short duration exposure to the lease areas.

Summary

O'Hanlon Design (2014) concluded that from Callala Beach and its surrounds, the impacts will be sufficiently low to satisfy the majority of viewers that scenic quality is not significantly diminished. Impacts could be further reduced by implementing the suggested O'Hanlon Design (2014) mitigation measures. In response to the suggested mitigation measures Fisheries NSW has included in the amended Draft EMP for the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases a Support Buoy Protocol to assist in minimising visual impact which includes:

. buoy numbers are kept to a minimum;

. floatation levels are balanced to minimise visibility whenever possible;

. cleaning of bird guano from buoys (if present); and

. culture support buoys are removed from the lease when lines are not in use.

Viewers around the Vincentia beaches and Plantation Point rock platform will have views that are moderately impacted in almost all conditions. More elevated public places and residences will vary significantly between minimal impacts and moderate impacts depending on any intervening screening. Moderate impacts are significant in these locations of high scenic quality and identified heritage value of some foreshore elements.

To minimise potential visual impacts, O'Hanlon Design (2014) suggests careful management and monitoring of the Vincentia Lease by the lessee and Fisheries NSW. In response to the identified level of visual impact by O'Hanlon Design (2014) for traditional longline aquaculture infrastructure. Fisheries NSW proposes that for the Vincentia lease site the following mitigation measures be put in place to reduce the visual impact of the surface buoys.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 26 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. When longline are not stocked they are only permitted to have a maximum of 12 buoys of up to 50cm on each longline to maintain the integrity of the lines;

. Culture support buoys are to be circular in shape;

. Culture support buoys are to be mid grey (naval grey) in colour to camouflage them;

. Floatation levels of the culture support buoys are to be on average only 50% above the water surface to minimise visibility; and

. Bird guano is to be removed from the culture support buoys as soon as practicable.

O'Hanlon Design (2014) also recommends that consideration is given to a review of the visual impacts. It is suggested that lease performance and tracking of sensitivity for viewers is carried out at approximately five yearly intervals similar to the review of impacts at Twofold Bay carried out in 2005. A review of the availability of the lease was recommended if lessee performance or visual sensitivity give rise to significant concerns. O'Hanlon Design (2014) suggested that data collected from such reviews could form a significant resource for assessment of future leases in other bays in NSW where aquaculture is proposed in the future.

RMS have also confirmed that they are prepared to work with the navigation aid contractor and a representative from Fisheries NSW to make observations at a distance at night at different light intensity settings and adjust them to the lowest level at which the minimum required visibility is maintained, in order to minimise the visual impact on residents.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 27 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.2 Navigation Hazards - Recreational Use

Submissions

Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club, Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association, Community Stakeholders (59)

Summary of Issues Raised

. The proposed leases are very close to established residential communities at Callala Beach and Vincentia. These waters are used regularly and frequently by all forms of small recreational watercraft. The proposed lease infrastructure will create additional navigation hazards and permanent loss of access to a highly valued public asset.

. The present unimpeded nature of the bay is one of its great attractions for water sports. Generally these activities are carried out within 2 km of the shore and so will be in conflict with the proposed mussel leases and prove dangerous.

. The area of Jervis Bay just off Callala Beach is extensively used for recreational boating and particularly sailing due to the prevailing winds and the aqua farm buoys, lines and nets could easily get caught in yacht keels and boat motors. The increased boat activity that the farm will produce is a hindrance to this recreational activity.

. These leases will detract from the water surface area and restrictions will apply to entering the proposed areas. Also commercial activity will add to the traffic on the waterways.

. The Preliminary Project Outline (Section 2.8) states that recreational uses were taken into account in selecting the site. Clearly recreational use of the site has NOT been taken into account given the proposed site is one of the prime recreational areas of the bay during the summer period.

. The two most popular recreational fishing locations in Jervis Bay are Longnose Point and Middle Ground Reef. Following an evening of fishing, many people from Callala Beach travel from Middle Ground Reef and/or Longnose Point back to Callala Beach after the sun goes down. The proposed sites are directly in the path of the route taken by recreational anglers returning from these popular fishing locations. Navigating the leases at night would present a danger to the recreational anglers from Callala Beach. The leases would present a dangerous hazard for anglers returning home at night risking physical injury and damage to craft.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 28 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. There are a growing number of water skiers and jet skis who use the complete length of Callala Beach. Water and jet skiers naturally operate closer to the shore than fishing boats and could easily inadvertently stray close to the proposed leases.

. The proposed lease sites block off areas currently used frequently for kayaking, boating and wake boarding.

. The Vincentia Lease will be immediately in the path of small sailing boats, kayaks, windsurfers, kite surfers, paddle boarders, which are normally within 1 km offshore. These craft are at the mercy of changes in wind and wave strength and direction and could easily drift onto the buoys and mussel lines. Disentangling themselves could prove difficult and could be fatal. Barnacles on the ropes and buoys would also be a safety issue.

. The Callala Leases are further out from the shore but are located on existing yacht race courses, where races regularly start and finish. The leases are also in the path a recreational and tourists boats transiting from Huskisson to Callala Bay and the popular Long Reef and Honeymoon Bay beaches.

. The Hobie 16 Catamaran World Championships are to be held off Huskisson in February 2014 and will attractive participants and visitors from all over the world. This will be a major tourism event for the bay, the Shoalhaven and NSW. We understand the organisers, the Vincentia Sailing Club, believe such an event would not be possible with mussel leases at Vincentia and Callala.

. Both the Vincentia and Callala leases will be hazardous for all water craft including, larger yachts, motor boats and jet skis as the intention is to make the buoys and lines as inconspicuous as possible. Cardinal marks on each corner of leases will be insufficient particularly for many holiday makers who will be unaware of existence of the leases, or at night or times of poor visibility due to high winds, rain storms and fog. To use more markers will only increase the visual pollution. We request you refer the matter to the Minister for RMS for comment on this important safety issue.

. Jervis Bay is well enough occupied with naval activities, regattas and recreational pursuits without another constraint.

. Cardinal marks on each corner of the leases will be insufficient, particularly for many holiday makers who will be unaware of existence of the leases. Additional markers will only increase the visual pollution. Storms could cause damage to the leases and floating debris would be a further hazard.

. Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club believes it will be adversely affected by the proposal. The club at present regularly sails courses across the proposed lease areas. Yachts

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 29 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

tacking to windward in a north easterly utilise a zig zag course which will be severely affected and will ruin races that have been in operation for many years. Many visiting yachts coming to the bay will also be affected. Jervis Bay already struggles due to poor boating facilities and this will cause further problems for the area.

. In relation to the obstruction caused by the leases, their location is in a frequently travelled area between the biggest group of moorings in the area (i.e. near Callala Bay and Huskisson) and the entrance to the main public wharf. Currambene Creek is also in this region, which is another major area that boats use to moor and launch. The only pump out service in the bay is situated at Huskisson and its wharves are the closest to re-fueling facilities. Callala Bay also has one of the busiest launching ramps in the region.

. Jervis Bay already has a large number of lights similar to those proposed for the leases. A multitude of blinking lights is extremely difficult to differentiate between and judge distances even over small distances. Lights would be obscured at night by the backdrop of house and street lights when viewed from the water on the other side. At night the proposed location is virtually directly in line between Huskisson and Callala areas which will require boats to travel in an arc around the locations, which is not a simple matter.

. Poor weather will severely affect visibility and the prospect of vessels being blown or pushed onto the leases. The proposed style of the leases will act as a trap to capture any vessel that strays into the area. The proposed style of the lease will be a significant hazard to keel yachts in one respect and in another to outboard speed boats moving quickly across the surface.

. The proposed location of the lease off Orion Beach is in the racing area of Vincentia Sailing Club, which will make it extremely dangerous for all competitors. Risks such as entrapment are highly likely. Capsized sailboats and crew drifting in an open area opposes very little risk as they are easy to spot therefore rescue craft are able to respond quickly. A sudden weather change and there could be 10 boats or more in difficulty. If they end up inside the lease area, which will happen, it would be very difficult to respond quickly. Crew being entangled in between boats and the proposed aquaculture lease is a real concern. Vincentia Sailing Club is well respected and has held major events over many years. Our greatest asset is our unobstructed waterway.

. Sailing teams come from all over Australia and we have even had international guests to state and national level events. If the proposal were to go ahead, instead of

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 30 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

offering the lure of Jervis Bay to our visitors, we’d be offering them an obstacle course.

. The removal of the previous rafts in 2008 was a significant improvement in terms of water access for recreational sailors and paddlers.

. The Callala leases are further out from the shore but are located on existing yacht race courses, where races regularly start and finish.

Response

Jervis Bay Marine Park has been established for the protection of marine biological diversity, marine habitats and ecological processes as well as ecologically sustainable resource use under the Marine Parks Act 1997. Aquaculture is a permissible use in the Habitat Protection Zone in accordance with c 1.18 of the Marine Parks (Zoning Plans) Regulation 1999. There are a number of navigational marks already on Jervis Bay waters associated with Marine Park zoning, permanent moorings, naval operations and naval moorings. The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases would only result in the addition of about 16 navigation marks in an area that represents approximately 0.4% of Jervis Bay.

Any person who is the master of a powered recreational vessel operating on NSW waters at a speed of 10 knots or more must have a Boat Driving Licence. To obtain this licence requires familiarisation with NSW Maritime legislation including the relevant navigational aids used in NSW waters such as marks, charts and maps. Sailing vessels, sailboards and kite surfers are surface water craft that harness the power of the wind and are classified as vessels so operators must adhere to NSW Maritime legislation. Canoes and kayaks are also classified as vessels. A person who is master of a sailing vessel, sailboard, kite surfer, canoe or kayak is not required to hold a Boat Driving Licence. However, they are still required to have an understanding of NSW Maritime legislation and the safe boating rules that apply to them to enjoy their sport safety (NSW RMS, 2012).

NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) have prepared a boating handbook which outlines the responsibilities of a master of a vessel. The handbook states that the master of a vessel is responsible at all times for keeping a lookout for dangers. It also outlines the system of buoys, poles and lights used to assist safe navigation, as well as provide information on each type of mark and the unique combination of colour, shape, topmark and lights that may be used. A boat driver must be able to identify these marks and pass them safely on the correct side (NSW RMS, 2012).

Concerns were expressed in submissions about navigating around the proposed leases in Jervis Bay. Fisheries NSW has consulted with NSW RMS to ascertain its requirements for safe navigation. If the proposed leases are approved, NSW RMS has requested that the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 31 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Callala lease areas be marked with buoys on each corner of the leases plus an intermediary buoy along the long edge of the lease areas resulting in six buoys per Callala lease area. On the Vincentia lease area buoys are to be positioned on the corners of the lease area. The type of buoys required to be installed on the three lease areas are to be of a type similar to SLB1250 buoys (Figure 10). The corner buoys would be required to conform to the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) buoyage system ‘A’ for both day and night for cardinal marks north, east, south and west.

Figure 10: Diagram and photograph of SLB1250 type navigation buoys (Source: Sealite, 2014).

The daytime cardinal marks that will be placed on the buoys are outlined in Figure 11. These buoys will be yellow and black in colour which will also assist in reducing their impact on visual amenity. To facilitate night time navigation the buoys will be marked by solar powered lights that will be required to have a range of one nautical mile or 1.85km. The corner buoy lights will be white in colour and the intermediary buoys on the Callala leases will be yellow in colour.

RMS has informed Fisheries NSW that the proposed navigation lights (SL52) must be set so that they are visible from 1 nautical mile, which is the standard practice. RMS have also confirmed that they are prepared to work with the navigation aid contractor and a representative from Fisheries NSW to make observations at a distance at night at different light intensity settings and adjust them to the lowest level at which the minimum required visibility is maintained, in order to minimise the visual impact on residents.

NSW RMS also requested that the proposed end and culture support buoys should be black opposed to yellow as this colour is least likely to clash with the visual aesthetics of Jervis Bay and most likely to blend in with the environment.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 32 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 11: Cardinal marks for corner navigation buoys (Source: NSW RMS, 2014).

If the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project is approved, Fisheries NSW will notify the Australian Hydrographic Office. A ‘Notice to Mariners’ will be issued and official charts will be amended (See Section 8.1.7 - EIS). NSW RMS and NSW Marine Parks will also be provided with the coordinates of the lease locations so that relevant publications and maps can be amended.

In addition, Fisheries NSW will work with NSW RMS, NSW Marine Parks, Marine Rescue NSW, Jervis Bay Tourism and Shoalhaven City Council to provide suitable advisory material on lease locations and associated maritime safety matters to tourists and vessel masters. This advisory material could include a notice for display at boating access points to Jervis Bay to inform masters of vessels of the location of the aquaculture leases.

All waterway users are required to keep up to date with matters affecting maritime safety in NSW waters.

NSW Maritime legislation requires that any person or organisation conducting, promoting or organising a race, competition or exhibition or any other activity which restricts the availability of navigable waters for normal use by the public must have an aquatic licence

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 33 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

(NSW RMS, 2012). Fisheries NSW consulted with NSW RMS to determine the location of any aquatic licences in Jervis Bay which are illustrated in Figure 12.

Fisheries NSW also conferred with the Jervis Bay Sailing Club, Vincentia Sailing Club and the Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club during the EIS consultation and exhibition process. The Jervis Bay Sailing Club was first advised of the proposed locations for the three leases in the Preliminary Project Outline. A recommendation was made by the Jervis Bay Sailing Club to move the Callala Leases northeast so as to avoid the club's regular courses off Huskisson. The Commodore of the club made a suggestion that the two Callala Leases could possibility be joined together and also requested information on the pitch of anchoring lines. The annual Jervis Bay Challenge sailing event was noted and potential interactions with the leases were considered. The Commodore suggested that advisory material should be promoted to sailors to avoid negative interactions with the leases. Notably, Jervis Bay Sailing Club does not race at night and are required to be off the water by 6:30 pm if racing. Fisheries NSW's response was to relocate the proposed Callala Leases in a northeast direction as far as possible while avoiding the Navy's Firing Trace and remaining in an area with a suitable depth profile. The two Callala Leases have not been moved together to allow sufficient water flow and ease of access between the leases.

Fisheries NSW consulted with the Vincentia Sailing Club (VSC) about the location of the proposed lease off Vincentia. The proposed area is the same location used by the former Blue Mussel aquaculture lease. Several iterations were proposed in regards to the location of the Vincentia Lease, including shifting the lease westwards (issue with depth profile) and northwards (issue with depth profile and interference with wind surfers, kite boarders and other watercraft). The VSC also suggested relocating the lease to same locality as the other two leases - Callala Bay.

The proposed location for the Vincentia Lease in the EIS is a 10 hectare area situated over the top of one of the former Blue Mussel aquaculture leases. The current proposed location is further northwards than the proposed location in the Preliminary Project Outline. Vincentia Sailing Club advised Fisheries NSW that they use the near shore area for regular sailing events and were concerned that the lease would represent a navigational hazard for races, especially in northeast winds. During meetings over the EIS public exhibition period, the VSC advised that they were not satisfied with the location proposed for the Vincentia Lease. The club stated that they were about to host the Hobie 16 World Championships and they wished to continue to conduct sailing regattas in the waters of Jervis Bay. The Hobie 16 World Championships were held off Huskisson Beach and the northern end of Collingwood Beach (February 2014).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 34 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Fisheries NSW considered moving the Vincentia Lease 400 m northeast of the proposed location to minimise impacts to sailing vessels that use the waters offshore of Orion Beach. However, this location will impact on the area used for the Hobie 16 World Championships, as well as kite surfers and wind surfers which use the northern end of Collingwood Beach.

After considering all the constraints in the waters offshore of Vincentia, Fisheries NSW is proposing the same location as exhibited in the EIS for the Vincentia Lease. It is outside the exclusion area used for the Hobie 16 World Championship (and potentially future events) and outside the aquatic licence area approved by RMS as the VSC race area.

The proposed Vincentia Lease is located about 270 m to the west of the aquatic licence area for Vincentia Sailing Club and about 20 m south of the exclusion zone used for the Hobie 16 World Championships (Figure 12). Moving the Vincentia Lease away from the current proposed location would impact on the VSC’s ability to continue to host future events at Huskisson Beach and the northern end of Collingwood Beach.

The VSC holds race events on most Sundays from September through to April. The number of competitor vessels averages between 10 to 16 (Web Reference 1). Concerns were expressed in submissions that during racing events in the waters offshore of Vincentia, catamarans could become entangled in the lease infrastructure and people could be injured by fouling organisms on the infrastructure if vessels capsized. The predominant vessels sailed by VSC members are Hobie catamarans which are a highly manoeuvrable vessel, most do not have keels or dagger boards and the rudders are designed to “kick-up” to allow for easy beaching.

The proposed Vincentia Lease is located approximately 1000 m from the shoreline abutting the VSC club rooms, from which vessels would be launched and about 270 m to the west of the aquatic licence area for Vincentia Sailing Club (See Figure 12). It is standard practice for sailing clubs to provide support vessels (e.g. rescue boats and start boats) during race days. Rescue vessels play a role in assisting disabled sailing craft (gear malfunction) and capsized craft. Rescue craft can be used to either right a capsized or overturned vessel, or tow a capsized or overturned vessel away from hazards (e.g. moored vessel, shoreline, aquaculture lease).

A small proportion of the aquatic licence area for VSC lies to the northeast of the proposed Vincentia Lease. Should a Hobie catamaran inadvertently sail into the lease area during a northeasterly breeze there is capacity to reach across the wind between the longlines (which would be 15 to 50 m apart) either in a northwesterly or a southeasterly direction, or worst case scenario, a vessel could run with the wind in a southerly direction over the top of the submerged longline between the mussel buoys with rudders raised.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 35 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Routine lease inspections and maintenance of the longlines generally involves lifting the backbones from the water and suspending them using rollers and winches. These rollers and winches are then used to move along the backbones to undertake the required farming activities. This activity results in the crushing of most of the hard bodied organisms (e.g. barnacles) and mainly soft bodied fouling organisms are left on the backbones. Cleaning of the backbones is undertaken to enable inspection of the infrastructure and to reduce the weight burden. This would reduce the potential for damage to the vessels if they were to interact with the lease infrastructure as they sailed over it.

Fisheries NSW also consulted with Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club about the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. The club stated that their set courses utilise the existing lateral marks or buoys permanently in place in Jervis Bay. The exception is S2 which is a laid mark used only in some events and located to the northeast of the proposed Callala Leases (See Figure 12). With the exception of the S2 mark, the location of the proposed Callala and Vincentia Leases do not impact on safe navigation around those marks and there is enough clearance for sailors to safely navigate around the leases. As a laid mark, S2 can be relocated from the current position as required depending on wind conditions.

Concerns were raised in submissions that the leases would create a navigation hazard for boating traffic (including fishers) between Callala Beach, Huskisson, Callala Bay, Longnose Point, Middle Ground Reef, Long Beach and Honeymoon Bay. Figure 13 illustrates the indicative vessel tracks for vessels which may access Long Beach and Honeymoon Bay. The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases would not significantly impact on the ability of boaters to transverse between these locations. Fisheries NSW has not identified any formal boat launching facilities on Callala Beach and in the event that a small vessel is launched from Callala Beach there are large areas of beach to the north and south of the proposed leases that have unrestricted access.

Shellfish leases have been established in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria for a number of years. The waters of Port Phillip Bay are heavily used by both commercial and recreational vessels. As illustrated in Figure 14, water users can become familiar with the leases and safely navigate around or within the lease areas. Recreational fishers quickly become familiar with the leases and often utilise them for the recreational fishing opportunity they provide.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 36 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 12: Location of aquatic licences (sailing courses) in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 37 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 13: Indicative vessel tracks, Naval areas and moorings within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW; 2014)

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 38 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 14: Recreational boating use in and around mussel leases in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria. (Source: James Ray, 2014).

During the community information session at Callala Beach as part of the EIS exhibition process, a number of people questioned the location of the display buoys placed in the middle of the closest lease off Callala Beach. Information was received by some community members which led them to believe that the leases were going to be considerably closer inshore than the distance proposed. The display buoys demonstrated the true distance to the community members who attended the community information session at Callala Beach.

Concerns were also expressed about the potential impact of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases on recreational activities offshore of Callala Beach. Figure 15 illustrates the indicative paths that would be taken by the lease service vessels. There is a considerable area of clearance on the shore side of the leases for water based activities and for vessels to transit between Callala Bay and Huskisson (Figure 16). Caution must be exercised by water skiers, wakeboarders and jet skiers operating in close proximity to the leases. Notably there must be observers keeping a lookout at all times whilst skiing and wakeboarding.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 39 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 15: Indicative path of vessels servicing the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Google Earth, 2013).

Figure 16: Near shore track of tourist vessel moving between Huskisson and Callala Bay. The movement of such vessels would not be hindered by the proposed leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 40 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Marine vessel traffic associated with proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases would represent a very small proportion of the total number of vessels in Jervis Bay on any given day. The waters of Jervis Bay are currently used by a range of vessels from small tinnies through to cruise ships, large Naval vessels and commercial tourist vessels. Section 8.2.1.2 of the EIS estimated that daily vessel movements in Jervis Bay could be up to 300 during peak periods (F. Clements - A/Manager, Jervis Bay Marine Park 2013, pers comm.). This would include vessels that are either already moored in Jervis Bay or launched from boat ramps. During the operational stage marine vessel movements are expected to be in the range of 0-3 return trips per lease per day to undertake inspections, cleaning, harvesting and maintenance. This represents an approximate 2 % increase in vessel movements during the peak periods. Fisheries NSW considers that it is unlikely that the service vessels would have a significant impact on marine traffic in Jervis Bay especially when considered in context with the size of the bay and the vessel movements predominantly being a direct route to and from the leases.

Section 2.3.6 addresses concerns about the structural integrity and stability of the lease infrastructure and the potential impact on safe navigation in Jervis Bay. The Structural Integrity and Stability Monitoring Program will outline the details of the procedures and inspection schedules. Evidence of faults, damage, excessive biofouling and loose lines or buoys will be the focus of the inspections which will be followed by appropriate maintenance. Inspections would be undertaken at least once a week while more detailed servicing inspections would be undertaken at least once a year and would cover all infrastructure components including anchors, ropes, chains and connectors.

Aquaculture leases in NSW are not exclusive use areas but it is an offence to interfere with or steal from a lease. Granting the lease will not prevent appropriate watercraft moving through the leases (e.g. kayaks, paddleboards and other small vessels). However, the masters of vessels need to consider WH&S risks when undertaking their activities in close proximity to lease infrastructure (Section 8.2.1.5 - EIS). During the operation of the previous Blue Mussel leases off Vincentia, no reports were made to Fisheries NSW of negative interactions with vessels or waterway users (including scuba divers which used to dive around the leases to view seahorses).

There is always a risk of equipment breaking or motors failing, which may leave vessels powerless and could lead to uncontrolled interactions with existing structures (e.g. moored vessels, mooring lines, other vessels, shallow reefs, rocky foreshores). These inherent risks associated with being on the water mean that all vessel masters should have appropriate life jackets and safety equipment onboard, as well as be aware and/or trained in self-rescue techniques and de-rigging techniques.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 41 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Case Study - Twofold Bay

Concerns about navigation safety were also raised in submissions for Stage Two of Mussel Aquaculture in Twofold Bay in 2005. Issues raised included that the aquaculture infrastructure would be a hazard to boating, as well as restrict yacht racing courses and safe harbourage areas within Twofold Bay.

NSW Maritime outlined stringent guidelines for the marking of the leases during the day and night to ensure navigational safety. NSW Maritime also stated that it is likely that regular sailors on Twofold Bay quickly become familiar with the location of the leases. Navigation buoys similar to those proposed for Jervis Bay were required to delineate the leases. NSW Maritime also acknowledged that yachting courses are regularly modified without major inconvenience to yacht club members or race participants to accommodate wind and wave direction and as such the impacts of the mussel leases on yachting should not be significant. Notwithstanding this, yacht skippers and crews will have to exercise care to avoid leases in a similar manner to wharves, reefs, moorings and other bay users.

The same methods proposed to inform waterway users in Jervis Bay were used in Twofold Bay. Since the expansion of the mussel leases in Twofold Bay over a decade ago, there have been no reports of negative interactions between the leases and other waterway users.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 42 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.3 Financial Concerns - Financial Justification, Impact on Tourism Industry and Property Values

Submissions

Financial Justification

Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association, Callala Beach Progress Association, Community Stakeholders (40)

Impact on Tourism

Vincentia Ratepayers and Residents Association, Callala Beach Progress Association, Community Stakeholders (46)

Property Values

Callala Beach Progress Association, Community Stakeholders (7)

Summary of Issues Raised

Financial Justification

. Commercial aquaculture on the proposed scale is not financially viable. Hence, the investor will seek to expand the size of the operation/s.

. There would be insignificant economic gain from the proposed leases. The contribution to the local and regional economy is estimated to be no more than $2 million. Is it worth risking a $700 million tourism industry for this small return?

. The most important issue of financial viability of large scale mussel farming in Jervis Bay is not discussed in the proposal. Issues that arise include:

o Can the product when delivered to Sydney compete with imports?

o With limited local support facilities would costs be higher than other areas e.g. Port Stephens?

o What income would the NSW Government require to justify their involvement in the regulatory supervisory duties involved?

o What are the likely construction, operation and maintenance costs?

o Would special financial arrangements be necessary to encourage participation of local aboriginal communities?

o What level of production is required to make the project financially viable is 50 hectares enough?

o What are the impacts of a lessee failing financially?

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 43 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. The proposal cites the success of the Twofold Bay operation, however although this has a leased area of 50 hectares only a small part is operational and the product is sold into a local market remote from Sydney. It is not comparable.

. It is important to establish the financial viability of the project and its contribution to the community before proceeding further with the Development Application in order to avoid wasting everyone's time and ensure it does not become a burden on the community.

. No cost/benefit or feasibility analysis has been provided. The community must know what the project is proposed to generate economically to be able to effectively evaluate the project. If the project is not economic then why do the project?

. General comments about other areas and multiplier effects are all very informative but not directly relevant to this project under assessment now. These additional comments only become relevant when the initial financial feasibility of this project is done and agreed as being reasonable. Then the flow on effects and comparisons to other areas can have some meaningful relevance.

. The costs to tourism, the environment, boating safety and the costs of development/operations will far outweigh any benefits to the state or local community.

. The NSW Government has not provided the local community with an independent experts’ report as to whether the proposal is commercially sound and viable.

. Promoting world class sporting and recreational events will create significantly greater levels of jobs and income than a 50 hectare aquaculture lease, without degrading the natural environment and risking injury to waterway users.

. There is no indication of how the job creation figures were quantified. Aquaculture has been tried three occasions and proven unsuccessful. Additional jobs of 20-35 people are claimed. This is a questionable number and some detail as to how it is derived would be very informative. Twofold Bay has 2-3 FTE and 2-3 part-timers on a lease of 20 ha. The point is that using this example this project will result in 5 – 11 FTE and the same number of part time jobs, which is half the number of jobs claimed by the proponent.

Impact on Tourism

. Tourist numbers will decline if Jervis Bay's reputation for pristine beaches and natural beauty is damaged by the issues associated with aquaculture. The leases will result in tourists choosing to holiday at other locations.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 44 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. The proposed leases are at odds with what the tourists actually want to experience – dolphins and other wildlife - not mussels.

. The leases have the potential to impact on the future sustainability of tourism.

. The tourist based economy relying on the beautiful natural environment and recreational activities will suffer. The contribution of the leases to the local and regional economy is estimated to be no more than $2 million. Is it worth risking a $700 million tourism industry for this small return?

. There will be a significant loss of revenue to the broader community if sailing events are cancelled because Jervis Bay becomes an obstacle course. For example, the Hobie World Championship is being held in Jervis Bay on 14 February 2014. Over 600 people are expected to visit our region, staying for two weeks bringing in an estimated $1 million to the tourism industry and the local economy. The estimated gross turnover of the proposal is a mere $173,000! The proposal will contribute little to the local and regional economy and it is likely to compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

. The EIS formulates the view that the economic impact on the local economy will be positive based on experience at other sites. It is obvious that this assessment has not taken into account the negative impact on tourism of turning a near pristine area into a semi industrial one. Tourism at Callala Beach in particular has in the recent past been badly wounded by algae blooms that have resulted in unsightly and smelly beaches. It is expected that a semi industrial site immediately off the beachfront will have a similar negative outcome.

. Despite claims that the proposal would be positive for tourism due to the attraction of fresh seafood, there is no data to show that the previous mussel farming operation contributed to the local tourism. Even if there were benefits, it is unlikely to outweigh the negative effects to the tourism that is based on the natural environment and recreation activities.

. There is no detailed analysis (independent experts report) of social impact of the project, particularly the impacts on the tourism industry, including the impact of the loss of revenue generated by business and resultant employment losses.

. The potential increase in shark numbers close to shore in Jervis Bay would be devastating to tourism (See Section 2.3.10).

. In regards to the food trail example on the Eyre Peninsula, the distances in NSW are great and not effective for a tourism trail. Such a venture would need State

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 45 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

government funding to support the establishment. This is a misrepresentation of the opportunity.

. The conclusion of negligible impact on tourism when compared to the potential economic developments in other parts of Australia is a misdirection and leap of faith. There is no consideration of the opportunity loss from future sailing, swimming and paddle board events. No evaluation of the general loss of tourism through the “tarnishing “of the National Park and the vista. No evaluation of the loss of general tourism through fear of drifting into the leases and subsequent damage to person or property or loss of life from entanglement (See Section 2.3.2).

Impact on Property Values

. The proposal will have a detrimental impact on land values, particularly beachfront properties, most significantly due to the visual impact.

. The proposal will have an adverse impact on a number of ratepayers, many of whose superannuation and retirement plans are directly linked to the value of their properties in Callala Beach.

. Newer properties on Quay Road are being developed with dual stories to take advantage of the view and most residents have put developmental investments into their properties which far exceed median property prices. Hence, their property development investments may be negated at point of resale because of the visual pollution afforded by the leases. The homes at Callala Beach have a direct view of the bay which is not interrupted by vegetation or other buildings as in Vincentia. Unlike taking the risk of purchasing a home with an empty block in front of it, these homes were purchased and developed at prices which were set to take into account that views of Jervis Bay would be of the natural environment (not man-made infrastructure).

. The values of beach front properties at Callala Beach have already been reduced by new building policies based on sea rise due to global warming. The main asset of these properties is their unspoiled view of the Jervis Bay and proximity to a clean beach. The question still to be answered by the State Government - who will compensate landowners for the considerable loss in property values?

Response

Financial Justification

The financial viability of a commercial shellfish farm depends on a combination of factors including the size of a farm, business structure, species grown, competing products, natural

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 46 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

productivity, technologies, availability of services and facilities, production costs and product pricing.

The business structure (i.e. whether it is an individual, family, partnership or company) is a factor that strongly influences financial viability as each type of business has differing financial demands. In addition, the integrated nature of a business with other activities will also determine its financial viability. For example, two fish farm models that have been financially successful in NSW are a company based Barramundi farm producing 10's of tonnes for the Sydney markets, and a small family run farm producing 100's of kilograms for its own restaurant/tourism business.

In primary production it is not uncommon for an enterprise to have farms or property in a number of different locations to diversify activities and to lessen the impact of any potential disasters which may occur in a particular location. For example, it is common for oyster farmers in NSW to have leases in a number of different estuaries, and livestock producers can have properties in different parts of the state and shift stock to where the feed is best at the time. Individually, each oyster lease or livestock property may not be financially viable but as a part of larger holdings it can be. This is a useful risk management strategy for aquaculture, particularly where seasonality can affect the condition of shellfish.

The species to be grown and the markets into which the stock is sold also determine the financial viability of the leases. High value products such as pearl oysters or scallops, would require a smaller area to be commercially viable than species with a lower value e.g. mussels. Primary producers will often also farm a number of different species to manage financial risk. Selling directly to consumers and value adding a product has a greater return then selling through wholesale markets.

The market place has a number of competing products not just the species being grown by a farmer which can determine the amount of product that can be sold and the price obtained. For example, NSW grown oysters are not only competing with interstate oysters but also with prawns. Australian seafood producers also compete regularly with imported products in the market place. However; local produce often attracts the premium price over the imported products. Australian prawn farmers for example, despite being one of the smaller volumetric producers in the world, are able to compete with imports because of their ability to have high productivity per hectare and attract a premium price over that paid for imported products.

In 2011/2012 the Australian mussel industry produced 3404 tonnes of mussels while imports totalled 2197 tonnes to satisfy demand for this seafood product (Skirtun et al., 2013). Mussels like any seafood products are subject to the standard rules of demand and supply. The above figures suggest that the demand from Australian consumers for mussels was not met by local production and therefore imported product was required to make up the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 47 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

shortfall. The figure for Australian mussel production indicates that locally produced shellfish can effectively compete with imported products.

Fisheries NSW is aware that across Australia the size of an aquaculture farm alone does not determine its financial viability. For example, mussel lease holdings in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria, range in size from 8 to 30 hectares depending on the business model (individual or company) for the aquaculture farm. The previous leases in Jervis Bay near Vincentia consisted of two sites that were each four hectares which were held by different permit holders. These lease areas were financially viable to the respective mussel farmers at the time of operation. The faster growth rates attained in Jervis Bay compared to Port Phillip Bay for example, resulted in quality product which attracted a premium price.

Concerns about the issue of economic viability were also expressed as part of the public exhibition process for the expansion (a total of 50 hectares) of the mussel farming development in Twofold Bay, Eden. However, the group that reviewed this proposal concluded that there was no requirement for comment or recommendations on this matter. Also Eden Sea Farms Pty Ltd has continued to operate since 2005 despite a number of storm events in Twofold Bay impacting operations and its current production level of approximately 17 hectares of mussels is economically viable.

As with any primary production unit the vagrancies of the natural productivity of an area are a risk to be managed. For example, agricultural farmers battle with drought and flooding events which at that time make the natural productivity of the respective farms less profitable. However, for the rest of the time the natural productivity of those farms may be very profitable and over a period of years makes the agricultural farm a financially viable enterprise. Aquaculture farms are no different and within Jervis Bay the respective climatic conditions, changes in coastal currents, nutrient inflows from offshore upwellings and land based nutrients, as well as the sea state can alter the natural productivity of bay. These changes in natural productivity may be yearly, seasonally or last only a short period of time but are risk factors that aquaculture farmers have learnt to manage.

The ability for an industry to be viable in a region can also be influenced by the availability of service industries and supporting facilities. There are currently maritime services and facilities in Jervis Bay that support a range of recreational and commercial activities. These established services and facilities can be utilised during the establishment and operation of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. There are also two substantial industrial estates located in the region - Woollamia and South Nowra (See Section 8.1.4 - EIS), which can support the required land based facilities for the ongoing operation of the leases.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 48 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

In addition, the development of a local cluster - BlueTech Shoalhaven, is being proposed by Shoalhaven City Council to trigger further investment and economic development in the region. It is suggested that the cluster would focus on the use of algae for high tech biomaterials for the medical, food, cosmetic, environment and clean tech and marine renewable energy sectors. There is a core group already operating in the area (University of Wollongong. Manildra Group, Nowra Chemicals, Algae.Tec) and this would build momentum and identify the Shoalhaven as a key location for this activity in Australia. This could benefit the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project in Jervis Bay which may also be used for algae production. The cluster and investment opportunities will be highlighted at the upcoming 5th Congress of the International Society for Applied Phycology during 22-27 June 2014.

Production costs are incumbent on any business and are a standard starting point in any business planning development. Appendix 10 of the EIS outlines the approximate start up costs for a standard longline system that has proven to be viable in Australian shellfish aquaculture. The ongoing production costs will vary between the species grown but will not be dissimilar to shellfish production in other parts of Australia. Ongoing advancements in aquaculture technologies (See Section 8.1.5 - EIS) also assist to ensure aquaculture enterprises continue to be financially viable.

Similarly, the close proximity of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases to Sydney will assist to reduce operating costs, particularly in regards to transport costs to market. Lease holder/s would be required to pay annual fees to contribute to aquaculture research and the administration and management of the aquaculture industry. These fees are annually reviewed in line with the Consumer Price Index. These costs should be accounted for in any operational business planning process.

The price for the product grown will depend on the species grown by the operators and if the product is sold directly to consumers, made into a value added product or sold through wholesale markets. Market forces will determine the most appropriate species to be grown to ensure the financially viability of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

It is worth noting that Fisheries NSW has sought further understanding of the socio- economic factors associated with commercial aquaculture production in the region. For example, in 2010 the University of Wollongong was commissioned by the Fisheries Research Development Corporation to develop a report on environmental and socio- economic factors associated with aquaculture in Jervis Bay (See Joyce et al., 2010).

Small businesses are the backbone of Australia's economy, representing 96 % of all businesses in the country. There are an estimated 2 million small businesses across the nation providing nearly half of all employment. In NSW alone, there are 680,000 small

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 49 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

businesses providing employment for around 50 % of the NSW workforce (Web Reference 2).

Regional economies are built on a range of businesses both large and small incorporating owner operated through to multi personnel companies. Individually each small business contributes very little to the overall economy of a region but combined they are the cornerstone of a vibrant sustainable community. In 2011 the Shoalhaven region had about 6,750 businesses contributing to the local community (Web Reference 3).

The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases on their own, just like all the other small businesses in the Jervis Bay region, will contribute a small percentage to the overall economy of the Shoalhaven region. However, in conjunction or integrated with other small businesses in the region they can assist in providing a robust diversified regional economy.

As outlined in Section 8.2.1.6 of the EIS, aquaculture business such as the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, have provided a valuable input to regional and local economies both in Australia and overseas. A European review of the social and economic impact of aquaculture for example, concluded that available evidence indicates that aquaculture can generate significant social and economic benefits at a regional level (Neiland et al., 1991).

In the Shoalhaven region an average of 950 businesses exit each year (Web Reference 3). As outlined in Section 8.1.5 of the EIS; if the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project was to become financially unviable and the operator/s did not complete the decommissioning, the bond provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 would ensure that the community would not be left with the burden of removing the lease infrastructure.

There are numerous possible ways in which an aquaculture business could be operated if the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases were approved. Since commencing this project, Fisheries NSW has been approached by a number of shellfish growers who have expressed an interest in establishing operations in Jervis Bay. These interested parties consider that commercial leases would be commercially viable as Jervis Bay offers a suitable growing environment, support services and is in close proximity to markets. The interested parties also believe that there may be opportunities to establish a seafood processing facility in the region to value add to shellfish and other seafood products.

The former experimental aquaculture leases located off Vincentia were found to be financially viable by the lease holders. In response to this, a former mussel farmer commenced the planning process in 2004 that was required to expand the experimental lease areas to a commercial lease of approximately 11 hectares. However, the process was not completed due to personal constraints.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 50 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

In response to interest from potential investors in shellfish aquaculture received by Fisheries NSW and Shoalhaven City Council (Economic Development Office) and a request from NSW Marine Parks to develop a sustainable aquaculture plan for Jervis Bay to ensure consistency between aquaculture development and the management plans for JBMP, Fisheries NSW commenced the planning process to establish commercial shellfish leases. An overview of the potential economic benefits of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project has been outlined in Section 8.2.1.6 of the EIS. Notably, the estimated employment figures were based on a number of economic studies undertaken overseas and in Australia for aquaculture activities similar to those proposed for Jervis Bay.

If the project is approved Fisheries NSW will issue aquaculture permit/s and lease/s to successful tenderer/s in accordance with the Fisheries Management Act 1994. The permit and/or lease holder is responsible for payment of annual permit and lease fees. These fees are used by Fisheries NSW to manage the aquaculture industry including compliance inspections.

In regards to the potential for financial support for Indigenous community participation, NSW and Federal Government agencies, recognise the unique skills and knowledge that Indigenous staff can bring to our workplace. As a result a number of programs, initiatives and cadetships have been developed to assist in providing employment opportunities in a range of fields and locations. If the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project is approved the successful tenderer/s will be advised of the interest from the local Indigenous community to be involved in the operation of the leases. The Indigenous community will also be advised of the relevant services available through the respective government agencies to assist with employment.

Impact on Tourism

During the community “drop in” days and in submissions received, it has been claimed that aquaculture will have a negative impact on tourism in Jervis Bay. Notably, there are concerns that aquaculture will damage Jervis Bay's reputation for 'pristine' beaches and the 'untouched' natural environment, as well as interfere with recreational activities, especially sailing and other recreational boating.

One of the main concerns was associated with sailing and the impact of the leases on events such as the Hobie World Championships. However, the proposed locations for the three leases are outside the current area used for this event (See Figure 12). Section 2.3.2 provides further information regarding the potential impact of the leases on water based recreational activities.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 51 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

As discussed in Nimmo et al. (2009), the perception of an area by tourists is likely to depend on their initial expectations. Where a place has been marketed as a busy, thriving coastal community with the associated commercial activities such as aquaculture, the tourists are likely to be content with the sight of fish and shellfish farms. Tourists seeking tranquillity in an unspoilt location may find fish and shellfish farms to be more of an impact. Therefore, appropriate marketing is likely to assist in developing a mutually beneficial relationship between tourism and aquaculture (Mikkelsen, 2003 cited in Nimmo et al., 2009).

Concerns were raised about the impact of nutrients especially relating to algal blooms and water quality. During the community “drop in” days for example, it was mentioned that aquaculture similar to this proposal was the cause of an algae outbreak in Cyprus which had damaged its tourism industry. However, further investigation revealed that this situation involved intensive finfish aquaculture not shellfish culture. Review of scientific literature on this matter discovered that aquaculture was not the primary cause. An in-depth study of the phenomenon by local and foreign experts proved that tourism development projects and intensive agriculture contributed 300% more nitrites to sea enrichment than the fish farm (Stephanou, 1996).

The issues of nutrients, faecal waste, water quality, biofouling and sedimentation are addressed in Section 2.3.8. In regards to the proposal for Jervis Bay, the cultured species would only be grown using extensive aquaculture techniques (i.e. no feed input) which utilise the naturally occurring plankton and other nutrients in the waters of Jervis Bay to growout the stock. No artificial feeds will be used and no additional nutrients will be added to Jervis Bay waters resulting in a nett export of nutrients via the harvested stock.

Fisheries NSW has identified that worldwide primary producers including aquaculturists, are linking together to form food trails which promote regional foods which are intrinsically linked with local food outlets and tourism operators. In Canada for example, tourism operators in shellfish farming areas such as Baynes Sound, Cortes Island, Okeover Inlet, Barkley Sound and Clayoquot Sound of British Columbia, have a strong interest in extending their tourist season by linking with shellfish farm activities. Many established tourism related businesses can gain by having an added activity in their community – accommodation, eco-tourism, guides, restaurants and transportation providers can all benefit. An example of this is the annual Comox Valley Shellfish Festival, the Cortes Island Oyster Festival, the Ladysmith Oyster Festival and the Clayoquot Oyster Growers Festival, held every year in British Columbia. As well as celebrating the area seafood through the participation of local chefs, these festivals include literature, wine, music, and storytelling (BCSGA, 2007).

Both aquaculture and tourism sectors have grown steadily over the last 25 years in the state of Maine, indicating that aquaculture and tourism can and do coexist. Boat tour and sea

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 52 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

kayaking companies use Maine’s aquatic farms as an attraction. Recreational fishing guides bring clients to fish around the farms because they act as artificial reefs attracting game fish to feed around the underwater structures that the farms create. For similar reasons birdwatchers visit aquatic farms to view the many different birds attracted to the farms. Also, tourists can sample the aquaculture products at the annual salmon and oyster festivals (Nimmo et al., 2009).

According to Food Tourism Scotland (2008), research has shown that “Eating locally distinctive food, experiencing new and exciting flavours and having easy access to a choice of catering are all essential components of a memorable tourism experience”. Scotland is well known for its production of high quality mussels and smoked salmon. There are a number of examples where aquaculture exists in partnership with food companies selling high quality seafood products to the tourism industry. The Loch Fyne Oyster farm for example, has developed a fine dining image due to the high quality local produce and high environmental standards in their culturing and fishing methods. Also, the farm acts as a tourist attraction with a number of restaurants and shops.

Coromandel (south of Auckland) was one of the first towns to farm Green Mussels in New Zealand which also has a long history of rack oyster farming. The farm has a mussel barge tourist charter that takes people fishing and visits mussel farms. There is also an oyster shop which forms one of three seafood stops on a tourist route that also takes in chocolate, macadamia nuts, an ostrich farm and a winery (Rennie, 2008).

The Tasmanian tourism industry has incorporated a number of aquaculture farms into its experiences. Wineglass Bay Cruises for example, has incorporated local foods into its cruise experiences and states: “At anchor in Wineglass Bay, you’ll have time to absorb the true peace of this beautiful place as you taste some of Tasmania’s finest produce. Sample freshly shucked Freycinet Marine Farm oysters still dripping from the sea and served with a glass of fine Spring Vale sparkling wine and creamy Ashgrove Farm cheeses" (Web Reference 4). The Freycinet Marine Farm also offer farm tours including oyster and mussel tasting fresh from the sea (Web Reference 5). Similarly, the luxury Saffire Freycinet Resort provides its patrons with a unique tourism experience where they visit an aquaculture farm and then sample the produce.

The tourism information website for Broome lists aquaculture products and farm visits in the top ten selling tourism experiences in the region, which includes farm visits and retail outlets selling aquaculture produce (Web Reference 6). Willie Creek Pearl Farm (Broome) is Western Australia’s most awarded tour company and was inducted into WA tourisms hall of fame after winning the categories of Tourism Attraction, Transport Operator and Specialised Tourism Services each for three years in a row.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 53 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

On the south coast of NSW shellfish farmers are diversifying into the tourism industry as the public looks to obtain local foods and see how their seafood is produced. These farmers are working with Eurobodalla and Shoalhaven Councils, and Sapphire Coast Tourism, to create an 'Oyster Trail' that visitors can follow down the coast to experience the very best the ‘Australian Oyster Coast’ has to offer (Web Reference 7). Wheelers Oysters at Merimbula have already developed a strong tourism presence with its retail outlet, restaurant and farm tours (Web Reference 8).

Jim Wilds Oyster Service at Greenwell Point in the Shoalhaven region recently featured in an episode of the television tourism program Discover Downunder and is advertised as a tourist attraction on the VisitNSW and Tripadvisor websites (Figure 17). Mr Wild has advised that he has over 100 bus loads of international tourists visiting his facility annually and has established linkages with Jervis Bay Dolphin watching cruises (J. Wild - 2014, pers. comm.).

Figure 17: Singaporean tourists enjoying oysters at Jim Wilds Oyster Service, Greenwell Point, NSW (Source: Jim Wild, 2014).

In NSW the oyster industry has a series of tourism related festivals and oyster promotional events throughout the year, including but limited to:

. Oysters in the Vines (Port Macquarie);

. Wallis Lake Oyster Festival (Forster/Tuncurry);

. Seafood and Semillon (Hunter Valley);

. Karuah Oyster and Timber Festival;

. Oysters in the House (Sydney);

. Narooma Oyster Festival;

. Brisbane Water Oyster Festival; and

. Bega Show (oyster competition).

The former mussel lease activities in Jervis Bay enhanced the tourism experience of the Jervis Bay region through the provision of a safe dive site, notably for viewing seahorses, as

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 54 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

well as by the sales of mussels. Jervis Bay mussels established a reputation as a quality seafood product with tourists and locals taking advantage of the ability to purchase fresh seafood direct from the farmer. The former shellfish farmer also undertook some basic processing of his product at the wharf at Huskisson which attracted tourists interested in learning about how their seafood was grown and processed. This created a tourism experience in its own right.

In regards to issues associated with visual amenity and impacts on tourism, the Scottish Government (2008) surveyed 380 visitors and tourists in four areas of Scotland. Respondents were asked to rate the effect of fish farms (among other structures) on the landscape. The responses towards fish farms are summarised in Figure 18. Twenty two percent of respondents thought the fish farms had a strongly to slightly positive effect on the landscape, 11% viewed the fish farms as having a slightly negative effect and 3% felt that the effect was strongly negative. The combined response for positive and neutral effects was viewed by 89% of the respondents.

Figure 18: Opinion of the effect of fish farm structures on the landscape in Scotland (Source: Scottish Government, 2008).

During the public exhibition process in 2005 for the expansion (to 50 hectares) of the mussel farming development in Twofold Bay (Stage 2), 17 submissions raised concerns about the impact on Eden tourism or voiced their belief that the development would boost tourism in the region. The review group consisting of representatives from the Bega Valley Shire Council; Department of Lands; NSW Department of Primary Industries; NSW Maritime Authority; Department of Infrastructure, Planning & Natural Resources and the Department of Environment and Conservation did not assess this issue to require any further comment or investigation. The development was for a mussel farm the same size as the proposed

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 55 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project in a bay with characteristics similar to Jervis Bay. Eden Sea Farm and its produce is now an integral part of the Eden tourism experience including participating in local festivals, providing produce to local restaurants, seafood outlets and providing the opportunity to obtain fresh seafood direct from the boat (Web Reference 9).

Fisheries NSW were invited to present details of the project to the Jervis Bay Tourism and Promotions Incorporated on Monday, 3rd December 2012 at The Huskisson Pub. During this meeting a number of participates voiced their views that the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases potentially provided them with the opportunity to diversify their businesses in Jervis Bay.

The Australian and international examples of aquaculture activities highlight that aquaculture and tourism can have a mutually beneficial relationship on local, regional and national levels. Furthermore, aquaculture can complement tourism businesses and provide additional experiences to tourists.

Impact on Property Values

In regards to the concerns about the impact of aquaculture infrastructure upon property values, it is clear that individual members of the public are relying upon their intuitive sense of 'disamenity’. If a structure appears imposing and unattractive or blocks scenic viewscapes, then many people believe that it must have a negative impact on local property values (Web Reference 10).

Fisheries NSW is unaware of any research literature relating to the impact of aquaculture on property values. However, the concerns raised in submissions related primarily to visual impact issues so a number of visual amenity impacting developments within residential landscapes have been reviewed, including mobile phone towers and high voltage overhead transmission lines.

In New Zealand studies of the impact of mobile phone towers on property values indicated that prices of properties decreased by just over 2% on average after a tower was built. This effect generally reduced with distance from the tower and was almost negligible after about 200 m (Web Reference 10).

There have also been a number of studies investigating the visual impact of high voltage overhead transmission lines (HVOTL) on property values. In New Zealand the results of the sales analysis, comprising sales from 1989 to 1991 (330 of which were within 300 m of a HVOTL) indicate the effect of having a 'pylon' close to a particular property is statistically significant and has a negative effect of 27% at 10 m from the pylon, 18% at 15 m, decreasing to 5% at 50 m. This effect diminishes to a negligible amount after 100 m (Bond &

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 56 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Squires, 2006). In Scotland an analysis of prices at varying distances from the HVOTL showed no clear pattern. The presence of a pylon was found to have a more significant impact on value than the HVOTL and could reduce price by up to 20.7%. All negative impacts appeared to reduce with distance and were negligible at around 250 m (Bond & Squires, 2006).

In the US and Canada a major review and analysis of the literature indicated that in about 50% of the studies carried out, HVOTLs had not affected property values and in the rest of the studies there was a loss in property value between 2-10%. The strongest effect of the HVOTLs was within the first 15 m but with this dissipating quickly further away, disappearing beyond 60 m. In summary, this literature review shows that the price effect of proximity to a HVOTL-pylon is generally consistent between studies (i.e. negative and significant) ranging from between 12 to 27% depending on the distance. The closer the home is to a pylon, the greater the decrease in price. The effect diminishes to a negligible amount after 250 m on average (Bond & Squires, 2006).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 57 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.4 Social Concerns - Noise, Odours and Product Availability

Submissions

Community Stakeholders (14)

Summary of Issues Raised

. The quietness of Jervis Bay is one of its most important environmental qualities. Operation of the proposed leases will create continuous noise pollution both above and below the water. This will detrimentally impact upon residents and visitors.

. Will the leases interrupt the quietness of Collingwood Beach by way of machinery or engines?

. In regard to noise generation, Fisheries NSW fails to differentiate between existing vessels used for recreational purposes or commercial whale watching, with new 'industrial scale' operations in close proximity to residential housing and/or waterway users who prefer peace and quiet.

. The risk assessment for noise is illogical - it is unreasonable to state that more of the same noise that already exists in the bay is acceptable. The value and precision of the estimates for noise attenuation defy belief.

. Assessment of the social impact of the proposal is inadequate and has not taken the community views on this matter into account.

. Will the leases create smells either in its production or harvesting?

. There is nothing in the proposal to guarantee the mussels will be available locally. The nature of the processing could see the product packed and shipped out to Sydney or overseas. The guarantee that shellfish would be readily and easily available to locals is misleading. Callala Beach residents would have to travel 45 minutes to Huskisson to purchase. The price would have to undercut the price at the Nowra Fish market where the price of New Zealand mussels is quite often around the $4 per kilo.

. Pressure from local seafood retailers needs to be managed so the public can receive aquaculture products direct from the producers. This is one of the public benefits for allowing aquaculture to take place.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 58 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Response

Noise - Construction/Deployment Stage

Industry best practices for noise management will be employed during the construction and deployment of the longline infrastructure to minimise the impacts of noise. Some examples of industry best practices include:

. Use of well-maintained sound suppression devices (e.g. barriers, baffles and mufflers) when operating equipment;

. Acknowledging concerns and complaints and aiming to resolve them cooperatively;

. Manoeuvring vessels with minimal acceleration to minimise boat motor noise;

. Use of marine radios to communicate between vessels;

. Use courteous language in the vicinity of other waterway users;

. Ensure truck drivers are informed of designated vehicle routes, parking locations, acceptable delivery hours and other relevant practices e.g. no extended periods of engine idling and minimising the use of engine brakes;

. Maintaining good communication between the community and lease staff; and

. Due to the potential for surrounding communities to be impacted by the noise generated during the construction stage, hours of operation are recommended as follows:

o Monday to Friday – 7 am to 6 pm; o Saturday – 8 am to 4 pm; and o Avoiding construction work on Sundays or Public Holidays where possible. The most likely construction site for the partial pre-assemblage of the longline infrastructure is Woollamia Industrial Estate. This area hosts a range of businesses which undertake a variety of industrial activities. The Woollamia Industrial Estate is also isolated from nearby residences by tracts of vegetation which dampen noise impacts from the estate. Consequently, the noise associated with the construction/pre-assemblage of the infrastructure will not be uncharacteristic for the area. The longline construction will be undertaken in accordance with approvals for the selected land based site which will be lodged in a separate application submitted by the lease operator/s.

Jervis Bay waterways are currently used by a range of vessels from small tinnies to commercial tourist vessels and large Naval vessels. These waters are also frequented by Naval helicopters undertaking training exercises. The vessels used to deploy the longline infrastructure will be similar to existing vessels that use the bay. The vessels used during the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 59 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

deployment of the infrastructure will not introduce noise that is uncharacteristic of the acoustic environment of Jervis Bay.

The risk of the noise associated with the construction (i.e. pre-assemblage) and deployment of the longline infrastructure having a significant impact on the community was assessed to be ‘low’ when considered in context with the proposed location for construction/pre- assemblage which is an existing industrial area, the industry best practices that will be implemented, the existing acoustic environment of Jervis Bay and the small scale and short- term nature of the works. See Section 8.1.3 (Noise) of the EIS for further details.

Noise - Operation Stage

The principal source of noise in Jervis Bay is generated by the sea state conditions and vessel movements undertaken by existing waterway users. Existing vessels in Jervis Bay consist of small recreational fishing boats, dive boats, dolphin/whale watching boats, luxury cruisers, Naval vessels and commercial fishing vessels. In addition to vessel noise, the Navy frequently undertakes training exercises in the bay that often involve the use of helicopters.

The operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will cause a slight increase in noise levels in Jervis Bay due to the movements of the service vessels, on board equipment and incidental noise from personnel. Noise levels vary depending on weather conditions, background noise, the equipment used and the season.

The operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will not involve a significant increase in vessel movements in Jervis Bay, where it expected that there will be 0-3 trips per day per lease. Service vessels will be similar to existing recreational and commercial vessels so the noise generated is not considered to be uncharacteristic of the area. Other types of machinery that may be used during the operational stage include onboard motors that drive lease servicing equipment (84 dB), outboard motors (80 dB), cleaning and winching system, diesel generator and hand/small power tools. Industry best practices for noise management will be employed during the operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases to minimise the impacts of noise on surrounding communities (see above).

The operators of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will also be requested to fit the service vessels with four stroke outboard motors, transit routes to and from the leases will be set to remain at least 400 m from the foreshore where possible and the entry and exit point on the lease will be the area furthest from the foreshore (Umwelt, 2003). In addition, workers will be made aware that sound travels largely unimpeded across water and that every effort should be made to minimise noise while on the leases (Umwelt, 2003).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 60 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

A pearl farm at Wanda Head, Port Stephens (NSW) implemented a range of modifications to vessels and work place practices to alleviate potential noise generation (Umwelt, 2003), including:

. Rubber matting or an equivalent noise insulating material was attached to the working area along the side of the cleaning punt to alleviate the problem of noise generation from longline floats striking the side or gunnels of the vessels;

. Rubber matting was placed on noise generation surfaces of the punt to reduce noise generated from work implements and infrastructure striking these surfaces;

. Routine maintenance of the vessels including chandlery, pumps, motors and filters and as well as cleaning equipment and winches;

. Lifting and work equipment was secured while not in use;

. Routine servicing of bushings, bearings and mechanical components of winches, cleaning machines, pumps and engines and hydraulic equipment;

. The power unit (diesel motor, hydraulic pump and water pumps) was insulated;

. All taps and valves were insulated, where possible, to reduce valve noise;

. The power unit was mounted on anti-vibration mounts to reduce transmission of noise and vibration through the hull of the boat; and

. The hull of the boat below the cleaning power unit was foam filled, which reduced the transmission of noise and vibration through the deck and hull of the boat.

These work place practices and modifications to vessels may be adopted by the operators of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases if deemed appropriate. The operators of the leases will also regularly review workplace practices and the equipment used to ensure noise emissions are minimised, which may include public consultation to assist with identifying potential noise issues (Umwelt, 2003).

An online modelling program that calculates the damping of sound level with distance was used to estimate the noise impact at five main residential areas in Jervis Bay due to the operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (See Section 8.2.1.4 - EIS). The modelling results suggest that the noises associated with the daily operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are likely to be difficult to hear from nearby beaches and residential areas. However, the models predict the damping of the sound without the effects of surfaces, barriers, reflections, wind and atmospheric effects, and are also done in isolation to other background noises (e.g. wind in trees, vehicles, people speaking, etc) in the residential areas. The distance of the leases from the surrounding residential areas (i.e. Callala Beach, Callala Bay, Huskisson and Vincentia), the normal

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 61 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

daytime operation hours, the sea state, wind conditions and existing background noise will ensure further attenuation of any noise generated by service vessels and associated operational and maintenance activities.

The risk of the noise associated with the operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases having a significant impact on surrounding communities was assessed to be ‘low’ when considered in context with the relatively small increase in vehicle and vessel movements, the restrictions on operation hours, the noise being predominately characteristic of the area, the distances from residential areas, the results of the noise attenuation calculations and the implementation of industry best practices. See Section 8.2.1.4 (Noise) of the EIS for further details.

Odour

Offensive smells associated with the marine environment are usually the result of decomposing marine debris such as seaweed and other organisms washed up on beaches after storms. Offensive smells are not usually present if these areas are not subject to decomposing marine debris.

The production of shellfish on the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases is similar to the natural production of shellfish on rocky reefs i.e. the stock is submerged beneath the water's surface. These areas do not exhibit any smells other than those normally encountered within a marine environment. Offensive smells will not be generated by the culturing activities associated with the proposal.

Harvesting of the product is done relatively quickly to ensure that the product is of highest quality. Freshly harvested product does not have any significant odour or smell.

Availability of Product

Stipulations about the allocation of the stock to local markets are not routinely placed on the operator(s) of aquaculture leases. However, there are a number of reasons why it would be advantageous for the operator(s) to sell their product locally, including the following:

. Product sold locally can attract a premium profit as it will have less transport and handling costs;

. Product sold locally can attract a premium price as it may be fresher (not frozen as for NZ product) and of a higher quality, as it hasn’t undergone the delays of getting to the retailer via the usual supply chain involving wholesaler and distributor;

. Product sold locally can attract a premium price if it is being supplied directly to a customer (e.g. restaurant and seafood outlets) with specific requirements (e.g.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 62 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

size) but at a price that is cheaper than the regional seafood distributor, which will represent greater profit for local businesses;

. The producer receives prompt responses in relation to the quality of the product and any possible value adding opportunities direct from the consumer, restaurant or retail outlet;

. The producer's profile is raised within the community which can result in a better understanding of the aquaculture activities;

. Tourists are often looking to purchase local regional foods and may pay a premium price for them;

. Selling produce locally especially linked to the local tourism industry (e.g. food trail) helps to raise the profile of the region and the product. This may result in more product being sought once the tourist returns home and therefore increasing demand for the product; and

. Diversifies the business which may assist with business viability.

As outlined in Section 2.3.3, selling product locally can also benefit the tourism industry. Similarly, the demand for local produce is likely to increase as tourism increases. This in turn will encourage further local sales of produce from the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

Aquaculture permit holders under the Fisheries Management Act 1995 are required to provide an annual production return to Fisheries NSW. The production return outlines the markets (local, interstate, etc) to which product has been sold. The production return database can be utilised to review the amount of locally sold product if required

If the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project is approved, Fisheries NSW will investigate the potential of listing criteria in the lease tender documents relating to the availability of product for local sales.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 63 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.5 Land Based Infrastructure

Submissions

Community Stakeholders (8)

Summary of Issues Raised

. What land-based infrastructure is proposed to support the aquaculture farm?

. Where is the infrastructure proposed?

. There are concerns that the land based component is unknown - akin to a blank cheque.

. Details about land based activities are not described, including the processing facility, effluent disposal, odours and rubbish disposal.

. Concerns about time barges will spend at wharfs and ramps, and the impact on other users, as well as the potential need for upgrades to existing infrastructure (which the community will ultimately have to pay for). An alternative suggested was that a purpose made wharf could be erected by Fisheries NSW.

. Land/water interface infrastructure is at its full capacity - servicing the proposal will have a severe impact on existing users.

. Jervis Bay is not well serviced with local infrastructure and support industries - the nearest commercial slip way is in Ulladulla .There is limited land available for processing facilities, construction depots and most importantly, there are no commercial maritime access points that are not already at full capacity.

. There has been inadequate assessment and planning given to the land based facility and land/water interface. The land and water based components of this proposal need to be considered simultaneously if the project is to be viable and considered ecologically sustainable development.

Response

The Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases proposal does not involve the construction of any new land based infrastructure or any upgrades of existing water access facilities in the Jervis Bay region. Any development of land based facilities associated with the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will need to be evaluated through a separate development approval process by the Shoalhaven City Council (See Section 8.1.4 - EIS).

Land based infrastructure such as a depot/warehouse and launching facilities will be required to operate and maintain the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. In discussions with staff from Shoalhaven City Council, it was identified that the depot(s) and/or

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 64 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

processing facilities should be established on appropriately zoned land in consultation with council to ensure that supporting services (e.g. waste disposal) and infrastructure are available and improved.

Shoalhaven City Council has advised that there is industrial land in close proximity to Jervis Bay at South Nowra or off Woollamia Road in Woollamia (near Huskisson) if required for processing facilities or depots. The Woollamia Industrial Estate already has a number of maritime related industries operating from it. Also, Shoalhaven City Council has advised in its submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure (NSW DoPI) that it has suitable land available for industrial activities at the Woollamia Industrial Estate.

Depot/warehouse facilities will be required for the storage of vessels, maintenance materials, new or used infrastructure and the harvested product. In addition, value adding facilities such as product cleaning, processing, packaging and refrigeration, may also be stored or used within the depot/warehouse facilities.

Daily operations and maintenance activities associated with the Commercial Aquaculture Shellfish Leases will generate wastes, such as worn infrastructure, damaged equipment, damaged product, biofouling and general waste, which may need to be stored at the land based site prior to its disposal at approved waste management facilities.

There are a number of land/water access points in Jervis Bay but the Woollamia and Callala Bay boat ramps are considered the most suitable locations to launch and retrieve the large trailer vessels that will be used to operate and maintain the leases.

Woollamia boat ramp is located less than 1 km from Woollamia Industrial Estate and access to Jervis Bay is via Currambene Creek. The boat ramp has two lanes, wharf facilities on both sides and a parking area with over 40 formal parking bays (Figure 19). The ramp is currently used by both commercial and private vessel operators with peak usage during summer.

The boat ramp at Callala Bay is a single lane ramp which launches directly into the embayment of Jervis Bay and has over 20 formal car and trailer parking spaces (Figure 20). The closest established industrial area to this township is located in South Nowra about 20 km from the Callala Bay boat ramp.

There is also a public wharf facility located in Huskisson, which may potentially be used during the construction stage and occasionally during the operational stage to load service vessels. Any use of this wharf would need to be done in consultation with the Huskisson Wharf Management Committee. This wharf is not currently being considered for activities such as cleaning of product, sales or regular daily operational and maintenance activities.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 65 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 19: Woollamia boat ramp, carpark (left) and wharf facilities (right) (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Figure 20: Callala Bay boat ramp and parking area (insert) (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Fisheries NSW has been informed by Shoalhaven City Council that the Woollamia and Callala Bay boat ramp carparks and boat launching ramps operate at about full capacity during peak periods, notably on long weekends, public holidays and during the Christmas and Easter school holidays (G. Pullen - Economic Development Manager, Shoalhaven City Council 2013, pers. comm.). It is also expected that the wharf facilities at Huskisson would also be busy at these times.

During the construction stage the movement of vehicles and marine vessels between the leases, boat ramps and/or wharf facilities and depot/warehouse may be as high as six return

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 66 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

trips per lease per day to install the longline infrastructure. The construction activities could be undertaken outside of the peak periods or times of the day as outlined above to mitigate conflicts between users.

Once the infrastructure is installed the movement of vehicles and marine vessels is expected to be in the range of 0-3 return trips per day per lease to undertake inspections, maintenance and harvesting. Vehicular and marine vessel traffic associated with leases would represent a very small proportion of the total number of vehicles and marine vessels in Jervis Bay on any given day.

The operators of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases may use the boat ramps on a daily basis and therefore they will be extremely proficient at launching and retrieving their vessels. It is expected that minimal time, compared to many recreational users, will be spent on the boat ramps which will mitigate potential user conflicts and ensure the boat ramp functions efficiently, especially during times of high use. During peak periods when the boat ramp parking areas are likely to reach their full capacity, the operator/s of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases may be required to park their boat trailers at a different location such as the land based site e.g. Woollamia Industrial Estate.

There is also opportunity for any commercial operator to seek a permanent mooring in Currambene Creek, Callala Bay or off Orion Beach to avoid the routine use of the boat launching facilities.

As outlined in Section 8.1.4 of the EIS, the industrial estates in the Jervis Bay region have the facilities to service the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. There are a number of established maritime businesses for example, already in operation at Woollamia Industrial Estate.

Shoalhaven City Council submitted further comments and recommendations to NSW DoPI (March 2014) in addition to the formal submission (November 2013). Shoalhaven City Council requested that their comments and recommendations are addressed and/or incorporated into the notice of approval if issued. The issues raised included land based approvals and zoning, use of Huskisson Wharf, launching and storing vessels and trailers, navigation hazards, impacts on recreational users, monitoring and waste management.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 67 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.6 Structural Integrity of Infrastructure and Marine Debris

Submissions

NSW OEH, Jervis Bay Cruising Yacht Club, NSW Farmer's Association (Oyster Committee), Sapphire Coast Marine Discovery Centre, Eden Sea Farms, Community Stakeholders (25)

Summary of Issues Raised

. The suitability of the proposed locations for the leases is questionable given the severity of the southerly storms that hit Callala Beach regularly (i.e. at least once each month). Callala Beach is subjected to swells generated across the longest fetch of the bay and ocean swells coming in from the heads. Previous aquaculture activities were located in more sheltered areas of the bay and surrounding creeks.

. Severe storms are likely to result in infrastructure from the farms being a floating hazard and/or washed onto the beaches in Jervis Bay.

. Foreshore and beach litter (e.g. plastics) will increase in addition to the existing rubbish issue in Jervis Bay with marine tour operators and tourists.

. It was discovered during the marine/foreshore clean up activity on the Sapphire Coast in 2012/2013 (Love Our Lakes Project) that the mussel farm in Twofold Bay was one of the major contributors to marine debris off the coast of Eden. Hence, it is important that the businesses establishing leases have adequate capital to implement the project with appropriate infrastructure for the site.

. There have been some episodes of mussel farm infrastructure (mainly buoys) washing onto local beaches in Twofold Bay after storm events.

. NSW OEH stated that "while the draft EMP indicates that best management practices and ongoing monitoring are to be put in place, there is always a risk of infrastructure failure particularly during ocean storm events, collision and other accidents (e.g. fuel spills). It is recommended that conditions of consent assign clear responsibility for 'making good' any clean up should material become adrift or leak during the construction, operational and decommissioning stages (and ultimately wash up on National Park estate lands and elsewhere). It may be that the responsibility for the cleanup ultimately rests with the project proponent who can then transfer this responsibility onto the lessee via licence conditions".

Response

Longline aquaculture within the marine environment has been undertaken worldwide for more than 40 years. The development of the longline infrastructure will be done utilising proven technologies and established engineering knowledge and models will be used during

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 68 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. the design process. The design will accommodate the dynamic marine environment of Jervis Bay and be tailored to withstand the recorded maximums for wave height, tidal range, swell and wind speed. Utilisation of the latest engineering knowledge will mitigate the risk of equipment failure and the occurrence of stock losses.

Aquaculture engineering knowledge and longline technology has developed greatly since the initial deployment of aquaculture infrastructure in Jervis Bay in the late 1970s. Initially NSW marine shellfish aquaculture was conducted using rafts from which the culturing apparatus was suspended. This was the standard practice worldwide for culturing shellfish species such as mussels, oysters and scallops. Raft technology was found to have a number of limitations in the high energy coastal environments of NSW, especially during heavy seas which often resulted in damage to the infrastructure and loss of large quantities of stock. In response to this, the aquaculture industry in NSW investigated the use of longline systems which were being used in similar environments overseas and in other states of Australia. The use of rafts is not proposed as part of this proposal.

Longline culture has been used successfully in Twofold Bay for more than 20 years and has replaced rafts as the preferred culturing infrastructure. The longlines installed in Twofold Bay have regularly withstood significant storm events with wave heights of about 6 m and only experienced very minor losses of stock. Director of Eden Sea Farms, Chris Boyton, stated in his submission that "we were subject to a number of objections concerning infrastructure and mussel shell washing up on beaches and while there was some initial impact resulting from failures in old raft infrastructure the newer longline structures has minimised the loss of material and we do not receive complaints from the public".

Former experimental longline systems established by Fisheries NSW in Jervis Bay were found to withstand the environmental conditions of the bay including storm and seasonal large drift seaweed events.

All longline infrastructure will be routinely inspected (including in situ diving assessments) and cleaned of biofouling and drift seaweed as part of the ongoing operation of each lease to ensure all components remain structurally sound and stable. Notably, the backbone lines and buoys will be required to be visually inspected every week (weather permitting) to ensure all backbone lines are taut. Cleaning of the longlines will be undertaken every 2-4 weeks or when considered necessary (e.g. during winter months cleaning may be needed less frequently due to slow growth rates). The mooring infrastructure (anchors, chains and mooring ropes) will be serviced at least once a year to maintain good order and condition. Inspections and maintenance of the longline infrastructure will also be conducted after severe weather to ensure that structural integrity has not been compromised. The inspection

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 69 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

and maintenance procedures will be described in the Structural Integrity and Stability Monitoring Program (Appendix 2).

The daily operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will generate general waste, such as plastics, containers and bags. These wastes will be secured in waste bins on the service vessels and transported by road to an appropriate waste disposal facility in the area. On board operations will also involve the use of fuel and oil products, which will be secured in storage containers with tightly fitted lids. Regular servicing of all boats and equipment, as well as daily inspections and appropriate ‘start up’ and ‘shut down’ procedures will ensure early identification of any issues (e.g. potential spillages or leaks) and prompt remedial action by appropriately trained staff. Any residual or out of date products will be transferred to land based facilities and disposed of in an appropriate manner.

The Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will also follow industry best practice guidelines such as:

. Waste materials will be reduced, reused and recycled where possible; . Longline infrastructure removed from the lease will be returned to shore for processing, recycling or disposal; . Collected biofouling and general wastes will be returned to shore for disposal; . All sewage wastes will be contained on service vessels in onboard holding tanks or chemical toilets and disposed of through an approved vessel sewage discharge point on return to port, and . Residual materials that cannot be reused or recycled will be disposed of at an approved waste management facility.

Waste handling, transport and disposal procedures, inspection schedules and industry best practices will be detailed in the Waste Management Plan (Appendix 2).

The operator/s of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will be authorised for their activities under an aquaculture permit and lease/s in accordance with the provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Under these provisions the permit holder/s are responsible for maintaining their lease infrastructure to appropriate standards and be responsible for any lease infrastructure that may leave the lease area. Permit holders are also required to enter into an Aquaculture Lease Security Arrangement (Bond) with Fisheries NSW. In the event that longline infrastructure breaks away from the lease due to an extreme weather event, vandalism or unexplained equipment failure, the bond can be used to clean up any shellfish debris or lost infrastructure if the operator fails to attend to removing the waste.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 70 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.7 Marine Park Zoning and Strategic Planning

Submissions

Jervis Bay Regional Alliance, Community Stakeholders (29)

Summary of Issues Raised

. Community stakeholders are very concerned that the area proposed for shellfish aquaculture will expand beyond 50 hectares in the future if the farms are proven viable.

. Why hasn't an amendment been made to the Jervis Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan to ensure that aquaculture doesn't expand beyond 50 hectares in the future?

. No further action should be taken on this proposal until a properly constituted Integrated Coastal Zoning Planning (ICZP) methodology is implemented. The consequences of not using ICZP opens the possibility of citizen unrest and economic dislocations.

. Please put the leases somewhere away from direct sight from my house and other residents. The eastern side of the bay is a more suitable location.

Response

Jervis Bay has had a long history of aquaculture activity including oyster farming in Currambene and Moona Moona Creeks (1935-1991), Blue Mussel culture at Vincentia (1977-2008) and aquaculture research into longline culture of scallops (1992-94).

In the 1990s the Jervis Bay Mariculture Association requested the NSW Government to develop a strategic approach to the development of aquaculture in Jervis Bay. This was at the same time as applications were being processed for mussel farming in Twofold Bay. During this period it was announced that there were plans to establish a marine park in Jervis Bay. Consequently, an assessment was needed to review all activities in the Jervis Bay Marine Park (JBMP). In 1998 NSW Marine Parks (NSW MP) commenced the preparation of zoning and operational plans for Jervis Bay in accordance with the requirements of the Marine Parks Act 1997. These strategic management documents were prepared to ensure appropriate management of the values within the multiple use areas of the Marine Park. NSW MP investigated the environmental, recreational, commercial, historical and other social values of Jervis Bay and surrounding areas. It also sought community input about the development of the zoning and operational plans for JBMP.

To inform the public about this strategic planning process, a survey entitled “Help Us Plan Jervis Bay Marine Park” was provided for public comment in December 1998 and a

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 71 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

“Planning Issues and Options Paper” was distributed in August 1999. Community information sessions were also conducted in October 1999.

In October 2001, a Draft Operational Plan and a Draft Zoning Plan were released for public consultation. The Draft Operational Plan acknowledged the presence of mussel aquaculture within the marine park and emphasised that aquaculture was not permitted in Sanctuary or Habitat Protection Zones. It also stated that in order to minimise the visual impacts it is preferred that longline infrastructure replace the current raft infrastructure.

The Draft Operational Plan outlined that future aquaculture developments may occur in general use zones within the marine park subject to normal planning processes. It was proposed that intensive aquaculture, which involves feeding of fish, typically in cages, would not be permitted within the Jervis Bay embayment, or the use of non-local species anywhere within the marine park.

The Draft Zoning Plan outlined that the raft aquaculture of mussels undertaken at a location north of Plantation Point would be contained in a special purpose zone. This zone would allow the continuation of shellfish aquaculture at the location. The plan also included a Callala Beach General Use Zone which allowed for commercial and recreational fishing and aquaculture. It also stated that aquaculture would otherwise be allowed within General Use Zones and the Plantation Point Special Purpose Zone with Marine Parks and other relevant environmental approvals.

The Jervis Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan commenced on 1 October 2002 and partitioned the park into the following zones:

 Sanctuary Zones, 20% (4,253 hectares);  Habitat Protection Zones, 72% (15,600 hectares);  Special Purpose Zones, 0.2% (48 hectares), comprising two areas Huskisson wharves and the naval training facilities at HMAS Creswell; and  General Use Zones 8% (1,618 hectares), this zone type provides a level of environmental protection whilst allowing for a wider range of commercial and recreational activities. Aquaculture is a permitted activity within this zone and includes the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

The Operational Plan for Jervis Bay Marine Park commenced in October 2003. The majority of the strategies included in this document were outlined in the Jervis Bay Marine Park Planning Issues and Options Paper. Additional strategies were developed in response to comments made on the draft of this document, which was released for public comment from 8 October 2001 to 31 January 2002. Some of these management strategies involve the development of specific documents that will detail how particular activities are to be conducted, monitored, and promoted.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 72 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

The Operational Plan was designed to address specific management areas. These include: habitat and species conservation (Section 2); management of activities for ecologically sustainable use (e.g. fishing, whale watching and scuba diving) (Section 3); management for Indigenous culture and non-Indigenous heritage (Section 4 and 5); pollution control, management of marine pests, and other management issues (Section 6); and research, community education, compliance and permits (Section 7-10).

In addition to the Zoning Plan which stipulates where aquaculture can occur, Section 3.2 of the Operational Plan sets out the parameters under which it can be established. It states that aquaculture in Jervis Bay embayment will not be permitted to exceed more than 2% of the area of the park (440 hectares) and is subject to the conduct of a full EIS that assesses cumulative impacts.

To meet the requirements of the Operational Plan, the existing mussel farmer applied for an area of approximately 11 hectares off Plantation Point in 2004. This required the preparation of a formal environmental assessment in the form of an EIS to be assessed by the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources. During the preparation of the EIS the proponent undertook community consultation meetings and received general support from the community, Shoalhaven City Council and government agencies. Unfortunately due to personal matters the farmer ceased operations in 2008 before the environmental assessment was completed.

Coincidently, a similar process was being undertaken for the expansion of the mussel farms in Twofold Bay. This process also involved the development of a formal environmental assessment document and a public consultation process. A review committee comprising of representatives of Bega Valley Shire Council, Department of Environment and Conservation, NSW Department of Primary Industries, NSW Maritime Authority, Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources and Department of Lands considered the submissions and reviewed the environmental report. On the 22 February 2005 the Minister for Primary Industries approved the expansion of mussel farming in Twofold Bay.

The need for a strategic approach to the development of aquaculture in Jervis Bay was identified by the NSW Marine Parks and Fisheries NSW and was progressed through the State Aquaculture Steering Committee (SASC). The committee was chaired by the Director General of Premiers and Cabinet and included representation from the Director Generals or nominees from Planning, EPA, OEH, Local Government, NSW DPI (NSW Food Authority and Fisheries NSW), Lands and Department of State and Regional Development.

After developing the NSW Oyster and Land Based Sustainable Aquaculture Strategies, the SASC looked to development in marine waters of NSW with a Marine Finfish Research Lease Project off Port Stephens and the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project in

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 73 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Jervis Bay. Fisheries NSW commenced its strategic planning process to identify potential aquaculture areas in Jervis Bay in 2009.

A working group (including State agencies and Shoalhaven City Council) was established and throughout 2009, consultation was undertaken with a range of stakeholders to identify the constraints in establishing leases. The initial investigations identified some 150 hectares that met aquaculture farming parameters. The working group then started to investigate the activity constraints that existed in Jervis Bay that would limit the potential locations for the proposed leases. As part of this process, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation funded a project for an independent expert to consider the issues relating to economic and social factors in establishing aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay. Unfortunately, the funding required to complete an appropriate environmental assessment process was not available and the process was placed into a temporary abeyance.

In 2010 funding resources became available to investigate the establishment of a Marine Aquaculture Research Lease off Port Stephens. Following the completion of this project the SASC supported the continued investigation of a strategic plan for the establishment of shellfish leases in Jervis Bay in 2012.

It was identified by the SASC that the investigations into the establishment of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay combined with the work undertaken for the Marine Finfish Research Lease Project at Port Stephens, would provide for the coordinated development of aquaculture in marine waters of NSW rather than by a piecemeal or “ad-hoc” approach for individual applications. The above work would lead to a framework for the strategic development of a NSW Marine Waters Sustainable Aquaculture Strategy.

In 2012, Fisheries NSW recommenced its constraints investigations, undertook stakeholder consultation as outlined in Section 5 of the EIS, prepared an Environmental Impact Statement and the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project went on public exhibition in late 2013.

Figures 21 to 29 (constraints mapping) provide an overview of the identified areas of environmental and cultural significance matters that were investigated as part of the project. The main constraint to the establishment of aquaculture in Jervis Bay is the Naval Trace Area that occupies 73% of the Jervis Bay embayment (Figure 23). In 2009, Fisheries NSW investigated establishing the aquaculture leases on the eastern side of the bay as requested by some of the stakeholders during consultation and in submissions received. However, after discussions with the Australian Navy, Fisheries NSW was informed that no aquaculture would be permitted on the eastern side of the bay or within the Naval Trace area.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 74 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

When all of the above constraints were taken into consideration it was identified that the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases would only occupy about 0.4% (50 hectares) of Jervis Bay. Considering the current constraints within the Jervis Bay Marine Park the development of 2% of the area of the park (440 hectares) is not possible. Fisheries NSW has no further plans to develop additional aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay embayment than the three areas covered in the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project.

The approach undertaken by Fisheries NSW in developing the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project will ensure that the development of aquaculture in Jervis Bay is conducted in a strategic and coordinated manner rather than a piecemeal “adhoc” approach.

The integration of the development of the zoning and operational plans for JBMP by NSW Marine Parks and the investigations undertaken as part of the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project demonstrate an integrated coastal planning process.

Figure 21: Location of the zones within JBMP relative to the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 75 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 22 Location of some of the matters protected by the EPBC Act relative to the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012).

Figure 23: Location of Naval Trace and Commonwealth Waters restricted areas (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 76 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 24: Benthic habitat types present within Jervis Bay. (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012).

Figure 25: Benthic habitat and sediment types present in Jervis Bay (Source: CSIRO, 1994, Joyce et al., 2010).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 77 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 26: Location of bait gathering areas, dolphin aggregation areas and Commonwealth Waters within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2009).

Figure 27: Plane and shipwrecks in Jervis Bay that are in close proximity to proposed leases (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2012).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 78 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 28: Indicative vessel tracks, Naval areas and moorings within Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 79 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 29: Location of aquatic licences (sailing courses) in Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2014).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 80 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.8 Water Quality, Sedimentation and Biofouling

Submissions

Callala Beach Progress Association, Jervis Bay Regional Alliance, Community Stakeholders (31)

Summary of Issues Raised

. The risk of aquaculture bi-products, biofouling and faecal waste washing up onto Jervis Bay beaches and the potential for injuries, infections and illness is unacceptable. It is a risk to the safety of beach walkers, swimmers and fishers (i.e. those who eat fish caught in the area).

. Who would be liable for public injury caused by broken shells?

. The 'moderate' risk of degradation of water quality, the seabed (sedimentation) and surrounding beaches due to large quantities of wastes such as organic matter, nutrients, effluent, diesel fuel and biofouling, associated with the aquaculture leases is unacceptable. These wastes could cause eutrophication, toxic blooms, accelerate growth of pests and weeds, disrupt ecological balance and have a severe impact on Jervis Bay's reputation of having pristine beaches.

. Pesticides, therapeutants, disinfectants, anaesthetics, biocides, hormones, growth promoters and other chemicals will be discharged directly into Jervis Bay and represent a health hazard both directly and via the consumption of the farmed shellfish. The impact of the proposal on water quality has been under-estimated.

. The leaseholders must carry out and cover the cost of water quality and benthic environment monitoring.

. Longline infrastructure can alter hydro-sedimentary processes by modifying currents and sedimentation, as well as cause shading of the seabed.

. Inadequate consideration has been given to the impact of anchors and mooring chains on the seabed, particularly the impact of 'scouring'. Section 8.1.5 does not describe the 'footprint' of the combination of anchors and mooring chains, or dynamic motions that could result from the combined effects of wind, waves, tides and currents.

Response

The site selection process for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases carefully considered the habitat types within Jervis Bay and avoided sensitive and unique habitats such as rocky reefs, seagrass beds, mangroves and Sanctuary Zones. It is proposed that the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will be situated at depths of about 10 m and

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 81 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

over soft sediment habitat (predominately sand), which is extensively represented in Jervis Bay.

Waste Inputs

The cultured species will only be grown using extensive aquaculture techniques which utilises the naturally occurring plankton and other nutrients in the waters of Jervis Bay to growout the stock. No artificial feeds will be used and no additional nutrients or chemicals will be added to Jervis Bay waters resulting in a nett export of nutrients via the harvested stock.

The main types of waste inputs into the marine environment from longline aquaculture include faeces, pseudofaeces, biofouling and the resuspension of sediments (Kaiser et al., 1998). The input of the organic matter can cause changes to the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the receiving marine environment. The magnitude of the impact largely depends on the cultured species, husbandry practices, stocking densities, dispersion of wastes by currents and the environmental carrying capacity of the region to assimilate organic inputs (Kaiser et al., 1998; Gavine & McKinnon, 2002). Figure 30 illustrates the range of potential issues associated with shellfish farming which have broadly been classified into three main areas, including (1) effects on seabed, (2) effects on water column and (3) wider ecological effects - effects on fish, mammals and the spread of invasive species or disease.

Figure 30: Potential ecological issues associated with shellfish farming (Source: Keeley et al., 2009).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 82 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Water Quality and Dissolved Products

As shellfish aquaculture is extensive (i.e. no input of feed), the ecological impact is essentially a redistribution of nutrients (Joyce et al., 2010). Nutrients, in the form of seston (i.e. phytoplankton, zooplankton, suspended organic and inorganic matter) are filtered from the water by shellfish. Some of the seston is used by the shellfish for metabolic growth and the remainder of the organic waste is returned to the water as faeces or pseudofaeces. Consequently, shellfish culture is integrally linked to the surrounding environment through water circulation and primary production (Joyce et al., 2010).

Dissolved metabolic products originating from the shellfish predominantly consist of nitrogen and phosphorus. The release of dissolved nutrients directly into the water column can potentially cause localised enrichment and stimulate phytoplankton growth (Keeley et al., 2009). However, shellfish aquaculture usually results in a net removal of nutrients from the water column. Reduced phytoplankton concentrations, a net loss of nitrogen from the system and a decrease in suspended matter can occur in waters which have shellfish farms (Crawford, 2001). The results of a study on a pearl farm at Wanda Head, Port Stephens, indicate that for every tonne of oyster material harvested about 14 kg of nitrogen, 0.7 kg of phosphorus and up to 8 kg of metals are removed from the environment (Gifford et al. 2005). The pearl farm was proposed as a means of remediating anthropogenic impacts (Gifford et al. 2003).

Removing excess nutrients from the water column and reducing turbidity by removing suspended solids and phytoplankton is viewed as a potentially positive effect in degraded estuaries but it may result in a reduction of nutrients that are essential to the functioning of the ecosystem if the area is relatively unaffected by human activities (Crawford, 2001). Seagrass beds for example, have been found to benefit from shellfish farms by reducing and/or controlling elevated levels of nutrients and metals (Crawford, 2001). Selective feeding of cultured shellfish can also potentially alter the composition of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities (Keeley et al., 2009).

During the cleaning of the longline infrastructure, there is likely to be a localised and temporary resuspension of some sediment and organic material creating a visual 'plume' around the vessel. However, the suspended material is expected to be dispersed by wind, tidal currents and settling under gravity, which has been observed on a pearl farm at Wanda Head in Port Stephens (Umwelt, 2003).

The overall area of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases is a relatively small portion of Jervis Bay (0.4% of the embayment). There is the potential for localised effects to occur but these will be avoided by ensuring that the stocking densities are kept below the ecological carrying capacity of the bay (Joyce et al., 2010). Water quality parameters will be

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 83 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

monitored on a regular basis to ensure early detection of potential problems. However, impacts are expected to be minimal as shellfish feed on naturally occurring seston in the water column and there will be no additional inputs of feed or nutrients (Inspiring Place, 2001).

The shellfish farms may potentially improve water quality in Jervis Bay by removing excess algae, nutrients and metals from the water column when the stock is harvested. The current and tidal flows which continually circulate the waters within Jervis Bay will also assist to ensure that dissolved nutrients from this activity will be assimilated rapidly with negligible impact.

Particulate Matter and Biosedimentation

Faeces, pseudofaeces, dislodged shellfish and fouling organisms can accumulate on the seabed beneath longline farms and cause changes to the physico-chemical characteristics and benthic community structure of the receiving benthic environment (Cranford et al., 2006). Faeces and pseudofaeces are predominately composed of organic nitrogen compounds which are denser than seawater so these particles typically settle on the seabed in the immediate vicinity of longlines (Islam, 2005).

The material deposited on the seabed by the shellfish will be utilised by microorganisms and benthic fauna in the area. The amount deposited, current flows and the number/types of microorganisms and benthic fauna present will largely determine how this material is utilised (Mitchell, 1999 cited in Inspiring Place, 2001). If deposits are excessive and the utilisation rate is exceeded by supply a depletion of oxygen in the area can occur (i.e. sediments become anoxic), which can lead to a range of environmental problems as well as impacting on shellfish growth. Changes to sedimentary habitat and the benthic community structure can occur as a result (e.g. a shift from suspension feeders to scavenging gastropods and deposit feeding species) (Joyce et al., 2010).

The severity of biological and physico-chemical impacts on the benthos depends on the type of waste (i.e. organic or inorganic) and the extent of accumulation (Joyce et al., 2010), which depends on water currents, tidal flows and depth beneath a farm (Gavine & McKinnon, 2002). The results of several studies suggest that the accumulation of waste shells and attached algae has a greater effect on the seabed than the biodeposition of faeces and pseudofaeces (Grant et al., 1995; Crawford et al., 2001). Stocking densities, current flows and farm management have largely negated benthic impacts in Tasmania (Mitchell, 1999 cited in Inspiring Place, 2001). Similarly, Kaiser et al. (1998) concluded that use of appropriate culture techniques can minimise environmental changes as a result of shellfish farming. The studies that have detected significant impacts, such as extensive bacterial mats

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 84 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

(Dahlback & Gunnarsson, 1981), changes in benthic community composition and anoxic sediments (Diaz & Rosenburg, 1995), have largely been on farms that were overstocked.

Most studies conducted on the impacts of longline farms on the benthic environment in Australian and international waters have found that impacts are minimal (Kaiser et al., 1998; Underwood & Hoskins, 1999; Kaiser et al., 2000; Crawford, 2001; Lasiak & Underwood, 2002; Crawford et al., 2003), highly localised and restricted to the area beneath or in the immediate vicinity of longlines (Keeley et al., 2009).

Extensive aquaculture farming in NSW has included scallop longline aquaculture in Jervis Bay (now ceased operating), raft culture of mussels in Jervis Bay (now ceased operating), longline mussel farm in Twofold Bay and Akoya pearl longline cultivation in Port Stephens. As part of the conditions of approval required by Fisheries NSW, monitoring of benthic organisms and total organic carbon (TOC) in sediments below lease sites and control sites is required. The following is a summary of the results of environmental monitoring to date:

. The impact of a scallop longline in Jervis Bay remained within the assimilative capacity of the environment in that no significant increases in organic material were detected in sediment samples from in and around the site (Heasman et al., 1998);

. An assessment of potential ecological impacts of longline mussel farming in Twofold Bay found that there was no evidence of change in the total number of different fauna groups, dominant taxa or the overall structure of the benthic assemblages found below the mussel longlines (Lasiak & Underwood, 2002);

. The operation of aquaculture leases did not have a measurable effect on TOC in sediments in Twofold Bay. No significant differences in TOC levels were detected in comparisons between the lease sites and the means of their respective controls (NSW Fisheries, 1996). The results of benthic fauna surveys more than a decade later revealed only a small amount of evidence of ecological impact which was only within the bay where the mussel farm was located (Underwood & Hoskins, 1999);

. The results of a monitoring program on a pearl farm at Wanda Head, Port Stephens found no change in nitrogen, phosphorus or TOC in sediment beneath the lease (O'Connor et al., 2003). Studies also found no evidence of impact on benthic fauna beneath the farm or to seagrass beds at Wanda Head (Gifford, 2006);

. The farming activities in Twofold Bay have had a minimal impact despite the mussels being farmed at shallower depths (10 m), slower current speeds and higher stocking densities (approximately four times greater) than the pearl farm at Wanda Head (O'Connor et al., 2002); and

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 85 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. The results of the monitoring program in 2012 of the mussel farm in Twofold Bay (Eden Sea Farms) confirm the large spatial variability in TOC and support the conclusion that the operation of the mussel leases has not led to a significant increase in TOC when compared to the control sites. No significant impact on TOC levels has been detected in the last three surveys (i.e. 2007, 2009 and 2012) so additional management has not be considered necessary (Cardno Ecology Lab, 2012).

These NSW examples are relatively small scale compared to the large area of longline installed in other states and internationally.

Crawford et al. (2003) investigated the benthic environment under and near three shellfish farms in Tasmania which had a relatively high level of production over many years. Sediment deposition, sediment sulphide concentrations, redox values, organic carbon content and water turbidity levels near the bottom were not significantly different between sites outside the farm, at the boundary and sites within the farm. Dense beds of seagrass were observed in video surveys both outside the farm and under trays of oysters on one of the farms (Crawford et al., 2003). Video surveys also revealed that there were fine filamentous algae and patchy bacterial mats directly under some longlines. The benthic infauna did not show clear signs of organic enrichment, and neither univariate nor multivariate measures of benthic infauna were significantly different between sites inside and outside the farm, although they were different between farms. This study concluded that shellfish farming was having little impact on the benthic environment in Tasmania. The farms investigated also had characteristics less than ideal for shellfish culture i.e. low current flows, sediment with high silt and clay content and relatively shallow depths (Crawford et al., 2003).

A review of the ecological effects of farming shellfish in New Zealand also indicated that seabed effects were low to moderate, consisting of minor enrichment of seabed sediments (organic content increased by ~7.5%), increased build up of shell debris directly beneath the leases, and increased aggregations of starfish and other epifauna in some instances (Keeley et al., 2009). Seabed effects were found to be most pronounced directly beneath the leases, reduced rapidly with distance, and were usually difficult to detect within 20 to 50 m from the farm. Water depth and current speeds were found to be the most important factors influencing the magnitude of effects. Locating farms in well-flushed areas where species and habitats of environmental significance are not present has been found to greatly minimise impact (Keeley et al., 2009).

Biodeposition and sedimentation from the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will be minimised by ensuring that appropriate stocking densities are used which will reduce the quantity of waste produced (Joyce et al., 2010). Significant localised particle

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 86 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. depletion could occur if large numbers of bivalves were cultured and removed particles faster than the tidal exchange replenished them. This could in turn depress natural populations of secondary producers (Cranford et al., 2006).

The orientation of the longline infrastructure will also assist to minimise potential environmental impacts. The longlines will be aligned with the prevailing wave and swell direction in Jervis Bay, where possible (i.e. south to southeast). This orientation will minimise impediments to water flows by reducing the obstructed area in which currents will flow through as water circulates in and out of the bay. The orientation will also assist to reduce the stress placed on the culture apparatus. Reduced water flow velocity could cause the rates of sedimentation of suspended matter from the water column to increase under the leases or in a concentrated area (Umwelt, 2003).

Overall, Jervis Bay is a well flushed embayment where it is estimated that it takes six to 20 days for water to circulate the bay (Holloway, 1995). The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are also a small scale operation (50 hectares = 0.4% of Jervis Bay) and the leases will be spread throughout the bay. However, currents near the proposed lease locations can be weak and inconsistent (Joyce et al., 2010) e.g. currents range from 0.3-12 cm/s in the bay and tidal movement can be as low as 0.01 m/s (Holloway et al., 1995) so monitoring of water quality and the benthic environment is important to ensure that the aquaculture operations are not having a significant impact.

A Water Quality and Benthic Environment Monitoring Program will be implemented to ensure that the aquaculture activities are not having a significant impact on the environment and surrounding communities. The monitoring program will examine the physico-chemical environment and benthic community structure by regularly sampling before and during the operation of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, including control sites and sites within the leases (Appendix 2). Spatially and temporally replicated baseline data for water quality and benthic parameters will be required before aquaculture activities can commence (Joyce et al., 2010). If any parameters are outside the acceptable range, notably water quality and sediment levels, monitoring effort may be increased and practices will be modified until acceptable levels are regained. For example, fallowing (i.e. removal of stock and potentially equipment) of sites or reducing stocking densities will be considered. However, if the results of the monitoring program indicate negligible impact after the first five years of full scale production, monitoring requirements could potentially be decreased and consideration may be given to the use of low cost but high value methods e.g. photographic/video monitoring (Joyce et al., 2010).

A Waste Management Plan will also be implemented for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, which will include the regular removal of biofouling and deposited

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 87 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

sediment from the longline infrastructure, mooring lines and culture apparatus (See Section 8.2.2.9 - EIS). Removal of biofouling and deposited sediment is important to maintain water quality and reduce resistance to currents and wave action (Willemsen, 2005). Removal of biofouling from culturing apparatus will either be conducted at a land based site or by using specifically designed pressure cleaning equipment on the leases. All material that is collected in the filters and tanks will be disposed of at an approved land based treatment facility (Umwelt, 2003). Cleaning of the longlines will be undertaken every 2-4 weeks or when considered necessary (e.g. during winter months cleaning may be needed less frequently due to slow growth rates) and the mooring apparatus will be cleaned at least once a year.

During the process of cleaning infrastructure and culture apparatus, stock and biofouling can fall off onto the seabed and deposited sediment can be resuspended. The accidental loss of stock will be largely prevented by containing shellfish within nets, cages, baskets, panels and/or trays or the use of specially designed dropper lines. A visual 'plume' can be created during the cleaning process and can potentially have an impact on the benthic environment. However, the suspended material is expected to be dispersed by wind, tidal currents and settling under gravity, which has been observed on a pearl farm at Port Stephens (Umwelt, 2003). The benthic sediments and seagrass beds adjacent to the pearl farm at Wanda Head (Port Stephens) for example, were monitored and the results from initial and ongoing surveys found no detectable difference between the lease sites and adjacent control sites (Umwelt, 2003).

Human Health Risk - Disease and Toxins

Many diseases can affect shellfish but these do not appear to be transmittable to humans. The risk to human health from shellfish most commonly relates to contamination by bio- toxins produced by marine algae. Another well-recognised problem associated with shellfish culture is the contamination of shellfish with domestic sewage that contains human pathogenic bacteria and viruses, which in turn can cause diseases such as hepatitis and typhoid fever (Chinabut et al., 2007).

Section 8.2.2.2 of the EIS outlined a number of potential diseases of shellfish that may be cultured on the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. Fisheries NSW consulted with the Aquatic Biosecurity Unit of NSW DPI and was advised that it considers that there is currently no scientific evidence to suggest any direct linkage between the cultivation of molluscs and increases in zoonotic diseases except via the direct consumption of contaminated shellfish or through injuries arising from physical cuts e.g. cuts caused by shells (NSW DPI, Aquatic Biosecurity Risk Management - Biosecurity 2013, pers. comm.).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 88 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Fisheries NSW is also unaware of any NSW shellfish farmer being infected with any of the shellfish diseases (e.g. winter mortality) in the 150 years of shellfish culture in NSW.

A community stakeholder rightly stated that a major concern for human health associated with shellfish aquaculture is the impact of sewage entering Jervis Bay. Shellfish growing in sewage polluted waters accumulate micro-organisms including human pathogenic bacteria and viruses. However, it is compulsory for shellfish farms to adhere to the NSW Shellfish Program to ensure the public health safety of shellfish grown and harvested from NSW waters.

The NSW Shellfish Program is administered by the NSW Food Authority under the Food Act 2003. The objective of the program is to protect the health of shellfish consumers through the administration and application of procedures described in the New South Wales Shellfish Program Operations Manual that:

. assess the risk of shellfish contamination by pathogenic bacteria and viruses, biotoxins and chemicals derived from the growing area;

. control the harvest of shellfish in accordance with the assessed risk; and

. protect shellfish from contamination after harvesting.

As outlined in Section 3.1.6 of the draft EMP, a Food Safety Plan would need to be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Food Authority.

Fisheries NSW has commenced a water quality surveillance program. This program has involved a shoreline survey to identify any potential discharge points into Jervis Bay which may impact on water quality. Water sampling has also commenced to identify any particular weather events that may trigger contamination of Jervis Bay due to discharges from residential, rural or industrial areas. Fisheries NSW has collected about 12 months of water quality data to date. Sampling is now being concentrated on collecting data relating to the impacts of adverse weather events.

If the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are approved, the permit holders culturing shellfish for human consumption will be responsible to undertake regular monitoring of the stock and water quality to assess the risk of contamination by pathogenic bacteria and viruses, biotoxins and chemicals.

Councils, conservation groups, sewage trusts, rural land holders and shellfish farmers in other regions with an aquaculture industry have worked together to identify and rectify pollution sources impacting on surrounding waterways.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 89 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Human Safety Risk - Shell Debris

The perceived issue of increased shell debris and faecal matter washing up onto beaches creating a hazard to beach users was raised in a number of submissions. Walking along any beach has risks associated with natural marine debris, such as jellyfish, shells, dead fish, dead sea birds, driftwood and rocks, as well as risks from human generated waste, such as glass, plastics and other refuse.

This issue of increased shell debris and faecal matter on nearby beaches was also raised during the public exhibition process for the expansion of the mussel farming development in Twofold Bay, Eden. There is no evidence of the mussel farm increasing shell debris on nearby beaches or turning the sand black from faecal matter. Notably the mussel leases in Twofold Bay are closer inshore than the leases proposed for Jervis Bay.

Figure 31 indicates locations from which photos have been taken on two beaches (red and blue arrows) near the mussel farm in Twofold Bay and one a greater distance away (green arrow). Keith’s Pinch Beach (red arrow) is located approximately 280 m due west of the mussel farm (Figure 32), while Cocora Beach (blue arrow) is approximately 300 m northwest (Figure 33). Cocora Beach is a popular swimming beach due to its close proximity to the main residential area of Eden and the picnic and parking facilities available. Aslings Beach (green arrow) is located more than 4 km from the mussel farm (Figure 34). The substantial distance from the leases along with the physical separation caused by a large headland provides an example of a local beach that should not be influenced by the mussel farm. The following photographs of the subject beaches were taken shortly after a storm event which had washed up natural marine debris such as sea weed, drift wood and dead mutton birds.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 90 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 31: Aerial photograph of Twofold Bay - coloured arrows mark the location from which photos of beaches were taken (Source: Google Earth, 2013).

Figure 32: Keith’s Pinch Beach (red arrow) looking in a northerly direction towards Eden (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 91 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Figure 33: Cocora Beach (blue arrow) looking in a southerly direction (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

Figure 34: Aslings Beach (green arrow) looking in a southerly direction towards Eden (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013). Figures 32, 33 and 34 illustrate that the beaches near the mussel farm in Twofold Bay have not been fouled with mussel shell debris or mussel faecal matter even after a storm event. There is not a significant contribution of mussel shell amongst the broken shell debris (from a range of species) on the beach or mussel farming biofouling on the beach despite

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 92 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

substantial quantities of natural marine debris washing up. Mussel faecal matter could not be identified amongst the debris or wash zone on the beaches. The amount of natural marine debris washed up on the three beaches is not significantly different between the beaches that are 300 m or 4 km from the mussel farm. The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are located further offshore (0.7 to 1.9 km) than the mussel farm in Twofold Bay, which is likely to reduce any potential risk of increased shell or biofouling debris occurring on beaches in Jervis Bay.

Scouring

As outlined in Section 8.1.1 of the EIS, the seabed beneath the areas proposed for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay primarily consist of fine to medium grained sand and small cobble and have a water depth of approximately 10 m (CSIRO, 1994; Joyce et al., 2010). The issue of scouring by anchors is usually associated with the impacts this has on seagrass beds but there are no seagrass beds near the proposed leases. The mobile nature of the seabed would mitigate any potential scouring of the fine to medium grained sand and small cobble under the lease areas.

Hydro-sedimentary Processes

Community stakeholders were concerned that the longline infrastructure would alter hydro- sedimentary processes by modifying currents and sedimentation, as well as cause shading of the seabed. These issues are discussed in Section 8.1.6 (Coastal Processes and Climate Change) and Section 8.1.1 (Habitat Loss and Shading).

The proposed longline infrastructure is not a solid obstruction to waves and currents. The infrastructure is open and streamlined consisting of ropes and culture apparatus, which will be secured to the seafloor using a system of anchors and chains not dissimilar to the numerous permanent boat moorings within Jervis Bay. The supporting buoys and backbone ropes will float on or near the water's surface and will have a degree of flexibility. Only the anchoring system will be in contact with the seabed so bottom currents beneath the proposed leases are unlikely to be altered significantly. Consequently, the subsurface infrastructure of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases is not expected to significantly impede the path of waves or currents, which are expected to pass under, over and through this infrastructure with no significant alteration to coastal processes or the stability of the shoreline in Jervis Bay.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 93 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.9 Genetics, Disease and Introduced Pests

Submissions

Callala Beach Progress Association, Community Stakeholders (9)

Summary of Issues Raised

. What organisation will be responsible for monitoring the introduction of seed and spat into Jervis Bay? Where are the seed and spat coming from?

. A major concern is the effects of the farmed mussels could have on the genetics of the wild native mussels. Mussel spawn from marine farms can readily mix with wild populations and adversely affect the diversity and survivability of the native mussels.

. The EIS states that the proposal is for only native shellfish species but other species "may be considered".

. Native mussels will suffer due to the spawning of the farmed mussels. The introduction of a non native mussel could change the marine structure in Jervis Bay.

. Reefs and intertidal regions in Jervis Bay may be regularly overwhelmed by unprecedented levels of spat settlement to the detriment of existing sessile animals and thus the ecosystem of the bay.

. The ecological consequences of increased spat production have not been suitably addressed in the EIS. Increased fouling of moored boats in Callala Bay and in Currambene Creek will cause additional costs to boat owners. Increased fouling of navigation markers, mooring ropes and buoys will also require increased maintenance. More frequent cleaning of moored boats will add to the shedding of toxic antifouling compounds in environmentally sensitive areas, particularly along Currambene Creek.

. A web posting by a keen diver - “On a recent trip to Eden whilst diving in Twofold Bay, I was shocked and disgusted to find once healthy reefs had been inundated with mussels, displacing much weed and marine life from those reefs. On returning back to the boat ramp we struck up a conversation with a local abalone diver. He told us they had lost much of the abalone bearing reefs around the bay to mussel inundation.”

. Twofold Bay, an area with aquaculture leases, is evidence of the detrimental impact mussel farms can have on the marine environment.

. The EIS suggests that there is a moderate risk of the proposal introducing disease, parasites and pests into Jervis Bay.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 94 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. Monitoring of changes due to enhanced spat establishment needs to occur - this will assist to regulate stocking rates.

Response

Responsible Agencies

Fisheries NSW is the responsible agency for the management of aquaculture and other fisheries related matters in NSW. These matters are managed in accordance with the provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Issues relating to the aquaculture farm operations, genetics, environmental monitoring and aquatic ecosystems are managed by Fisheries NSW a division of NSW DPI. Biosecurity NSW, another division of NSW DPI, is responsible for investigating reports of suspected or confirmed aquatic pests and disease occurrences in NSW. If specific new pest or disease issues are suspected or confirmed, the Minister may implement relevant biosecurity control measures as required..

Endemism and Genetic Integrity

The genetic integrity of wild stocks is most at risk when shellfish originate from broodstock outside the range of the local genetic population. Limits and restrictions will be applied to ensure application of the endemism rule on the source of spat or juveniles for the species to be cultivated in Jervis Bay. All hatchery produced spat for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will be derived from broodstock that has either been collected from wild stocks local to the marine farming activity or from the same recognised genetic population. If spat are to be hatchery reared, broodstock will be collected in sufficient numbers to ensure the genetic diversity of spat is not compromised. There will be no use of genetically modified organisms.

The degree of endemism in Jervis Bay for shellfish such as mussels, oysters and scallops is considered low as spat of these species that settle in Jervis Bay can be derived from planktonic stages originating in spawning populations well up or down the Australian east coast and carried to Jervis Bay by ocean currents (NSW MP, 2008). The larvae of these species can remain free swimming in the water column for weeks before settling and can be dispersed over great distances.

Whilst the arguments put forward for the continued collection of spat from other estuaries based on the Twofold Bay mussel spat experience can be developed for other species, the ideal situation for aquaculture in Jervis Bay would be to use spat cultivated from wild shellfish collected directly from the bay.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 95 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Resource Competition

Concerns were expressed in submissions that an increase in the number of shellfish in Jervis Bay may increase the size of the spawning population, which could in turn increase recruitment pressure on rocky shores and reefs as well as increase fouling on boats.

There is the potential for cultivated spawning shellfish species to influence the distribution of individual shellfish species within Jervis Bay with possible consequences for the balance or makeup of wild assemblages of biota. The extent of competition between cultured stock and wild stock is largely dependent on the ecological niches they occupy, feeding habits and survival rates.

The Twofold Bay mussel farming operation suggests that recruitment from cultured stocks is unlikely to be a problem and that the potential increase in populations arising from farm spawnings was less than the background variation in natural spawning of mussels. Certainly, practical experience gathered in Jervis Bay has recorded heavy natural spatfall occurring but these settlements have been sporadic and insufficiently reliable in timing for commercial purposes (W. O’Connor 2013, pers comm.). The consequence of these 'windfall' spatfalls indicate that there can be spikes of settlement of various shellfish species from time to time (Fuentes et al., 1992; Heasman et al., 1994). That is, there is already a certain natural dynamism in the makeup of the assemblages of species in the various habitats in Jervis Bay.

The capacity for cultured stocks to contribute to wild recruitment also needs to consider the characteristics of the spawning cycle for shellfish (which take a number of years to reach full spawning potential), the farming methods (which remove the larger and more mature specimens for sale prior to them spawning) and the lack of appropriate spawning triggers in Jervis Bay (in effect a sudden and prolonged cold snap). Collectively these factors generally work together to reduce the likelihood there would be large farming-induced spawning events in Jervis Bay.

For example, cultured mussels in Jervis Bay were previously harvested between about 10 and 14 months of age. Figure 35 indicates that at this age the mussels have low reproductive capacity and therefore would not be significantly contributing to the wild population of mussels in Jervis Bay. This would equally apply to other shellfish species proposed for culture on the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, where fecundity will increase with size/age (Cole, 1941; Sause et al., 1987). Shellfish are generally harvested at their reproductive peak condition (prior to spawning) which further reduces their capability to contribute to wild populations. In the case of Pearl Oysters, deliberate attempts are made to prevent reproductive condition improving as it hinders pearl nucleus insertion (O’Connor et al., 2003).

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 96 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Mussel farming had occurred previously in Jervis Bay from late 1970s to 2008 with no significant impacts from recruitment being identified.

Figure 35: Somatic (solid circles) and gamete (open circles) production as a function of age and shell length in low shore Mytilus edulis from Long Island, New York, North America (Source: Rodhouse et al., 1986).

Disease, Parasites and Pests

The risk of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases having a significant impact on the occurrence of diseases and pests was assessed to be ‘low’ (Section 8.2.2.2 - EIS) when considered in context with the implementation of the Disease, Parasite and Pest Management Plan (Appendix 2) that is required to be implemented by the lease operator/s. Overall however, Fisheries NSW allocated a ‘moderate’ risk rating for disease, parasite and pest issues to ensure adequate management of these risks.

The Disease, Parasite and Pest Management Plan will include guidelines and protocols for surveillance regimes and monitoring, how to reduce stress to stock, the implementation of strict husbandry practices, the reporting of any unusual mortality or suspected notifiable aquatic diseases, the reporting of unusual or suspected non-native biofouling species (i.e. potential marine pest species), the removal of biofouling and compliance with hatchery protocols. The introduction of exotic pathogens and pests into the surrounding region will also be mitigated by only culturing species that are native to NSW waters.

From the experience of many years of mussel cultivation in Jervis Bay based on spat collected from Twofold Bay, there is no indication that changes have occurred to wild stocks or local assemblages of animals, and there have been no introductions of pest species

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 97 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

reported in association with the mussel cultivation. This result can be attributed to a number of natural and specific farming practices. A combination of trialled spat collection and transportation methods from Twofold Bay plus the developed awareness and testing for introduced species (including planktonic species) by farmers have worked to mitigate the introduction of pest species into Jervis Bay via the mussel spat collection route.

See Section 8.2.2.2 of the EIS for further details on the mitigation of potential genetics, disease and pests issues associated with the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 98 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.10 Marine Fauna Interactions - Entanglement, Marine Debris, Behavioural Changes and Impacts on Marine Ecology

Submissions

Jervis Bay Regional Alliance, Community Stakeholders (39)

Summary of Issues Raised

. The longline infrastructure is a significant entanglement hazard for marine wildlife.

. What measures are in place to prevent the likely deaths of marine fauna from being entangled in the longline infrastructure?

. What measures are in place to recover marine fauna which have been entangled in aquaculture infrastructure?

. There are concerns about the potential impacts on the resident dolphin populations, including entanglement, marine debris. alterations of movements and removal of habitat.

. There are concerns that the proposal will increase shark numbers in the areas near the leases and surrounding beaches.

. Noise generated by the installation, maintenance and operation of the leases would disrupt marine fauna (especially dolphins) and their feeding patterns.

. Any changes to the dynamics of the ecology will have an impact all the way along the food chain with disastrous results.

Response

Entanglement and Marine Debris

Whales

There are very few reported cases of negative whale interactions with longline farms in Australian waters. There is a single reported fatality case of a Bryde's whale becoming entangled in a mussel spat line in Australian waters (Great Barrier Reef) in 1996. Similarly, there are two reported cases of mortality of the Bryde's whale due to entanglement in mussel spat collectors in New Zealand (Lloyd, 2003). However, spat lines have narrow diameters and are often only lightly anchored (Baker, 2005) so the risk of entanglement is considered to be significantly greater for this type of infrastructure (Lloyd, 2003). Entanglement risk to large whales is significantly reduced if ropes and lines are kept tightly tensioned and have a thick diameter (Baker, 2005).

Prior to the commencement of mussel farming in Twofold Bay (NSW) an extensive review of the threat of entanglement of marine fauna in aquaculture lines was conducted and the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 99 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

conclusion was that there was no significant risk posed (Pacific Seafood Management Consulting Group, 1996). Growing mussels on longlines and rafts has been practiced in areas frequented by whales in NSW, including Jervis Bay and Twofold Bay, for over 20 years without entanglement incidents (NSW DPI, 2005). Similarly, a pearl farm at Wanda Head, Port Stephens had operated from 1999 to 2009 and no incident of whale entanglement has been recorded.

Humpback and southern right whales are regular visitors to Twofold Bay (NSW) and have been sighted in close proximity to mussel leases and appeared to have negotiated the longlines without any issues arising (NSW DPI, 2005). In July 2012 five male humpback whales (about 10 m long) were observed chasing a female in Port Phillip Bay. They stayed in the bay for 10-12 days. At one point during their stay while being filmed the males were observed to divide into two groups. One group headed straight through the Dromana mussel farm. While they swam between the 200 m longline mussel ropes, they never touched one or disturbed them. The longlines are about 20 m apart and carry a continuous dropper system (A. Clarke - Manager Aquaculture, Fisheries Victoria - 2014, pers. comm.). Similarly, longline aquaculture (1600 hectares) is also carried out in Great Oyster Bay and Mercury Passage (Tasmania) which is in the migration path of these two species. There is no evidence to suggest entanglement is an issue of significant concern in these areas (NSW DPI, 2005). There is a general consensus that longline systems do not represent a significant threat to whales provided that lines are kept taut, no netting is used, vessel speed restrictions are enforced in areas surrounding leases and a contingency plan is implemented to address potential issues that may arise (NSW DPI, 2005).

The taut rope system that is proposed to be used on the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases is similar to what is used on pearl farms along the Western Australian coast since 1961. There are tens of thousands of hectares of longlines established within and adjacent to whale migration routes along the Western Australian coast with more than 30,000 humpback whales migrating up and down the coast every year. Notably, longline aquaculture occurs north of Cape Leveque, which is an important area for humpback whale calving and breeding, and in Albany, which is habitat for southern right whales during the breeding season (NSW DPI, 2005).

There are records of entanglements of large baleen whales in Western Australia in the fishing gear of the West Coast Rock Lobster Fishery (WCRLF) accounting for over 90% of whale entanglements (Campbell, 2011). The WCRLF uses much finer ropes than those proposed for the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, and the ropes are free floating via small buoys and not maintained in a taut state.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 100 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

In regards to longline aquaculture in Western Australia, there are no known fatalities of whales due to entanglement in the past five decades that longlines have been used (Umwelt, 2003). However, there are five records of entanglements of humpback whales between 1982 and 2010 (Groom & Coughran, 2012). Three incidents were associated with pearl aquaculture gear where two whales were completely disentangled and one mostly freed. The other two incidents were associated with abalone and mussel aquaculture gear (Groom & Coughran, 2012).

The rigidity associated with the longline design of taut ropes and lines will allow the infrastructure to be forced aside by any large animal (i.e. dolphins and whales) that makes contact with it and effectively 'bounce off' it rather than becoming entangled (Umwelt, 2003; Marine Pollution Research, 2008).

In the unlikely event that a large whale did enter the 'corridors' between sets of longlines and become disoriented, the whale should be capable of pushing through the vertical culture ropes with ease and/or safely pass beneath them provided that the longlines are secured at the appropriate position in the water column (Pacific Seafood Management Consulting Group, 1996). Alternatively, there should be enough space for whales to traverse within the 'corridor' (i.e. 15-50 m between each longline). Notably, the proposed design for the longline infrastructure includes a 'clear zone' of about 4-5 m between the culture apparatus and the seabed.

Dolphins

Growing shellfish on ropes strung beneath longlines and rafts has been practiced in areas frequented by dolphins without entanglement incidents in NSW (i.e. Twofold Bay, Jervis Bay and Port Stephens) for more than 20 years (NSW DPI, 2005) and Australia wide for the past 40 years (Umwelt, 2003). Many estuaries in NSW also have numerous boat moorings which have similar submerged rope infrastructure to that of longline cultures. Jervis Bay and Port Stephens for example, have about 240 and 800 moorings respectively, and to Fisheries NSW knowledge no entanglements have occurred involving the resident dolphins or turtles at either location.

An international survey involving literature reviews and consultation with researchers associated with the longline shellfish industry (including Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, Californian Coast and Normandy Coast) revealed no incidents of dolphin entanglement in bivalve culture infrastructure (Pacific Seafood Management Consulting Group, 1996).

The culture apparatus represents a physical structure in the water column that would not naturally occur, which modifies the movements of dolphins within aquaculture lease areas.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 101 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Dolphins have been observed on numerous occasions moving through the longline pearl leases in Port Stephens as individuals and pods (Umwelt, 2003).

The rigidity associated with the longline design of taut ropes and lines will allow the infrastructure to be forced aside by any large animal (i.e. dolphins and whales) that makes contact with it and effectively 'bounce off' it rather than becoming entangled (Umwelt, 2003; Marine Pollution Research, 2008).

Seals

Fur seals are prone to entanglement in plastic objects, discarded fishing gear and other marine debris but are not considered to be at risk of entanglement in the longline infrastructure (Pacific Seafood Management Consulting Group, 1996). Seals could fish around the structures and 'play' with loose culture lines or baskets (particularly young seals) (Marine Pollution Research, 2008). However, appropriate infrastructure design and maintenance will minimise the risk of entanglement associated with this potential interaction e.g. taut lines, heavy culture lines and appropriate design of baskets (See Section 8.2.2.4 of EIS - Mitigation Measures).

Marine Turtles

According to Environment Australia (2003), there is no available evidence to suggest any turtle mortalities from aquaculture activities. However, there are concerns about the potential impact of entanglement and ingestion of marine debris associated with the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases on turtles foraging and resting in Jervis Bay.

Green turtles are sighted quite regularly in the embayment and leatherback turtles are seen occasionally. Green turtles mainly inhabit shallow waters and seagrass beds so the risk of interaction with longline infrastructure will increase with decreasing distance from these habitat areas in the bay. Direct interaction between turtles and longline infrastructure is considered unlikely but turtles are highly vulnerable to marine debris (Marine Pollution Research, 2008).

Operator/s of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will be required to implement a range of mitigation measures to ensure the risk of entanglement and ingestion of marine debris is minimised e.g. taut ropes, thick diameter lines, heavy culture lines and regular removal of biofouling (See Section 8.2.2.4 of EIS – Mitigation Measures).

Seabirds

Seabirds could potentially be vulnerable to accidental collision with the longline infrastructure when aerial diving for schooling fish within the longline farms. There is also a potential risk of ingestion of marine debris, as well as a risk of entanglement of diving birds in loose culture lines (Marine Pollution Research, 2008). These risks however, will be mitigated on the

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 102 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases by appropriate infrastructure design and maintenance (e.g. taut lines, heavy culture lines and appropriate design of baskets) and the implementation of a Waste Management Plan (See Section 8.2.2.4 of EIS - Mitigation Measures). In addition, many seabird species may take advantage of the longline infrastructure as temporary roosting sites while foraging (Marine Pollution Research, 2008).

Concerns were expressed about marine fauna entanglement during the public exhibition process for Stage 2 of the mussel farm in Twofold Bay, which involved expansion of the operation to 50 hectares. A review group consisting of representatives from the Bega Valley Shire Council; Department of Lands; NSW Department of Primary Industries; NSW Maritime Authority; Department of Infrastructure, Planning & Natural Resources and NSW Department of Environment and Conservation was formed. It was concluded that although the risk to whales from the mussel farming infrastructure may not be significant the aquaculture permit holders should still be required to develop a marine mammal entanglement protocol to further reduce any risk to whales in the event of entanglement. There has not been an entanglement incident associated with the longline infrastructure in Twofold Bay during the 15 years of operation despite the leases being visited regularly by whales, dolphins and seals.

The issues of entanglement and marine debris associated the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases have been discussed in further detail in Section 8.2.2.4 of the EIS and briefly in Sections 3.1.4 (Marine Fauna Interaction Management Plan) and 3.3.1 (Marine Fauna Entanglement Avoidance Protocol) of the draft EMP. These management plans and protocols will be developed further if the project is approved.

In the unlikely event that a marine fauna entanglement was to occur, procedures outlined in the Marine Fauna Entanglement Avoidance Protocol would be implemented. The Protocol will include a response plan and Entanglement Committee for any incidences including procedures to be followed, training and equipment required and reporting incidents. The Entanglement Committee would consist of staff from Fisheries NSW, NSW OEH, NSW Marine Parks and any other expert organisations as deemed appropriate.

Habitat Loss

Marine fauna would not be excluded completely from the lease areas - the longline infrastructure will consist of a series of buoys and lines running parallel to each other and separated by about 15-20 m of open water. The two leases off Callala will also be separated by about 530 m of open water. Dolphins and fairy penguins for example, were regularly sighted moving through the pearl farm in Port Stephens and around the work boats (Umwelt, 2003). Similarly, reports on pearl farms in Western Australia indicate that resident dolphin populations have doubled following the installation of the longline infrastructure. Female

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 103 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

dolphins have been observed calving within the pearl farms and using the longline areas to shelter from sharks and other predators (Umwelt, 2003).

There are no environmentally sensitive or unique areas within the areas proposed for the leases. Seagrass beds, rocky reefs and mangroves are present in Jervis Bay but are considered to be a sufficient distance away from the leases to avoid significant impact on these habitats.

The Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are not located in any known important foraging, breeding or resting habitat for any marine fauna species. Notably, the proposed leases are positioned outside of recognised dolphin aggregation areas within Jervis Bay (See Figure 37 - EIS). There are extensive areas of similar habitat in the direct and wider study area. The installation of the longlines will not isolate any habitat area which is considered unique in the direct or wider region and adjacent soft sediment and pelagic habitat is likely to support very similar fauna and flora assemblages to those in the immediate vicinity of the longline infrastructure.

Behavioural Changes - Sharks

Given the publicity regarding shark attacks and the presence of sharks in our coastal waters it is unlikely that any person who participates in marine waters based activities could claim not to be aware of the risk of shark attacks. A number of shark species are now protected within Australia waters and their populations may increase slowly over following decades.

There are numerous species of sharks that naturally inhabit Jervis Bay for varying durations with some species such as Wobbegongs, Port Jackson and various rays being present for most of the year. Jervis Bay is also renowned for its aggregations of Grey Nurse Sharks, predominately around the entrance to Jervis Bay and along Beecroft Peninsula. In addition, adult Dusky Whalers are regularly observed during summer when they migrate into the bay to pup (N. Otway - Senior Research Scientist, NSW DPI, Fisheries Research Aquatic Ecosystems - 2013, pers. comm.).

Despite regular aerial sightings of sharks in Jervis Bay, especially over summer, negative human - shark interactions have not been observed. Notably, SCUBA divers seek out sharks during dives and Naval personnel are regularly (all year round) involved in water based activities. Thousands of people partake in water activities each year and there is only one suspected shark related incident in the late 1960s involving two Australian Navy frogmen while night diving (Web Reference 11).

The Commercial Aquaculture Shellfish Leases will undertake extensive aquaculture activities (i.e. no input of feed) which utilises naturally occurring food sources within the environment of Jervis Bay. No supplementary feeds which may attract fish species will be used to feed

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 104 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

the stock being cultured. Fisheries NSW acknowledges that the longline infrastructure will offer some small fish species such as seahorses, bream and luderick with potential habitat in Jervis Bay. Artificial structures in Jervis Bay in the form of numerous boat moorings, wharves and jetties already provide similar habitat for fish in Jervis Bay and have not been associated with an aggregation of sharks.

The Sydney Sewage Outfall is an example of an artificial structure that provides both habitat and a source of nutrients for marine species. The outfall has been studied to evaluate the change in the composition of fish species post installation and during its operation. The research identified that the primary response to the installation of the outfall was a sustained increase in species richness and the abundance of species such as Trumpter, Goatfish, Gurnard, Puffer Fish, Carpet Sharks, Stingrays and Flounder (Otway et al., 1996). There were no obvious shifts in the dominance of one trophic group over others (Otway et al., 1996).

Long lived animals with low reproductive rates such as marine mammals and sharks, exhibit low productivity and therefore, have poor recovery potential (Smith et al., 1998; Walker, 1998; Frisk et al., 2001). Moreover, slow rates of recovery are exacerbated in species with specific habitat requirements and localised distributions because immigration from non- exploited populations is probably limited (Walker, 1998). Indeed, many large-bodied elasmobranchs (i.e. sharks and rays) have low potential intrinsic rates of population growth and rebound potential (Smith et al., 1998; Frisk et al., 2001) due to slow maturation and low fecundity (Otway et al., 2004). White Sharks for example, have long gestation periods of 18 months with a 3 year reproductive cycle and take 7 to 12 years to reach maturity (Last & Stevens, 2009). Furthermore, significant increases in shark numbers will not occur due to the aggregation of fish around the leases.

The mussel farm in Twofold Bay is located about 300 m off Cocora Beach (a popular swimming beach) and there has been no recorded incidents or reported increases in visitation by sharks to the beach. In comparison, the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases in Jervis Bay are located 0.7 to 1.9 km from the shore, which is two to six times the distance between the mussel farm and beaches in Twofold Bay.

Fisheries NSW consulted with shark researchers in Australia and New Zealand to determine if any research had been conducted on interactions between sharks and shellfish aquaculture leases. New Zealand researchers were contacted because there are a large number of shellfish leases in surrounding coastal waters which are similar to the marine environment of Jervis Bay.

Dr Nick Otway, Senior Research Scientist from Fisheries NSW, advised that research has been undertaken into interactions between sharks with sea cages but he was unaware of

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 105 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report. any research undertaken on the interactions with extensive shellfish farming. Dr Otway advised that extensive shellfish farming does not provide the same attractants for sharks as sea cage farming, particularly the species of concern to humans, as no supplementary feeding of the stock occurs. Notably, the shark species of concern to humans are not molluscivorous species (i.e. do not consume molluscs).

Clinton Duffy, Scientific Officer from the Marine Ecosystems Team - Department of Conservation in New Zealand, advised that unlike birds and marine mammals, he was unaware of any research on the interactions between elasmobranchs (i.e. sharks and rays) and shellfish aquaculture. Mr Duffy thought that the major effect on elasmobranchs would be displacement and some molluscivorous species may be attracted to the leases. Depredation of clams and oysters by eagle rays has been reported in Japan and the United States. He stated that large, potentially dangerous sharks might be attracted to farm structures if they served to aggregate wild fish that were an important component of the sharks’ diet but this is highly speculative.

Mr Duffy also provided Fisheries NSW with a statement of evidence in relation to the establishment of eight finfish farms in the Marlborough Sounds in which the issue of shark interactions was addressed. It was outlined that concerns were expressed in New Zealand and elsewhere about marine fish farms attracting and causing potentially dangerous sharks to aggregate around leases and increasing the risk of shark attack. The statement of evidence suggests that the risk sharks present to humans is generally overstated. The widespread fear of sharks owes much to the media coverage of infrequent attacks on humans and the inaccurate representation by the media of shark behaviour. While it is prudent to treat any shark greater than 1.8 m length as potentially dangerous, shark attack is a rare phenomenon and under most circumstances it is possible to safely undertake most aquatic activities in the presence of sharks. This includes situations where bait and/or chum (minced fish and fish oil) is used to attract sharks so divers can view them underwater, or where divers view sharks feeding on natural aggregations of bait fishes.

The statement of evidence also indicated that fish farm divers involved in farm operations and maintenance are exposed to the greatest risk of attack due to the amount of time they spend in the water close to, or in direct contact with the feeding stimulus (i.e. live fish and mortalities). Despite this increased risk, Mr Duffy is unaware of any shark attacks occurring at or near fish farms in New Zealand, which is also the case in South Australia (S. Murray - Jones - DEH 2014, pers. comm.). No attacks on divers or any other recreational waterway users in the vicinity of a fish farm have been recorded on the International Shark Attack File (R. Buch - ISAF 2014, pers. comm.).

Mr Duffy concluded that:

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 106 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. fish farms do not attract sharks into a particular region but they are likely to attract the attention of sharks inhabiting or passing through the area, and depending on the species concerned this could result in the temporary aggregation of sharks around farms;

. the nature of shark-farm interactions will vary depending upon a number of variables including the species of shark involved, site, season, marine farm size and management practices and the fish species being cultured;

. it is unlikely that large pelagic sharks would linger around a farm for an extended period of time without receiving a food reward;

. while common sense and caution should always be exercised when interacting with sharks, the presence these species, particularly bronze whalers, does not represent an unacceptable risk to swimmers and divers and is not incompatible with most other forms of water-based recreation; and

. the actual risk of shark attack does not appear to be any greater around fish farms than many other parts of New Zealand’s marine environment (e.g. areas where schools of bait fish naturally aggregate, or in close proximity to seal colonies or pods of dolphins).

The above statement indicates that fish farms, which potentially provide attractants (e.g. feed and live/moribund fish), have minimal impacts on the risk of attracting shark species of risk to humans.

Extensive shellfish leases do not provide attractants to large pelagic shark species and therefore the risk of attracting these shark species is considered to be negligible. However, some molluscivorous sharks such as Port Jackson Sharks, may be attracted to the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases.

Acoustic Pollution

Vessels in Jervis Bay consist of small recreational fishing boats, dive boats, dolphin and whale watching boats (Figure 36), luxury cruisers, sailing vessels, commercial fishing vessels and Naval vessels. The number of vessels in Jervis Bay and associated acoustic pollution levels vary according to weather conditions and seasons. Commercial and recreational vessel traffic is significantly greater over summer, particularly around Christmas and New Year (around 300 vessel movements), and decreases substantially during winter (about 20 vessel movements).

Shellfish aquaculture operations largely do not require intensive day to day activities on site, except during the deployment, thinning and harvesting stages. During the operational stage

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 107 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, marine vessel movements will be in the range of 0-3 return trips per day per lease to undertake inspections and maintenance. Consequently, vessel movements in the Jervis Bay region to service the leases will only increase boating traffic in bay by approximately 2% during peak periods. This minor increase is not expected to have a significant impact on acoustic pollution levels. Marine vessel motors will also be well maintained to ensure engine noises are kept to a minimum.

Figure 36: Pictures of commercial and recreational vessels that currently use Jervis Bay (Source: Fisheries NSW, 2013).

An Observer Protocol will be implemented where operators will routinely keep watch for marine fauna, notably dolphins, turtles and seals, when travelling between the leases and land based facilities. Vessels will be required to adhere to NSW RMS speed limits and slow down in sensitive areas if they traverse them. Sensitive areas in Jervis Bay include seagrass beds and important feeding areas for dolphins, including (1) the large areas of soft sediment and seagrass in the Hare Bay Sanctuary Zone, (2) the soft sediment and mosaic of reef habitat in Huskisson Sanctuary Zone, and (3) the inshore and rocky reef habitat in Hyams Beach Sanctuary Zone (NSW MP, 2009b). Lease vessels will be required to slow down to a maximum speed of 25 knots if marine fauna are observed within 200 m of the vessel.

Further details about the potential impacts of the noise associated with the construction, deployment and operation stages of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are outlined in Sections 8.1.3; 8.2.1.2; 8.2.1.4 and 8.2.2.5 of the EIS.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 108 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

2.3.11 Management, Monitoring and the EIS Process

Submissions

NSW OEH, Jervis Bay Regional Alliance, Community Stakeholders (6)

Summary of Issues Raised

. Monitoring of the deaths of animals off site needs to occur.

. Monitoring of the impact of the leases on catch levels of fish species needs to occur to ensure there is not increased pressure on fish stocks (i.e. lure fish out of Sanctuary Zones).

. Monitoring programmes should be undertaken by an independent authority and funded by the commercial operator.

. SEPP 62 on sustainable aquaculture, so far, does not contain in its Schedule 2, minimum performance criteria for permissible development. Can we assume that this would cover those standards required for monitoring, and if so, until these criteria are written, what are the criteria against which monitoring will be carried out?

. There should be a regularly scheduled independent auditing process that, over a cycle of years, covers all aspects of the management plan and performance assessment. It is suggested that an independent auditor be appointed through a DPI process and paid for by the lessee.

. In addition to the above independent audit, a smaller environmental monitoring group is recommended (headed by local DPI) with involvement of local officers from other agencies/local government (including one OEH representative) as well as community representation (e.g. member of the public/recreational group). This environmental monitoring group can review the self-audit and independent audit reports and make recommendations to DPI about improvements and/or compliance. This process can then do away with the suggested Entanglement Committee (which is proposed to have 4 OEH staff). The smaller environmental monitoring group of local officers (above) can cover all aspects of the management plan through reviewing the reporting and independent auditor can do this), but oversee that audits and reporting is occurring appropriately. If entanglement does become an issue, the group can quickly seek out key stakeholders for more technical advice/support as appropriate.

. The need for aquaculture is assumed and the 'do-nothing' option is dismissed. The EIS does not present any arguments in favour of preserving the current natural environment, and hence, does not necessarily reflect the interests of the broader community.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 109 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

. The argument for the proposal is based on the claim that JBMP allows aquaculture. Whether the JBMP should allow aquaculture is a legitimate question, as is the question of whether aquaculture should deny the right of access of ordinary Australians to areas within the Marine Park?

. There is no independence or impartiality evident in the preparation of the EIS.

. The proposal is exclusive of the broader community and re-enforced by security. The lease arrangement is potentially for up to 30 years so the "exclusive" and "secure" nature of the proposal is quasi-permanent.

. Community consultation appears to have been 'information distribution' rather than one of genuine consultation.

. The EIS should be independent and unbiased by commercial considerations and vested interests.

. Risks are consistently downgraded with mitigation advocated in support.

. Consultation alone, with various established coastal zone stakeholders, is not Integrated Planning. ICZP requires a planning team that includes those expert and experienced in the operations, aspirations and limitations of the specific coastal zones stakeholders. There have been attempts, as shown in this document, of consultation and briefings to inform the numerous and diverse stakeholders in Jervis Bay coastal zone of the proposal but the responses are fractionalized, isolated and have only be assessed by a single stakeholder. The criteria for assessing other stakeholder contributions have been from the single perspective of aquaculture and not the holistic dimensions of present and proposed future economic and social activities in the zone. The sustainability and resilience of both the proposal and the myriad of other ventures currently operating may be threatened by a single stakeholder making decisions independent of other interests.

Response

Monitoring Programs

The Jervis Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan and Operational Plan have incorporated the principles behind integrated coastal zone planning (ICZP) in their development as outlined in Section 2.3.7. These plans permit aquaculture in Jervis Bay Marine Park. To complement these plans NSW Marine Parks requested that Fisheries NSW develop an aquaculture strategy to ensure any aquaculture development in the future is conducted in accordance with a sustainable aquaculture management plan. The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project will assist in the strategic and coordinated development of aquaculture in Jervis Bay rather than a piecemeal “adhoc” approach.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 110 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Under the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development 2011) the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Lease Project was classified as State Significant Infrastructure (c.14 (1)(b) and Schedule 3 (1)(1)) and requires approval from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure under s.115W of the EP&A Act.

Statutory obligations under State and Commonwealth legislation, areas of responsibility for government departments and key considerations for the EIS were identified in the Preliminary Environment Assessment of the proposal carried out by Fisheries NSW in November 2012. Requirements to satisfy State legislation were subsequently issued to Fisheries NSW in December 2012 by Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DoPI). These guidelines were issued to meet the requirements of State legislation (See Appendix 2 - EIS). Fisheries NSW prepared an EIS in accordance with the Director-General requirements.

In addition to the statutory requirements, Fisheries NSW also undertook preliminary consultation meetings with stakeholders and provided detailed information before the preparation of the EIS. Issues identified with stakeholders were included and addressed in the EIS. During the EIS process Fisheries NSW also held community information days to provide an opportunity for stakeholders to discuss matters face to face (See Section 1.3). Fisheries NSW does not agree that consultation was “information distribution” only.

If the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are approved, the successful tenderer/s for the proposed leases will be subject to approval conditions issued by the DoPI. Along with aquaculture lease and permit conditions, the consent conditions will determine the management plans, protocols and monitoring programs for the proposed leases.

Under Section 163 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) aquaculture leases may be granted for up to 15 years with Section 167 providing the option for renewal for another 15 years provided certain criteria are met. Under the FM Act the successful tenderer/s for the proposed leases will be responsible for all operational matters relating to the leases.

The existing marine based aquaculture farms in NSW are currently subject to a range of independent monitoring programs which are funded by the operator/s of the respective leases. These monitoring programs reflect the development consent conditions and/or aquaculture permit conditions for the particular lease.

The independent person/s or organisation/s who undertake the monitoring programs are scrutinised and approved by DoPI and/or Fisheries NSW to ensure they are suitably qualified to undertake the required monitoring. For example, any monitoring requiring the testing of samples must be through a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited laboratory. NATA accreditation is recognised worldwide and provides a means of

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 111 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

determining, formally recognising and promoting the competence of facilities to perform specific types of testing, inspection, calibration, and other related activities.

Recommended monitoring programs for the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases were outlined in Section 8.2.2 and Appendix 1 of the EIS. If the proposed leases are approved they may also be subject to additional monitoring programs as outlined in development consent conditions issued by DoPI.

Management Plans and Protocols

Recommended management plans and/or protocols for the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases were outlined in Section 8.2.2 and Appendix 1 of the EIS. If the proposed leases are approved they may also be subject to additional management plans or protocols as outlined in development consent conditions issued by DoPI.

In the development and approval of these management plans and protocols, Fisheries NSW may convene an appropriate inter-departmental working group. The group would be made up of relevant State or local government agencies that have expertise in the relevant matter within the particular plan or protocol. For example, for other marine based leases Fisheries NSW has prepared a Marine Fauna Entanglement Avoidance Protocol in conjunction with NSW OEH Head Office staff. This protocol has then been amended in consultation with local NSW OEH staff to reflect the details of the local committee members (Fisheries NSW, OEH and JBMP staff) that would be consulted regarding any issues.

Environmental Review and Auditing

It is proposed that an annual environment report will be completed at the end of each year (See Section 4.1 - draft EMP). The aim of the report will be to assess environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation, monitoring and management measures, and make modifications to the operation of the leases in accordance with the report findings. The annual environment report will consist of information such as the following:

. Annual water and benthic monitoring report; . Annual marine fauna interaction/observations report; . Annual navigation incidents report; . Annual complaints report; . Annual diseases, parasites and pests report; . Annual WH&S report; and . Annual structural integrity and stability report.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 112 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

A program and procedures will also be developed for the periodic auditing of the EMP's implementation and effectiveness. The audit will also provide information for the EMP's review. The audit program will cover both internal and external auditing requirements, including scope, methods and frequency, as well as the requirements and responsibilities for conducting the audits and reporting the results.

Impact on Fish Catch Levels

The Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases could potentially function as artificial reefs and therefore, may act as fish aggregating devices (FAD). The term FAD has been used for a wide variety of drifting, surface floating or mid-water objects which have the primary purpose of facilitating the harvest of fish (mostly pelagic species) (Pears & Williams, 2005). Shellfish farms can affect fish populations by changing fishing pressures and aggregation behaviour (Keeley et al., 2009).

If the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases function as artificial reefs or FADs, there is the potential for 'draw down' effects on natural reef areas, which in turn could cause changes to natural reef and fish assemblages. If fish are drawn away from the protection of their natural habitat and Sanctuary Zones for example, they may become more susceptible to capture, which in turn could impact on the dynamics of adjacent natural reef assemblages (Cardno Ecology Lab, 2010).

Effects on adjacent natural reefs are likely to be dependent on factors such as the distance from the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases and the type of fish found on nearby reefs that may be attracted to the longlines. Investigations of fish assemblages inhabiting artificial reefs have shown that the local area of influence may range from 5 to 50 m depending on the reef size and local environmental conditions (Fabi & Sala, 2002). The most extensive rocky reef habitat in Jervis Bay extends offshore from Plantation Point, Huskisson and Callala Bay. The distances of the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases from these reefs are considered sufficient to minimise the risk of attracting significant numbers of native fauna, notably fishes, from nearby natural reefs. It is considered unlikely that the Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases will have a significant impact on any species of fish due to the distance from key habitat areas (e.g. reefs and seagrass beds).

Sustainable Aquaculture

The NSW Government recognises the need to look at opportunities for sustainable and viable aquaculture development. Aquaculture supports the regional economies of NSW and will be an increasingly important contributor to the future food security needs of the State.

The promotion of sustainable aquaculture was prioritised at the NSW Executive Food Security Group in 2011. This group tasked the NSW Government’s State Aquaculture

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 113 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Steering Committee to progress initiatives to further develop aquaculture. Under State Environmental Planning Policy – 62 (Sustainable Aquaculture), the NSW Government has developed two strategies to promote sustainable aquaculture industry development. The NSW Oyster Industry and Land Based Sustainable Aquaculture Strategies have been prepared to streamline the approval process, guide the development of aquaculture in NSW and promote industry best practice.

Research undertaken on aquaculture production in the marine environment will assist with the development of policy and management practices for any future marine aquaculture developments in NSW. The investigations conducted in preparing this EIS and those undertaken previously for the Marine Aquaculture Research Lease off Port Stephens will provide an evidence base for the development of policies for sustainable aquaculture in NSW marine waters.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 114 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

3 REFERENCES

Baker, A.N. (2005) Sensitivity of marine mammals found in Northland waters to aquaculture activities. Department of Conservation, Northland Conservancy, New Zealand. ABARES, Canberra, November. CC BY 3.0Bond, S. & Squires, L. (2006) Using GIS to Measure the Impact of Distance to Cell Phone Towers on House Prices in Florida. Thirteenth Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Perth, Western Australia 21- 24 January 2007 British Columbia Shellfish Growers Association (2007) Aquaculture and Tourism. Found on: http://bcsga.ca/?page_id=87 Campbell, R. (2011) Assessing and managing interactions of protected and listed marine species with commercial fisheries in Western Australia. Report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Fisheries Research Report No. 223. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia. Cardno Ecology Lab (2012) Benthic Monitoring for Eden Aquaculture Facility - Report on Analyses of Sediments. Prepared for Eden Sea Farms Pty Ltd. Chinabut, S., Somsiri, T., Limsuwan, C. and Lewis, S. (2006) Problems associated with shellfish farming. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz. 25: 627-635. Cole, H.A. (1941) The fecundity of Ostrea edulis. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK. 10/1941; 25(02): 243 - 260. Cranford, P.J., Anderson, R., Archambault, P., Balch, T., Bates, S.S., Bugden, G., Callier, M.D., Carver, C., Comeau, L.A., Hargrave, B., Harrison, W.G., Horne, E., Kepkay, P.E., Li, W.K.W., Mallet, A., Ouellette, M. and Strain, P. (2006) Indicators and Thresholds for Use in Assessing Shellfish Aquaculture Impacts on Fish Habitat. In Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat: Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Crawford, C.M. (2001) Environmental risk assessment of shellfish farming in Tasmania. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania. Crawford, C.M., Macleoad, C.K.A. and Mitchell, I.M. (2003) Effects of shellfish farming on the benthic environment. Aquaculture 244: 117- 140. CSIRO (1994) Jervis Bay Baseline Studies. Final Report: CSIRO Division of Fisheries, Commonwealth of Australia. Dahlback, B. and Gunnarsson, L.A.H. (1981) Sedimentation and sulfate reduction under mussel culture Marine Biology 63: 269– 275. Diaz, R.J. and Rosenberg, R. (1995) Marine benthic hypoxia: a review of its ecological effects and the behavioural responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 33: 245-303. Environment Australia (2003) Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles in Australia. Environment Australia, Canberra. Fabi, G. and Sala, A. (2002) An assessment of biomass and diel activity of fish at an artificial reef (Adriatic Sea) using a stationary hydroacoustic technique. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59: 411-420. Food Tourism Scotland (2008) http://www.foodtourismscotland.com/casestudies/case.php Frisk, M.G., Miller, T.J. and Fogarty, M.J. (2001) Estimation and analysis of biological parameters in elasmobranch fishes: a comparative life history study. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 969–981. Fuentes, H.R., Williams, R.J., Diver, L.P. and Smith, A.K. (1992) Commercial Molluscs of Jervis Bay. In: Jervis Bay Marine Ecological Study. Final Report. Gavine, F.M, and Mc Kinnon. L. J. (2002) Environmental Monitoring of Marine Aquaculture in Victorian Coastal Waters: A Review of Appropriate Methods. Technical Report: No 46. Marine and Freshwater Resources Institute, Victoria. Gifford, S., Dunstan, H., O’Connor, W., Roberts, T., Toia, R. (2003) Pearl aquaculture – Profitable environmental remediation. Sci. Total Environ. 319: 27-37.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 115 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Gifford, S., Dunstan, H., O’Connor, W., Macfarlane G. (2005) Quantification of in situ nutrient and heavy metal remediation by a small pearl oyster farm at Port Stephens, Australia. Mar. Poll. Bull. 50: 417- 422. Gifford, S. (2006) Environmental considerations associated with the development of an Akoya pearl aquaculture industry in NSW Australia. PhD thesis. University of Newcastle, Newcastle. Grant, J., Hatcher, A., Scott, D.B., Pocklington, P., Schafer, C.T. and Winters, G.V. (1995) A multidisciplinary approach to evaluating impacts of shellfish aquaculture on benthic communities. Estuaries 18:124-144. Groom, C. and Coughran, D. (2012) Entanglements of baleen whales off the coast of Western Australia between 1982 and 2010: patterns of occurrence, outcomes and management responses. Pacific Conservation Biology 18: 203-214. Heasman, M.P., O'Connor, W.A. and Frazer, A.W.J. (1994) Improved hatchery and nursery rearing techniques for the commercial scallop Pecten fumatus Reeve. Mem. Queensland Mus. 36: 351-356. Heasman, M.P, O’Connor, W.A,, O’Connor, S.J and Walker, W.W (1998) Enhancement and farming of scallops in NSW using hatchery produced seedstock. NSW Final Report Series No. 8. Holloway, P.E. (1995) Chapter 9: Water circulation. Jervis Bay - A place of cultural, scientific and educational value. Cho, G., Georges, A., Stoutjesdijk, R. and Longmore, R. Australian Nature Conservation Agency Publication, Canberra. Inspiring Place Pty Ltd (2001) Marine Farming Development Plan - Port Sorell Estuary. Prepared for the Food, Agriculture & Fisheries Division, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Tasmania. Islam, M.S. (2005) Nitrogen and phosphorus budget in coastal and marine cage aquaculture and impacts of effluent loading on ecosystem: review and analysis towards model development. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50: 48-61. Joyce, A., Rubio-Zuazo, A.M. and Winberg, P.C. (2010) Environmental and Socio-Economic Considerations for Aquaculture in Jervis Bay, NSW. Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra. Kaiser, M.J. (2000) Ecological effects of shellfish cultivation. In: Black, K.D. (Ed.), Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, UK. Kaiser, M.J., Laing, I., Utting, S.D. and Burnell, G.M. (1998) Environmental impacts of bivalve mariculture. Journal of Shellfish Research 17: 59–66. Keeley, N., Forrest, B., Hopkins, G., Gillespie, P., Clement, D., Webb, S., Knight, B. and Gardner, J. (2009) Sustainable Aquaculture in New Zealand: Review of the Ecological Effects of Farming Shellfish and Other Non-finfish Species. Prepared for the Ministry of Fisheries. Cawthron Report No. 1476. Lasiak, T.A. and Underwood, A.J. (2002) Experimental assessment of potential ecological impacts of long-line mussel farming in Twofold Bay, Eden. Final report for NSW cultured mussel growers association Inc. Centre for Research on Ecological Impacts of Coastal Cities. Last, P.R. and Stevens, J.D. (2009) Sharks and Rays of Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria. Lloyd, B.D. (2003) Potential effects of mussel farming on New Zealand's marine mammals and seabirds: a discussion paper. Department of Conservation, Te Papa Atawhai, Wellington. Marine Pollution Research Pty Ltd (2008) Review of Water Based Aquacultural Potential in Jervis Bay Marine Park. Report Prepared for Shoalhaven City Council, Nowra. Neiland, A.E., Shaw, S.A. & Bailly, D. (1991) The social and economic impact of aquaculture: a European review. Aquaculture and the Environment. N. De Pauw and J. Joyce (Eds). European Aquaculture. Society Special Publication No. 16, Gent, Belgium.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 116 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Nimmo, F., Cappell, R. Grant, A. (2009) SARF045 Appendix A Literature Review of Evidence that Fish Farming Impacts on Tourism. Royal Haskoning, United Kingdom. NSW Department of Primary Industries (2005) Mussel Aquaculture in Twofold Bay - Stage 1 Review Report and Determination of Progression to Stage 2. NSW DPI. NSW Marine Parks (2003) Operational Plan for Jervis Bay Marine Park. NSW MP, NSW Marine Parks, NSW. NSW Marine Parks (2008) Natural values of the Jervis Bay Marine Park. NSW MP, NSW Marine Parks, NSW. NSW Marine Parks (2009) Jervis Bay Marine Park: zoning plan review report. NSW MP, NSW. NSW Roads and Maritime (2012) Boating Handbook. NSW Roads and Maritime Services, Rozelle Bay, NSW. O'Connor, W.A., Lawler, N.F. and Heasman, M.P. (2003) Trial farming the akoya pearl oyster, Pinctada imbricata, in Port Stephens, NSW. Final Report to Australian Radiata Pty Ltd. NSW Final Report Series No 42, 175 pp. O’Hanlon, E. (2004) Visual Impact Assessment – Stage 2 of Aquaculture Mussel Farming for Twofold Bay. Eden Shellfish Pty Ltd and NSW Cultured Mussel Growers Association, NSW. O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd (2014) Visual Impact Assessment – Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases. Fisheries NSW, Port Stephens. Otway, N.M., Bradshaw CJ.A. and Harcourt, R.G. (2004) Estimating the rate of quasi- extinction of the Australian grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus) population using deterministic age- and stage-classified models. Biological Conservation 119: 341– 350. Otway, N.M., Sullings, D.J. and Lenehan, N.W. (1996) Trophically-based assessment of the impacts of deepwater sewage disposal on a demersal fish community. Environmental Biology of Fishes 46: 167-183. Pacific Seafood Management Consulting Group Pty Ltd (1996) Evaluating Mussel Aquaculture in Twofold Bay - Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for South Coast Business Enterprise Centre Ltd. Bega. Pears, R.J. and Williams, D.McB. (2005) Potential effects of artificial reefs on the Great Barrier Reef: Background paper. CRC Reef Research Centre Technical Report No. 60. CRC Reef Research Centre, Townsville. Rennie. H.G. (2008) Article in The Grower, Newsletter for the Association of Scottish Shellfish Growers, March 2008. Tourism – friend or foe? Sause, B.L., Gwyther, D., Hanna, P.J. and O’Connor, N.A. (1987) Evidence for winter –spring spawning of the scallop Pectan alba (Tate) in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria, Australia, Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 38(3): 329 – 337. Scottish Government (2008) The Economic Impact of Wind Farms on Scottish Tourism. Produced by Caledonian University, Moffat Centre and Cogentsi. Skirtun, M., Sahlqvist, P. and Vieira, S. (2013) Australian fisheries statistics 2012, FRDC project 2010/208. Smith, S.E., Au, D.W. and Show, C. (1998) Intrinsic rebound potential of 26 species of Pacific sharks. Marine and Freshwater Research 49: 663–678. Stephanou, D. (1996) Marine aquaculture development and tourism; the case of Cyprus. Aquaculture Planning in Mediterranean Countries. Zaragoza, CIHEAM. Umwelt Pty Ltd (2003) Proposed Pearl Farm - Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Port Stephens Pearls, Salamander Bay. Underwood, A.J. and Hoskins, M.G. (1999) Examination of potential ecological effects of mussel culture in Twofold Bay, NSW. Centre for Research on Ecological Impacts of Coastal Cities, Marine Ecological Laboratories, University of Sydney, Sydney.

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 117 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

Walker, T.I. (1998) Can shark resources be harvested sustainably. A question revisited with a review of shark fisheries. Marine and Freshwater Research 49: 553–572. Willemsen, P.R. (2005) Biofouling in European aquaculture: is there an easy solution. European Aquaculture Society Special Publications 35: 82-87.

Internet References

Web Reference 1 Vincentia Sailing Club (2014) "Vincentia Sailing Club - Jervis Bay Australia" Retrieved 10/03/14 from http://vincentiasailingclub.com.au/results/

Web Reference 2 NSW Trade and Investment (2012) "Small Business Commissioner" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/doing-business-in-nsw/small-business- commissioner

Web Reference 3 Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013) "National Regional Profile: Shoalhaven (C) Local Government Area" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Latestproducts/LGA16950Econom y12007- 2011?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=LGA16950&issue=2007-2011

Web Reference 4 Wineglass Bay Cruises (2012) "The Wineglass Bay Cruises" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.wineglassbaycruises.com/cruise.html

Web Reference 5 Freycinet Marine Farm (2008) "Freycinet Marine Farm" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.freycinetmarinefarm.com/

Web Reference 6 Broome Visitor Centre (2012) "Top Ten Selling Experiences in Broome" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.visitbroome.com.au/discover/see-and-do

Web Reference 7 Australia's Oyster Coast (2014) "Oyster Trail" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.oystercoast.com.au/

Web Reference 8 Wheelers Seafood Restaurant (2013) "Oyster Tour" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.wheelersoysters.com.au/#!c-work/c1ger

Web Reference 9 Sapphire Coast (2013) "Local Produce - Seafood Experience" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.visiteden.com.au/local-produce/seafood-experiences/

Web Reference 10 Industry Canada (2012) "Report On the National Antenna Tower Policy Review" Retrieved 2/01/14 from http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08353.html

Web Reference 11 Go Shark (2012) "Incident Details" Retrieved 16/01/14 from http://www.goshark.co.za/incident.php?id=2390

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 118 Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay, NSW – Submissions Report.

4 APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Visual Impact Assessment

Appendix 2 - Revised Draft Environmental Management Plan

Fisheries NSW – May 2014 119