DOCSLIB.ORG

Seagrass in Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seagrass in Australia 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page i Seagrass in Australia STRATEGIC REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT OF AN R & D PLAN Alan Butler Peter Jernakoff 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page ii CSIRO Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Butler, Alan J., 1946– . Seagrass in Australia : strategic review and development of an R & D plan. ISBN 0 643 06442 7. ISBN 0 643 09168 8 (eBook). 1. Seagrasses – Government policy – Australia. 2. Seagrasses – Research – Australia. 3. Research – Australia – Evaluation. I. Jernakoff, Peter. II. Title. 584.740994 FRDC 1999 FRDC Project 98/223: Seagrass in Australia: strategic review and development of an R & D plan A.J. Butler Contact address: CSIRO Marine Research, GPO Box 1538, Hobart, Tas, 7001 Email:[email protected] P. Jernakoff Contact address: International Risk Consultants Environment Group (IRC Environment) 2 Emerald Tce, West Perth, WA, 6005 Email [email protected] Date: March 10, 1999 This book is available from: CSIRO Publishing PO Box 1139 (150 Oxford Street) Collingwood Vic 3006 Australia Tel: (03) 9662 7666 Int: +613 9662 7666 Fax: (03) 9662 7555 Int: +613 9662 7555 Email: [email protected] Web: www.publish.csiro.au 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page iii Disclaimer This report has been produced for the sole use of the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC). The application or use of this report and or any data or information including recommendations contained within it shall be at the sole risk and responsibility of FRDC. CSIRO does not provide any warranty or assurance as to the accuracy or suitability of all or any section of the report, for any particular purpose or application. Neither CSIRO nor the personnel contracted to produce the report will be responsible to FRDC, or any person claiming through FRDC, for any consequences of its use or application (whether in whole or in part). 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page iv Contents Executive Summary vi Introduction xi 1. Status of Australian seagrass research and knowledge 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Seagrass plants 2 1.3 Habitat effects 8 1.4 Food webs 13 1.5 Gaps in seagrass knowledge and recommendations to address them 16 1.6 Acknowledgements 17 1.7 References 18 2. Seagrass dynamics and fisheries sustainability 25 2.1 Introduction 25 2.2 Importance of seagrass beds in fisheries production 26 2.3 Influence of seagrass status on fisheries sustainability 40 2.4 Gaps in understanding and future research needs 47 2.5 Recommendations for future research 49 2.6 Acknowledgements 50 2.7 References 51 3. Review of Australian rehabilitation and restoration programs 65 3.1 Introduction 65 3.2 Review of Australian projects 73 3.3 Recommendations for research 83 3.4 Acknowledgements 88 3.5 References 89 Appendix 3.1 Summary of seagrass rehabilitation and restoration projects in Australia 93 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page v Contents v 4. Monitoring and assessment of seagrass 116 4.1 Introduction 116 4.2 Critical review of existing literature 117 4.3 Gaps in understanding of monitoring issues 129 4.4 Recommendations for strategy and future research 131 4.5 References 133 5. Seagrasses and their management — implications for research 140 5.1 Introduction 140 5.2 Issues confronting seagrass managers 142 5.3 How is seagrass managed? 143 5.4 Information needs for better seagrass management 151 5.5 Assessing the effectiveness of seagrass management 156 5.6 Suggestions for improvement of seagrass management 157 5.7 Conclusions 162 5.8 References 163 Appendix 5.1 Questionnaire to seagrass managers 164 Appendix 5.2 Legislation and seagrass management 166 6. Research and Development plan 172 6.1 Roles of funding agencies and their R&D responsibilities 173 6.2 Suggested structure to maintain R&D links between organisations 178 6.3 Key issues and knowledge gaps 179 6.4 Goals of the R&D plan 181 6.5 Priorities for seagrass R&D 181 6.6 Strategies to implement, maintain and develop the R&D plan 187 6.7 Communication and coordination strategies 194 6.8 Summary 195 6.9 References 198 Appendix 6.1 Research needs identified by working groups 199 Appendix 6.2 Composition of steering committee and working groups 208 Appendix 6.3 Acronyms 210 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page vi Executive Summary The FRDC Seagrass Review follows the Corporation’s Fisheries Habitat Review. It reflects a shift from viewing fished species or even fisheries habitats as separate, unconnected entities to viewing them as components of larger ecosystems, and it seeks to develop a comprehensive, ecosystem-based management. The reviewers were asked to assess • Gaps in existing knowledge of seagrass ecosystems • Knowledge of links between seagrass and fisheries • The state of the art in rehabilitation and restoration of damaged seagrass beds • Monitoring and assessment of seagrass • Seagrass and fisheries management and to prepare a research and development plan to guide FRDC’s future invest- ment in the context of FRDC’s Ecosystem Protection Program. The review will also guide FRDC’s interaction with other agencies who have responsibilities in marine habitat management. Each of the five areas listed above was reviewed by a separate team of three experts, who co-opted other experts as necessary. The five reports were edited, and the R&D plan drafted, by the principal investigators. The whole report was dis- cussed with the steering committee and reviewed by four independent experts. Status of Australian seagrass research and knowledge The authors of this chapter examine the attributes of seagrass communities to determine whether seagrass form provides an indication of function, and hence the significance of particular seagrasses to fisheries. They examine habitat effects, relationships to water movement and nutrients, and mechanisms of seagrass decline, and discuss what is known about food webs associated with seagrasses, and of the transfer of biological productivity between seagrasses and other components of the marine ecosystem. The working group identified nine areas of knowledge gaps, and the authors suggest ways to address them. Some examples of gaps are: 1. Northern Australian, turbid-water seagrasses on remote, inaccessible coast- lines remain virtually unknown, 2. The importance, as habitat, of seagrasses in wave-exposed conditions and in deep water is not known, 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page vii Executive Summary vii 3. Understanding of the dispersal and recruitment characteristics of different seagrass species is inadequate, 4. Comparative studies are needed of the fates and influences of production from the seagrass system — seagrass detritus, plankton, epiphytic flora and fauna, benthic fauna and microphytobenthos. Seagrass dynamics and fisheries sustainability This chapter examines the evidence for links between seagrass and fisheries resources. It focuses on the reliability of that evidence, especially on the impor- tance of seagrass beds in fisheries production, and the influence of the extent of seagrass cover, type, or density on fisheries sustainability. The authors compare the relationships between fish and seagrasses to those of other estuarine and nearshore habitats. Then, more specifically, they explore the relationship of seagrass to fisheries; firstly, those species that are actually fished in seagrass areas, and secondly, those that are fished elsewhere but may have some link to seagrass. The next section examines the related, but distinct, question of the influence of seagrass status on fisheries sustainability. In conclusion, the working group identifies 17 major gaps in our under- standing and future research needs, and recommends specific research to address those gaps. Examples are: 1. Changes in juvenile fish and decapods before and after seagrass loss are poor- ly understood. Baseline studies of sufficient spatial and temporal intensity are needed to quantify natural variability in fish and decapods in seagrass beds, so useful comparisons can be made after seagrass loss. 2. The importance of exported seagrass detritus to commercially important fish in unvegetated habitats is poorly understood. What is the long-term effect of seagrass loss to these species? 3. The nature of the links with seagrass is still poorly known for many species. Those links might include feeding, protection from predators, or amelioration of physical disturbance. The role of small, non-commercial species in food chains for commercial species is only known in localised areas. Under- standing these links is important in predicting the effects of changes in sea- grass extent on commercial fish. 4. Research has hinted at the importance of many aspects of seagrass meadows relating to ‘landscape ecology’. It is critical to determine the importance of features such as size, shape, and spatial arrangement of meadows, the details of ocean currents over seagrass beds, and relations with other habitats (e.g. unvegetated areas, mangroves, deep water, sand bars). Review of Australian rehabilitation and restoration programs This chapter reviews international experience, then concentrates on Australian pro- jects in the restoration and rehabilitation of seagrasses. It identifies the factors that are important to success, although most of these have yet to be investigated for 00 Seagrass 23/7/99 10:15 AM Page viii viii Seagrass in Australia most seagrass species. Consequently, at this time, no projects in Australia can unequivocally demonstrate creation of a permanent, functional seagrass bed out of transplanting efforts. Nor have techniques been tested to the degree that par- ticular methods can be recommended for different seagrass species or habitats. Nonetheless, enough experience is available to enable the authors to review the issues important to successful seagrass rehabilitation and restoration. In making recommendations for future research the working group argues that restoration and rehabilitation depend on a thorough understanding of the sys- tem being restored, and therefore that it would be prudent to undertake restora- tion programs in combination with well constructed programs of research into the fundamental characteristics of seagrass.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Development Assessment Report
    Development Assessment Report Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (THPDA) Proposed interim use - car park 233 Middle Street Cleveland 14 February 2018 1 Executive Summary Redland City Council (RCC) are seeking approval for an Interim Land Use (car park) to cater for overflow parking for visitors going to North Stradbroke Island during peak holiday periods and/or festivals/events. Previously RCC have utilised two grassed areas located at 233 Middle Street Cleveland, more specifically Lot 19 on SP115544, for overflow parking which prior to the area being included in the THPDA was self-assessable development as a temporary use under the Redlands Planning Scheme. The area used would be approximately 2000m2 in ‘Area 1’ and 1400m2 in ‘Area 2’ and the number of car parks would not exceed 100 and 60 respectively. Area 1 adjoins residential development and a buffer zone is included in addition to the existing 5m wide public walkway that runs between the boundaries to negate any potential adverse amenity impacts. Area 1 and 2 are located in Precinct 2 – Residential of the THPDA Development Scheme. The proposed development necessitates a development application for Material Change of Use – Interim Land Use (car park). RCC understands that notification of this application may not be required. Having regard to the THPDA Development Scheme, current market conditions, and other external influences it is RCC’s view that the use of the site for the proposed Interim Land Use (car park) use is an appropriate use of the site. The use is a continuation of a previous temporary use that did not require development works or approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Ecological Character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland from the Toondah Harbour Project
    Attachment 3 - Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Ecological Character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland from the Toondah Harbour Project Introduction It is recognised that the proposed Toondah Harbour development has the potential to have a significant impact on the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland and is therefore referred as a controlled action warranting further assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). To assist proponents determine if their proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance (MNES), the Commonwealth Government produced a series of guidelines on significant impacts. Most relevant for Ramsar wetlands are the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 Matters of National Environmental Significance (CoA 2013). These guidelines state that: A ‘significant impact’ is an impact which is important, notable, or of consequence, having regard to its context or intensity. Whether or not an action is likely to have a significant impact depends upon the sensitivity, value, and quality of the environment which is impacted, and upon the intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic extent of the impacts. You should consider all of these factors when determining whether an action is likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance. The guidelines goes on to identify specific significant impact criteria for each MNES. An action is likely to have a significant impact on the ecological character of a declared Ramsar wetland if there is a real chance or possibility that it will result in: . areas of the wetland being destroyed or substantially modified; . a substantial and measurable change in the hydrological regime of the wetland, for example, a substantial change to the volume, timing, duration and frequency of ground and surface water flows to and within the wetland; .
    [Show full text]
  • Submission To: Senate Environment and Communications References
    Submission to: Senate Environment and Communications References Committee Inquiry into Environmental Offsets Marine and Coastal Ecological Communities with Reference to the Planned Toondah Harbour Marina Chris Walker Cleveland, Queensland 4 April 2014 Inquiry into Environmental Offsets Submission about Marine and Coastal Ecological Communities with Reference to the Planned Toondah Harbour Marina Introduction When actions associated with projects such as ports, canal estates and marinas are put forward for consideration under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) it is important to understand how environmental offsets may apply. This submission focuses attention on environmental offsets for actions which have significant residual impacts on marine and/or coastal ecological communities. This is done with reference to a particular case. Planned Toondah Harbour Marina A marina up to 800 berths1 is planned for development at Cleveland on Brisbane’s southern bayside by the Redland City Council and the Queensland Government as part of the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (PDA).2 If such a marina project were to proceed it would impact on or destroy up to 50 hectares of marine and coastal ecological communities including mangroves, tidal mudflats and seagrass beds. The area for the planned marina is located in the Moreton Bay Marine Park Habitat Protection Zone.3 It is also part of the internationally significant Moreton Bay Ramsar site. 4 These habitats are protected because of their rich ecologies and because they support species which have conservation requirements. Figure 1 Area of Toondah Harbour PDA defined by Qld Govt Notable examples include the dugong, green turtle and loggerhead turtle which are all regarded as vulnerable or endangered.
    [Show full text]
  • Toondah Harbour PDA
    Toondah Harbour PDA Ecological Studies in Support of Works Area Determination Prepared for: Walker Corporation frc environmental PO Box 2363, Wellington Point QLD 4160 Telephone: + 61 3286 3850 Facsimile: + 61 3821 7936 frc reference: 141002iii frc environmental Document Control Summary Project No.: 140210iii Status: Final Report Project Director: Dr John Thorogood Project Manager: Dr Craig Chargulaf Title: Toondah Harbour PDA: Ecological Studies in Support of Works Area Determination Project Team: Dr Craig Chargulaf, Cameron Forward, Dr John Thorogood Client: Walker Corporation Client Contact: Mr Ben Johnson Date: November 2014 Edition: 141002iii Final Checked by: Dr John Thorogood _______________ Issued by: Dr John Thorogood _______________ Distribution Record Walker Corporation: as pdf and Word.docx This work is copyright. A person using frc environmental documents or data accepts the risk of: 1 Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original signed hard copy version; and 2 Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by frc environmental. Toondah Harbour PDA: Ecologist Studies in Support of Works Area Determination Projects:2014:141002_PartB_WC_Toondah Weinam PDA:Report:ecological_studies:Current:140102RiiiToondah_14-11- 18JT.docx frc environmental Contents Summary i 1 Introduction 1 2 Marine Plants / Habitats 2 2.1 Overview 2 2.2 Mangrove Forests 4 2.3 Intertidal and Subtidal Un-vegetated Mudflats and Sand-banks 8 2.4 Intertidal and Shallow
    [Show full text]
  • Toondah Harbour Community Engagement Report
    Toondah Harbour Community Engagement Report Prepared August 2013 CONTENTS 1. Toondah Harbour Community Engagement – Phase 1 2. Overview of Community Engagement Report 3. Input Gathered 3.1. Key Themes / Learnings 3.2. Issues and Constraints 3.3. Preferred Uses 3.4. Suggested Ideas 3.5. Integration of New and Existing Uses 3.6. Funding Options 4. Structure of Online Survey 5. Structure of Open Houses (Community Information Sessions) 6. Appendix 1: Community and Stakeholder Engagement Process 7. Appendix 2: Structured Comment Forms – From Toondah Harbour Sessions 8. Appendix 3: Structured Comment Forms – From North Stradbroke Island Session 9. Appendix 4: Comment Forms – Toondah Harbour Sessions 10. Appendix 5: Comment Forms – North Stradbroke Island Session 11. Appendix 6: Comments recorded on Comment Wall at Toondah Harbour 12. Appendix 7: Comments recorded on Comment Wall at North Stradbroke Island 13. Appendix 8: Online Survey Results Disclaimer As part of the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area project residents were invited to provide comment on a number of questions via surveys and public forums. These comments were submitted via hard copy forms, the internet and through facilitated conversations and reproduced verbatim. Council is publishing them for community information and reporting purposes only. The publication should not be construed as endorsement by Council of any of the comments contained herein. 1. Toondah Harbour Community Engagement – Phase 1 Redland City Council is undertaking a broad range of community and stakeholder engagement activities as part of a joint-process with Economic Development Queensland to create a Development Scheme for the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (PDA). During Phase 1 of its community and stakeholder engagement program (July 2013 – late 2013), Council is seeking to gain community and stakeholder input on the key constraints and opportunities to help inform the creation of a draft Development Scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Development and Management of Tourism in Moreton Bay
    sustainable development and management of tourism in moreton bay SUSTAINABLE TOURISM CRC Michelle Whitmore and Terry De Lacy 1 Sustainable Tourism in Moreton Bay AUTHORS Prepared by Michelle Whitmore and Terry De Lacy, STCRC with funding from Brisbane City and Redland Shire Councils. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to Dr Jan Warnken for putting together the GIS maps, Jan Olaf Meynecke for doing a lot of the groundwork for the GIS maps and Kate Lawrance for her assistance with some of the environmental information. This project would not have occurred if it were not for the Moreton Bay Taskforce. Special thanks go to Brisbane City Council and Redland Shire Council for their funding and support. Sincere appreciation is directed to all those who participated in the surveys, interviews and focus groups or assisted in anyway. ACRONYMS B&B Bed and Breakfast BMB & I Brisbane’s Moreton Bay and Islands EPA Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland GIS Geographic Information System MBTF Moreton Bay Taskforce MSQ Maritime Safety Queensland NSI North Stradbroke Island QPWS Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service SEQ South-East Queensland SQID Stormwater Quality Improvement Device STCRC Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre STP Sewerage Treatment Plant VIC Visitor Information Centre VIM Visitor Impact Management DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared for consideration by the Local Government Authorities constituting the Moreton Bay Taskforce. It does not represent the opinions or policy position of these Authorities. The report provides evidence from research in order to assist in the planning and programming of sustainable tourism and recreation within the Moreton Bay region. Neither the STCRC nor any of its partners are liable for any action taken or not taken as a result of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Toondah Harbour PDA Development Scheme Approval Under the Marine Parks Act (The Scheme) Fulfils This Requirement by 2004
    Economic Development Queensland Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area Development Scheme May 2014 Great state. Great opportunity. Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area Development Scheme The Department of State Development, Attribution: The State of Queensland, Disclaimer: While every care has been taken Infrastructure and Planning is responsible Department of State Development, in preparing this publication, the State of for driving the economic development of Infrastructure and Planning. Queensland accepts no responsibility for Queensland. decisions or actions taken as a result of The Queensland Government supports and any data, information, statement or advice, © State of Queensland, Department of State encourages the dissemination and exchange expressed or implied, contained within. To Development, Infrastructure and Planning, of information. However, copyright protects the best of our knowledge, the content was July 2013, 100 George Street, Brisbane Qld this publication. The State of Queensland correct at the time of publishing. 4000 (Australia). has no objection to this material being reproduced, made available online or Any references to legislation are not an electronically but only if it is recognised as interpretation of the law. They are to be Licence: This work is the owner of the copyright and this material used as a guide only. The information in this licensed under the Creative Commons CC remains unaltered. publication is general and does not take BY 3.0 Australia licence. To view a copy of into account individual circumstances or The Queensland Government is committed this licence, visit www.creativecommons. situations. Where appropriate, independent to providing accessible services to org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en. Enquiries legal advice should be sought.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Ecology Assessment Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area, Redland City for Walker Corporation
    TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY ASSESSMENT TOONDAH HARBOUR PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA, REDLAND CITY Prepared for Walker Corporation Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd PO Box 1376 CLEVELAND 4163 Specialised ecological knowledge that reduces your risk Document Control Sheet File Number: 0107-005 Project Manager/s: Dr Penn Lloyd Client: Walker Corporation Project Title: Terrestrial Ecology Assessment, Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area, Redland City Project Author/s: Dr Penn Lloyd, Adrian Caneris, Dr Jo Chambers and Lui Weber Project Summary: This report provides an assessment of the terrestrial ecology values present within the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (PDA) in Redland City, south- east Queensland, the potential impacts on these values of development of the PDA, and potential impact mitigation and management measures. Draft Preparation History: Draft No. Date draft Reviewed by Issued by completed 0107-005 Draft A 19/03/2017 Jedd Appleton Penn Lloyd Revision/ Checking History Track: Version Date of Issue Checked by Issued by 0107-005 Version 0 05/04/2017 Penn Lloyd Document Distribution: Destination Revision 1 Date 2 Date 3 Date 4 Date Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Client Copy 1 - A 19/03/2017 0 05/04/2017 digital Client Copy 1- hard copy PDF - server A 19/03/2017 0 05/04/2017 PDF – backup – A 19/03/2017 0 05/04/2017 archived Hard Copy - library BAAM Pty Ltd File No. 0107-005 Version 0 NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS REPORT Copyright and reproduction This report and all indexes, schedules, annexures or appendices are subject to copyright pursuant to the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Subject to statutory defences, no party may reproduce, publish, adapt or communicate to the public, in whole or in part, the content of this report without the express written consent of Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Ecological Character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland
    Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Ecological Character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland Introduction It is recognised that the proposed Toondah Harbour development has the potential to have a significant impact on the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland. To assist proponents determine if their proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance (MNES), the Commonwealth Government produced a series of guidelines on significant impacts. Most relevant for Ramsar wetlands are the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 Matters of National Environmental Significance (CoA 2013). These guidelines state that: A ‘significant impact’ is an impact which is important, notable, or of consequence, having regard to its context or intensity. Whether or not an action is likely to have a significant impact depends upon the sensitivity, value, and quality of the environment which is impacted, and upon the intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic extent of the impacts. You should consider all of these factors when determining whether an action is likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance. The guidelines go on to identify specific significant impact criteria for each MNES. For Ramsar listed wetland the key consideration is the impact to the ecological character of the wetland. An action is likely to have a significant impact on the ecological character of a declared Ramsar wetland if there is a real chance or possibility that it will result in: areas of the wetland
    [Show full text]
  • EPBC Act Referral 2015/7612)
    Submission #3360 - Toondah Harbour Development Title of Proposal - Toondah Harbour Development Section 1 - Summary of your proposed action Provide a summary of your proposed action, including any consultations undertaken. 1.1 Project Industry Type Tourism and Recreation 1.2 Provide a detailed description of the proposed action, including all proposed activities. In June 2013, the Queensland Government declared Toondah Harbour a Priority Development Area (PDA) under the Economic Development Act 2012 (ED Act) at the request of Redland City Council (RCC). PDAs are parcels of land within Queensland identified for specific accelerated development, with a focus on economic growth. The Minister for Economic Development Queensland (EDQ) manages the planning of the Toondah Harbour PDA. The location was identified by the state and local government on the basis that the area includes the existing marine facility that serves as the base for water taxi, passenger and vehicular ferry services between the mainland and North Stradbroke Island, as well as a public boat ramp for recreational vessels. More than a million passengers and 200,000 vehicles move through the port annually. The PDA has a total area of 67.4 hectares, encompassing 17.9 hectares of existing land and 49.5 hectares of marine and tidal environments, of which 42 ha overlaps with the Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland. The area is of variable ecological quality as Toondah Harbour has undergone historical disturbance with a large portion of the PDA previously reclaimed from the 1960s onwards. The site continues to be disturbed by intermittent maintenance dredging and vessel traffic associated with the existing barge and ferry terminals and public boat ramp.
    [Show full text]
  • Certain Aspects of Queensland Government Administration Submission
    Submission to: Senate Select Committee Inquiry into Certain Aspects of Queensland Government Administration Submission about the Queensland Government’s dealings in relation to the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area Chris Walker Cleveland, Queensland 25 November 2014 Inquiry into Queensland Government Toondah Harbour Development Introduction The Queensland Government has actively sought to promote coastal development in the area around Toondah Harbour, Cleveland. In this matter the Queensland Government has been assisted by the Redland City Council. Most of area proposed for development is publicly owned land. Plans for development include a 400 berth marina and development of some 2,000 multi-story units in buildings up to 10 storeys high. This development is proposed in an area that currently features community parkland, unspoilt tidal waterways and low-rise residential dwellings (as well as a former CSIRO research facility). The area proposed for development includes a small ferry terminal which serves North Stradbroke Island, the nearby G.J. Walter Park, and many hectares of internationally significant Ramsar Wetlands. The ostensible reason for the proposed development in this area was to achieve an upgrade to the ferry terminal. But it has become apparent that the bulk of the proposed investment in this area is intended to be spent on development of high rise residential accommodation units and a marina. Concerns about the proposed development of Toondah Harbour There are two principle concerns about the Queensland Government’s involvement in promotion of this development which have Commonwealth Government implications: Federal Environmental Law Any development would have a potentially significant impact on matters which are protected by Federal environmental law (the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act).
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Environment and Energy
    DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY Td: Assistant Secretary, Assessments and Governance Branch, (for decision) Referral Decision Brief- Toondah Harbour Development, Queensland (EPBC 2018/8225) Timing: The statutery timeframe for making this decision was 2 July 2018. Recommended Decision NCAO NCA(pm}O Designated Proponent Walker Group Holdings Pty Limited I ACN: 00121506.9 Controlling Provisions World Heritage (s12 & s15A) National Heritage (s15B & s15C) triggered or matters Yes D Nojgj No if PM D Yes D No~ No if PM D protected by particular manner Wetlands (Ramsar)(s16 & s17B) Threatened Species & Yes~ No D No if PM D Communities (s18 & s18A} Yes!ZI NoO Noif PMO Migratory Species (s20 & s20A) C'wealth marine (s23 8t s24A) Yes [8l No D No if PM 0 Ye.so No[8! Noif PMO Nuclear actions (s21 & s22A) C'wealth land (s26 & s27A) Yes D No !ZI No if PM D Yes D No 1:8] No if PM D C'wealth actions (s28) GBRMP (s24B & s24C) Yes D No IZ! No if PM D Ye!>O No~ No if PM D A water resource - large coal C'wealth heritage o/s (s27B & mines and CSG (s24D & s24E) s27C) YesO No~ Noif PMO YesO No~ Noif PMO I Public Comments Yes 1ZJ No D Number: 75 individual and2,224 campaign. See Attachment L. Ministerial Comments Yes IZ! No O Who: Queensland Department of Environment and Science. See Attachment I. Assessment Approach Yes [81 No D What. Environmental Impact Statement Decision Bilateral Applies D Recommendations: 1. Consider the information in this brief, the referral (Attachment A) and other the information in the attachments.
    [Show full text]