Development of Methods and Results for the Pilot Report Card Freshwater Basins Final Report

Technical Working Group April 2016

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. General ...... 1 1.2. Purpose of this Document ...... 1 2. Selection of Indicators ...... 2 2.1. Water Quality Indicators ...... 3 2.1.1. Sediment ...... 3 2.1.2. Nutrients ...... 3 2.1.3. Contaminants ...... 4 2.2. Habitat and Hydrology Indicators ...... 5 2.2.1. Hydrological Modification ...... 5 2.2.2. Flow ...... 6 2.2.3. Riparian Extent ...... 6 2.2.4. Wetland Extent ...... 6 2.3. Fauna Indicators ...... 7 2.3.1. Fish ...... 7 2.3.2. Macroinvertebrates ...... 7 3. Methods for Data Collection ...... 9 3.1. Water Quality Data Collection ...... 9 3.2. Habitat and Hydrology Data Collection ...... 9 3.2.1. Hydrological Modification ...... 10 3.2.2. Flow ...... 10 3.2.3. Riparian Extent ...... 10 3.2.4. Wetland Extent ...... 10 3.3. Fauna Data Collection ...... 11 3.3.1. Fish ...... 11 3.3.2. Macroinvertebrates ...... 12 4. Development of Condition Assessments Scoring Methods ...... 13 4.1. Grading for Condition Assessments ...... 13 4.2. Decision Rules ...... 13 4.3. Water Quality Condition Assessment ...... 14

4.4. Habitat and Hydrology Condition Assessment ...... 15 4.4.1. Habitat Modification ...... 15 4.4.2. Flow ...... 16 4.4.3. Riparian Extent ...... 16 4.4.4. Wetland Extent ...... 17 4.5. Fauna Condition Assessment...... 17 5. Development of Progress to Targets Scoring Methods ...... 18 5.1. Calculating Progress to Targets ...... 18 6. Condition Assessment Results ...... 19 6.1. Water Quality ...... 19 6.2. Habitat and Hydrology ...... 20 6.3. Fauna ...... 21 6.4. Results by Freshwater Basins ...... 21 7. Confidence, Limitations, and Recommendations ...... 25 7.1. Confidence Associated with Results ...... 25 7.2. Limitations and Recommendations ...... 26 References ...... 28 Appendix A – Calculations used in assessing freshwater basins...... 29 Appendix B - Confidence ratings for freshwater basin indicators ...... 54

1. Introduction

1.1. General The Mackay-Whitsunday Healthy Rivers to Reef Partnership was established in October 2014, with the aim to release a pilot report card in 2015. The pilot report card reports on the 2013-14 year (1 July to 30 June), and includes assessments of the freshwater environment, the marine environment (to the eastern boundary of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) Marine Park), economic and social context, and stewardship levels within different industries in the region.

For more detail on the Mackay-Whitsunday report card and Partnership, refer to the Program Design: Pilot Report Card document.

1.2. Purpose of this Document The purpose of this document is to provide information to support the Program Design for the pilot report card. This document describes the methods used, and the results, from the freshwater basin assessments, including:

. Indicator selection process; . Data collection methods; . Scoring methods; and . Results.

Similar documents are available describing the indicators, methods, and results for social and economic assessments, and stewardship assessments, as well as for the condition assessments for estuaries, and inshore and offshore marine environments.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 1 of 59

2. Selection of Indicators The sections below outline the process and final outcomes of determining the most appropriate indicators used in the freshwater basin assessments for the pilot report card (Figure 1). The indicators needed to be relevant to the region and the pressures currently occurring (refer to Program Design and the conceptual model specifically developed for the report card).

Figure 1. Freshwater basin condition assessment coaster for the pilot report card.

All potential indicators were analysed and shortlisted based on the following questions:

. Is the indicator clearly linked to an objective of the report card? . Can the indicator easily be used to provide a report card score? . Do other programs and report cards use this indicator?

Additionally, it was identified that indicators needed to be:

. Indicative of what the Partnership is trying to protect (or a good ‘proxy’); . Sensitive to change; . SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound); . Of strong scientific and conceptual basis - i.e. indicators based on well-defined or validated cause-and-effect chains linking human-related pressures to ecosystem response if possible; . Signals that can be measured in simple, cost-effective ways with available resources, and analysed in a fashion that allows unambiguous interpretation; . Well-established regarding links with specific management objectives and responsive to related management actions; and . Easily communicated and understood by stakeholders and/or the target audience.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 2 of 59

2.1. Water Quality Indicators The water quality indices included in the pilot report card for the freshwater basins were selected through an analysis of the range of monitoring programs historically, currently, and planned, which are collecting water quality data in the freshwater environment considering the items listed in Section 2 above.

The parameters for water quality were also chosen due to their linkages to land management practices, and their potential to impact on waterway and ecosystem health.

In addition to those discussed below, other indices were investigated and deemed to not be the most relevant to specific regional freshwater issues, nor the best representative indicators. Consideration was also given to the relevance of the sampling frequency to the indicator (i.e. if the indicator was measured once a month in a grab sample, does that actually provide useful information). Some indicators were determined to be less useful for incorporating into a report card as an indicator, but instead would be useful to explain any anomalies or provide further detail to results obtained. Finally, selected water quality indicators needed to have scheduled guideline values (GVs) available which are used in the assessment scoring.

The other considered indices included:

. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD); . pH; . Dissolved oxygen (DO); . Salinity; . Temperature; . Metals; and . Chlorophyll-a (chl-a).

2.1.1. Sediment The index selected to represent sediment was total suspended solids (TSS). This index is a common representative of sediment levels in freshwater systems, and is very strongly linked to land management practices and erosion. Turbidity was also investigated (it is used in the estuary assessments), but in the freshwater system there was no volume of data for turbidity. TSS was the preferred index as a GV exists for TSS in freshwater systems and there is a volume of data on TSS as it is currently included in the monitoring programme suite (without additional cost).

2.1.2. Nutrients The selected nutrient indices were shortlisted from a large suite of parameters which are associated with sugarcane farming and grazing management which are the major land uses within the Mackay- Whitsunday freshwater basins. The shortlist of potential indicators for inclusion in the report card included:

. Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) (ammonia + nitrite + nitrate);

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 3 of 59

. Particulate nitrogen (PN); . Particulate phosphorus (PP); and . Filterable reactive phosphorus (FRP).

The selected nutrients were chosen as it was decided to restrict the report card indices to as few as possible (to avoid doubling up on speciation of nutrients) that are still representative of the issues and pressures in the region for freshwater waterways. In addition to the general requirements for indices that are outlined in Section 2 above, and the Program Design, the nutrient indicators were selected based on:

. Availability of freshwater GVs for nutrients; . Maintaining consistency where appropriate across environmental zones; . Relevance to the freshwater environment; . Availability of data (currently and likely in future); . One measure of each nutrient species selected to avoid double counting; and . Inorganic forms are often more biologically available.

Due to the known local presence of the nutrients and their known impacts on water quality, it was decided that DIN would be the representative nitrogen index, and FRP would be the representative phosphorus index. DIN encompasses all inorganic forms of nitrogen specified under Queensland GV, and is the preferred nitrogen indicator. There is also a GV for DIN for freshwater environments. While consistency between environmental areas would be preferred (the estuary assessments use

NOx and FRP), there are scheduled GVs for DIN and FRP in the freshwater environment. There are no scheduled GVs available for NOx, TP, TN, or chl-a in the freshwater environment for MW.

2.1.3. Contaminants The concentrations in the water column of five photosystem II inhibiting (PSII) herbicides (ametryn, atrazine, diuron, hexazinone, and tebuthiuron) were previously identified as the pesticides of greatest concern to the health and the resilience of the Great Barrier Reef and are hence one of the key contaminants focussed on in the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan (DPC, 2013). These herbicides are used extensively in sugarcane farming (ametryn, atrazine, diuron, and hexazinone) and grazing (tebuthiuron) management practices. Given the preceding and the fact that they were already being monitored for in the Mackay Whitsunday region, they were selected for inclusion in the report card.

It was determined that the best way to include these in the report card was through the multi- substance potentially affected fraction (ms-PAF) method, which can account for combined effects of these herbicides on ecosystem health when they occur as mixtures in waterways.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 4 of 59

2.2. Habitat and Hydrology Indicators Rationale and explanation on the selected habitat and hydrology indicators are described below.

2.2.1. Hydrological Modification The hydrological modification indicator will be made up of two indices – impoundment length and fish barriers. Justification on the inclusion of both indices in the report card is provided below.

Impoundment Length The basis for using this index is that impoundment of rivers and streams by the construction of artificial in-stream barriers, e.g. dams and weirs, has a profound impact upon stream ecology. The purpose of constructing in-stream barriers is commonly to store water for later use, and impounded areas generally have increased water depth and decreased water velocities. Cycles of wetting and drying are disrupted, decreasing the occurrence of natural disturbance and the nutrient processing cycle. Increased sedimentation may occur and benthic habitats may become anoxic. The spawning habitat of some aquatic organisms may be lost.

The index was selected with the intention to describe how much “natural” riverine habitat remained, i.e. riverine habitat not turned into a deep pool with relatively little diversity in terms of depth (benthic light availability, oxygen availability), flow rate, wetting/drying etc. due to the river channel being artificially (and almost permanently) filled by impounded waters. The length of stream impoundment will vary according to attributes such as the height of the constructed in-stream barrier and landscape features (such as slope of the local stream bed). As an index of remaining natural riverine habitat, impoundment length was also intended to be complementary to other indices, such fish barriers and flow modification.

Because in-stream barriers constructed to store water also disrupt the movement of aquatic organisms, impoundment length is likely to have some correlation with a measure of the ecological impact of barriers to movement per se. However, the intended focus is on the ecological impact of impoundment on in-stream habitat and not the movement of organisms.

Fish Barriers Fish barriers are deemed to be an important indicator for inclusion in the Mackay-Whitsunday report card due to their links to ecosystem health, and the value the local community places on the presence of freshwater fish species. The majority of freshwater fish species of the Mackay- Whitsunday region migrate at some stage during their life cycle. Of the 48 freshwater fish species found to occur in the Mackay-Whitsunday region, almost half (48%) require unimpeded access between freshwater and estuarine habitats to complete their life cycle and maintain sustainable fish populations (Moore 2015a). Therefore, barriers that prevent or delay connectivity between key habitats have the potential to impact migratory fish populations, decrease the diversity of freshwater fish communities and reduce the condition of aquatic ecosystems (Moore 2015a).

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 5 of 59

The fish barriers indicator has not been included in the pilot report card as the indicators and metrics currently available are being reviewed and finalised. It is expected that fish barriers will be included in the 2014-15 report card.

2.2.2. Flow Flow is an important indicator to include in the Mackay-Whitsunday report card due to its relevance to ecosystem and waterway health. It is proposed that the flow indicator, once finalised, will consider three key attributes of flow.

Potential indices and their importance to ecosystem and waterway health are described below:

1. The number of low flow (or no flow) days during the year – previous work undertaken in the region under the Environmental Flows Assessment Program (EFAP) highlighted that flows less than 4 ML/day no longer provide the necessary conditions for a range of low flow assets, such as riffle dependent taxa, connectivity for migratory fish, and the maintenance of waterhole water quality. 2. The number of medium-high flow events per year – previous work undertaken through the EFAP has shown that medium to high flows are required to support a range of assets, such as waterhole flushing and scouring, connectivity for migratory fish species, active river-forming processes, maintenance of refuge waterholes/pools by scour, riparian veg seed dispersal and scour of in channel vegetation recruits. The range of flows required by these assets varies, however a 1.5yr average recurrence interval (ARI) could be considered as an event necessary to support most, if not all, the above assets. 3. Total Summer flow (Dec – Feb) – work undertaken in the Fitzroy River and other Queensland catchments have shown a positive relationship between summer flows and fish growth and recruitment (e.g. barramundi and threadfin salmon). This flow/recruitment link is likely to be relevant in the Mackay-Whitsunday region. Whilst specific flow versus recruitment linear relationships are not transferrable, the overall patterns are likely to be, with strong recruitment shown to occur for 25% of the modelled years.

2.2.3. Riparian Extent The extent of riparian vegetation was determined to be an important indicator to include in the report card due to the importance of riparian vegetation in both ecological function and habitat provision, and its benefits to water quality and filtering of inputs to the waterways.

2.2.4. Wetland Extent Wetland extent was determined to be a relevant indicator to include within the freshwater basin assessments in the report card due to its importance in both ecological function and the provision of habitat for a range of species, and the function of wetlands relevant to whole catchment freshwater systems.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 6 of 59

2.3. Fauna Indicators Rationale and explanation on the inclusion of fauna indicators are described below.

2.3.1. Fish The development of freshwater basin fish indicators and methods is still progressing and was not included in the pilot report card.

Assessments of fish community health was deemed important for the Mackay-Whitsunday report card in terms of ecosystem health assessment and outcomes of water quality impacts, as well as due to the value the local community places on the presence of freshwater fish species.

The aquatic ecosystems of Mackay Whitsunday region have been significantly impacted by the surrounding land use practices (Moore 2015b). Impacts include (but are not limited to) poor water quality runoff, degraded riparian and in-stream habitats, flow modification, and barriers to fish migration (Moore 2015b). The cumulative impacts of these modifications has led to changes in the condition of the region’s fish communities, adversely impacting fish abundance, species richness, fish community composition and exacerbating the prevalence of pest fish species (Moore 2015b). Significantly, where in-stream and terrestrial habitats persist undisturbed, healthy fish populations remain (Moore 2015b).

Inclusion of fish indicators in the report card will help to provide the local community with an assessment of the health of the local freshwater fish communities.

2.3.2. Macroinvertebrates The development of freshwater macroinvertebrates indicators and methods is still progressing and is not included in the pilot report card.

Indices that could potentially be used to assess the condition of macroinvertebrates in the freshwater basins include taxa richness, SIGNAL1, and PET2. These are described below including justification for inclusion in the report card. It should be noted that these methods are standardised, well-known and well-used. SIGNAL is based on a sensitive grade assigned at the Sub-Family/Family level (or higher taxa), and the Plecoptera/Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera involved in PET are taxonomic orders. No species-level information is required, but sub-family/family level data on the composition of aquatic macroinvertebrate communities (from minimally-disturbed sites) is generally required, or at least advantageous, in translating numeric index values into qualitative terms (e.g. good, fair, poor).

1 A Scoring System for Macroinvertebrates (‘Water Bugs’) in Australian Rivers. Refer to Chessman B, 2003, SIGNAL 2 – A Scoring System for Macro-invertebrate (‘Water Bugs’) in Australian Rivers, Monitoring River Heath Initiative Technical Report no 31, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. 2 PET (Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera, and Trichoptera) richness (number of stonefly, mayfly, and caddisfly families).

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 7 of 59

Taxa richness (TBC) Number of taxa is a direct measure of taxa richness, which generally increases with ecological condition. A high number of taxa within a site indicates that the various water quality, habitat, and food requirements of those taxa have been met locally in recent times. This index is calculated simply as the number of macroinvertebrate taxa collected; excluding cladocerans, ostracods, copepods and spiders.

SIGNAL (TBC) SIGNAL, or ‘Stream Invertebrate Grade Number – Average Level’, is a simple scoring system for quantifying the ecological health of streams. It is based on the average sensitivity to disturbance of the aquatic macroinvertebrate taxa present in a sample based on a pre-determined set of ‘sensitivity grades’ allocated to individual taxa. SIGNAL scores theoretically range from 1.0 to 10.0, with higher scores indicating ‘healthier’ conditions. When used in conjunction with data on the richness of aquatic macroinvertebrate taxa, SIGNAL scores provide an indication of the types of pollution and other physical and chemical factors affecting the ecological condition of a stream. This index is calculated by averaging the sensitivity grades for taxa collected in a sample, using SIGNAL 2.1iv sensitivity grades and simple (unweighted) arithmetic averaging.

PET (TBC) PET richness refers to the number of families in a sample belonging to one of the three particularly sensitive orders of aquatic insects: Plecoptera (stoneflies), Ephemeroptera (mayflies) and Trichoptera (caddisflies). The abundance of individuals within PET taxa shows a marked decline with anthropogenic disturbance and is thus useful as an early warning indicator of a decline in stream health. This index is calculated simply as the number of taxa belonging to the Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera orders.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 8 of 59

3. Methods for Data Collection The sections below provide an overview of the data collection methods for the various freshwater indicators and indices reported on in the Mackay-Whitsunday report card (Figure 1).

3.1. Water Quality Data Collection The water quality data used in the Mackay-Whitsunday report card were collected through the Department of Science, Information Technology, and Innovation (DSITI) Great Barrier Reef Catchment Loads Monitoring Program (GBRCLMP). The general summary of data collection methods are described below for total suspended solids (TSS), dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN), and filterable reactive phosphorus (FRP). For full details refer to Garzon-Garcia et al. (2015).

Three (end-of-system) water quality monitoring sites were monitored within the Mackay- Whitsunday report card region:

. Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station; . Sandy Creek at Homebush; and . O’Connell River at Caravan Park.

Monitoring included in the pilot report card was undertaken at these sites between 1 July 2013 and 30 June 2014. Sampling was conducted in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy Monitoring and Sampling Manual (EHP 2010). At all three sites, manual grab and automatic sampling was used.

Intensive sampling (up to hourly) occurred during high flow events and reduced sampling (monthly) was undertaken during ambient (low or base-flow) conditions. Samples for total suspended solids, nutrients and pesticide analysis were collected concurrently (Garzon-Garcia et al. 2015). All samples were stored and transported in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy Monitoring and Sampling Manual (EHP 2010) (Wallace et al. 2015).

Analyses for total suspended solids and nutrients were undertaken by the Science Division Chemistry Centre (Dutton Park, Queensland), and the analyses for the PSII herbicides were analysed by Queensland Health Forensic and Scientific Services (Coopers Plains, Queensland) (Garzon-Garcia et al. 2015). Both laboratories are accredited by the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA). Further information on the water quality data collection and analysis is provided in Garzon-Garcia et al. (2015).

3.2. Habitat and Hydrology Data Collection Data collection methods for the habitat and hydrology indicators for the pilot report card (hydrological modification, flow, riparian extent, and wetland extent) are described below.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 9 of 59

3.2.1. Hydrological Modification Impoundment Length The impoundment length index reports on the proportion (%) of the linear length of non-tidal streams of order three or higher that are inundated at the Full Supply Level of artificial in-stream structures such as dams and weirs.

Estimates of impounded lengths were derived from the Department of Natural Resources and Mines Queensland 1:100,000 ordered drainage network, Queensland Globe imagery and local knowledge, e.g. local hydrographic staff. The proportion of impoundment length was calculated as a percentage of the total linear length of the river channel. All streams of order three or higher within the freshwater basin were included in the assessment.

As the construction or removal of substantial structures is infrequent, it is predicted that this index will be reviewed every 3-5 years.

Fish Barriers The fish barriers indicator has not been included in the pilot report card. The indicators and metrics currently available will be reviewed and finalised prior to the 2014-15 report card.

3.2.2. Flow The flow indicator was not used in the pilot report card, as the indices and metrics are still being developed. It will be finalised and included in the next report card. It is proposed that data used to assess this indicator will be sourced from Environmental Flows Assessment Program (EFAP) and available gauging stations in the region.

3.2.3. Riparian Extent The assessment of riparian extent uses similar methods to the Reef Plan report card riparian extent assessment. The source data used in the assessment for the report card was 2013 (current) and pre- clearing riparian extents from the Queensland Herbarium’s Regional Ecosystem (RE) mapping, version 9. Data pertaining to the Don, Proserpine, O’Connell, Pioneer, and Plane basins (for pre-clear and 2013) was extracted and reported.

3.2.4. Wetland Extent The assessment of wetland extent uses similar methods to the Reef Plan report card wetland extent assessment. The source data is the same for both report cards, however with a focus on only palustrine systems in the five reported basins for the Mackay-Whitsunday report card (the Don, Proserpine, O’Connell, Pioneer, and Plane basins).

The current condition (2013) of wetland extent was conducted through a comparison of current extent against pre-clear extent of vegetated freshwater swamp (palustrine) systems with more than 30 per cent emergent vegetation cover, using the Queensland Regional Ecosystem (RE) mapping version 9.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 10 of 59

3.3. Fauna Data Collection As the fauna indicator category is not included in the pilot report card, potential data collection methods for fish and macroinvertebrates are described below.

3.3.1. Fish The development of freshwater basin fish indicators and methods is still progressing and is not included in the pilot report card.

The majority of data for indices within this indicator are currently only available from sampling undertaken in 2007. Those data were collected across three distinct seasons, encompassing pre and post-wet season conditions in 2006/07 and pre-wet season conditions in 2007/08. Boat and backpack electrofishing methods were used to survey fish communities. It is expected that these data are not sufficiently current to use for reporting on the ecological condition of contemporary fish assemblages.

Since 2007, further sampling has been undertaken as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Freshwater fish sampling undertaken since 2007.

Timing and reaches sampled Waterway 2013 2014 2015 Gregory River Lower and middle - - Louisa Creek Lower and upper - - Owens Creek Pre-wet; middle (x2) Pre-wet; middle (x2) and Post-wet; middle (x2) and lower and lower lower O'Connell River - Pre-wet; upper, mid, and Post-wet; upper, mid, and lower lower Basin Creek - - Post-wet; upper, mid, and lower Sandy Creek - - Post-wet; upper, mid, and lower Rocky Dam Creek - - Post-wet; upper, mid, and lower Repulse Creek - - Post-wet; upper and middle lower Lagoons Creek - - Middle reach

Sampling is currently planned to occur in five waterways in 2015 and 2016 (Table 2).

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 11 of 59

Table 2. Freshwater fish sampling planned for 2015 and 2016.

Timing and reaches sampled Waterway 2015 2016 O'Connell River Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Basin Creek Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Sandy Creek Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Rocky Dam Creek Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Repulse Creek Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower Pre-wet; upper, mid, and lower

It is likely more sampling than that currently planned (Table 2) will be required to adequately assess and include freshwater fish in the Mackay-Whitsunday report card.

The indices previously reported on as descriptors of the ecological condition of fish communities in the Mackay-Whitsunday region include catch per unit effort (CPUE), native fish species richness, alien fish species richness. With additional monitoring further metrics could be established to be used the report card such as expected species which would enable better assessments and comparisons.

3.3.2. Macroinvertebrates The development of freshwater macroinvertebrates indicators and methods is still progressing and is not included in the pilot report card.

There is currently no data collection monitoring program for macroinvertebrates in the region.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 12 of 59

4. Development of Condition Assessments Scoring Methods

4.1. Grading for Condition Assessments Grading needs to be scaled appropriately for each indicator, and then standardised so all indicators present the same ranges. The overall ranges used in the pilot report card are the same as those for the Reef Plan report card, shown in Table 3. However, in order to translate results for differing indices, standardising across all indices was required. The different indicators and scoring methods are described in the sections below.

Table 3. Overall range of scores (source: Reef Plan report card).

Range of index condition scores Midpoint of range Condition grade and colour code 81-100 90 Very Good 61-80 70 Good 41-60 50 Moderate 21-40 30 Poor 0-20 10 Very Poor

QA/QC: All estuarine and freshwater data and calculations have been analysed and cross-checked by the DSITI teams.

4.2. Decision Rules Decision rules were developed for the minimum proportion of information required to generate the rolled up scores, as follows:

≥ 50% of indices to generate the indicator score ≥ 60% of indicators to generate the indicator category score

Overall scores for reporting zones are presented in the pilot report card, even if not all indicator categories are available. However, the coaster visually shows what components contribute to the overall grade, e.g. which three out of four indicator categories.

Unless otherwise stated, to roll up the different indicator results into indicator categories, and indicator category results into the overall indicator (unless otherwise stated) each indicator/indicator category result was assigned the midpoint of the relevant scoring range (see Table 3). This midpoint score was then the value used for that indicator/indicator category in the calculations.

The use of the midpoint is a way to standardise scores in order to aggregate them, particularly as scoring ranges between indices and indicators varied, and some of these were non-linear with unequal bandwidths. Unequal bandwidths were considered appropriate for some indices as the assessments were reporting on the condition of ecological features, which would not expect to be linearly distributed from Very Good condition through to Very Poor condition. Scoring ranges could not all be on the same scale with the same category bandwidths as different aspects were getting

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 13 of 59

assessed, and measured on different scales, with a difference in what is considered to be “Good” or “Very Good”, etc. As the bandwidths and the scales vary, these are not interchangeable, or compatible to roll up scores, as is.

In the absence of a statistician expertise, or formulas which converted all scoring ranges and scales to a simple 0-100 evenly disturbed scoring range, it was determined to use the midpoint of the grade awarded for each individual score. This provided a method to standardise the scores, in order to aggregate up. While it is noted that this is not a perfect method, due to the ranges of indices measured and scaling, no other aggregation or standardisation method was deemed to be more suitable. In the future, if technical workshops or statistical advice are able to determine a better method to standardise the scores across different indices, this can be adopted into subsequent report cards.

Finally, it is not considered that using the midpoint to aggregate scores would mask changes at the index level, or a reverse by another index when rolled up together, any more than any other report card scoring method. Changes over time can still be seen at the raw index data (trend) level, which is the same with other report cards, given the nature of report cards is to average results to provide a communication tool. Additionally, future report cards will also be reporting on “progress to targets” which will show trends over time.

4.3. Water Quality Condition Assessment The formula used to translate the raw water quality monitoring results into a report card condition score was: Condition score = (1-Absolute value ((Median - GV)/(WCS - GV)))*100 Where: WCS means worst case scenario GV means guideline value or target Absolute value means the positive number

The condition score is then translated to the report card five-point grading scale using the ranges and grades shown in Table 3 above.

Decision rules used in the scoring for the water quality attributes include:

. Worst case scenario (WCS) values are based on the 90th percentile of all values available from the CLMP for the analysed waterway; . Monthly medians are generated from the CLMP data, and then the annual median is calculated; . Where the median is compliant with the guideline value, a condition score of 100 is assigned; . The nutrients indicator condition score is the mean of the index scores for DIN and FRP; . The sediment indicator condition score is the median of the TSS scores; and . Guideline values that have been applied are those scheduled through the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy (EPP Water).

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 14 of 59

The scoring ranges attributed to the ms-PAF results have been developed by the Pesticide Working Group and are presented in Table 4. The concentration of each PSII herbicide in each water sample was converted to hazard units and the corresponding percentage of species (ms-PAF) that would be affected was determined. Where there were more than one sample per day a single ms-PAF value for each day was calculated. These values were plotted as a cumulative frequency distribution against the number of days in the wet season (taken to be a fixed value of 185 days) and the area under the curve (under the cumulative frequency distribution) was calculated for each day that had a sample. The area under the curve that corresponds to meeting the water quality guideline (the concentration that is protective of 99% of species, PC99) was then subtracted from the total area under the curve to give the area under the curve when the guideline was exceeded. The area under the portion of the curve that exceeded the guideline was then divided by the duration of the wet season (185 days) to calculate the mean daily potentially affected fraction (% species affected). These values were then compared to the risk levels and grades presented in Table 4 to determine the grade for contaminants at each site.

Table 4. Grading description for the contaminants index in the freshwater basin assessments.

Mean daily ms-PAF Risk Level Grade score 0 – 1 Very low risk Very Good >1 – 5 Low risk Good >5 – 10 Moderate risk Moderate >10 – 20 High risk Poor >20 Very high risk Very Poor

4.4. Habitat and Hydrology Condition Assessment

4.4.1. Habitat Modification Impoundment length The suggested rating scheme (Table 5) was derived from earlier work on Murray-Darling Basin rivers which involved benchmarking the ecological condition of multiple rivers in relation to several ecological indices, one of which was the proportion of river impounded by dams and weirs. The ecological condition of streams was assessed during benchmarking based on existing studies and the expert opinion of a panel of experienced aquatic ecologists (see DNR 2000 and Sheldon et al. 2000).

There are likely to be differences in the degree of ecological impact resulting from impoundment of stream segments in differing areas of the stream network, but currently it is not possible to account for such complex differences in any robust way. The rationale for including impoundment length as an indicator was to highlight the loss of natural habitat and ecological processes in the region, many of which are related to natural channel wetting and drying as a result of impoundment. An assumption of status quo is implied in the scoring for impoundment length (rather than cause-and- effect with ecological function) with additional impoundments lowering subsequent report card scores.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 15 of 59

Table 5. Grading description for the impoundment length index in the freshwater basin assessments.

% of waterway impounded Condition grade < 1 Very Good 1 – < 4 Good 4 – < 7 Moderate 7 – < 10 Poor > 10 Very Poor

Fish Barriers The fish barriers indicator has not been included in the pilot report card. The indicators and scoring metrics currently available will be reviewed and finalised prior to the 2014-15 report card.

4.4.2. Flow While the flow assessment has not been conducted and included in the Mackay-Whitsunday pilot report card, the suggested formulas for scoring the three proposed indices are listed below. The scoring metrics to translate the index scores to the very good to very poor grading system are yet to be developed. These will be included in the next report card.

Three flow indices have been proposed to be used in the freshwater condition assessments. The indices, justification, and methods are below:

1. The number of low flow (or no flow) days during the year (Jan-Dec):

2. The number of medium-high flow events per year (July-June):

3. Total Summer flow (Dec – Feb):

4.4.3. Riparian Extent The condition score for the extent of riparian vegetation was determined by calculating the per cent loss of riparian vegetation since pre-clear to current (2013) (as per RE mapping version 9) for each basin. The score was generated by subtracting the RE mapped 2013 per cent extent of riparian vegetation from the pre-clear per cent extent of riparian vegetation, and assigning the result a grade as per Table 6.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 16 of 59

Table 6. Grading description for the riparian extent index in the freshwater basin assessments.

Scoring range Grade <5% loss Very Good 5.1-15% loss Good 15.1-25% loss Moderate 25.1-35% loss Poor >35% loss Very Poor

At the time of the development of the Pilot Report Card, based on a review of literature, Acts, and discussions held with relevant staff in DSITI and the Qld Herbarium these scoring ranges were considered the best available estimates of ranges to reflect the report card grades. Further work will be conducted in 2016 with a range of experts, to refine these ranges. The workshops will also aim to align similar scoring ranges used in different report cards.

4.4.4. Wetland Extent The condition score for the extent of wetlands was determined by calculating the per cent loss of vegetated freshwater swamp (palustrine) systems with more than 30 per cent emergent vegetation cover. The current (2013) extent was compared to the pre-clear extent, using the RE mapping version 9 for each basin. The score was generated by subtracting the RE mapped 2013 per cent extent of wetland vegetation from the pre-clear per cent extent of wetland vegetation, and assigning the result a grade as per Table 7.

Table 7. Grading description for the wetland extent index in the freshwater basin assessments.

Scoring range Grade <5% loss Very Good 5.1-15% loss Good 15.1-25% loss Moderate 25.1-35% loss Poor >35% loss Very Poor

As mentioned above, at the time of the development of the pilot report card, based on a review of literature, Acts, and discussions held with relevant staff in DSITI and the Qld Herbarium these scoring ranges were considered the best available estimates of ranges to reflect the report card grades. Further work will be conducted in 2016 with a range of experts, to refine these ranges. The workshops will also aim to align similar scoring ranges used in different report cards.

4.5. Fauna Condition Assessment As the development of freshwater basin fish and macroinvertebrate indicators and methods are still being developed, no condition assessment methods are finalised. These will be developed and finalised for inclusion in subsequent report cards.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 17 of 59

5. Development of Progress to Targets Scoring Methods To provide information on how the region is tracking toward targets set for certain aspects, progress to targets should be presented in the report card and associated documentation. This will enable progress on a year-to-year basis to be assessed and allow comparison across years and trends to be established.

5.1. Calculating Progress to Targets In order to provide a score in how the region is progressing toward meeting its targets, the following information is required:

. Baseline condition (i.e. a starting point); . Current condition; and . Target condition.

The calculation of the results of the progress to targets in each report card will use the following equation:

Progress to target = ((X-Z)/(X-Y))*100

Where: X = Baseline Z = current condition Y = target

The pilot report card will be the first report card compiling these different sets of data and assessments together for the Mackay-Whitsunday region. Determining appropriate targets requires a specific body of work to identify which indicators should have targets, and what the targets (and associated timeframes) should be. Where possible, the targets established for the report card will align with available targets used in the Reef Plan report card and other relevant programs to provide consistency. The condition assessment results from the pilot report card can also be integrated in the development of appropriate targets for this region. This information will also be considered in developing the targets for subsequent Mackay-Whitsunday report cards.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 18 of 59

6. Condition Assessment Results

6.1. Water Quality The results for sediment (TSS) in the three monitored waterways ranged from very poor (Plane Creek) to very good (O’Connell River), with Pioneer scoring moderate, as shown in Table 8 below.

Table 8. Results for sediment in the freshwater basin assessments (all scores rounded to 1 dp).

Waterway TSS score Sediment Grade O'Connell 87.3 Very Good Pioneer 58.1 Moderate Plane 6.9 Very Poor

The averaged results for nutrients (DIN and FRP) in the three waterways are shown in Table 9. O’Connell and Pioneer both scored very good, while Plane Creek scored moderate.

Table 9. Results for nutrients in the freshwater basin assessments (all scores rounded to 1 dp).

Waterway DIN score FRP score Averaged nutrient score Nutrient Grade O'Connell 84.4 77.9 81.2 Very Good Pioneer 87.8 95.1 91.5 Very Good Plane 57.5 49.0 53.3 Moderate

The results for contaminants (ms-PAF area under the curve method for the five priority PSII pesticides) in the three waterways are shown in Table 10, with two being scored as very poor, and O’Connell scored as good.

Table 10. Results for contaminants in the freshwater basin assessments (all scores rounded to 1 dp).

Waterway ms-PAF daily average Risk Category Contaminant Grade O'Connell 4.6 Low Risk Good Pioneer 24.5 Very High Risk Very Poor Plane 34.5 Very High Risk Very Poor

The results for all water quality indicators and the overall water quality indicator scores are shown below in Table 11. O’Connell River was scored as very good overall, Pioneer Creek as moderate, and Plane Creek as poor. Refer to Appendix A for all results and scoring.

Table 11. Overall water quality grades for the freshwater basin assessments.

Water Quality Waterway Sediment Nutrients Contaminants OVERALL SCORE O'Connell Very Good Very Good Good Very Good Pioneer Moderate Very Good Very Poor Moderate Plane Very Poor Moderate Very Poor Poor

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 19 of 59

6.2. Habitat and Hydrology Table 12 below shows the draft results for the impoundment length index and, therefore, the hydrological modification indicator extent in the freshwater basin condition assessments.

Table 12. Results for impoundment length in the freshwater basin assessments (all values rounded to 1 dp).

Not impounded Impounded Total Basin (km) (km) (km) % total Impoundment Rating Don 938 0 938 0.0 Very Good Proserpine 518 38 555 6.8 Moderate O'Connell 595 0 595 0.0 Very Good Pioneer 506 62 568 10.9 Very Poor Plane 612 7 620 1.2 Good

The draft results for the riparian vegetation in the freshwater basin condition assessments are shown in Table 13.

Table 13. Results for riparian vegetation in the freshwater basin assessments (all values rounded to 1 dp).

Waterway % loss of vegetation (pre-Clear to 2013) Riparian Extent Grade Don 29.6 Poor Proserpine 22.6 Moderate O'Connell 22 Moderate Pioneer 22 Moderate Plane 29.5 Poor

The table below (Table 14) shows the draft results for the wetland extent in the freshwater basin condition assessments.

Table 14. Results for wetland extent in the freshwater basin assessments.

Extent of palustrine RE (% of pre-clear) Loss since pre-clear Waterway Wetland Extent Grade remaining in 2013 (as %) Don 52 48 Very Poor Proserpine 86 14 Good O'Connell 44 56 Very Poor Pioneer 17 83 Very Poor Plane 55 45 Very Poor

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 20 of 59

The habitat and hydrology grades for the five freshwater basins are shown in Table 15 below. The Don, Proserpine, and O’Connell basins all scored moderate, which the Pioneer and Plane basins scored poor. Refer to Appendix A for all results and scoring.

Table 15. Overall habitat and hydrology grades for the freshwater basin assessments.

Hydrological Wetland Habitat and Hydrology Waterway Riparian Extent modification Extent OVERALL SCORE Don Very Good Poor Very Poor Moderate Proserpine Moderate Moderate Good Moderate O'Connell Very Good Moderate Very Poor Moderate Pioneer Very Poor Moderate Very Poor Poor Plane Good Poor Very Poor Poor

6.3. Fauna Fauna assessment was not included in the pilot report card.

6.4. Results by Freshwater Basins The scores presented above have been consolidated for each freshwater basin, and shown in Table 16 below and Figure 2 through to Figure 6. The overall basin scores were generated by averaging the midpoint of the indicator category scores (as per described in Section 4.2 for standardising the indicator scores).

Table 16. Overall water quality and habitat and hydrology grades for all freshwater basin assessments.

Water quality Habitat and hydrology Overall Grade Freshwater Basin grade grade Don No data Moderate Moderate Proserpine No data Moderate Moderate O'Connell Very Good Moderate Good Pioneer Moderate Poor Poor Plane Poor Poor Poor

The scores for the Don and Proserpine basins are only relevant to the habitat and hydrology indicator category as no water quality data was available for either basin in the 2013-14 reporting.

The full calculations used in the assessment of all indicators and basins can be found in Appendix A.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 21 of 59

The Don basin was scored as moderate (“C”) overall, based on the habitat and hydrology scores, which included a very good for hydrological modification, a very poor for wetland extent, and a poor for riparian extent (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Overall results for the Don freshwater basin.

The Proserpine basin was scored as moderate (“C”) overall, based on the habitat and hydrology scores, which included a good for wetland extent, and moderate for both hydrological modification and riparian extent (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Overall results for the Proserpine freshwater basin.

The O’Connell basin was scored as good (“B”) overall, based on the water quality and habitat and hydrology scores. Water quality in the O’Connell basin was very good, based on very good for both

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 22 of 59

sediment and nutrients, and good for contaminants. Habitat and hydrology was scored as moderate, with very good for hydrological modification, moderate for riparian extent, but very poor for wetland extent (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Overall results for the O’Connell freshwater basin.

The Pioneer basin was scored as poor (“D”) overall, based on the water quality and habitat and hydrology scores. Water quality in the Pioneer basin was moderate, based on very good for nutrients, moderate for sediment, and very poor contaminants. Habitat and hydrology was scored as poor, with moderate for riparian extent, but very poor for both hydrological modification and wetland extent (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Overall results for the Pioneer freshwater basin.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 23 of 59

The Plane basin was scored as poor (“D”) overall, based on the water quality and habitat and hydrology scores. Water quality in the Pioneer basin was poor, due to a moderate score for nutrients, but very poor for both sediment and contaminants. Habitat and hydrology was also scored as poor, with good for hydrological modification, poor for riparian extent, and very poor for wetland extent (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Overall results for the Plane freshwater basin.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 24 of 59

7. Confidence, Limitations, and Recommendations

7.1. Confidence Associated with Results The freshwater basin assessment results presented in the report card and this paper have been rated in terms of the confidence surrounding the data used in the analysis. The “uncertainty” ratings developed through the Reef Plan report card have been utilised in the Mackay-Whitsunday pilot report card. The uncertainty/confidence score is based on five criteria:

. Maturity of methodology (the score is weighted half for this criteria so not to outweigh the importance of the other criteria); . Directness of measurement; . Spatial/temporal coverage; . Strength of relationship between the methodology, indicator reported and measured data; and . Measured error.

The scores for each criteria range from 1 (lowest) to 3 (highest), with the total score calculated and prescribed an overall confidence score (from 1 to 5) based on the following rules:

. 0 to <5 = one bar ranking; . 5 to <7.5 = two bars ranking; . 7.5 to <10 = three bars ranking; . 10 to <12.5 = four bars ranking; and . 12.5 to <15 = five bars ranking.

The data inputting into the freshwater basin assessments has been separately evaluated for confidence levels, due to the use of different data sets. The full ratings are shown on the assessment matrices in Appendix B, and summarised as:

. Water quality: sediment – Score: 11.5, Number of confidence bars: 4; . Water quality: nutrients – Score: 11.5, Number of confidence bars: 4; . Water quality: contaminants – Score: 8, Number of confidence bars: 3; . Habitat and hydrology: Impoundment length – Score: 7.5, Number of confidence bars: 3; . Habitat and hydrology: Riparian vegetation – Score: 8, Number of confidence bars: 3; and . Habitat and hydrology: Wetland extent – Score: 8, Number of confidence bars: 3.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 25 of 59

7.2. Limitations and Recommendations Following the release of the pilot report card, the program design, indicators, and scoring methods will be reviewed to determine any aspects that require improvement.

Particular focus for the freshwater basin assessment components will be given to:

. Reviewing all indicators for appropriateness within a conceptual model framework, scoring ranges, and methods (with input from a statistician); . Reviewing reference condition for all indicators and indices; . Reviewing indicators to determine which indicators should have progress-to-target reporting, and what the targets should be; . While Queensland Herbarium staff, and DSITI staff involved in remote sensing of vegetation were consulted during the development of vegetation scoring ranges, it is noted that reviewing and obtaining consensus on appropriate scoring ranges for condition assessments for riparian extent and wetland extent should be conducted, with consideration given to: . Perceived ecosystem function for species that utilise them . Subsequent connectivity to freshwaters and offshore ecosystems; . Reviewing the suggested indices for flow, and determining scoring ranges; . Further discussion around the ‘banding’ used in water quality assessment grades, and investigating whether further scales past WCS are required to adequately measure water quality; . Research on the scoring grades used in the impoundment assessments, relative to ecological health/function; . Development and finalisation of fish community health metrics, including identifying the amount of monitoring required to include fish community health assessments in the report card; . Development and finalisation of fish barrier metrics; . Development and finalisation of macroinvertebrate indicators and metrics; and . Future derivation of assessment data using a modelling and monitoring framework

It should also be noted that different scoring methods are used for assessing the marine environment to those used in assessing freshwater and estuarine systems. Refer to the marine results report for further detail on the method used. The method applied in the marine water quality condition assessments is that which is used in the MMP assessments, so is consistent with other Reef programs and reporting. However, this means there are inconsistencies in the pilot report card in terms of what the scores mean – in the freshwater method meeting guidelines is attributed a “very good” score, whereas in the marine assessments meeting guidelines is attributed a “moderate” score. The differences between methods and merits should also be reviewed after the release of the pilot report card.

Additionally, wetland mapping is continually reviewed and updated, where necessary, to improve its accuracy. This report card includes updated baseline estimates of the historical clearing and extent of wetlands in 2001, 2005 and 2009, as well as new information about the extent of wetlands in

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 26 of 59

2013. It should be noted that summarising wetlands extent across whole regions and at a broad wetland system level can mask variations in wetland loss across parts of the catchment or differential loss for different wetland types. Further, summarising wetlands into broad systems can mask variations of the types within these systems.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 27 of 59

References DEHP (Department of Environment and Heritage Protection) (2013). Monitoring and Sampling Manual 2009, Version 2, July 2013. Brisbane, Australia. Available from: . Downloaded: 22 May 2015.

DPC (Department of the Premier and Cabinet) (2013a). Reef Water Quality Protection Plan 2013, Securing the health and resilience of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and adjacent catchments, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Brisbane. Available from: www.reefplan.qld.gov.au. Downloaded: 20 May 2015.

Garzon-Garcia, A., Wallace, R., Huggins, R., Smith, R. A., Turner, R. D. R., Warne, M. St. J. 2015. Total suspended solids, nutrient and pesticide loads (2013–2014) for rivers that discharge to the Great Barrier Reef – Great Barrier Reef Catchment Loads Monitoring Program. Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation. Brisbane

DNR 2000. Condamine-Balonne WAMP: environmental flows technical report. Water Resource Allocation and Management, Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane. 163 pp. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. 2009. Monitoring and Sampling Manual 2009, Version 2, July 2013.

Mackay-Whitsunday Healthy Rivers to Reef Technical Working Group. 2015. Program Design: Pilot Report Card. Brisbane.

Moore M. 2015a. Mackay Whitsunday WQIP barriers to fish migration health metrics. Catchments solutions.

Moore M. 2015b. Mackay Whitsunday Region freshwater fish community health report. Catchment Solutions.

Sheldon, F., Thoms, M., Berry, O., and Puckridge, J. 2000. Using disaster to prevent catastrophe: Referencing the impacts of flow changes in large dryland rivers. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 16: 403-420.

Smith et al. (in prep). Rationale and Revised Methods for Reporting Pesticides Using the Multisubstance – Potentially Affected Fraction (ms-PAF).

Wallace, R., Huggins, R., Smith, R. A., Turner, R. D. R., Garzon-Garcia, A and Warne, M. St. J. 2015. Total suspended solids, nutrient and pesticide loads (2012–2013) for rivers that discharge to the Great Barrier Reef – Great Barrier Reef Catchment Loads Monitoring Program 2012–2013. Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation. Brisbane.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 28 of 59

Appendix A – Calculations used in assessing freshwater basins.

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 29 of 59

Ammonium nitrogen as Oxidised nitrogen as N Dissolved inorganic Filterable reactive Total suspended solids Ametryn (lower LOR) Atrazine (lower LOR) Diuron (lower LOR) Hexazinone (lower LOR) Tebuthiuron (lower LOR) SITE_NO Site Location WQ_ANALYSIS_NO DATE_SAMPLED N (mg/L) (mg/L) nitrogen (mg/L) phosphorus (mg/L) (mg/L) (μg/L) (μg/L) (μg/L) (μg/L) (μg/L) 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 314805 9/08/2013 9:00 <0.002 0.012 0.012 0.004 2 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 9/08/2013 9:00 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313352 8/01/2014 14:50 0.029 0.002 0.031 0.005 28 <0.01 0.05 0.03 0.07 <0.01 8/01/2014 14:50 0.05 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313364 10/01/2014 16:30 0.156 0.302 0.458 0.043 384 0.01 0.18 0.36 0.2 0.23 10/01/2014 16:30 0.18 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320402 30/01/2014 12:30 0.055 0.139 0.194 0.023 28 <0.01 0.17 0.45 0.16 <0.01 30/01/2014 12:30 0.17 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320403 30/01/2014 19:00 0.044 0.126 0.17 0.017 44 <0.01 0.1 0.31 0.12 0.01 30/01/2014 19:00 0.1 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320404 30/01/2014 22:00 0.018 0.35 0.368 0.02 166 <0.01 0.06 0.39 0.18 0.06 30/01/2014 22:00 0.06 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320405 31/01/2014 2:00 0.02 0.321 0.341 0.018 168 <0.01 0.05 0.32 0.12 0.07 31/01/2014 2:00 0.05 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320406 31/01/2014 7:00 0.018 0.26 0.278 0.024 134 <0.01 0.05 0.32 0.14 0.12 31/01/2014 7:00 0.05 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320407 31/01/2014 13:00 0.016 0.234 0.25 0.034 83 <0.01 0.02 0.2 0.09 0.04 31/01/2014 13:00 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320408 31/01/2014 17:00 0.014 0.254 0.268 0.036 78 <0.01 0.01 0.12 0.05 0.02 31/01/2014 17:00 0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320409 31/01/2014 21:00 0.015 0.25 0.265 0.036 42 <0.01 0.02 0.13 0.07 0.04 31/01/2014 21:00 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320410 1/02/2014 8:00 0.019 0.251 0.27 0.031 15 <0.01 0.03 0.17 0.07 0.05 1/02/2014 8:00 0.03 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313389 9/02/2014 22:21 0.044 0.066 0.11 0.051 175 <0.01 0.02 0.09 0.03 <0.01 9/02/2014 22:21 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313390 10/02/2014 6:30 0.037 0.077 0.114 0.012 125 10/02/2014 6:30 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313391 10/02/2014 12:30 0.026 0.101 0.127 0.021 86 <0.01 0.02 0.1 0.04 0.04 10/02/2014 12:30 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320411 19/02/2014 9:45 0.034 0.025 0.059 0.015 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 19/02/2014 9:45 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320413 19/02/2014 10:01 0.022 0.021 0.043 0.015 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.02 0.05 19/02/2014 10:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320414 19/02/2014 11:01 0.026 0.025 0.051 0.018 <0.01 <0.01 0.05 0.03 0.03 19/02/2014 11:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320412 19/02/2014 15:21 0.019 0.045 0.064 0.022 <0.01 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.03 19/02/2014 15:21 0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320415 19/02/2014 17:31 0.018 0.052 0.07 0.024 <0.01 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.04 19/02/2014 17:31 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320416 19/02/2014 20:31 0.026 0.056 0.082 0.023 <0.01 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04 19/02/2014 20:31 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320417 20/02/2014 9:31 0.016 0.07 0.086 0.024 <0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 20/02/2014 9:31 0.02 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320418 27/03/2014 20:31 0.162 0.078 0.24 0.036 67 <0.01 <0.01 0.06 0.03 0.01 27/03/2014 20:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320419 27/03/2014 20:53 0.246 0.071 0.317 0.046 25 <0.01 <0.01 0.06 0.03 0.01 27/03/2014 20:53 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320420 28/03/2014 2:31 0.268 0.069 0.337 0.094 26 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.02 0.01 28/03/2014 2:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320421 13/04/2014 17:31 0.217 0.027 0.244 0.089 28 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.02 <0.01 13/04/2014 17:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320422 13/04/2014 18:01 0.223 0.025 0.248 0.082 29 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.02 <0.01 13/04/2014 18:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320423 13/04/2014 18:31 0.225 0.022 0.247 0.077 23 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.03 <0.01 13/04/2014 18:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320424 13/04/2014 19:01 0.233 0.016 0.249 0.07 26 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 13/04/2014 19:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320425 13/04/2014 19:31 0.213 0.009 0.222 0.067 23 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 13/04/2014 19:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320426 13/04/2014 20:01 0.235 0.014 0.249 0.061 21 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.03 0.09 13/04/2014 20:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320427 13/04/2014 21:01 0.228 0.024 0.252 0.054 23 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.03 0.12 13/04/2014 21:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320428 13/04/2014 23:01 0.222 0.025 0.247 0.051 23 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.02 0.09 13/04/2014 23:01 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320429 14/04/2014 0:31 0.241 0.02 0.261 0.037 26 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.03 0.08 14/04/2014 0:31 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320430 14/04/2014 1:59 0.519 0.015 0.534 0.014 18 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.02 <0.01 14/04/2014 1:59 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320431 14/04/2014 3:29 0.428 0.016 0.444 0.025 21 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 14/04/2014 3:29 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320432 14/04/2014 4:59 0.25 0.022 0.272 0.096 31 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.02 0.09 14/04/2014 4:59 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320433 14/04/2014 6:59 0.244 0.028 0.272 0.097 21 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.03 0.08 14/04/2014 6:59 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320434 14/04/2014 15:17 0.016 0.168 0.184 0.021 25 <0.01 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 14/04/2014 15:17 0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320435 14/05/2014 14:50 0.004 0.013 0.017 0.007 3 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 14/05/2014 14:50 <0.01 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320436 17/06/2014 15:10 <0.002 0.008 0.008 <0.001 4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 17/06/2014 15:10 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312928 12/08/2013 10:30 0.004 0.012 0.016 <0.001 8 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312930 16/09/2013 10:15 0.004 0.01 0.014 0.001 7 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312132 27/11/2013 18:30 0.114 0.442 0.556 0.006 8 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313351 8/01/2014 11:40 0.051 0.092 0.143 0.006 2 0.02 0.85 0.54 0.17 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313358 10/01/2014 12:00 0.229 0.45 0.679 0.038 0.01 0.83 0.43 0.11 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313359 10/01/2014 14:30 0.074 0.143 0.217 0.016 0.02 1.1 1.7 0.11 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313360 10/01/2014 20:00 0.087 0.445 0.532 0.036 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313361 11/01/2014 2:00 0.155 1.49 1.645 0.129 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313362 11/01/2014 7:30 0.267 2.6 2.867 0.165 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313363 11/01/2014 13:00 0.387 3.17 3.557 0.192 30 0.04 3.3 6.5 1.1 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313369 30/01/2014 21:00 0.049 1.38 1.429 0.063 17 0.14 1.8 3.3 0.57 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313370 30/01/2014 21:45 0.042 1.57 1.612 0.066 7 0.14 1.8 3.6 0.54 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313371 30/01/2014 22:30 0.037 1.58 1.617 0.065 6 0.14 1.7 2.8 0.48 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313372 30/01/2014 23:15 0.032 1.67 1.702 0.067 6 0.15 1.9 3.2 0.53 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313373 31/01/2014 1:00 0.044 0.914 0.958 0.042 6 0.14 1.7 2.8 0.51 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313374 31/01/2014 6:45 0.032 0.33 0.362 0.04 91 0.03 1 1.4 0.21 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313375 31/01/2014 7:15 0.034 0.406 0.44 0.04 93 0.02 0.77 1.2 0.16 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313377 31/01/2014 13:15 0.04 0.664 0.704 0.046 118 0.04 1.2 1.5 0.23 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313378 31/01/2014 19:30 0.046 0.552 0.598 0.043 83 0.02 1.1 1.3 0.18 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313379 1/02/2014 1:30 0.04 0.508 0.548 0.054 52 0.03 0.79 0.91 0.14 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313380 1/02/2014 7:45 0.032 0.482 0.514 0.058 37 0.03 0.65 0.92 0.15 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313381 1/02/2014 13:45 0.037 0.482 0.519 0.06 35 0.03 0.56 0.73 0.15 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313382 1/02/2014 20:00 0.047 0.454 0.501 0.065 34 0.02 0.47 0.64 0.16 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313383 2/02/2014 2:15 0.038 0.432 0.47 0.057 19 0.02 0.4 0.55 0.12 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313384 2/02/2014 5:00 0.04 0.386 0.426 0.046 32 <0.01 0.31 0.4 0.06 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313385 2/02/2014 6:45 0.031 0.372 0.403 0.034 53 <0.01 0.29 0.38 0.05 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313386 2/02/2014 13:30 0.038 0.217 0.255 0.132 84 <0.01 0.13 0.25 0.04 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313387 2/02/2014 22:30 0.034 0.213 0.247 0.061 81 <0.01 0.28 0.48 0.08 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313388 3/02/2014 7:30 0.038 0.24 0.278 0.06 47 0.01 0.22 0.34 0.06 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318250 3/02/2014 12:58 60 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318251 4/02/2014 12:58 56 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318252 5/02/2014 12:58 38 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318253 6/02/2014 12:58 30 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318254 7/02/2014 12:58 35 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318255 8/02/2014 12:58 0.047 0.332 0.379 0.039 27 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318256 9/02/2014 12:58 0.027 0.33 0.357 0.034 27 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313396 9/02/2014 18:55 0.044 0.388 0.432 0.023 34 <0.01 0.08 0.13 0.04 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313397 10/02/2014 6:29 0.06 0.328 0.388 0.027 32 <0.01 0.1 0.16 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313398 10/02/2014 16:27 0.053 0.309 0.362 0.029 30 <0.01 0.11 0.18 0.05 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313399 11/02/2014 7:45 0.053 0.267 0.32 0.037 18 <0.01 0.13 0.25 0.07 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318263 19/02/2014 13:32 0.02 0.054 0.074 0.015 42 <0.01 0.08 0.14 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318264 19/02/2014 14:59 0.038 0.052 0.09 0.015 18 <0.01 0.07 0.11 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318265 19/02/2014 20:48 0.031 0.097 0.128 0.035 25 <0.01 0.18 0.32 0.04 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318266 19/02/2014 21:29 0.028 0.098 0.126 0.036 22 <0.01 0.17 0.37 0.04 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318267 20/02/2014 3:29 0.028 0.164 0.192 0.05 45 0.02 0.22 0.45 0.07 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318268 20/02/2014 9:29 0.033 0.2 0.233 0.068 45 0.01 0.76 0.78 0.1 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318269 20/02/2014 15:59 0.04 0.161 0.201 0.064 38 0.02 0.54 0.7 0.1 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318270 21/02/2014 0:59 0.055 0.154 0.209 0.059 41 <0.01 0.93 0.46 0.07 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318271 21/02/2014 9:59 0.056 0.176 0.232 0.053 30 <0.01 0.57 0.34 0.06 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318274 21/02/2014 18:59 0.031 0.147 0.178 0.05 25 <0.01 0.84 0.25 0.04 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318275 22/02/2014 4:29 0.039 0.105 0.144 0.042 16 <0.01 0.47 0.19 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318276 22/02/2014 13:29 0.048 0.113 0.161 0.04 24 <0.01 0.49 0.15 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318277 22/02/2014 22:59 0.042 0.12 0.162 0.038 13 <0.01 0.4 0.18 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318278 23/02/2014 7:59 0.04 0.126 0.166 0.036 12 <0.01 0.35 0.16 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318279 23/02/2014 16:59 0.039 0.126 0.165 0.035 12 <0.01 0.28 0.14 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318280 24/02/2014 2:29 0.033 0.116 0.149 0.033 10 <0.01 0.25 0.13 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318296 13/04/2014 19:30 0.111 0.392 0.503 0.02 23 <0.01 0.03 0.04 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318297 13/04/2014 20:45 0.109 0.304 0.413 0.015 14 <0.01 0.02 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318298 13/04/2014 22:00 0.059 0.094 0.153 0.008 14 <0.01 0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318299 14/04/2014 0:00 0.058 0.088 0.146 0.022 49 <0.01 0.04 0.04 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320050 14/04/2014 1:30 0.031 0.121 0.152 0.034 58 <0.01 0.06 0.1 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320051 14/04/2014 7:30 0.041 0.111 0.152 0.031 211 <0.01 0.04 0.08 0.02 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320052 14/04/2014 10:30 0.039 0.105 0.144 0.035 156 <0.01 0.03 0.08 0.02 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320056 14/04/2014 16:29 0.055 0.191 0.246 0.038 112 <0.01 0.03 0.09 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320057 15/04/2014 1:29 0.042 0.158 0.2 0.039 49 <0.01 0.04 0.09 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320058 15/04/2014 10:59 0.048 0.128 0.176 0.038 34 <0.01 0.03 0.08 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320059 15/04/2014 20:29 0.061 0.212 0.273 0.038 23 <0.01 0.03 0.07 0.03 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320060 16/04/2014 12:29 0.051 0.247 0.298 0.034 66 <0.01 0.03 0.07 0.02 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320061 13/05/2014 14:10 0.031 0.154 0.185 0.01 54 <0.01 0.03 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320064 13/06/2014 13:02 0.053 0.139 0.192 0.006 101 <0.01 0.02 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 314804 8/08/2013 17:00 0.004 1.14 1.144 0.033 1 <0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312929 16/09/2013 9:30 0.009 0.78 0.789 0.012 8 <0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312931 17/11/2013 1:08 0.072 0.531 0.603 0.021 24 <0.01 0.05 0.03 0.01 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312932 18/11/2013 4:18 0.092 1.54 1.632 0.057 53 0.03 0.39 0.4 0.2 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312933 18/11/2013 8:35 0.134 3.61 3.744 0.125 119 0.17 0.22 0.69 0.18 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312133 27/11/2013 17:15 0.149 0.888 1.037 0.115 3 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313350 8/01/2014 9:30 0.088 0.131 0.219 0.028 4 <0.01 0.19 0.41 0.18 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313353 10/01/2014 14:45 0.118 1.66 1.778 0.19 96 0.16 2.2 5.4 2.4 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313354 10/01/2014 17:05 0.154 0.154 0.308 0.112 539 0.14 1.6 6.5 2.1 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313355 10/01/2014 23:15 0.161 4.44 4.601 0.155 241 0.11 4.6 8.5 2.1 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313356 11/01/2014 13:49 0.091 3.75 3.841 0.289 60 0.16 5.1 8.1 2.2 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313357 12/01/2014 10:41 0.062 1.78 1.842 0.287 28 0.17 5.3 9.4 2.4 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313365 30/01/2014 16:30 0.03 0.98 1.3 0.46 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313366 31/01/2014 2:42 0.023 0.832 0.855 0.099 169 0.03 2.3 2.1 1 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313367 31/01/2014 7:24 0.015 0.75 0.765 0.119 125 0.23 1.7 2.1 0.92 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313368 31/01/2014 11:22 0.018 0.777 0.795 0.153 148 0.09 1.3 2.4 0.73 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313376 31/01/2014 18:14 0.018 1.03 1.048 0.13 70 0.07 1.1 2.4 0.79 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313392 9/02/2014 17:32 0.063 0.199 0.262 0.119 118 0.02 0.57 0.65 0.29 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313393 9/02/2014 22:49 0.048 0.303 0.351 0.123 100 0.04 0.36 1.2 0.3 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313394 10/02/2014 10:58 0.039 0.159 0.198 0.109 43 0.02 0.41 2.1 0.33 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313395 10/02/2014 19:50 0.041 0.106 0.147 0.125 42 0.02 0.42 1.3 0.35 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318259 19/02/2014 13:42 0.038 0.215 0.253 0.129 73 0.01 0.15 0.45 0.16 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318257 19/02/2014 15:30 0.01 0.14 0.46 0.14 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318260 20/02/2014 1:52 0.03 0.165 0.195 0.106 62 0.01 0.16 0.53 0.19 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318261 20/02/2014 13:07 0.022 0.091 0.113 0.1 67 0.11 0.62 0.42 0.16 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318258 20/02/2014 16:05 0.09 0.52 0.44 0.13 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318262 21/02/2014 1:16 0.023 0.094 0.117 0.106 39 0.11 0.44 0.35 0.14 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318272 21/02/2014 22:51 0.024 0.055 0.079 0.115 16 0.08 0.35 0.38 0.16 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318273 23/02/2014 9:03 0.026 0.093 0.119 0.108 13 0.05 0.31 0.38 0.17 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318284 26/03/2014 10:24 0.04 0.133 0.173 0.081 269 0.2 0.26 0.29 0.15 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318285 26/03/2014 11:49 0.037 0.171 0.208 0.106 306 0.05 0.12 0.36 0.16 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318286 26/03/2014 20:30 0.026 0.121 0.147 0.105 107 <0.01 0.1 0.26 0.08 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318287 27/03/2014 5:13 0.025 0.098 0.123 0.102 159 <0.01 0.11 0.26 0.09 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318281 27/03/2014 11:45 <0.01 0.11 0.26 0.07 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318282 27/03/2014 11:45 <0.01 0.11 0.24 0.07 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318288 27/03/2014 11:53 0.063 0.116 0.179 0.112 183 <0.01 0.11 0.21 0.07 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318289 28/03/2014 0:02 0.027 0.075 0.102 0.118 <0.01 0.14 0.31 0.07 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318290 28/03/2014 4:37 0.017 0.053 0.07 0.11 205 <0.01 0.15 0.32 0.11 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318283 28/03/2014 8:30 <0.01 0.13 0.34 0.08 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318291 28/03/2014 13:15 0.023 0.063 0.086 0.136 40 <0.01 0.12 0.33 0.08 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318292 28/03/2014 17:03 0.016 0.073 0.089 0.106 417 <0.01 0.07 0.27 0.06 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318293 28/03/2014 18:37 0.02 0.052 0.072 0.118 90 <0.01 0.15 0.32 0.11 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318294 29/03/2014 10:06 0.023 0.057 0.08 0.121 <0.01 0.14 0.34 0.09 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318295 31/03/2014 11:15 0.032 0.189 0.221 0.089 17 <0.01 0.09 0.22 0.07 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320053 14/04/2014 10:23 0.068 0.088 0.156 0.092 62 <0.01 0.26 0.2 0.09 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320054 14/04/2014 22:32 0.051 0.051 0.102 0.091 49 0.01 0.42 0.34 0.13 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320055 15/04/2014 22:08 0.039 0.07 0.109 0.105 31 0.01 0.25 0.26 0.11 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320062 13/05/2014 15:15 0.011 0.914 0.925 0.019 3 <0.01 0.13 0.06 0.04 <0.01 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320063 13/06/2014 12:30 0.022 0.757 0.779 0.015 3 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.1 <0.01 SITE_NO Site Location WQ_ANALYSIS_NO DATE_SAMPLED Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (mg/L) MW estimates Filterable reactive phosphorus (mg/L) MW estimates Total suspended solids (mg/L) MW estimates 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 314805 9/08/2013 9:00 0.012 0.004 2.0 August Mean 0.012 0.012 0.004 0.004 2.0 2.0 Median 0.012 0.012 0.004 0.004 2.0 2.0

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313352 8/01/2014 14:50 0.031 0.005 28.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313364 10/01/2014 16:30 0.458 0.043 384.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320402 30/01/2014 12:30 0.194 0.023 28.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320403 30/01/2014 19:00 0.170 0.017 44.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320404 30/01/2014 22:00 0.368 0.020 166.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320405 31/01/2014 2:00 0.341 0.018 168.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320406 31/01/2014 7:00 0.278 0.024 134.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320407 31/01/2014 13:00 0.250 0.034 83.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320408 31/01/2014 17:00 0.268 0.036 78.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320409 31/01/2014 21:00 0.265 0.036 42.0 January Mean 0.262 0.262 0.026 0.026 115.5 115.5 Median 0.267 0.267 0.024 0.024 80.5 80.5

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320410 1/02/2014 8:00 0.270 0.031 15.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313389 9/02/2014 22:21 0.110 0.051 175.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313390 10/02/2014 6:30 0.114 0.012 125.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 313391 10/02/2014 12:30 0.127 0.021 86.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320411 19/02/2014 9:45 0.059 0.015 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320413 19/02/2014 10:01 0.043 0.015 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320414 19/02/2014 11:01 0.051 0.018 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320412 19/02/2014 15:21 0.064 0.022 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320415 19/02/2014 17:31 0.070 0.024 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320416 19/02/2014 20:31 0.082 0.023 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320417 20/02/2014 9:31 0.086 0.024 February Mean 0.098 0.098 0.023 0.023 100.3 100.3 Median 0.082 0.082 0.022 0.022 105.5 105.5

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320418 27/03/2014 20:31 0.240 0.036 67.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320419 27/03/2014 20:53 0.317 0.046 25.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320420 28/03/2014 2:31 0.337 0.094 26.0 March Mean 0.298 0.298 0.059 0.059 39.3 39.3 Median 0.317 0.317 0.046 0.046 26.0 26.0

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320421 13/04/2014 17:31 0.244 0.089 28.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320422 13/04/2014 18:01 0.248 0.082 29.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320423 13/04/2014 18:31 0.247 0.077 23.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320424 13/04/2014 19:01 0.249 0.070 26.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320425 13/04/2014 19:31 0.222 0.067 23.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320426 13/04/2014 20:01 0.249 0.061 21.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320427 13/04/2014 21:01 0.252 0.054 23.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320428 13/04/2014 23:01 0.247 0.051 23.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320429 14/04/2014 0:31 0.261 0.037 26.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320430 14/04/2014 1:59 0.534 0.014 18.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320431 14/04/2014 3:29 0.444 0.025 21.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320432 14/04/2014 4:59 0.272 0.096 31.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320433 14/04/2014 6:59 0.272 0.097 21.0 1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320434 14/04/2014 15:17 0.184 0.021 25.0 April Mean 0.280 0.280 0.060 0.060 24.1 24.1 Median 0.249 0.249 0.064 0.064 23.0 23.0

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320435 14/05/2014 14:50 0.017 0.007 0.052 3.0 May Mean 0.017 0.017 0.007 0.070 3.0 3.0 Median 0.017 0.017 0.007 0.070 3.0 3.0

1240062 O'Connell River at Caravan Park 320436 17/06/2014 15:10 0.008 0.001 4.0 June Mean 0.008 0.080 <0.001 0.0005 4.0 4.0 Median 0.008 0.080 <0.001 0.0005 4.0 4.0

Annual median 0.082 0.023 23 MW's values 0.082 0.024 23.0 RT's values 0.082 0.024 23.000 MH's values Annual mean 0.150 0.035 41.175 Final Correct Annual Median values Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (mg/L) 0.082 Filterable reactive phosphorus (mg/L) 0.024 Total suspended solids 23.0

All values calculated by Rae Huggins, then recalculated by Michael Warne, then checked by Ryan Turner and Mike Holmes

Nutrients conditions score using medians 81.1533904 DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Median 0.082 Median 0.024 Median 23 GV 0.03 GV 0.006 GV 2 WCS based upon ALL Michael's data for O'Connell WCS 0.3626 WCS 0.0876 WCS 167 Condition score 84.36560433 Condition score 77.94117647 Condition score 87.27272727

DIN means FRP means TSS means 0.012 0.004 2 0.262 0.0256 115.5 0.097818182 0.023272727 100.25 0.298 0.058666667 39.33333333 0.280357143 0.060071429 24.14285714 0.017 0.07 3 0.08 0.0005 4

Nutrients conditions score using means 64.49782851 DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Mean 0.150 Mean 0.035 Mean 41.175 GV 0.03 GV 0.006 GV 2 WCS 0.3626 WCS 0.0876 WCS 167 Condition score 64.02906431 Condition score 64.9665927 Condition score 76.25747269 Dissolved inorganic Michael's Filterable reactive Total suspended solids SITE_NO Site Location WQ_ANALYSIS_NOAmmonium DATE_SAMPLED nitrogenOxidised as N (mg/L) nitrogen as N (mg/L) nitrogen (mg/L) calculations phosphorus (mg/L) Michael's calculations (mg/L) Michael's calculations 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 314804 8/08/2013 17:00 0.004 1.14 1.144 0.033 1 August Mean 0.004 1.14 1.144 1.144 0.033 0.033 1 1 Median 0.004 1.14 1.144 1.144 0.033 0.033 1 1

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312929 16/09/2013 9:30 0.009 0.78 0.789 0.012 8 September Mean 0.009 0.78 0.789 0.789 0.012 0.012 8 8 Median 0.009 0.78 0.789 0.789 0.012 0.012 8 8

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312931 17/11/2013 1:08 0.072 0.531 0.603 0.021 24 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312932 18/11/2013 4:18 0.092 1.54 1.632 0.057 53 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312933 18/11/2013 8:35 0.134 3.61 3.744 0.125 119 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 312133 27/11/2013 17:15 0.149 0.888 1.037 0.115 3 November Mean 0.112 1.642 1.754 1.754 0.080 0.080 49.75 49.75 Median 0.113 1.214 1.335 1.335 0.086 0.086 38.50 38.50

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313350 8/01/2014 9:30 0.088 0.131 0.219 0.028 4 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313353 10/01/2014 14:45 0.118 1.66 1.778 0.19 96 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313354 10/01/2014 17:05 0.154 0.154 0.308 0.112 539 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313355 10/01/2014 23:15 0.161 4.44 4.601 0.155 241 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313356 11/01/2014 13:49 0.091 3.75 3.841 0.289 60 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313357 12/01/2014 10:41 0.062 1.78 1.842 0.287 28 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313365 30/01/2014 16:30 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313366 31/01/2014 2:42 0.023 0.832 0.855 0.099 169 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313367 31/01/2014 7:24 0.015 0.75 0.765 0.119 125 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313368 31/01/2014 11:22 0.018 0.777 0.795 0.153 148 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313376 31/01/2014 18:14 0.018 1.03 1.048 0.13 70 January Mean 0.075 1.530 1.605 1.605 0.156 0.156 148.00 148.00 Median 0.075 0.931 0.952 0.952 0.142 0.142 110.50 110.50

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313392 9/02/2014 17:32 0.063 0.199 0.262 0.119 118 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313393 9/02/2014 22:49 0.048 0.303 0.351 0.123 100 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313394 10/02/2014 10:58 0.039 0.159 0.198 0.109 43 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 313395 10/02/2014 19:50 0.041 0.106 0.147 0.125 42 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318259 19/02/2014 13:42 0.038 0.215 0.253 0.129 73 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318257 19/02/2014 15:30 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318260 20/02/2014 1:52 0.03 0.165 0.195 0.106 62 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318261 20/02/2014 13:07 0.022 0.091 0.113 0.1 67 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318258 20/02/2014 16:05 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318262 21/02/2014 1:16 0.023 0.094 0.117 0.106 39 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318272 21/02/2014 22:51 0.024 0.055 0.079 0.115 16 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318273 23/02/2014 9:03 0.026 0.093 0.119 0.108 13 February Mean 0.035 0.148 0.183 0.183 0.114 0.114 57.30 57.30 Median 0.034 0.133 0.171 0.171 0.112 0.112 52.50 52.50

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318284 26/03/2014 10:24 0.04 0.133 0.173 0.081 269 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318285 26/03/2014 11:49 0.037 0.171 0.208 0.106 306 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318286 26/03/2014 20:30 0.026 0.121 0.147 0.105 107 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318287 27/03/2014 5:13 0.025 0.098 0.123 0.102 159 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318281 27/03/2014 11:45 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318282 27/03/2014 11:45 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318288 27/03/2014 11:53 0.063 0.116 0.179 0.112 183 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318289 28/03/2014 0:02 0.027 0.075 0.102 0.118 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318290 28/03/2014 4:37 0.017 0.053 0.07 0.11 205 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318283 28/03/2014 8:30 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318291 28/03/2014 13:15 0.023 0.063 0.086 0.136 40 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318292 28/03/2014 17:03 0.016 0.073 0.089 0.106 417 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318293 28/03/2014 18:37 0.02 0.052 0.072 0.118 90 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318294 29/03/2014 10:06 0.023 0.057 0.08 0.121 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 318295 31/03/2014 11:15 0.032 0.189 0.221 0.089 17 March Mean 0.029 0.100 0.129 0.129 0.109 0.109 179.30 179.30 Median 0.026 0.087 0.113 0.113 0.108 0.108 171.00 171.00

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320053 14/04/2014 10:23 0.068 0.088 0.156 0.092 62 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320054 14/04/2014 22:32 0.051 0.051 0.102 0.091 49 126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320055 15/04/2014 22:08 0.039 0.07 0.109 0.105 31 April Mean 0.053 0.070 0.122 0.122 0.096 0.096 47.33 47.33 Median 0.051 0.070 0.109 0.109 0.092 0.092 49.00 49.00

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320062 13/05/2014 15:15 0.011 0.914 0.925 0.019 3 May Mean 0.011 0.914 0.925 0.925 0.019 0.019 3 3 Median 0.011 0.914 0.925 0.925 0.019 0.019 3 3

126001A Sandy Creek at Homebush 320063 13/06/2014 12:30 0.022 0.757 0.779 0.015 3 June Mean 0.022 0.757 0.779 0.779 0.015 0.015 3 3 Median 0.022 0.757 0.779 0.779 0.015 0.015 3 3

Annual median MW's values 0.789 0.086 38.50 (calculated as median RT'sof monthly values medians) 0.789 0.086 38.500 Annual mean MH's values 0.826 0.070 55.187

Final Correct Annual Median values Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (mg/L) Filterable0.789 reactive phosphorus (mg/L) 0.086 Total suspended solids 38.50

Nutrients median conditions score 53.25328407 All values calculated by Rae Huggins, then recalculated by Michael Warne, then checked by Ryan Turner and Mike Holmes DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Median 0.789 Median 0.086 Median 38.5 GV 0.03 GV 0.015 GV 5 WCS Based upon ALL Michael's data for Sandy WCS 1.8164 WCS 0.1542 WCS 41 Condition score 57.51231527 Condition score 48.99425287 Condition score 6.944444444

DIN medians FRP medians TSS medians 1.144 0.033 1 0.789 0.012 8 1.3345 0.086 38.5 0.9515 0.1415 110.5 0.171 0.112 52.5 0.1125 0.108 171 0.109 0.092 49 0.925 0.019 3 0.779 0.015 3

DIN means FRP means TSS means 1.144 0.033 1 0.789 0.012 8 1.754 0.0795 49.75 1.6052 0.1562 148 0.1834 0.114 57.3 0.129166667 0.108666667 179.3 0.122333333 0.096 47.33333333 0.925 0.019 3 0.779 0.015 3

Nutrients mean condition score 57.83946125 DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Mean 0.826 Mean 0.070 Mean 55.187 GV 0.03 GV 0.015 GV 5 WCS 1.8164 WCS 0.1542 WCS 41 Condition score 55.45914813 Condition score 60.21977437 Condition score 0 Dissolved inorganic nitrogen Filterable reactive phosphorus Total suspended solids SITE_NO Site Location WQ_ANALYSIS_NO DATE_SAMPLED (mg/L) Michael's calculations (mg/L) Michael's calculations (mg/L) Michael's calculations 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312928 12/08/2013 10:30 0.016 <0.001 8 August Mean 0.016 0.016 <0.001 0.0005 8 8 Median 0.016 0.016 <0.001 0.0005 8 8

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312930 16/09/2013 10:15 0.014 0.001 7 September Mean 0.014 0.014 0.001 0.001 7 7 Median 0.014 0.014 0.001 0.001 7 7

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 312132 27/11/2013 18:30 0.556 0.006 8 November Mean 0.556 0.556 0.006 0.006 8 8 Median 0.556 0.556 0.006 0.006 8 8

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313351 8/01/2014 11:40 0.143 0.006 2 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313358 10/01/2014 12:00 0.679 0.038 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313359 10/01/2014 14:30 0.217 0.016 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313360 10/01/2014 20:00 0.532 0.036 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313361 11/01/2014 2:00 1.645 0.129 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313362 11/01/2014 7:30 2.867 0.165 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313363 11/01/2014 13:00 3.557 0.192 30 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313369 30/01/2014 21:00 1.429 0.063 17 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313370 30/01/2014 21:45 1.612 0.066 7 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313371 30/01/2014 22:30 1.617 0.065 6 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313372 30/01/2014 23:15 1.702 0.067 6 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313373 31/01/2014 1:00 0.958 0.042 6 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313374 31/01/2014 6:45 0.362 0.04 91 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313375 31/01/2014 7:15 0.44 0.04 93 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313377 31/01/2014 13:15 0.704 0.046 118 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313378 31/01/2014 19:30 0.598 0.043 83 January Mean 1.191 1.191 0.066 0.066 40.23 40.23 Median 0.831 0.831 0.045 0.045 30.00 30.00

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313379 1/02/2014 1:30 0.548 0.054 52 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313380 1/02/2014 7:45 0.514 0.058 37 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313381 1/02/2014 13:45 0.519 0.06 35 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313382 1/02/2014 20:00 0.501 0.065 34 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313383 2/02/2014 2:15 0.47 0.057 19 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313384 2/02/2014 5:00 0.426 0.046 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313385 2/02/2014 6:45 0.403 0.034 53 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313386 2/02/2014 13:30 0.255 0.132 84 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313387 2/02/2014 22:30 0.247 0.061 81 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313388 3/02/2014 7:30 0.278 0.06 47 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318250 3/02/2014 12:58 60 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318251 4/02/2014 12:58 56 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318252 5/02/2014 12:58 38 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318253 6/02/2014 12:58 30 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318254 7/02/2014 12:58 35 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318255 8/02/2014 12:58 0.379 0.039 27 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318256 9/02/2014 12:58 0.357 0.034 27 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313396 9/02/2014 18:55 0.432 0.023 34 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313397 10/02/2014 6:29 0.388 0.027 32 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313398 10/02/2014 16:27 0.362 0.029 30 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 313399 11/02/2014 7:45 0.32 0.037 18 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318263 19/02/2014 13:32 0.074 0.015 42 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318264 19/02/2014 14:59 0.09 0.015 18 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318265 19/02/2014 20:48 0.128 0.035 25 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318266 19/02/2014 21:29 0.126 0.036 22 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318267 20/02/2014 3:29 0.192 0.05 45 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318268 20/02/2014 9:29 0.233 0.068 45 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318269 20/02/2014 15:59 0.201 0.064 38 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318270 21/02/2014 0:59 0.209 0.059 41 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318271 21/02/2014 9:59 0.232 0.053 30 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318274 21/02/2014 18:59 0.178 0.05 25 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318275 22/02/2014 4:29 0.144 0.042 16 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318276 22/02/2014 13:29 0.161 0.04 24 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318277 22/02/2014 22:59 0.162 0.038 13 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318278 23/02/2014 7:59 0.166 0.036 12 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318279 23/02/2014 16:59 0.165 0.035 12 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318280 24/02/2014 2:29 0.149 0.033 10 February Mean 0.282 0.282 0.046 0.046 34.57 34.57 Median 0.240 0.240 0.041 0.041 32.00 32.00

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318296 13/04/2014 19:30 0.503 0.02 23 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318297 13/04/2014 20:45 0.413 0.015 14 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318298 13/04/2014 22:00 0.153 0.008 14 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 318299 14/04/2014 0:00 0.146 0.022 49 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320050 14/04/2014 1:30 0.152 0.034 58 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320051 14/04/2014 7:30 0.152 0.031 211 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320052 14/04/2014 10:30 0.144 0.035 156 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320056 14/04/2014 16:29 0.246 0.038 112 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320057 15/04/2014 1:29 0.2 0.039 49 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320058 15/04/2014 10:59 0.176 0.038 34 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320059 15/04/2014 20:29 0.273 0.038 23 125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320060 16/04/2014 12:29 0.298 0.034 66 April Mean 0.238 0.238 0.029 0.029 67.42 67.42 Median 0.188 0.188 0.034 0.034 49.00 49.00

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320061 13/05/2014 14:10 0.185 0.01 54 May Mean 0.185 0.185 0.01 0.01 54 54 Median 0.185 0.185 0.01 0.01 54 54

125013A Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station 320064 13/06/2014 13:02 0.192 0.006 101 June Mean 0.192 0.192 0.006 0.006 101 101 Median 0.192 0.192 0.006 0.006 101 101

Annual median MW's values 0.190 0.008 31.00 RT's values 0.190 0.008 31.000 Annual mean MH's values 0.334 0.021 40.027

Final Correct Annual Median Values Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (mg/L) 0.190Filterable reactive phosphorus (mg/L) 0.008 Total suspended solids 31.000

All values calculated by Rae Huggins, then recalculated by Michael Warne, then checked by Ryan Turner and Mike Holmes

Nutrients conditions score using medians91.46678776 DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Median 0.19 Median 0.008 Median 31 GV 0.008 GV 0.005 GV 5 Based upon ALL data for Pioneer WCS 1.5022 WCS 0.0664 WCS 67 Condition score 87.819569 Condition score 95.11400651 Condition score 58.06451613

DIN medians FRP medians TSS medians 0.016 0.0005 8 0.014 0.001 7 0.556 0.006 8 0.831 0.0445 30 0.24 0.041 32 0.188 0.034 49 0.185 0.01 54 0.192 0.006 101

DIN means FRP means TSS means 0.016 0.0005 8 0.014 0.001 7 0.556 0.006 8 1.191375 0.065875 40.23076923 0.28153125 0.04640625 34.56756757 0.238 0.029333333 67.41666667 0.185 0.01 54 0.192 0.006 101

Nutrients conditions score using means 76.34757394 DIN DIN FRP FRP TSS TSS Mean 0.334 Mean 0.021 Mean 40.027 GV 0.008 GV 0.005 GV 5 WCS 1.5022 WCS 0.0664 WCS 67 Condition score 78.16635783 Condition score 74.52879004 Condition score 43.50503962 Table for Freshwater ms-PAF calculations Beta of common mixture combinations O'Connell Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron 0.3549928 median 2.77 25.80 1.65 7.48 29.97 Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone 0.391935 Beta 0.463486 0.37929 0.395745 0.329219 0.207224 Ametryn Atrazine Diuron 0.4128403 Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone 0.3680847 Concentration Data Atrazine Diuron 0.3875175

Average Beta - based on chemicals Potentially affected Fraction MW Date:Time Exposure Concentrations Hazard Units (HU) Log10 HU present - % of species affected checked Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron 0.3278695 Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Mixture Mixture (select from column y) Mixture Diuron Hexazinone 0.362482

9/08/2013 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #NUM! 0 0.0

8/01/2014 14:50 0.005 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.005 0.001805 0.001938 0.018181818 0.009358289 0.000166834 0.031449979 -1.50238 0.3549928 1.4 10/01/2014 16:30 0.01 0.18 0.36 0.2 0.23 0.00361 0.006977 0.218181818 0.026737968 0.007674341 0.26318098 -0.57975 0.3549928 16.3 30/01/2014 12:30 0.005 0.17 0.45 0.16 0.005 0.001805 0.006589 0.272727273 0.021390374 0.000166834 0.302678682 -0.51902 0.3549928 18.8 30/01/2014 19:00 0.005 0.1 0.31 0.12 0.01 0.001805 0.003876 0.187878788 0.016042781 0.000333667 0.209936259 -0.67791 0.3549928 12.9 30/01/2014 22:00 0.005 0.06 0.39 0.18 0.06 0.001805 0.002326 0.236363636 0.024064171 0.002002002 0.266560445 -0.5742 0.3549928 16.6 31/01/2014 2:00 0.005 0.05 0.32 0.12 0.07 0.001805 0.001938 0.193939394 0.016042781 0.002335669 0.216060882 -0.66542 0.3549928 13.3 31/01/2014 7:00 0.005 0.05 0.32 0.14 0.12 0.001805 0.001938 0.193939394 0.018716578 0.004004004 0.220403014 -0.65678 0.3549928 13.6 31/01/2014 13:00 0.005 0.02 0.2 0.09 0.04 0.001805 0.000775 0.121212121 0.012032086 0.001334668 0.137159123 -0.86278 0.3549928 8.1 31/01/2014 17:00 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.05 0.02 0.001805 0.000388 0.072727273 0.006684492 0.000667334 0.08227175 -1.08475 0.3549928 4.5 31/01/2014 21:00 0.005 0.02 0.13 0.07 0.04 0.001805 0.000775 0.078787879 0.009358289 0.001334668 0.092061084 -1.03592 0.3549928 5.1

1/02/2014 8:00 0.005 0.03 0.17 0.07 0.05 0.001805 0.001163 0.103030303 0.009358289 0.001668335 0.117024772 -0.93172 0.3549928 6.8 9/02/2014 22:21 0 0.02 0.09 0.03 0.005 0 0.000775 0.054545455 0.004010695 0.000166834 0.059498177 -1.2255 0.3278695 2.3 10/02/2014 12:30 0 0.02 0.1 0.04 0.04 0 0.000775 0.060606061 0.005347594 0.001334668 0.068063516 -1.16709 0.3278695 2.8 19/02/2014 9:45 0 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.03 0 0.000194 0.012121212 0.002673797 0.001001001 0.015989808 -1.79616 0.3278695 0.4 19/02/2014 10:01 0 0.005 0.03 0.02 0.05 0 0.000194 0.018181818 0.002673797 0.001668335 0.022717748 -1.64363 0.3278695 0.7 19/02/2014 11:01 0 0.005 0.05 0.03 0.03 0 0.000194 0.03030303 0.004010695 0.001001001 0.035508525 -1.44967 0.3278695 1.2 19/02/2014 15:21 0 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.03 0 0.000388 0.03030303 0.004010695 0.001001001 0.035702323 -1.4473 0.3278695 1.2 19/02/2014 17:31 0 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.04 0 0.000775 0.03030303 0.004010695 0.001334668 0.036423587 -1.43862 0.3278695 1.2 19/02/2014 20:31 0 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04 0 0.000775 0.024242424 0.004010695 0.001334668 0.030362981 -1.51766 0.3278695 1.0 20/02/2014 9:31 0 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0 0.000775 0.012121212 0.001336898 0.000667334 0.014900638 -1.8268 0.3278695 0.4

27/03/2014 20:31 0 0.005 0.06 0.03 0.01 0 0.000194 0.036363636 0.004010695 0.000333667 0.040901797 -1.38826 0.3278695 1.4 27/03/2014 20:53 0 0.005 0.06 0.03 0.01 0 0.000194 0.036363636 0.004010695 0.000333667 0.040901797 -1.38826 0.3278695 1.4 28/03/2014 2:31 0 0.005 0.04 0.02 0.01 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.002673797 0.000333667 0.027443686 -1.56156 0.3278695 0.8

13/04/2014 17:31 0 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.005 0 0.000194 0.006060606 0.002673797 0.000166834 0.009095035 -2.0412 0.3278695 0.2 13/04/2014 18:01 0 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.005 0 0.000194 0.012121212 0.002673797 0.000166834 0.015155641 -1.81943 0.3278695 0.4 13/04/2014 18:31 0 0.005 0.03 0.03 0.005 0 0.000194 0.018181818 0.004010695 0.000166834 0.022553145 -1.64679 0.3278695 0.7 13/04/2014 19:01 0 0.005 0.03 0.03 0.01 0 0.000194 0.018181818 0.004010695 0.000333667 0.022719979 -1.64359 0.3278695 0.7 13/04/2014 19:31 0 0.005 0.03 0.03 0.02 0 0.000194 0.018181818 0.004010695 0.000667334 0.023053646 -1.63726 0.3278695 0.7 13/04/2014 20:01 0 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.09 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.004010695 0.003003003 0.031449921 -1.50238 0.3278695 1.0 13/04/2014 21:01 0 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.12 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.004010695 0.004004004 0.032450922 -1.48877 0.3278695 1.1 13/04/2014 23:01 0 0.005 0.04 0.02 0.09 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.002673797 0.003003003 0.030113022 -1.52125 0.3278695 1.0 14/04/2014 0:31 0 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.08 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.004010695 0.002669336 0.031116254 -1.50701 0.3278695 1.0 14/04/2014 1:59 0 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.005 0 0.000194 0.012121212 0.002673797 0.000166834 0.015155641 -1.81943 0.3278695 0.4 14/04/2014 3:29 0 0.005 0.03 0.03 0.02 0 0.000194 0.018181818 0.004010695 0.000667334 0.023053646 -1.63726 0.3278695 0.7 14/04/2014 4:59 0 0.005 0.04 0.02 0.09 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.002673797 0.003003003 0.030113022 -1.52125 0.3278695 1.0 14/04/2014 6:59 0 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.08 0 0.000194 0.024242424 0.004010695 0.002669336 0.031116254 -1.50701 0.3278695 1.0 14/04/2014 15:17 0 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0 0.000388 0.018181818 0.002673797 0.002335669 0.023578881 -1.62748 0.3278695 0.7

14/05/2014 14:50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

17/06/2014 15:10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron ms-PAF Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Month Mean Median Mean Median Monthly Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) % % July August 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.005 0 0 September October November December January 0.0055 0.005 0.071 0.05 0.263 0.315 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.04 11.1 13.1 February 0.0005 0 0.0155 0.02 0.062 0.05 0.031 0.03 0.034 0.035 1.8 1.2 March 0 0 0.005 0.005 0.053 0.06 0.027 0.03 0.01 0.01 1.2 1.4 April 0 0 0.005357 0.005 0.031 0.03 0.026 0.03 0.049285714 0.045 0.7 0.7 May 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 June 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MW checked Table for Freshwater ms-PAF calculations Beta of common mixture combinations Sandy Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron AmetrynAtrazineDiuronHexazinoneTebuthiuron0.354993 median 2.77 25.80 1.65 7.48 29.97 AmetrynAtrazineDiuronHexazinone 0.391935 Beta 0.463486 0.37929 0.395745 0.329219 0.207224 AmetrynAtrazineDiuron 0.41284 AtrazineDiuronHexazinone 0.368085 Concentration Data AtrazineDiuron 0.387518 AtrazineDiuronHexazinoneTebuthiuron0.32787 DiuronHexazinone 0.362482 Potentially affected MW Average Beta - based on Fraction - % of species check Exposure Concentrations Hazard Units (HU) Log10 HU chemicals present affected ed Date:Time

Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Mixture Mixture (select from column y) Mixture 8/08/2013 17:00 0 0.01 0.03 0.03 0 0 0.000387597 0.018181818 0.004010695 0 0.02258011 -1.646274 0.368084667 1.1

16/09/2013 9:30 0 0.02 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.000775194 0.012121212 0.001336898 0 0.0142333 -1.846694 0.368084667 0.7

17/11/2013 1:08 0.005 0.05 0.03 0.01 0 0.001805054 0.001937984 0.018181818 0.001336898 0 0.02326176 -1.633358 0.391935 1.5 18/11/2013 4:18 0.03 0.39 0.4 0.2 0 0.010830325 0.015116279 0.242424242 0.026737968 0 0.29510881 -0.530018 0.391935 20.5 18/11/2013 8:35 0.17 0.22 0.69 0.18 0 0.061371841 0.008527132 0.418181818 0.024064171 0 0.51214496 -0.290607 0.391935 32.3

8/01/2014 9:30 0.005 0.19 0.41 0.18 0 0.001805054 0.007364341 0.248484848 0.024064171 0 0.28171841 -0.550185 0.391935 19.7 10/01/2014 14:45 0.16 2.2 5.4 2.4 0 0.057761733 0.085271318 3.272727273 0.320855615 0 3.73661594 0.5724785 0.391935 81.2 10/01/2014 17:05 0.14 1.6 6.5 2.1 0 0.050541516 0.062015504 3.939393939 0.280748663 0 4.33269962 0.6367586 0.391935 83.5 10/01/2014 23:15 0.11 4.6 8.5 2.1 0 0.039711191 0.178294574 5.151515152 0.280748663 0 5.65026958 0.7520692 0.391935 87.2 11/01/2014 13:49 0.16 5.1 8.1 2.2 0 0.057761733 0.197674419 4.909090909 0.294117647 0 5.45864471 0.7370848 0.391935 86.8 12/01/2014 10:41 0.17 5.3 9.4 2.4 0 0.061371841 0.205426357 5.696969697 0.320855615 0 6.28462351 0.7982793 0.391935 88.5 30/01/2014 16:30 0.03 0.98 1.3 0.46 0 0.010830325 0.037984496 0.787878788 0.061497326 0 0.89819094 -0.046631 0.391935 47.0 31/01/2014 2:42 0.03 2.3 2.1 1 0 0.010830325 0.089147287 1.272727273 0.13368984 0 1.50639472 0.1779388 0.391935 61.2 31/01/2014 7:24 0.23 1.7 2.1 0.92 0 0.083032491 0.065891473 1.272727273 0.122994652 0 1.54464589 0.1888289 0.391935 61.8 31/01/2014 11:22 0.09 1.3 2.4 0.73 0 0.032490975 0.050387597 1.454545455 0.097593583 0 1.63501761 0.2135224 0.391935 63.3 31/01/2014 18:14 0.07 1.1 2.4 0.79 0 0.025270758 0.042635659 1.454545455 0.105614973 0 1.62806684 0.2116722 0.391935 63.2

9/02/2014 17:32 0.02 0.57 0.65 0.29 0 0.007220217 0.022093023 0.393939394 0.038770053 0 0.46202269 -0.335337 0.391935 29.8 9/02/2014 22:49 0.04 0.36 1.2 0.3 0 0.014440433 0.013953488 0.727272727 0.040106952 0 0.7957736 -0.09921 0.391935 43.7 10/02/2014 10:58 0.02 0.41 2.1 0.33 0 0.007220217 0.015891473 1.272727273 0.044117647 0 1.33995661 0.1270907 0.391935 58.0 10/02/2014 19:50 0.02 0.42 1.3 0.35 0 0.007220217 0.01627907 0.787878788 0.046791444 0 0.85816952 -0.066427 0.391935 45.8 19/02/2014 13:42 0.01 0.15 0.45 0.16 0 0.003610108 0.005813953 0.272727273 0.021390374 0 0.30354171 -0.517782 0.391935 21.1 19/02/2014 15:30 0.01 0.14 0.46 0.14 0 0.003610108 0.005426357 0.278787879 0.018716578 0 0.30654092 -0.513512 0.391935 21.2 20/02/2014 1:52 0.01 0.16 0.53 0.19 0 0.003610108 0.00620155 0.321212121 0.02540107 0 0.35642485 -0.448032 0.391935 24.2 20/02/2014 13:07 0.11 0.62 0.42 0.16 0 0.039711191 0.024031008 0.254545455 0.021390374 0 0.33967803 -0.468933 0.391935 23.2 20/02/2014 16:05 0.09 0.52 0.44 0.13 0 0.032490975 0.020155039 0.266666667 0.017379679 0 0.33669236 -0.472767 0.391935 23.0 21/02/2014 1:16 0.11 0.44 0.35 0.14 0 0.039711191 0.017054264 0.212121212 0.018716578 0 0.28760324 -0.541206 0.391935 20.1 21/02/2014 22:51 0.08 0.35 0.38 0.16 0 0.028880866 0.013565891 0.23030303 0.021390374 0 0.29414016 -0.531446 0.391935 20.5 23/02/2014 9:03 0.05 0.31 0.38 0.17 0 0.018050542 0.012015504 0.23030303 0.022727273 0 0.28309635 -0.548066 0.391935 19.8

26/03/2014 10:24 0.2 0.26 0.29 0.15 0 0.072202166 0.010077519 0.175757576 0.020053476 0 0.27809074 -0.555813 0.391935 19.5 26/03/2014 11:49 0.05 0.12 0.36 0.16 0 0.018050542 0.004651163 0.218181818 0.021390374 0 0.2622739 -0.581245 0.391935 18.5 26/03/2014 20:30 0.005 0.1 0.26 0.08 0 0.001805054 0.003875969 0.157575758 0.010695187 0 0.17395197 -0.759571 0.391935 12.6 27/03/2014 5:13 0.005 0.11 0.26 0.09 0 0.001805054 0.004263566 0.157575758 0.012032086 0 0.17567646 -0.755286 0.391935 12.7 27/03/2014 11:45 0.005 0.11 0.26 0.07 0 0.001805054 0.004263566 0.157575758 0.009358289 0 0.17300267 -0.761947 0.391935 12.5 27/03/2014 11:45 0.005 0.11 0.24 0.07 0 0.001805054 0.004263566 0.145454545 0.009358289 0 0.16088145 -0.793494 0.391935 11.7 27/03/2014 11:53 0.005 0.11 0.21 0.07 0 0.001805054 0.004263566 0.127272727 0.009358289 0 0.14269964 -0.845577 0.391935 10.4 28/03/2014 0:02 0.005 0.14 0.31 0.07 0 0.001805054 0.005426357 0.187878788 0.009358289 0 0.20446849 -0.689374 0.391935 14.7 28/03/2014 4:37 0.005 0.15 0.32 0.11 0 0.001805054 0.005813953 0.193939394 0.014705882 0 0.21626428 -0.665015 0.391935 15.5 28/03/2014 8:30 0.005 0.13 0.34 0.08 0 0.001805054 0.00503876 0.206060606 0.010695187 0 0.22359961 -0.650529 0.391935 16.0 28/03/2014 13:15 0.005 0.12 0.33 0.08 0 0.001805054 0.004651163 0.2 0.010695187 0 0.2171514 -0.663237 0.391935 15.5 28/03/2014 17:03 0.005 0.07 0.27 0.06 0 0.001805054 0.002713178 0.163636364 0.00802139 0 0.17617599 -0.754053 0.391935 12.7 28/03/2014 18:37 0.005 0.15 0.32 0.11 0 0.001805054 0.005813953 0.193939394 0.014705882 0 0.21626428 -0.665015 0.391935 15.5 29/03/2014 10:06 0.005 0.14 0.34 0.09 0 0.001805054 0.005426357 0.206060606 0.012032086 0 0.2253241 -0.647192 0.391935 16.1 31/03/2014 11:15 0.005 0.09 0.22 0.07 0 0.001805054 0.003488372 0.133333333 0.009358289 0 0.14798505 -0.829782 0.391935 10.7

14/04/2014 10:23 0.005 0.26 0.2 0.09 0 0.001805054 0.010077519 0.121212121 0.012032086 0 0.14512678 -0.838252 0.391935 10.5 14/04/2014 22:32 0.01 0.42 0.34 0.13 0 0.003610108 0.01627907 0.206060606 0.017379679 0 0.24332946 -0.613805 0.391935 17.3 15/04/2014 22:08 0.01 0.25 0.26 0.11 0 0.003610108 0.009689922 0.157575758 0.014705882 0 0.18558167 -0.731465 0.391935 13.4

13/05/2014 15:15 0.005 0.13 0.06 0.04 0 0.001805054 0.00503876 0.036363636 0.005347594 0 0.04855504 -1.313766 0.391935 3.4

13/06/2014 12:30 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.1 0 0.003610108 0.003100775 0.03030303 0.013368984 0 0.0503829 -1.297717 0.391935 3.5 Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron ms-PAF Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Month Mean Median Mean Monthly Median Monthly Mean Median Mean Monthly Median Monthly Mean Monthly Median Monthly Mean Median (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) % % July August 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0 0 1.1 1.1 September 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0 0 0.7 0.7 October November 0.068 0.03 0.22 0.22 0.373 0.4 0.13 0.18 0 0 18.1 20.5 December January 0.109 0.11 2.397 1.7 4.419 2.4 1.389 1 0 0 67.6 63.3 February 0.048 0.03 0.371 0.385 0.722 0.455 0.210 0.165 0 0 29.2 23.1 March 0.021 0.005 0.127 0.12 0.289 0.29 0.091 0.08 0 0 14.3 14.7 April 0.008 0.01 0.31 0.26 0.267 0.26 0.11 0.11 0 0 13.7 13.4 May 0.005 0.005 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04 0 0 3.4 3.4 June 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.1 0 0 3.5 3.5

MW checked Table for Freshwater ms-PAF calculations Beta of common mixture combinations Pioneer Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Ametryn AtrazineDiuronHexazinoneTebuthiuron0.354993 median 2.77 25.80 1.65 7.48 29.97 Ametryn AtrazineDiuronHexazinone 0.391935 Beta 0.463486 0.37929 0.395745 0.329219 0.207224 Ametryn AtrazineDiuron 0.41284 AtrazineDiuronHexazinone 0.368085 Concentration Data AtrazineDiuron 0.387518 AtrazineDiuronHexazinoneTebuthiuron0.32787 DiuronHexazinone 0.362482 Average Beta - based on Potentially affected MW Exposure Concentrations Hazard Units (HU) Log10 HU chemicals present Fraction - % of species Checked Date:Time

Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron Mixture Mixture (select from column y) Mixture 12/08/2013 10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #NUM! 0 0

16/09/2013 10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #NUM! 0 0

8/01/2014 11:40 0.02 0.85 0.54 0.17 0 0.00722022 0.032945736 0.32727273 0.022727273 0 0.390165953 -0.40875063 0.391935 26.1 10/01/2014 12:00 0.01 0.83 0.43 0.11 0 0.00361011 0.032170543 0.26060606 0.014705882 0 0.311092594 -0.50711033 0.391935 21.5 10/01/2014 14:30 0.02 1.1 1.7 0.11 0 0.00722022 0.042635659 1.03030303 0.014705882 0 1.094864788 0.039360489 0.391935 52.5 11/01/2014 13:00 0.04 3.3 6.5 1.1 0 0.01444043 0.127906977 3.93939394 0.147058824 0 4.228800173 0.626217164 0.391935 83.2 30/01/2014 21:00 0.14 1.8 3.3 0.57 0 0.05054152 0.069767442 2 0.076203209 0 2.196512167 0.341733613 0.391935 70.5 30/01/2014 21:45 0.14 1.8 3.6 0.54 0 0.05054152 0.069767442 2.18181818 0.072192513 0 2.374319653 0.375539187 0.391935 72.3 30/01/2014 22:30 0.14 1.7 2.8 0.48 0 0.05054152 0.065891473 1.6969697 0.064171123 0 1.877573809 0.273597019 0.391935 66.8 30/01/2014 23:15 0.15 1.9 3.2 0.53 0 0.05415162 0.073643411 1.93939394 0.070855615 0 2.13804459 0.330016758 0.391935 69.9 31/01/2014 1:00 0.14 1.7 2.8 0.51 0 0.05054152 0.065891473 1.6969697 0.068181818 0 1.881584504 0.274523728 0.391935 66.8 31/01/2014 6:45 0.03 1 1.4 0.21 0 0.01083032 0.03875969 0.84848485 0.028074866 0 0.92614973 -0.0333188 0.391935 47.9 31/01/2014 7:15 0.02 0.77 1.2 0.16 0 0.00722022 0.029844961 0.72727273 0.021390374 0 0.785728279 -0.10472762 0.391935 43.4 31/01/2014 13:15 0.04 1.2 1.5 0.23 0 0.01444043 0.046511628 0.90909091 0.030748663 0 1.000791633 0.000343666 0.391935 50.0 31/01/2014 19:30 0.02 1.1 1.3 0.18 0 0.00722022 0.042635659 0.78787879 0.024064171 0 0.861798835 -0.0645941 0.391935 45.9

1/02/2014 1:30 0.03 0.79 0.91 0.14 0 0.01083032 0.030620155 0.55151515 0.018716578 0 0.611682209 -0.21347415 0.391935 36.7 1/02/2014 7:45 0.03 0.65 0.92 0.15 0 0.01083032 0.025193798 0.55757576 0.020053476 0 0.613653357 -0.21207689 0.391935 36.8 1/02/2014 13:45 0.03 0.56 0.73 0.15 0 0.01083032 0.021705426 0.44242424 0.020053476 0 0.49501347 -0.30538298 0.391935 31.4 1/02/2014 20:00 0.02 0.47 0.64 0.16 0 0.00722022 0.018217054 0.38787879 0.021390374 0 0.434706433 -0.36180393 0.391935 28.4 2/02/2014 2:15 0.02 0.4 0.55 0.12 0 0.00722022 0.015503876 0.33333333 0.016042781 0 0.372100207 -0.42934009 0.391935 25.1 2/02/2014 5:00 0.005 0.31 0.4 0.06 0 0.00180505 0.012015504 0.24242424 0.00802139 0 0.264266191 -0.5779584 0.391935 18.6 2/02/2014 6:45 0.005 0.29 0.38 0.05 0 0.00180505 0.01124031 0.23030303 0.006684492 0 0.250032887 -0.60200287 0.391935 17.7 2/02/2014 13:30 0.005 0.13 0.25 0.04 0 0.00180505 0.00503876 0.15151515 0.005347594 0 0.163706559 -0.78593392 0.391935 11.9 2/02/2014 22:30 0.005 0.28 0.48 0.08 0 0.00180505 0.010852713 0.29090909 0.010695187 0 0.314262045 -0.50270807 0.391935 21.7 3/02/2014 7:30 0.01 0.22 0.34 0.06 0 0.00361011 0.008527132 0.20606061 0.00802139 0 0.226219237 -0.64547047 0.391935 16.2 9/02/2014 18:55 0.005 0.08 0.13 0.04 0 0.00180505 0.003100775 0.07878788 0.005347594 0 0.089041302 -1.0504085 0.391935 6.4 10/02/2014 6:29 0.005 0.1 0.16 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.003875969 0.0969697 0.004010695 0 0.106661415 -0.97199266 0.391935 7.7 10/02/2014 16:27 0.005 0.11 0.18 0.05 0 0.00180505 0.004263566 0.10909091 0.006684492 0 0.121844021 -0.91419578 0.391935 8.8 11/02/2014 7:45 0.005 0.13 0.25 0.07 0 0.00180505 0.00503876 0.15151515 0.009358289 0 0.167717254 -0.77542226 0.391935 12.1 19/02/2014 13:32 0.005 0.08 0.14 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.003100775 0.08484848 0.004010695 0 0.093765009 -1.0279592 0.391935 6.8 19/02/2014 14:59 0.005 0.07 0.11 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.002713178 0.06666667 0.004010695 0 0.075195594 -1.1238076 0.391935 5.4 19/02/2014 20:48 0.005 0.18 0.32 0.04 0 0.00180505 0.006976744 0.19393939 0.005347594 0 0.208068786 -0.68179307 0.391935 14.9 19/02/2014 21:29 0.005 0.17 0.37 0.04 0 0.00180505 0.006589147 0.22424242 0.005347594 0 0.237984219 -0.62345184 0.391935 16.9 20/02/2014 3:29 0.02 0.22 0.45 0.07 0 0.00722022 0.008527132 0.27272727 0.009358289 0 0.29783291 -0.52602732 0.391935 20.7 20/02/2014 9:29 0.01 0.76 0.78 0.1 0 0.00361011 0.029457364 0.47272727 0.013368984 0 0.519163729 -0.28469566 0.391935 32.6 20/02/2014 15:59 0.02 0.54 0.7 0.1 0 0.00722022 0.020930233 0.42424242 0.013368984 0 0.465761857 -0.33183608 0.391935 30.0 21/02/2014 0:59 0.005 0.93 0.46 0.07 0 0.00180505 0.036046512 0.27878788 0.009358289 0 0.325997733 -0.48678542 0.391935 22.4 21/02/2014 9:59 0.005 0.57 0.34 0.06 0 0.00180505 0.022093023 0.20606061 0.00802139 0 0.237980074 -0.62345941 0.391935 16.9 21/02/2014 18:59 0.005 0.84 0.25 0.04 0 0.00180505 0.03255814 0.15151515 0.005347594 0 0.191225939 -0.7184532 0.391935 13.8 22/02/2014 4:29 0.005 0.47 0.19 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.018217054 0.11515152 0.004010695 0 0.139184319 -0.85640969 0.391935 10.1 22/02/2014 13:29 0.005 0.49 0.15 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.018992248 0.09090909 0.004010695 0 0.115717088 -0.9366025 0.391935 8.4 22/02/2014 22:59 0.005 0.4 0.18 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.015503876 0.10909091 0.004010695 0 0.130410534 -0.88468733 0.391935 9.5 23/02/2014 7:59 0.005 0.35 0.16 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.013565891 0.0969697 0.004010695 0 0.116351338 -0.93422862 0.391935 8.4 23/02/2014 16:59 0.005 0.28 0.14 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.010852713 0.08484848 0.004010695 0 0.101516947 -0.99346145 0.391935 7.3 24/02/2014 2:29 0.005 0.25 0.13 0.03 0 0.00180505 0.009689922 0.07878788 0.004010695 0 0.094293551 -1.02551801 0.391935 6.8

13/04/2014 19:30 0 0.03 0.04 0.005 0 0 0.001162791 0.02424242 0.000668449 0 0.026073664 -1.58379793 0.368084667 1.3 13/04/2014 20:45 0 0.02 0.03 0.005 0 0 0.000775194 0.01818182 0.000668449 0 0.019625461 -1.70718013 0.368084667 1.0 13/04/2014 22:00 0 0.01 0.02 0.005 0 0 0.000387597 0.01212121 0.000668449 0 0.013177258 -1.88017494 0.368084667 0.6 14/04/2014 0:00 0 0.04 0.04 0.005 0 0 0.001550388 0.02424242 0.000668449 0 0.026461261 -1.57738946 0.368084667 1.4 14/04/2014 1:30 0 0.06 0.1 0.03 0 0 0.002325581 0.06060606 0.004010695 0 0.066942337 -1.17429913 0.368084667 4.0 14/04/2014 7:30 0 0.04 0.08 0.02 0 0 0.001550388 0.04848485 0.002673797 0 0.052709033 -1.27811495 0.368084667 3.0 14/04/2014 10:30 0 0.03 0.08 0.02 0 0 0.001162791 0.04848485 0.002673797 0 0.052321436 -1.28132035 0.368084667 3.0 14/04/2014 16:29 0 0.03 0.09 0.03 0 0 0.001162791 0.05454545 0.004010695 0 0.05971894 -1.22388791 0.368084667 3.5 15/04/2014 1:29 0 0.04 0.09 0.03 0 0 0.001550388 0.05454545 0.004010695 0 0.060106537 -1.22107829 0.368084667 3.5 15/04/2014 10:59 0 0.03 0.08 0.03 0 0 0.001162791 0.04848485 0.004010695 0 0.053658334 -1.27036281 0.368084667 3.1 15/04/2014 20:29 0 0.03 0.07 0.03 0 0 0.001162791 0.04242424 0.004010695 0 0.047597728 -1.32241377 0.368084667 2.7 16/04/2014 12:29 0 0.03 0.07 0.02 0 0 0.001162791 0.04242424 0.002673797 0 0.04626083 -1.33478658 0.368084667 2.6 13/05/2014 14:10 0 0.03 0.02 0 0 0 0.001162791 0.01212121 0 0 0.013284003 -1.87667104 0.3875175 0.8

13/06/2014 13:02 0 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0.000775194 0.01212121 0 0 0.012896406 -1.88953131 0.3875175 0.8

Ametryn Atrazine Diuron Hexazinone Tebuthiuron ms-PAF Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Month Mean Median Mean Monthly Median Monthly Mean Median Mean Median Mean Monthly Median Monthly Mean Median (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) % % July August 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 September 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 October November December January 0.070 0.040 1.465 1.200 2.328 1.700 0.377 0.230 0.000 0.000 55.1 52.5 February 0.010 0.005 0.371 0.300 0.373 0.330 0.065 0.050 0.000 0.000 17.0 15.5 March April 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.030 0.066 0.075 0.019 0.020 0.000 0.000 2.5 2.8 May 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.030 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.8 0.8 June 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.8 0.8

MW checked O'Connell River

Area Under Curve & Risk Categories Risk Category Table Condition (AUC of whole Progress towards period of wet season, Daily Average % Daily Average % Species target (AUC above including below the Species Affected Risk Affected Over the Entire Wet the target) target) No. Days (wet season) Category Risk Classification Season 2013-14 605.3270748 706.9583706 182 3.88 Low Lower limit Upper limit Very High 20.01 100 High 10.01 20 Moderate 5.01 10 Low 1.01 5 Very low 0 1

Workings: Cumulative frequency distribution of the daily average ms-PAF and AUC calculations for the wet season 2009-10 No. of Progress Condition (AUC of whole log- days in towards target period of wet season, normal culmulative log- wet (AUC above the including below the No. Days Daily Average ms-PAF ms-PAF norm season target) target) Parameters 3.9 -0.7 175 5.60353113 3.414061 y-intercept of cumulative frequency plot 0 16.3 2.791165 0.154483517 0 440.6642331 440.6642331 10/01/2014 1 16.3 2.791165 0.154483517 27.03462 2.441993301 2.441993301 30/01/2014 2 16.1 2.778819 0.155344891 27.18536 98.58448272 98.58448272 31/01/2014 3 8.9 2.186051 0.200412083 35.07211 31.34990765 31.34990765 1/02/2014 4 6.8 1.916923 0.223232762 39.06573 71.23503784 71.23503784 10/02/2014 5 2.8 1.029619 0.308036378 53.90637 9.172640926 9.172640926 9/02/2014 6 2.3 0.832909 0.328591316 57.50348 17.51774133 17.51774133 8/01/2014 7 1.4 0.336472 0.382700169 66.97253 0 0 27/03/2014 8 1.4 0.336472 0.382700169 66.97253 8.001405524 12.28354832 Target 9 1 0 0.4208021 73.64037 28/03/2014 10 0.8 -0.22314 0.44651081 78.13939 0 14/04/2014 11 0.8 -0.22314 0.44651081 78.13939 2.034352247 13/04/2014 12 0.7 -0.35667 0.462010637 80.85186 6.286437254 20/02/2014 13 0.4 -0.91629 0.52732427 92.28175 15.3879959 9/08/2013 14 0.0 -6.90776 0.965884895 169.0299 0 14/05/2014 15 0.0 -6.90776 0.965884895 169.0299 0 17/06/2014 16 0.0 -6.90776 0.965884895 169.0299

AUC AUC 678.9674424 706.9583706 AUC below Target (1% msPAF) 73.64036756 AUC above Target (1% msPAF) 605.3270748

All calculations checked by Michael Warne 25/8/20125 Sandy Creek

Area Under Curve & Risk Categories

Progress towards Condition (AUC of Daily Average % Species Affected target (AUC above whole period of wet (during wet season - 6 month the target) season, including below No. Days (6 months) period) Risk Category 2013-14 6324.154806 6525.723646 182 35.86 Very High

2013-14 Condition (AUC of log- Progress towards whole period of wet normal No. of days in target (AUC season, including No. Days Daily Average ms-PAF ms-PAF culmulative log-norm wet season above the target) below the target) Parameters 33.80985684 3.111523 202 28.94941294 1.064295 y-intercept of cumulative frequency plot 0 90.454 4.504841 0.095242335 0 1740.240126 1740.240126 12/01/2014 1 90.454 4.504841 0.095242335 19.23895157 51.85296269 51.85296269 11/01/2014 2 88.85819 4.487042 0.098105473 19.81730559 91.37494976 91.37494976 10/01/2014 3 86.12849 4.45584 0.103275595 20.86167022 918.7695806 918.7695806 31/01/2014 4 63.58706 4.15241 0.164035673 33.13520601 590.2503987 590.2503987 10/02/2014 5 52.0957 3.953082 0.214553688 43.33984495 309.8471938 309.8471938 30/01/2014 6 46.72075 3.844188 0.245599065 49.61101122 727.7864012 727.7864012 9/02/2014 7 35.52747 3.570306 0.333209544 67.30832798 815.2677669 815.2677669 18/11/2013 8 24.47605 3.197695 0.467734287 94.482326 237.781785 237.781785 20/02/2014 9 21.33801 3.06049 0.519121898 104.8626234 179.136389 179.136389 19/02/2014 10 18.96104 2.942386 0.563133547 113.7529764 65.42286438 65.42286438 21/02/2014 11 18.0828 2.894961 0.580619615 117.2851623 35.91859633 35.91859633 23/02/2014 12 17.59722 2.867741 0.590586809 119.2985354 6.368530968 6.368530968 8/01/2014 13 17.51083 2.86282 0.592382829 119.6613314 202.8863063 202.8863063 26/03/2014 14 14.69854 2.687748 0.654749007 132.2592994 54.85063907 54.85063907 29/03/2014 15 13.90606 2.632325 0.673734612 136.0943916 71.91349253 71.91349253 28/03/2014 16 12.83667 2.552306 0.700359223 141.472563 186.2879982 186.2879982 27/03/2014 17 9.807549 2.283152 0.781812049 157.9260338 53.79122534 53.79122534 31/03/2014 18 8.806754 2.175519 0.810423724 163.7055922 186.0580763 185.9764398 Target 1 0 0.998269689 201.6504772 17/11/2013 19 0.994097 -0.00592 0.998300357 201.6566721

AUC 6525.805283 6525.723646 AUC below Target (1% msPAF) 201.6504772 AUC above Target (1% msPAF) 6324.154806

All calculations checked by Michael Warne 25/8/20125 Pioneer River

Area Under Curve & Risk Categories

Condition (AUC of whole Progress towards period of wet season, Daily Average % Species target (AUC including below the Affected (during wet Risk above the target) target) No. Days (6 months)season - 6 month period) Category 2013-14 4307.076554 4477.066743 182 24.60 Very High

2013-14 No. of Progress Condition (AUC of log- days in towards target whole period of wet normal wet (AUC above the season, including below No. Days Daily Average ms-PAF ms-PAF culmulative log-norm season target) the target) Parameters 26.04491544 2.940251 178 22.76056187 0.812987 y-intercept of cumulative frequency plot 0 83.17047592 4.420892 0.034285506 0 507.5744555 507.5744555 11/01/2014 1 83.17047592 4.420892 0.034285506 6.10282 269.2044645 269.2044645 30/01/2014 2 69.86369732 4.246546 0.054050825 9.621047 624.848384 624.848384 31/01/2014 3 50.79493402 3.927797 0.112237863 19.97834 721.5604049 721.5604049 10/01/2014 4 37.01425273 3.611303 0.204567841 36.41308 239.9364006 239.9364006 1/02/2014 5 33.34638115 3.506949 0.242883508 43.23326 410.6820336 410.6820336 20/02/2014 6 27.77608229 3.324175 0.318377927 56.67127 136.5783166 136.5783166 8/01/2014 7 26.05900285 3.260363 0.346883275 61.74522 606.3155325 606.3155325 2/02/2014 8 18.99421568 2.944134 0.498094094 88.66075 112.2759685 112.2759685 21/02/2014 9 17.7079923 2.874016 0.532466079 94.77896 134.5530823 134.5530823 3/02/2014 10 16.15308807 2.782111 0.577114164 102.7263 327.4398492 327.4398492 11/02/2014 11 12.14845863 2.497202 0.707110572 125.8657 83.28715929 83.28715929 19/02/2014 12 11.00333466 2.398198 0.747531233 133.0606 109.2067537 109.2067537 22/02/2014 13 9.326277192 2.232836 0.807888616 143.8042 58.27038084 58.27038084 10/02/2014 14 8.286932687 2.11468 0.845060908 150.4208 19.86200765 19.86200765 23/02/2014 15 7.894319427 2.066143 0.85885271 152.8758 48.17743257 48.17743257 24/02/2014 16 6.808077713 1.91811 0.89567116 159.4295 14.83586291 14.83586291 9/02/2014 17 6.416039878 1.858801 0.908276545 161.6732 60.44149904 52.45825382 Target 1 0 0.999850751 177.9734 Anchor point 0.01 -4.60517 1 178 AUC 4485.049988 4477.066743 AUC below Target (1% msPAF) 177.9734337 AUC above Target (1% msPAF) 4307.076554

All calculations checked by Michael Warne 25/8/20125 Pre-Clearing-1988 Pre-Clearing-1988 Pre-Clearing-2013 Pre-Clearing-2013 Pre-Clearing-2013 Pre-Clearing Catchment Forest Loss (ha) Forest Loss (%) Forest Loss (ha) Forest Loss (%) Forest Loss (ha) Remaining O'Connell River 6737.5 17.209 8622.7 22.024 8622.7 77.976 Plane Creek 10018.6 24.022 12323.1 29.548 12323.1 70.452 Don River 20015.7 25.955 22887.3 29.679 22887.3 70.321 Pioneer River 6280.8 18.366 6840.1 20.001 6840.1 79.999 Proserpine River 5194.7 12.169 9686.9 22.692 9686.9 77.308 Mackay-Whitsunday Total 48247.3 20.543 60360.1 25.7 60360.1 74.3

Riparian forest remaining since pre-European extent - Mackay- 82 Whitsunday and Don 80

78

76

74 % 72

70

68

66

64 O'Connell River Plane Creek Don River Pioneer River Proserpine River Mackay-Whitsunday Total Mackay-Whitsunday - Pilot Report Card - Scoring and rating of impounded stream length

Attributes of OrderedDrainage100KSO3plusAlbers.shp Results Rating

OBJECTID SO SHAPE_LEN Impounded MWBasin Basin Not impounded (km)Impounded (km) Total (km) % total Rating % total Rating 4410502 4 0.66575467999N Don River Don River 938 0 938 0.0Very good x < 1 Very good 4410905 3 3.05744214291N Don River Proserpine River 518 38 555 6.8Moderate 1 ≤ x < 4 Good 4410773 3 1.15574652633N Don River O'Connell River 595 0 595 0.0Very good 4 ≤ x < 7 Moderate 4413233 4 1.00043284958Y Proserpine River Pioneer River 506 62 568 10.9Very poor 7 ≤ x < 10Poor 4413234 3 0.10307914426N Proserpine River Plane Creek 612 7 620 1.2Good x ≥ 10 Very poor 4413228 3 0.24242081279 N Plane Creek 4412995 6 2.68403735237 N Proserpine River 4413078 3 0.69395606422 N Pioneer River 4413079 3 0.42947792652 N Pioneer River 4412856 3 0.77701510393 N Plane Creek 4412853 3 0.33279705197 N O'Connell River 4413121 5 0.90582770539 N Pioneer River 4413123 4 1.49406864255 N O'Connell River 4413160 4 0.87839438426 N Plane Creek 4412941 4 2.74863003578 N Proserpine River 4413207 3 0.44914215860 N Pioneer River 4413222 3 0.88111427632 Y Proserpine River 4413213 4 0.17689235059 N Pioneer River 4413465 3 0.77871812009 N Plane Creek 4413642 3 1.90738028786 N O'Connell River 4413485 3 0.43747303281 N O'Connell River 4413660 3 0.52552312316 N Plane Creek 4413329 4 0.13529542841 N Pioneer River 4413540 4 2.46039992603 N Proserpine River 4413566 5 1.54128275437 N O'Connell River 4413597 5 0.15850508189 N Pioneer River 4413814 4 3.16712465712N Don River 4413808 3 0.37358711746N Don River 4413406 3 0.83561458010 N Plane Creek 4413629 3 0.27672947935 N Plane Creek 4413440 4 2.05786304536 N O'Connell River 4413867 3 1.21863960838 N Pioneer River 4413447 3 0.59837349666 N O'Connell River 4413448 3 2.14727860706 N Proserpine River 4413462 6 2.37896370259 Y Pioneer River 4415853 5 2.40378411604 N Plane Creek 4415866 3 0.95179816465 N Plane Creek 4416282 3 1.37950523128 N O'Connell River 4417128 3 1.38642149799 N Plane Creek 4416988 3 0.94891274517 N Proserpine River 4417149 3 2.98055892353N Don River 4416809 3 0.97166855015 N Proserpine River 4416625 3 0.34172621923 N Proserpine River 4417031 5 0.49002105575N Don River 4417219 4 0.56252368565N Don River 4417054 4 3.73770343854 N O'Connell River 4416964 3 2.30733475900 N Plane Creek 4418301 3 1.30261212297N Don River 4417649 3 0.50988532102 N Plane Creek 4418216 4 1.03871399596 N Plane Creek 4418985 3 1.34917359418N Don River 4419963 3 1.68814693996 N O'Connell River 4419132 3 0.27578921680 Y Proserpine River 4419311 4 0.74958209986 N O'Connell River 4419178 3 0.64444927759 N Proserpine River Wetland extent KD input Loss 2001- Loss 2005- Loss 2009- Extent 2013 Extent 2013 Loss since Extent 2013 Extent 2013 Loss 2001- Loss 2005- Loss 2009- 05 (% of 09 (% of 13 (% of (NRM Region)(ha) (% pre-clear) pre-clear (%) % catch % natural 2005 (ha) 2009 (ha) 2013 (ha) Extent 2001 Extent 2005 Extent 2009 2013) 2013) 2013) Don 5,211 52 48 1.4 10 7 -26 6 5,197 5,191 5,217 0.1 -0.5 0.1 O'Connell 688 44 56 0.3 85 2 0 0 690 688 688 0.2 0.0 0.0 Pioneer 146 17 83 0.1 89 0 3 1 150 150 147 0.2 1.8 0.4 Plane Creek 2,594 55 45 1.0 40 2 2 2 2,601 2,599 2,597 0.1 0.1 0.1 Proserpine 6,705 86 14 2.6 68 0 -4 0 6,701 6,701 6,705 0.0 -0.1 0.0 HABITAT & HYDROLOGY Impounded Length* Assessment system Basin Not impounded (km) Impounded (km) Total (km) % total Rating % total Rating *The Impoundment Length index is 50% of the Hydrological Modification indicator. The Don River 938 0 938 0.0 Very Good x < 1 Very Good other 50% is Fish Barriers (not being Proserpine River 518 38 555 6.8 Moderate 1 ≤ x < 4 Good assessed this year). Based upon our decision O'Connell River 595 0 595 0.0 Very Good 4 ≤ x < 7 Moderate rules of ≥50% indices can be used to Pioneer River 506 62 568 10.9 Very Poor 7 ≤ x < 10 Poor generate an Indicator Score, the Plane Creek 612 7 620 1.2 Good x ≥ 10 Very Poor Impoundment length score is used for the Hydrological Modification score. Assessment System Pre-Clearing-2013 Riparian Forest Loss Riparian Extent** % Rating % loss Rating **Data from Dan Tindall's group Don River 29.679 Poor <5% Very Good Proserpine River 22.692 Moderate 5.1-15% Good O'Connell River 22.024 Moderate 15.1-25% Moderate Pioneer River 20.001 Moderate 25.1-35% Poor Plane Creek 29.548 Poor >35% Very Poor

Assessment System Extent 2013 % Pre- Loss 2013 Pre-Clear **Data from Don Butler's group (Herbarium) Wetland Extent** Clear % Rating % loss Rating for Palustrine Wetlands Don River 52 48 Very Poor <5% Very Good Proserpine River 86 14 Good 5.1-15% Good O'Connell River 44 56 Very Poor 15.1-25% Moderate Pioneer River 17 83 Very Poor 25.1-35% Poor Plane Creek 55 45 Very Poor >35% Very Poor

Flow Don River Proserpine River O'Connell River Pioneer River Not included in Plane Creek pilot report card

WATER QUALITY Nutrients DIN WCS Median DIN (90th %ile) Median FRP (mg/L) FRP WCS 90th %ile DIN FRP Average score Assessment (mg/L) (mg/L) DIN GV GV = 0.005 (mg/L) FRP GV Don River No data No data Proserpine River No data No data O'Connell River 84.4 77.9 81.15 VG 0.082 0.3626 0.03 0.024 0.0876 0.006 Pioneer River 87.8 95.1 91.45 VG 0.19 1.5022 0.008 0.008 0.0664 0.005 Plane Creek 57.5 49.0 53.25 M 0.789 1.8164 0.03 0.086 0.1542 0.015 Sediments

Median TSS TSS WCS 90th TSS Assessment (mg/L) GV = 5 %ile (mg/L) TSS GV Don River No data Proserpine River No data O'Connell River 87.3 87.3 VG 23 167 2 Pioneer River 58.1 58.1 M 31 67 5 Plane Creek 6.9 6.9 VP 38.5 41 5

Contaminants Daily Average % Species affected (wet season Risk Category Assessment Don River No data No data Proserpine River No data No data O'Connell River 4.62 Low Risk Low Risk Pioneer River 24.5 Very High Risk Very High Risk Plane Creek 34.48 Very High Risk Very High Risk HABITAT & HYDROLOGY Hydrological Modification Beer Coaster Basin (Impoundment length) Riparian extent Wetland extent Flow Assessment Don River Very Good Poor Very Poor Proserpine River Moderate Moderate Good O'Connell River Very Good Moderate Very Poor Pioneer River Very Poor Moderate Very Poor Plane Creek Good Poor Very Poor Average score Assessment Don River 90 30 10 43.3 Moderate Proserpine River 50 50 70 56.7 Moderate O'Connell River 90 50 10 50.0 Moderate Pioneer River 10 50 10 23.3 Poor Plane Creek 70 30 10 36.7 Poor

Assigning midpoint values to WATER QUALITY Beer Coaster standardised scores for averaging to Basin Sediment Nutrients Contaminants produce the Indicator Category Don River No Data No Data No Data VG = 90 Proserpine River No Data No Data No Data G = 70 O'Connell River Very Good Very Good Low Risk M = 50 Pioneer River Moderate Very Good Very High Risk P = 30 Plane Creek Very Poor Moderate Very High Risk VP = 10 Average score Assessment Don River No Data No Data No Data No Data Greyed Out Proserpine River No Data No Data No Data No Data Greyed Out O'Connell River 90 90 70 83.3 Very Good Pioneer River 50 90 10 50.0 Moderate Plane Creek 10 50 10 23.3 Poor

WATER QUALITY & HABITAT & HYDROLOGY Habitat & Basin Water Quality Hydrology Don River Moderate No data Proserpine River Moderate No data O'Connell River Moderate Very Good Pioneer River Poor Moderate Plane Creek Poor Poor

Habitat & Beer Coaster Basin Water Quality Hydrology Average score Assessment Don River 50 No data 50 Moderate Proserpine River 50 No data 50 Moderate O'Connell River 50 90 70 Good Pioneer River 30 50 40 Poor Plane Creek 30 30 30 Poor

Appendix B - Confidence ratings for freshwater basin indicators

Table B1. Confidence ratings associated with water quality sediment data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 3 x0.5 = 1.5 3 2 3 2 Total score 11.5 Number of confidence bars 4

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 54 of 59

Table B2. Confidence ratings associated with water quality nutrients data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 3 x0.5 = 1.5 3 2 3 2 Total score 11.5 Number of confidence bars 4

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 55 of 59

Table B3. Confidence ratings associated with water quality contaminants data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 2 x0.5 = 1 2 2 2 1 Total score 8 Number of confidence bars 3

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 56 of 59

Table B4. Confidence ratings associated with habitat and hydrology impoundment length data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 1 x0.5 = 0.5 1 2 2 2 Total score 7.5 Number of confidence bars 3

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 57 of 59

Table B5. Confidence ratings associated with habitat and hydrology riparian vegetation extent data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 2 x0.5 = 1 2 2 1 2 Total score 8 Number of confidence bars 3

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 58 of 59

Table B6. Confidence ratings associated with habitat and hydrology wetland extent data (highlighted cells indicate the relevant assessment for this data).

Maturity of Directness of measurement Spatial/temporal Strength of relationship Measured methodology between Methodology, error (weighting 0.5) indicator reported and measured data New or Remote sensed data with no or 1:1,000,000 OR Measurement of data Error not experimental limited ground truthing OR that have conceptual measured Less than 10% of methodology relationship to reported OR Modelling with no ground population survey indicator truthing OR data >25% error Survey with no ground truthing Peer reviewed Remote sensed data with 1:100,000 OR Measurement of data 10-25% method regular ground truthing (not that have a quantifiable error 10%-30% of comprehensive) OR relationship to reported population survey indicators Modelling with documented data validation (not comprehensive) OR Survey with ground-truthing (not comprehensive) Established Remote sensed data with 1:10,000 OR Direct measurement of Less than methodology comprehensive validation reported indicator with 10% error 30-50% of in published program supporting (statistical error population paper error measured) OR Modelling with comprehensive validation and supporting documentation OR Survey with extensive on ground validation or directly measured data 2 x0.5 = 1 2 2 1 2 Total score 8 Number of confidence bars 3

Freshwater Scoring Methods and Results Pilot Report Card Page 59 of 59