Kooragang Ramsar Wetland Ecological Character Description
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Hunter Estuary Wetlands Ramsar Site Is Located in the Lower Hunter River Estuary, Along the Central Coast of New South Wales
The Hunter Estuary Wetlands Ramsar site is located in the lower Hunter River estuary, along the central coast of New South Wales. Tomago Wetland lies immediately to the west of Fullerton Cove. As part of the Williamtown - Long Bight - Tomago Drainage Scheme, the levee bank, ring drain and other internal drains were enlarged by the NSW Public Works Department between 1968 and 1980 (MacDonald et al. 1997). These engineering works, including the installation of floodgates at the tidal boundary, ensured that tidal waters are excluded from Tomago Wetlands (i.e. the site drains via one- way tidal floodgates). The drainage and exclusion of tidal waters within Tomago Wetland degraded the salt marsh ecosystem and fostered the growth of non-salt marsh species. Lowering of the groundwater table also oxidised sub-surface acid sulfate soils causing soil acidification. Grazing and other users of the site further degraded the previous ecosystem and reduced migratory wading bird habitat. Tidal inundation was restored to the western portion of the site in 2007, with a culvert restricting exchange between the eastern and western sides installed as part of these works. As such the western half of Tomago Wetlands remains in an unrestored state. This study aimed to determine the impact of restoring tidal exchange at the eastern floodgates of Tomago Wetlands. Benefits of tidal restoration would include increased fish habitat, reduced weed growth, increase salt marsh habitat, improved bird roosting and feeding conditions and minimise acid sulfate soil impacts. Two-Dimensional (2D) numerical modelling hydrodynamic tools were used to simulate the reintroduction of tidal exchange at the site and to determine the optimal configuration of on-ground structures. -
Combined Effects of Urbanization and Connectivity on Iconic Coastal Fishes
Diversity and Distributions, (Diversity Distrib.) (2016) 22, 1328–1341 BIODIVERSITY Combined effects of urbanization and RESEARCH connectivity on iconic coastal fishes Elena Vargas-Fonseca1, Andrew D. Olds1*, Ben L. Gilby1, Rod M. Connolly2, David S. Schoeman1, Chantal M. Huijbers1,2, Glenn A. Hyndes3 and Thomas A. Schlacher1 1School of Science and Engineering, ABSTRACT University of the Sunshine Coast, Aim Disturbance and connectivity shape the structure and spatial distribution Maroochydore DC, Qld 4558, Australia, 2 of animal populations in all ecosystems, but the combined effects of these fac- Australian Rivers Institute – Coast & Estuaries, School of Environment, Griffith tors are rarely measured in coastal seascapes. We used surf zones of exposed University, Gold Coast, Qld 4222, Australia, sandy beaches in eastern Australia as a model seascape to test for combined 3Centre for Marine Ecosystems Research, effects of coastal urbanization and seascape connectivity (i.e. spatial links School of Natural Sciences, Edith Cowan between surf zones, estuaries and rocky headlands) on fish assemblages. University, Perth, WA 6027, Australia Location Four hundred kilometres of exposed surf beaches along the eastern coastline of Australia. A Journal of Conservation Biogeography Methods Fish assemblages were surveyed from surf zones of 14 ocean-exposed sandy beaches using purpose-built surf baited remote underwater video sta- tions. Results The degree of coastal urbanization and connectivity were strongly cor- related with the spatial distribution of fish species richness and abundance and were of greater importance to surf fishes than local surf conditions. Urbaniza- tion was associated with reductions in the abundance of harvested piscivores and fish species richness. Piscivore abundance and species richness were lowest on highly urbanized coastlines, and adjacent to beaches in wilderness areas where recreational fishing is intense. -
Kooragang Wetlands: Retrospective of an Integrated Ecological Restoration Project in the Hunter River Estuary
KOORAGANG WETLANDS: RETROSPECTIVE OF AN INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION PROJECT IN THE HUNTER RIVER ESTUARY P Svoboda Hunter Local Land Services, Paterson NSW Introduction: At first glance, the Hunter River estuary near Newcastle NSW is a land of contradictions. It is home to one of the world’s largest coal ports and a large industrial complex as well as being the location of a large internationally significant wetland. The remarkable natural productivity of the Hunter estuary at the time of European settlement is well documented. Also well documented are the degradation and loss of fisheries and other wildlife habitat in the estuary due to over 200 years of draining, filling, dredging and clearing (Williams et al., 2000). However, in spite of extensive modification, natural systems of the estuary retained enough value and function for large areas to be transformed by restoration activities that aimed to show industry and environmental conservation could work together to their mutual benefit. By establishing partnerships and taking a collaborative and adaptive approach, the project was able to implement restoration and related activities on a landscape basis, working across land ownership and management boundaries (Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project, 2010). The Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project (KWRP) was launched in 1993 to help compensate for the loss of fisheries and other wildlife habitat at suitable sites in the Hunter estuary. This paper revisits the expectations and planning for the project as presented in a paper to the INTECOL’s V international wetlands conference in 1996 (Svoboda and Copeland, 1998), reviews the project’s activities, describes outcomes and summarises issues faced and lessons learnt during 24 years of implementing a large, long-term, integrated, adaptive and community-assisted ecological restoration project. -
Hunter Valley: Coal Seam Gas Exclusion Zones Submission 8 November 2013
Director Assessment Policy, Systems & Stakeholder Engagement Department of Planning and Infrastructure Hunter Valley: Coal Seam Gas Exclusion Zones Submission 8 November 2013 Coal Seam Gas Exclusion Zones Submission: Hunter Valley This page was intentionally left blank 2 Coal Seam Gas Exclusion Zones Submission: Hunter Valley Foreword Closing the loop on CSG Mining in the Hunter Valley When it comes to coal seam gas (CSG) mining, protecting Australia’s most visited wine tourism region in its entirety - not in parts - is of paramount importance. And the time to do it is now. The NSW State Government should be recognised for delivering on its pre-election promises to preserve the Hunter Valley wine tourism region from CSG mining by confirming exclusion zones around the villages of Broke and Bulga as well as around significant areas defined as Viticulture Critical Industry Clusters (VCIC). But protecting most of the region, while leaving several critical areas open for CSG exploration and mining, could have devastating consequences for the iconic Hunter region as a whole – and undo the Government’s efforts thus far. While mining is obviously a legitimate land use and an important revenue source, this can’t justify allowing mining activities in areas where other existing, profitable industries would be adversely affected. Put simply, winemaking, tourism and CSG mining are not compatible land uses. The popularity and reputation of the Hunter Valley wine tourism region is fundamentally connected to the area’s natural beauty and landscape – and that natural beauty will fast disappear if the countryside is peppered with unsightly gas wells. Research reveals 80%1 of Hunter Valley visitors don’t want to see gas wells in the wine and tourism region, with 70%2 saying if gas wells are established they’ll just stop coming. -
Species Bathytoshia Brevicaudata (Hutton, 1875)
FAMILY Dasyatidae Jordan & Gilbert, 1879 - stingrays SUBFAMILY Dasyatinae Jordan & Gilbert, 1879 - stingrays [=Trygonini, Dasybatidae, Dasybatidae G, Brachiopteridae] GENUS Bathytoshia Whitley, 1933 - stingrays Species Bathytoshia brevicaudata (Hutton, 1875) - shorttail stingray, smooth stingray Species Bathytoshia centroura (Mitchill, 1815) - roughtail stingray Species Bathytoshia lata (Garman, 1880) - brown stingray Species Bathytoshia multispinosa (Tokarev, in Linbergh & Legheza, 1959) - Japanese bathytoshia ray GENUS Dasyatis Rafinesque, 1810 - stingrays Species Dasyatis chrysonota (Smith, 1828) - blue stingray Species Dasyatis hastata (DeKay, 1842) - roughtail stingray Species Dasyatis hypostigma Santos & Carvalho, 2004 - groovebelly stingray Species Dasyatis marmorata (Steindachner, 1892) - marbled stingray Species Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) - common stingray Species Dasyatis tortonesei Capapé, 1975 - Tortonese's stingray GENUS Hemitrygon Muller & Henle, 1838 - stingrays Species Hemitrygon akajei (Muller & Henle, 1841) - red stingray Species Hemitrygon bennettii (Muller & Henle, 1841) - Bennett's stingray Species Hemitrygon fluviorum (Ogilby, 1908) - estuary stingray Species Hemitrygon izuensis (Nishida & Nakaya, 1988) - Izu stingray Species Hemitrygon laevigata (Chu, 1960) - Yantai stingray Species Hemitrygon laosensis (Roberts & Karnasuta, 1987) - Mekong freshwater stingray Species Hemitrygon longicauda (Last & White, 2013) - Merauke stingray Species Hemitrygon navarrae (Steindachner, 1892) - blackish stingray Species -
Marine Fish Conservation Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions
Marine Fish Conservation Global evidence for the effects of selected interventions Natasha Taylor, Leo J. Clarke, Khatija Alliji, Chris Barrett, Rosslyn McIntyre, Rebecca0 K. Smith & William J. Sutherland CONSERVATION EVIDENCE SERIES SYNOPSES Marine Fish Conservation Global evidence for the effects of selected interventions Natasha Taylor, Leo J. Clarke, Khatija Alliji, Chris Barrett, Rosslyn McIntyre, Rebecca K. Smith and William J. Sutherland Conservation Evidence Series Synopses 1 Copyright © 2021 William J. Sutherland This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work; to adapt the work and to make commercial use of the work providing attribution is made to the authors (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Attribution should include the following information: Taylor, N., Clarke, L.J., Alliji, K., Barrett, C., McIntyre, R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine Fish Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Further details about CC BY licenses are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Cover image: Circling fish in the waters of the Halmahera Sea (Pacific Ocean) off the Raja Ampat Islands, Indonesia, by Leslie Burkhalter. Digital material and resources associated with this synopsis are available at https://www.conservationevidence.com/ -
Extinction Risk and Conservation of the World's Sharks and Rays
RESEARCH ARTICLE elife.elifesciences.org Extinction risk and conservation of the world’s sharks and rays Nicholas K Dulvy1,2*, Sarah L Fowler3, John A Musick4, Rachel D Cavanagh5, Peter M Kyne6, Lucy R Harrison1,2, John K Carlson7, Lindsay NK Davidson1,2, Sonja V Fordham8, Malcolm P Francis9, Caroline M Pollock10, Colin A Simpfendorfer11,12, George H Burgess13, Kent E Carpenter14,15, Leonard JV Compagno16, David A Ebert17, Claudine Gibson3, Michelle R Heupel18, Suzanne R Livingstone19, Jonnell C Sanciangco14,15, John D Stevens20, Sarah Valenti3, William T White20 1IUCN Species Survival Commission Shark Specialist Group, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada; 2Earth to Ocean Research Group, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada; 3IUCN Species Survival Commission Shark Specialist Group, NatureBureau International, Newbury, United Kingdom; 4Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, United States; 5British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom; 6Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Australia; 7Southeast Fisheries Science Center, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Panama City, United States; 8Shark Advocates International, The Ocean Foundation, Washington, DC, United States; 9National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, New Zealand; 10Global Species Programme, International Union for the Conservation -
Study-Newcastle-Lonely-Planet.Pdf
Produced by Lonely Planet for Study NT NewcastleDO VIBRAne of Lonely Planet’s Top 10 Cities in Best in Travel 2011 N CREATIVE A LANET Y P ’S EL TO N P O 1 L 0 F TOP C O I T TOP E I E N S O 10 CITY I N 10 CITY ! 1 B 1 E 0 S 2 2011 T L I E N V T A R 2011 PLANE LY T’S NE T O O P L F 1 O 0 C E I N T I O E S ! 1 I 1 N 0 B 2 E L S E T V I A N R T LANET Y P ’S EL TO N P O 1 TOP L 0 F TOP C O I T 10 CITY E I E N S O 10 CITY I N ! 2011 1 B 1 E 0 LAN S P E 2 Y T 2011 T L L ’ I S E N E V T A R N T O O P L F 1 O 0 C E I N T I O E S ! 1 I 1 N 0 B 2 E L S E T V I A N R T E W RE HANI AKBAR st VER I » Age 22 from Saudi Arabia OL » From Saudi Arabia » Studying an International Foundation program What do you think of Newcastle? It’s so beautiful, not big not small, nice. It’s a good place for students who are studying, with a lot of nice people. -
Newcastle Fortresses
NEWCASTLE FORTRESSES Thanks to Margaret (Marg) Gayler for this article. During World War 2, Newcastle and the surrounding coast between Nelson Bay and Swansea was fortified by Defence forces to protect the east coast of New South Wales against the enemy, in case of attack from the Japanese between 1940 and 1943. There were the established Forts along the coastline, including Fort Tomaree, Fort Wallace (Stockton), Fort Scratchley, Nobbys Head (Newcastle East) and Shepherd’s Hill (Bar Beach) and Fort Redhead. The likes of Fort Tomaree (Nelson Bay), Fort Redhead (Dudley) and combined defence force that operated from Mine Camp (Catherine Hill Bay) came online during the Second World War to also protect our coast and industries like BHP from any attempt to bomb the Industries as they along with other smaller industries in the area helped in the war effort by supplying steel, razor wire, pith hats to our armed forces fighting overseas and here in Australia. With Australia at war overseas the Government of the day during the war years decided it was an urgency to fortify our coast line with not only the Army but also with the help of Navy and Air- Force in several places along the coast. So there was established a line of communication up and down the coast using all three defence forces involved. Starting with Fort Tomaree and working the way down to Fort Redhead adding a brief description of Mine Camp and the role of the RAAF, also mentioning where the Anti Aircraft placements were around Newcastle at the time of WW2. -
A3-Port-Aerial-Map-Low-Res.Pdf
18 KOORAGANG PRECINCT 17 Kooragang 4, 5, 6, 7 Berths 18 Kooragang 8, 9, 10 Berths 19 18 17 MAYFIELD PRECINCT 11 9 Mayfield 4 Berth 11 Mayfield 7 Berth 13 10 10 BHP 6 16 WALSH POINT PRECINCT 18 9 15 15 Kooragang 2 Berth 16 Kooragang 3 Berth 11 8 7 CARRINGTON PRECINCT 1 West Basin 3 Berth 5 Channel Berth 2 West Basin 4 Berth 6 Dyke 1 Berth 3 East Basin 1 and 2 Berths 7 Dyke 2 Berth 6 4 Towage services 8 Dyke 4 and 5 Berths 18 KEY Port of Newcastle Boundary 2 as per the State Environmental 3 18 North / South Rail Corridor Planning Policy (Three Ports) 5 1 Mayfield Site Boundary 19 To M1 Motorway, Golden Highway and New England Highway Arterial road access 20 Port of Newcastle Head Office 4 Rail lines 4 20 BERTH INFORMATION CARRINGTON PRECINCT WALSH POINT PRECINCT Berth Details Facilities Cargo/Commodity Operators Berth Details Facilities Cargo/ Operators Commodity West Basin 3 Design depth: 11.6m 4 ship loaders Grains Common user Channel depth: 12.8m Loading height max: 17.1m Orange juice 1 Kooragang 2 Design depth: 11.6m 2 gantry type grab unloaders Bulk cargo Common user Loading outreach max: 26.5m concentrate Predominant user: Channel depth: 15.2m Bulk liquids Travel distance: 213.4m GrainCorp 15 1 ship loader General cargo New state-of-the-art crane Design throughput: 1,000tph Storage area adjacent to Containers and conveyor infrastructure berths due for completion in 2019. West Basin 4 Design depth: 11.6m Berth-face rail line Machinery Common user 2 Channel depth: 12.8m 1.5ha wharf storage area Project cargo Dolphins at either end allow -
Acanthobothrium Urolophi Sp. N., a Tetraphyllidean Cestode (Oncobothriidae) from an Australian Stingaree
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications from the Harold W. Manter Laboratory of Parasitology Parasitology, Harold W. Manter Laboratory of 1973 Acanthobothrium urolophi sp. n., a Tetraphyllidean Cestode (Oncobothriidae) from an Australian Stingaree Gerald D. Schmidt University of Northern Colorado Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/parasitologyfacpubs Part of the Parasitology Commons Schmidt, Gerald D., "Acanthobothrium urolophi sp. n., a Tetraphyllidean Cestode (Oncobothriidae) from an Australian Stingaree" (1973). Faculty Publications from the Harold W. Manter Laboratory of Parasitology. 693. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/parasitologyfacpubs/693 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Parasitology, Harold W. Manter Laboratory of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications from the Harold W. Manter Laboratory of Parasitology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Schmidt in Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington (1973) 40. Copyright 1973, Helminthological Society of Washington. Used by permission. Acanthobothrium urolophi sp. n., a Tetraphyllidean Cestode (Oncobothriidae) from an Australian Stingaree GERALD D. SCHMIDT Deparbnent of Biology, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado 80631 ABSTRACT: Acanthobothrium urolophi sp. n. is described from a common stingaree, Urolophus testa cet/s, from South Australia. It differs from all other species in being apolytic and acraspedote, in having hooks 105-115 fJ- long, one accessory sucker 80-90 wide on each bothridinm, and 40-72 testes in two longitudinal rows. This report is based upon four specimens on anterior end of each bothridium, each with recovered from the spiral valve of a common single accessory sucker 80 to 90 wide. -
Lower Hunter Regional Conservation Plan Cover Photos (Main Image, Clockwise): Hunter Estuaries (DECC Estuaries Unit) Mother and Baby Flying Foxes (V
Lower Hunter Regional Conservation Plan Cover photos (main image, clockwise): Hunter estuaries (DECC Estuaries Unit) Mother and baby flying foxes (V. Jones, DECC) Lower Hunter estuary, Hunter Wetlands National Park (G. Woods, DECC) Sugarloaf Range (M. van Ewijk, DECC) Published by: Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW 59 Goulburn Street PO Box A290 Sydney South 1232 Phone: (02) 9995 5000 (switchboard) Phone: 131 555 (environment information and publications requests) Phone: 1300 361 967 (national parks information and publications requests) Fax: (02) 9995 5999 TTY: (02) 9211 4723 Email: [email protected] Website: www.environment.nsw.gov.au © Copyright State of NSW and Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW. The Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water and State of NSW are pleased to allow this material to be reproduced for educational or non-commercial purposes in whole or in part, provided the meaning is unchanged and its source, publisher and authorship are acknowledged. Specifi c permission is required for the reproduction of photographs and images. The material provided in the Lower Hunter Regional Conservation Plan is for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice in relation to any matter, whether particular or general. This document should be cited as: DECCW 2009, Lower Hunter Regional Conservation Plan, Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, Sydney. ISBN 978 1 74232 515 6 DECCW 2009/812 First published April 2009; Revised December 2009 Addendum In the Gwandalan Summerland Point Action Group Inc v. Minister for Planning (2009) NSWLEC 140 (Catherine Hill Bay decision), Justice Lloyd held that the decisions made by the Minister for Planning to approve a concept plan and project application, submitted by a developer who had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Deed of Agreement with the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment were invalid.