Submission to Infrastructure Victoria: Preparing Advice on Options to Secure Victoria’S Future Port Capacity

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

PRESERVE WESTERN PORT ACTION GROUP

SUBMISSION TO INFRASTRUCTURE VICTORIA: PREPARING ADVICE ON OPTIONS TO SECURE VICTORIA’S FUTURE PORT CAPACITY.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Contents: Page No.

Executive Summary 3 Infrastructure Victoria: Terms of Reference. 3

Environmental Issues. 4 Recent Environmental Reports Tidal flows, dredging and erosion Western Port Flora Seagrass, Mangroves and Salt Marsh Carbon Sinks in Western Port Putting a value on the Western Port Environment

Economic Issues and Impacts . 10 The threat to the economy – Why take such a risk? Increased coastal erosion and inundation following dredging of Western Port. Increased visual and noise pollution – Visitor impact Impact on recreational boating, fishing and the marine related economy Impact on Victorian agriculture and aquifers Oil spills

Social Issues . 17 Bass Coast Shire Council – Guiding Principals

Attachments. 18 A. List of Abbreviations.

B. Bass Coast Shire Council roundtable with key stakeholders regarding the future of Port of Hastings. 28th April 2016. Including Guiding Principles adopted by Bass Coast Shire Council.

C. List of Reports, Documents presented to Infrastructure Victoria that supplement this submission.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Preserve Western Port Submission to Infrastructure Victoria- Preparing advice on options to secure Victoria’s future port capacity

Executive Summary The Preserve Western Port Action Group is a subcommittee of the Phillip Island Conservation Society. We have carefully examined the issue of constructing a container port in Western Port over the last three years. With our volunteer members we have undertaken research on issues and engaged with key stakeholders in understanding the key impacts on the region’s economy, environment and communities. We firmly believe that constructing a container port in Western Port will have significant adverse impacts on the Western Port communities. The impact on the Phillip Island economy and environment could be devastating. The annual movement of 6,000 large container ships through the existing penguin and marine feeding grounds, combined with loss of amenity and recreational boating access for the coastal communities and the vastly increased coastal erosion will put at significant risk the visitors to the region. These visitors currently generate $339 million in visitor expenditure equating to 3,100 direct and full-time equivalent jobs. (Phillip Island and San Remo Visitor Economy Strategy 2035. p3.) Our submission identifies key risks and impacts associated with the dredging and construction impacts of constructing a container port in Western Port. We believe these adverse impacts on the region will vastly outweigh any purported benefits that may arise from operating a container port in Western Port. We have recently provided your representatives with a number of reports and research that form part of our representations to you. (See Attachment C)

Infrastructure Victoria: Terms of Reference The Preserve Western Port Action group have focussed on where a second container port would be located and the costs and impacts of developing a container port in Western Port. Specifically we provide comments to address Terms of Reference 2c and 2d with some emphasis on 2b. We believe many of the issues that are linked as environment issues can and do have economic impacts. Nevertheless, we have structured our comments in this report on: 1/. Environmental issues, especially in relation to International treaty obligations, (e.g. Ramsar) and detailed researched State-based studies such as the Western Port Local Coastal Hazard Assessment (WPLCHA) and the Central Region Coastal Plan.(CRCP)

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

2/. Economic issues, especially those relating to tourism, recreational fishing and agriculture. 3/. Social Impact. In essence this is an amalgamation of the first two, but with an emphasis on what a container port at Hastings would means for the people who live, work and play on and around Western Port in its entirety.

1. Environmental Issues We firmly believe that adverse environmental impacts from the construction of a container port in Western Port will have a direct adverse economic impact due to the importance of tourism to the region’s economy. Further, the potential damage to the unique ecosystem of Western Port itself makes a compelling case against the construction of a container port particularly as Western Port is listed on the National Estate and contains three Marine National Parks to support its biodiversity. Australia is a signatory to a number of International agreements that oblige us to protect the area. In the 1970s, the Victorian government commissioned the Westernport Bay Environmental study 1973–1974 directed by Professor Maurice Shapiro and assisted by a team of 200 researchers. The study presented a comprehensive basic understanding of the bay’s major features, establishing the complexity and the high ecological values of the ecosystem. It modelled the hydrodynamics of the tidal flows and other circulation patterns showing how it would distribute pollutants rapidly to all parts of the bay. The Shapiro Report found: Industrial development can have far-reaching environmental effects, and also necessitates urban and port growth which, in turn, affects the environment. Areas of particular significance have been recognised at Westernport and, from a nature conservation point of view, options for industrial development may have to be limited so that these are not adversely affected. Environmental quality standards to protect these areas may be such that certain industries should not establish in the area. The Report observed: “This is what options are all about. If we have more of something, we may need to have less of something else, must weigh up all the issues of which we have knowledge, and make our decisions in full awareness of their consequences.” (Ministry for Conservation Victoria 1975, p3) Recent Environmental Reports Since early 2015 three landmark environmental reports have been released which have a direct impact on the environmental future of Western Port. They are as follows: The Central Region Coastal Plan (CRCP) Victorian Government DWELP 2015 http://ccb.vic.gov.au/staging/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Draft-Central-Region- Coastal-Plan.pdf

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

The Revised Western Port Ramsar Site Management Plan (Ramsar Plan), DWELP 2016 http://www.delwp.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/326262/Western-Port-MP- Full-Draft-for-public-comment.pdf

The Western Port Local Coastal Hazard Assessment, (WPLCHA), Water Technology/Melbourne Water, September 2015. http://www.seccca.org.au/project/western-port-local-coastal-hazard-assessment/

Whilst the CRCP applies to all of the Port Phillip and Western Port coastlines, it does contain some very specific references that apply to Western Port. In referring to the 2014 Victorian Coastal Policy as its source document, the chairs foreword states that the CRCP is based on the former’s hierarchy of principles, which clearly state, “protecting the natural environment” as a key goal along with “protecting significant coastal and marine ecosystems and habitats.” What is especially relevant is under the heading of “Coastal Processes and Climate Change,” the CRCP quotes the WPLCHA as a case study. The importance of this document is further highlighted via the Ramsar Plan. Under the heading “Management Strategies and responsible organisations related to living with Climate Change” at 2.1, it states: “Implement the recommendations of the WLCHA,” it then goes on to quote specific points to achieve the above. Under the same main heading but at 2.3, it states: “Investigate the risk with and potential mitigation strategies, for climate change impacts to the ecological character of the Ramsar site.” Of the three reports, perhaps the Ramsar Plan is the most important overarching document of all, in that Western Port fulfils six of the nine criteria required for a site to be listed under the Ramsar Convention. Tidal flows, dredging, and erosion Tidal flows in Western Port are unique. The deep wide entrance on the western side allows large volumes of water to enter Western Port. It has spring tides of three metres, twice a day. Swells from the deep water of Bass Strait’s incoming south- westerly tides dissipate on Middle Bank to the west of French Island, and Tortoise Head on the western extremity of French Island. The eastern entrance between Newhaven and San Remo has a tidal stream of 6–8 knots (11–15 kph). These tidal movements define the current Western Port ecosystem, beaches and land mass. The Port of Hastings is not a natural deepwater port. To establish the Port of Hastings, the North Arm of Westernport Bay was first dredged in 1964 to allow commercial shipping free passage to wharf developments on the western shoreline. This dredging involved the removal of 1.5 million cubic metres of seabed from an area of 85.4 hectares (Ministry for Conservation, 1975).

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

More than 384,000 cubic metres of seafloor was removed during dredging works at Crib Point in 1966, and all spoil was dumped in the North Arm channel off Tankerton, French Island. Dredging at Long Island Point was completed in 1969 and most of the 450,000 cubic metres of spoil was dumped into mangroves south of the Long Island Pier, the rest of the spoil was dumped sub-tidally on the side of the East Arm channel between French and Phillip Islands (Ministry for Conservation, 1975). All of the 676,000 cubic metres of spoil produced from dredging operations near the Steel Industry Wharves in 1972 was dumped ashore to provide reclamation areas for future building development. The Victoria University Institute of Supply Chain and Logistics have estimated the amount of dredging required to construct a container port in Western Port. The University estimated the need to remove approximately 6 million cubic metres in the approach channel and a further 18 million cubic metres to establish a berthing pocket adjacent to a wharf. This is a total of about 24 million cubic metres on top of the dredging of the anchorage area located just off the north Shore of Phillip Island and dredging required for the construction of the wharf itself. The conservative estimate of 24 million cubic metres of dredging is the equivalent of 15 Melbourne Cricket Grounds (MCG’s) full to the top of the grand stands. With two tidal movements a day that represents around 60 MCG’s of additional tidal movement occurring daily in Western Port. Removal of this volume of material would lead to vastly increased tidal flows, erosion and inundation and the smothering of fish breeding sea grass grounds. The harder running incoming tidal flows, exacerbated by constructing a container wharf would impact on the extensive mangroves at Tooradin and the surrounding shoreline and the town. This area is already marked as increasingly flood prone due to the probable rise in sea levels from climate change. The increased volume of water flowing through a channel of greater depth and width would likely act like a ‘fire hose’ on the mud banks between the mainland and French Island. Conversely, the Silverleaves and north foreshore on Phillip Island could be directly in the firing line of the outgoing tide; and the mud banks would no longer protect it. But the mud banks not only protect the shoreline, they are also invaluable breeding grounds for fish. Their destruction will affect the food chains of fairy penguins, fur seals, dolphins, whales, Orcas, the wading and shoreline birds. One of Australia’s leading geomorphologists Associate Professor David Kennedy of the University of Melbourne considered the impact of the required dredging on Western Port based on the Victoria University dredging estimates and the Western Port Local Coastal Hazard Assessment reports. (WPLCHA) Associate Professor Kennedy stated: I can conclude that the proposed development is almost certain to have major environmental impacts on the marine and coastal environment of Western Port Bay…. There will be immediate effects from dredging particularly associated with suspended sediment and its impact on the benthic

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

intertidal and subtidal communities. A larger concern is the changes in hydrodynamics and associated sediment movement that will be associated with the development… There is a very high risk of greatly increased erosion throughout the northern, western and southern shores of Western Port including the eastern shoreline of Bass Coast around Coronet Bay and the Phillip Island north shore. We believe the erosion and inundation caused by the container port dredging would not be gradual and imperceptible. It will be obvious, as the Western Port Local Coastal Hazard Assessment reports give us a baseline for erosion and inundation without the dredging for the port. We believe any analysis of the construction of a container port at Hastings should support the establishment of a Western Port Erosion and Compensation Fund as part of a business case for Hastings. The fund could then be accessed by affected property holders and coastal land managers to restore the coast or to be provided with compensation. In addition, Bass Coast Shire Amendment C82, (Land Subject to Inundation, adopted by Council 19/8/15), clearly shows the impact of future climate change on coastline within the Shire boundaries. This would only be greatly exacerbated by a Port development at Hastings. Inundation of the access road to Churchill Island would severely impact the Phillip Island Nature Parks famous ‘Three Park Pass,’ namely: the Penguins, the Koalas and Churchill Island.

Western Port Flora Western Port is an enormous wetland containing 270 square kilometres of intertidal mudflats and wetlands and extensive seagrass meadows, mangroves and salt marshes (57% of which is seagrass beds.) This is seven times larger than the City of Melbourne municipality. The area is recognised worldwide for its extensive seagrass beds. It contains Victoria’s most extensive tracts of mangrove and salt marsh habitat, unique channel habitats, sandy beaches and rocky platforms. These offer food and shelter for 1,350 species of animals, birds, insects, fish and marine invertebrates, including significant sponges. Tidal seagrass meadows, mangrove and salt marsh vegetation rank with tropical rainforests in supplying environmental services and contributing a buffer to the effects of climate change. They provide important nurseries for fish, crab life and many crustacean and mollusc species, and a foraging, breeding and roosting habitat for many shorebird and wader species. Yet human disturbance is a continual threat to these habitats. If the construction of a container port at Hastings proceeds, the threats increase disproportionately. Dredging, the dumping of dredge spoil, the consequent increased tidal flows and the need for land clearing during the development stage along with the increased potential for oil spills, the probability of significant (illegal) bilge discharges, potential for ship groundings or collisions and vessel-generated waves

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017 once the port was operational, all pose significant risks. Seagrass, Mangroves and Salt marsh In 2011, Melbourne Water measured 150 square kilometres of seagrass in Western Port. Apart from their nursery role for fish and prawns- seagrass found in inter-tidal and sub-tidal zones in Western Port stabilises the sediment, is a collection site for organic detritus eaten by detritivores and a nutrient sink for inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus (Kirkman 2014). The fauna in seagrass includes juvenile fish and prawns for commercial and recreational use. Living on its leaves are snails, hydroids, anemones and bivalves. Swans eat some forms of seagrass. King George whiting, garfish, calamari and rock flathead rely on seagrass in different ways – living in it, eating it or eating what lives in the seagrass. The enlarged footprint of an expanded port, and the dredging would significantly adversely impact the ongoing health of seagrass beds. Increased turbidity in the water would reduce the light to seagrass beds and lead to further loss of seagrass. There are 18 square kilometres of mangroves in Western Port. Mangroves have a wide tolerance to salinity, intertidal position and temperature and are able to occupy rocky and sandy sheltered embayments and offshore lagoons (Kirkman 2014). Their specialised root structures allow gas exchange functions for root respiration in waterlogged soils (Kirkman 2014). Mangroves respond to, and assist with, sedimentation processes and protect shorelines from erosion by wave action.

Mangroves are only found in a few locations in Victoria, including Barwon Heads, Port Phillip Bay and Wilson’s Promontory, where they are protected from the high- energy waves of Bass Strait. The largest populations are growing along the shores of Western Port, with the main concentrations at Rhyll Inlet, the north-east, northwest and south-west coasts of French Island, the northern coast from Watsons Inlet to Tooradin, continuing to the Lang Lang coast. A significant mangrove stand is at Hastings itself, continuing almost uninterrupted down to Sandy Point. Mangroves are vulnerable to the anticipated sea level rises caused by climate change, and would migrate landwards as an adaptive response. Human development can prevent mangroves adapting to increase sea levels by preventing them from migrating landwards, so that they would suffer from ‘coastal squeeze.’ Mangroves are extremely susceptible to damage from oil spills, which can smother, foul, asphyxiate, poison and cause the absorption of toxic substances. Victoria’s Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has already listed Western Port’s mangroves as, ‘ecologically stressed and extremely sensitive to disturbance and other impacts.’ (EPA 1996) There are 10 square kilometres or 1,000 hectares of salt marsh in Western Port. Salt marsh generally occurs between mangroves and more land-based vegetation and is another nursery area for fish. A number of the larger salt marshes in Western Port can be found at Yaringa, and around French Island and Churchill Island Marine

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

National Parks. There is also a significant area of salt marsh at the Bass River estuary. Most of the salt marsh in the area, though, has been lost due to clearing for past agricultural and industrial development around the northern and western shores of the bay. The remaining saltbush is susceptible to acidification, meaning that any acid sulphate soils released by dredging would pose a further threat.

Carbon Sinks in Western Port A report for the Port Phillip & Westernport Catchment Management Authority was commissioned by Emmaline Froggatt in February 2015 with Authors: Paul Carnell, Carolyn Ewers, Ellen Rochelmeyer, Richard Zavalas and Bruce Hawke.

The report entitled, The Distribution and Abundance of ‘Blue Carbon’ within Port Phillip and Westernport, states:

The Port Phillip and Westernport catchment contains a significant portion of the blue carbon ecosystems present across Victoria.

Many other vegetated coastal habitat locations are under threat from anthropogenic influences. The salt marsh and mangroves at Hastings were among the highest sediment carbon stocks within the catchment. Yet, salt marsh, mangroves, and seagrass at Hastings are potentially under threat from the planned Port of Hastings development. While the project is in the planning and approval phase, any proposal to remove or negatively impact these vegetated coastal habitats (and thus their carbon stocks) should be taken into account before proceeding.

Mr Nottle: “...seagrasses, salt marshes and mangroves are among the earth’s most efficient and long-term carbon sinks. Seagrasses can capture and store carbon at a rate 40 times faster than tropical rainforests; 154 square kilometres of seagrass is in Western Port. Disturbance to the seagrass ecosystem can cause release of ancient carbon, with potentially major global warming consequences.” PORT OF MELBOURNE SELECT COMMITTEE. Inquiry into the proposed lease of the port of Melbourne, Hastings, 28 th October 2015.

Putting a value on the Western Port environment ‘Ecosystem services’ are the tangible goods and intangible services that provide benefits to humans. These benefits provided by ecosystems are typically classified as provisioning, regulating, habitat or cultural and amenity services. The idea of ecosystem services acknowledges that humans can obtain both market and non- market benefits from ecological processes. Ecological services and the capital stocks that produce them are critical to the earth’s life-support system. They contribute to human welfare, both directly and indirectly, and therefore represent part of the total economic value of the planet.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

The Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council (WPPC) commissioned a study by New Economics Advisory Service of the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF). WPPC asked them to establish an annual value and a discounted present value of the ecosystem services provided by Westernport Bay. The ACF study estimated that Western Port generates ecosystem services valued at between $205 million and $2.6 billion per year. Discounting those annual flows by 3% in perpetuity results in a present value of Western Port of between $7 billion and $88 billion (ACF 2013). Further to this study the ecosystem of Western Port supports tourism of $339 million per annum on Phillip Island alone. We suggest that in the cost/benefit analysis of the proposed expansion of the Port of Hastings must include, the extent to which the value of the ecosystem is likely to be compromised – in other words, the cost penalty of the expansion paid in the diminishing of this value need to be identified and included in the business case. 2. Economic Issues and impacts Tourism is the foundation of Phillip Island’s economy; in fact Phillip Island/Bass Coast is the second most tourism dependent economy in the country (Cameron 2014). The Penguin Parade is a hugely popular tourist destination for both local and overseas visitors. An estimated 3.1 million day visitors and tourists visit Phillip Island every year (Business in Bass Coast 2014). “With the region expected to double its visitor numbers from 1.85 million to 3.4 million and be worth upwards of $1.1 billion by 2035, the time for investment in marketing and tourism infrastructure for Phillip Island and San Remo is now.” (Phillip Island and San Remo Visitor Economy Strategy 2035. p3.) In a report commissioned by Tourism Australia, Chinese respondents chose world- class beauty and natural environment as their top consideration when picking a holiday destination (Tourism Australia 2014). For Indian respondents, the same choice was equal first with safety and security (Tourism Australia 2014). And both national groups ranked Australia second (or first if they’d been here) from a list of 50 international destinations as a place they associated with world-class beauty and natural environment. The same report notes the contribution of Phillip Island to that regional expenditure is $619 million per year and that tourism provides 5,000 full time equivalent jobs in Bass Coast Shire, a third of all the employment in the Shire. The threat to the economy- Why take such a risk? Western Port has a unique coastal marine environment, with over 1,300 species of marine animals living in its environs, including penguins,weedy sea dragons and pot- bellied sea horses. Wildlife cruises – to see seals, dolphins and whales – are a significant tourism activity. Domestic and international tourists visit Phillip Island to explore habitats, landscapes, seas and heritage areas. The attractions of wading and shoreline birds, penguins,

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017 swans, ducks, pelicans, fur seals, orcas, whales, dolphins, koalas and wallabies along with Phillip Island’s famous sandy beaches from Silverleaves almost to Grossard Point and its magnificent surf beaches on the southern coast, are a major tourist drawcard. The construction of a container port in Western Port would change the essential character of the region from a pristine environment to an industrialised precinct.

Ms Whittager: “.... Phillip Island, it is seen as being a natural eco-type tourism place. I think having a very large container port, with what has been purported to be 8 to 10 container ships off the beaches of Cowes and within Western Port per day, makes that nature and ecotourism lack credibility, because it becomes not a place of nature but rather a place of industry. To me it just makes the whole tourism side of the bay lack credibility and authenticity.” PORT OF MELBOURNE SELECT COMMITTEE . Inquiry into the proposed lease of the port of Melbourne, Hastings, 28 October 2015.

Also the construction of a container port in Western Port would have multiple economic impacts including:

Increased coastal erosion and inundation following dredging of Western Port. The adverse impact on the beaches on the north shore of Phillip Island would lead to potential loss of beaches and beach access to visitors and residents. The increased erosion and inundation would lead to calls for additional protections for coastal communities around Western Port. Increased visual and noise pollution- Visitor impact Preserve Western Port Action Group surveyed domestic and international visitors to Cowes on Phillip Island regarding their knowledge that 6,000 container ships could be passing the Cowes foreshore every year and the fact that the anchorage area for the ships is only 100 metres from the beaches of Cowes. The ships would be burning heavy diesel fuel 24 hours a day. The visitors were then asked if the presence of container ships would deter the people from choosing Phillip Island as a future holiday destination. In reviewing the responses our group issued a release to the local media in January 2016 that stated: The responses from this initial survey should send shock waves to the tourism industry, local businesses and land owners. The responses indicated that 75% of people would not choose to visit the Phillip Island region if the container terminal is built in Western Port. In committing $48.2 million to upgrading the famous Phillip Island Penguin Parade, Premier Daniel Andrews said:

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

This world-class attraction needs world-class facilities. The Penguin Parade and Phillip Island Nature Parks must remain top of the list for visitors to Victoria…This project is a big win for jobs, tourism and Phillip Island.

This Media release may be viewed at http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/little-penguins-big-upgrade/

Impact on recreational boating, fishing and the marine related economy The provisioning of yachts, fishing vessels and other recreational craft with both hardware and consumables, as well as men, women and children who fish from jetties, beaches and rocks, makes a large financial contribution to the local economies around Western Port. Enthusiasts spend money on bait, fuel, fishing tackle, drinks (hotels), food (supermarkets, cafes and restaurants) and accommodation, and on hardware for their boats. The local councils, and foreshore committees, derive revenue from boat launching fees. Last year a study of boating users and marine industries around Port Phillip Bay and Western Port valued its contribution to the Victorian economy at $1.3 billion (Ernst and Young 2015). If we split this between the two regions it would mean that approximately $650 million derives from these activities around Western Port. An expanded port poses a significant threat to this economy. The positioning of massive container ships in the anchorage opposite Cowes’ northern beaches, and the never-ending transit of those vessels along the shipping channels, would inevitably lead the Port Authority to impose ‘exclusion zones’ on where watercraft could venture around Phillip Island and French Island. The construction of a container port would mean no anchoring would be allowed in the declared port waters and anchorage area off the north Shore of Phillip Island. Boating users would need to add a safety margin to the declared waters for staying clear of the vessels. Given the speed of the tides in Western Port, drift fishing is not viable which means: No Anchoring = No Fishing. As a result this would leave only around 25% of the Western Port as safe, high tide fishable water. Those attempting to fish in the remaining safe high tide areas will face extreme congestion not only on the water but especially on the remaining useable boat ramps.

Mr Chambers “..... If you put that expanded port limit in and put a 60,000-tonne container ship in that channel, no-one is going to fish there. You cannot fish there. It will throw intolerable pressure on the rest of the ramps in Western Port.” PORT OF MELBOURNE SELECT COMMITTEE. Inquiry into the proposed lease of the port of Melbourne, Hastings, 28 October 2015.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

For recreational fishermen the loss of fishing areas would be compounded by a significantly reduced catch, as a result of the destruction of the vital fish breeding habitat of the mud banks and seagrasses. Turbidity in the water from the ships’ wake and wash along with potentially depleted fish stocks, would inevitably lead to an economic decline – less participants and less spending in those components of local economies. Yachtsmen and women would find their racing zones severely restricted, particularly in the proposed shipping anchorage area; and other recreational boats would be similarly restricted. The loss of fishing and yachting activities would also have an adverse impact on the nine marinas, yacht clubs and boat clubs around Western Port including Westernport Marina, Flinders, Newhaven, Somers, Westernport, Hastings and Warneet yacht clubs; and Port Leo Boat Club. The multiplier impact for onshore businesses associated with those hobbies – particularly restaurants, retail shopping and holiday accommodation – could be massive. The loss of fishing grounds and impact on the marine economy would mean that the State Government policies on expanding recreational fishing in Victoria would fail. In a press release dated May 2 2015, The Minister for Agriculture, The Hon Jaala Pulford launched the Victorian Government’s Target One Million Fishers program. She stated at the time: “Increasing the number of recreational fishers to one million will create jobs, support local businesses and strengthen our rural and regional communities.” The restrictions imposed on Western Port which is the second largest saltwater fishery in Victoria would ensure that this policy objective would fail. Indeed the restrictions will see a reduction in the number of recreational fishers and subsequent economic loss for the region and the State of Victoria.

Impact on Victorian agriculture and aquifers

Within the Westernport Basin, much of the groundwater resource is fresh water. Approximately 40 % of the available renewable resource is extracted from the 5000 or so groundwater bores in the region which supplies the Bunyip Food Belt.

The impact on dredging a shipping channel, berth pocket and swing channel in the same location as the proposed Port of Hastings Container Port, were the subject of investigation GSV#58 in 1980 by the Dept. Minerals and Energy. The conclusion of the report states:

It is concluded that dredging of a channel as presently proposed to a depth of 15metres below mean low tide water mark would not significantly disrupt the existing hydrological balance. If channel depths greater than 15 metres are required they should be confined to the south limbs of the proposal and not exceed 20 metres.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Further consideration would be required if the proposal is extended to the north or the northwest. The volume of water entering the aquifer under the prevailing hydraulic gradients is estimated at 250,000 cubic metres per year…..

The major Western Port Group aquifers occur at or near the seabed over much of the northern arm of Western Port, providing an avenue for both discharge and recharge (saline intrusion).

It is our understanding that increased agricultural use in the intervening years has depleted the fresh water in the aquifer resulting in saline intrusion which has rendered bores in the Tyabb area unusable.

Based on this report the risk to agriculture dependent on the water in these aquifers, by further dredging of the North Arm as proposed to establish a container port, is unacceptable.

Mr Hanigan: …Also, bringing your attention to...... a geological survey report of 1980, discussing the exact same area as the proposed container port and warning that the freshwater aquifers that underlie the bay are at risk of being contaminated with salt water — in fact, they are now — and that further dredging of that area will only make the problem worse.

PORT OF MELBOURNE SELECT COMMITTEE. Inquiry into the proposed lease of the port of Melbourne, Hastings, 28 October 2015.

Oil Spills

The Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) commissioned consultants to model the effects of a relatively small oil spill from a ship in Western Port. The modelling did not study a major accident involving a spill from an oil tanker, but rather focused on the effects of a smaller spill of transport fuels (there have been 27 similar spills in 43 years in Australia).

The work, which was backed up by on water testing found oil would spread widely and quickly and in some conditions reach protected areas within hours.

Details regarding the report and media coverage are as follows:

The report called: Quantative assessment of exposure risks due to oil spills from shipping in Westernport Bay : http://vnpa.org.au/admin/library/attachments/Reports/rpt-wportspillrisks.pdf ,

For further information, see the media background summaries:

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017 http://vnpa.org.au/admin/library/attachments/PDFs/media%20backgrounders/bgr- wport-shipping-spill.pdf

The Age http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/penguins-face-serious-risk-if-oil-spill-occurs- 20130901-2syu5.html

The main point of this oil spill study is:

New research finds Hastings port expansion plan is an oil spill disaster in the making. Massive development plans for Victoria’s Westernport Bay will expose the area’s globally significant marine and coastal wetlands to potentially huge damage from oil spills.

The report was commissioned in response to the Victorian Government’s proposal to expand the Port of Hastings into an international container port, increasing shipping traffic from under 100 ships a year to more than 3000. Such an increase in shipping is likely to heighten the risk of oil spill.

The findings have sparked calls for the Federal Government to launch an immediate environmental assessment of the Victorian Government’s port expansion plans under national conservation laws.

The new research found that even relatively small amounts of oil spilled from shipping traffic in Western Port could reach local shorelines within minutes and high conservation areas within less than six hours.

Graeme Branigan of the Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) said: “We aren’t talking about oil tankers, but rather heavy fuel oil and diesel spills from container ships and port support vessels.”

The research modelled six credible oil spill scenarios based on 27 previous oil spill accidents across Australia since 1970. Computer modelling tracked the spills over a two-week period from two locations within Westernport Bay. The modelling shows Phillip Island Nature Park is vulnerable to oil spill contamination, and French Island Marine National Park is also at high risk of exposure. It also highlighted the fact that once oil is in the water, it will be hard to stop.

Both these parks and many other parts of the bay are home to key roosting, feeding and breeding habitats for waterbirds including annual migratory birds that breed in Russia, China, Japan and Alaska, spending the summer months feeding in the bay.

All of Westernport Bay is listed under the International Ramsar Convention. It is home to 32 species of migratory birds protected by international agreements, making its waters and shorelines subject to national environmental laws.

The Victorian National Parks Association and the Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council are calling on federal Labor and the Coalition to commit to a comprehensive and independent assessment using the full force of national

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017 environmental laws before any further work or money is spent on expanding the port.

Simon Branigan, spokesperson of the Victorian National Parks Association said:

Westernport Bay is one of Victoria’s richest marine and coastal environments, and we call for the port expansion plans to have the highest level assessment available under national laws as a matter of urgency.

Chris Chandler, spokesperson of Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council said: Westernport is Victoria’s marine playground, a unique tidal bay and wetland of international importance with remarkable environmental and recreational values right on the doorstep of Melbourne…

We are very concerned that the State Government’s plans to turn Westernport into an international container port will expose the bay to a spill disaster, threatening the area’s rich biodiversity including its beautiful beaches, seagrass meadows, native wildlife such as Little Penguins and Black Swan, as well as highly prized recreational fishing species King George Whiting and Snapper.

Both groups fear the port expansion will require major dredging, the clearing of mangroves to fill in parts of the bay, and road and rail transport corridors through Gippsland, the Mornington Peninsula and suburban Melbourne.

Expanding the Port of Hastings poses unacceptable danger to Western Port’s unique environmental, social and recreational values. Any proper assessment must consider environmental impacts, all risks and alternative port locations with links to national transport planning.

Mr. P McGrath, Chief Executive of AMSA , stated at Spillcon 94: “Other than in exceptional circumstances, current technology does not exist to prevent weather driven oil from an inshore incident coming ashore on the coastline."

Westernport consists of narrow, tidal waterways around two islands, so that a ship must always be within 2 to 5 kilometres off a coastline. Much of the time there is ‘weather’, so current technology does not exist to save Western Port from a moderate or major spill. A moderate (say 550 tonnes) or major (10,000 tonnes) spill would be catastrophic, and once deposited more damage would be caused by any attempted removal.

What is the risk of a major oil spill? To quote ANAO: “As AMSA says, 'It is only a matter of time'. The remarks made in the second and third paragraphs of this section are all especially relevant to Western Port:

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Oil may be ingested by marine and animal life and the toxic chemicals in oil, and dispersants used to treat the oil, can have a significant ecological impact. This is a particular problem in mangroves, seagrass, and reef areas where it is difficult to remove the oil...Spilled oil can have a serious economic impact on coastal activities such as tourism and the fishing industry.

Also relevant to Westernport Bay in the ANAO report is the observation that:…."The National Plan Review identified that swift currents and high tidal velocities severely limit the opportunity for physical response (use of booms and skimmers) throughout Torres Strait and Northern Territory waters." These conditions also apply in Western Port, where tides run at up to 5 knots along the narrow arms of the bay. These conditions render the use of booms largely ineffective. The alternative response tool pointed to in the audit for Torres Strait and Northern Territory, namely dispersant, should also be regarded as generally unacceptable in Western Port, due to its toxicity. Thus the two principal oil-spill response tools will be generally unavailable in Western Port.

Social Issues It is extremely possible that the construction of a container port in Western Port will adversely impact the existing economy and that what it offers in return will not have the same value. The value of visual and acoustic amenity for residents, holiday-home owners and visitors around Westernport and the ability to engage in water-based recreational pursuits, are social benefits that should not be undervalued. We should not undervalue or compromise the significant benefits of pristine beaches; magnificent, unspoiled inland and coastal walks; the fresh sea air; and the multifaceted array of bird, flora and animal life around Western Port. Bass Coast Shire Council – Guiding Principles The Bass Coast Shire Council held a roundtable discussion with key stakeholders in April 2016. (Refer Attachment B) The stakeholders agreed on Guiding Principles that have been adopted by Council. These include no dredging of Western Port except for maintenance and the principle that: “The recommendation of Infrastructure Victoria to the Victorian Government on the timing and location of a second container port requires a whole of government approach which fully considers tourism, environment, economic development, fisheries and recreation.” The Preserve Western Port Action Group supported by the Phillip Island Conservation Society and all the Waterline areas, strongly supports the Bass Coast Shire Council Guiding Principles.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Attachments:

A. List of Abbreviations.

B. Bass Coast Shire Council roundtable with key stakeholders regarding the future of Port of Hastings. 28th April 2016. Including Guiding Principles adopted by Bass Coast Shire Council.

C. List of Reports, Documents, Photographs, presented to Infrastructure Victoria that supplement this submission.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

List of Abbreviations:

ACF Australian Conservation Foundation

CRCP Central Region Coastal Plan

DWELP Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

EPA Environment Protection Agency (Victoria)

MCG Melbourne Cricket Ground

PINP Phillip Island Nature Park

RAMSAR PLAN Westernport Ramsar Site Management Plan

SHAPIRO REPORT Westernport Bay Environmental Study

VNPA Victorian National Parks Association

WPLCHA Westernport Local Coastal Hazzard Assessment

WPPC Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

FUTURE OF PORT OF HASTINGS ROUNDTABLE Thursday 28 th April 2016 9.30am-11.30am, Nobbies Conference Centre

In Attendance :

Dr Peter Dann Phillip Island Nature Park Dave Sutton South Gippsland Conservation Society Jeff Nottle Preserve Western Port / Phillip Island Conservation Society Peter Mulherin RMIT Lecturer (Sustainable Productivity, Innovation and Climate change) Cr David Garnock Westernport Biosphere Council Liaison Sub-committee Peter Quigley Westernport Water Anne Davie Phillip Island Conservation Society Loise Rawlings Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council Inc. Kevin Chambers Preserve Western Port Bass Coast Shire Council: Cr Crugnale, Mayor Cr Rankin Cr Le Serve Paul Buckley, CEO Allison Jones, General Manager Sustainable Development and Growth Roslyn Jenzen, Acting Manager Economic Development and Tourism

Invitees :

Kellie Nichols Bass Coast Landcare Network John Gemmil Clean Ocean Caroline Briggs Boonwurrung Foundation Jane Jobe PPWCMA Tony Walton Parks Victoria Ross Kilburn Central Coastal Board Prof.David Kennedy School of Geography, The University of Melbourne Clinton Rodda Southern Rural Water Representative Western Port Seagrass Partnership

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Representative Energy Innovation Co-operative Representative Melbourne Water Representative Phillip Island Tourism Association Representative Groundswell Representative Nature Conservancy Councillors Bass Coast Shire Council

Agenda • Councils current position • Infrastructure Victoria Process • Today’s Roundtable Opportunity to provide input and views on any future Port of Hastings expansion: Share expertise and local knowledge Will form a part of Council’s submission Request Infrastructure Victoria to visit Bass Coast to hear from community firsthand

BCSC Port of Hastings Current Position Council has adopted position on any expansion of the Port of Hastings: • Council’s position is based on the fact that our prosperity comes from the environment which in turn drives our economy through tourism and agriculture. • The impacts of an expansion to the Port of Hastings on the environment are known. Bass Coast Shire Council is unwavering in its view that a balanced sustainable approach must be found to provide positive community outcomes and environment conservation of the natural assets. Council is seeking an outcome where the proposed project provides a net gain benefit to the environmental, social and economic prosperity of Bass Coast Shire.

Background • May 2015 Council Resolution: That the Mayor: 1. Write to the Special Minister of State and the Minister for Ports reinforcing Council’s position in relation to the Port of Hastings. 2. Request that the Ministers instruct the soon to be established Infrastructure Victoria to engage with Bass Coast Shire Council on the future of the Ports of Hastings, given the importance of Westernport to the Victorian and Australian economy and environment - Supporting sustainable environmentally sensitive development in Westernport; - Working with key stakeholders including tourism operators and bodies, recreational boating and fishing groups as well as community groups;

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

- Developing a comprehensive submission to Infrastructure Victoria that provides analysis on the costs to the Bass Coast economy, environment and community; and - Developing the submission to Infrastructure Victoria in conjunction with the key Bass Coast stakeholder groups.

Agreed Principles: 1. No dredging in Westernport bay other than for maintenance No capital dredging, widening or deepening of channels in Westernport Bay, other than for maintenance If declared as Port Waters, changes status of overlay (for example, the distance you can fish/ reduction of fishing area) Dredging needs to be the position – Not types of use!

2. Any change in/or continuation of, port operations should result in no net loss for the environment More environmental safe guards over existing volumes 15 Year Clause – Planning can still occur for Port use/s Port of Hastings actively looking at other uses, i.e. car carriers If change in Government, policy is to develop site

3. Infrastructure Victoria to demonstrate need for a second major port: a. National approach b. Existing capacity Infrastructure Victoria must demonstrate need and timing for a second major port through consideration of existing port capacity in Victoria and via national approach. 2013 Community Plus Forum – requested release of consultation scope and terms of reference – denied. – Lack of transparency Infrastructure Victoria needs to meet community – clear understanding of community and impacts

4. Independent, scientifically based research vital: a. Social b. Environmental c. Economic Independent, scientifically based research must be the basis of any recommendation for a second container port in Victoria to ensure that the environment impact is known and understood. Of equal importance is economic and social impacts.

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

Position/s need to be based on accurate research – Need to be able to access past research undertaken Need to lobby for reinstatement of ongoing research to ensure better informed of impacts (tidal flow, salinity, aqua flow into bay etc.) Coastal hazards Economic reference Refer to Melbourne Water report ‘Understanding Westernport’ – more targeted report Importance of channel ledges feeding grounds – sea life, penguins etc. No position should be set without access to / availability of funds to complete accurate research RAMSAR principles (top two thirds of Westernport RAMSAR)

5. Whole of government considerations – not just Department of Transport: a. Tourism b. Environment c. Economic development d. Fisheries e. Recreation

The recommendation of Infrastructure Victoria to the Victorian Government on the timing and location of a second container port requires a whole of government approach which fully considers tourism, environment, economic development, fisheries and recreation. All costs incurred including environmental impacts, growth, tourism, marine, recreation etc. need to be included / considered If process goes to State, automatically wipes out 10 acts to be able to appeal Penguin numbers have doubled the last decade PINP / Penguin Parade worth $420m to the State per year

Reference Material (circulated prior / provided at / referenced at round table)

• Preserve Western Port Discussion Paper http://www.preservewesternport.org.au/discussion-paper-forum/

• Gippsland Regional Plan http://www.rdv.vic.gov.au/ data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1165407/Gippslan d-Regional- Plan-2015_web.pdf

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

• South East Melbourne Group of Councils Regional Plan 2015- 2019 (refer page 11) http://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au/getattachment/Council/Council Plans_ Policies/Regional_Plans/South_East_Melbourne_Group_of_Councils_Plan.pdf.aspx

• Infrastructure Victoria http://yoursay.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/developing-strategy and http://yoursay.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/application/files/5514/6121/0/806/We_hea r_you_-_consultation_report.pdf

• The Distribution and Abundance of ‘Blue Carbon’ within Port Phillip and Westernport http://www.ppwcma.vic.gov.au/Resources/PublicationDocuments/117/PP W%20Blue%20Carbon%20Report%20March%202014.pdf

• Natural Environment Sustainability Strategy 2016 – 2026 http://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au/Council/Consultation/Natural_Environm ent_ Sustain ability_Strategy

• Draft Phillip Island Tourism Strategy 2035 http://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au/Business/Phillip_Island_Tourism_Strateg y_2035)

• Bass Coast Shire Council Economic Development Strategy 2016 - 2021 http://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au/Business/Business_in_Bass_Coast

Preserve Western Port Action Group Submission. January 2017

List of Reports, Documents presented to Infrastructure Victoria in November/December 2016 that supplement this submission.

Bass Coast Shire Council. http://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au

References to various Economic Development and Environment Strategies and Policies. Phillip Island and San Remo Visitor Economy Strategy 2035: Growing Tourism. Adopted by Council in August 2016. Planning Scheme Amendments. C82. Land subject to Inundation Overlay.

Preserve Western Port Action Group. (PWP) http://www.preservewesternport.org.au

Power Point Presentation, January 2015 on USB which also includes: The Shapiro Report- Westernport Bay Environmental Study 1973-1974.

Professor David Kennedy, Coastal Geomorphologist, School of Geography, The University of Melbourne. Media release dated 9 th November 2015. Presentation to Vegie Gowers by Graeme Hanigan PWP brochure and postcard. A suite of photographs to supplement the submission.

Other Documents/Reports Geological Survey Report no. 58. Effects of Channel Dredging in the Tyabb area on the Western Port Basin Groundwaters. 1980 Central Region Coastal Plan Draft Western Port Ramsar Site Report Western Port Local Coastal Hazard Assessment Summary Report Economic Study of Recreation Fishing in Victoria Report, Ernst & Young, 2015.