DOCSLIB.ORG

Single Column Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Single Column Report Aggregated emissions of total nitrogen and total phosphorus to the Peel-Harvey catchment Western Australia A submission to the National Pollutant Inventory Looking after all our water needs SCT_Online Print_Final_A4.indd 1 31/05/10 11:08 AM Aggregated emissions of total nitrogen and total phosphorus to the Peel-Harvey catchment Western Australia A submission to the National Pollutant Inventory Peta Kelsey, Joel Hall, Peter Kretschmer, Belinda Quinton and Deepak Shakya Department of Water February 2011 Department of Water 168 St Georges Terrace Perth Western Australia 6000 Telephone +61 8 6364 7600 Facsimile +61 8 6364 7601 www.water.wa.gov.au © Government of Western Australia 2011 February 2011 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Department of Water. ISBN (online) 978-1-921789-82-3 Acknowledgements Thank you to the Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, the South West Catchments Council, the Drainage and Waterways Branch of the Department of Water, the Department of Agriculture and Food, Waroona office and the Department of Environment and Conservation for help and support during this project. For more information contact: Peta Kelsey or Deepak Shakya, Water Science Branch, Department of Water. The recommended reference for this publication is: Kelsey, P, Hall, J, Kretschmer, P, Quinton, B & Shakya D, 2011, Aggregated emissions of total nitrogen and total phosphorus to the Peel-Harvey catchment, Western Australia, A report to the National Pollutant Inventory, Department of Water, Western Australia. Disclaimer This document has been published by the Department of Water. Any representation, statement, opinion or advice expressed or implied in this publication is made in good faith and on the basis that the Department of Water and its employees are not liable for any damage or loss whatsoever which may occur as a result of action taken or not taken, as the case may be in respect of any representation, statement, opinion or advice referred to herein. Professional advice should be obtained before applying the information contained in this document to particular circumstances. This publication is available at our website <www.water.wa.gov.au> or for those with special needs it can be made available in alternative formats such as audio, large print, or Braille. Aggregated emissions of TN and TP to the Peel-Harvey catchment Contents Contents ................................................................................................................................ iii Summary .............................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 Catchment description ....................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Location ..............................................................................................................................3 2.2 Climate ................................................................................................................................5 2.3 Geology and hydrogeology................................................................................................. 7 2.3.1 Geology .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.3.2 Hydrogeology ........................................................................................................................ 12 2.4 Physiography and soils .....................................................................................................13 2.5 Vegetation .........................................................................................................................16 2.6 Surface drainage ..............................................................................................................19 2.7 Land use ...........................................................................................................................24 2.8 Environmental issues .......................................................................................................29 2.8.1 History................................................................................................................................... 29 2.8.2 Impact of catchment remediation and the Dawesville Channel............................................. 30 2.8.3 Catchment loads ................................................................................................................... 31 2.8.4 Current condition of the estuary and rivers ........................................................................... 33 3 The Streamflow Quality Affecting Rivers and Estuaries model ........................................ 35 3.1 Description ........................................................................................................................35 3.2 Peel-Harvey SQUARE models .........................................................................................39 3.3 Other estimation techniques .............................................................................................40 3.4 In-stream attenuation in the SQUARE models................................................................. 43 3.5 Input data ..........................................................................................................................43 3.5.1 Meteorological data .............................................................................................................. 44 3.5.2 Spatial data ........................................................................................................................... 47 3.6 SQUARE calibrations for the Peel-Harvey catchments ................................................... 57 4 Modelling results .............................................................................................................. 62 4.1 Current catchment condition.............................................................................................62 4.1.1 Average annual flows and loads ........................................................................................... 62 4.1.2 Comparison with previous LASCAM modelling (Zammit et al. 2006) .................................... 65 4.1.3 Annual loads and comparison with EPP targets for phosphorus .......................................... 66 4.2 Sources of nutrients ..........................................................................................................69 4.2.1 Nutrient loads by reporting catchment .................................................................................. 69 4.2.2 Nutrient loads by land use .................................................................................................... 75 5 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 79 5.1 Point source emissions .....................................................................................................79 5.2 Septic tank emissions .......................................................................................................79 5.3 Comparison with previous NPI aggregated emissions report (Lord et al. 2001) ............. 79 6 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 88 Appendix A Soil descriptions ........................................................................................ 89 Appendix B Point sources of nutrient pollution .................................................. 93 Appendix C Estimating nitrogen and phosphorus inputs from septic tanks ................. 100 Department of Water iii Department of Water Appendix D Aggregated emissions of total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) .. 103 References ......................................................................................................................... 113 Tables Table 2.1: Population of local government authorities within the catchment (ABS 2009) ........ 3 Table 2.2: Stratigraphy and lithology of the coastal plain area .............................................. 11 Table 2.3: Geomorphic elements of the Peel-Harvey catchment .......................................... 15 Table 2.4: Dams in the Peel-Harvey catchment .................................................................... 20 Table 2.5: Peel-Harvey catchment areas ............................................................................ 24 Table 2.6: Land-use areas in the Peel-Harvey catchment (2006) ........................................ 27 Table 2.7: Land-use classes used for reporting ................................................................... 28 Table 2.8: Areas and percentage areas for land-use classes in the Peel-Harvey catchment, the Upper Murray catchment and the other reporting catchments in 2006 .......... 29 Table 2.9: Annual total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) loads at Serpentine River (614030), Murray River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 82452 JW.Rdo
    Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 Item 9.1.19 WSD Item 9.1.19 H PP TONKIN HS HS HWY SU PICKERING BROOK HS ROE HS TS CANNING HILLS HS HWY MARTIN HS HS SU HS GOSNELLS 5 8 KARRAGULLEN HWY RANFORD HS P SOUTHERN 9 RIVER HS 11 BROOKTON SU 3 ROAD TS 12 H ROLEYSTONE 10 ARMADALE HWY 13 HS ROAD 4 WSD ARMADALE 7 6 FORRESTDALE HS 1 ALBANY 2 ILLAWARRA WESTERN BEDFORDALE HIGHWAY WSD THOMAS ROAD OAKFORD SOUTH WSD KARRAKUP OLDBURY SU Location of the proposed amendment to the MRS for 1161/41 - Parks and Recreation Amendment City of Armadale METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME LEGEND Proposed: RESERVED LANDS ZONES PARKS AND RECREATION PUBLIC PURPOSES - URBAN Parks and Recreation Amendment 1161/41 DENOTED AS FOLLOWS : 1 R RESTRICTED PUBLIC ACCESS URBAN DEFERRED City of Armadale H HOSPITAL RAILWAYS HS HIGH SCHOOL CENTRAL CITY AREA TS TECHNICAL SCHOOL PORT INSTALLATIONS INDUSTRIAL CP CAR PARK U UNIVERSITY STATE FORESTS SPECIAL INDUSTRIAL CG COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT WATER CATCHMENTS SEC STATE ENERGY COMMISSION RURAL SU SPECIAL USES CIVIC AND CULTURAL WSD WATER AUTHORITY OF WA PRIVATE RECREATION P PRISON WATERWAYS RURAL - WATER PROTECTION ROADS : PRIMARY REGIONAL ROADS METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME BOUNDARY OTHER REGIONAL ROADS armadaleloc.fig N 26 Mar 2009 Produced by Mapping & GeoSpatial Data Branch, Department for Planning and Infrastructure Scale 1:150 000 On behalf of the Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth WA 0 4 Base information supplied by Western Australian Land Information Authority GL248-2007-2 GEOCENTRIC
    [Show full text]
  • Local Biodiversity Strategy
    Serpentine-Jarrahdale Shire Local Biodiversity Strategy Final version 8 July 2008 Ironbark Environmental Acknowledgements This draft Strategy has been prepared by Ironbark Environmental for the Serpentine Jarrahdale Shire with assistance from the South West Biodiversity Project (SWBP) and the South West Catchments Council (SWCC). It uses the approach developed in Local Government Biodiversity Planning Guidelines for the Perth Metropolitan Region (WALGA & PBP, 2004). Funding for this project was received from the Commonwealth of Australia’s Natural Heritage Trust and the Western Australian National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality through the South West Catchments Council. The following people are thanked for their involvement in the project: Suzette van Aswegen, Mangala Khadpekar, Brad Gleeson, Meredith Kenny, Jocelyn Ullman, Chris Portlock, Mark Angeloni, Paula Haro, and Jenni Andrews, of the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale, Carol Bryant (SJ Landcare Centre), and Michael Taylforth (Belton-Taylforth Consultants), and Jodie Wood and Natalie Olsen of the South West Biodiversity Project. All photographs were provided by Andrew Del Marco unless otherwise indicated. Thanks to Karen Clarke for photos of vegetation complexes. Photos by Kiri Lochman used with permission. Serpentine-Jarrahdale Shire Final Local Biodiversity Strategy Abbreviations CCW Conservation Category Wetlands DRF Declared Rare Flora EPA Environmental Protection Authority LNA Local Natural Area MUC Multiple Use Corridor NASCA Natural Area Special Control Area PBP Perth Biodiversity Project SPF Specially Protected Fauna SWBP South West Biodiversity Project TEC Threatened Ecological Community LPS Local Planning Scheme VNA Verified Natural Area WALGA WA Local Government Association WAPC WA Planning Commission Reader’s note and qualifications on native vegetation information This is a consultant’s report produced for the Serpentine-Jarrahdale Shire.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Meeting
    Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale Page i Minutes – Ordinary Council Meeting 27th September, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES: ....................................................................................................1 2. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME: ............................................................................................................1 2.1 Response To Previous Public Questions Taken On Notice .................................................1 3. PUBLIC STATEMENT TIME:.........................................................................................................2 4. PETITIONS & DEPUTATIONS:......................................................................................................2 5. PRESIDENT’S REPORT: ...............................................................................................................2 6. DECLARATION OF COUNCILLORS AND OFFICERS INTEREST: ............................................3 7. RECEIPT OF MINUTES OR REPORTS AND CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM COMMITTEE MEETINGS HELD SINCE THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS:...................................................................................................................3 SD038/09/05 CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 143 FOR FINAL APPROVAL – REZONING OF LOT 1 WEBB ROAD, MARDELLA AND LOT 499 MUNDIJONG ROAD, MUNDIJONG (A1265) .....................................................4 SD036/09/05 PROPOSED MINOR CHANGES TO ADOPTED LOCAL STRUCTURE PLAN – LOTS 1, 2 AND 63 LARSEN
    [Show full text]
  • Mundijong District Structure Plan (Draft) Summary of Submissions SJ2302 – E18/6969
    OCM148.1/12/18 NEW SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS Development Strategy – Mundijong District Structure Plan (Draft) Summary of submissions SJ2302 – E18/6969 Officer Submitter No Submitter Comments Officer Comment Recommendation We generally support the Mundijong Concept Plan prepared by Hames 1. WA Land Sharley and the recent rezoning of land in West Mundijong to Industrial in Noted. Compensation – 49 the MRS. We understand and accept the reasons why the freight railway Pure Steel Lane, needs to be realigned. The Shire notes your Mundijong concerns and is working with Unfortunately the greater part of my client's property is proposed as part of relevant State Government the rail realignment. That part of the property, required for rail, has remained agencies to provide further zoned Rural in the MRS. It should have either been shown as Industrial as certainty towards those per Hames Sharley's plan or preferably reserved for railways. Reservation landowners directly provides owner's with compensation rights. impacted by the freight rail Leaving my client's property and others as Rural with a proposed rail realignment. realignment, creates problems for my clients and the Shire. My client's property is almost unsaleable, at a fair price, in this situation. They have no compensation rights if they wished to sell their property. Development proposals should be the State's responsibility rather than the Shire's. As the procedure to reserve land can take many years, owners of land affected by this proposal should immediately have compensation rights. In these situations the State often declares Planning Control Areas (PCA) that last for 5 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Serpentine Townsite Local Structure Plan
    OCM275.3/12/15 Serpentine Townsite Local Structure Plan Draft January 2014 OCM275.3/12/15 Contents Part 1 Statutory Section ............................................................................................. 2 1.0 Structure Plan Area .......................................................................... 2 2.0 Structure Plan Content ..................................................................... 2 3.0 Interpretation and Use Class Permissibility ................................... 2 4.0 Relationship with the Scheme ......................................................... 2 5.0 Operation Date .................................................................................. 2 6.0 Zones, Reserves and Residential Density Codes .......................... 2 7.0 Provisions ......................................................................................... 3 8.0 Investigations and Management Plans ........................................... 5 9.0 Local Structure Plan ......................................................................... 5 Part 2 Explanatory Section ........................................................................................ 7 1.0 Planning Background ....................................................................... 7 1.1 Introduction and Purpose .................................................................... 7 1.2 Land Description ................................................................................. 7 1.3 Planning Framework ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1298/41 West Mundijong Industrial Precinct To: Secretary Western Australian Planning Commission Locked Bag 2506 Perth WA 6001
    June 2017 Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1298/41 West Mundijong Industrial Precinct Report on Submissions Submissions Transcript of hearings Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1298/41 West Mundijong Industrial Precinct Report on Submissions Submissions Transcript of hearings Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale June 2017 Disclaimer This document has been published by the Western Australian Planning Commission. Any representation, statement, opinion or advice expressed or implied in this publication is made in good faith and on the basis that the Government, its employees and agents are not liable for any damage or loss whatsoever which may occur as a result of action taken or not taken, as the case may be, in respect of any representation, statement, opinion or advice referred to herein. Professional advice should be obtained before applying the information contained in this document to particular circumstances. © State of Western Australia Internet: http://www.wa.gov.au Published by the Western Australian Planning Commission, 140 William Street, Perth Western Australia 6000 Locked Bag 2506 Perth WA 6001 MRS Amendment 1298/41 Report on Submissions Submissions Transcript of hearings File 809-2-29-5 Pt 1, 2 & 3 Published June 2017 Internet: http://www.planning.wa.gov.au Email: [email protected] Phone: (08) 6551 9000 Fax: (08) 6551 9001 National Relay Service: 13 36 77 Infoline: 1800 626 477 This document is available in alternative formats on application to Communication Services. Introduction to Metropolitan Region Scheme major amendments The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) is responsible for keeping the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) under review and initiating changes where they are seen as necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Perth Metropolitan Mobile Speed Camera Deployment Locations
    Perth Metropolitan Mobile Speed Camera Deployment Locations Current as at 01 August 2020 Locations are correct at time of printing and are subject to change without notice. Locations will be updated each month as required. Location Location Street Name Locality Street Name Locality Criteria Criteria Alexander Drive Alexander Heights 2, 4 Neilson Avenue Armadale 3, 4 Hepburn Avenue Alexander Heights 2, 4 Powell Crescent Armadale 3, 4 Marangaroo Drive Alexander Heights 1, 2, 4 Railway Avenue Armadale 4 Mirrabooka Avenue Alexander Heights 1, 2, 4 Robin Hood Avenue Armadale 3, 4 Northumberland Avenue Alexander Heights 3, 4 Schruth Street Armadale 2, 3, 4 Canning Highway Alfred Cove 2, 4 Seventh Road Armadale 2, 4 Kitchener Road Alfred Cove 2, 4 Seville Drive Armadale 4 Latham Street Alfred Cove 4 South Western Highway Armadale 2, 4 North Lake Road Alfred Cove 4 Streich Avenue Armadale 4 Marmion Avenue Alkimos 4 Tijuana Road Armadale 3, 4 Kwinana Freeway Anketell 1, 2, 4 Wungong Road Armadale 4 Thomas Road Anketell 2, 4 Grandstand Road Ascot 2, 4 Canning Highway Applecross 2, 4 Great Eastern Highway Ascot 2, 4 Dunkley Avenue Applecross 2, 4 Raconteur Drive Ascot 4 Glenelg Street Applecross 3, 4 Resolution Drive Ascot 4 Kintail Road Applecross 2, 3, 4 Stoneham Street Ascot 4 Kishorn Road Applecross 2, 3, 4 Tonkin Highway Ascot 4 Sixth Avenue Applecross 3, 4 Carosa Road Ashby 2, 4 Tweeddale Road Applecross 4 Monet Drive Ashby 4 Alness Street Ardross 4 Pinjar Road Ashby 2, 4 Ardessie Street Ardross 2, 3, 4 Wanneroo Road Ashby 2, 4 Ardross Street
    [Show full text]
  • Restricted Bridges
    Special Purpose Vehicle Restricted Bridges Perth Metropolitan and Mandurah Area July 2020 Edition 31 Page 1 of 54 Purpose The tables in this document provide details of all the bridges in the Perth Metropolitan and Mandurah areas. Table 1 (Restricted Bridges) contains the bridges which are not be approved for use by any Special Purpose Vehicles. These bridges are in addition to any bridge restriction specified in the SPV permit. Do not drive your SPV over any Restricted Bridge listed in Table 1. The Table 1 (Restricted Bridges) list is subject to amendments as bridges are re- assessed, which includes bridges being added as a restricted bridge, as well as bridges removed from the Restricted Bridge list. Operators and drivers are responsible for ensuring that they check the current listing of Restricted Bridges, available on the Main Roads website at www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/UsingRoads/HeavyVehicles/Permits prior to operating the vehicle on the public road network. If amendments are made to the Table 1 (Restricted Bridges), they will be made on the first working Monday of the month and will be published on the Main Roads website at this time. Table 2 (Other Bridges) contains the remaining bridge locations in the Perth and Mandurah areas not listed in Table 1. Many of these bridges may be restricted for a particular SPV depending on the type and configuration of the vehicle. The operator/driver must refer to the specific permit which will outline which of the Table 2 bridges are restricted for that particular vehicle. Do not drive your SPV over any Restricted Bridge listed in your permit.
    [Show full text]
  • Peelhurst Ruins Conservation Management Plan
    PEELHURST RUINS LOT 40 DAMPIER DRIVE, GOLDEN BAY Conservation Management Plan March 2011 For The City of Rockingham Peelhurst Ruins, Golden Bay Conservation Management Plan March 2011 Cover Illustration: View of Peelhurst Ruins, Golden Bay, August 2010 by Hocking Planning and Architecture COPYRIGHT Peelhurst ruins, Conservation Management Plan is copyright to the City of Rockingham and Hocking Planning & Architecture. This report cannot be reproduced, in whole or in part, for any purposes apart from those permitted under the Copyright Act or use for professional or financial benefit by other professional consultants and / or building trade contractors without prior approval of the City of Rockingham and Hocking Planning & Architecture. HP&A Job No. 2009-35 201035 Hocking Planning & Architecture | 2 Peelhurst Ruins, Golden Bay Conservation Management Plan March 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND Peelhurst ruins are the remnants of a stone cottage built by Thomas Peel Jr (Tom Peel) in the early 1860s. The cottage was within a large landholding which Tom Peel named ‘Peelhurst’. The cottage was never completed but was occupied by Peel and his housekeeper Mrs Spencer until approximately 1882 when the property was sold to brothers William and George Paterson. The Paterson’s acquired the landholding, to provide a coastal run for their sheep from their property ‘Creaton’ in Pinjarra. The cottage was not permanently occupied during ownership by the Paterson family although a caretaker did occupy the cottage for some periods. The Paterson’s subdivided the large landholding and in 1949 the lot on which the Peelhurst ruins were located was sold to engineer Cyril Robbins. In the 1960s, the large landholding was subdivided for residential lots and sold under the name ‘Golden Bay’.
    [Show full text]