Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report June 2006 Resource Planning and Development Commission National Library of Australia Cataloguing–in–Publication data: Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion. Background Report

ISBN 0 7246 7410 1

Resource Planning and Development Commission GPO Box 1691 Hobart Tasmania 7001 June 2006 Email address: [email protected] Production by Artemis Publishing Consultants, Hobart, Tasmania This report is available on the Internet. The Internet address is: website: www.rpdc.tas.gov.au

Printed on environmentally friendly paper Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Invitation to comment

On 6 June 2005 the former Minister for Environment and Planning, the Hon. Judy Jackson, issued a reference to the Resource Planning and Development Commission (the Commission). The terms of reference require the Commission to conduct an inquiry and make recommendations to the Minister on the establishment of marine protected areas in the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia Bioregion known as the Bruny Bioregion.

The first key step in the inquiry process is for the Commission to prepare a Background Report and place it on public exhibition. The Background Report presents information considered to be relevant to the identification and selection of marine protected areas, as described in the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy, within the Bruny Bioregion.

Government agencies, community and other interest groups and individuals are invited to comment in writing on this Background Report. In particular, comments or additional information are sought that may be relevant to the identification and selection of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion, especially as they may relate to draft ecosystems (see Appendix 4). Submissions that refer to specific areas or places of special value are encouraged to include maps that indicate, as accurately as possible, the location of those areas.

Public comment will assist the Commission in the preparation of draft recommendations.

Written submissions should be sent to:

Address: Resource Planning and Development Commission GPO Box 1691 Hobart Tasmania 7001 Phone Number: (03) 6233 2795 Fax Number: (03) 6233 5400 E-mail: [email protected]

Written submissions must be received by the Commission no later than 4.30 pm on Monday 31 July 2006. Late submissions will not be accepted. However, faxed or e-mail copies of submissions will be received up until 4.30 pm on the closing date. Please note that submissions will be treated as public documents unless an argument is put to the contrary by the person making the submission.

Additional copies of the Background Report may be obtained without cost by contacting the Commission or from the Commission’s office:

3rd floor, 144 Macquarie Street, Hobart.

The Background Report is available in pdf format on the Commission’s website: http://www.rpdc.tas.gov.au

Resource Planning and Development Commission iii Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Resource Planning and Development Commission

The Resource Planning and Development Commission is a statutory body established by the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997.

The Commission has six principal functions:

• to assess and approve local government planning schemes and planning scheme amendments; • to assess projects of State significance; • to assess draft State Policies; • to prepare the Tasmanian State of the Environment Report; • to review representations and the report of the Secretary of the Department of Primary Industries and Water relating to draft water management plans; and • to conduct inquiries into the use of public land. The Commission is part of the State’s Resource Management and Planning System, the objectives of which are set out in Schedule 1 of the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997 (Appendix 1).

The Commission is made up of:

• an Executive Commissioner (Julian Green) • a Commissioner with planning experience nominated by the Local Government Association of Tasmania (Sandra Hogue) • a Commissioner with expertise and management experience in resource conservation (Helen Locher) • a Commissioner with planning experience and experience in industry and commerce (Jamieson Allom) • a Commissioner with resource conservation or planning experience representing community interests (Catherine Nicholson) • a Commissioner with public administration experience in regard to project implementation (Helen Hudson)

Resource Planning and Development Commission iv Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Table of contents

1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background to the inquiry ...... 1 1.1.1 Description of the lands ...... 1 1.1.2 Submissions made in relation to terms of reference ...... 1 1.2 Inquiry process ...... 1 1.3 Matters to be taken into account ...... 4 1.4 Overview of Background Report ...... 4

2.0 Context of inquiry ...... 5 2.1 Jurisdiction of waters ...... 5 2.2 Management in Tasmanian waters ...... 6 2.3 Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia ...... 7 2.4 National representative system of marine protected areas ...... 9 2.5 Commonwealth marine protected areas in Australia’s south-east marine region ...... 10

3.0 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy ...... 13 3.1 Strategy development ...... 13 3.2 Criteria for identifying and selecting marine protected areas ...... 15 3.3 Potential types of marine protected areas ...... 17 3.4 Tasmanian marine protected areas within the NRSMPA ...... 18 3.5 Strategy’s relationship to this inquiry ...... 19

4.0 Bruny Bioregion ...... 21 4.1 General description ...... 21 4.2 The marine environment ...... 22 4.2.1 Bathymetry ...... 22 4.2.2 Hydrology ...... 23 4.2.3 Exposure (waves and swell) ...... 23 4.2.4 Benthic habitats ...... 25 4.2.5 Macroalgae ...... 29 4.2.6 Benthic animals (species living on or in the seabed) ...... 32 4.2.7 Fish ...... 33 4.2.8 Cetaceans (whales, dolphins) and seals ...... 34 4.2.9 Seabirds ...... 36 4.2.10 Geoconservation ...... 38 4.2.11 Estuaries and wetlands ...... 40

Resource Planning and Development Commission v Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

4.3 Human use of the marine environment ...... 43 4.3.1 Commercial fishing ...... 43 4.3.1.1 Abalone ...... 43 4.3.1.2 Rock lobster ...... 45 4.3.1.3 Scalefish ...... 48 4.3.1.4 Commercial dive ...... 51 4.3.1.5 Commonwealth fisheries ...... 53 4.3.2 Marine farming ...... 53 4.3.3 Fish processing ...... 55 4.3.4 Recreational fishing ...... 55 4.3.4.1 Abalone ...... 58 4.3.4.2 Rock lobster ...... 58 4.3.4.3 Scallops ...... 59 4.3.4.4 Scalefish ...... 59 4.3.5 Minerals and petroleum ...... 59 4.3.6 Marine and estuarine outfalls ...... 59 4.3.7 Slipways ...... 60 4.3.8 Marine transport and cruising ...... 61 4.3.9 Recreational boating ...... 64 4.3.10 Recreational diving ...... 64 4.3.11 Commercial tourism ...... 65 4.3.12 Nature recreation ...... 67 4.3.13 Science and education ...... 68 4.4 Cultural and heritage values ...... 69 4.4.1 Indigenous values ...... 69 4.4.2 Historic heritage ...... 70 4.4.3 Shipwrecks ...... 70 4.5 Current area management status ...... 71 4.5.1 Marine protected areas ...... 71 4.5.2 Reserved land ...... 71 4.5.3 Public reserve ...... 74 4.5.4 Fishing area restrictions ...... 74 4.5.5 Municipal areas and planning schemes ...... 74 4.6 Conclusions ...... 77

5.0 Bibliography ...... 78

6.0 Glossary ...... 81

Resource Planning and Development Commission vi Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Appendix 1 Objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania ...... 83

Appendix 2 Terms of reference ...... 84

Appendix 3 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy ...... 87

Appendix 4 Draft ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 117

Appendix 5 Substrate types and habitat categories and broad area based descriptions of key habitat; selected extracts from Barrett et al. (2001) ...... 134

Resource Planning and Development Commission vii Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Tables

Table 1 Area of main benthic habitat types mapped in Bruny Bioregion, to the 40 m depth contour ...... 28

Table 2 Physical class, naturalness and conservation values of estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 42

Table 3 Commercial abalone catch for Tasmania, the Eastern zone and from the Bruny Bioregion, 2000 – 2004 ...... 45

Table 4 Commercial abalone catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion and annual average number of divers, by block, 2000 – 2004...... 46

Table 5 Commercial rock lobster catch for Tasmania and from the Bruny Bioregion, quota years 2000/01 – 2004/05 ...... 48

Table 6 Commercial rock lobster catch (tonnes) from Bruny Bioregion and average number of vessels, by block, quota years 2000/01 – 2004/05 ...... 48

Table 7 Commercial scalefish catch for Tasmania and from the Bruny Bioregion, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04 ...... 50

Table 8 Commercial scalefish catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion and average number of vessels, by block and estuary, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04 ...... 50

Table 9 Commercial scalefish catch of top ten species by weight from the Bruny Bioregion, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04 ...... 51

Table 10 Commercial scalefish catch by method from the Bruny Bioregion, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04 ...... 52

Table 11 Commercial dive catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion, 2000 – 2004 ...... 52

Table 12 Commercial catch (tonnes) from Commonwealth non-trawl logbooks within the Bruny Bioregion, 1999/00 – 2003/04 ...... 53

Table 13 Area of marine farming plans, zones and leases for Tasmania and for Bruny Bioregion, 1995 and 2000 – 2004 and estimated value 2004 ...... 54

Table 14 Annual marine farming production for Tasmania and the Bruny Bioregion, 1995 and 2000 – 2004 and estimated value 2004 ...... 55

Resource Planning and Development Commission viii Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Figures

Projection – all maps. Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA94) Map Grid of Australia (MGA) Zone 55

Figure 1 Inquiry process ...... 3

Figure 2 Tasmanian IMCRA bioregions showing area of Bruny Bioregion within inquiry ...... 8

Figure 3 Australian Government Candidate MPA, Huon Candidate MPA ...... 12

Figure 4 Mainland Tasmanian marine protected areas (marine reserves) ...... 19

Figure 5 Bathymetry of the Bruny Bioregion, including notable geomorphic basin (depth contours beyond the 200 m isobath not shown) ...... 22

Figure 6 General circulation pattern for coastal waters in southeast Tasmania ...... 24

Figure 7 Predicted coastal exposure levels for the Bruny Bioregion ...... 25

Figure 8 Seabed habitat map of Bruny Bioregion, 40 m depth contour ...... 26

Figure 9 Seabed mean grain size in south-eastern Tasmania ...... 29

Figure 10 Distribution of Macrocystis pyrifera in the Bruny Bioregion from habitat mapping records ...... 30

Figure 11 General recorded distribution of benthic threatened species in the Bruny Bioregion ...... 31

Figure 12 Fur seal haul-out sites within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 35

Figure 13 Major little penguin and short-tailed shearwater colonies and priority sites for beach nesting and migratory shorebirds in the Bruny Bioregion ...... 37

Figure 14 Prominent listed geoconservation sites within Bruny Bioregion ...... 39

Figure 15 Major estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion and their estuarine catchments ...... 41

Figure 16 Commercial abalone fishing blocks and sub-blocks within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 44

Figure 17 Commercial rock lobster and scalefish fishing blocks, including fishing areas for reporting the commercial rock lobster fishery ...... 47

Figure 18 Marine farming zones and lease areas in the Bruny Bioregion, 2005 ...... 56

Figure 19 Location of major marine and estuarine outfalls within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 61

Figure 20 Location of major slipways within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 62

Figure 21 Major boat ramps and jetties and pilotage zones within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 63

Figure 22 Dive sites and located shipwrecks within the Bruny Bioregion...... 65

Figure 23 Sites of significant tourism, recreation or cultural and historic value ...... 66

Figure 24 Tinderbox and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserves ...... 71

Resource Planning and Development Commission ix Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report

Figure 25 Reserved land adjacent to the coast, Bruny Bioregion ...... 72

Figure 26 Notable marine and estuarine areas (i.e. below high water mark) of reserved land and public reserve within Bruny Bioregion ...... 73

Figure 27 Netting and rock lobster potting restrictions and shark refuge areas in the Bruny Bioregion ...... 75

Figure 28 Main municipal areas adjoining and within the Bruny Bioregion ...... 76

Resource Planning and Development Commission x Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background to the inquiry On 6 June 2005 the former Minister for Environment and Planning, the Hon. Judy Jackson, (the former Minister) issued a reference to the Resource Planning and Development Commission (the Commission). The terms of reference require the Commission to conduct an inquiry and make recommendations to the Minister on the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia (IMCRA) Bioregion known as the Bruny Bioregion.

The terms of reference are presented in Appendix 2.

The date of submission of the final recommendations to the Minister is 30 November 2006.

1.1.1 Description of the lands The lands that are the subject of the inquiry are that area of public land within the Bruny Bioregion, that are within the jurisdiction of Tasmania, shown on the attached plan to the terms of reference (Appendix 2).

1.1.2 Submissions made in relation to terms of reference The former Minister received five submissions in response to the public notification of the terms of reference. Two of the submissions were in support of the terms of reference. The other submissions, including one of the supportive submissions, provided comments on matters that the inquiry would address when it commenced. One submission referred to protection of areas of land that are adjacent to the Bruny Bioregion, and are therefore not within the inquiry area.

The former Minister considered that no changes to the terms of reference were required.

1.2 Inquiry process The inquiry process will be conducted in accordance with Part 2 of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 (the Act). Under the Act, the Minister may refer questions on the use of any public land to the Commission requiring it to enquire into them and to make recommendations.

For the purposes of this inquiry, the Commission will delegate its functions and powers to conduct the inquiry to a panel, in accordance with section 8 of the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997.

Introduction Resource Planning and Development Commission 1 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Panel is made up of:

• Mr Julian Green (Chair)

• Dr Helen Locher

• Hon John Bennett

• Dr Matt Edmunds

• Dr Tom Lewis

The functions and powers of the panel will be limited to sections 6, 7, and sections 17 to 29 (inclusive) of the Act. The Commission retains the function of reporting to the Minister under section 30 of the Act.

During the inquiry, there are three main stages where the public can have formal input into the inquiry by written submissions. These are:

• Public comment invited by the Minister on the inquiry terms of reference (completed); • Public comment invited by the Commission on a Background Report (this Report); and • Public comment invited on a Draft Recommendations Report of the Commission’s proposed recommendations. The Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997 provides for the Commission to hold hearings to inform itself in respect of all matters relevant to the reference. If the Commission determines that hearings are required, reasonable notice of the hearing will be given in relevant daily newspapers stating when and where such hearings will be held. If hearings are held, anyone who has made a written submission may be given the opportunity to make a presentation to the Commission at its hearing.

A Final Recommendations Report will be forwarded to the Minister for tabling in both Houses of Parliament. The Final Recommendations Report will be available to the public.

In accordance with the inquiry terms of reference and section 21 of the Act, the Background Report describes (as far as is known) the resources of the land relevant to the area of public land within the Bruny Bioregion subject to the inquiry, including any environmental, cultural, social, industrial and economic values, and any existing commitments in respect of those resources.

The inquiry process is set out in Figure 1.

Introduction Resource Planning and Development Commission 2 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] Figure 1 Inquiry process Part 2 of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 (as amended)

The Minister must publish a copy of the reference in the Minister refers an inquiry Gazette and at least three to the Commission Tasmanian newspapers June 2005

Commission may undertake public consultation

Commission prepares Background Report

Background Report is placed on public Panel must advertise the exhibition and comment invited from the exhibition of the Background public Report in the Gazette and (42 days public exhibition) at least three Tasmanian newspapers

Panel may hold hearings to inform itself on matters relevant to the reference

Panel prepares Draft Recommendations Report having regard to the submissions made in relation to the Background Report and evidence presented at a hearing (if held)

Draft Recommendations Report is placed on Panel must make copies of public exhibition and comment invited from the Draft Recommendations the public (42 days public exhibition) Report available

Panel may hold hearings to inform itself on matters relevant to the reference

Commission must submit a fi nal Recommendations Report to the Minister

The Minister must table the Recommendations The Minister must make the Report in both Houses of Parliament Recommendations Report available to the public [Back to figures]

Introduction Resource Planning and Development Commission 3 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

1.3 Matters to be taken into account The inquiry terms of reference requires the Commission, in arriving at its recommendations, to take into account the following:

• the marine habitat mapping which has been carried out in the bioregion; • the existing marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion (Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve); • whether any areas within the public land under investigation that are subject to existing fisheries management restrictions can be established as a marine protected area, or form part thereof; and • whether the provision of different management zones, allowing for differing forms of activity, are an appropriate means of managing the area when identifying potential arrangements for management.

1.4 Overview of Background Report The Background Report describes (as far as is known) the resources of the land relevant to the area of public land within the Bruny Bioregion subject to the inquiry, including any environmental, cultural, social, industrial and economic values, and any existing commitments in respect of those resources.

• Chapter 2 Describes the international and national context that establishes jurisdiction over the area within the inquiry and Tasmanian marine management responsibilities within this area. Includes the basis for the development of the marine bioregions that guide the national system of MPA planning, summarises the internationally recognised protected area categories and the status of concurrent MPA planning in Commonwealth waters. • Chapter 3 Describes key aspects of the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy that the inquiry should consider, particularly with respect to identification and selection of potential MPAs. Includes a summary of the different types of MPAs that can be established under Tasmanian legislation and current Tasmanian MPAs. • Chapter 4 Provides a summary of the resources of the Bruny Bioregion and existing commitments in respect of those resources, including any environmental, cultural, social, industrial and economic values. Describes aspects of the marine and estuarine environment such as habitats, plants, fish, birds, mammals and geological features. Human activities described include fisheries and marine farming production, recreational fishing and boating, marine transport and marine related infrastructure such as sewage outfalls and slipways. The importance of tourism, nature recreation, education and cultural and heritage values are summarised. Area specific management of coastal and marine areas, such as reserves and fishing area restrictions, are shown. • Appendices Includes the objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania; the inquiry terms of reference; the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy; a report on draft ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion; and an extract from Barrett et al. (2001) of substrate types, habitat categories and area based description of key habitat.

Introduction Resource Planning and Development Commission 4 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

2.0 Context of inquiry

This chapter contains a description of the international and national context that establishes jurisdiction over the area within the inquiry and Tasmanian management responsibilities within this marine area. The development of the marine bioregions that guide the national system of marine protected area (MPA) planning, and the Australian Government commitment to establishment of a national system of MPAs, is described. A summary of the internationally recognised protected area management categories that can be established is provided.

2.1 Jurisdiction of waters

International The international jurisdiction of marine waters is defined in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The spatial extent of this jurisdiction is described with respect to lines along the coastline known as baselines. The normal baseline is the low-water line along the coast as marked on official charts. Where coastlines are deeply indented, or across bay or river mouths, the baselines are straight lines joining appropriate points on the coast and meeting the requirements of UNCLOS. In Australia, the baselines are known as the Territorial Sea Baseline (TSB).

Australian Sovereign rights to an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), extending 200 nautical miles (nm) from the baselines (and to the continental shelf where this extends beyond 200 nm from the baseline) are provided for within UNCLOS. In general, the sovereign rights of a country within its EEZ include exploring, exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources of the waters and seabed. Australia declared and enacted its sovereignty of an EEZ under the Seas and Submerged Lands Act 1973. This act incorporates relevant parts of UNCLOS within domestic legislation.

In February 1983, the Australian Government proclaimed that the low-water datum upon which the TSB would be based is the Lowest Astronomical Tide. The Lowest Astronomical Tide is the lowest level that can be predicted under average meteorological conditions and any combination of astronomical conditions. The points of latitude and longitude that define the straight baselines by which Australia establishes its sovereign rights were also gazetted at this time.

Tasmanian The Australian Government and the State and Territory Governments share jurisdiction over coastal and marine areas. The Coastal Waters (State Powers) Act 1980 provides for the Tasmanian Government to exercise certain legislative powers to a distance of three nm from the TSB around Tasmania. In general, the rights and title to the property of land beneath these coastal waters are vested in the Tasmanian Government under the Coastal Waters (State Title) Act 1980.

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 5 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Under Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) arrangements between the Australian and State Governments certain resources in one jurisdiction may be managed jointly or individually by either authority within the EEZ and inside the three nm limit of coastal waters. OCS arrangements between the Australian and Tasmanian Governments occur for a number of important fisheries.

Terminology The terminology describing jurisdiction and management responsibilities in marine, estuarine and tidal waters around Tasmania is varied and can be confusing. The terms ‘State waters’, ‘coastal waters of the State’, ‘coastal waters’, ‘waters within the limits of the State’, ‘waters relevant to the State’, ‘inland waters’ and ‘internal marine waters’ occur in various legislation. In some instances, identical terms can have different meanings in different legislation.

None of these terms singularly describe the extent of the waters subject to this inquiry. Therefore, for the purposes of this inquiry only, all marine and tidal waters from the high-water mark1 to the three nm limit of coastal waters (i.e. the extent of this inquiry), shall be referred to as ‘Tasmanian waters’.

2.2 Management in Tasmanian waters In Tasmania, a number of agencies at all levels of government are responsible for management of the land, water and natural resources in marine, estuarine and tidal waters. The Department of Primary Industries and Water (DPIW) is the agency with principal management authority in Tasmanian waters, with different divisions of DPIW having management responsibilities for specific natural resources.

Natural resources and conservation Most marine fishes, plants, reptiles, invertebrates and their environment up to the high water mark are managed by the Marine Resources Group, DPIW, under the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995. Some commercial fish species (e.g. school and gummy shark) are managed by the Australian Government (Australian Fisheries Management Authority) under OCS arrangements. The Resource Management and Conservation Division, DPIW, manages whales, dolphins, seals, seabirds and geoconservation, under the Nature Conservation Act 2002, and threatened species, under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995. The Australian Government (Department of Environment and Heritage) may also have management responsibility for threatened species and migratory species, such as marine birds and whales, declared under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Management of reserved land under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 (e.g. National Parks, Nature Reserves, Conservation Areas, etc.) is undertaken primarily by the Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment (DTAE) under the National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002. The management of Crown land including public reserves is generally performed by Crown Land Services, DPIW, under the Crown Lands Act 1976, often in cooperation with the Parks and Wildlife Service.

1In Tasmania, the high-water mark is the general landward extent for management of living marine resources and fish.

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 6 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Land use and planning In general, Local Government has planning authority within its municipal district to the low- water mark (and for adjoining structures that extend into the sea) under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, although this does not include the activities of fishing, marine farming or mineral exploration.

Marine farming to the high-water mark is managed by Marine Resources, DPIW, under the Marine Farming Planning Act 1995. Mineral and petroleum exploration is managed by Mineral Resources Tasmania, Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, under various Australian and Tasmanian legislation.

Pollution and water quality The Environment Division, DTAE, has primary responsibility for managing the general environment and the control of pollution under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994, although certain activities are the responsibility of Local Government under the Local Government Act 1993. Under the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997, protected environmental values and water quality objectives are to be applied to each body of water, including coastal waters.

Navigation and safety Marine and Safety Tasmania manages the majority of functions relating to safety of recreational and commercial vessels in Tasmania, including the management of jetties, boat ramps and navigation aids. The Tasmanian Ports Corporation Pty Ltd (TasPorts) manage large vessels and facilities near their immediate port areas. Tasmania Police, Marine Services, is responsible for enforcing fisheries and marine safety laws and provides marine search and rescue capabilities.

2.3 Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia A spatial framework for marine resource planning and biodiversity conservation, particularly for the development of MPAs, is provided by the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia (IMCRA). The regionalisation was undertaken by hierarchically considering the ecological patterns and processes which occur at continental, regional, local and site scales. IMCRA provides marine regionalisations at both a provincial scale (> 1000s of km) and meso-scale (100s – 1000s of km). The meso-scale regions are referred to as bioregions (IMCRA Technical Group 1998).

There are eight bioregions adjacent to the Tasmanian coastline. They are known as the Otway; Boags; Twofold Shelf; Flinders; Freycinet; Bruny; Davey; and Franklin Bioregions. The area that is subject to this inquiry is that part of the Bruny Bioregion within Tasmanian waters (Figure 2).

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 7 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 2 Tasmanian IMCRA bioregions showing area of Bruny Bioregion within inquiry

Data sources: Department of the Environment and Heritage; Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

The bioregional boundaries were based on established State or Territory coastal regionalisations. In Tasmania, the primary data sources used to determine the bioregions were invertebrate, plant

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 8 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] and fish distributions on shallow rocky reefs (Edgar et al. 1997) in addition to soft-sediment fish distributions, beach-washed mollusc distributions and sea-surface temperature data (Edgar et al. 1995). The seaward boundary of the bioregions were extended to the nominal edge of the continental shelf (i.e. 200 m isobath), to provide better planning integration between the meso-scale and provincial scale regionalisations (IMCRA Technical Group 1998).

Importantly, IMCRA should only provide the first layer in a broad ecological planning framework. Within the bioregional framework, more detailed information on ecosystems1, communities and/or species distributions must be used to assist decision making across and within a bioregion (IMCRA Technical Group 1998).

2.4 National representative system of marine protected areas The establishment of a national representative system of marine protected areas (NRSMPA) is a key responsibility and obligation under a number of conventions and strategies endorsed by the Australian, State and Local Governments, and arising from the international Convention on Biological Diversity. At a national level, Australia’s commitment to the protection of marine biodiversity and ecological processes, and the sustainable use of marine resources, is addressed under the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (Commonwealth of Australia 1992a). It is implemented through strategies such as the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (Commonwealth of Australia 1992b) and the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity (Commonwealth of Australia 1996).

The Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (the Strategic Plan) describes the goals of the NRSMPA and the actions necessary to achieve those goals (ANZECC TFMPA 1999).

The primary goal of the NRSMPA is:

“To establish and manage a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of Marine Protected Areas to contribute to the long-term ecological viability of marine and estuarine systems, to maintain ecological processes and systems, and to protect Australia’s biological diversity at all levels.”

The NRSMPA is a national system of MPAs that contains representative samples of Australia’s marine ecosystems in both State and Commonwealth waters, with individual MPAs declared under appropriate legislation for each jurisdiction (ANZECC TFMPA 1999).

The Guidelines for Establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (the Guidelines) describe the principles on which the development of the NRSMPA is based. The Guidelines outline a consistent and common approach to the identification and selection of MPAs. They were prepared to assist government agencies in the development of the NRSMPA and stakeholders in understanding the process (ANZECC TFMPA 1998). The Guidelines are reproduced in full within the Strategic Plan as an appendix.

1See Appendix 4 for a report on draft ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion to be used when applying the principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness. Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 9 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Guidelines apply the World Conservation Union (IUCN) definition of a ‘protected area’ for MPAs. This is:

“An area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means” (IUCN 1994).

The Guidelines identify four key characteristics that distinguish MPAs in the NRSMPA from other marine managed areas. These characteristics are that the MPA:

• has been established especially for the conservation of biodiversity (consistent with the primary goal); • is able to be classified into one or more of the six IUCN Protected Area Management Categories (see Box 1) reflecting the values and objectives of the MPA; • must have secure status which can only be revoked by a parliamentary process; and • contributes to the representativeness, comprehensiveness or adequacy of the national system.

2.5 Commonwealth marine protected areas in Australia’s south-east marine region The Australian Government has determined that the component of the NRSMPA within Commonwealth waters will be developed as part of the regional marine planning process. The system of representative MPAs within the south-east region will build on two existing Commonwealth MPAs in the region (the Tasmanian Seamounts Marine Reserve and the Macquarie Island Marine Park) and will complement MPAs established by the States in adjoining waters.

Under the South-east Regional Marine Plan (National Oceans Office 2004), Australian Government marine research and management organisations have used the Guidelines to help identify 11 Broad Areas of Interest (BAOI) to guide the areas where candidate MPAs will be identified. These areas are based largely on the provincial bioregionalisations of IMCRA and a further interim offshore regionalisation (Butler et al. 2001) developed as part of the regional marine planning process. Specifications and guidelines for identifying potential MPAs within these areas is provided within Australia’s South-east Marine Region: A User's Guide to Identifying Candidate Areas for a Regional Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (Commonwealth of Australia 2003).

The Australian Government released modified proposals for candidate MPAs in the south-east region in May 2006, capturing areas within each of the BAOI in the proposed MPA network. Of most relevance to this inquiry will be the final boundaries and zoning within the Huon candidate MPA, which currently includes some Commonwealth waters within the Bruny Bioregion and has a boundary adjacent to the 3nm limit of Tasmanian coastal waters (Figure 3). The Australian Government intends to formally declare the final MPAs by the end of 2006.

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 10 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Box 1. World Conservation Union (IUCN) protected area management categories

One of the key characteristics distinguishing MPAs in the NRSMPA from other marine managed areas is the ability to be classified into one or more of the IUCN protected area management categories. In summary, these categories are defined as:

Category Ia: Strict Nature Reserve: protected area managed mainly for science

Area of land and/or sea possessing some outstanding or representative ecosystems, geological or physiological features and/or species, available primarily for scientific research and/or environmental monitoring.

Category Ib: Wilderness Area: protected area managed mainly for wilderness protection

Large area of unmodified or slightly modified land, and/or sea, retaining its natural character and influence, without permanent or significant habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural condition.

Category II National Park: protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation

Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present and future generations, (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible.

Category III Natural Monument: protected area managed mainly for conservation of specific natural features

Area containing one, or more, specific natural or natural/cultural feature which is of outstanding or unique value because of its inherent rarity, representative or aesthetic qualities or cultural significance.

Category IV: Habitat/Species Management Area: protected area managed mainly for conservation through management intervention

Area of land and/or sea subject to active intervention for management purposes so as to ensure the maintenance of habitats and/or to meet the requirements of specific species.

Category V: Protected Landscape/Seascape: protected area managed mainly for landscape/seascape conservation and recreation

Area of land, with coast and sea as appropriate, where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant aesthetic, ecological and/or cultural value, and often with high biological diversity. Safeguarding the integrity of this traditional interaction is vital to the protection, maintenance and evolution of such an area.

Category VI: Managed Resource Protected Area: protected area managed mainly for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems

Area containing predominantly unmodified natural systems, managed to ensure long term protection and maintenance of biological diversity, while providing at the same time a sustainable flow of natural products and services to meet community needs.

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 11 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 3 Australian Government candidate MPA, Huon candidate MPA

Data sources: Department of the Environment and Heritage; Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Context of inquiry Resource Planning and Development Commission 12 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.0 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy

This chapter describes the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy (the Strategy), including the key steps for establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) within Tasmania, and how the identification and selection criteria within the Strategy are to be used within this inquiry. The types of MPAs that can be declared under Tasmanian legislation are described and the location of current MPAs are shown.

3.1 Strategy development As a result of the development of the national systems-based approach to marine protected area establishment, the Tasmanian Government reviewed its approach to MPA reservation. The Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy is the result of that review (Appendix 3). The Strategy was adopted by the Tasmanian Government in August 2001 (Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 2001).

The Strategy advocates a systems-based approach for the protection of the Tasmanian marine environment. The goals, principles, key steps and outcomes of the Strategy are based largely on those within the Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (the Strategic Plan) and the Guidelines for Establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (the Guidelines), including the definition and key characteristics of MPAs.

The Strategy provides the framework for the identification, selection and establishment of new marine reserves in Tasmania. Together these reserves will form a representative system of MPAs for the State and contribute to the national representative system of marine protected areas (NRSMPA). The Tasmanian Government recognises the need to formally conserve and protect the full range of marine ecosystems, habitats and species that occur along Tasmania’s coast. This extends to include the conservation and protection of significant physical natural features and seascapes, marine and cultural heritage, and aesthetic and wilderness values, together with providing specific sites for education and recreation, and scientific research and monitoring.

Recognising the Tasmanian Resource Management and Planning System (refer Appendix 1), the primary goal of the Strategy is:

“to establish and manage a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of marine protected areas, to contribute to the long-term ecological viability of marine and estuarine systems, to maintain ecological processes and systems, and to protect Tasmania’s biological diversity”.

The development of the system of MPAs is also guided by a series of secondary goals and principles contained within the Strategy.

The Strategy uses the IMCRA bioregions as the first layer in the bioregional planning framework and adopts a twelve step process (Key Steps) for the establishment of the representative system of MPAs within Tasmania.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 13 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Strategy describes the Key Steps as follows: “Step 1 The Minister issues a terms of reference to the Resource Planning and Development Commission, which then conducts public consultation on the terms of reference2. Step 2 Gather data at the bioregion level, including ecosystem mapping (see Appendix 4). Step 3 Using Tasmanian identification criteria, identify a list of candidate Marine Protected Areas within Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregions to represent major ecosystems. This will include an evaluation of all areas subject to existing fisheries management restrictions. Step 4 Identification of threatening processes such as human activities and natural occurrences that can cause some of the following effects: habitat destruction; species removal and disturbance; pollution (heavy metals, oil spills and toxic chemicals); and run off. Step 5 Assess the comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness of ecosystems and habitats in existing Marine Protected Areas within each Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregion. Step 6 Develop priorities for Marine Protected Areas at the bioregional and ecosystem level, based on results of steps 4 and 5. Step 7 Develop additional criteria for identification and selection of Marine Protected Areas if required. Step 8 Select and prioritise sites for Marine Protected Areas from a candidate list of Marine Protected Areas using Tasmanian selection criteria, and any other additional criteria developed in step 7 and identify arrangements for management, funding and enforcement. Step 9 Assess feasibility of potential Marine Protected Areas and negotiate new protected areas. Step 10 The Resource Planning and Development Commission provides to the Minister a final recommendations report on potential Marine Protected Areas based on the completion of steps 2-9 inclusive. Step 11 Obtain Cabinet approval for final management arrangements and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Categories (IUCN) based on management objectives, values and resources identified in this step, and Establish Marine Protected Areas. Step 12 Undertake management tasks, including ongoing evaluation and review of Marine Protected Areas.” Steps 1 to 7 represent the identification stage of the establishment process. In this stage an assessment of scientific information about Tasmanian waters is undertaken to identify potential MPAs for a given bioregion. The selection and prioritisation of potential MPAs, together with an assessment of their feasibility, is undertaken in Steps 8 to 9. The remaining steps relate to reporting to the Minister on the process findings, the approval by Cabinet of a MPAs final management arrangements and the ongoing management of the MPA. However, the steps outlined are not necessarily sequential as many of the tasks may be performed simultaneously.

2 Note that under section 14 of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 the Minister seeks comment on the terms of reference, not the Resource Planning and Development Commission. The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 14 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.2 Criteria for identifying and selecting marine protected areas The identification and selection criteria for MPAs as defined by the Strategy, are as follows. a) Identification criteria

“Comprehensiveness • Adds to the coverage of the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion. • Enhances the comprehensive nature of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. Adequacy • The size of the area, its boundaries and location are adequate to ensure that its biological and ecological values can be protected and managed and the impact of activities can be minimised. Representativeness • Represents one or more ecosystems within an Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregion. • Enhances the representative nature of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. Ecological Importance • Contributes to maintenance of essential ecological processes or life-support systems. • Contains habitat for rare or endangered species. • Preserves genetic diversity, ie. is diverse or abundant in species. • Contains areas on which other species or other systems are dependent, eg. contain nursery or juvenile areas or feeding, breeding or rest areas for migratory species. • Contains one or more areas which are a biologically functional, self-sustaining ecological unit. International or National Significance • Is listed, or has the potential to be listed, on the World or National Heritage List or declared as Biosphere Reserve or subject to an international or national conservation agreement. Uniqueness • Contains unique species, populations, communities or ecosystems. • Contains unique or unusual geographic features. Productivity • Do the species, populations, or communities of the area have a high natural productivity. Vulnerability Assessment • Contains ecosystems and/or communities vulnerable to natural processes.

Biogeographic Importance • Captures important biogeographical qualities.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 15 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Naturalness • Extent to which the area has been protected from, or not been subject to, human-induced change.”

b) Selection criteria Economic Interests • Existing or potential contribution to economic value by virtue of its protection, eg. for recreation or tourism, or as a refuge or nursery area, or source of supply for economically important species. • Current or potential use for the extraction of, or exploration for resources. • Importance for shipping and/or trade. • Value due to its contribution to local or regional employment and economic development. Indigenous Interests • Traditional usage and/or current economic value. • Contains indigenous cultural values. • Native title considerations. Social Interests • Existing or potential value to the local, national or international communities because of its heritage, cultural, traditional, aesthetic, educational, recreational, or economic values. Scientific Interests • Existing or potential value for research and monitoring. Practicality/Feasibility • Degree of insulation from external destructive influences. • Social and political acceptability, and a degree of community support. • Access for recreation, tourism, and education. • Lends itself to practical management (cost effectiveness, compliance etc.). Vulnerability Assessment • Extent to which the site is vulnerable and susceptible to human induced changes and threatening processes.

Replication • Provides a replication of ecosystems within a Marine Protected Area within the bioregion.”

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 16 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.3 Potential types of marine protected areas Within Tasmania, MPAs that may contribute to the NRSMPA are established and managed jointly under three principal pieces of legislation. The Nature Conservation Act 2002 provides for the establishment of reserved land (both marine and terrestrial) and for the conservation and protection of fauna, flora and geological diversity. However, the Nature Conservation Act 2002 cannot be used to protect living marine resources, such as fishes, invertebrates and plants, or control fishing activities within the marine environment. The Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 provides for rules for this purpose. The ongoing management of MPAs is provided under the National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002.

The Strategy lists four classes of reserved land under which MPAs could be declared in Tasmania, of which the stated values and objectives would satisfy classification into one or more of the IUCN protected area management categories.

Under the Nature Conservation Act 2002, these classes of reserved land (including water) are:

• Nature Reserve (could include IUCN Ia) An area that contains natural values that contribute to natural biological diversity and/or geological diversity, and also are unique, important or have representative value; and which is managed primarily for the preservation of these features.

• National Park (could include IUCN Ib and II) A large natural area containing a representative or outstanding sample of major natural regions, features or scenery; and which should be managed for the protection and maintenance of natural and cultural values of the area, while providing for ecologically sustainable recreation consistent with conserving those values.

• State Reserve (could include IUCN Ib and III)

An area containing significant natural landscapes and/or natural features and/or sites, objects or places of significance to Aboriginal people; and which should be managed for the protection and maintenance of natural and cultural values of the area and use of the area by Aboriginal people, while providing for ecologically sustainable recreation consistent with conserving those values.

• Conservation Area (could include IUCN IV, V and VI) An area predominantly in a natural state; and which should be managed for the protection and maintenance of natural and cultural values of the area and the sustainable use of the area’s natural resources.

The Governor may declare land to be reserved land of the above classes. Revocation of this status must first be approved by each House of Parliament. Therefore MPAs declared under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 satisfy a key characteristic of MPAs within the NRSMPA in that they have secure status which can only be revoked by a parliamentary process.

In addition to the four classes of reserved land listed above, some areas declared as Regional Reserves or Game Reserves under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 could potentially satisfy guidelines for

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 17 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

IUCN protected area management Category VI (Managed Resource Protected Areas) and, thus, be considered MPAs within the NRSMPA.

The Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 provides for the establishment of protected areas known as ‘marine resources protected area’. Under this Act, the relevant Minister can establish a marine resources protected area for any of the following purposes:

• the protection of representative samples of marine and estuarine habitats and ecosystems; • the maintenance of fish species and genetic diversity; • the protection of sites of ecological significance or fragility; • the protection of the biological productivity of fish species through enhanced egg production and settlement within, and propagation from, the area; • the protection of vulnerable fish species and their habitats; • the establishment of scientific reference areas; and • public education in the resources, protection and use of the marine environment. Changes to the rules applying to a marine resources protected area must be tabled before each House of Parliament. Therefore these types of protected areas would have the secure status required for MPAs within the NRSMPA (although the rules need to be remade and tabled every 10 years). To date, no marine resources protected areas have been established under the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995.

3.4 Tasmanian marine protected areas within the NRSMPA There are currently six MPAs within mainland Tasmanian waters that may be considered as contributing to the NRSMPA. Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve and Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve (Bruny Bioregion) and Governor Island Marine Nature Reserve and Maria Island National Park (Freycinet Bioregion) were all declared in 1991. Two new MPAs, Port Davey-Bathurst Harbour, Southwest National Park (Davey Bioregion) and Kent Group National Park (Twofold Shelf Bioregion) were developed using the Strategy and were declared in 2005 (Figure 4). A large MPA encompassing all State waters around the external territory of Macquarie Island was declared in 2000. There are currently no MPAs in the Boags, Flinders, Otway or Franklin Bioregions, within Tasmanian waters.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 18 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 4 Mainland Tasmanian marine protected areas (marine reserves)

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

3.5 Strategy’s relationship to this inquiry The Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy is integral to this inquiry. The inquiry terms of reference (Appendix 2) require the Commission to act pursuant to the Strategy and to use the identification and selection criteria contained within the Strategy when, respectively:

• assessing whether the areas of public land under investigation are suitable as potential MPAs; and

• selecting those areas of public land under investigation that are suitable for declaration as MPAs.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 19 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Commission notes from the Strategy that the aim of the identification and selection process is to “meet the primary goal of establishing and managing a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of marine protected areas, whilst taking into account and minimising any negative impact on social, cultural and economic values (and considering safety issues including access to fishing grounds for small vessels, access to safe anchorage and movement of vessels in accordance with International Law).” The Commission also notes that the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregions are to provide the regional planning framework for the development of the representative system of MPAs.

The terms of reference require the Commission to identify potential boundaries and arrangements for management of any area determined to be suitable as an MPA. The Strategy requires that funding and enforcement arrangements be identified for recommended MPAs.

Notwithstanding the requirements of the Strategy, the Commission is required to conduct the inquiry in accordance with the requirements of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 and the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 20 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.0 Bruny Bioregion

This chapter provides a summary of the resources of the Bruny Bioregion and existing commitments in respect of those resources, including any environmental, cultural, social, industrial and economic values. Natural features of the marine and estuarine environment such as depth contours, benthic habitats, plants, fish, birds, mammals and geological features are shown. Human activities including commercial fisheries and marine farming production, recreational fishing and boating, marine transport and marine related infrastructure such as sewage outfalls and slipways are described. Tourism, nature recreation, science and education and cultural and heritage values within the bioregion are summarised. Area specific management of coastal and marine areas, such as reserves and fishing area restrictions, are shown.

4.1 General description The Bruny Bioregion extends from Cape Bernier (Hellfire Bluff, near Maria Island) south to Rossel Point (near Southport) (Figure 5). The region is characterised by a highly-dissected coastline with extensive, large, shallow embayments that are protected from sub-maximal swell by islands and peninsulas. Exposed, rocky shores drop quickly into deeper water due to the narrow continental shelf.

The northern boundary of the bioregion is related to the average position of the interface between warm East Australian Current waters and colder sub-Antarctic waters. The southern boundary is determined by a major exposure gradient, with waters to the south being maximally exposed to the prevailing Southern Ocean swell (Barrett et al. 2001).

The climate is cool temperate with wet winters and mild summers. Mean water temperature ranges from 17°C in summer to 10°C in winter. A larger annual temperature range occurs within the sheltered embayments. The tidal range is approximately one metre (ANZECC TFMPA 1998).

Compared with other Tasmanian bioregions the fish species richness is low whereas plant species richness is extremely high. The bioregion contains a large number of endemic (confined to the region) fish and plant species and may have the highest localised level of marine endemism in Australia (Edgar et al. 1997).

The total area of the Bruny Bioregion to the 200 m isobath is approximately 727,500 hectares (ha). The total area of the Bruny Bioregion within Tasmanian waters (and therefore within this inquiry) is about 410,975 ha, representing around 56% of the overall bioregion.

The Strategy Resource Planning and Development Commission 21 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 5 Bathymetry of the Bruny Bioregion, including notable geomorphic basin (depth contours beyond the 200 m isobath not shown)

Data sources: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute; Geoscience Australia [Back to figures]

4.2 The marine environment

4.2.1 Bathymetry Bathymetric contours for the Bruny Bioregion, to the 40 m depth contour, were determined by Barrett et al. (2001). Within the extensive sheltered embayments, depth is generally less than 30 m, with much of Norfolk Bay, Frederick Henry Bay and the D’Entrecasteaux Channel being less than 20 m. Some areas deeper than 40 m are found in the northern and southern regions of the D’Entrecasteaux Channel. In contrast, the steep shores of the southern and eastern coastlines of South Bruny Island and the Tasman Peninsula extend underwater, with the 40 m depth contour usually occurring less than one kilometre from the shoreline.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 22 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Within Tasmanian waters, the rest of the bioregion is generally less than 100 m in depth. However, a notable geomorphic feature within the bioregion is a deeper channel, or basin, on the shelf adjacent to Cape Pillar (Harris et al. 2005) (Figure 5).

4.2.2 Hydrology Marine waters within the Bruny Bioregion are strongly influenced by sub-tropical East Australian Current waters and colder sub-Antarctic waters that are, respectively, nutrient poor and nutrient rich water masses. The area of convergence between these two water masses varies seasonally and annually depending on prevailing climatic and oceanographic factors. The average position of the area of convergence, off Maria Island, largely determines the northern boundary of the bioregion. However, during late summer the most southerly extent of East Australian Current water may include the mouth of the Derwent estuary. During late-winter, sub-Antarctic water can move northwards and enter Storm Bay and the Derwent estuary. The interaction between the two water masses strongly influences the nutrient dynamics and primary productivity of the region.

Two large drowned river valley estuaries, the Huon and Derwent estuaries, occur within the bioregion. Both are strongly stratified systems, with a layer of freshwater flowing over a denser layer of salt water. The depth of the freshwater layer and the extent of the salt wedge in each estuary is dependent on freshwater flow. The Huon water is highly coloured due to tannins and, as such, light penetration is strongly reduced in this region. Extensive modelling of the Huon estuary was undertaken by Butler et al. (2000) and hydrodynamics of the upper Derwent estuary are reported in Davies et al. (2002). A 3-dimensional hydrodynamic and biogeochemical model for the Huon Estuary and D'Entrecasteaux Channel is currently being developed by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute. The general circulation pattern for southeast Tasmania is shown in Figure 6.

The tidal range in the Bruny Bioregion is relatively small and is usually about 1 m but can extend to more than 1.5 m during spring tides.

4.2.3 Exposure (waves and swell) A coastal wave exposure index within the Bruny Bioregion, based on wind speed and direction, fetch and exposure to oceanic swells, was developed by Barrett et al. (2001). In estimating coastal exposure, shorelines were initially classified into those that were only affected by wind and those that were exposed to open ocean swell. Wind only shores were subdivided into low and high exposure categories. Ocean swell affected shores were subdivided into low, moderate and maximum exposure categories. This resulted in five exposure categories: very sheltered; sheltered; low wave exposure; medium wave exposure and high wave exposure.

Norfolk Bay, Blackman Bay, the upper-D’Entrecasteaux Channel, the eastern side of the lower- D’Entrecasteaux Channel and the lower-Huon estuary were classified as very sheltered to sheltered

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 23 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 6 General circulation pattern for coastal waters in southeast Tasmania

Data sources: Butler (in press), [as modified from Cooper et al. (1982) and updated with information from Mike Herzfeld] [Back to figures]

(although not calculated, Pitt Water and the upper-Derwent and upper-Huon estuaries would also have a low exposure index). In these areas, most of the sea state is wind driven. Frederick Henry Bay, Storm Bay, the east coast of the Tasman Peninsula and the western side of the lower-D’Entrecasteaux Channel are generally exposed to medium wave energy, although some of the more protected shorelines in these areas have low wave exposure. The southern and south-eastern coastline of Bruny Island and the Tasman Peninsula have high wave exposure (Figure 7).

The southern boundary of the bioregion is largely determined by a major exposure gradient.

Wave exposed shores tend to have a greater proportion of reef substrate and steeper shorelines whereas wind only shores tend to gradually increase in depth and have more sandy shorelines. Exposure is a key factor that influences the distribution and abundance of macroalgae and fishes within Tasmania.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 24 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 7 Predicted coastal exposure levels for the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute [Back to figures]

4.2.4 Benthic habitats Physical and biological characterisation of most of the seabed within the Bruny Bioregion, to the 40 m depth contour, has been determined by the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (TAFI) using a combination of echo sounder surveys, underwater video surveys and aerial photographs (Barrett et al. 2001; Jordan et al. 2001; Mount et al. 2005). Approximately 171,260 ha has currently been mapped, representing about 42% of the area of the bioregion within Tasmanian waters (Figure 8).

Benthic habitats are categorised as either consolidated (reef) or unconsolidated substrate. Consolidated substrates are then classed as either high profile; medium profile; low profile; or patchy reef. Unconsolidated substrates are classed as being either unvegetated or vegetated. Unvegetated, unconsolidated substrates are further classified as either hard sand; sand; silty sand; or silt. Vegetated, unconsolidated substrates are further classified as either seagrass; patchy seagrass; sparse seagrass;

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 25 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 8 Seabed habitat map of Bruny Bioregion, 40 m depth contour

[Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 26 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 8 continued

Data source: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 27 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Caulerpa; or aquatic macrophyte. Detailed characteristics of each substrate and habitat type, including broad area based descriptions of key habitat, as described in Barrett et al. (2001), are provided in Appendix 5. Table 1 summarises the area and percentage area of each of the main benthic habitat types currently mapped by the TAFI seabed mapping program. Overall, approximately 92.5% of the mapped area is unconsolidated substrate and 7.5% is consolidated substrate. Of the unconsolidated substrate, approximately 93% is unvegetated and 7% is vegetated. Figure 8 shows the mapped habitat types to the 40 m depth contour.

Table 1 Area of main benthic habitat types mapped in Bruny Bioregion, to the 40 m depth contour

Substrate Habitat Area (ha) % area % Total Unconsolidated Unvegetated Hard Sand 20177 11.7 Sand 83140 48.5 Silty Sand 26783 15.6 Silt 17680 10.3 86.3 Vegetated Seagrass 4719 2.8 Patchy Seagrass 1556 0.9 Sparse Seagrass 688 0.4 Sparse Patchy Seagrass 189 0.1 Caulerpa 3022 1.8 Aquatic Macrophyte 591 0.3 6.3 Consolidated High Profi le Reef 156 0.1 (Reef) Medium Profi le Reef 5295 3.1 Low Profi le Reef 6761 3.9 Patchy Reef 335 0.2

Reef1 222 0.1 7.4 Total 100 100 1. The profile of reef within the Derwent estuary was not mapped. Data source: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute [Back to tables]

Broad-scale (5km accuracy) sedimentary characterisation within the bioregion has been undertaken by Geoscience Australia as part of the Australian Government regional marine planning process. In general, benthic substrates below 40 m are predominantly unconsolidated, ranging from fine sand to coarse sand (Figure 9). However, it is undoubtable that some areas of consolidated substrate will occur within the region at depths greater than 40 m, although present mapping data is of an insufficient scale to show these features. Figure 8 clearly shows that rocky reef continues into deeper water on the southern end of Bruny Island and on most of the prominent headlands between Nubeena and Marion Bay. Jordan (1997) noted that the bottom type in Storm Bay varied considerably from sand and muddy sand to reef and Alan Jordan (pers. comm.) has further indicated that there are patches of reef that run due south of Betsy Island and continue to at least the southern end of Bruny Island.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 28 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 9 Seabed mean grain size in south-eastern Tasmania

Data source: Geoscience Australia [Back to figures]

4.2.5 Macroalgae Most species of macroalgae that occur within the Bruny Bioregion are widespread throughout the area. The species distribution and abundance of macroalgae is primarily determined by depth and exposure, although the response to depth may be modified in areas of reduced light availability, such as the tannin-stained Huon River water.

On the more exposed rocky shores, bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum is the dominant plant species that occurs around the low-tide level. As depth increases, the brown algae Phyllospora comosa and strapweed Lessonia corrugata are the main species followed by the common kelp Ecklonia radiata. Red algae predominate at greater depths. However, the coastline from the Iron Pot to Cape Raoul is notable for the lack of Phyllospora. As rocky shores become less exposed, Durvillaea and Phyllospora are replaced by brown algae of the order Fucales including Xiphophora, Acrocarpia, Cystophora and Caulocystis species. Sargassum species are common in the most sheltered waters (Barrett et al. 2001, Edgar et al. 1984b).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 29 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

A distinctive feature of the Bruny Bioregion is the presence of large ‘forests’ of the giant string kelp Macrocystis pyrifera. Although string kelp is also found in adjacent bioregions it is most abundant on the moderately exposed coasts within the Bruny Bioregion. Consistently large areas occur in Fortescue Bay, Lagoon Bay, Port Arthur, north-east Bruny Island and the coastline between Dover and Southport (Barrett et al. 2001). The distribution of string kelp from TAFI habitat mapping records is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10 Distribution of Macrocystis pyrifera in the Bruny Bioregion from habitat mapping records

Data source: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 30 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 11 General recorded distribution of benthic threatened species in the Bruny Bioregion

Data sources: Department of the Environment and Heritage; Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures] Edgar et al. (1995) listed seven macroalgal species whereby the only records within Australia were from the Bruny Bioregion. This high level of local marine endemism included several sub-Antarctic species (Edgar et al. 1997). Within Tasmania, the brown algae Cystoseira trinodis is only known to occur at Blackman Bay (Sanderson 2000) and is a listed threatened species (rare) under Tasmanian legislation (Figure 11).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 31 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

In sheltered areas with sandy substrates the most obvious vegetation are seagrasses of the species Heterozostera tasmanica and Halophila australis. Areas of green algae of the genus Caulerpa may occur on the deeper boundaries of seagrass habitat, with the most extensive Caulerpa beds and seagrass areas occurring in Norfolk Bay. Large areas of seagrass habitat also occur in Blackman Bay and often in association with the aquatic macrophyte Ruppia megacarpa. Large Ruppia beds also occur in the upper Derwent estuary (Figure 8).

The introduced marine pest, wakame Undaria pinnatifida, is found in the northern part of the bioregion and in the upper-D’Entrecasteaux Channel, including the Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve.

4.2.6 Benthic animals (species living on or in the seabed) Common large benthic invertebrates occurring within the bioregion include the commercially important blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra and southern rock lobster Jasus edwardsii. Other conspicuous faunal groups include molluscs, such as periwinkles, limpets, chitons, mussels, scallops, clams, cowries and whelks. Seastars, featherstars, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, crabs and shrimps are all common in the marine environment of the bioregion. Smaller, less obvious, species living in and on the seabed and within inter-tidal areas include polychaete worms, amphipods, isopods, gastropods and bivalves.

Within the bioregion, a diverse faunal assemblage of sponges, gorgonians, alcyonarians, ascidians, bryozoans, hydroids and seawhips may occur in areas of reef with high water motion. These communities can occur at depths greater than 10 m in sheltered waters where sufficient current exists and in areas of high turbidity, such as the Huon estuary. In the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, sponge communities can occur on beds of shells in relatively shallow water. More generally, these communities are found in waters greater than 33 m, the lower limit of brown algae cover on rocky reefs. Notable communities of this type occur on deeper reefs off the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas and within the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, particularly off Simpsons Point and near the mouth of the Huon estuary (Barrett et al. 2001).

Three seastars are endemic to the Bruny Bioregion and are all listed threatened species under Tasmania legislation, Marginaster littoralis (endangered); Smilasterias tasmaniae (rare); and the live-bearing seastar Patiriella vivipara (endangered). While not restricted to the bioregion, Gunns screw shell Gazameda gunnii has been recorded on unconsolidated habitat within the area and is a listed threatened (vulnerable) species (Figure 11).

Many introduced marine species occur within the Bruny Bioregion although not all cause a known significant impact on the natural marine environment. However, some introduced species are a serious threat by displacing native flora and fauna, predating on native species or by becoming pests to marine based industries. These species are known as marine pests. Major marine pests (as listed by the Australian Ballast Water Management Advisory Council) within the bioregion include the Northern Pacific seastar Asterias amurensis, which is very common in the Derwent estuary, European green crab Carcinus maenas, the European clam Corbula gibba and the feral Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. Although not a declared marine pest, the New Zealand screw shell Maoricolpus roseus is very common within the bioregion and has colonised more habitat than any other introduced benthic species in Australia.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 32 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.2.7 Fish Fish communities within the unconsolidated habitat of Norfolk Bay were sampled by Jordan et al. (1998) using a small beam trawl. In the unvegetated sites, over 80% of the fish sampled were comprised of three species: sand flathead Platycephalus bassensis; little rock whiting Neoodax balteatus; and girdled goby Nesogobius sp.1. In vegetated sites, approximately 95% of the fish sampled were comprised of three species: bridled leatherjacket Acanthaluteres spilomelanurus; spotted pipefish Stigmatopora argus; and little rock whiting. Although consistently greater numbers of fish were caught in vegetated than unvegetated habitat, the difference in the number of species recorded was small. Further beam trawl surveys at Cloudy Bay Lagoon, Simpsons Bay, Dru Point, Trial Bay and Lime Bay indicated a similar species composition, although soldierfish Gymnapistes marmoratus and orange-spotted goby Nesogobius hinsbyi occurred in significant numbers at the vegetated and unvegetated sites, respectively. In vegetated sites, high fish abundance was consistently related to areas of greatest seagrass density.

Jordan et al. (1998) also sampled fish communities over unconsolidated habitats in Norfolk Bay using gillnets and at 27 nearshore sites within the Bruny Bioregion using a beach seine. For both vegetated and unvegetated sites, over 80% of the gillnet catch was comprised of sand flathead and red cod Pseudophycis bachus. The near shore fauna was dominated by hardyheads (Atherinids); East Australian salmon Arripis trutta; gobies (predominantly girdled goby); flounders and yellow-eyed mullet Aldrichetta forsteri. This data supported the results of earlier beach seine surveys, of ten estuaries in the bioregion, conducted by Last (1983). These species comprised over 70% of the beach seine samples at many sites. Specific groupings of these main species differed by exposure. The majority of these species were juvenile fish indicating the shallow, unconsolidated nearshore habitats are important areas for juveniles of these species, some of which are important commercial and recreational fishes (Jordan et al. 1998).

In seasonal trawl surveys of the inner shelf (10-50 m) and mid shelf (50-100m) of Storm Bay, Jordan (1997) reported that the round-snouted gurnard Lepidotrigla mulhalli comprised over 20% by weight of nearly all samples, while grooved gurnard L. modesta and butterfly gurnard L. vanessa were also found in large numbers. Other species that contributed significantly to the samples were Shaw’s cowfish Aracana aurita; porcupinefish Allomycterus pilatus; spiked dogfish Squalus megalops; elephant fish Callorhynchus milii; tiger flathead Platycephalus richardsoni; school whiting Sillago bassensis and a variety of skates and stingarees. The fish fauna showed little separation across the depth strata. However, a distinct trend of increasing size with depth for commercial species indicates that the inner and mid shelf is a significant area for juveniles of these species.

In diver surveys of fish abundance on exposed and sheltered rocky reefs, that were used in the IMCRA bioregionalisation for Tasmania (Edgar et al. 1995, 1997), over 80% by number of all conspicuous fish within the bioregion were represented by two species, hulafish Trachinops caudimaculatus and barber perch Caesioperca rasor. Including these two common species, over 97% of fish observed were either blue warehou Seriolella brama; purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola; blue throated wrasse N. tetricus; little rock whiting; rosy wrasse Pseudolabrus psittaculus; toothbrush leatherjacket Penicipelta vittiger; senator wrasse Pictilabrus laticlavius; bastard trumpeter Latridopsis forsteri; butterfly perch Caesioperca lepidoptera; or common bullseye Empheris multiradiata. Of the small number of cryptic (inconspicuous) fishes observed during these surveys, most were either red rock cod Scorpaena papillosa or many-rayed threefin Forsterygion varium.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 33 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Larger fishes (greater than 25 cm in length) on medium to high exposure reefs at the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas and north Bruny Island were surveyed using experimental gillnets by Murphy and Lyle (1999). Ten species or species groups accounted for over 93% of all samples, by weight and number, with marble fish Apoldactylus arctidens; banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis; purple wrasse; blue throated wrasse; bastard trumpeter; striped trumpeter Latris lineata; draughtboard shark Cephaloscyllium laticeps; and various leatherjacket species (Monacanthidae) comprising the main species.

Three handfish species are primarily endemic to the Bruny Bioregion, the spotted handfish Brachionichthys hirsutus; red handfish B. politus and Ziebell’s handfish Sympterichthys sp [CSIRO #T6.01]. All are listed threatened species under Australian Government legislation (the Waterfall Bay handfish Sympterichthys sp [CSIRO #T1996.01] and Ziebell’s handfish are likely to be colour morphs of the one species). The spotted handfish is also a listed threatened species (endangered) under Tasmanian legislation (Figure 11). All seahorses, sea-dragons and pipefish of the Family Sygnathidae are listed marine species and are protected under Commonwealth legislation.

4.2.8 Cetaceans (whales, dolphins) and seals

Cetaceans A large variety of whale and dolphin species are known to occur in Tasmanian waters. The south-east coast provides an important migration path for southern right whales Eubalaena australis and humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae, both species being listed threatened species under Commonwealth and State legislation. The highest proportion of whale sightings in Tasmania occur within the Bruny Bioregion. The areas around Storm Bay, Frederick Henry Bay, Adventure Bay and Cloudy Bay have the highest incidences of sightings.

In recent years, records of mother and calf sightings and even births within the region have increased and the area was historically recognised as an important calving ground for the southern right whale. An extended stay (six weeks) by a pod of southern right whales recently occurred within Frederick Henry Bay. Sightings of this type suggest the Bruny Bioregion can provide important habitat for these whale species. The historical significance of the bioregion for whales can be gauged from the level of early whaling industries in the area.

While most sightings of cetaceans are either migrating southern right or humpback whales, stranding records since the early 1800s indicate that a large number of other species occur within the Bruny Bioregion. Whales and dolphins of 23 species have been found stranded within the bioregion representing over 70% of all cetacean species known to have stranded within Tasmania. The long- finned pilot whale Globicephalus melas, common dolphin Delphinus delphis and bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus comprise over 90% of all individuals recorded from strandings within the bioregion. The two dolphin species are commonly observed within the bioregion.

Seals Within Tasmania, the Bruny Bioregion provides an important foraging area for the Australian fur seal Arctocephalus pusillus and the New Zealand fur seal A. forsteri. These species are particularly abundant in the bioregion in winter, during the non-breeding season. Six major fur seal haul-out sites

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 34 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] are recognised within the bioregion (Figure 12). Of these, the largest haul-out site is at The Friars, at the southern end of Bruny Island, with over 1,000 individuals currently occurring during winter when occupancy is highest. Tasman Island and The Hippolytes provide other important haul-outs while smaller numbers occur on sites at Cape Huay, Cape Pillar and Cape Raoul. While incidental breeding can occur within the Bruny Bioregion, the major Tasmanian breeding areas are outside of the bioregion within Bass Strait for the Australian fur seal and on the Mattsuyker Group for the New Zealand fur seal. The New Zealand fur seal is a listed threatened species (rare) in Tasmania. Figure 12 Fur seal haul-out sites within the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 35 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The waters of the Bruny Bioregion are also known to be utilised on occasion by several other seal species including the southern elephant seal Mirounga leonina; leopard seal Hydrurga leptonyx; Australian sea lion Neophoca cinerea; and crabeater seal Lobodon carcinophaga.

4.2.9 Seabirds The Bruny Bioregion encompasses important breeding and foraging habitat for many of Tasmania’s seabirds, particularly the little penguin Eudyptula minor and short-tailed shearwater Puffinus tenuirostris. Both species breed along the coast and offshore islands within the bioregion.

An estimated 15,300 – 152,660 breeding pairs of little penguins occur within the bioregion with the largest colonies occurring on Betsy Island, Sloping Island, and The Neck at Bruny Island. An estimated 293,800 – 2,937,600 breeding pairs of short-tailed shearwaters occur within the bioregion with the largest colonies occurring at Betsy Island and on Courts Island at the southern end of Bruny Island. Other large shearwater colonies occur at Pigeon Holes (South Arm); Cape Deslacs; Wedge Island; Tasman Head; Standaway Bay (South Bruny Island); Cape Queen Elizabeth; and Whalebone Point (Cloudy Bay) (Figure 13).

The Bruny Bioregion contains three of the four known Tasmanian breeding sites for sooty shearwaters Puffinus griseus representing over 99% of the Tasmanian population of this species. The largest of these colonies is on Tasman Island. The largest fairy prion Pachyptila turtur colony in Tasmania is also located on Tasman Island. A breeding colony of white-faced storm petrels Pelagodroma marina on Visscher Island (near North Bay) is the southern most occurring in Australia.

The foraging range for nearly all species of seabirds breeding within the Bruny Bioregion (with the exception of the black faced cormorant Phalacrocorax fuscescens) is likely to extend beyond the bioregional boundary and outside of Tasmanian waters.

A significant number of migratory albatross species and other Procellariiformes, many of which are listed as threatened species under Commonwealth and State legislation, are known to forage in the waters of the Bruny Bioregion. Detailed at-sea distribution and abundance of these species within the bioregion is shown in the Seabird atlas of south-eastern Australian waters (Reid et al. 2002).

Shorebirds Tasmanian shorebirds are highly dependant on the inter-tidal and shallow sub-tidal zones of estuaries and beaches for feeding and resting. Some species forage in the offshore marine environment. In Tasmania, four main groupings of birds are considered as shorebirds: waders; terns; gulls (resident breeding species); and migratory shorebirds. Forty-three species of breeding and migratory shorebirds are recognised within Tasmania of which 12 species are resident and breed locally and 31 species migrate to Tasmania from other parts of the world.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 36 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 13 Major little penguin and short-tailed shearwater colonies and priority sites for beach nesting and migratory shorebirds in the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Of the shorebirds species within Tasmania, 26 are considered to be of conservation concern and three of those that occur within the Bruny Bioregion are listed threatened species under Tasmanian legislation. They are the fairy tern Sterna nereis nereis (rare); white-fronted tern Sterna striata (vulnerable); and the eastern curlew Numenius madagascariensis (endangered).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 37 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Except for one species (the double-banded plover Charadrius bicinctus), all of the migratory shorebirds that visit Tasmania are trans-equatorial species that breed in northern China, Mongolia, Siberia and Alaska in June-July each year and migrate south, for the non-breeding season, along a migration route known as the East-Asian Australasian Flyway. Due to Tasmania’s geographical position at the southern extremity of the range of these migratory shorebirds, and in particular the Bruny Bioregion, the region provides important feeding and resting sites for these species before the northward migration (Bryant 2002). Sites of high conservation significance for beach nesting and migratory shorebirds in the Bruny Bioregion, as listed by Bryant (2002), are shown in Figure 13 and include Orielton Lagoon and Causeway; Little Boomer Bay; Pipe Clay Lagoon; South Arm Neck; Barilla Bay; Marion Beach and Causeway; Ralphs Bay-Lauderdale; and Great Bay.

White-bellied sea eagles The white-bellied sea eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster is a listed threatened species (vulnerable) under Tasmanian legislation. There are less than 200 pairs in Tasmania. Around a nest site, adult sea eagles will defend a territory of about 300 ha against other adults. A larger home range of up to 15,000 ha is used for hunting and may be shared with other sea eagles. There are 61 known sea eagle nests on land adjacent to the Bruny Bioregion, representing 31 territories. Within the bioregion, the waters adjacent to the coastline are an important foraging area for the species. For ongoing protection of the species, the location of known nesting sites is confidential.

4.2.10 Geoconservation Geologically, the area within the Bruny Bioregion has developed on the southern end of two broad geological structures, similar to rift valleys, known as the Derwent River and Coal River Grabens. They are Tertiary features (approximately 50 million years old) that developed after Australia broke away from the Antarctic continent. Over the last 2 million years there have been a number of glaciations and sea level fluctuations that have had a profound affect on the landscape evolution within the bioregion. Rising sea levels up to 6,000 years ago drowned much of the area around Storm Bay and the Tasman Peninsula, isolating places like Bruny Island, and leading to the development the sandy coastal landforms that presently occur (Pemberton 2004). Due to the highly varied configuration of the coast and extent of reasonably protected coastal locations, a wide variety of sandy coastal features occur within the Bruny Bioregion compared to the rest of Tasmania. These include mid-bay spits (e.g. Cloudy Bay, Cremorne, Seven Mile Beach); tombolos (e.g. the Bruny Island isthmus, Eagle Hawk Neck, at South Arm, at Ralphs Bay); bay mouth spits (Marion Bay and North Bay); a wide variety of bay head and river mouth dune systems; and rare headland bypass dunes and cliff top dunes (Cape Deslacs-Clifton Beach). The beaches at Frederick Henry Bay are considered a textbook example of beach alignment concordant with wave patterns. On the higher wave energy coastline of the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas and South Bruny Island, towering sea cliffs have formed as a consequence of the pounding of the sea and are constantly being eroded by coastal processes. A number of sea caves occur on the east coast of the Tasman Peninsula. The Tesselated Pavement at Pirates Bay is a site of world geoconservation significance and is illustrated in international textbooks.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 38 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Tasmanian Geoconservation Database lists 65 features (one site is currently ‘under consideration’) within the Bruny Bioregion, including coastal sites that are within 100 m inland of the shoreline, that are relatively obvious or of outstanding geoconservation value (Figure 14). These features probably represent most of the more ‘outstanding’ elements of the bioregion’s geodiversity. Sites are currently ranked into five significance categories, being: World (1 site); Australia (9 sites); Tasmania (23 sites); Regional (14 sites); and Local (18 sites) significance. Although the low-water mark may delineate the seaward extent of some geoconservation features that occur within the inter-tidal zone, it should be noted that these features may extend below the low water mark. However, due to the logistics of underwater sampling the seaward extent of these features is unknown. Therefore, while some features of geoconservation value are clearly evident, other important sites may occur under water. Figure 14 Prominent listed geoconservation sites within Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 39 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.2.11 Estuaries and wetlands Pitt Water-Orielton Lagoon is the only Ramsar Wetland of International Significance (Ramsar site) within the Bruny Bioregion. The site is of international importance as a summer feeding area for migratory shorebirds and provides habitat for the endemic, live-bearing seastar Patiriella vivipara, which is a listed threatened species (endangered) in Tasmania.

Within the bioregion, Oyster Cove and a section of the upper-Derwent estuary above Bridgewater have national significance and are listed in A Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia (Environment Australia 2001). Pitt Water-Orielton Lagoon is also listed within this directory as an important wetland having national significance.

In the reef-based bioregionalisation used to determine Tasmanian IMCRA bioregions it was indicated that an equivalent study was needed for regionalisation of estuaries (Edgar et al. 1997). Therefore, in a subsequent estuarine study, Edgar et al. (1999) classified all major Tasmanian estuaries into nine different classes based on key physical variables. Within the Bruny Bioregion, 13 estuaries3 were identified representing estuaries within three of the nine physical classes within the State. The three classes of estuaries occurring within the bioregion are open estuaries; marine inlets and bays; and microtidal drowned river valleys.

For each estuary, the degree of naturalness of each estuarine catchment (Figure 15) was determined using a weighted index that incorporated the percentage area of natural vegetation cover and urban landtypes. The resulting six categories of naturalness ranged from pristine to severe impact. While no catchments within the Bruny Bioregion were pristine, the Garden Island, Esperance, Cloudy Bay and Huon estuarine catchments were considered natural.

Edgar et al. (1999) also determined the conservation significance of Tasmanian estuaries, classifying each estuary into one of five conservation classes ranging from critical conservation significance (Class A) to low conservation significance-severely degraded (Class E). The estuary within each of the physical classes with the least human disturbance and greatest proportion of catchment under statutory protection was determined to be a Class A estuary. Estuaries were also assigned a high level of conservation significance if they possessed exceptional species diversity or included species with restricted distributions. No Class A estuaries occur within the Bruny Bioregion. Cloudy Bay Lagoon is the only Class B (high conservation significance) estuary within the bioregion. To assist in the development and management of Tasmania’s water resources, the Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystems Value Project (CFEV Project) has been initiated to identify where important freshwater (including estuarine) values exist. The estuarine component of the CFEV project is based on the work of Edgar et al. (1999). The CFEV Project has utilised three categories of naturalness. No estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion were considered pristine (the highest class of naturalness) and only Cloudy Bay Lagoon is classed as being of moderate naturalness.

3 This differs from the IMCRA description of the Bruny Bioregion (IMCRA Technical Group 1998) as containing 25 estuaries.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 40 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 15 Major estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion and their estuarine catchments

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

On a broad regional basis, the CFEV Project considers Cloudy Bay Lagoon to be of priority representative (A) conservation value as a marine bay and inlet while the Derwent and Huon estuaries are of priority representative (A) conservation value of microtidal drowned river valleys. The CFEV

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 41 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Project has also incorporated specific values, such as the occurrence of threatened and migratory species and Ramsar sites, to determine an integrated conservation value for each estuary. Within the Bruny Bioregion, Pitt Water, Blackman Bay and the Derwent estuary have a very high integrated conservation value, the highest integrated conservation value (CFEV Project, unpublished report). Table 2 shows the physical class, naturalness and conservation values of the 13 estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion as determined by both Edgar et al. (1999) and the CFEV Project.

Table 2 Physical class, naturalness and conservation values of estuaries within the Bruny Bioregion

Estuary Physical class Naturalness Conservation value CFEV Edgar CFEV Edgar Representative Integrated

Browns open poor moderate impact B medium E Garden Island open poor natural B medium D Esperance open poor natural B medium C Port Cygnet open poor low impact B medium D Pitt Water marine inlets poor high impact B very high D and bays* North West Bay marine inlets poor low impact B medium E and bays* Blackman Bay marine inlets poor low impact B very high C and bays Carlton marine inlets poor moderate impact B high D and bays Pipe Clay Lagoon marine inlets poor severe impact B high D and bays Crooks marine inlets poor low impact B medium D and bays Cloudy Bay marine inlets moderate natural A high B Lagoon and bays Derwent microtidal poor moderate impact A very high C drowned river valley Huon microtidal poor natural A high C drowned river valley

* After further physical and biological sampling, Edgar et al. (1999) considered these estuaries were better classified as open estuaries.

Data sources: Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute

[Back to tables]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 42 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.3 Human use of the marine environment

4.3.1 Commercial fishing The Bruny Bioregion is an important area for commercial fishing in Tasmania. The port of Hobart provides a base for many commercial fishers and is also used by vessels engaged in Commonwealth fisheries in the south-east region. Smaller ports within the bioregion include Dunalley, Margate and Dover. The main commercial fisheries within the region are abalone, rock lobster, scalefish (including squid, calamari and octopus), sea urchins and shark.

In the 1980s, the south-east region, particularly around Storm Bay, was an important component of the inshore trawl fishery. However, (otter board) trawling is now banned within State waters. A small amount of Danish seine fishing still occurs under strict management controls.

A significant fishery for small pelagic species, jack mackerel and redbait, occurred in south-eastern Tasmanian waters in the late 1980s and 1990s. The fishery initially involved relatively small vessels operating in inshore waters but has now moved offshore and utilises larger mid-water trawlers operating exclusively in Commonwealth waters.

Historically, the Derwent estuary and D’Entrecasteaux Channel were important commercial scallop dredge fisheries but the fishery collapsed due to overfishing. Commercial scallop fishing has not occurred within the Bruny Bioregion for many years. However, scallop beds do occur within the bioregion and assessment of their commercial potential is ongoing.

4.3.1.1 Abalone Abalone are a large, marine mollusc found on rocky reef around almost the entire coastline of Tasmania. The Tasmanian abalone fishery commenced in the early 1960s and as the largest wild abalone fishery in the world is a major contributor to the Tasmanian economy. The fishery in the south-east of the State is comprised almost entirely of a single species, blacklip abalone.

Abalone are collected by 125 licensed divers who prise individual fish off the reef, down to depths of about 30 m. The fishery is managed primarily by size limits, quota and zoning, with a total allowable catch set each year for each zone. The majority of quota units are held under contracts (Abalone Deed of Agreement) that were introduced to increase the level of security for quota holders and potentially increase the economic return to the Tasmanian community from the fishery.

The Bruny Bioregion is contained entirely within the eastern blacklip zone which encompasses the entire east coast of Tasmania from Whale Head to Great Musselroe. Commercial abalone fishers report their catch by abalone fishing block, and recently by sub-block (i.e. block 16 is comprised of sub-blocks 16A, B, C and D) (Figure 16). Although these blocks are shown extending some distance off the coast, in reality, most fishing will be conducted in close proximity to the coastline where habitat within a depth suitable for diving occurs.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 43 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 16 Commercial abalone fishing blocks and sub-blocks within the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Catch from sub-block 13C and 13E is not included within the following summary for the Bruny Bioregion, as most areas of reef in these sub-blocks that occur within the bioregion are considered too deep to be fished. Although most of the area within sub-block 24A occurs outside of the bioregion, catch from this sub-block has been included as a significant proportion is likely to be taken from between Hellfire Bluff and the southern boundary of the sub-block. Conversely, catch from sub-block 14A has not been included within the summary for block 14 because only a relatively minor proportion of the catch is taken between the northern boundary of the sub-block and the southern boundary of the bioregion.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 44 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 3 Commercial abalone catch for Tasmania, the Eastern zone and from the Bruny Bioregion*, 2000 – 2004

Catch (tonnes) Bruny Bioregion Year State total Eastern Bruny % of State % of Eastern Annual zone Bioregion total Zone divers 2000 2726.0 1190.0 430.0 16 36 81 2001 2799.0 1119.7 436.7 16 39 81 2002 2536.5 856.7 357.0 14 42 89 2003 2603.8 855.5 383.1 15 45 71 2004 2503.3 768.2 365.4 15 48 85

Average 2633.7 958.0 394.4 15 41 81

Value 2004 93.2 29.8 14.2 ($m)

* Includes blocks 14 –23 and sub-block 24A, but excludes sub-block 14A

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

The average annual commercial abalone production from the Bruny Bioregion between 2000 and 2004 was 394.4 tonnes. This represents approximately 15% of the total State catch and 41% of the catch from the Eastern zone. An average of 81 licensed abalone divers per year reported fishing within the bioregion during this time, representing about 65% of all divers within the fishery. The estimated ‘beach price’ value of the abalone fishery from the Bruny Bioregion for 2004 was about $14.2m (Table 3). The most important areas to the abalone fishery within the Bruny Biorgion are on the wave exposed coasts of the Tasman and Forestier Peninsula, the outside of Bruny Island and the southern D’Entrecasteaux Channel. Between 2000 and 2004, over 90% of the catch was taken from blocks 14 and 16 (42%) and blocks 20-23 (50%). Almost 25% of the bioregional catch was taken from block 14, with nearly half of all licensed divers reporting catch from this block on an annual basis. Very little commercial catch is taken from the D’Entrecasteaux Channel north of Port Esperance (block 15), the lower Derwent estuary (block 18), or Frederick Henry and Norfolk Bays (block 19) (Table 4).

4.3.1.2 Rock lobster Rock lobster are a large, marine crustacean found on rocky reef and other consolidated substrate around Tasmania. The fishery has been an important component of the State’s fishing industry for over 150 years. Currently, there are approximately 314 licensed commercial fishers that use rock lobster pots, with catch being reported from about 260 vessels per year. The fishery is managed as a single zone with a total allowable catch set for the entire State. Size limits, gear restrictions and seasonal closures also apply. Within the Bruny Bioregion, rock lobster potting is prohibited within the D’Entrecasteaux Channel (ES02 and ES03), Huon estuary (ES04) and Derwent estuary (ES01) and, as such, these areas are effectively closed to commercial rock lobster fishing.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 45 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 4 Commercial abalone catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion and annual average number of divers, by block, 2000 – 2004

Block Year 14* 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24A 2000 77.0 ^ 71.3 28.6 ^ 3.6 62.0 60.0 69.2 43.6 13.0 2001 123.9 2.9 108.0 19.6 0.6 2.3 56.4 49.5 40.4 24.1 8.9 2002 85.0 ^ 72.2 15.7 ^ ^ 62.0 57.7 46.0 14.5 2.2 2003 97.4 ^ 59.7 17.2 0.7 ^ 87.9 54.2 35.4 21.1 5.9 2004 85.0 7.5 49.8 20.0 ^ ^ 92.5 52.2 35.2 18.6 2.8 Average 93.7 3.0 72.2 20.2 0.5 2.0 72.2 54.7 45.2 24.4 6.6 % of 24 1 18 5 0 1 18 14 11 6 2 Bruny Average 60 7 40 23 5 6 36 36 33 27 14 annual divers

* excluding sub-block 14A

^ confidential, five or less divers

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

Reporting of the commercial catch is by fishery blocks, although assessment of the fishery is generally undertaken within eight fishing areas around the State. The majority of waters within the Bruny Bioregion are encompassed by Area 1. The vast majority of other fishable habitat within the bioregion occurs within a small part of Area 2, primarily in block 6G4, between Pirates Bay and Marion Bay (Figure 17).

For the purposes of this report, rock lobster catch within the Bruny Bioregion is assumed to be represented by blocks 6G4, 7H1, 7G1, 7G2 and 7G3. However, catch from block 7G3 is likely to provide an overestimate from within the Bruny Bioregion as a significant proportion of catch may come outside of the bioregional boundary, most likely from Actaeon Reef. Catch from block 6H3 has not been included as very little catch from this block is considered to come from within the bioregional boundary, most catch being taken from waters off Maria Island. No commercial rock lobster catch was reported from within any of the estuary blocks, ES01-04 and ES17-20.

Reporting and assessment of the fishery has recently been undertaken by ‘quota year’, March to February. The average yearly commercial rock lobster production from the Bruny Bioregion for 2000/01 to 2004/05 was 155.7 tonnes. This represents approximately 10% of the total State catch. An average of 103 vessels per quota year reported fishing within the bioregion during this time, representing about 38% of all vessels within the fishery. The estimated ‘beach price’ value of the rock lobster fishery from the Bruny Bioregion for 2004/05 was about $5.0m (Table 5), but ranged from between $4.0m and $6.0m over the previous five years.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 46 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 17 Commercial rock lobster and scalefish fishing blocks, including fishing areas for reporting the commercial rock lobster fishery

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Within the Bruny Bioregion, approximately half of the rock lobster catch comes from around the Tasman and Forestier Peninsula (53% from blocks 6G4, 7G2 and 7H1) and half from around the outside of Bruny Island (47% from blocks 7G1 and 7G3). However, given catch from 7G3 overestimates the amount from within the bioregional boundary, the actual proportion from around the Bruny Island area is likely to be somewhat less than that indicated above and that from around the Peninsula area somewhat greater. Almost 40% of the bioregional catch was taken from block 7G2 (including a small amount from block 7H1) (Table 6).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 47 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 5 Commercial rock lobster catch for Tasmania and from the Bruny Bioregion*, quota years 2000/01 – 2004/05

Catch (tonnes) Bruny Bioregion Year State total Bruny Bioregion % of State total # of vessels 2000/01 1484.9 120.1 8 107 2001/02 1497.0 146.8 10 96 2002/03 1511.9 146.9 10 102 2003/04 1509.5 172.1 11 104 2004/05 1505.7 192.6 13 108 Average 1501.8 155.7 10 103 Value 2004/05 39.0 5.0 ($m)

* Includes blocks 6G4, 7H1, 7G1, 7G2 and 7G3.

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

Table 6 Commercial rock lobster catch (tonnes) from Bruny Bioregion and average number of vessels, by block, quota years 2000/01 – 2004/05

Block Year 6G4 7G2 (+7H1^) 7G1 7G3 2000/01 19.1 43.8 16.6 40.7 2001/02 22.4 49.8 33.5 41.1 2002/03 22.8 61.5 28.9 33.7 2003/04 26.9 68.9 38.6 37.7 2004/05 28.4 73.0 36.7 54.6 Average 23.9 59.4 30.9 41.5 % of Bruny Bioregion 15 38 20 27 Average annual vessels 43 56 65 50

^ Annual catch from block 7H1 is relatively small and represents less than 5 vessels in each year and is therefore included with block 7G2

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

4.3.1.3 Scalefish The Tasmanian scalefish fishery is a multi-species fishery, including bony fishes, sharks, rays, squids and octopuses, and encompasses a wide variety of capture methods. The fishery is relatively dynamic, with many fishers adapting and changing their operations in response to fish availability and market requirements. As such, only a small proportion of the fleet specialises in a single activity or targets a Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 48 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] single species (Lyle et al. 2004). The fishery is managed primarily by a range of input controls including gear restrictions, size limits, area closures, species access and closed seasons. An average of 322 vessels per fishing year recorded catch within the Tasmanian scalefish fishery between 1999/00 and 2003/04. Fishers report the location of their catch using the same fishing blocks as within the rock lobster fishery. Catch data is analysed and reported for the ‘fishing year’, July to June, as this period provides a better reflection of the seasonality of the fisheries for most species. Catches, and effort, are generally concentrated between late spring and early autumn. For the purposes of this report, scalefish catch within the Bruny Bioregion is assumed to be represented by blocks 6G4, 6H3, 7H1, 7G1, 7G2 and 7G3 and estuary blocks ES01-04 and ES17-20 (Figure 16). In contrast to the rock lobster fishery, catch from block 6H3 has been included within the bioergional boundary, as it is uncertain what proportion of catch from this block is taken from waters outside of the bioregion around Maria Island. As a result, the estimated bioregional catches given here may be an overestimate by a maximum of between 6 to 15% in any one fishing year (average 10%). This assumes that no catch reported from block 6H3 actually occurred within the bioregion for that year. However, the real level of error reported here is likely to be significantly lower as some catch from this block will certainly have been taken from within the bioregion. Similarly, catches from block 7G3 may contribute to a slight overestimate (3% maximum) of the total catch for the bioregion. The spatial reporting of scalefish catch for the shark fishery has historically been problematic, with catch recorded on either or both of State or Commonwealth logbooks by fishers with endorsements within each jurisdictions. Recent efforts have focused on minimising duplication, or omission, of data from catch records within each jurisdiction. While the data presented here is considered the best currently available from each responsible fisheries agency, it is acknowledged that some reporting errors for these fisheries may occur. The average yearly commercial scalefish production from the Bruny Bioregion during the fishing years, 1999/00 to 2003/04, was 536 tonnes. This represents approximately 37% of the total State catch. An average of 134 vessels per fishing year reported fishing within the bioregion, representing about 42% of all vessels within the State fishery. The estimated ‘beach price’ value of the scalefish fishery from the Bruny Bioregion for 2003/04 was about $1.2m (Table 7). Between 1999/00 to 2003/04, a relatively large proportion of the catch within the Bruny Bioregion was reported from blocks 7G2 (34%), 7G1 (17%) and 6G4 (15%). However, as with many catch summaries of the scalefish fishery, the data in any one year may be skewed by large captures of one or two species or by a small number of vessels fishing in a particular area or block. Block 7G2 consistently recorded the largest number of vessels in each year, with an average of 60 vessels per fishing year recording catch from this block. A zero, or negligible, catch was recorded from the D’Entrecasteaux Channel (ES02 – ES03) and the Huon River (ES04) during this period (Table 8). Table 9 shows the catch of the top ten scalefish species by weight from the Bruny Bioregion for each of the fishing years 1999/00 to 2003/04. In any single fishing year, the top ten species comprised between 80 and 90% of the catch for the bioregion. Squids, whiting, flathead and garfish were in the top species in each fishing year. Wrasse, octopus and banded morwong were in the top species in four of the five fishing years. Large catches of Australian salmon, barracouta, blue warehou and jack mackerel were recorded in some years.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 49 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 7 Commercial scalefish catch for Tasmania and from the Bruny Bioregion*, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04

Catch (tonnes) Bruny Bioregion Year State total Bruny Bioregion % of State total # of vessels 1999/00 1916 1044 55 162 2000/01 1356 358 26 135 2001/02 1448 411 28 129 2002/03 1207 533 44 122 2003/04 1020 336 33 124 Average 1389 536 37 134 Value 2003/04 4.1 1.2 ($m)

* Includes blocks 6G4, 6H3, 7H1, 7G1, 7G2 and 7G3 and estuaries ES01-04 and ES17-20

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

Table 8 Commercial scalefish catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion and average number of vessels, by block and estuary*, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04

Block or estuary Year 6G4 6H3 7G1 7G2 7G3 7H1 ES01 ES17 ES18 ES19 ES20 1999/00 136 81 264 446 17 20 ^ 22 29 17 ^ 2000/01 24 53 77 93 14 3 ^ 16 28 28 ^ 2001/02 34 53 46 125 10 23 ^ 8 63 33 ^ 2002/03 190 33 39 142 12 13 ^ 14 35 23 ^ 2003/04 24 37 29 94 12 7 ^ 6 60 22 ^ Average 82 51 91 180 13 13 13 43 25 % of Bruny Bioregion 15 10 17 34 2 2 2 8 5 Average annual vessels 42 41 45 60 25 9 2 11 18 16 4 * Catch from estuary block ES02, ES03 and ES04 not presented as either no catch reported or very small catch from less than five vessels and therefore confidential ^ represents less than 5 vessels in each year and is therefore confidential Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 50 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 9 Commercial scalefish catch of top ten species* by weight from the Bruny Bioregion, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04

Catch (tonnes) % of catch from Bruny Bioregion Species 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 Squids 411.8 62.5 43.3 43.2 29.9 39 17 11 8 9 Whiting 31.2 42.5 39.3 38.1 50.9 3 12 10 7 15 Flathead 45.3 53.2 34.6 32.3 18.6 4 15 8 6 6 Garfish 26.9 25.3 20.7 23 10.1 37543 Wrasse 30.5 23 21.3 17.3 3 6 5 5 Octopus 16.4 11.1 30.9 13.1 2 3 8 4 Banded morwong 15.6 14.6 14 17 4435 Australian salmon 187.6 21.3 196.6 18 5 37 Barracouta 94.1 51.2 67.4 23 10 20 Blue warehou 138.9 19 29.2 13 5 5 Jack mackerel 18.2 18.8 39.6 4 4 12 Gummy shark 27.5 19.6 3 5 Striped trumpeter 17.2 12.7 2 2 Elephant shark 13 4 Bastard trumpeter 8.9 3 Total percentage 89 80 82 86 81 * Note, if no catch is recorded here for a species in a given year this does not indicate that the catch was zero, but that the species was not in the top ten species by weight in that year. However, in that year, those species would each have comprised less than 4 % of the bioregional catch. Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

The main fishing methods used to take scalefish within the Bruny Bioregion are squid jig, beach seine, gillnet, Danish seine, trolling and handline. However, large individual catches of squid by squid jig and Australian salmon by beach seine in some years may strongly influence this data (refer catches of these species as shown in Table 9). Other methods used to take at least 2% of the overall catch from within the bioregion are shark net, purse seine, fish trap, dip net, spear and hand collection. The methods with the greatest average number of participants per fishing year within the bioregion are gillnet (75 vessels), handline (54 vessels) and squid jig (36 vessels) (Table 10).

4.3.1.4 Commercial dive The Tasmanian commercial dive fishery is based mainly on the harvest of sea urchin and periwinkles. Species such as feral Pacific oysters, clams and the introduced kelp Undaria make a significant proportion of the catch in certain regions. Sea urchins are collected by licensed divers using tongs and hand rakes. There are currently 60 licensed divers in the State and between 2000 and 2004 over half of the active divers have operated within the Bruny Bioregion. The estimated annual beach price for the commercial dive fishery from the bioregion is between approximately $60,000 and $180,000. Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 51 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 10 Commercial scalefish catch by method from the Bruny Bioregion, fishing years 1999/00 – 2003/04

Gear Average annual catch % of catch from Average annual vessels (tonnes) Bruny Bioregion Squid jig 102.1 19 36 Beach seine 99.4 19 7 Gillnet 92.3 17 75 Danish seine ^ ^ ^ Troll 39.7 7 27 Handline 26.5 5 54 Shark net 17.7 3 6 Purse seine 17.7 3 4 Fish trap 16.9 3 26 Dip net 13.7 3 16 Spear 12.9 2 18 Hand collection 9.5 2 5

^ represents less than 5 vessels and is therefore confidential

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

The commercial dive catch for the period 2000 – 2004 is summarised in Table 11. In the Bruny Bioregion, sea urchins and periwinkles comprise approximately 80% of the catch from that part of the fishery that is reported by weight. In addition to the catch recorded by weight, as presented here, approximately 27,000 dozen oysters (wild Pacific oysters and native oysters) were taken by commercial divers within Tasmania during this time, of which just under half were from the Bruny Bioregion.

Table 11 Commercial dive catch (tonnes) from the Bruny Bioregion, 2000 – 2004

Bruny Bioregion Year State total (t) Total (t) % of State total Annual divers 2000 250 58 23 17 2001 237 57 24 17 2002 274 46 17 13 2003 202 63 31 14 2004 246 35 14 9

Average 242 52 22 14

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 52 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.3.1.5 Commonwealth fisheries Several fisheries occur within the Bruny Bioregion in Tasmanian waters that are managed by the Australian Government (Australian Fisheries Management Authority), primarily the southern shark fishery. During 1999/2000 to 2003/04, an average of 10 vessels per fishing year have reported an average annual catch of 38 tonnes for these fisheries within the bioregion. During this time, approximately 50% of the total catch was comprised of gummy shark. The other main species taken regularly was elephant fish. A large catch of squids were recorded in 1999/2000 (Table 12).

Over 50% of this catch was taken in inshore waters less than 50 m in depth with a further 40% coming from the 50-100 m depth range.

Table 12 Commercial catch (tonnes) from Commonwealth non-trawl logbooks within the Bruny Bioregion*, 1999-2000 to 2003-04

Fishing year Species 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 % of Total Gummy shark 13.0 12.0 16.3 19.6 33.8 50 Squids 30.2 16 Elephant fish 2.4 2.4 9.2 3.5 6.1 13 Barracouta 0.0 8.1 4 Striped trumpeter 2.3 3.8 0.1 0.5 0.3 4 Southern saw shark 0.6 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.2 3 School shark 1.6 0.2 0.4 0.5 1.2 2 Broadnose sevengill shark 0.0 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 1 Blue warehou 0.8 1.3 1 Common saw shark 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 1 Other 4.2 2.4 0.9 0.8 0.8 5

Total 55.5 23.6 37.6 26.9 44.5 Vessels 8 11 10 10 11

* Includes catch between latitude 42.75°S and 43.60°S and longitude 147°E and 148.20°E, where depth is less than or equal to 150 m

Data source: Australian Fisheries Management Authority [Back to tables]

4.3.2 Marine farming Marine farming (aquaculture) in Tasmania has expanded rapidly in the past decade, with marine farming lease areas (Table 13) and overall production (Table 14) doubling during this time. The farming of salmonids (Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout) in sea cages makes up the largest part of the industry, with oyster farming on inter-tidal racks or baskets and oyster and mussel farming on sub-tidal longlines being the other main component. Other species farmed include scallops and abalone.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 53 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 13 Area of marine farming plans, zones and leases for Tasmania and for Bruny Bioregion, 1995 and 2000–2004 and estimated value 2004

State Bruny Bioregion* Bruny Bioregion* Year Parameter (hectares) (% of State total) 1995^ Leasable Area 3410 1019 30 2005 Plan Area 402283 71609 18 Zone Area 17533 4542 26 Special Lease Area 3712 0 0 Maximum Leasable Area 7072 2129 30 2005 Employees - permanent 472 327 69 Employees - casual 192 92 48

^ It is not possible to provide an accurate figure for the total marine farming lease area held in 1995. The value provided represents a total lease area at the time of the release of each specific draft marine farming development plans and is likely to be very close to the actual 1995 figure. * Actual area and employment figures for the Bruny Bioregion will be slightly lower as values from Hastings Bay and Recherche Bay (within D’Entrecasteaux Channel Marine Farming Development Plan Area) have been included.

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

The majority of Tasmanian marine farming occurs within the waters of the Bruny Bioregion. Half of the current Marine Farming Development Plans (MFDP) are located within the region. These are the D’Entrecasteaux Channel; Huon River and Port Esperance; Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay; Blackman Bay; Pipe Clay Lagoon; Pitt Water; and Trumpeter Bay Marine Farming Development Plans. These seven MFDPs cover approximately 71,600 ha, representing about 17% of the bioregion within Tasmanian waters. Within a MFDP, zones where marine farming may occur are identified and a maximum leasable area within each zone is determined. Under the Marine Farming Planning Act 1995, a lessee generally has exclusive possession of the lease area for the duration of the lease. The location of all marine farming zones and lease areas within the Bruny Bioregion is shown in Figure 18. The current maximum leasable area represents about 0.5% of the bioregion within Tasmanian waters. Within the Bruny Bioregion, 4,542 ha are currently zoned. The maximum leasable area of 2,129 ha represents 30% of the total leasable area within the State (Table 13). However, the relative importance of the bioregion to the industry is much greater than this, with 85% of the salmonid and 66% of the shellfish total State production between 2000 and 2004 occurring within the bioregion. This is also reflected in employment figures whereby about 70% of full-time and 50% of part-time employees within the industry work within the bioregion (Table 14). The estimated ‘farm-gate value’ of marine farming production from the Bruny Bioregion for 2004 was about $100m.

A number of land-based marine farms are being developed within the area and utilise the waters of the bioregion within their farming systems.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 54 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 14 Annual marine farming production for Tasmania and the Bruny Bioregion*, 1995 and 2000–2004 and estimated value 2004

Salmonids Shellfish State Bruny Bruny State Bruny Bruny Bioregion Bioregion Bioregion^ Bioregion^ Year (tonnes HOGG#) (% of State (tonnes) (% of State total) total) 1995 7123 6462 91 2167 1326 61 2000 12003 10839 90 2356 1577 67 2001 13815 12260 89 2639 1738 66 2002 14699 12568 86 2593 1749 67 2003 13324 10822 81 2945 1947 66 2004 14229 11392 80 2823 1754 62 Value 2004 ($m) 111.0 88.9 80 17.6 11.5 65

* Regional production figures only include stock that is sent to market and does not include stock that is sent to other regions for ongrowing

# HOGG = Head On, Gilled and Gutted

^ Actual production for shellfish in the Bruny Bioregion will be slightly lower as figures from Hastings Bay and Recherche Bay (within D’Entrecasteaux Channel Marine Farming Development Plan Area) have been included due to confidentiality requirements

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to tables]

4.3.3 Fish processing There are currently 34 holders of fish processing licences operating from 40 processing locations on lands adjacent to the Bruny Bioregion. Of these licences, 27 are endorsed to process fish from both the wild fishery and marine farming, 6 from the wild fishery only and one from marine farming only. Although a significant proportion of the fish that is processed by these operators will have been taken or farmed from within the waters of the bioregion, movement of stock to and from other regions of the State precludes reporting the relative importance of the bioregional production to local fish processors.

4.3.4 Recreational fishing A national recreational fishing survey conducted in 2000/01 provided the first comprehensive snapshot of Tasmanian recreational fishing (Henry and Lyle 2003), although catch and effort information are not routinely collected for the Tasmanian recreational fishery. The highest participation rates in recreational fishing occur in the southern region of the State, with approximately 38% of residents aged 5 years or older fishing at least once a year.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 55 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 18 Marine farming zones and lease areas in the Bruny Bioregion, 2005

[Back to figures] Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 56 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 18 continued

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures] Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 57 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Based on this survey, it was estimated that approximately 53,000 Tasmanian residents (plus 3,000 interstate visitors) fished at least once per year within the waters of the Bruny Bioregion (i.e. southern east coast, Norfolk and Frederick Henry Bay, Derwent and D’Entrecasteaux Channel), representing about 43% of Tasmanians participating in recreational sea fishing (Jeremy Lyle, pers. comm.). Line fishing was by far the most popular fishing activity within the region, representing 74% of all recreational fishing events followed by gillnet (9%) and rock lobster potting (8%) (Lyle 2005).

Recreational fishing information is usually collected by a combination of diary and recall surveys, but may include some on-site survey techniques. Species specific surveys such as abalone and rock lobster (Lyle and Morton 2004) and the recreational gamefish fishery (Morton and Lyle 2003) have recently been reported. Reporting of recreational abalone and rock lobster fishing has utilised the eight fishing areas used for reporting the commercial rock lobster fishery (Figure 17).

4.3.4.1 Abalone Blacklip abalone are highly prized by recreational divers and snorkellers with approximately 9,300 persons licensed within the State for abalone during 2002/03. The recreational catch is concentrated in the south-east of the State with 40% of the harvest and effort being reported from Area 1, which encompasses the majority of waters within the Bruny Bioregion. Despite the importance of this area to the recreational fishery, the recreational harvest of about 26.5 tonnes was equivalent to only 4% of the commercial catch from this area. The number of participants and the catch within the recreational abalone fishery have increased significantly since the mid-1990s (Lyle and Morton 2004).

4.3.4.2 Rock lobster Rock lobster are a premium target for recreational fishers and can be taken by a variety of methods, including rock lobster pots, lobster ring or hoop nets, and dive collection. Approximately 15,500 persons held a recreational rock lobster licence for at least one of these methods during 2002/03.

Statewide, potting represented over 80% of recreational lobster fishing days but accounted for only 62% of the harvest whereas diving accounted for about 18% of trips and 34% of the harvest. As with blacklip abalone, the recreational catch and effort is concentrated in the south-east of the State with about 31% of the total harvest and 33% of the effort occurring in Area 1. In Area 1, the estimated recreational catch in 2002/03 was 43.5 tonnes, with 59% of the harvest taken by pots and most of the balance being taken by divers (Lyle and Morton 2004).

In Area 1, the recreational harvest was estimated to be equivalent to about 35% of the commercial fishery. Alternatively, if it is assumed that all of the recreational catch is taken from shallow water, less than 20 m in depth, then the recreational harvest from Area 1 is almost equal (95%) to the commercial take in this depth range (Lyle and Morton 2004).

Participation and catch within the recreational rock lobster fishery has increased significantly since the mid-1990s.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 58 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.3.4.3 Scallops After closure of the fishery for much of the previous decade, a trial recreational dive fishery for scallops was undertaken for a three month period in 2005 and 2006. The trial followed indications of recovery of the fishery in traditional recreational dive areas, particularly in the D’Entrecasteaux Channel. The results of the trial will be used to determine whether a sustainable fishery can be established.

4.3.4.4 Scalefish Recreational fishing for scalefish in Tasmania is conducted using a variety of methods including line fishing, netting and spears. The Bruny Bioregion accounts for about 40% of all scalefish, by number, taken by recreational sea fishers within the State. Within the bioregion, sand flathead dominate the recreational catch comprising about 68% of the total recreational scalefish catch, by number. Nearly all of the sand flathead catch is by line fishing. Other significant species include flounder, Australian salmon, cod, gurnard and bastard trumpeter (Lyle 2005).

Net fishers are required to be licensed, with the total number of gillnet licences in the State ranging between about 8,400 and 11,000 between 1995 and 2003.

Although comprising a relatively small and specialised part of the recreational fishery, gamefishing for tuna and albacore is an important part of the recreational fishery, involving significant investment in vessels and fishing gear. As approximately 25% of gamefishing trips are undertaken on charter boats, the fishery has an important tourism component. Traditionally, recreational gamefishing has been centred off the Tasman Peninsula, particularly from the Pirates Bay area, although recently activity has increased off Southport in the region south of Bruny Island (Morton and Lyle 2003).

Many of the estuaries in the Bruny Bioregion are important recreational bream fisheries and provide seasonal opportunities for anglers to target sea-run brown trout and whitebait.

4.3.5 Minerals and petroleum Seismic surveys have been conducted within the Bruny Bioregion for petroleum exploration. Although there are no known reserves of minerals or petroleum, significant sand resources exist within the bioregion. Historically, licences and leases have been issued for exploration of petroleum, manganese and sand. While the potential of these resources have been investigated, no resources of consequence have been located.

There are currently no licences or leases within the Bruny Bioregion.

4.3.6 Marine and estuarine outfalls There are 18 major outfalls into coastal or estuarine waters within the Bruny Bioregion from waste water treatment plants having a permitted flow of at least 100 kilolitres of sewage per day (KL/day).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 59 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Waste water from homes, offices, shops and factories, including human waste, is treated at these plants. The two largest of these plants have outfalls within the Derwent estuary at Macquarie Point and New Town Bay and each have a permitted flow of greater than 10,000 KL/day. A further eight plants of between 1,000 and 10,000 KL/day also have outfalls in the Derwent estuary and one plant of this flow range has an outfall into Pitt Water. Smaller sewage treatment plants having a permitted flow of between 100 and 1,000 KL/day have outfalls at Barilla Bay; Orielton Lagoon; Port Cygnet; Port Esperance; North West Bay; and Port Arthur (Figure 19).

Discharge from outfalls into New Town Bay and Ralphs Bay are tertiary treated, with all other plants of this size having a secondary treatment level. Five of the plants currently have some level of reuse.

Smaller waste water treatment plants (less than 100 KL/day) with outfalls into estuarine or coastal waters of the bioregion may occur from other coastal townships in the area.

An industrial waste outfall into the Derwent estuary occurs from an effluent treatment plant at the zinc smelter at Lutana. The discharge contains the major contaminants of zinc, cadmium, lead and mercury although substantial improvements in emissions have recently occurred. The plant treats a combined total of approximately 3,285 KL/day of process water and contaminated stormwater.

An effluent discharge into the upper-Derwent estuary occurs from the pulp mill at Boyer. The mill discharges a combined effluent stream of approximately 50,000 KL/day, with major pollutants including organic matter and resin acids.

4.3.7 Slipways Boat repair and maintenance facilities within the Bruny Bioregion are centred around slipways located on the bays and estuaries of the region. The Environment Division has defined slipways within three general categories: small private slipways (generally vessels less than 5 m); commercial facilities (vessels 10 – 65 m); and boat club slipways (vessels 10 – 18 m). Similar activities are undertaken at most commercial and boat club slipways such as hull cleaning and repair, paint removal and painting, engine maintenance and fibreglassing. Very few slipway facilities have solid waste interception or liquid waste collection measures in place. Therefore contaminants generated by slipway activities may typically enter the marine environment through tidal inundation or stormwater runoff. Commercial fishing and charter vessels are the largest user group of commercial facilities, followed by recreational power boats and recreational sailing boats. Recreational sailing boats and recreational power boats are the largest users of boat club slipways (DPIWE 2002). Within the Bruny Biregion there are 16 recognised commercial facilities (including two commercial marinas) and seven boat club slipways (Figure 20). In addition, there are two boat building facilities with slipways that are not used for commercial boat repair and maintenance and six private facilities that repair and maintain own boats that are greater than 5 m in length.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 60 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 19 Location of major marine and estuarine outfalls within the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

4.3.8 Marine transport and cruising The Port of Hobart, administered by the Tasmanian Ports Corporation Pty Ltd (TasPorts), is one of the four major ports within Tasmania and is the most southern deep water port in Australia. Hobart has an international container service and is the main cruise ship and naval destination in Tasmania. Hobart is the main supply base for Australian Antarctic supply vessels and, at times, other Antarctic vessels. In the middle reaches of the Derwent estuary, port facilities at Risdon support a zinc processing facility and the major fuel supply facility at Selfs Point.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 61 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 20 Location of major slipways within the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

A port at Port Huon is also managed by the TasPorts but is now rarely used for shipping purposes. Smaller ports within the Bruny Bioregion at Dover, Port Cygnet, Margate, Electrona, Kettering, Port Arthur and Dunalley are managed by Marine and Safety Tasmania (MAST). MAST are responsible for navigational matters within the Bruny Bioregion, although TasPorts Shipping Services may respond to the conduct of vessels in the bioregion as the pilotage provider. TasPorts is charged with the responsibility of being the pilot service provider within the Port of Hobart comprising two zones (Zone A and B) within the lower and middle Derwent estuary and one zone (Zone C) within the D’Entrecasteaux Channel. TasPorts also provides pilotage services within the Port of Port Arthur (Figure 21).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 62 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

A number of cruise ship vessels and some commercial vessels navigate close to the coast between Tasman Island and Cape Raoul and this area is used by cruise ships to show some of Tasmania’s most spectacular coastline. Coastal cruising and visiting unique destinations such as Port Arthur, as well as cruising in the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, is of significant importance to the cruise ship sector. Statewide, the cruise business has been worth up to $9m per annum (source TasPorts). The Port of Hobart hosts a number of local day cruise operators on the Derwent estuary, to Port Arthur and as far south as Recherche Bay. The number of cruise operators has recently increased in response to increased tourism demand. The local cruise sector directly and indirectly employs around 100 full time employees.

A regular passenger and vehicle ferry service operates daily between Kettering and Bruny Island.

Figure 21 Major boat ramps and jetties and pilotage zones within the Bruny Bioregion

Data sources: Marine and Safety Tasmania; Tasmanian Ports Corporation Pty Ltd [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 63 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.3.9 Recreational boating All waters within the Bruny Bioregion are extremely popular for recreational boating, particularly the D’Entrecasteaux Channel and Derwent estuary region. The many protected bays and sheltered areas provide safe anchorages in most weather conditions. Participation in recreational boating is highest during the summer months. In a 2002 survey of recreational boaters conducted by MAST, over 40% of boating in marine waters in Tasmania was reported to occur within the waters of the bioregion. Statewide, over 80% of registered recreational vessels are motor boats less than 6 m in length while 6% are sailing vessels over 6 m in length. Fishing was reported as the main reason for boating by 79% of respondents with a further 10% primarily involved in cruising. Boat ramps are used by 77% of boat owners to gain access to their boating. The areas in which recreational vessels can legally operate are determined largely by the size of the vessel (generally whether the vessel is smaller or larger than 6 m in length) and the safety equipment that is carried on that vessel. The areas that are of most importance to recreational boat operators are ‘smooth waters’ and ‘sheltered waters’ as defined within the Marine and Safety (Definition of Operational Areas) By-laws 2003. In general, sheltered waters are waters within two nautical miles of land. Smooth waters are those waters, within sheltered waters, that are of a more enclosed nature and include the D’Entrecasteaux Channel and Huon estuary; Derwent estuary; Norfolk Bay; Blackman Bay; Pitt Water; Wedge Bay; and Port Arthur. A range of marine infrastructure occurs within the region such as marinas, jetties, boat ramps navigation markers and moorings. MAST currently recognises 29 jetties, 54 boat ramps and 2,903 moorings within the Bruny Bioregion. Boating facilities at Southport and Recherche Bay also provide access to the waters of the bioregion (Figure 21). Many smaller boat ramps and private jetties and slipways also occur within the bioregion. Further information on recreational boating within the area, including recognised anchorages, is available in the MAST brochure South East Tasmanian Boating Guide. Sea-kayaking, surfing, water skiing and windsurfing are other popular water-based recreational activities within the region.

4.3.10 Recreational diving The Tasmanian marine environment is regarded as providing some of the best temperate water diving in the world. In particular, the area around the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas provides some of the best diving sites available. Diving attractions of the bioregion include shore dives, shipwrecks, sea-caves and swim throughs, kelp forests and sponge gardens. Good diving occurs within a range of sheltered waters through to exposed ocean sites. Jacques (1997) lists details on 70 individual dive sites within the Bruny Bioregion and these are shown in Figure 22. The author classifies the difficulty of each dive into five categories, from ‘beginners’ to ‘high risk’ and rates the quality of the dives into six categories. Forty of the dive sites within the bioregion were rated as being of a very good, or higher, quality. Notwithstanding the scenic aspect of diving within Tasmania, the activities of a significant proportion of local recreational divers are focused on the harvesting of rock lobster and abalone (see 4.3.4 Recreational fishing).

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 64 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.3.11 Commercial tourism The marine environment of the Bruny Bioregion provides significant scenic and natural values for a large number of tourism operations in Tasmania. It is an essential component of water-based tourism businesses such as diving, fishing, sea-kayaking and cruising. There are approximately 500 tourism businesses in the Huon, D’Entrecasteaux, Hobart and Tasman areas of which approximately 300 are accommodation businesses and 130 specific attractions (natural and man-made). Other tourism businesses utilising the resources of the bioregion include 42 tour operations, three boat or yacht hiring businesses, four scenic flight operators, 11 cruises, three kayak operators and six dive operators. Some key tourism sites are shown in Figure 23.

Figure 22 Dive sites and located shipwrecks within the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Jacques 1997, Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 65 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 23 Sites of significant tourism, recreation or cultural and historic value

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

Many tourism businesses in the bioregion build on their positioning as a coastal or river destination, capitalising on the water views and promoting the scenic values that add interest to the journey to and from the destination. The ‘Huon Trail’ in the Huon Valley and on Bruny Island, the ‘Convict Trail’ on the Tasman Peninsula, and a small section of the ‘Rivers Run’ in the Derwent Valley are important touring routes that connect the visitor to some of the core appeals and values of Tasmania; an island destination with diverse seascapes and river views.

One of the key appeals of the city of Hobart is its location on the Derwent estuary and there is significant potential to develop further tourism and recreation experiences that build on the strength of this element. Hobart is a major gateway destination for visitors to Tasmania, attracting 585,600 interstate and overseas visitors in 2004. Holiday visitors to the Hobart region have above average

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 66 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] participation rates in visiting marine situated attractions such as Constitution Dock, Salamanca Market, Port Arthur and the Huon Valley. Mount Wellington offers expansive views of the River Derwent and Storm Bay. The Huon and D’Entrecasteaux Channel region attracted 233,640 interstate and international visitors in 2004. Recent major tourism developments in this region include a restaurant and cruise from Hobart to Woodbridge and charter boat tours viewing marine wildlife and seascapes on Bruny Island. These operations rely heavily on the marine values and coastal seascapes of the region. The Tasman Peninsula is a major destination for visitors to Tasmania, with Port Arthur attracting 246,640 visitors in 2004. Significant tourism development in the region include cruises to and from Port Arthur and Point Puer, Coal Mines developments and recent redevelopments of accommodation in the region. The Tasman Peninsula offers sea kayaking and dive experiences. The marine habitats in this region are essential to these businesses, with Waterfall Bay being of particular significance to dive operators in the area. Future tourism planning for the Tasman region has a strong emphasis on building upon the natural and coastal values of the region.

4.3.12 Nature recreation Reserved land, such as National Parks, State Reserves and Conservation Areas, and public reserves adjacent to the coast (see 4.5.2 Reserved Land, Figure 25) provide a significant recreation experience within the Bruny Bioregion, for both locals and visitors. Visitation and many of the activities that are undertaken in these areas are strongly related to the near coastal and marine environment. Some key sites for nature recreation activities are shown in Figure 23. The Tasman National Park is one of the most highly visited parks in Tasmania and features a wide variety of coastal scenery including high sea-cliffs, sea caves, wave cut platforms and sandy beaches. Within the Tasman National Park, walkways and cliff top viewpoints at Tasman Arch and the Devils Kitchen and connecting to Waterfall Bay provide scenic seascapes. Recent annual visitors numbered approximately 155,000 to Tasman Arch and 2,000 to Waterfall Bay. Significant seascape values are also associated with the Tesselated Pavement State Reserve and Eagle Hawk Neck Historic Site.

The nearby Tasman Blowhole, within the Pirates Bay State Reserve, is a geoheritage feature with seascape values and a cliff top viewing point. Associated infrastructure includes a boat launching ramp and jetty. This is the busiest visitor site on reserved land within the Tasman Peninsula. The site has strong connections to the marine environment being a departure point for recreational and commercial fishing, charter fishing, major sport fishing events and recreational diving. Pirates Bay is also a popular surfing location.

Within the Tasman National Park, walks to Cape Hauy, Cape Pillar, Cape Raoul and Ship Stern Bluff feature expansive scenic seascapes. Recent annual walker registrations were approximately 5,000 to Cape Hauy, 600 to Cape Pillar and 4,000 to 5,000 to Cape Raoul and Ship Stern Bluff (including a number of surfers at this site). Remarkable Cave received approximately 90,000 visits in 2004/05.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 67 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The Fortescue Bay campground and boat launching facility within the Tasman National Park is a popular coastal camping area. The site offers a family orientated camping area and another camping area strongly associated with boating and fishing related activities. Recent annual visitor numbers were around 28,000 with about 10,000 camping nights recorded in the campground.

The Lime Bay State Reserve provides a popular coastal camping and associated beach launching area for small boats. The estimated number of visits is about 10,000 per year. The Stewarts Bay State Reserve includes a popular short walk with associated seascapes of the Port Arthur region.

South Bruny National Park features a wide variety of coastal scenery including high cliffs, sand and shingle beaches, wave cut platforms and offshore rocks. Visits to the park in 2003/04 were about 36,000 and are increasing. Within South Bruny National Park, the Fluted Cape and Grass Point walking tracks at Adventure Bay feature scenic seascapes. Camping areas and walking tracks are located at Cloudy Bay while the Cape Bruny lighthouse is a popular site offering scenic seascape views. Camping, beach activities and walking tracks at Lighthouse Jetty Beach (Great Taylors Bay) attract well over 1,000 walkers annually with numbers increasing.

Approximately 1,000 walker registrations are recorded annually for the Cape Queen Elizabeth walking track within the Bruny Island Neck Game Reserve. The Neck penguin viewing platform offering panoramic ocean views and a coastal camping area, with associated beach activities, is located within the reserve.

The South Arm Conservation Area provides a wetland and saltmarsh area associated with bird watching and nature appreciation activities. Surfing is popular on the Storm Bay side of the reserve. Cape Deslacs Nature Reserve provides evening bird watching activities and the Clifton Beach Conservation Area is an important surfing location. The southern beaches area of Dodges Ferry, Lewisham and Primrose Sands are important for surfing, fishing, jet skis, water skiing and biscuit towing, whale watching and general water sports.

There are a large number of offshore islands within the Bruny Bioregion. While general visitation to the islands is fairly low, nature recreation activities are strongly associated with the surrounding marine environment.

4.3.13 Science and education Central within the Bruny Bioregion, the city of Hobart provides the base for a number of agencies engaged in marine science, such as the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (University of Tasmania), the CSIRO Marine Laboratories and the Australian Antarctic Division. Marine management and planning agencies such as the National Oceans Office and the head offices of the Department of Primary Industries and Water are also sited in Hobart. The Secretariat for the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Living Marine Resources is located in Hobart. It has been recommended that a permanent Secretariat for the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels be established in Hobart.

The Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (TAFI) conducts a substantial amount of research within the waters of the Bruny Bioregion and the waters of the bioregion provide a convenient

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 68 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] location for many undergraduate research studies. The TAFI Marine Research Laboratories, Taroona, have a long association with marine research within the bioregion. Tasmanian research and development priorities for the period 2005 to 2008 identified by TAFI include, understanding ecological processes and species interactions; human impacts on the marine environment; fish health; and the socio-economic contribution of marine resources and the marine environment.

The Tinderbox and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserves provide sites for ongoing investigations into the effects of human activities on the marine environment. These areas also fulfil an educational role, with underwater dive trails within each reserve. The Taroona Waters (Crayfish Point) site is regularly used as a research site, particularly for rock lobster studies.

The Marine Discovery Centre (Woodbridge District High School), on the shores of the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, allows Tasmanian students of all ages to learn about, discover and care for the marine environment. The centre houses an aquarium room and touch tanks, undertakes marine sampling from its own research vessel and has its own small marine farming lease.

With much of Tasmania’s population residing in Hobart and the south-east region, the waters of the Bruny Bioregion provide many accessible opportunities for Tasmanians to observe and interact with the marine environment on a regular basis.

4.4 Cultural and heritage values

4.4.1 Indigenous values The Tasmanian Aboriginal community considers the entire Tasmanian coastline, to a distance of at least 500 m inland, to be of significant cultural value with respect to the marine environment (Brett Noble, pers. comm.).

Within the Bruny Bioregion, land title to coastal land at Risdon Cove and Oyster Bay is held by the community under the Aboriginal Lands Act 1995.

The Aboriginal Heritage Office, Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment, maintains a permanent record of identified Aboriginal heritage places. As occupation of Tasmania by Aboriginal people pre-dates the last major period of sea-level rise, it is undoubted that much material heritage may be contained below the current low-water mark. However, logistics dictate that very little of this indigenous heritage has been identified.

Some coastal sites within the bioregion having significant indigenous value are listed on the Register of the National Estate.

Tasmanian Aborigines engage in cultural fishing practices within the marine environment. The State Government is currently working with the community to gain a better understanding of customary fishing, hunting and gathering practices and of how these activities may be better provided for in the future.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 69 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.4.2 Historic heritage The Port Arthur Historic Site is one of only two places in Tasmania that is listed on the National Heritage List. A significant maritime archaeological feature at Port Arthur is Lempriere’s tidal benchmark on the Isle of the Dead. Carved into a rock in 1841, it is believed to be the earliest benchmark installed in the world and has exceptional historical and scientific significance in the international field of climate research. The Port Arthur settlement is one of a small number of places which relied on the marine, water-bounded landscape to form the ‘bars of the prison’. As such, the harbour location and views to and from the water are considered integral elements of the visual and historical values of the site.

The Tasman Island Lighthouse is listed on the Commonwealth Heritage List, gaining Australian Government protection under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Built in 1906, it was one of the last lighthouses erected in Tasmania before the Australian Government assumed responsibility for coastal lights.

A number of other coastal, maritime sites within the Bruny Bioregion are listed on the Register of the National Estate. These include Cape Bruny Lightstation; the Iron Pot Light; Batchelors Grave Historic Site (Taroona); and Variety Bay Historic Sites (Figure 23). The Tasman Peninsula is also listed, whereby elements of the natural and cultural environment of the peninsula region combine in a landscape of nationally recognised outstanding value.

Marine sites within the Bruny Bioregion listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register include the Port Arthur Historic Site; Bridgewater Bridge; ANM Pavilion Point Site; Cornelian Bay Boat Houses; Cornelian Bay Former Baths; and Battery Point Shipping Activity Places (Figure 23). Sites on the Tasmanian Register are protected under the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995. Other places of historic cultural heritage significance may exist within the bioregion but are yet to be identified or assessed by the Tasmanian Heritage Council. Further sites may occur on local government heritage lists.

4.4.3 Shipwrecks All shipwrecks that occurred at least 75 years from the date of the wreck are protected under the Tasmanian Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 or the Commonwealth Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976. Therefore, each year more shipwrecks can be protected as they have their 75th anniversary. Under each of these Acts, protected zones not exceeding 100 or 200 ha, respectively, can be declared around a shipwreck site and general access prohibited. While approximately 150 shipwrecks within Tasmanian waters are known from the Bruny Bioregion, only 12 of these shipwreck sites have been located (Figure 22). Specific information on all shipwrecks can be found on the Australian National Shipwrecks Database.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 70 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.5 Current area management status

4.5.1 Marine protected areas Two areas of reserved land within the Bruny Bioregion are currently recognised as marine protected areas (MPAs). The Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve (Figure 24) are reserved under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 and may potentially contribute to the National Representative System of MPAs (NRSMPA). No fishing or setting of fishing gear is allowed in either area. Initial surveys of potential marine reserve sites in Tasmania tended to focus on rocky reefs, as these communities were considered to be more exploited than those on sand and mud substrate (Edgar 1981). The Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve was declared mainly to allow large fish to return to the area and to therefore increase the enjoyment of amateur divers. The Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve was declared to protect the diverse red algal and invertebrate communities which occur in water depths that are shallower than is typical for these species. Fishing was excluded to protect larger fish species that contribute to the interest of the area to divers. Prior to their establishment, it was recognised that these relatively small reserves (55 ha) would have less conservation significance than larger marine reserves but that they would have significant recreational value, being located near population centres (Edgar 1984a).

4.5.2 Reserved land A large amount of coastal land adjacent to the waters of the Bruny Bioregion, including some inter- tidal areas and waters below low water mark, is reserved land having the values and purposes of reservation defined within the Nature Conservation Act 2002 (Figure 25). Boundaries of reserved lands are shown on relevant plans in the Central Plan Register. In particular, the Tasman National Park and South Bruny National Park have extensive coastal boundaries to the bioregion. Other reserves with significant coastal boundaries are the (River) Derwent Conservation Area; Pitt Water Nature Reserve; Lime Bay State Reserve; South Arm Conservation Area; and Bruny Island Neck Game Reserve.

Figure 24 Tinderbox and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserves

Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 71 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 25 Reserved land adjacent to the coast, Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

Although not currently recognised as MPAs (or as marine reserves), parts of some predominantly terrestrial reserved land under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 encompass marine and estuarine areas within the Bruny Bioregion. Significant areas include the Pitt Water Nature Reserve; (River) Derwent Conservation Area; Ralphs Bay Conservation Area; South Arm Conservation Area; Chuckle Head Conservation Area; Bruny Island Neck Game Reserve; Port Cygnet Conservation Area; and small parts of South Bruny National Park (Figure 26).

The seaward boundary of many other areas of reserved land is the low water mark. Therefore parts of these inter-tidal areas may also potentially contribute to the NRSMPA.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 72 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 26 Notable marine and estuarine areas (i.e. below high water mark) of reserved land and public reserve within Bruny Bioregion

Pitt Water Nature Reserve and Seven Mile Beach (River) Derwent Conservation Area Protected Area

South Arm Conservation Area and Ralphs Bay Bruny Island Neck Game Reserve and Chuckle Conservation Area Head Conservation Area

Port Cygnet Conservation Area South Bruny National Park

Data source: Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment [Back to figures]

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 73 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.5.3 Public reserve A significant proportion of the Seven Mile Beach Protected Area, established as public reserve under the Crown Lands Act 1976, extends into waters of the Pitt Water estuary (Figure 26).

As with reserved land, the seaward boundary of some public reserves is the low water mark and therefore extends into marine and estuarine areas.

4.5.4 Fishing area restrictions A range of species and gear restrictions, established as fisheries rules under the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995, apply to areas within the Bruny Bioregion.

The Derwent River, Pitt Water, Blackman Bay, Frederick Henry Bay, Norfolk Bay, and the D’Entrecasteaux Channel (including North West Bay and the Huon River) are shark refuge areas (Figure 27). Shark refuge areas are established in areas where important habitat exists, where sharks can breed and find refuge and all species of sharks and rays are protected. The use of longlines, droplines and setlines is prohibited within shark refuge areas and various netting restrictions, specific to each area, also apply.

Outside of shark refuge areas, netting is prohibited within Cloudy Bay Lagoon and around Waterfall Bay and Patersons Arch (Tasman Peninsula). The use of rock lobster pots is prohibited within the Derwent River and D’Entrecasteaux Channel (including North West Bay and the Huon River). Fishing by diving, netting, potting and rings and the possession of rock lobster and abalone is prohibited in Taroona Waters (Crayfish Point) (Figure 27).

4.5.5 Municipal areas and planning schemes Nine main municipal areas in Tasmania have boundaries adjoining, and extending into, the waters of the Bruny Bioregion. Of these, the municipalities of Tasman, Kingborough, Clarence, Sorell and Huon Valley have relatively large boundaries adjacent to, and within, marine and estuarine waters within the region. Hobart, Glenorchy, Brighton and Derwent Valley municipalities adjoin the waters of the Derwent estuary (Figure 28). A very small part of the Glamorgan-Spring Bay municipality is adjacent to the bioregion near Hellfire Bluff.

In general, the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 provides for a municipality to exercise its powers in respect of, parts of the sea-shore to the low water mark; accretions from the sea; structures partly over the sea; and areas of the sea where any use or development (but not including fishing or marine farming) is related to, or affects, the use of adjacent land, that adjoin its municipal district. Notwithstanding this, the planning schemes of many municipalities have traditionally only extended to the high water mark, as these municipalities have failed to understand the actual extent of their planning powers.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 74 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 27 Netting and rock lobster potting restrictions and shark refuge areas in the Bruny Bioregion

Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water [Back to figures]

Planning schemes may make provisions which relate to the use, development, protection or conservation of land. Planning schemes are required to be consistent with adjacent planning schemes and have regard for the use and development of the region as an entity in environmental, economic and social terms. Where a municipality exercises its powers with respect of areas of the sea where any use or development (but not including fishing or marine farming) is related to, or affects, the use of adjacent land, the planning scheme is to be prepared in consultation with the Marine and Safety Authority Tasmania.

Common planning zones include rural, residential, industrial and open space. Planning zones within each planning scheme can be viewed at relevant council offices.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 75 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] Figure 28 Main municipal areas adjoining and within the Bruny Bioregion Data source: Department of Primary Industries and Water

[Back to figures] Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 76 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

4.6 Conclusions In accordance with the inquiry terms of reference and section 21 of the Act, the purpose of this Background Report is to describe (as far as is known) the resources of the land relevant to the area of public land within the Bruny Bioregion subject to the inquiry. This includes any environmental, cultural, social, industrial and economic values, and any existing commitments in respect of those resources. The Background Report presents information considered to be relevant to the identification and selection of marine protected areas, as described in the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy (the Strategy), within the Bruny Bioregion.

With respect to applying the principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness described in the Strategy, identifying and spatially defining (mapping) the full range of ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion at an appropriate scale is integral to the inquiry process. To this end, draft ecosystems for the Bruny Bioregion have been determined by a Reference Body established by the Commission and are described and mapped in Appendix 4.

Government agencies, community and other interest groups and individuals are invited to comment in writing on this Background Report. In particular, comments or additional information are sought that may be relevant to the identification and selection of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion, especially as they may relate to draft ecosystems (see Appendix 4, Table 2 and Figure 2). Submissions that refer to specific areas or places of special value are encouraged to include maps that indicate, as accurately as possible, the location of those areas.

Bruny Bioregion Resource Planning and Development Commission 77 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

5.0 Bibliography

ANZECC TFMPA (1998). Guidelines for Establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Task force on Marine Protected Areas. Environment Australia, Canberra. ANZECC TFMPA (1999). Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas: A Guide for Action by Australian Governments. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Task force on Marine Protected Areas. Environment Australia, Canberra. Barrett, N., Sanderson, J.C., Lawler, M., Halley, V. and Jordan, A. (2001). Mapping of inshore marine habitats in south-eastern Tasmania for marine protected area planning and marine management. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Report No. 7, 74p. Bryant, S. (2002). Conservation assessment of beach nesting and migratory shorebirds in Tasmania. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. NHT Project No NWP 11990. Butler, A., Harris, P., Lyne, V., Heap, A., Passlow, V., and Smith, R. (2001). An interim draft bioregionalisation for the continental slope and deeper waters of the South-east Marine Region of Australia. Report to the National Oceans Office, CSIRO Marine Research and Geoscience Australia. Butler, E. (in press). The tail of two rivers in Tasmania: The Derwent and Huon Estuaries. In: P.J.Wabgersky (ed.). Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 5: Water Pollution, Part H. Estuaries, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Butler, E., Parslow, J., Volkman, J., Blackburn, S., Morgan, P., Hunter, J., Clementson, L., Parker, N., Bailey, R., Berry, K., Bonham, P., Featherstone, A., Griffin, D., Higgins, H., Holdsworth, D., Latham, V., Leeming, R., McGhie, T., McKenzie, D., Plaschke, R., Revill, A., Sherlock, M., Trenerry, L., Turnbull, A., Watson, R., and Wilkes, L. (2000) CSIRO, Huon Estuary study, Environmental research for integrated catchment management and aquaculture. Project number 96/284. 285 p. Commonwealth of Australia (1992a). Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment. Department of the Arts, Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra. Commonwealth of Australia (1992b). National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Commonwealth of Australia (1996). National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity. Department of the Arts, Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra. Commonwealth of Australia (2003). Australia’s South-east Marine Region: A Users Guide to Identifying Candidate Areas for a Regional Representative System of Marine Protected Areas, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra.

Cooper, R.J., Langlois, D. and Olley, J (1982). Heavy metals in Tasmanian shellfish. 1. Monitoring heavy metal contamination in the Derwent estuary: Use of oysters and mussels. Journal of Applied Toxicology. 2, 99-109.

Bibliography Resource Planning and Development Commission 78 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

DPIWE (2002). Tasmanian Slipways Management Framework: Issues and Options Paper. Davies, P.E., Warfe, D., Parslow, J. and Telfer, D. (2002a). Environmental flows for the lower Derwent River. Final Report to DPIWE. 204 p. Edgar, G. (1981). An initial survey of potential marine reserves in Tasmania. National Parks and Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No.4. Edgar, G. (1984a). Marine life and potential marine reserves in Tasmania: part 2. National Parks and Wildlife service Occasional Paper No.7. Edgar, G.J. (1984b). General features of the ecology and biogeography of Tasmanian subtidal rocky shore communities. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 118, 173-186. Edgar, G.J, Moverley J, Peters D and Reed, C. (1995). Regional classification of Tasmanian coastal waters and preliminary identification of representative marine protected area sites. Ocean Rescue 2000 marine protected area program 1993/1994 Project No. D705, Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment and Land Management. Edgar, G.J, Moverley J, Barrett N.S, Peters D and Reed, C. (1997). The conservation related benefits of a systematic marine biological sampling programme: the Tasmanian reef bioregionalisation as a case study. Biological Conservation, 79, 227-240. Edgar, G.J., Barrett, N.S. and Graddon, D.J. (1999). A classification of Tasmanian estuaries and assessment of their conservation significance using ecological and physical attributes, population and land use. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Series Report 2,. 205 p. Environment Australia (2001). A directory of important wetlands in Australia. Third Edition. Environment Australia, Canberra. Harris, P, Heap, A, Passlow, V, Sbaffi, L, Fellows, M, Porter-Smith, R, Buchanan, C and Daniell, J. (2005). Geomorphic features of the continental margin of Australia. Geoscience Australia, Record 2003/30, 142 p. Henry, G.W. and Lyle, J.M. (2003). The national recreational and indigenous fishing survey. Final report to FRDC, Project 99/158. NSW Fisheries Final Report Series No. 48, 188p. IMCRA Technical Group (1998). Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia: An ecosystem-based classification for marine and coastal environments. Version 3.3. Environment Australia, Commonwealth Department of the Environment. Canberra. IUCN (1994). Guidelines for Protected Area Management Categories. Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas with the assistance of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Gland, Switzerland.

Jacques, M (1997). Dive Tasmania, : including Bass Strait and Macquarie Island. Gemini Publications, Hobart.

Jordan, A. (1997). Demersal trawl surveys of the continental shelf of southern and eastern Tasmania 1993-95. Technical Report of the Marine Research Laboratories, Tasmania Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. 50, 148 p.

Bibliography Resource Planning and Development Commission 79 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Jordan, A.R., Mills, D.M., Ewing, G. and Lyle, J.M. (1998). Assessment of inshore habitats around Tasmania for life-history stages of commercial finfish species. Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Final Report Project 95/037. 176p. Jordan, A., M. Lawler and V. Halley (2001). Estuarine habitat mapping in the Derwent – Integrating science and management. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute NHT Final Report, 67pp. Last, P. (1983). Aspects of the ecology and zoogeography of fishes from soft bottom habitats of the Tasmanian shore zone. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tasmania. Lyle, J.M. and Morton, A.J. (2004). Survey of the 2002/03 Tasmanian recreational rock lobster and abalone fisheries. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Report No. 22, 33p. Lyle, J.M. (2005). 2000/01 survey of recreational fishing in Tasmania. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Report No. 24, 97p. Lyle, J.M., Ziegler, P.E., Haddon, M., Tracey, S.R. and Burch, P. (2004). Tasmanian Scalefish Fishery – 2003. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Fishery Assessment Report, 88p. Morton, A.J. and Lyle, J.M. (2003). Preliminary assessment of the recreational gamefish fishery in Tasmania, with particular reference to southern bluefin tuna. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Report No. 21, 30p. Mount, R., Lucieer, V., Lawler, M. and Jordan, A. (2005). Mapping of estuarine and marine habitats in the southern NRM region. NHT Project No. 46937. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, 96p. Murphy, R and Lyle, J. (1999) Impact of gillnet fishing on inshore temperate reef fishes, with particular reference to banded morwong. Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Final Report Project 95/145. 135p. National Oceans Office (2004). South-east Regional Marine Plan, Implementing Australia’s Ocean Policy in the South-east Marine Region. National Oceans Office, Hobart. Pemberton, M. (2004). The geology, geomorphology and landscape evolution of Murrayfield, Bruny Island and adjacent areas. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Nature Conservation Report 04/1. Reid, T.A., Hindell, M.A., Eades, D.W. and Newman, N. (2002). Seabird atlas of south-eastern Australian waters. Birds Australia, East Hawthorn. Sanderson, C. (2000). Assessment of the distribution of the alga Cystoseira trinodis (Forsskal) C. Agardh in Blackman Bay. Unpublished report to the Threatened Species Unit, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Hobart. Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy (2001). Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, Hobart.

Bibliography Resource Planning and Development Commission 80 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

6.0 Glossary

Act (The) Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991

ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council

BAOI Broad Areas of Interest

CFEV Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystem Values

Commission (The) Resource Planning and Development Commission

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DPIW Department of Primary Industries and Water

DTAE Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

Guidelines (The) Guidelines for Establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas ha hectares

HOGG Head on, gilled and gutted

IMCRA Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia

IUCN World Conservation Union

KL kilolitre (1000 litres) km kilometre m metre m ($) million dollars

MFDP Marine Farming Development Plan

MAST Marine and Safety Tasmania

Minister (The) Minister for Environment and Planning

MPA Marine protected area nm nautical mile

NRSMPA National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas

OCS Offshore Constitutional Settlement

Ramsar The Convention on Wetlands Ramsar, Iran, 1971

RPDC Resource Planning and Development Commission

Strategic Plan (The) Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas

Glossary Resource Planning and Development Commission 81 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Strategy (The) Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy

TAFI Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute

Tasmanian waters Marine and tidal waters adjacent to Tasmania, from the high water mark to the three nm limit of coastal waters

TasPorts Tasmanian Ports Corporation Pty Ltd

TFMPA Task Force on Marine Protected Areas (ANZECC)

TSB Territorial Sea Baseline

UNCLOS 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

Glossary Resource Planning and Development Commission 82 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 1

Objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania 1. The objectives of the resource management and planning system of Tasmania are -

a) to promote the sustainable development of natural and physical resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity; and

b) to provide for the fair, orderly and sustainable use and development of air, land and water; and

c) to encourage public involvement in resource management and planning; and

d) to facilitate economic development in accordance with the objectives set out in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c); and

e) to promote the sharing of responsibility for resource management and planning between the different spheres of Government, the community and industry in the State.

2. In clause 1 (a), “sustainable development” means managing the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural well-being and for their health and safety while -

a) sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and

b) safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems; and

c) avoiding, remedying or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment.

Appendix 1 Resource Planning and Development Commission 83 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 2

Terms of reference The Terms of reference issued by the Minister are as follows:

“Pursuant to Section 14 of the Public Land (Administration of Forests) Act 1991, a reference is hereby issued to the Resource Planning and Development Commission. The Commission is to conduct an inquiry and make recommendations on the establishment of Marine Protected Areas in the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia Bioregion known as the Bruny Bioregion.

1. Description of the Land

That area of public land within the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia Bruny Bioregion as shown on the attached plan.

2. The Scope of the Inquiry

Acting pursuant to the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy, the inquiry is to:

(a) use the identification criteria contained within the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy to assess which of those areas of public land under investigation are suitable as potential Marine Protected Areas.

(b) use the selection criteria contained within the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy to select those areas of public land under investigation that are suitable for declaration as Marine Protected Areas.

(c) identify potential boundaries and arrangements for management of the areas of public land under investigation determined to be suitable for declaration as Marine Protected Areas as a result of completing (a) and (b) above.

(d) make recommendations to the Minister for Environment and Planning on the following matters:

(i) those areas of public land under investigation which meet the identification and selection criteria contained within the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy, and are suitable for declaration as Marine Protected Areas;

(ii) the potential boundaries of any area of public land under investigation determined to be suitable for declaration as a Marine Protected Area;

(iii) the potential arrangements for management of any area of public land under investigation determined to be suitable for declaration as a Marine Protected Area.

Appendix 2 Resource Planning and Development Commission 84 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3. Matters to be taken into account

In arriving at its recommendations the Commission is to take into account the following:

(a) the marine habitat mapping which has been carried out in the bioregion.

(b) the existing Marine Protected Areas within the Bruny bioregion (Tinderbox Marine Nature Reserve and Ninepin Point Marine Nature Reserve).

(c) whether any areas within the public land under investigation that are subject to existing fisheries management restrictions, can be established as a Marine Protected Area, or form part thereof.

(d) whether the provision of different management zones, allowing for differing forms of activity are an appropriate means of managing the area, when identifying potential arrangements for management.

4. Recommendations Report

In the final recommendations report to the Minister for Environment and Planning, the Commission is to provide a range of alternatives giving, in each case, its advantages and disadvantages.

5. Date of Submission of Final Recommendations

The Commission is to provide its Final Recommendations to the Minister by 30 November 2006.”

Appendix 2 Resource Planning and Development Commission 85 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 2 Resource Planning and Development Commission 86 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 3

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy

Appendix 3 Resource Planning and Development Commission 87 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Draft Recommendations Report [Back to contents]

88 [Back to contents] Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy

DEPARTMENT of PRIMARY INDUSTRIES, WATER and ENVIRONMENT Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Published by the Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania [Back to contents] ISBN 0724662677

Recommended Citation: Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy, Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, Hobart.

© 2001 Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania

This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Commonwealth Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Inquiries should be directed to the General Manager, Strategic Issues and Programs, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, GPO Box 44, Hobart, TAS, 7001.

Disclaimer Any representation, statement, opinion or advice, expressed or implied in this publication is made in good faith but on the basis that the Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, its agents and employees are not liable (whether by reason of negligence, lack of care or otherwise) to any person for any damage or loss whatsoever which has occurred or may occur in relation to that person taking or not taking (as the case may be) action in respect of any representation, statement or advice referred to herein. Table of Contents [Back to contents] Introduction 3

Marine and Marine Industries Council 4

Marine Ecosystem Management in Tasmania 5

Representative System of Marine Protected Areas 6

Primary Goal 6

Secondary Goals 6

Ecological 6

Economic 6

Social 7

Scientific 7

Principles 7

What is a Marine Protected Area? 8

Development of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas 11

How are Marine Protected Areas Identified and Selected 12

Key Steps in the Development of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas 14

Criteria for Identification of Marine Protected Areas 16

Criteria for Selection of Marine Protected Areas 18

Establishment and Management of Marine Protected Areas 19

Public Education and Consultation 20

Review of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas 21

Glossary 23

Appendix 1 24

International Union for the Conservation of Nature Guidelines for

Protected Area Management Categories 24

Appendix 2 25

Potential types of Marine Protected Area within Tasmania’s existing

marine ecosystem management framework 25

Suggested Further Reading 26

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 91 [Back to contents]

92 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Introduction Tasmania has a spectacular coastline and diverse [Back to contents] marine environment which combine to form an integral part of the lifestyle of many Tasmanians. In recognition of the importance of the marine environment to the During the year 2000 a new large marine people of Tasmania, the Government is committed reserve was created in Tasmanian State to ensuring the long-term ecological viability of waters around Macquarie Island. This reserve the marine environment, and the protection of its comprises some 75,000 hectares. biological diversity. There has been an increasing recognition The geographical position and varying climatic in the Tasmanian community of the need to conditions of Tasmania, together with the influence better protect parts of the marine environment, of ocean currents, combine to produce a marine in a similar manner to the way in which parts of environment recognised as one of the most the terrestrial environment are protected. The biologically diverse in the world. The coast of increasing recognition of the value and vulnerability Tasmania includes rocky reefs, sandy beaches, sea of our offshore waters, together with Tasmania’s cliffs, headlands, estuaries, natural harbours and active involvement in the development of a National open coasts. The marine environment contains a Representative System of Marine Protected Areas, rich variety of marine life that includes kelp forests, has resulted in the need for a more formal and seagrass beds and sponge gardens each with their systematic approach to the protection of the own communities of fish and invertebrates. It is Tasmanian marine environment. the home of many commercially important species including abalone and rock lobster. It also hosts a range of special creatures from sea dragons and fairy penguins to great white sharks and migrating whales. Protection of Tasmania’s coastal areas commenced in 1916 with the declaration of the Freycinet National Park. Since then, many terrestrial areas have been set aside to protect physical and biological features, however, these rarely extended beyond the shoreline. In 1991 the Tasmanian Government announced a strategy for marine conservation, and declared four marine reserves as a result. These marine reserves include three small areas – Governor Island, Ninepin Point and Tinderbox – and one larger area off Maria Island.

photo: Jon Bryan

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 93 Marine and Marine Industries Council The Marine and Marine Industries Council (MMIC) was established by the Minister for Primary Industries, Water and Environment in August 1999, with its first task being the development of a policy framework for a system of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. The members of the Marine and Marine Industries Council represent a range of key stakeholders, and have individual expertise in areas such as marine conservation, management and utilisation. The chairman of the Marine and Marine Industries Council is Mr Tony Harrison, a marine management consultant.

Name Representing Mr Peter Bosworth 5 Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment Mr Jon Bryan Tasmanian Conservation Trust Professor Colin Buxton Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania Mr Owen Carington Smith Tasmanian Aquaculture Council Mr John Cocker Australian Underwater Federation Mr Colin Dyke Tasmanian Aquaculture Council Dr Graham Edgar Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania Mr Tony J Harrison (Chair) Independent Chairman Mr Bob Lister Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council Mr Michael Lynch Tasmanian Conservation Trust Mr Michael Mansell 1 Tasmanian Aboriginal Cultural Fishing Advisory Committee Mr Mark O’May Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council Mr Jim Rees 3 Marine Recreational Fishery Council Mr Stuart Richey Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council Mr Alex Schaap 2 Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment Ms Dianne Snowden Community Representative Inspector Hank Timmerman 4 Department of Police and Public Safety Mr Malcolm Wells Department of State Development Notes: 1 Mr Michael Mansell resigned and was replaced by Mr Greg Brown 2 Mr Alex Schaap resigned and was replaced by Mr Dennis Witt 5 3 Mr Jim Rees resigned and was replaced by Mr Chris White 4 Inspector Hank Timmerman resigned and was replaced by Inspector Steve Williams 5 Mr Peter Bosworth and Mr Dennis Witt resigned and were replaced by Mr Glenn Appleyard

94 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Marine Ecosystem Management in Tasmania Australia’s governments are working together to set up a National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas throughout Australia’s entire marine zone. The aim of which is to protect areas that represent all of or control fishing activities within the marine the major ecological regions and the communities of environment, even if a part of that environment plants and animals they contain. is reserved under that Act. Marine reserves are therefore established under both the National Australia’s marine and coastal organisms have Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 and Living Marine been classified by the Interim Marine and Coastal Resources Management Act 1995. Regionalisation of Australia (IMCRA) into 60 different areas, or bioregions. Each contains Within this marine management framework, distinct combinations of biological and physical Tasmania has declared five marine reserves: features. Through this process, Tasmania’s inshore Governor Island Marine Nature Reserve, Ninepin hard rocky reefs have been classified into eight Point Marine Nature Reserve, Tinderbox Marine bioregions. The Interim Marine and Coastal Nature Reserve, Maria Island National Park, and Regionalisation for Australia provides the template Macquarie Island Nature Reserve. These marine and the scientific base on which governments can reserves are reserved under the National Parks and select marine areas for the national system. Wildlife Act 1970, and the fish within the reserves are protected under the Living Marine Resources With the development of a systems based Management Act 1995. The present marine reserves approach to the conservation and management comprise 3.4 % of State waters. of the marine environment at the national level, the somewhat ad hoc approach to the reservation Since the development of the Marine Reserves of marine protected areas in Tasmania needs to be Strategy in 1991, and the subsequent declaration reviewed. This Strategy is the result of such a review, of five marine reserves, there has been and recommends a systems based approach for the no substantial progress in relation to the protection of the Tasmanian marine environment. development of a Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. In fact, Currently, Tasmania’s marine environment and the the 1991 Marine Reserves Strategy did not activities within the marine environment are managed set out a clear framework for progressing through a range of legislation and State Policies. The a system of marine reserves, but major pieces of legislation are: Living Marine Resources concentrated on individual reserves. Management Act 1995; National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970; Marine Farming Planning Act 1995; and Environmental Recognition of the need for a clear Management and Pollution Control Act 1994. The two framework to guide progress, together relevant State Policies are the State Coastal Policy 1996, and with a strong impetus nationally for the the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997. cooperative establishment of a National Representative System of Marine The purpose of the Living Marine Resources Management Protected Areas, forms the basis for the Act 1995 is to promote the sustainable management of living development of this new comprehensive marine resources, make provision for the development of Marine Protected Areas Strategy. This management plans for fish resources, and the protection Strategy will provide the framework for the of marine habitats. There are currently a number of areas identification, selection and establishment established for fisheries management purposes under of new marine reserves in Tasmania, which the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995. These together will form a Representative System areas provide varying levels of protection to the marine of Marine Protected Areas for the State, and plants and animals, and include recreational fishing contribute to the National Representative areas, no netting or restricted fishing areas, and shark System of Marine Protected Areas. nursery waters. This Strategy has been developed in The purpose of the National Parks and Wildlife the context of recognition that area based Act 1970 is to make provision for the establishment conservation does not of itself ensure that marine and management of National Parks and other conservation and management objectives are met. reserves and for the conservation and A combination of on and off reserve management protection of the fauna and flora of Tasmania. is central to achieving those objectives. Tasmania is The National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 can more fortunate than most jurisdictions in having a robust protect and manage selected areas of the management framework for key issues such as fishery marine environment in a similar manner exploitation and aquaculture development. to terrestrial areas. However, the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 can not be used to protect fish,

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 95 Primary Goal Representative System of Marine Recognising the Tasmanian Resource Management and Planning System, the primary goal of the Tasmanian Protected Areas Marine Protected Areas Strategy is: Effective marine biodiversity conservation is to establish and manage a comprehensive, adequate and recognised both nationally and internationally representative system of marine protected areas, to as relying on two basic strategies: contribute to the long-term ecological viability of marine (i) the establishment of a representative and estuarine systems, to maintain ecological processes system of Marine Protected Areas, and and systems, and to protect Tasmania’s biological (ii) the ecologically sustainable management of diversity. natural resources. The Tasmanian Government recognises the need to formally conserve and protect the full range of marine ecosystems, habitats and species that occur along Tasmania’s coast. The need also extends to include the conservation and protection of significant physical natural features and seascapes, marine and cultural heritage, and aesthetic and wilderness values, together with providing specific sites for education and recreation, and scientific research and monitoring. The Tasmanian Government also recognises that no Marine Protected Area will be sustainable if established or managed in isolation. There are biological, social and economic interactions between different places and components of the marine system that are an integral part of any Strategy. Approaching the conservation and management of a Marine Protected Area by evaluating the whole system is a necessary part of striking an appropriate balance between conservation and development, and between the differing management emphasis required for areas within the Marine Protected Area. Given this, a set of goals and principles have been developed to guide the establishment of a Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania which is comprehensive, adequate and representative of the Tasmanian marine environment. Secondary Goals The development of the comprehensive, representative and adequate system of Marine Protected Areas outlined in this Strategy is also guided by a series of secondary goals. These secondary goals are aimed at particular management goals of the system, and are not hierarchical in nature or application. Ecological ∑• To protect threatened, rare, or endangered species, or ecological communities, and in particular, habitats considered critical for the survival of such species. ∑• To provide for special groups of organisms, eg. species with complex habitat requirements, mobile or migratory species, and species vulnerable to disturbance which may depend on reservation for their conservation. ∑• To protect areas of: (i) high species diversity; (ii) natural refugia for flora and fauna; and (iii) centres of endemism. ∑• To facilitate the restoration of degraded marine ecosystems. Economic ∑• To protect and manage: (i) habitats of significance to the life-cycles of economically important species; and (ii) habitats, species and seascapes of importance to recreation and tourism. ∑• To provide a formal management framework for a broad spectrum of human activities, including recreation, tourism and the use or extraction of resources, that are compatible with the primary goal.

96 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Social • To protect and manage significant geological, archaeological, historical and cultural sites. • To protect the natural aesthetic values of marine and estuarine areas. • To cater for the management of marine areas and species in partnership with indigenous communities. ∑• To achieve the support and cooperation of the community, and to facilitate the interpretation of marine and estuarine systems for the purposes of conservation, recreation and public education. Scientific ∑• To provide for reference sites for scientific • Precautionary Principle – the absence of studies, including sites for baseline fisheries scientific certainty should not be a reason for monitoring and long-term environmental postponing measures to establish Marine Protected monitoring. Areas to protect representative ecosystems. If an activity is assessed as having a low risk of causing Principles serious or irreversible adverse impacts, or if there is insufficient information with which to assess The Representative System of Marine Protected fully and with certainty the magnitude and nature Areas in Tasmania should be developed in of impacts, decision making should proceed in a accordance with the following principles. conservative and cautious manner. • Regional Framework – the Interim Marine • Consultation – the process of and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia provides identification and selection of Marine the regional planning framework for developing the Protected Areas will include effective public Representative System of Marine Protected Areas consultation with appropriate community in Tasmania, with ecosystems used as the basis for and interest groups, to address current and determining representativeness. future social, economic and cultural issues. • Comprehensiveness – the Representative System • Indigenous Involvement – the of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania will include the full interests of Australia’s indigenous people range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale should be recognised and incorporated in within and across each bioregion. decision making. • Adequacy – the Representative System of Marine • Displacement – the Tasmanian Protected Areas in Tasmania will have the required level of Government recognises the importance reservation to ensure the ecological viability and integrity of displacement issues. To address these of populations, species and communities. issues, the Tasmanian Government has • Representativeness – those marine areas that are agreed to establish a process for providing selected for inclusion in Marine Protected Areas should special adjustment payments on a case by reasonably reflect the biotic diversity of the marine case basis (ex poste) to certain individuals ecosystems from which they derive. directly affected by a Marine Protected Area. • Highly Protected Areas – the Representative • Decision Making – decision making System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania will processes should effectively integrate both aim to include some highly protected areas (IUCN long-term and short-term environmental, Categories I and II) in each bioregion. economic, social and equity considerations. In adopting the above principles it is recognised that they may be amended in light of new information and issues. For example, it is recognised that the definition of bioregions under the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia is interim and is based upon the best available information. As an ongoing iterative process, it will be subject to change in light of new information.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 97 What is a Marine Protected Area? A Marine Protected Area within the Tasmanian system is defined in the following manner. An area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means (International Union for the Conservation of Nature 1994).

98 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy A number of key characteristics will define Marine Protected Areas that form the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania, as compared to other marine managed areas. The characteristics are that a Marine Protected Area: The categories are not designed to drive • has been established for the conservation of the development of protected area systems biodiversity (consistent with the primary goal); but to provide an international system of ∑• is able to be classified into one or more of the categorisation to facilitate understanding. six International Union for the Conservation They are not a commentary on management of Nature (IUCN) Protected Area Management effectiveness and should be interpreted with Categories (refer to Appendix 1) reflecting the flexibility at national and regional levels. Marine values and objectives of the Marine Protected Protected Areas should be established to meet Area; objectives consistent with national or regional ∑• must have secure status which can only be goals and needs and only then be assigned an revoked by a Parliamentary process; and International Union for the Conservation of ∑• contributes to the representativeness, Nature (IUCN) category according to the agreed comprehensiveness or adequacy of the management objectives. Tasmanian System. The current marine management framework of The Strategy recognises that Marine Protected Tasmania provides for five possible types of Marine Areas can be established for a variety of Protected Area. The Living Marine Resources management purposes and provide for a range of Management Act 1995 provides for one type, known activities while still protecting the environment. For as a Marine Resources Protected Area, and the example, Marine Protected Areas can be reserved National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 provides for for conservation, fisheries management, research, the remaining four types: Nature Reserve, State education, social and historical importance, tourism Reserve, National Park or Conservation Area or recreational use – or a combination of any of these. (refer to Appendix 2). Recognising the range of purposes for the establishment of a Marine Protected Area, and the need for a system that enables a national and internationally consistent scheme of management types, the Tasmanian Government has adopted the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Protected Area Management Categories (refer to Appendix 1). These categories provide a uniform classification which both identifies the principal management objectives of the protected area, as well as acknowledging that other secondary uses and values can be conserved through reservation. There are six International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Protected Area Management Categories into which a Marine Protected Area, or parts thereof, can be classified. Categories I and II are highly protected, or no take areas, Category III is a limited use area, and Categories IV–VI are multiple use areas. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Management Categories provide for large Marine Protected Areas to contain identifiable zones of different categories dependent on the management objectives and the levels of protection applying to those zones. It also allows for the nesting of Marine Protected Areas of different categories.

photo: Jon Bryan

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 99 100 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Development of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas The principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness have been adopted by the Tasmanian Government to guide the development of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. Put simply, to be comprehensive the system of Marine Protected Areas will include the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion of Tasmania. The adequacy of the system will be measured against the requirement that the level of protection will ensure the ecological viability and integrity of populations, species and communities. In order to be representative the system will include Marine Protected Areas selected on the basis that they reasonably reflect the biological diversity of the ecosystem from which they derive. An essential step in the conservation and management of the marine environment is the determination of biogeographic regions. This allows a vast area to be partitioned into smaller units on the basis of the ecosystems contained within each biogeographic or ecological unit. In natural ecosystems an understanding of the patterns of biodiversity, particularly habitat biodiversity, is essential for identifying an ecologically or biogeographically representative system of protected areas. The Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia classifies and partitions the Australian marine organisms into various biogeographic regions. This process has identified eight inshore rocky reef bioregions within Tasmanian waters. The bioregions are: Otway, Twofold Shelf, Flinders, Boags, Freycinet, Bruny, Davey and Franklin. The map opposite illustrates the location and extent of each of these bioregions. The Tasmanian Government recognises that the successful establishment of a Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania is dependent upon a transparent, accountable and consultative process (Refer to page 12-13). Therefore it is proposed that the Tasmanian system will be established using the twelve step process outlined in this Strategy. This process will allow Marine Protected Areas to be identified, selected and established using the best available scientific information, and through a process that the Tasmanian community can easily understand and actively participate in.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 101 How are Marine Protected Areas Identified and Selected? The identification and selection process outlined in this Strategy provides a transparent and rigorous identification and selection process, in which decisions will be based on scientific, economic and social information. The identification and selection process will also consider safety issues including access to fishing grounds for small vessels, access to safe anchorage and for movement of vessels in Marine Protected Areas, in accordance with International Law. This is vital for the ongoing growth and acceptance of the Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas.

102 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy The Tasmanian Government is committed to establishing a Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas which will have broad based community support. There will be a number of opportunities for the community and other stakeholders to contribute to the process of identification and selection of Marine The success of the Tasmanian System Protected Areas. of Marine Protected Areas depends not only on a formal and inclusive process for The aim of the identification and selection the identification and selection of Marine process is to meet the primary goal of establishing Protected Areas, but also the body who carries and managing a comprehensive, adequate and out the identification and selection process. representative system of Marine Protected Areas, With this in mind the Tasmanian Government will whilst taking into account and minimising any appoint the Resource Planning and Development negative impact on social, cultural and economic Commission to carry out the identification and values. selection process for Marine Protected Areas. The The identification and selection process is Resource Planning and Development Commission made up of a number of stages. Conservation may appoint Assistant Commissioners with relevant and ecological qualities are the primary values expertise to assist with the task. for identifying potential areas. The selection The criteria that follow are important. All criteria take into account broader issues such areas being considered for inclusion in the as economic, social and cultural values of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas area. It is recognised that some areas are subject need to be assessed against all criteria however, to statutory obligations and entitlements and in not all criteria will be equally relevant in all cases. selecting Marine Protected Areas these must be acknowledged and considered. The first stage is the assessment of scientific information about Tasmania’s State waters to identify areas for potential Marine Protected Areas using the identification criteria outlined in this Strategy (Steps 1–7). The results of this stage will then be discussed with Tasmanians, and their input incorporated into the finalisation of the first stage. The second stage (Steps 8–9) is the application of the selection criteria listed in this Strategy to those potential Marine Protected Areas identified as a result of stage one. This selection process will be conducted on a bioregional basis. The results of this stage will also be discussed with the community and their input incorporated in the final recommendations to the Minister for Primary Industries, Water and Environment, for the establishment of Marine Protected Areas within each bioregion.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 103 Key Steps in the Development of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas

Step 1 The Minister issues a terms of reference to the Resource Planning and Development Commission, which then conducts public consultation on the terms of reference. Step 2 Gather data at the bioregion level, including ecosystem mapping. Step 3 Using Tasmanian identification criteria, identify a list of candidate Marine Protected Areas within Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregions to represent major ecosystems. This will include an evaluation of all areas subject to existing fisheries management restrictions. Step 4 Identification of threatening processes such as human activities and natural occurrences that can cause some of the following effects: habitat destruction; species removal and disturbance; pollution (heavy metals, oil spills and toxic chemicals); and run off. Step 5 Assess the comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness of ecosystems and habitats in existing Marine Protected Areas within each Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregion. Step 6 Develop priorities for Marine Protected Areas at the bioregional and ecosystem level, based on results of steps 4 and 5. Step 7 Develop additional criteria for identification and selection of Marine Protected Areas if required. Step 8 Select and prioritise sites for Marine Protected Areas from a candidate list of Marine Protected Areas using Tasmanian selection criteria, and any other additional criteria developed in step 7 and identify arrangements for management, funding and enforcement. Step 9 Assess feasibility of potential Marine Protected Areas and negotiate new protected areas. Step 10 The Resource Planning and Development Commission provides to the Minister a final recommendations report on potential Marine Protected Areas based on the completion of steps 2-9 inclusive. Step 11 Obtain Cabinet approval for final management arrangements and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Categories (IUCN) based on management objectives, values and resources identified in this step, and Establish Marine Protected Areas. Step 12 Undertake management tasks, including ongoing evaluation and review of Marine Protected Areas.

The steps outlined above are not necessarily a sequence as many of the tasks may be performed simultaneously. In addition, all will involve feedback loops as the process is continual. The relationship between these steps is illustrated opposite.

104 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Reference to RPDC (step 1)

Public Consultation

Gather bioregional data (step 2)

Identify potential MPAs Identify risks to environment Assess existing MPAs (step 3) (step 4) (step 5) Identification

Public Consultation Develop bioregional priorities for MPAs (step 6) Additional identification and selection criteria MPAs (step 7) Select and prioritise MPAs (step 8)

Assess feasibility of MPAs (step 9)

Selection Public Consultation

RPDC final recommendations to the Minister (step 10)

Public Consultation Cabinet approval for the establishment of MPAs and IUCN categories including any displacement issues (step 11)

Establishment Undertake ongoing management of MPAs (step 12)

RPDC = Resource Planning and Development Commission MPA = Marine Protected Area IUCN = International Union for Conservation of Nature Categories

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 105 Criteria for Identification of Marine Protected Areas The identification of potential Marine Protected Areas to form part of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania will be conducted through a formal process, with each potential Marine Protected Area being measured against clearly enunciated identification criteria.

The identification criteria adopted by the Tasmanian Government are as follows. Comprehensiveness ∑• Adds to the coverage of the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion. ∑• Enhances the comprehensive nature of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. Adequacy ∑• The size of the area, its boundaries and location are adequate to ensure that its biological and ecological values can be protected and managed and the impact of activities can be minimised. Representativeness ∑• Represents one or more ecosystems within an Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregion. ∑• Enhances the representative nature of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas in Tasmania. Ecological Importance • Contributes to maintenance of essential ecological processes or life-support systems. • Contains habitat for rare or endangered species. ∑• Preserves genetic diversity, ie. is diverse or abundant in species. ∑• Contains areas on which other species or other systems are dependent, eg. contain nursery or juvenile areas or feeding, breeding or rest areas for migratory species. ∑• Contains one or more areas which are a biologically functional, self-sustaining ecological unit. International or National Significance ∑• Is listed, or has the potential to be listed, on the World or National Heritage List or declared as a Biosphere Reserve or subject to an international or national conservation agreement. Uniqueness ∑• Contains unique species, populations, communities or ecosystems. ∑• Contains unique or unusual geographic features.

106 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Productivity • Do the species, populations, or communities of the area have a high natural productivity. Vulnerability Assessment • Contains ecosystems and/or communities vulnerable to natural processes. Biogeographic Importance ∑• Captures important biogeographical qualities. Naturalness • Extent to which the area has been protected from, or not been subject to, human-induced change.

photo: Jon Bryan

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 107 Criteria for Selection of Marine Protected Areas Once potential Marine Protected Areas have been identified through the identification process, the selection of individual Marine Protected Areas to form part of the Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas will occur. Like the identification process, the selection of Marine Protected Areas will be done via the application of a series of formal selection criteria set out in this Strategy.

The formal selection process for Marine Protected Areas involves assessing each potential Marine Protected Area against the following criteria. Economic Interests ∑• Existing or potential contribution to economic value by virtue of its protection, eg. for recreation or tourism, or as a refuge or nursery area, or source of supply for economically important species. ∑• Current or potential use for the extraction of, or exploration for resources. ∑• Importance for shipping and/or trade. • Value due to its contribution to local or regional employment and economic development. Indigenous Interests • Traditional usage and/or current economic value. ∑• Contains indigenous cultural values. ∑• Native title considerations. Social Interests • Existing or potential value to the local, national or international communities because of its heritage, cultural, traditional, aesthetic, educational, recreational, or economic values. Scientific Interests ∑• Existing or potential value for research and monitoring. Practicality/Feasibility ∑• Degree of insulation from external destructive influences. • Social and political acceptability, and a degree of community support. • Access for recreation, tourism, education. • Lends itself to practical management (cost effectiveness, compliance etc.). Vulnerability Assessment • Extent to which the site is vulnerable and susceptible to human induced changes and threatening processes. Replication ∑• Provides a replication of ecosystems within a Marine Protected Area within the bioregion.

108 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Establishment and Management of Marine Protected Areas The declaration of new Marine Protected Areas as a result of the implementation of the comprehensive, systems based framework set out in this Strategy, will combine to provide Tasmania with a Representative System of Marine Protected Areas. The Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 will be utilised to establish new Marine Protected Areas (see Appendix 2). The Government is committed to the ongoing assessment of the performance of Marine Protected Areas in meeting the objectives for which they were declared. To meet this commitment the Government, through the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment and the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, will undertake a regular monitoring and research program at two levels. The first level of the program will involve a performance assessment of each individual Marine Protected Area. The second level will be an investigation into the effectiveness of the Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas as a whole.

The program will involve an assessment of how each Marine Protected Area is being used, by way of surveillance or activity monitoring together with undertaking ongoing scientific research, to provide information on the condition of the Marine Protected Areas and the impacts of both human use and natural occurrences. The results of monitoring and research will then be fed into the management planning process, and will thus ensure that the management plan of each Marine Protected Area is based on the most up to date information available.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 109 Public Education and

Consultation Tasmania’s marine resources form an essential part of the State’s economic and cultural heritage. Through the development of this Strategy, the Tasmanian Government has recognised the need to formally conserve and protect the full range of marine ecosystems, habitats and species that occur along Tasmania’s coast. It also recognises that the effective management of these resources is a shared responsibility between government, users and the wider community. The early involvement and active participation o f d i r e c t and indirect users of the marine environment, and the community in general, is crucial to the successful development, implementation and management of a Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas. Education and awareness of this Strategy is therefore of the utmost importance. All parties must be well informed. The aims of the Strategy must be clearly defined and understood. It is essential that all stakeholders who may be involved in, or affected by, Marine Protected Area development and/or management and the suite of issues that relate to them, be identified and a consultation and education process established. Consultation and education engenders a sense of stewardship and increases the ability of stakeholders to provide informed contributions. It also enables decision makers to have a good understanding of the concerns and values of stakeholders. This Strategy recommends that the education priorities for the Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas are as follows. ∑ • Develop an education and community awareness program to promote Tasmania’s marine biodiversity, habitats and ecosystems. ∑ • Develop an education and community awareness program to promote the role and benefits of establishing Marine Protected Areas. ∑• Investigate and support opportunities to establish community-based monitoring and awareness programs (such as ‘Dragon Search’, ‘Reef Watch’) as tools to raise community awareness of Tasmanian’s diverse marine environments. The awareness and education component of the program will develop different types of materials for different audiences, including schools, resource users, government agencies, community and various non government groups. A wide range of education tools can be used, for example, public meetings, brochures, booklets and educational videos.

110 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Review of the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas

The Tasmanian Government, stakeholders and community will review the policy framework for the establishment of the Tasmanian Representative System of Marine Protected Areas outlined in this Strategy five years after the finalisation of the Strategy. This review will ensure that the policy framework outlined in this Strategy continues to provide the most effective process for the development of Marine Protected Areas within Tasmanian State waters.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 111 112 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Glossary Adequacy The maintenance of the ecological viability and integrity of populations, species and communities. Baseline The territorial sea baseline is the line from which the seaward limits of Australia’s maritime zones or has not been subject to human-induced are measured. change. Biodiversity The variety of life forms – the different Replication The principle that if more than one plants, animals and micro-organisms, the genes they sample of an ecosystem is reserved across its contain, and the ecosystems they form. It is usually geographic range this will decrease the likelihood considered at three levels: genetic diversity, that chance events will cause the ecosystem to species diversity and ecosystem diversity. decline. Bioregion or Biogeographic Region A Representativeness Those marine areas that complex area (land/sea) composed of a cluster are selected for inclusion in reserves should of interacting ecosystems that are repeated in reasonably reflect the biotic diversity of the marine similar form throughout. Region descriptions seek ecosystems from which they derive. to describe the dominant land/sea scape in terms State waters State waters are (a) any waters of of a hierarchy of interacting biophysical attributes. the territorial sea of Australia that are (i) within 3 Biogeographic regions vary in size, with larger nautical miles of the baseline by reference to which regions found where areas have more subdued the territorial limits of Australia are defined for the environmental gradients. These are defined and purposes of international law; and (ii) adjacent to delineated at the meso-scale. the State; and (b) any marine or tidal waters that Comprehensiveness Includes the full range of are on the landward side of that baseline and ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within are adjacent to the State, except inland waters; and across each bioregion. and (c) any land which is swept by those waters to the highest landward extent; and (d) in Conservation The protection, maintenance, relation to a fishery managed under a law of management, sustainable use, restoration and Tasmania under an arrangement, any waters enhancement of the natural environment. to which the arrangement relates; and (e) Ecosystem A dynamic complex of plant, animal and in relation to recreational fishing to which micro-organism communities and their non-living the Commonwealth Act does not apply, environment interacting as a functional unit. any waters to which the legislative powers of Tasmania extend. In relation to a fishery IMCRA The Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for managed under law other than a law of Australia is an ecosystem based classification for marine Tasmania under an arrangement, State and coastal environments. It provides ecologically based waters do not include any waters to which regionalisations at the mesoscale (100–1000 km) and at a that arrangement relates. provincial scale (greater than 1000 km). In summary: this means the near coastal Inshore The near coastal waters extending from the waters extending from the coastline and coastline and estuaries out to 3 nautical miles seaward estuaries out to 3 nautical miles seaward of of the baseline, which is the boundary of the State and the baseline. Territory waters. Threatened species and/or ecological International Union for the Conservation communities A species or ecological of Nature Guidelines for Protected Area community that is vulnerable or endangered. Management Categories Nationally and Internationally recognised categories for marine Threatening processes The dominant protected areas. See Appendix 1 for full explanation limiting factors and constraints to the ongoing of the different categories. conservation of biodiversity. Marine Protected Area An area of land and/ Viability The likelihood of long-term survival of the or sea especially dedicated to the protection example/population of the particular ecosystem or and maintenance of biological diversity, species under consideration. and of natural and associated cultural Vulnerability The predisposition of an area to a resources, and managed through legal or threatening process. other effective means. Naturalness The extent to which an area has been protected from,

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 113 Appendix 1 International Union for the Conservation of Nature Guidelines for Protected Area Management Categories Category Ia Strict Nature Reserve: Protected Area managed mainly for science Area of land and/or sea possessing some outstanding or representative ecosystems, geological or physiological features and/or species, available primarily for scientific research and/or environmental monitoring. Category Ib Wilderness Area: Protected Area managed mainly for wilderness protection Large area of unmodified or slightly modified land and/or sea, retaining its natural character and influence, without permanent or significant habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural condition. Category II National Park: Protected Area managed mainly for ecosystem conservation and recreation Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for this and future generations, (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible. Category III Natural Monument: Protected Area managed for conservation of specific natural features Area containing one or more specific natural or natural/cultural feature which is of outstanding value because of its inherent rarity, representative or aesthetic qualities or cultural significance. Category IV Habitat/Species Management Area: Protected Area managed mainly for conservation through management intervention Area of land and/or sea subject to active intervention for management purposes so as to ensure the maintenance of habitats and/or to meet the requirements of specific species. Category V Protected Landscape/Seascape: Protected Areas managed mainly for landscape/seascape conservation and recreation Area of land, with coast and seas as appropriate, where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant aesthetic, cultural and/or ecological value, and often with high biological diversity. Safeguarding the integrity of this traditional interaction is vital to the protection, maintenance and evolution of such an area. Category VI Managed Resource Protected Areas: Protected Area managed mainly for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems Area containing predominantly unmodified natural systems, managed to ensure long term protection and maintenance of biological diversity, while providing at the same time a sustainable flow of natural products and services to meet community needs.

For further information regarding the objectives of each of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) management categories outlined above, please refer to Appendix Three of the publication titled, Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas: A Guide for Action by Australian Governments. A full reference for this publication can be found in the list of Suggested Further Reading on page 26 of this Strategy.

114 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy Appendix 2 Potential types of Marine Protected Area within Tasmania’s existing marine ecosystem management framework Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 Marine Resources Protected Area An area established for any or all of the following purposes: • the protection of representative samples of marine and estuarine habitats and ecosystems; • the maintenance of fish species and genetic diversity; • the protection of sites of ecological significance or fragility; • the protection of biological productivity of fish species through enhanced egg production and settlement within, and propagation from, the area; • the protection of vulnerable fish species and their habitats; • the establishment of scientific reference area; • public education in the resources, protection and use of the marine environment. Establishment Process The Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 provides for the establishment of a Marine Protected Area as a marine resources protected area by the Minister for Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Before the Minister establishes a marine resources protected area, a draft marine resources protected area management plan is prepared and approved. The marine resources protected area management plan is released for public comment prior to its approval. National Parks and Wildlife Act 1970 Nature Reserve An area of land that contains natural values that contribute to the natural biological diversity or geological diversity of the area of land, or both; and are unique, important or have representative value. The purposes of reservation are the conservation of the natural biological diversity or geological diversity of the area of land, or both, and the conservation of the natural values of that area of land that are unique, important or have representative value. State Reserve An area of land containing any of the following: ∑• significant natural landscapes; • natural features; • signs, objects or places of significance to Aboriginal people.

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy 115 Suggested Further Reading Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, 2000, Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy: Background Report, Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, Hobart. Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia Technical Group, 1998, Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia: an ecosystem-based classification for marine and coastal environments Version 3.3, Environment Australia, Canberra. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Task Force on Marine Protected Areas, 1998, Guidelines for Establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas, Environment Australia, Canberra. World Commission on Protected Areas of IUCN – The World Conservation Union, 1998, Protected Areas Programme PARKS The International Journal for Protected Area Managers, Volume 8, Number 2, June 1998. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Task Force on Marine Protected Areas, 1999, Strategic Plan of Action for the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas: A Guide for Action by Australian Governments, Environment Australia, Canberra. Environment Australia, Australia’s Marine Protected Areas, Environment Australia, Canberra. Department of Conservation and Land Management, NEW HORIZONS the way ahead in marine conservation and management, Government of Western Australia.

116 Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy [Back to contents] Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 4

Draft ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion

Resource Planning and Development Commission Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Report on draft ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion

Prepared by the Reference Body, Marine Ecosystems and Habitat Classification, Bruny Bioregion

Background

The Strategy Recognising the Tasmanian Resource Management and Planning System, the primary goal of the Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy (the Strategy) is:

“to establish and manage a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of marine protected areas, to contribute to the long-term ecological viability of marine and estuarine systems, to maintain ecological processes and systems, and to protect Tasmania’s biological diversity”.

The Strategy identifies that the Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Tasmania should be developed in accordance with certain principles, including:

• Regional Framework – the Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia provides the regional planning framework for developing the Representative System of MPAs in Tasmania, with ecosystems used as the basis for determining representativeness. • Comprehensiveness – the Representative System of MPAs in Tasmania will include the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion. • Representativeness – those marine areas that are selected for inclusion in MPAs should reasonably reflect the biotic diversity of the marine ecosystems from which they derive. • Precautionary Principle – the absence of scientific certainty should not be a reason for postponing measures to establish MPAs to protect representative ecosystems.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 117 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

These principles are reflected within certain criteria for identification of potential MPAs, In particular: Comprehensiveness • Adds to the coverage of the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion. Representativeness • Represents one or more ecosystems within an Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia bioregion. Identifying and spatially defining (mapping) the full range of ecosystems at an appropriate scale within the Bruny Bioregion is integral to the inquiry process, particularly with respect to applying the principles of comprehensiveness and representativeness.

Step 2 of the Strategy is to, ‘Gather data at the bioregion level, including ecosystem mapping.’

Bruny Bioregion The Bruny Bioregion contains a particularly complex and convoluted coastline with an abundance of islands, peninsulas, embayments and estuaries. Exposed southern shores are exposed to constant and often extremely large swells originating in the Southern Ocean, while eastern shores are exposed to less frequent but occasionally large swells from the Tasman Sea. Despite this exposure the convoluted nature of the coastline also provides a substantial component of sheltered waters and associated habitats (Barrett et al. 2001). Clear oceanic water influences much of the exposed coast. However, water from the Derwent and Huon Rivers substantially structures the biota in parts of the bioregion such that biotic communities can be characterised by the influence of one, both, or neither of these systems. The Derwent appears to substantially influence water clarity in Storm Bay and Frederick Henry Bay causing a compression in species succession with depth and changes in species assemblages relative to those at equivalent oceanic sites. The water at the mouth of the Huon River strongly attenuates light resulting in a substantial compression of species succession with depth, a very high red algal species diversity and characteristic invertebrate assemblages. The D’Entrecasteaux Channel forms an intermediate zone with greater light penetration than the Huon water but less than oceanic water. Within the Channel there is moderate species compression with depth and a high diversity of filter feeding invertebrates (Barrett et al. 2001). A consequence of the complexity and diversity of the Bruny Bioregion is that identification of appropriate ecosystems that may satisfy the requirements of the Strategy is difficult, compared to most other bioregions in Tasmania.

Ecosystems Scale is an important consideration for the application of the principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness (CAR principles). For the National Representative System of MPAs, the adopted hierarchy of biodiversity, against which the principles are applied, is: Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 118 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Bioregion Ecosystem Habitat Community/population Species/individual Comprehensiveness and adequacy are applied at the scales of bioregions, ecosystems and habitats. Representativeness is applied at the finer scales of communities and individual/species (TFMPA 1999).

Spatially defining appropriate ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion may be undertaken by an initial finer-scale regionalisation (10-100s of km2, microscale) of ecologically functional biophysical units (biounits) that incorporate key physical and biotic features at a relevant scale. Biounits may be used to identify functional ecosystem-level management units suitable for regional biodiversity and conservation planning, including MPA identification (Edyvane et al. 2000).

Biounits are considered to represent areas within the bioregion where the main ecological processes and biotic features are reasonably distinctive and reasonably representative of the processes and biodiversity of that area. Ecosystems may then be defined with reference to an appropriate hierarchical level of seabed substrate type within a biounit.

Reference body Acting under section 9 of the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997, the Resource Planning and Development Commission (the Commission) established a committee (the Reference Body), as provided for in section 19 of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991, to advise the Commission and a delegated Panel established to conduct the inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion. The Reference Body comprises the following persons –

Ray Murphy (Chair) Project Officer (Marine), Resource Planning and Development Commission

Neville Barrett Research Associate, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute

Vanessa Lucieer Research Group Leader, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute

Graham Edgar Research Fellow, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute

Jon Bryan Marine Issues Spokesperson, Tasmanian Conservation Trust

Peter Last Senior Principal Research Scientist, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research

Peter Thompson Principal Research Scientist, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research

The Reference Body sought to identify draft ecosystems (incorporating draft biounits) and their boundaries within the Bruny Bioregion. An expert-based, hierarchical regionalisation, informed by spatial overlay of available datasets, was considered an appropriate method to achieve this task.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 119 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Ecosystems The key physical and biotic features by which ecosystems within the Bruny Bioregion may be appropriately defined, for the purposes of applying the Strategy, include:

• seabed (benthic) substrate; • depth; • wave exposure; • water systems (estuaries; light attenuation; turbidity; salinity; macronutrient levels; etc); and • communities/populations and/or species. Although the inquiry terms of reference are only for waters within the Bruny Bioregion, it is anticipated that the principles described here to define biounits and ecosystems will be generally applicable within all Tasmanian waters (from the high water mark to the three nm limit of coastal waters).

Draft Biounits, Bruny Bioregion The classification process used to categorise draft biounits within the Bruny Bioregion (Figure 1) is shown in Table 1. Geographic boundaries for each biounit are described in Table 3.

Rationale for hierarchical regionalisation.

• Depth The 40 m depth contour provides an approximate boundary for the euphotic zone (within reach of sunlight sufficient for primary production) in clear oceanic waters. In the Bruny Bioregion, this is indicated by being near the lower limit of macroalgae cover on rocky reefs, with communities changing from algal to invertebrate dominated below this depth (Barrett et al. 2001). In addition, it is likely that turbulence effects on sediment mobility and consolidated substrate from ocean swell are considerably reduced at greater than 40 m depth in this bioregion.

The 40 m depth contour also provides a major disjunction in the scale of available mapping data (i.e. extent of TAFI mapping) and other environmental data. The TAFI mapping stopped at this depth because of reduced reliability in interpreting the echo sounder data to discriminate lower levels of seabed substrate type. The echo sounder used requires re-configuration for depths greater than 40 m.

While the area from the 40 m depth contour to the 3nm limit of coastal waters has been initially classified within a single draft biounit, it was suggested the scale of biological change across the 40- 200 m depth range may warrant separation of this biounit at a smaller spatial scale. A current national regionalisation of shelf waters suggests that the inner to outer shelf may be further separated into three distinct regions and, upon completion of that process, the national regionalisation may be used to further classify the Offshore biounit.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 120 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] Draft biounit (Drowned river valleys) 2 2 2.2.2.2.2.1 salinity < 27 psu in central region Winter 2.2.2.2.2.2 salinity > 27 psu in central region Winter 8) Open estuaries 9) Marine inlets and bays 2.2.2.2.2 2.2.2.2.1.1 Estuarine area < 50 km High light attenuation (+ low catchment development) 2.2.2.2.1.2 Medium light attenuation (+ high catchment development) 6) Huon 7) Derwent Table 1 Table Process used to categorise draft biounits, Bruny Bioregion 1 > 40 m depth (Barrett et al. 2001) 2 < 40 m depth (Barrett et al. 2001) 2.1 Oceanic Ocean swell exposure (+ boundary silt substrate) (Barrett et al. 2001) 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.2 Estuarine influence influence only exposure (+ boundary silt substrate) (Barrett et al. 2001) Wind Estuarine 2.2.2 2.2.1 Oceanic 2.2.2.1 Embayment [Not an estuary defined using criteria of Edgar et al. (1999)] 2.2.2.2 Estuary [Estuary defined using criteria of Edgar et al. (1999)] 2.2.2.2.1 Exposed Estuarine area > 50 km 5) Channel 2) 1) Offshore influence) (Derwent 3) Mod-exposed 4) Norfolk Bay

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 121 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

• Exposure Delineation of appropriate boundaries between ocean swell and wind only exposure areas were augmented by interpretation of the approximate limit of silt substrate (Barrett et al. 2001).

Ocean swell exposed shores tend to have a greater proportion of consolidated substrate with steeper shorelines and greater variety of reef profiles. Wind only shores tend to gradually increase in depth and have more sandy shorelines and less complex reef profile. Exposure is a key factor that influences the distribution and abundance of macroalgae and fishes within Tasmania.

On the more exposed rocky shores within the Bruny Bioregion, bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum is the dominant plant species that occurs around the low-tide level. As depth increases, the brown algae Phyllospora comosa and strapweed Lessonia corrugata are the main species which are then replaced by Ecklonia radiatia which may persist to 35 m depth in clear waters. As rocky shores become less exposed, the depth to which these communities occurs reduces and Durvillaea and Phyllospora are eventually replaced by Ecklonia in the shallower zones and then by brown algae of the order Fucales including Xiphophora, Acrocarpia, Cystophora and Caulocystis species. Sargassum species are common in the most sheltered waters (Barrett et al. 2001, Edgar et al. 1984). Giant string kelp Macrocystis pyrifera is most abundant on the moderately exposed coasts.

In sheltered areas with sandy substrates vegetation such as seagrasses of the species Heterozostera tasmanica and Halophila australis, green algae of the genus Caulerpa and the aquatic macrophyte Ruppia megacarpa may occur (Barrett et al. 2001).

In general, most fish species in this region are found in both ocean swell exposed and wind only exposed locations, although their relative abundance varies significantly with exposure. Typical reef fish species occurring within the Exposed biounit include purple wrasse, blue-throated wrasse, banded morwong, marblefish, bastard trumpeter, striped trumpeter and butterfly perch. In more sheltered waters (wind only exposure), purple wrasse, little rock whiting, hulafish, barber perch, bridled leatherjackets and brown striped leatherjackets are the dominant species.

• Water systems Oceanic (marine) The salinity of oceanic waters in the Bruny Bioregion tends to be near 34 psu and relatively constant. Offshore waters tend to have greater light transmittance than more inshore waters. The euphotic zone has a single temporal peak in nutrient (dissolved nitrate and phosphate) concentrations in winter and lower concentrations at other times of the year. In most years there is a spring, and sometimes autumn, phytoplankton bloom. The phytoplankton community composition is complex, affected by local conditions, the subtropical convergence and the seasonal strengthening of both the East Australian and the Zeehan Currents.

Predominantly marine waters in Norfolk Bay result in low light attenuation (see below) and, in combination with low exposure and shallow depths, allow significant vegetated areas (seagrass and Caulerpa). The Norfolk Bay biounit is considered to be quite functionally different from other biounits, with primary productivity likely to be based largely on detritus from vegetated areas.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 122 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Estuarine influence The Moderately-exposed (Derwent influence) and Channel draft biounits within the Bruny Bioregion are heavily influenced by nearby riverine inputs. The intermediate nature of these waters, between oceanic and estuarine, is manifest in intermittent increases in light attenuation (see below), reductions in salinity, and periodic inputs of nutrients and organic matter. The two river systems (Huon and Derwent) are different in part due to the different characteristics of their catchments, concentrations of coloured dissolved organic matter (e.g. tannins), regional differences in rainfall patterns in each catchment and the fact that the Derwent is more heavily regulated. The latter two factors lead to a substantial difference in the seasonal pattern of freshwater input, which results in different impacts on the ecology of the affected ecosystems. In contrast to more oceanic waters, the phytoplankton in these biounits tends to be dominated by euryhaline diatoms such as Skeletonema costatum, Pseudonitzschia spp. and Chaetoeros spp.

In the Moderately exposed (Derwent influence) biounit, it is suggested that characteristics of Derwent water associated with nutrients and phytoplankton growth influence the macroalgal species composition, with a general lack of Phyllospora comosa which commonly occurs in more oceanic, exposed sites (Barrett et al. 2001). Fish communities within this area are also different to those on the same substrate in oceanic waters. In addition, the relatively gradual slope of the seabed may influence characteristics of the water system within this biounit.

The Channel biounit is differentiated from the other wind only exposure embayment, Norfolk Bay, due to the significant influence from Huon water, particularly in the lower Channel region. There is a very different species composition in the Channel. High to medium light attenuation results in a high to moderate species compression with depth and a high diversity of filter feeding invertebrates in shallow water, particularly where there is high current flow (Barrett et al. 2001). While the Channel biounit is considered here as a single functional area, it is acknowledged that the biounit encompasses a highly diverse and complex area with respect to exposure, water system characteristics, habitats and communities. Further analysis may warrant division of the Channel into at least two separate biounits.

• Estuaries and embayments Within Tasmania an estuary has been defined as, “a semi-enclosed or periodically closed coastal body of water in which the aquatic environment is affected by the physical and chemical characteristics of both fluvial drainage and marine systems” (Edgar et al. 1999). This definition included coastal lakes, lagoons and rivers upstream to the limit of tidal influence. It recognises the importance of external inputs from both marine and terrestrial environments (an estuarine catchment) and implies a seaward geographical limit at the opening to the sea. In contrast, marine embayments (eg. Norfolk Bay, D’Entrecasteaux Channel) do not have their own catchments.

The seaward boundary of an estuary is a line between headlands on either side of the entrance to the estuary, thus meeting the requirement that estuaries are semi-enclosed. The upstream limit of estuaries is defined geographically by cessation of bank separation, or by location relative to contours, as indicated on a topographic map (Edgar et al. 1999, Heap et al. 2001).

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 123 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Edgar et al. (1999) recognised 111 major estuaries within Tasmania. Geomorphology and physio- chemical attributes (primarily size, barrier presence, and tidal, salinity and rainfall characteristics) were used to classify these estuaries into nine physical classes. Within the Bruny Bioregion, 13 major estuaries were identified representing estuaries within three of the nine classes. The three classes of estuaries occurring within the bioregion are open estuaries; marine inlets and bays; and microtidal drowned river valleys, and are separated primarily on size and wintertime salinity.

Except for microtidal drowned river valleys, the boundaries and classes of estuaries described by Edgar et al. (1999) are considered appropriate as draft biounits. For the two microtidal drowned river valleys, the Derwent and Huon estuaries, the downstream boundary of the biounit was considered to be more appropriately defined at the higher hierarchical level of exposure to ocean swell, augmented by interpretation of the approximate limit of silt substrate.

• Estuarine area Estuaries in the Bruny Bioregion share a number of physical characteristics in that they are (generally) permanently open, and have a tidal range of < 1 m near the mouth or a summer salinity > 30 psu within the central region (Edgar et al. 1999). However, while most estuaries have an estuarine area of less than 50 km2 the Derwent and Huon estuaries are greater than 50 km2 and are known as drowned river valleys. Drowned river valleys are recognised internationally as a particular geomorphological type of estuary and are characterised by wide river mouths, rocky headlands and deep channels. In contrast, smaller estuaries with an estuarine area of less than 50 km2 (most being less than 20 km2) are characterised by narrow mouths, often with a sand barrier, and are much shallower than drowned river valleys.

• Light attenuation Light attenuation in water (the loss of light penetration, mainly by absorption and scattering) is largely affected by concentrations of coloured dissolved organic matter (e.g. tannins), suspended sediments and chlorophyll concentrations. In the Huon estuary light attenuation is very high (Butler in press), leading to a substantial compression of algal reef communities and filter-feeding invertebrates through the depth gradient, particularly near the mouth of the estuary (Barrett et al. 2001). Relatively lower light attenuation in the Derwent estuary allows growth of benthic microalgae on unconsolidated substrate that is not observed in the Huon estuary resulting in some differences in nutrient cycling between the two systems. In addition, the Derwent is likely to have historically had seagrass communities that do not occur in the Huon. Medium to high light attenuation may be an important factor in reducing the threat of eutrophication in both estuaries, particularly the Derwent (Butler in press). In addition to differences in light attenuation, the sediment chemistry in the Derwent and Huon estuaries is quite different. Metal and sulphide concentrations are significantly higher in the Derwent than the Huon (Macleod and Helidoniotis 2005). Due to anthropogenic impacts, the condition of the two estuaries is very different, with significant land clearing, agriculture, damming, industrialisation and urbanisation occurring in the Derwent catchment and marine farming in the Huon estuary. The Huon estuary possesses high fish and invertebrate diversity, while the Derwent estuary possesses an extremely high level of endemism (Edgar et al. 1999). Notwithstanding these differences, overall there is a strong similarity in the broad structure, function and ecology of the Huon and Derwent systems (Butler in press, Macleod and Helidoniotis 2005).

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 124 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

• Salinity In Tasmanian estuaries, species composition and richness is closely correlated with salinity (Edgar et al. 1999).

Marine inlets and bays generally lack large riverine inputs resulting in predominantly marine conditions where salinity measured in the central region in winter (highest freshwater inputs) is greater than 27 psu. Open estuaries are more strongly influenced by freshwater inputs.

Open estuaries are ecologically different from marine inlets and bays because the variation in salinity exerts considerable control over biota with some species being obligate freshwater, some obligate marine and others euryhaline. For long lived species only the euryhaline tolerant ones can survive in water bodies that are periodically inundated with freshwater, although seasonal incursions of shortlived obligate marine or freshwater species can occur. Stratification of the water column due to freshwater inputs can also cause open estuaries to have an earlier onset of a spring phytoplankton bloom.

Seabed classification Seabed substrate type, in association with depth and exposure, is considered the primary physical variable determining species and community distribution in Tasmanian waters. At the highest level, the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (TAFI), SeaMap Tasmania project, differentiates substrate into two geomorphic types; consolidated (reef) and unconsolidated. For the purpose of interpreting the Strategy, this is considered the appropriate level within a seabed habitat classification hierarchy to distinguish ecosystems within each biounit. For defining ecosystems, it is recommended that any hierarchical classification should be applied consistently across and within all bioregions in Tasmania.

The TAFI SeaMap Tasmania project further classifies unconsolidated substrate into lower levels based on whether the unconsolidated substrate is vegetated (e.g. seagrasses, Caulerpa, etc.). These substrate categories were subdivided again based on reef profile, sediment type of unconsolidated substrate and seagrass blade density (Barrett et al. 2001). Currently, information on lower levels in the seabed habitat classification hierarchy and modifiers of seabed habitat classification is not collected consistently. However, much of the available information is considered sufficiently robust to be used as biodiversity surrogates and for indicating representativeness within ecosystems.

Within the offshore biounit, present mapping data is of an insufficient scale to distinguish areas of consolidated substrate, although it is undoubtable that these areas occur. Seabed mapping clearly shows that reef continues into deeper water on the southern end of Bruny Island and on most of the prominent headlands between Nubeena and Marion Bay (Figure 2). Jordan (1997) noted that the bottom type in Storm Bay varied considerably from sand and muddy sand to reef and Alan Jordan (pers. comm.) has further indicated that there are patches of reef that run due south of Betsy Island and continue to at least the southern end of Bruny Island.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 125 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Changes in the slope of the seabed, examined through contouring of bathymetric data, can indicate areas of prominent consolidated substrate. While this process will not identify low profile reef, it may indicate large areas of consolidated substrate with vertical development above 5 m. TAFI is currently analysing Geosciences Australia 250 m pixel bathymetric data within the offshore biounit for this purpose. However, much of the consolidated substrate in the offshore biounit is considered to be of a different geomorpholgy to that within inshore areas, consisting of a cobble/rubble-type substrate, and will therefore not be identified by this process.

Draft ecosystems, Bruny Bioregion The expert-based, hierarchical regionalisation of the Bruny Bioregion identified 18 draft ecosytems, consisting of either consolidated or unconsolidated substrate within each of the nine draft biounits (Figure 2).

The approximate area of each biounit, draft ecosystem (i.e. substrate within a biounit) and percentage of each ecosystem within its biounit is shown in Table 2.

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 126 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] Ecosystems area (ha) Ecosystems as % of biounit % of Bruny (Substrate) (Substrate) Table 2. Draft biounit and ecosystem areas, including the percentage of each within Table BiounitOffshoreMod-exposedChannel Area (ha)ExposedNorfolk Bioregion 236412Derwent 56756 UnconsolidatedMarine Inlets & Bays 57.5 13.8 ConsolidatedHuon 37375 UnknownOpen estuaries 33182 Unconsolidated 8779 9.1Total Consolidated 18046 8.1 2.1 12903 Unknown 4.4 54622 3.1 1703 5819 36466 0.4 2135 24081 1.4 410975 8239 17595 12791 100 909 9102 236412 23 451 39 4660 96.2 85 158492 517 97.6 3.8 72.6 27 7 56 93.9 12768 97.5 99.1 239716 1657 2.4 1103 27.4 0.3 2.3 80.1 2.5 100.0 0.7 5.9 1.0 0.4 0.2 18.9 97.3

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 127 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Table 3 Draft biounits and geographic boundaries, Bruny Bioregion

Biounit 1) Offshore Boundary From the 3nm limit of the Bruny Bioregion boundary within Tasmanian waters landwards to the 40 m depth contour Rationale • > 40 m depth Notes • Oceanic water • Major disjunction in scale of mapping data (i.e. extent of TAFI mapping) and other environmental data • Mapping of consolidated substrate limited, but scope to model potential reef from changes in slope. • National regionalisation of inner shelf to outer shelf ongoing

Biounit 2) Exposed Boundary From the 40 m depth contour landwards to the seaward boundary of the 5) Channel biounit, 3) Moderately-exposed biounit, and any estuaries within the 9) Marine inlet and bays biounit Rationale • < 40 m depth • Ocean swell exposure • Oceanic water Notes • Large areas of consolidated substrate • Significant exposure related differences affect biodiversity within this biounit • Port Arthur region has high habitat richness

Biounit 3) Moderately exposed (Derwent influence)

Boundary Landwards of a line, from the southern end of Variety Bay, due east to the 40 m depth contour, eastwards along the 40 m depth contour to a point due west of the southern end of Wedge Island, eastwards to Low Point, to the seaward boundary of 4) Norfolk biounit, the southern boundary of the 7) Derwent biounit, the northern boundary of the 5) Channel biounit and any estuaries within the (8,9) estuary biounits

Rationale • < 40 m depth • Ocean swell exposure • Estuarine influence water

Notes • Derwent influence (low visibility) • Significant change in seabed slope • Predominantly sand • General lack of Phyllospora comosa • Different fish communities to 2) Exposed biounit

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 128 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Biounit 4) Norfolk

Boundary Norfolk Bay, bounded by the western entrance to Denison Canal and seaward to a line from Primrose Point southwards to Green Head

Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Oceanic water

Notes • Constricted embayment • Relatively shallow • Significant vegetated (seagrass and Caulerpa) areas • Silt and silty sand substrate • Very different species than in the Channel, especially vegetated • Seawhip communities in the Channel would not exist in Norfolk Bay • Primary productivity based on detritus • Connection of Blackman Bay to Norfolk is artificial (perhaps artificially clear water)

Biounit 5) Channel

Boundary South of a line from the western boundary of the Tinderbox Marine Reserve east to Dennes Point (following exposure boundary, Barrett et al. 2001) and north of a line from Scott Point southeasterly to the 40 m depth contour, following the 40 m depth contour to a point due north of Laughtons Point, then down the eastern shore of Partridge Island to the southern most point of the island, then due south across Partridge Narrows, to the seaward boundary of 6) Huon biounit and any estuaries within the (8, 9) estuary biounits

Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Estuarine influence water • Embayment (not an estuary)

Notes • “Channel water” (but significant influence from Huon and Oceanic water in lower Channel) • Predominantly sheltered • High diversity of benthic habitats • Considerable diversity of habitats in the lower Channel and doesn’t strictly satisfy criteria (exposure) used to define the Channel • May warrant division into 2 (or even 3) separate biounits • From marine farming environmental surveys, fauna at the top of the Channel is more similar to the Tasman Peninsula than the lower Channel and Huon. • The Channel is considered a single functional area but is a highly diverse and complex area (incredibly heterogenous)

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 129 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Biounit 6) Huon Boundary Landwards, of a straight line from Huon Point, passing the northernmost mapped benthic point of Butts Reef to a point at 5210360N, 511640E (GDA 94), to the upstream extent of estuary within the Bruny Bioregion and the seaward extent of any estuaries within the (8, 9) estuary biounits Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Estuarine influence water • Estuary • Estuarine area > 50 km • High light attenuation Notes • Huon estuary water • Predominantly sheltered from oceanic swell • Silt and silty sand substrate • Huon Island is very different from Butts Reef in the Channel

Biounit 7) Derwent Boundary Landwards, of a straight line from a point at 5245450N, 529190E (GDA 94) at Taroona High School to Gellibrand Point, to the upstream extent of the estuary within the Bruny Bioregion Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Estuarine influence water • Estuary • Estuarine area > 50 km • Medium light attenuation Notes • Derwent estuary water (medium light attenuation) • Catchment and estuary significantly impacted by human activities

Biounit 8) Open estuaries Boundary Mapped estuaries as reported in Edgar et al. (1999) for Esperance; Port Cygnet; Garden Island; and Browns estuaries. Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Estuarine influence water • Estuary • Estuarine area < 50 km • Winter salinity < 27 ppt in central region Notes • Conservation assessments at this scale under Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystems Value (CFEV) project • CFEV process has adopted this terminology

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 130 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Biounit 9) Marine inletsl and bays

Boundary Mapped estuaries as reported in Edgar et al. (1999) for Crooks; Cloudy Bay Lagoon; North West Bay River; Pitt Water; Pipe Clay; Carlton; and Blackman Bay estuaries.

Rationale • < 40 m depth • Wind only exposure • Estuarine influence water • Estuary • Estuarine area < 50 km • Winter salinity > 27 ppt in central region

Notes • Conservation assessments at this scale under Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystems Value (CFEV) project • CFEV process has adopted this terminology • Note that Blackman Bay has distinct fauna and Pitt Water may also justify separation from other Marine inlets and bays

References

Barrett, N., Sanderson, J.C., Lawler, M., Halley, V. and Jordan, A. (2001). Mapping of inshore marine habitats in south-eastern Tasmania for marine protected area planning and marine management. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Report No. 7, 74p.

Butler, E. (in press). The tail of two rivers in Tasmania: The Derwent and Huon Estuaries. In: P.J.Wabgersky (ed.). Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 5: Water Pollution, Part H. Estuaries, Springer-Verlag, Berlin

Edgar, G.J. (1984). General features of the ecology and biogeography of Tasmanian subtidal rocky shore communities. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 118, 173-186

Edgar, G.J., Barrett, N.S. and Graddon, D.J. (1999). A classification of Tasmanian estuaries and assessment of their conservation significance using ecological and physical attributes, population and land use. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Technical Series Report 2,. 205 p.

Edyvane, K., Kirkman, H., Crawford, C., Pigot, S., Butler, A. and Bosworth, P. (2000). Regional classification of Tasmanian coastal waters (Stage 3): Marine habitat mapping – final report. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment

Heap, A., Bryce, S., Ryan, D., Radke, L., Smith, C., Smith, R., Harris, P., and Heggie, D. (2001). Australian estuaries and coastal waterways: A geoscience perspective for improved and integrated resource management . A report to the National land and Water Resources Audit Theme 7: Ecosystem health.

Jordan, A. (1997). Demersal trawl surveys of the continental shelf of southern and eastern Tasmania 1993-95. Technical Report of the Marine Research Laboratories, Tasmania Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. 50, 148 p

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 131 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Macleod, C and Helidoniotis, F (2005). Ecological status of the Derwent and Huon estuaries. NAP/ NHT Project No. 46928 Final Report. Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, 107 p

Tasmanian Marine Protected Areas Strategy (2001). Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, Hobart.

TFMPA (1999). Understanding and applying the principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness for the NRSMPA, Version 3.1. Report prepared by the Action Team for the ANZECC Task Force on Marine Protected Areas. Marine Group, Environment Australia, Canberra.

Figure 1 Draft Biounits, Bruny Bioregion

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 132 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 2 Draft ecosystems (i.e. either consolidated or unconsolidated substrate within each draft biounit), Bruny Bioregion

Appendix 4 Resource Planning and Development Commission 133 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Appendix 5

Substrate types and habitat categories and broad area based descriptions of key habitat; selected extracts from Barrett et al. (2001) Note: Figures in text refer to figures in Barrett et al. (2001) Table 1 Definitions of substrate types and habitat categories used in this study

ReefReef

High relief reef

The term high relief was used when the apparent depth of hard substrate changed rapidly on the sounder. It usually coincided with steep underwater cliffs adjacent to or away from the coast but also includes areas of high rugosity where depth variation was greater than 4-10 m over short distances.

Medium relief reef

The term medium relief referred to areas where the bottom was hard and the relief changed regularly. Changes in depth are usually from 1-4 m over short distances.

Low relief reef

This definition referred to hard bottom type when there was very little change in the relief. This category occasionally overlapped with the patchy reef and hard sand categories.

Patchy reef

This category commonly occurred on the seaward side of coastal reef areas. It consisted of reef elements, including boulders and rocks, intermittently out cropping from unconsolidated sediments, principally sand. In deeper water it could easily be confused with the ‘hard sand’ category due to the decreasing discrimination power of the sounder signal with depth. Also, ‘Hard sand’ type substrates such as shells and gravel were often associated with patchy reef.

UUnconsolidatednconsolidated susubstratesbstrates

Sand

Sand was the most commonly encountered unconsolidated substrate in the Bruny Bioregion. Sand was common in high exposure to semi exposed environments. It represented the coarser end of a scale of sediments from silt to sand. Sand was generally characterised by a distinct second echo on the sounder trace.

Silty Sand

Silty sand was common in low exposure and sheltered waters. Silty sand broadly incorporated any sediment with a significant proportion of coarse “sand” particles and fine “silt” particles. Silty sand was characterised by a less distinct second echo on the sounder trace.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 134 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Silt

Silt substrate was only found in deeper sheltered bays or the backs of sheltered bays. This habitatcategory represented the finest unconsolidated substrate. Silt was characterised on the sounder by a lack of a second echo and often little scatter in the trace tail.

Hard sand

Hard sand referred to unconsolidated substrates containing elements that confound the sounder output causing the signal to appear either harder or rougher than would be expected from that substrate. There are several factors that lead to a substrate being classified as hard. These include large grain size, shell matter (either whole shells or shell grit) or biological material. The following list gives the physical and biological factors resulting in this hard sand category.

Physical:

Coarse sand/gravel

Compacted sand

Rippled sand

Shell or shell grit in sediment

Biological:

Burrows

Seawhips

Holothurians

Hard sand was common in and about seagrass beds indicating the possible presence of rhizoidal mats of the seagrass or associated organisms. It was also common on the seaward side of reefs indicating the presence of shells, detritus and organisms whose origin is dependent on the nearby reefs. The extensive areas of shelly substrate in high current areas in the D’Entrecasteaux Channel were characterised by a hard sand signature. On more exposed shores the sand hardened up closer to shore, due to coarser grade sands produced by the sorting action of waves. Vegetated unconsolidated substrate

Seagrass

Over 5-10m depth, beyond the effective range of detection from aerial photographs, the division of seagrass beds into various density grade areas was dependent on interpretation of the sounder recording. As our sounder signal only sampled from an area directly under the boat, only a series of lines through the surveyed area could be mapped with certainty. Because of this, and possible unknown seasonal changes in seagrass cover, the division of the seagrass areas by density was indicative only. Seagrass areas should perhaps be regarded as a seagrass zone, where seagrass was likely to be found. The seagrass category “dense” represented areas where seagrass cover was likely to be dense. The term refers to where the substrate, usually sand, was completely obscured by seagrass.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 135 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

The dominant seagrass type mapped in the Bruny Bioregion was Heterozostera tasmanica. Another common but minor species, Halophila tasmanica, often occurred in conjunction with Heterozostera. In some of the very shallow waters (mostly intertidal) the seagrass species Ruppia megacarpa was occasionally present. The habitat mapping presented here, details the extent of the larger beds of these species, however, it should be noted that seagrass was also a very common element of the biota where reef meets sand in more sheltered waters below 10m depth.

Patchy seagrass

The definition “patchy seagrass” represented areas where patch size varied from less than 1 m up to 20m in linear extent. The patches generally consisted of dense seagrass.

Sparse seagrass

This category usually applied to seagrass that occurred in waters exposed to significant swells, such as Marion Bay and Pirates Bay. Here, while the density of the shoots of the seagrass (primarily Heterozostera tasmanica) was low, the beds could cover extensive areas. The beds often had associated hard sand signals indicating the possibility of other biotic elements, such as shells, being present. In sparse seagrass areas, the substrate beneath the seagrass was easily visible, often consisting of more than 50% of the field of view in the camera frame.

Caulerpa

While seagrasses were the dominant plant species forming distinct habitats on soft sediments, other plants were also be found, including Caulerpa trifaria, a green algal species that can have extensive rhizoidal networks in the sediment. This species can form extensive beds similar to those formed by seagrass. Caulerpa species are often found on the seaward extent of seagrass beds. In a similar manner to seagrass, Caulerpa species are also a common element of the biota where reef forms a boundary with sand in more sheltered waters, however this usually extends deeper, up to 15 m depth.

3 Results and Habitat Descriptions The Bruny Bioregion was subdivided into nine coastal sections, or mapping units for ease of analysis and presentation. These sections, although divided intuitively on the basis of perceived general differences in physical characteristics, are not intended to be a formal splitting of the currently accepted bioregionalisation. They simply provide manageable sized units with shared features to facilitate discussion of differences within the bioregion. An additional section of coast, which includes the Actaeon islands, Recherche Bay and Southport (the Actaeon section), has also been included for discussion. While this area is nominally in the adjacent Davey Bioregion it contains many features in common with both regions, and includes an extensive network of coastal reef and Macrocystis forests. The outer coast in this area is subject to the heavy swells that characterise the Davey Bioregion, while the more sheltered inner coasts are very similar to those found to the north of Southport. Including the Actaeon area, there are ten coastal sections described here. These are: Actaeon, Cloudy, Adventure, Betsey, Arthur, Peninsula, Norfolk, Frederick Henry, D'Entrecasteaux and Huon (Fig. 2).

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 136 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Figure 2 Mapping units identified subjectively on exposure differences and used as a framework for mapping and discussion at the 1:25,000 scale

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 137 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.4 Peninsula

The Peninsula mapping region was chosen on the basis of its dominantly easterly aspect and high cliffs (Figs. 8-11). The coastal geology is composed of alternating dolerite and sedimentary rock types, except in the vicinity of the Sisters where granite rocks outcrop. This mapping region has four embayments with long sandy beaches and medium exposure to wave action. These are Marion Bay, North Bay, Pirates Bay and Fortescue Bay. The sediment within these bays and adjacent coastline is restricted to sand. This region is characterised by coastal reefs extending to substantial depths. It included Tasman Island and at the Hippolyte, where depths of up to 100 m are reached, and Cape Pillar, Cape Hauy, The Thumbs and The Sisters, where reefs extend to depths greater than 50 m. Along the coast to the south of Pirates Bay a number of substantial offshore reef extensions occur. One of these, located off Waterfall Bluff, extends for at least 1.5 km offshore, to depths greater than those mapped here. The combination of large areas of offshore reef, and a coastline that often rapidly plunges to 20 m before levelling out, results in a large proportion of the reef in this area being at depths below 20 m. Most of this coast is subject to medium wave exposure, with exceptions being the highly exposed coast between Cape Raoul and Tasman Island, and small pockets of low exposure at Fortescue Bay, the southern corner of Pirates Bay, and the northern shore of Cape Frederick Hendrick.

Community types: The greater majority of the coastline in this section is subject to moderate to high exposure, and this was reflected in the dominant community types on reef that followed the typical pattern of exposed coasts with Durvillaea, Phyllospora, Ecklonia, red algae and sponges dominating. Sponge communities always dominate on reef below about 33 m, a depth that appears to be close to the lowest limit that most macroalgae can tolerate in Tasmanian waters. On the east facing coast Durvillaea rarely extended below 5 m, whereas on the south facing coast near Tasman Island, and including the Hippolyte, Durvillaea extended below 5m and in places below 10 m. Due to the extensive area of reef below 30 m, sponge communities are abundant in this region, particularly in areas of high water movement due to swells and currents, such as the ends of the capes, headlands and island groups. Small pockets of mixed fucoid algae are found on reefs in the more sheltered embayments at Fortescue Bay and Pirates Bay, with areas of patchy seagrass on the sediments. In North Bay and Marion Bay at depths between 10-15 m, extensive beds of sparse seagrass are found over sand. Macrocystis forests also occur throughout this region on reef at depths of 5 m to 25 m and are particularly abundant in bays that provide reef habitat at suitable depths and moderate exposures, such as Fortescue Bay and Lagoon Bay. Special Features: • Areas of high aesthetic value to the diving community, including sponge gardens, Macrocystis forests, and marine cave systems. • Large sections of sedimentary coast with rock types providing a mixture of patchy broken and low profile reef extending for one to two kilometres offshore throughout the 20-45 m depth range. • Extensive areas of sparse seagrass in North Bay and Marion Bay. • Deep (>40 m, up to 100 m depth) reef communities. Some of these areas are subject to high currents with rich sponge communities. • Granitic coastline in the vicinity of The Sisters.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 138 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.5 Norfolk Norfolk Bay and Blackman Bay are particularly sheltered areas and are well protected from swell action (Figs 8, 9 and 12). This is reflected by the shallow and limited offshore extension of coastal reefs, a characteristic feature of low energy coastlines. The coastal geology of this area is characterised by a mix of sedimentary rocks and dolerite, with the underlying bedrock on the northern side of Blackman Bay and the southern side of Norfolk Bay being of sedimentary origin. The remaining shores are dolerite with the exception of a small basalt intrusion adjacent to Prices Bay in Norfolk Bay. In Norfolk Bay most of the dolerite shores extend to sand at 5–10 m depth, whereas most of the sedimentary shores extend no deeper than 2 m. The majority of Norfolk Bay is less than 20 m deep, and much of the substrate within the bay is silt and silty sand due to the low wave energy coastline.

Blackman Bay, was once essentially a large coastal lagoon with an opening into Marion Bay. However, with the opening of the Dunalley Canal, it now forms an enlarged water body connecting Marion Bay and Frederick Henry Bay. This bay is generally very shallow (less than 5 m) with the exception of deeper channels created by strong tidal currents that now flow between Frederick Henry Bay and Marion Bay. Much of the substrate is sand grading to sandy silts, and these are generally covered by seagrass.

Community types:

The shallow waters of Blackman Bay in conjunction with the tidal currents and sandy substrate make Blackman Bay a suitable prime area for seagrass. Extensive Heterozostera beds cover much of the bay in subtidal waters, while the aquatic macrophyte, Ruppia megacarpa is notably abundant in the intertidal zone, particularly on sediments in the western arm of the bay. Ruppia is notable as this species is usually associated with more estuarine conditions than those found in Blackman Bay. Reefs within the bay are restricted to the shoreline and are particularly shallow, mostly less than 2 m. The macroalgal species are primarily composed of mixed fucoids, with Sargassum spp, Cystophora spp. and Caulocystis dominating. The macroalgae includes the brown algae Cystoseira trinoides, and Blackman Bay is the only area in Tasmania where this alga has been recorded. It is not clear whether this is a relict population or whether it has been introduced, as the species also occurs in Western Australia and South Australia, however it is highly unusual for any macroalgae to have such a localised and fragmented distribution.

Norfolk Bay is unusual in that it contains extensive beds of Caulerpa species between depths of 10–15 m in areas where there is minimal water currents and a soft substrate. The dominant species appears to be Caulerpa trifaria, and while this species is commonly found on the sandy outer fringes of reefs, the extent of this Caulerpa bed is unusual in Tasmania. Seagrass beds occur throughout the bay, however unlike Blackman Bay, much of the bay is deeper than seagrass habitat in southern Tasmania, and the significant beds are restricted to the coastal fringes and shallow embayments. While isolated patches of reef extend to depths of 10 m, most of the rocky shoreline extends to depths of only 2 m, and is dominated by macroalgal species such as Sargassum spp, Cystophora spp, and Caulocystis spp.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 139 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Special Features:

• Blackman Bay has the only Tasmanian population of Cystoseira trinoides; • Presence of Ruppia megacarpa beds in Blackman Bay; • Large extensive and unique Caulerpa beds in Norfolk Bay; and • Large and particularly sheltered embayments with extensive seagrass beds.

3.6 Betsey The Betsey coastal section was divided on the basis of being predominantly a large exposed embayment (Storm Bay) with outcropping reefs in 20-50 m of water (Figures. 11 and 14). There are extensive areas of gravel/shells and rippled sand patches within this section, presumably produced by the action of the swells that are prevalent in the area. While the majority of the rocky coast faces southwest, direct exposure to the prevailing southwest swell only occurs on the southern-most coast, with the remainder protected by the blocking action of Bruny Island. The geology of this area is predominantly a mixture of sedimentary and dolerite rock types. North of Wedge Island, sedimentary rock types often extend to 500 m offshore, while the extent of dolerite reefs is particularly limited. South of Wedge Island the reverse is true, with dolerite reefs extending to substantially greater distances offshore than sandstone reefs, and presumably the large offshore reef located 2.5 km SE of Shipstern Bluff is of doleritic origin. Coastal reefs extend to depths of 40 m or more at Cape Raoul, but are generally limited to 20 to 30 m, with linear offshore extensions averaging 200 m. This section of coast is subject to moderate levels of exposure between Betsey Island and Wedge Island, high exposure between Wedge Island and Cape Raoul, and low exposure within the bay at Nubeena and northward along South Arm from Fort Direction. With a mixture of reef, sand and gravel/shells, this section contains a mix of habitat types at various exposures.

Community types:

An unusual feature of this coastal section is the virtual absence of a Phyllospora cover below Durvillaea on reef. Virtually no Phyllospora was found over the entire coastline. Inexposed waters such as those in the Betsey coastal section, Phyllospora is usually the dominant macroalgal species on reefs from depths of 3 to 5 m where it replaces Durvillaea, down to 10 to 15 m where it is gradually replaced by Ecklonia. The absence of Phyllospora from this area may be related to the low water clarity of this area, a feature presumably related to the outflow of nutrients and sediments from the adjacent Derwent Estuary, however this anomaly requires further investigation to determine its actual cause. On the moderately exposed reefs in this region Durvillaea extended to approximately 2 m in the more exposed locations, below which Lessonia, Carpoglossum and sea tulips were common until being replaced by Ecklonia at 4-5 m. Lessonia is a Tasmanian endemic species and its centre of abundance appears to be along the north Bruny coastline, the lower reaches of the Derwent Estuary and the Betsey region. Another feature of this region was the restricted depth distribution of Durvillaea with respect to the degree of exposure, a compression that may be due to the low water clarity of this area and possibly competition with Lessonia at greater depths.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 140 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

On the most exposed coasts (from Wedge Island to Cape Raoul) Durvillaea extended below 5 m, where it was replaced by Lessonia and sea tulips to 10 m, below which Ecklonia dominated. At depths below 30 m Ecklonia was replaced by invertebrate communities dominated by sponges. On the moderately exposed coast near Betsey Island Durvillaea extended to less than 5 m depth where it was replaced by a mix of Lessonia, Ecklonia and mixed algae including Carpoglossum. Below 10 m Ecklonia dominates and becomes sparse below 20 m where it is replaced by sponge dominated communities.

Wedge Bay, a large embayment within this region, provides substantial shelter from swell and wave action particularly in the vicinity of the Nubeena township. At the most sheltered locations, sizeable beds of Heterozostera seagrass are found over sand. The sheltered shallow reef areas within this embayment are dominated by mixed fucoid communities, particularly Caulocystis, Zonaria and Cystophora spp. At the time of the survey within this area, Macrocystis was common in the shallow reef areas close to the town of Nubeena, indicating that this location has at least some exposure to swell action.

Special Features:

• Offshore deep (20 to 40+ m depth) reefs outcropping from sand and from coarser sediments of gravel and shells; • Increased abundance of Carpoglossum confluens, sea tulips and Lessonia in the upper subtidal inshore reef areas. Lessonia corrugata, a Tasmanian endemic species is particularly abundant in this coastal section; and • Notable absence of Phyllospora as a dominant community species.

3.7 Arthur Port Arthur was identified as a distinct mapping section due to the diverse range of habitats found in the one small area, a character that clearly differentiated it from the adjacent highly exposed coastline (Fig. 10). The geology of this area is dominated by dolerite and sedimentary formations with most of the reefs on the eastern shore of the port composed of dolerite, and those of the western shore composed of sedimentary rock types. The depth of the port extends to 50 m in the middle of the embayment, with silty sand found at these depths and extending into the shallow waters of Long Bay. One notable feature is the large extent of gravel/cobble bottom off the cliffs south of Isle of the dead and off West Arthur Head. Some hard shelly patches are located in areas of 10-20 m depth in the upper reaches of Port Arthur itself. Exposure varies greatly within this area, from medium exposure along most of the eastern shore, through low exposure to very sheltered on the western shore. There is little offshore extension of reef in this area, although reefs do extend to depths of more than 20 m along parts of the eastern shore.

Community Types:

Within the embayment there is a decrease in wave exposure from south to north and a corresponding change in macroalgal communities. The headlands at Budget Head and West Arthur Head at the southern end of the port are highly exposed to swells, and have communities dominated by Durvillaea,

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 141 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Phyllospora, Ecklonia, red algae and sponges, in addition to extensive areas of sea tulips. At the substantially more sheltered northern end of Port Arthur, Lessonia is common and intergrades with some mixed fucoid in the shallows, while Ecklonia is dominant in deeper (2-8 m) waters. As the bay is relatively shallow, an extensive red algal and sponge community is not found. Macrocystis is common throughout Port Arthur on reefs in moderately exposed areas at depths between 5 to 15 m and forms dense stands at Garden Point and Stinking Bay. Dense beds of seagrass are found in Stewarts Bay and areas of patchy seagrass are located at the head of all the other bays.

Special Features:

• High variation in habitat types with good representation of a variety of most within a relatively small area; and • Large cobble/gravel beds on the eastern side of the Port.

3.8 Frederick Henry Frederick Henry Bay was mapped as a coastal section on the basis of a moderate to low exposure to the action of swells (Figures. 12 and 13). The coastal geology is dominated by headlands composed of dolerite and sedimentary rock types alternating with extensive sections of sandy beaches. The bay is relatively shallow and is mostly less than 25 m deep, with few reefs extending below 15 m depth. The majority of reefs have very little offshore extension, often reaching the sand edge at less than 50 m from the coast. During the survey of offshore areas within the bay some ‘harder’ traces on the sounder could not be adequately field-truthed using the camera because of the low visibility but may have consisted of small areas of patchy reef and some sponges.

The substrate sediments within the bay are well sorted, with this degree of sorting relating to the shallowness of the bay, the mostly unconsolidated substrate, and moderate exposure to wave action. Shell and gravel (shown as ‘Hard sand’ on the maps of this section) areas were common in the bay, although a full determination of the distribution of sediment types within the bay was hindered by generally poor visibility that limited calibration of sounder outputs with video drops. Poor water clarity is a characteristic feature of this bay, where even small swells resuspended substantial amounts of sediments within the water column, and where plankton densities appear to be high. Presumably the fine sediments are derived from the outflow of the Derwent River and to a lesser extent the Coal River valley, and that these rivers enhance nutrient levels within the bay. Silt and silty sand were found in deeper waters at the entrance to Norfolk Bay, and in a deep channel to the northwest of Sloping Island. This channel is an unusual feature of the bay and extends to depths greater than 40 m.

Community types:

On the reef margins in the more swell exposed areas of the bay Lessonia was the dominant macroalgae in the upper subtidal zone (0-3 m) with Ecklonia, mixed browns such as Acrocarpia, and red algae below. Sargassum and Cystophora species were increasingly common on reef on the less exposed shorelines. Due to the low water clarity of this region most macroalgae are replaced by sponges at depths of

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 142 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

10-15 m, and on reefs adjacent to Primrose Sands urchin barrens extend below depths of 5-7 m. Outcropping rocky areas within the bay have limited associated algal communities due to the abrasive action of the sand and swells, in combination with low light levels. While this coastline is exposed to swells, Durvillaea, which is characteristically found on exposed coasts, was largely absent. A combination of aspect and gently sloping shores limits the wave energy reaching the shoreline, allowing Durvillaea to be replaced by Lessonia. In some of the more sheltered locations such as Sloping Main beach and to the east of Sloping Island, Heterozostera seagrass beds of varying density are found on sandy substrates.

Special Features:

• Frequent high sediment load in the water column, and generally low water clarity; • Well sorted unconsolidated sediments consisting of gravel, cobbles and shell fragments in some areas; and • Shoreline predominantly composed of sandy beaches.

3.9 Adventure This coastal section is characterised by the continuous stretch of exposed east facing coastline (Figures. 16 and 17). The geology of the region is dominated by dolerite with occasional sedimentary outcrops, forming a coastline with a steep to cliffy aspect. There is a large sandy embayment in the centre of this section (Adventure Bay) and smaller indentations of the coastline further north of this at Trumpeter Bay, Variety Bay and Bull Bay. Reef systems within this region are limited in their offshore extent, with few extending beyond 20 m depth. Two notable exceptions are found at Fluted Cliffs where isolated reefs extend to depths in excess of 40 m. Isolated offshore reefs were found to occur in the 30 to 40 m depth range in Adventure Bay and off North Bruny, and gravel patches (shown as hard sand in Figures 16 and 17) are common feature offshore throughout this region. There is a gradient in wave exposure along this coastline which decreases towards the north as coastal aspect changes from southeasterly to northeasterly. The coastline to the south of Adventure Bay is moderately to highly exposed, while much of northern Bruny Island, and the coastline extending northwards to Taroona, is subject to medium to low exposure to swells. While still partially exposed, the southern most corner of Adventure Bay is sufficiently sheltered for small seagrass beds to develop. The sediments of this area are primarily sand, with a similar degree of exposure to the reef habitats, although beaches are not found on the most exposed coast.

One notable feature of this area is a large extensive shelly ‘shoulder’ located on the northeastern corner of Bruny Island. This shoulder supports a large population of urchins that is commercially fished by divers. The urchins are presumably sustained by strong currents flowing into and out of the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, carrying drift algae that the urchins feed on.

Community types:

Related to the gradual decrease in wave exposure from south to north, is a subtle change in communities present. The dominant species on reefs in the southern zone are those indicative of high exposure to wave action, including Durvillaea, Phyllospora, Ecklonia, redalgae and sponges, with

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 143 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

Durvillaea extending to below 5 m. In the northern zone the maximum depth of Durvillaea decreases to approximately 2 m at Bull Bay. Along the North Bruny coastline, and the coastline towards Taroona, Lessonia communities become common, with Lessonia partially to completely replacing Phyllospora. Within embayments, mixed fucoid species (including Sargassum and Cystophora species) are common in the shallow waters, replaced by Ecklonia at depth. Macrocystis forms extensive beds along the moderate to low exposure north-eastern coast of Bruny Island, and more generally occurs commonly throughout this entire region. On the soft-sediments, small Heterozostera seagrass beds are found in the most sheltered waters within Adventure Bay in the 1 to 10 m depth range.

Special Features:

• Large persistent Macrocystis beds in the northern section on reefs in depths of 5 to 20 m; • Large extensive shelly ‘shoulder’ off the north eastern corner of Bruny Island; • Gravel patches offshore; and • Extensive sand areas between 15 m and 40 m depth.

3.10 D’Entrecasteaux The D’Entrecasteaux Channel was chosen as a coastal mapping section as it is a continuous sheltered water body, protected from oceanic swells by Bruny Island (Figs. 15-18). The coastal rock types within the Channel are mostly dolerite and sedimentary. Where sedimentary, they form small cliffs in the intertidal and backshore areas, but usually slope gradually underwater. An unusual feature of this coastal section is the presence of basalt shores, particularly along the western shore of North West Bay and the shoreline between Gordon and Kettering. Most reefs within the Channel are associated with the shoreline and few extend more than 20-50 m offshore, with the majority reaching the sand edge at depths of 5 m or less. Some exceptions can be found on the ends of points extending from the eastern shore of Bruny Island. Here, at locations such as Roberts Point, depths of 25 m are reached. Isolated low-flat sandstone reefs outcrop offshore from Ventenant Point towards Zuidpool Rock in depths of 15-20 m.

While the Channel is not subject to swell action, it contains a high diversity of habitats. There are numerous bays, each subject to differing environmental conditions. For example, North West Bay is largely protected from wind, but has moderate currents, and this is reflected in relatively coarse inshore sediments grading to silty sand at depths of 20-30 m. Barnes Bay is relatively deep and is sheltered from most winds with low currents resulting in a substrate that is mostly silt. Simpson Bay is a broad expanse of water and is a reasonably shallow (>12 m) sandy bay. The strong currents that flow through this bay have resulted in the distribution of coarse sediments throughout much of the bay, except for a small area of silty sand in the southern part of bay that is protected from prevailing westerly winds. Little Taylors Bay similarly has coarser sediments probably as a result of currents and a shallow basin. On the western side of the Channel there are a number of smaller embayments suchas Kettering and Oyster Cove. These bays are protected from the prevailing winds and are generally sandy with isolated seagrass patches.

In the lower end of the Channel in the Gordon area, the channel is relatively narrow and particularly

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 144 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] shallow. The region between Green Island and Arch Rock is no deeper than 15m, with most of the seabed between 10 and 15 m. This restriction increases current flow resulting in a well sorted sediment covered by large shell fragments. These shelly areas are also found adjacent to Alonnah and at other high current areas within the Channel.

Community types:

At the northern and southern end of the Channel the coastal reefs are subject to some swells and the algal communities here are dominated by Phyllospora in the upper subtidal with Ecklonia and mixed fucoids extending into deeper waters. Most of the Channel is protected from swells and reefs in these more sheltered waters have macroalgal communities dominated by mixed fucoids (Caulocystis, Cystophora spp.) in the shallows (1-2 m depth), grading to Sargassum spp. at 10 m.

Adjacent to the lower margins of rocky reefs there is usually a sandy to shelly strip, sometimes with seagrass but usually with Caulerpa spp., which extends into the sand or silt. Silt deposition on the reefs often limits algal growth, particularly on the deeper reefs in areas with limited water motion. In areas where there is moderate to strong current flow and where reefs extend below 5 m, sponges become an increasingly dominant community type. These sponge communities are commonly found on the ends of points along the eastern shore of North Bruny.

On shelly substrates in high current areas, seawhip and sponge communities can be found inquite shallow waters, often less than 10 m depth. A particularly notable area is found approximately 100 m north west of Simpsons Point, where a reef outcrops from the surrounding substrate of shelly sand. This reef contains a complex community of sponges, seawhips and red and green algae. At the reef margins very dense communities of seawhips occur, all within depths of less than 10 m. Similar seawhip and seafan aggregations can be found along the reef margin extending southwards along the eastern shore of Simpsons Point. The offshore reefs outcropping in 15-20 m in the vicinity of Ventenant Point have very little cover associated with them, and presumably this is due to low light levels and low current flows.

While seagrass is not a common community type within the Channel, the greatest coverage occurred on the shallow sandflats between Gordon and Middleton, with more isolated patches occurring along the remaining western shore of the Channel and North West Bay.

Special Features:

• Large areas of shelly-sandy substrate exposed to high current in waters less than 10 m depth; • Sponge and seawhip invertebrate communities on shelly substrate in depths from 6-15 min high current areas; • Reef outcrop in high current waters adjacent to Simpsons Point with a diverse and fragile invertebrate community; and • A broad range of sheltered habitats including shallow and relatively deep reefs and sediments.

Appendix 5 Resource Planning and Development Commission 145 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents]

3.11 Cloudy The Cloudy coastal section was distinguished on the basis of its exposure to high wave action and the extensive reef systems that run to the south of the major promontories (Figures. 17 and 18). The geology is dominated by dolerite coast, reefs and offshore islands. The coastline is dominated by steeply sloping to cliffy shores and one main bay at Cloudy Bay where a large sandy beach is located. On the western side of this region, between Partridge Island and Quartz Rock there are large areas of patchy reef, intermingled with a gravelly substrate. Reef habitats extend to 60-70 m depth at some locations due to the highly exposed nature of this coastline. To the east of Cloudy Bay another extensive section of reef is located around The Friars island group and reef there also extends into depths > 40 m.

Community types:

There are no significant sheltered water communities in this section of coastline, and those present are typical of those expected on a highly exposed coast. The macroalgal communities on reef are dominated by Durvillaea to 10 m, with Phyllospora extending from 5 to 15 m and Ecklonia from 10 to 30 m Sponges and other invertebrates dominate the benthic community below 30 m. Cover of the larger brown algae is not high in many areas, presumably due to the very high exposure to wave action, however, a higher cover of red algae and encrusting coral lines is evident. South and westerly aspects had the least cover of the larger brown algae. In deeper areas subject to currents (particularly off headlands), profuse sponge, seawhip and gorgonian fan communities are found. Macrocystis is common in the upper reaches of small bays and in the vicinity of Partridge Island where some protection from swells is available. The sedimentary substrates are composed entirely of exposed sand which extends from the shoreline in Cloudy Bay. Although not included in this mapping, seagrass beds are located in the sheltered, shallow waters within Cloudy Lagoon.

Special Features:

• Extensive deeper water (20-40 m depth) reef areas with associated communities of encrusting coral lines and red algae; • Extensive sponge and seawhip gardens in deep waters; and • Very deep (>40 m) rocky reef communities.

3.12 Huon The Huon coastal section was chosen to incorporate the southern waters of the D'Entrecasteaux Channel where exposure grades from moderate in the south, to the more sheltered waters of the mid- Channel region (Fig 19). The geology of this area is dominated by dolerite, which forms most of the promontory’s, islands and rocky offshore outcrops. A notable exception is Ventenant Point which is of sedimentary origin, and sediments form localised outcrops throughout the region. The dolerite reefs tend to extend into deeper waters than the sedimentary reefs. In the northern section of this coastline the maximum depth of dolerite reefs reaches approximately 15 m in areas such as Butts Reef, Zuidpool Rock, Arch Rock and southern Huon Island (all influenced by the Huon River tannins). In the more oceanic southern section, reefs extend to depths of 40 m in places between Southport and Dover. This section of coast has a particularly notable component of reef, with some areas extending to one Resource Planning and Development Commission 146 Inquiry into the establishment of marine protected areas within the Bruny Bioregion

Background Report [Back to contents] kilometre from the shoreline, and it is moderately exposed in contrast with the low to sheltered reefs found in the northern section. In most areas sand usually extends to depths of 20 m, grading to silty sand between 20 and 30 m and to silt at depths beyond 30 m. There is an extensive region of deep water (>30 m) to the east and south of Huon Island related to valley of the Huon River during glacial periods of lower sea levels. This deep region is predominantly composed of fine silt.

Community types:

The section of reef between Southport and Dover is moderately exposed and has a macroalgal community dominated by Durvillaea to between 2-5 m, with Phyllospora below to 10 m where it is replaced by Ecklonia. Invertebrate communities replace Ecklonia below 25 m. Macrocystis forms dense forests along much of this section of coast in depths of 5 to 20 m. On the low exposure south facing coasts in the vicinity of the Huon River, such as Butts Reef, southern Huon Island and Arch Rock, Durvillaea is found in the upper subtidal, with Phyllospora to 3-5 m and Ecklonia dominating at depths beyond this. Macrocystis is common between 5-8 m in areas subject to some current. Red algae are common at most depths and dominant at depths beyond 10 m, particularly along the northern coastline. In the more sheltered waters, mixed fucoid communities are present with Acrocarpia and Cystophora being dominant species and Xiphophora relatively common. In very sheltered waters such as Great Taylors Bay, Sargassum species become dominant. At the edges of reefs, there is commonly a sandy-shelly strip, where Heterozostera and Caulerpa species are often found. In areas where there are moderate currents, such as adjacent to Arch Rock, there is a substantial cover of large shell fragments overlying the sandy substrate and in these areas seawhips, seafans and sponges are common. The heavily tannin stained waters discharging from the Huon River lead to substantial modification of the communities that are found on the reefs, particularly on reefs closest to the mouth of the Huon river, and to the east, where the bulk of the tannin water flows. The tannin limits light penetration, reducing the maximum depth to which algae can grow and compressing the succession of algal species through the depth gradient to substantially less than that found in clear water. In this unusual community, few brown algae are found at depths greater than 7-10 m where they are replaced by red algae as the dominant cover. Beyond 15 m, red algae become less common and filter-feeding invertebrates become the dominant cover-forming community. This community is highly distinctive of the region, with the only similar assemblage of species being found in Bathurst Channel at Port Davey. Butts Reef appears to have the best representation of this assemblage due to its greater maximum depth than other reefs in the strongly tannin influenced zone.

Special Features:

• Tannin stained waters due to the outflow of the Huon River with unique community compositions, including compression of algal succession, high red algal diversity and shallow water invertebrate dominated communities; • Deep silt holes and channels (to 50 m) in the drowned river valleys of the Derwent and Huon rivers; and • Dense Macrocystis forests on reef between Southport and Dover.

Resource Planning and Development Commission 147