DOCSLIB.ORG

Norfolk Bay Final Environmental Monitoring Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Norfolk Bay Final Environmental Monitoring Report ENVIRONMENTAL LICENCE #9957 FOR GREEN HEAD PERMIT 18093 Final Broadscale Monitoring Report 24th April 2019 Report to EPA TASMANIA/ HUON AQUACULTURE COMPANY PTY LTD BY AQUACULTURE, MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD EL 9957/Permit 18093 Final Report April 2019 Document Distribution Document Date Name Company Version Copies Type 8/4/2019 Various Huon Aquaculture Draft V1.1 1 Mark Churchill/Stephen 9/4/2019 EPA Draft V1.2 1 Gallagher/David Horner DISCLAIMER: The present report is provided for the exclusive use of EPA Tasmania/Huon Aquaculture Company P/L as part of the requirements for the Monthly Broadscale Reporting as part of the conditions of the Environmental Licence for the operation of Emergency Permit 18093 under the Living Marine Resources Act 1995. Aquaculture, Management & Development P/L disclaims all liability for any adverse consequences arising from the use of information contained within this report by any third party. Dr. Dom O’Brien Managing Director. AMD 24th April 2019 EL 9957/Permit 18093 Final Report April 2019 Contents 1 Environmental Licence (EL) Holder .......................................................................................... 1 2 Operational Summary ............................................................................................................. 1 3 Summary of Activity ................................................................................................................ 3 4 ROV monitoring surveys ........................................................................................................ 10 5 Broadscale Water Column Characteristics ............................................................................. 17 6 Seagrass surveys (provided by Aquenal) ................................................................................ 32 List of Figures Figure 1 - One of the pens in-situ within the Permit, showing the four internal ‘pods’ with individual feeder systems, with a white Dissolved Oxygen string marker buoy in the foreground .......................................................................... 4 Figure 2 - Mooring and pen layout in the 4-pod grid ................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 3 - General location and bathymetric map (taken from Navionics website) of the Green Head/Lime Bay area also showing lease areas 117 (East) and 128 (West). Note the pens were located in depths greater than 20m (white shading). ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 4 - Map of the Permit area (ABCD) showing approximate location of harvest pens. Black outline -lease boundary, Red outline - zone boundary. Co-ordinates GDA94 Zone 55. ......................................................................................... 6 Figure 5 - Spot bathymetry survey results superimposed onto the Navionics chart confirming predicted depths for the Permit area. ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 6 - Current speed at 6m depth in the Permit area ......................................................................................................... 7 Figure 7 - ROV location maps, showing all ROV survey sites. Top left, November sites with incorrect IF5 site. Top right, detail of final survey (December) pen sites. Bottom left, baseline sites showing triplicate ‘compliance’ sites and controls. Bottom right, December All final survey sites ................................................................................................12 Figure 8 - Map of actual handfish ROV tracks with reference to EPA transect start points..................................................16 Figure 9 - Map of the water quality monitoring stations associated with Environmental Licence 9957/1. ........................17 Figure 10 - Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen and conductivity averages for individual sites (at 5m depth) ........................19 Figure 11 - Temperature and conductivity for different depths for all sites..........................................................................20 Figure 12 - Graphs of NOx, Ammonia and Total Kjeldahl N concentrations at surface, midwater (labelled 10m) and seafloor depths ................................................................................................................................................................21 Figure 13 - Graphs of DRP, Silica and Chlorophyll a concentrations at surface, midwater (labelled 10m) and seafloor depths ..............................................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 14 - Ammonia levels vs fish biomass in Permit area (dotted line represents fish biomass) ......................................23 Figure 15 - Comparison of integrated sample lab analysis with Sonde probe measurement for Chlorophyll a at all sites for the survey period. ......................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 16 - A. Abundance of Phytoplankton groups by mean cell count for all surveys, B. Relative abundance of groups for all surveys by mean cell count ..................................................................................................................................26 Figure 17 - A. Total cell abundance of Phytoplankton groups for all surveys, B. Relative total cell abundance of groups for all surveys ...................................................................................................................................................................28 Figure 18 - Total number of phytoplankton cells at each site when the fish pens were stocked. There is no data for NB5 as integrated samples were not taken during these surveys........................................................................................29 Figure 19 – Dissolved oxygen (saturation and concentration) and temperature at sites DLS1 & DLS2 for the period of stocking of the permit area. ............................................................................................................................................31 Figure 20 - Representative imagery from December 2018 Seagrass surveys (frame grabs) on following 3 pages .............39 EL 9957/Permit 18093 Final Report April 2019 List of Tables Table 1 - General velocity statistics for ADCP deployment ....................................................................................................... 7 Table 2 - Stocking biomass, harvest biomass and feed fed to Fish Pens .................................................................................. 9 Table 3 - Dive position summary for all ROV surveys ..............................................................................................................11 Table 4 - Interpretation summaries for all ROV surveys. ........................................................................................................13 Table 5 - Laboratory Limits of Reporting for the water analytes ............................................................................................20 Table 6 - Comparison of nutrient maxima against EPA Bruny Bioregion DGV's. ...................................................................24 Table 7 - Epiphyte coverage qualitative scale ..........................................................................................................................32 Table 8 - Summary of seagrass observations. Seagrass and Caulerpa coverage estimates represent average assessed across ten replicate frame grabs per dive. Average epiphyte scores represent average assessed across ten replicate frame grabs per dive. See ................................................................................................................................34 Table 9 - Survey coordinates for December 2018 seagrass surveys, based on the Mapping Grid of Australia Zone 55 (Datum GDA94). ..............................................................................................................................................................35 Table 10 - Frame grab analysis of December 2018 seagrass footage ...................................................................................36 EL 9957/Permit 18093 Final Report April 2019 1 Environmental Licence (EL) Holder Huon Aquaculture Company P/L. EL 9957 2 Operational Summary Contractor: AQUACULTURE, MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD (AMD) ACN 079 618 385 Phone 0421 331797 e-mail: [email protected] Client: EPA Tasmania 134, Macquarie St, Hobart. TAS 7000 Liaison: Stephen Gallagher; Mark Churchill Field work: Huon Aquaculture Company (Huon) and EPA Tasmania. Personnel: Adam Smark, Bill Joyes, Darryl Boothey (all Huon), Dom O’Brien (AMD) Dates of fieldwork: Baseline Environmental Survey – July 2018 Water quality monitoring -Huon surveys from August 2018 through to February 2019. ROV monitoring surveys – July, October, November and December 2018 Laboratory Analysis: Nutrients in water - Analytical State Laboratories (AST), Hobart, TAS. Phytoplankton description and counts - Analytical State Laboratories (AST), Hobart, TAS. Monitoring Equipment for Huon surveys: A Getac
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Groundwater, Mineral Resources and Land Stability in the Tasman Peninsula. 1. Groundwater from Fractured Rocks
    1979/3. Groundwater, mineral resources and land stability in the Tasman Peninsula. W.C. Cromer, R.C. Donaldson P. C. Stevenson V.N. Threader Abstract Groundwater prospects, mineral deposits and land stability are discussed to provide information for a planning study of the Tasman Peninsula. INTRODUCTION This report was written at the request of the Commissioner for Town and Country Planning, and is the result of a map compilation, a search of records and field work during the period 20 - 24 November 1978. 1. Groundwater from fractured rocks P.C. Stevenson The amoun~ of water that may be obtained from the hard rocks of the Peninsula by boreholes is controlled by the composition and conditions of weathering and fracture. The amount of direct information is limited because only eight bore­ holes have been recorded, all at Koonya, Premaydena or Nubeena, but exper­ ience in other parts of the State enable some general comments to be made. The geology of the Peninsula is shown in Figure 1. The Jurassic dolerite, which forms many of the most rugged and remote parts of the Peninsula, has not been drilled for water but is regarded throughout Tasmania as an extremely poor prospect; very hard to drill, almost always dry and where water exists it is hard and saline. It cannot be recommended. The Permian mudstone and fine-grained sandstone have not been drilled in the Peninsula, but elsewhere are reliable producers of good quality groundwater. yields of 20 to 150 l/min and qualities of 200 - 600 mg/l of total dissolved solids are usual.
    [Show full text]
  • Tasman Peninsula
    7 A OJ? TASMAN PENINSULA M.R. Banks, E.A. Calholln, RJ. Ford and E. Williams University of Tasmania (MRB and the laie R.J. Ford). b!ewcastle fo rmerly University of Tasmama (EAC) and (ie,a/Ogle,Cl; Survey of Tasmania (E'W) (wjth two text-figures lUld one plate) On Tasman Peninsula, southeastern Tasmania, almost hOrizontal Permian marine and Triassic non-marine lOcks were inllUded by Jurassic dolerite, faulted and overiain by basalt Marine processes operating on the Jurassic and older rocks have prcl(iU!ced with many erosional features widely noted for their grandeur a self-renewing economic asset. Key Words: Tasman Peninsula, Tasmania, Permian, dolerite, erosional coastline, submarine topography. From SMITH, S.J. (Ed.), 1989: IS lllSTORY ENOUGH ? PA ST, PRESENT AND FUTURE USE OF THE RESOURCES OF TA SMAN PENINSULA Royal Society of Tasmania, Hobart: 7-23. INTRODUCTION Coal was discovered ncar Plunkett Point by surveyors Woodward and Hughes in 1833 (GO 33/ Tasman Peninsula is known for its spectacular coastal 16/264·5; TSA) and the seam visited by Captain scenery - cliffs and the great dolerite columns O'Hara Booth on May 23, 1833 (Heard 1981, p.158). which form cliffs in places, These columns were Dr John Lhotsky reported to Sir John Franklin on the first geological features noted on the peninsula. this coal and the coal mining methods in 1837 (CSO Matthew Flinders, who saw the columns in 1798, 5/72/1584; TSA). His thorough report was supported reported (1801, pp.2--3) that the columns at Cape by a coloured map (CSO 5/11/147; TSA) showing Pillar, Tasman Island and Cape "Basaltcs" (Raoul) some outcrops of different rock This map, were "not strictlybasaltes", that they were although not the Australian not the same in form as those Causeway Dictionary of (Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Bay and Frederick Henry Bay Monitoring Program
    EPA Water Quality Monitoring Plan for Norfolk Bay, 2018-19 Introduction The EPA has undertaken to conduct water quality monitoring within Norfolk Bay (and Frederick Henry Bay) to assist in understanding of the marine environment and provide an independent validation of water quality data provided by the aquaculture industry. Aims To provide water quality information to increase the understanding of water quality within Norfolk Bay and Frederick Henry Bay To provide water quality information to assist nutrient dispersion modelling and biogeochemical model development and validation To provide independent validation of water quality information collected by (or on behalf of) Huon Aquaculture. Description Norfolk Bay forms the northern extent of the Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay Marine Farm Development Plan Area (MFDPA). The monitoring program is to commence during August 2018, prior to the Huon Aquaculture Permit Area being stocked with fish. Under the terms of Environmental Licence 9957 held by Huon Aquaculture, water quality monitoring is to be conducted at six (6) locations within Norfolk Bay and Fredrick Henry Bay. Of these five (5) were selected for monitoring under this program for validation purposes (See Table 1). Water quality data is to be collected on a monthly basis. Program commencement: August 2018 Scheduled completion: January 2019 Extension of the monitoring program is subject to review. An overview of the monitoring locations is shown in Table 1 and a map of the locations is shown in Figure 1. A list and overview of the environmental parameters to be collected is shown in Table 2. EPA Water Quality Monitoring Plan for Norfolk Bay 2018 1 Table 1: List and overview of monitoring locations WQ monitoring Distance from Site ID Location Easting Northing Latitude longitude Comments required lease boundary Nutrients, phytoplankton, ~13.3 km EPA-NB1 Eaglehawk Bay 567205 5237334 -43.0137 147.8247 field measurements Far-Field Nutrients, phytoplankton, ~ 600 m Baseline site 2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution Act 1934 (Tas) [Transcript
    [Received from the Clerk of the Legislative Council the 10th day of January 1935 A.G. Brammall Registrar Supreme Court] TASMANIA. _________ THE CONSTITUTION ACT 1934. _________ ANALYSIS. PART I. – PRELIMINARY. Division III. – The Assembly. 1. Short title. 22. Constitution of the Assembly. 2. Repeal. 23. Triennial Parliaments. 3. Interpretation. 24. Election of Speaker. 25. Quorum of the Assembly. PART II. – THE CROWN. Division IV. – Electoral Divisions and 4. Parliament not dissolved by demise Qualifications Of Electors. of the Crown. 5. Demise of the Crown not to affect 26. Council Divisions. things done before proclamation 27. Assembly Divisions. thereof. 28. Qualification of electors for the 6. All appointments, &c., by the Gover- Legislative Council. nor to continue in force notwith- Joint tenants. standing demise of the Crown. 29. Assembly electors. 7. All civil or criminal process, and all contracts, bonds, and engagements Division V. – Disqualification; Vacation with or on behalf of His Majesty Of Office; Penalty. to subsist and continue notwith- standing demise. 30. Oath to be taken by members. 8. Deputy-Governor’s powers. 31. Commonwealth membership. Interpretation. 32. Office of profit. Exercise of powers by Deputy- 33. Contractors. Governor. 34. Vacation of office for other causes. Provision as to deputy of Lieutenant- 35. Penalty for sitting when disqualified. Governor or Administrator. Act to be retrospective. PART IV. – MONEY BILLS; POWERS OF HOUSES PART III. – PARLIAMENT. 36. Interpretation. Division I. – Both Houses. 37. Money bills to originate in the Assembly. 9. Continuation of existing Houses. 38. All money votes to be recommended Continuance in office of existing by the Governor.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Development Information to Accompany
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TO ACCOMPANY A REQUEST TO AMEND THE TASMAN PENINSULA AND NORFOLK BAY MARINE FARMING DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOVEMBER 2005 This environmental impact statement has been prepared by; Tassal Operations Pty Ltd. G.P.O. Box 1645 Hobart Tasmania Australia 7001 Phone: 1300 TASSAL (1300 827725) Fax: 1300 880 179 Web: www.tassal.com.au E-mail: [email protected] ii GLOSSARY ADCP Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler AGD Amoebic Gill Disease ASC Aquaculture Stewardship Council Salmon Aquaculture Standard CAMBA China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement DPIW Department of Primary Industries and Water EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPBCA Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 FCR Feed Conversion Rate GDA Geocentric Datum of Australia GPS Global Positioning System HAB Harmful Algal Bloom IMAS Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies JAMBA Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement MAST Marine and Safety Tasmania MFDP Marine Farming Development Plan MFPA Marine Farming Planning Act 1995 MFPRP Marine Farming Planning Review Panel PA Planning Authority PS Proposal Summary PSEG Proposal Specific Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines ROKAMBA Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement SCUBA Self Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus TSPA Threatened Species Protection Act iii 1 Table of Contents Contents GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................... III 1 ......... Table of Contents .......................................................................iv
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Mount Koonya Area
    Mineral Resources Tasmania Tasmanian Geological Survey Tasmania DEPARTMENT of INFRASTRUCTURE, Record 2003/08 ENERGY and RESOURCES Geology of the Mount Koonya area by S. M. Forsyth CONTENTS SUMMARY ……………………………………………………………………………………… 3 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………… 5 Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………… 5 GEOLOGY ……………………………………………………………………………………… 6 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 6 Previous geological maps and investigations …………………………………………………… 6 Stratigraphy ………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Lower Parmeener Supergroup ……………………………………………………………… 7 Upper Parmeener Supergroup ……………………………………………………………… 7 Cygnet Coal Measures correlate — Permian? ………………………………………………… 7 Dominantly quartz sandstone sequence (Rqph) — Early Triassic ………………………………… 8 Interbedded siltstone, fine-grained sandstone and mudstone sequence (Rqm) — Early Triassic ………… 8 Quartz sandstone unit with granules (Rvvp) — Middle? Triassic………………………………… 9 Undifferentiated quartz rich lithic sandstone, quartz sandstone and mudstone (Rvv)— Middle Triassic … 10 Quaternary deposits ……………………………………………………………………… 10 Slope deposits …………………………………………………………………………… 10 Other Quaternary deposits ………………………………………………………………… 11 Igneous rocks ………………………………………………………………………………… 11 Jurassic dolerite …………………………………………………………………………… 11 Metamorphic effects of the dolerite …………………………………………………………… 12 Structure …………………………………………………………………………………… 13 Attitude of Upper Parmeener Supergroup …………………………………………………… 13 Dolerite structure ………………………………………………………………………… 13 Faults ……………………………………………………………………………………
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Broadscale Monitoring Report for the Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay
    Annual Broadscale Monitoring Report for the Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay Marine Farming Development Plan Area for the period June 2017 to May 2018 July 2018 AQUENAL www.aquenal.com.au Aquenal Pty Ltd Tasman Annual Broadscale Monitoring Report July 2018 Document Control and Distribution Document Date Name Company Version Copies Type 31/7/2018 Matt Barrenger Tassal Electronic 1.0 1 1/8/2018 Mark Churchill EPA Electronic 1.0 1 COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Aquenal Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Aquenal Pty Ltd constitutes an infringement of copyright. DISCLAIMER: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Aquenal Pty Ltd’s client and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between Aquenal Pty Ltd and its Client. Aquenal Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. 2 Aquenal Pty Ltd Tasman Annual Broadscale Monitoring Report July 2018 Table of Contents 1. Operational Summary .................................................................................................................................... 5 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 6 3. Methods ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Coal Mines Historic Site
    Australian Heritage Database Places for Decision Class : Historic Identification List: National Heritage List Name of Place: Coal Mines Historic Site Other Names: Place ID: 105931 File No: 6/01/106/0006 Nomination Date: 11/07/2006 Principal Group: Mining and Mineral Processing Status Legal Status: 27/07/2006 - Nominated place Admin Status: 09/08/2006 - Under assessment by AHC--Australian place Assessment Recommendation: Place meets one or more NHL criteria Assessor's Comments: Other Assessments: : Location Nearest Town: Saltwater River Distance from town 3 (km): Direction from town: N Area (ha): 350 Address: Coal Mine Rd, Saltwater River, TAS 7186 LGA: Tasman Municipality TAS Location/Boundaries: About 350ha, 3km north of Saltwater River, comprising the following areas: 1. Coal Mines Historic Site. 2. An area bounded by a line commencing at the intersection of the northern boundary of the Coal Mines Historic Site with MGA easting 558200mE (approximate MGA point 558200mE 5241560mN), then via straight lines joining the following MGA points consecutively; 558160mE 5241830mN, 558100mE 5242480mN, 557920mE 5242660mN, 557710mE 5242560mN, 557510mE 5242070mN, then southerly to the intersection of the southern boundary of Lime Bay Nature Reserve with MGA easting 557470mE (approximate MGA point 557470mE 5241700mN), then easterly via that boundary and its alignment to the point of commencement. 3. A 340 metre seaward offset extending between the easterly prolongations of the northern and southern boundaries of the Coal Mines Historic Site. The offset extends from the High Water Mark. Assessor's Summary of Significance: The Coal Mines Historic Site contains the workings of a penal colliery and convict establishment that operated from 1833-1848.
    [Show full text]
  • The Convict Trail: a Community Project on the Tasman Peninsula
    The Convict Trail: a community project on the Tasman Peninsula © Rosemary Hollow The Convict Trail is located on the Tasman Peninsula and includes Port Arthur Historic Site. Prior to the dreadful massacre in April 1996 Port Arthur Historic Site had consistently had the highest number of tourists of any tourist destination in Tasmania.1 However after April 1996 there was a dramatic drop in tourist numbers to the Peninsula. It was not only the historic site at Port Arthur that depended on tourists for survival; there were also many businesses and individuals on the Peninsula who depended on tourists, to support their employment at the Site, or their accommodation and other tourist-related businesses. One of the positive outcomes and part of the recovery process for the Peninsula was the formation of the Port Arthur and Tasman Region Visitor Association. This association included representatives of Port Arthur Historic Site, the Tasman Council, local tourist-related businesses, and the Parks and Wildlife Service, who are responsible for managing a number of significant historic sites on the Peninsula including the Coal Mines and Eaglehawk Neck. The Association's agenda was not only to attract tourists back to the Peninsula but also to consider how to encourage tourists to extend their stay. Prior to 1996 the majority of tourists came to the Peninsula for a day visit only. If tourists could be encouraged to stay overnight it would provide additional income for the businesses on the Peninsula, most of which had a drastically reduced income in 1996. The Tasman Peninsula is not short of historic sites.2 Port Arthur was established as a penal settlement in 1830, and within five years a number of outstations were established around the peninsula as sites for farming, timber getting, coal mining, and a military station.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Amendment No. 5 to the Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay Marine Farming Development Plan November 2005
    Draft Amendment No. 5 to the Tasman Peninsula and Norfolk Bay Marine Farming Development Plan November 2005 Report of the Marine Farming Planning Review Panel August 2018 i Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Purpose of Report .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Structure of Report ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Background ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 Legislative Changes – Finfish Farming Environmental Regulation Act 2017 ................................................ 2 Role of the Marine Farming Planning Review Panel .................................................................................... 3 Context ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 2 Requirements of the Act ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Sections 21 and 22 of the Marine Farming Planning Act 1995 ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The English Ate the Derwent and the Risdon Settlement
    (No. 108.) 188 9. PARLIAMENT OF TABMANIA. THE ENGLISH AT THE DERWENT, AND THE. RISDOK SETTLElVIENT : BY JAMES BACKHOUSE W ALKBR. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by His Excellency's Command. THE ENGLISH AT THE DERWENT,, AND THE RISDON SETTLE ME NT. BY JAMES BACKHOUSE WALKER. 1. THE ENGLISH AT THE DERWENT. colonist;; of New South Wales could not trade with the IN a paper which I had the honour to read before the home country except by permission of the Company. Royal Society last November, entitled "The French in So late as the year 1806* it successfully resisted the sale Van Diemen's Land," I endeavoured to show how the in Eng~and of the first cargo of whale-oil and sealskins discoveries of the French at the Derwent, and their shipped by a Sydney firm in the Lady Barlom, on the supposed design of occupation, influenced Governor ground that the charter of the colony ga_ve the King's mind, and led him to despatch the first English colonists no right to trade, and that the transact10n was colony to these shores. That paper brought the story a violation of the Company's charter and against its to the 12th September, 1803, when the Albion whaler, welfare. It was urged on behalf of the Court of with Governor Bowen on board, cast anchor in Risdon Directors that such " piratical enterprises" as the Cove, five days after the Lad_y Nelson, which had venture of the owners of the Lady Barlorv must at brought the rest of his small establishment.
    [Show full text]
  • HUON AQUACULTURE | Stakeholder Engagement | Norfolk Bay Temporary Harvest Proposal
    HUON AQUACULTURE | Stakeholder engagement | Norfolk Bay temporary harvest proposal STAKEHOLDER ISSUES DISCUSSED HUON’S RESPONSE 1.0 Tasman Mayor Roseanne 1.1 Is there an alternative solution to We are unable to harvest in Storm Heyward harvesting in Norfolk Bay? Bay due to weather conditions. However once the Ronja Storm arrives we will be able to use the Ronja Huon for harvesting in situ. The vessel has been commissioned and is due to be delivered in September next year. 1.2 Concerns about lights during harvest All lights used during the harvest will be trained downwards so as not to impact local residents. While the Captain Bill is in transit only the minimal lights for maintaining staff safety and navigation will be used. This will include keeping all lights trained downwards where possibleThe Ronja Huon where possible, will only transfer fish to the harvest pens in Norfolk Bay during daylight hours, weather permitting. This will avoid the need to use lights on the vessel. Huon anticipates that there will be minimal impacts from lights on residents and waterways users given 1 HUON AQUACULTURE | Stakeholder engagement | Norfolk Bay temporary harvest proposal the proposed avoidance and mitigation measures. If any neighbour or waterway user wants to discuss this issue, Huon will work with them to reduce any impacts caused by lights. 1.3 Concerns about lights while the Captain Bill Position of lights and covers on lights is in transit subject to a final review before commencing Norfolk Bay operations. Also see 1.2 1.4 Concerns about noise during harvest A noise assessment has been undertaken by an independent noise expert.
    [Show full text]