DOCSLIB.ORG

Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study. Part A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study. Part A o i' ,,O (iI ? local Government Association of South Australia State Government of South Australia Audit of Existing Information Final Report r LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION AND STATE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study 1 .Part A —Audit of existing information Prepared for: METROPOLITAN ADELAIDE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STEERING COMMITTEE C/- 16 Hutt Street, Adelaide, South Australia 5000 Prepared by: Kellogg Brown & Root Pty Ltd ABN 91 007 660 317 186 Greenhill Road, Parkside, South Australia 5063 Telephone (08) 8301 1234, Facsimile (08) 8301 1301 L 23 July 2004 L AEV400-C-REP-003-Rev. 0 L L Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GLOSSARY OF TERMS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 COMPONENT 1 - ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT POSITION 2.1 Background 2-1 2.2 Stormwater management terminology 2-2 2.3 Data collection 2-4 2.4 Consultation 2-7 2.5 Known flood mitigation projects 2-16 2.6 Process for prioritising works 2-19 2.7 Flood hazard assessment 2-21 2.8 Flood damage assessment 2-23 2.9 Stormwater flow reduction 2-25 2.10 Environmental management 2-32 2.11 Regulatory and policy framework 2-34 2.12 Urban development 2-44 2.13 Information gaps 247 3 COMPONENT 2 — RECOMMENDED ACTIONS AND WAYS FORWARD 3.1 Flood hazard management 3-1 3.2 Stormwater flow reduction 3-5 3.3 Assessment of outstanding projects 3-8 3.4 Output based specifications 3-12 3.5 Regulatory and policy framework 3-14 3.6 Further investigations 3-15 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Conclusions 4-1 4.2 Recommendations 4-11 5 REFERENCES APPENDICES A Catchment boundaries and stormwater networks B Council consultation summary notes C Summary of currently identified outstanding drainage and flood mitigation projects D Catchment Management Subsidy Scheme historical funding E Catchment Management Subsidy Scheme identified project list and outstanding costs F Council Development Plan analysis G Catchment plans depicting potential dwelling increases AEV400-C-REP-003-Rev. 0 23 July 2004 KBR r, r, r, = 7 Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study Part A: Audit of Existing Information Executive Summary INTRODUCTION In 2003, the Local Government Association of South Australia prepared the `Stormwater Management Strategy' dated 27 June 2003, and presented it to the State Government (Minister for Local Government). The Strategy, targeted specifically at metropolitan Adelaide, was prepared to `provide a constructive means to address the significant challenges and opportunities in relation to stormwater management in metropolitan Adelaide'. Endorsed unanimously by all metropolitan council Mayors and Chief Executive Officers, the strategy proposed a partnership approach to stormwater management with equal responsibility for funding between councils and the State Government. `Step 1' of the proposed strategy - an independent study to clearly define `The What' subsequently resulted in the preparation of the terms of reference brief for the `Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study' (MASMS). The MASMS is being undertaken in three distinct, although inter related parts: • Part A—Audit of Existing Information - Component 1: Assessment of the current position - Component 2: Recommended actions/way forward • Part B—Stormwater Harvesting and Use • Part C Apportionment of Council Costs. This report presents the outcome of Part A: Audit of Existing Information. CONTEXT The assessment, conclusions drawn and recommendations presented in this report are based on a detailed examination of exiting drainage, flood mitigation and stormwater management reports, as well as an extensive consultation process involving all metropolitan councils within the study area, relevant State Government departments and other stakeholder groups. AEV400-GREP-003-Rev. 0 23 July 2004 " KBR Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study Part A: Audit of Existing Information The general perception of the significance of stormwater problems in Adelaide is highly varied, primarily due to the fact that Adelaide has long periods of time (often years) without significant rainfall events and associated flooding. Expenditure on stormwater infrastructure appears to be affected by this perception, often resulting in stormwater being a low priority for State Government and council spending, when compared to more `visible' projects. CONCLUSIONS It is concluded that a number of metropolitan councils do not have significant stormwater related problems, largely as a result of the size and topography of the contributing catchments and the age and condition of infrastructure. These councils, however, can be contributors to downstream problems, and therefore should be part of the solution (refer also Study Part C Report). There is a vast range in the standard of existing systems across metropolitan Adelaide, and most council areas have quite differing approaches to flood management including a combination of catchment based solutions (i.e. detention basins and underground drainage systems) and on-site management requirements for new developments. Detailed flood hazard and flood damage assessment has not been undertaken within the Study area, except for the Brown Hill and Keswick Creek and River Torrens catchments. Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) solutions are largely suitable only for new developments, where there is opportunity to incorporate open space into the planning and `shaping' of the development. For projects in existing developed areas with no or inadequate drainage systems, apart from on-site methods, the lack of open space (unless private property is acquired) will largely prevent WSUD solutions due to the additional costs associated with significant land acquisition, channel widening etc. Significant stormwater works required to be undertaken have been collated, categorised and costed. Based on historical cost estimates (adjusted to 2004 dollars), the estimated cost of identified significant stormwater flood mitigation works in metropolitan Adelaide is in the order of $160 million. This value excludes local level projects (catchment areas less than 40 ha) and land acquisition. An output based procurement model has been considered as one mechanism for achieving the backlog of outstanding works. Such a model can be applied to specific individual projects on a catchment wide basis or on a metropolitan wide basis. This approach has the potential to provide more opportunity to incorporate `innovative' and cost effective solutions to stormwater problems, addressing whole catchment/metropolitan wide benefits to the whole of water cycle under one contractual arrangement. One of the key issues associated with such a model is that hydrology and flooding is probabilistic, not an exact science, and hence will make it difficult to AEV400-C-REP-003-Rev. 0 vi 23 July 2004 KBR Metropolitan Adelaide Stormwater Management Study Part A: Audit of Existing Information clearly and unambiguously define the outputs. In addition, potential legal and contractual complexities with such an arrangement are likely to be significant. The notion that on-site detention (OSD) and on-site retention (OSR) will solve major system deficiencies is incorrect. Such devices are suited for consideration as part of the minor systems and would be overwhelmed during major events. The majority of metropolitan Adelaide is flat and will provide little opportunity to collect on-site surface flows from large events, and roofs are not designed to collect large storm events. The blanket approach of requiring OSD and OSR should be treated with caution as preliminary work has shown their effectiveness is very catchment specific and may actually be detrimental. Local disposal methods into the shallow aquifer have been proven for small scale (i.e. residential) developments for flood mitigation purposes, however, given the current (and proposed) onerous and stringent requirements set by the EPA for sampling and testing, it is unlikely that these will be economically feasible. As Adelaide's urban fringes approach a maximum level of growth and an increased trend to inner metropolitan living continues, urban consolidation will place further pressure on the existing stormwater infrastructure. The areas of highest potential for urban consolidation are considered to be within the western suburbs (Cities of West Torrens and Charles Sturt) and north eastern suburbs (Cities of Campbelltown and Tea Tree Gully). More specifically, these areas relate to the Meakin Terrace, Trimmer Parade, Port Road, Dry Creek and Third to Fifth Creek catchments. The impact on drainage systems due to urban consolidation metropolitan wide is yet to be quantified. Policy and regulatory tools are an important aspect of stormwater management. The role of the Development Act is to establish a framework for making policy and provide for its implementation. A summary of the important aspects and limitations of the Development Act are outlined as follows: • It is emphasised that it only controls development as defined by Section 4 of the Development Act 1993, being those activities such as land division, building works, changes in land use and certain prescribed works in floodplains. • The application of the Development Plan largely refers to new development and it has no effect on existing buildings and land uses that are not contained within a particular development application. • The State Government, through the Minister, can amend the Development Plan through a Ministerial Planning Amendment Report (PAR).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biodiversity
    Biodiversity KEY5 FACTS as hunting), as pasture grasses or as aquarium species Introduced (in the case of some marine species). They have also • Introduced species are been introduced accidentally, such as in shipments of recognised as a leading Species imported grain or in ballast water. cause of biodiversity loss Introduced plants, or weeds, can invade and world-wide. compete with native plant species for space, light, Trends water and nutrients and because of their rapid growth rates they can quickly smother native vegetation. • Rabbit numbers: a DECLINE since Similarly to weeds, many introduced animals compete introduction of Rabbit Haemorrhagic with and predate on native animals and impact on Disease (RHD, also known as calicivirus) native vegetation. They have high reproductive rates although the extent of the decline varies and can tolerate a wide range of habitats. As a result across the State. they often establish populations very quickly. •Fox numbers: DOWN in high priority Weeds can provide shelter for pest animals, conservation areas due to large-scale although they can provide food for or become habitat baiting programs; STILL A PROBLEM in for native animals. Blackberry, for example, is an ideal other parts of the State. habitat for the threatened Southern Brown Bandicoot. This illustrates the complexity of issues associated •Feral camel and deer numbers: UP. with pest control and highlights the need for control •Feral goat numbers: DECLINING across measures to have considered specific conservation Weed affected land – Mount Lofty Ranges the State. outcomes to be undertaken over time and to be Photo: Kym Nicolson •Feral pig numbers: UNKNOWN.
    [Show full text]
  • The River Torrens—Friend and Foe Part 2
    The River Torrens—friend and foe Part 2: The river as an obstacle to be crossed RICHARD VENUS Richard Venus BTech, BA, GradCertArchaeol, MIE Aust is a retired electrical engineer who now pursues his interest in forensic heritology, researching and writing about South Australia’s engineering heritage. He is Chairman of Engineering Heritage South Australia and Vice President of the History Council of South Australia. His email is [email protected] Beginnings In Part 1 we looked the River Torrens as a friend—a source of water vital to the establishment of the new settlement. However, in common with so many other European settlements, the developing community very quickly polluted its own water supply and another source had to be found. This was still the River Torrens but the water was collected in the Torrens Gorge, about 13 kilometres north-east of the City, and piped down Payneham Road to the Valve House in the East Parklands. Water from this source was first made available in December 1860 as reported in the South Australian Advertiser on 26 December. The significant challenge presented by the Torrens was getting across it. In summer, when the river was little more than a series of pools, you could just walk across. However, there must have been a significant body of water somewhere – probably in the vicinity of today’s weir – because in July 1838 tenders were called ‘For the rent for six months of the small punt on the Torrens for foot passengers, for each of whom a toll of one penny will be authorised to be charged from day-light to dark, and two pence after dark’ (Register 28 July).
    [Show full text]
  • OPEN SPACE and PLACES for PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils
    OPEN SPACE AND PLACES FOR PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils OPEN SPACE AND PLACES FOR PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils PROJECT NAME Whitmore Square/ Iparrityi Master Plan - Stage 1 Upgrade (City of Adelaide) COST AND FUNDING CONTRIBUTION Council contribution $1,400,000 Planning and Development Fund contribution $900,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,300,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Council is seeking funding to deliver the first stage of the master plan to establish pleasant walking paths and extend the valued leafy character of the square from its centre to its edges. This project involves: Safety improvements to the northern tri-intersection at Morphett and Wright Streets. Greening and paths that frame the inner edges of the square. The Northern tri-intersection will commence first, followed by the greening and pedestrian connections. TIMELINE OF THE WORKS Construction work to begin May and be completed by December 2020. Masterplan perspective PROJECT NAME Moonta Street Upgrade (City of Adelaide) COST AND FUNDING CONTRIBUTION Contribution Source Amount Council contribution TBC Planning and Development Fund contribution $2,000,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST $4,000,000* PROJECT DESCRIPTION Council is seeking funding to establish Moonta Street as the next key linkage in connecting the Central Market to Riverbank Precinct through north-south road laneways. The project involves: • the installation of quality stone paving throughout and the installation of landscaping to position Moonta Street as a comfortable green promenade and a premium precinct for evening activity. TIMELINE OF WORKS • The first stage of this project is detailed design prior to any works on ground commencing.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Groundwater Recharge Estimates for the Catchments of the Western Mount Lofty Ranges Prescribed Water Resources Area
    TECHNICAL NOTE 2008/16 Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER RECHARGE ESTIMATES FOR THE CATCHMENTS OF THE WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY RANGES PRESCRIBED WATER RESOURCES AREA Graham Green and Dragana Zulfic November 2007 © Government of South Australia, through the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 2008 This work is Copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission obtained from the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Chief Executive, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001. Disclaimer The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. ISBN 978-1-921218-81-1 Preferred way to cite this publication Green G & Zulfic D, 2008, Summary of groundwater recharge estimates for the catchments of the Western
    [Show full text]
  • Torrens Lake Update: Summer 2020–21
    Controlling blue-green algae in the lake has been most successful when releasing flows down the river – high flow rates, for a short duration, mix up and cool down the water – as well as benefiting the whole river system. Highbury Windsor Gardens Lochiel Park Catchment Monitoring Infrastructure Vale Park Felixstow management • Every 15 minutes, temperature, dissolved REMOVING LARGE ITEMS OF RUBBISH St Peters Flinders Park Adelaide oxygen and salinity, and weather conditions Adelaide • Gross pollutant traps on all stormwater Lockleys Hills • Removed over 3.5 tonnes Adelaide are measured from 3 permanent water of Carp directly entering the lake quality monitoring stations in the lake • Gross pollutant traps throughout • Erosion prevention and Gulf St • Twice weekly water quality monitoring the catchment, including on First, Vincent riverbank planting at 7 locations over summer Second, Third, Fourth and Fifth creeks • Woody weed removal + capturing over 5000 tonnes in the last • Weekly water quality monitoring along replanting with native two years the river – including the sea at the outlet plants along linear park • Floating boom on the river in St Peters • Twice yearly fish monitoring along the • Over 15,000 native aquatic river and around the lake MINIMISING NUTRIENTS IN THE LAKE plants placed in the lake • Duck feeding station in the lake closed • Regular dredging of the lake, • Aquatic plants added to take up nutrients 3 with over 3000m removed • Floating wetlands (aquatic plants grown on a floating platform) in 2017 being trialled
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Surface Water Resources of Patawalonga Catchment and the Impact of Farm Dam Development
    DWLBC REPORT Assessment of Surface Water Resources of Patawalonga Catchment and the Impact of Farm Dam Development 2007/09 Assessment of Surface Water Resources of Patawalonga Catchment and the Impact of Farm Dam Development Kim Teoh Knowledge and Information Division Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation January 2006 Report DWLBC 2007/09 Knowledge and Information Division Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 25 Grenfell Street, Adelaide GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone National (08) 8463 6946 International +61 8 8463 6946 Fax National (08) 8463 6999 International +61 8 8463 6999 Website www.dwlbc.sa.gov.au Disclaimer Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. © Government of South Australia, through the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 2007 This work is Copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission obtained from the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Chief Executive, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001. ISBN-13 978-1-921218-45-3 Preferred way to cite this publication Teoh, K 2006, Assessment of Surface Water Resources of Patawalonga Catchment and the Impact of Farm Dam Development.
    [Show full text]
  • Ambient Water Quality Monitoring of the Port River Estuary 1995-2000
    AMBIENT WATER QUALITY of the Port River Estuary 1995-2000 Government of South Australia Water monitoring report Ambient water quality of the Port River estuary September 1995–August 2000 Ambient Water Quality Monitoring: Port River Estuary, September 1995–August 2000 Author: Sam Wade For further information please contact: Information Officer Environment Protection Agency Department for Environment and Heritage GPO Box 2607 Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone: (08) 8204 2004 Facsimile: (08) 8204 9393 Free call (country): 1800 623 445 ISBN 1 876562 36 6 MAY 2002 © Environment Protection Authority This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority. Printed on recycled paper 2 SUMMARY This report summarises the water quality of the Port River estuary between September 1995 and August 2000. In an on-going monitoring program water samples are collected monthly from nine sites in the Port River, Barker Inlet, the inner harbour and Outer Harbor. These are analysed for a range of physical, chemical and biological parameters including salinity, turbidity, metals, nutrients, algae and bacteria. This is the second report the Environment Protection Authority has published on the ambient water quality of the Port River. The first report summarised data from September 1995 to December 1996 (EPA, 1997a). The report sets criteria for each water quality parameter, allowing us to describe water quality as good, moderate or poor.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Options in Response to Catchment Urbanization: a Scenario Analysis by SWAT
    water Article Water Quality Control Options in Response to Catchment Urbanization: A Scenario Analysis by SWAT Hong Hanh Nguyen *, Friedrich Recknagel and Wayne Meyer Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia; [email protected] (F.R.); [email protected] (W.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-044-919-2658 Received: 7 November 2018; Accepted: 11 December 2018; Published: 13 December 2018 Abstract: Urbanization poses a challenge to sustainable catchment management worldwide. This study compares streamflows and nutrient loads in the urbanized Torrens catchment in South Australia at present and future urbanization levels, and addresses possible mitigation of urbanization effects by means of the control measures: river bank stabilization, buffer strip expansion, and wetland construction. A scenario analysis by means of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) based on the anticipated urban population density growth in the Torrens catchment over the next 30 years predicted a remarkable increase of streamflow and Total Phosphorous loads but decreased Total Nitrogen loads. In contrast, minor changes of model outputs were predicted under the present urbanization scenario, i.e. urban area expansion on the grassland. Scenarios of three feasible control measures demonstrated best results for expanding buffer zone to sustain stream water quality. The construction of wetlands along the Torrens River resulted in the reduction of catchment runoff, but only slight decreases in TN and TP loads. Overall, the results of this study suggested that combining the three best management practices by the adaptive development of buffer zones, wetlands and stabilized river banks might help to control efficiently the increased run-off and TP loads by the projected urbanization of the River Torrens catchment.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Ecosystem Condition Reports
    Water quality Information Sheet Aquatic ecosystem condition reports 2011 panel assessment of creeks and rivers in the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM region Issued September 2012 EPA984/12: This information sheet describes the outcome of the panel assessment of creeks and rivers in the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges, NRM region based on monitoring data collected in 2011. Introduction The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) coordinates a monitoring, evaluation and reporting (MER) program on the aquatic ecosystem condition of South Australian creeks and rivers. This MER program is designed to meet several objectives: • Providing a statewide monitoring framework for creeks and rivers that revolves through the NRM regions with sufficient frequency to allow for State of the Environment Reporting purposes. • Describing aquatic ecosystem condition for broad general public understanding. • Identifying the key pressures and management responses to those pressures. • Providing a useful reporting format that can support environmental decision making within government, community and industry. This information sheet provides a summary of the scientific work used in assessing monitoring data from creeks and rivers. Aquatic ecosystem science is not always rigid and precise; it is often open to different interpretations in several respects. Therefore, the EPA has decided that the best way to assess the condition of streams is through an expert panel deliberation that uses a consistent descriptive modelling approach. The panel members comprised an environmental consultant, a biologist from the biomonitoring team at the Australian Water Quality Centre (AWQC), and two biologists from the EPA (the authors of this assessment). All have at least 10 years experience in monitoring and assessing a range of streams across South Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Hydraulic Head, Chloride and Electrical Conductivity Data to Distinguish Between Mountain-Front and Mountain-Block Recharge to Basin Aquifers
    Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1629–1648, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1629-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Using hydraulic head, chloride and electrical conductivity data to distinguish between mountain-front and mountain-block recharge to basin aquifers Etienne Bresciani1,2, Roger H. Cranswick1,3, Eddie W. Banks1, Jordi Batlle-Aguilar1,4, Peter G. Cook1, and Okke Batelaan1 1National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training, School of the Environment, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia 2Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, 02792, Republic of Korea 3Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, Government of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia 4Kansas Geological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA Correspondence: Etienne Bresciani (etienne.bresciani@flinders.edu.au) Received: 8 June 2017 – Discussion started: 31 July 2017 Revised: 10 January 2018 – Accepted: 29 January 2018 – Published: 2 March 2018 Abstract. Numerous basin aquifers in arid and semi-arid data indicate that not only the Quaternary aquifers but also regions of the world derive a significant portion of their the deeper Tertiary aquifers are recharged through MFR and recharge from adjacent mountains. Such recharge can ef- not MBR. It is expected that this finding will have a signif- fectively occur through either stream infiltration in the icant impact on the management of water resources in the mountain-front zone (mountain-front recharge, MFR) or sub- region. This study demonstrates the relevance of using hy- surface flow from the mountain (mountain-block recharge, draulic head, chloride and EC data to distinguish between MBR).
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving Marine Biodiversity in South Australia - Part 1 - Background, Status and Review of Approach to Marine Biodiversity Conservation in South Australia
    Conserving Marine Biodiversity in South Australia - Part 1 - Background, Status and Review of Approach to Marine Biodiversity Conservation in South Australia K S Edyvane May 1999 ISBN 0 7308 5237 7 No 38 The recommendations given in this publication are based on the best available information at the time of writing. The South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) makes no warranty of any kind expressed or implied concerning the use of technology mentioned in this publication. © SARDI. This work is copyright. Apart of any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the publisher. SARDI is a group of the Department of Primary Industries and Resources CONTENTS – PART ONE PAGE CONTENTS NUMBER INTRODUCTION 1. Introduction…………………………………..…………………………………………………………1 1.1 The ‘Unique South’ – Southern Australia’s Temperate Marine Biota…………………………….…….1 1.2 1.2 The Status of Marine Protected Areas in Southern Australia………………………………….4 2 South Australia’s Marine Ecosystems and Biodiversity……………………………………………..9 2.1 Oceans, Gulfs and Estuaries – South Australia’s Oceanographic Environments……………………….9 2.1.1 Productivity…………………………………………………………………………………….9 2.1.2 Estuaries………………………………………………………………………………………..9 2.2 Rocky Cliffs and Gulfs, to Mangrove Shores -South Australia’s Coastal Environments………………………………………………………………13 2.2.1 Offshore Islands………………………………………………………………………………14 2.2.2 Gulf Ecosystems………………………………………………………………………………14 2.2.3 Northern Spencer Gulf………………………………………………………………………...14
    [Show full text]
  • U.2.5 New Modelling Capability to Target Stormwater Interventions That Support Seagrass Health Along Adelaide's Coast | I
    New modelling capability to target stormwater interventions that support seagrass health along Adelaide's coast Project U.2.5 Karen Rouse, Dennis Gonzalez, Milena Fernandes, Jos van Gils, Shiroma Maheepala, Ying He, Fareed Mirza, Rob Daly, Susan Cuddy Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series No. 16/9 www.goyderinstitute.org Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series ISSN: 1839-2725 The Goyder Institute for Water Research is a partnership between the South Australian Government through the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, CSIRO, Flinders University, the University of Adelaide, the University of South Australia and ICE WaRM (The International Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Management). The Institute will enhance the South Australian Government’s capacity to develop and deliver science-based policy solutions in water management. It brings together the best scientists and researchers across Australia to provide expert and independent scientific advice to inform good government water policy and identify future threats and opportunities to water security. The following Associate organisation contributed to this report: Enquires should be addressed to: Goyder Institute for Water Research Level 4, 33 King William Street Adelaide, SA, 5000 tel: +61 8-8236 5200 e-mail: [email protected] Citation Rouse K, Gonzalez D, Fernandes M, van Gils J, Maheepala S, He Y, Mirza F, Daly R, Cuddy SM (2016) New modelling capability to target stormwater interventions that support seagrass health along Adelaide's coast, Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series No. 16/9, Adelaide, South Australia Copyright © 2016 CSIRO. To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.
    [Show full text]