Proposed new channel in Peel estuary

Hi All

I went to a public meeting on monday night at the port Bouvard Recreational and Sporting Club club house. The meeting was conducted by the Peel Preservation group inc, and the hot topic for the public meeting was the proposed new channel to be cut across the Peel estuary from the east end of the cut to Point Grey The meeting was facilitated by the Hon David Templeman and a lot of information about the possible effects of this channel was provided by Dr Vic Semeniuk who spoke on Coastal processes, intra estuarine sedimentation and Principles of acid sulphate soils their significance and various other matters the dredging could affect.

Dr Chris Hallet (Fisheries Research) gave an overview of fish and invertebrates fauna reserch findings relating to the estuary changes to the fish community resulting from the cut.

Two other speakers also gave presentations on possible effect that could result of this proposed channel being dredged.

And guess what the Peak body representing amateur fisherman gave a great talk on the possible effects that the channel will have on fishing in the estuary and how it will put in a submission against the channel being dredged- YEAH RIGHT !

The supposed PEAK Body looking after amateur fishermen has been noticeably missing at any public meetings that take place south of the river that will have affect on rec fishing, like the meeting held in Rockingham last year when the extent of the removal of sea grasses needed for the proposed marinia in Mangles Bay was disclosed

It appears to myself and a couple of mates that if it happens south of Fremantle who cares it's too far for the peak body representing amateur fishermen to attend and make representation or supply information to rec fishermen about something that may have far reaching adverse result on fishing.

This peak body has lost all respect for it by half a dozen estuarine fishermen, the only person to give some information about adverse affects on fishing came from a much respected pro fisherman.

One very disgusted fisherman.


Rick's picture

Posts: 1101

Date Joined: 22/12/06

Development

Wed, 2011-04-13 10:14

No doubt this has something to do with a proposed new delevolpment at Point Grey

____________________________________________________________________________

PGFC Member

 

crasny1's picture

Posts: 6985

Date Joined: 16/10/08

First Ive heard about this!!

Wed, 2011-04-13 12:13

Still got the old abode in Parkridge with a great view of the estaury. Moving up here I have heard nothing about this, as Kcity is to far north!!

Is this a channel they propose to allow bigger boats to Point grey??

Neels

____________________________________________________________________________

"I would like to die on Mars. Just not on impact!!" _ Elon Musk

Posts: 5981

Date Joined: 17/06/10

Proposed new chanelin Peel estuary

Wed, 2011-04-13 13:20

Yep certainly is ,what is proposed is that the developer puts in a chanel for 300 residence of the new Point Gray development can have access accros the estuary for their floating gin palaces.

Now in my view putting at risk the whole estuary system for approx 300 residences doesn't quite make scence to me. I have nothing against people having floating gin palaces or any other kind of boat, horses for courses and all that. Just that putting at risk a great recreational water way with one of the best crab fisheries for hundreds of Ks is not acceptable for the benifit of just 300 people (development figures not mine). 

Posts: 457

Date Joined: 03/09/10

Estuarine systems

Wed, 2011-04-13 18:57

 

Wow, a 2300 page document on the pros and cons of another disaster.

Tell me, how many people will spend the time to read that.

When is the government going to put a halt to this non stop attack on our inland waterways.

The day the Dawesville cut was opened it spelt the end of the Peel/Harvey Estuary.JMO.

 

Isn't this a job for the "Enviromentalists",Pew or the like.

Rod P's picture

Posts: 725

Date Joined: 20/05/08

I don't know but hasn't the

Thu, 2011-04-14 15:26

I don't know but hasn't the Cut helped the inlet? I just assumed it had.

grantarctic1's picture

Posts: 2546

Date Joined: 03/03/11

I thought

Thu, 2011-04-14 22:46

I fished the inlet before the cut was put through, what a stinking mess it was.

After the cut was opened, the change(for the good) was almost instant.

The only problem i see, is more and more cannal's were made with more houses and created the same problem they had before. Too much water and not enough movement (tide) to clean out the area.

Maccatak's picture

Posts: 29

Date Joined: 30/07/09

If it wasnt for the cut the

Thu, 2011-04-14 22:35

If it wasnt for the cut the estuary would be a stinking mess, as far as I can see it has only been good for the whole of the Mandurah area.

Salmo's picture

Posts: 913

Date Joined: 15/08/05

RECFISHWEST SUBMISSION- Point Grey Marina

Mon, 2011-05-09 10:36

RFW had been is discussions with the developer well before any public meeting by the way

RECFISHWEST SUBMISSION

Attention: Leanne Thompson

Recfishwest Submission to the Environmental Protection Authority on the Public

Environmental Review (PER) - Point Grey Marina EPA Assessment No. 1751

Recfishwest is Western Australia’s peak recreational fishing body. We represent the interests

of more than 600,000 Western Australians who go fishing and are recognised in this capacity

by the Government of Western Australia. Recfishwest’s charter encompasses ensuring that

marine and freshwater systems are only exploited in such a manner as to allow sustainable

use of their resources.

Recreational fishing is an extremely important pastime in the Peel region for both locals and

visitors. Fishing for blue swimmer crabs in the Peel-Harvey Estuary is highly valued by the

recreational fishing community. Mandurah crabs are an iconic recreational fishing species in

Western Australia. This estuary system also supports important recreational finfish and prawn

fisheries.

Recfishwest would like to make the following observations and comments in relation to the

PER document for this development.

Fauna surveys and risk assessment

While the proponents have undertaken surveys on various fauna in the development zone,

including the stygofauna and troglofauna, and assessed the risk of this development towards

these ecological communities, no such work has focused on the estuarine fish and

invertebrate fauna. The proponent has only undertaken a desktop study to identify the fish

fauna likely to occur within the development area. While this is a good starting point,

Recfishwest believes that a more detailed survey of the fish and crab fauna within the impact

zone is essential. A specifically designed fish and invertebrate survey within the development

area is the only method in which to gain the knowledge required to adequately assess risk and

develop strategies to minimise impacts.

By the same token, Recfishwest believes that this PER contains too many broad statements in

relation to the fish and invertebrate fauna of the zone of influence. For example, the

statement “Estuarine species are more tolerant of suspended solids than oceanic species” may

be somewhat true but misleading as many species deemed to be oceanic inhabit the estuary

in high abundances as a result of the Dawesville Cut. These species include Australian herring,

silver trevally, tailor and Australian salmon, all of which are important species to the

recreational fishing sector.

RECFISHWEST SUBMISSION

Public Environmental Review (PER) - Point Grey Marina, April 2011.

A more focussed fish and invertebrate study will also aid in quantifying some of the impacts of

this project. For example, statements such as “a relatively small number of crustaceans will be

killed by direct impact with the dredge” should be quantified to some extent.

The PER states that dredging will occur between May and October to avoid coinciding with

breeding times of key species. Very little evidence is used to justify this position. Recfishwest

believes that dredging at this time of year is preferable for numerous reasons such as to

minimise the impact on the commercial fishery, lessen interactions with the community and

the presence of beneficial outward flows due to winter rains. However, the generalised

statement regarding spawning times is oversimplified and far too dismissive. The proponents

must investigate potential impacts on spawning fish and crabs as well as impact on larvae and

juveniles and look towards measure to reduce these impacts.

Recfishwest is particularly concerned about the impacts of dredging on spawning cobbler, a

species with increased vulnerability due to low fecundity and distinct breeding behaviours.

Indeed, the PER states “The cobbler breeding habit of nesting burrows as they spawn has

made them particularly vulnerable to human induced impacts. Unlike many fish which spawn

prolifically, and several times of year, the cobbler reproductive cycle is conducive to low larval

dispersal”. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the western shoreline of Point Grey is important

cobbler spawning habitat and that this species exhibit spawning behaviour during August and

September in that area. Recfishwest believes that this species represents a single example of

how the risks of dredging have not been adequately assessed.

Detailed fauna surveys and risk assessments were raised as an issue by stakeholders during

consultation back in 2007. So far these measures have not been taken. Recfishwest believes

that a simple desk top study is insufficient in terms of collecting relevant site specific

information in determining any impacts of dredging. A survey specifically focussed on fish and

invertebrate fauna within the zones of impact and influence will:

• Accurately identify species within the zone

• Quantify direct impacts

• Identify potential impacts

• Identify non-commercially or non-recreationally important species

• Identify species movements, migrations and spawning times

• Guide impact mitigation strategies

Dredge impacts and mitigation

Some uncertainty remains as to the environmental consequences of the proposed channel

dredging across the Harvey Estuary, particularly given the aforementioned lack of appropriate

knowledge regarding the fish and invertebrate fauna within the area.

Recfishwest is concerned about the maintenance dredging that will be required on a 5 to 10

year basis. The Dredge and Spoil Disposal Management and Monitoring Plan (DSDMMP)

states that maintenance dredging will involve estuarine spoil disposal. Recfishwest believes

that this methodology is unacceptable and the DSDMMP must be altered to encompass an

onshore treatment and disposal of spoil strategy.

RECFISHWEST SUBMISSION

Public Environmental Review (PER) - Point Grey Marina, April 2011.

Given the fact that this maintenance activity is within the known scope of this project, the

methodology should be investigated and clearly determined before project approval is

granted. This is particularly important given an anticipated maintenance dredging volume of

50,000 m3, which is equivalent to approximately half of the initial dredge volume of 95,000

m3.

Recfishwest also believes that dredging periods must link closely with tide and prevailing

weather condition to minimise the size of the dredge plume in the estuary. For example, we

suggest that easily suspended sediments are dredged during out going tides. Recfishwest also

suggest that dredging should be avoided at peak recreational times such as fine weather

weekends in an attempt to decrease the social impacts during the dredging phase of this

development.

Increased recreational fishing pressure

Recfishwest commends the proponent recognising the potential impacts of increased fishing

pressure on key species as a result of recreational fishers using the marina and boat ramp

facilities. However, while the implementation of education materials within the marina and

the monitoring of recreational fishing effort are laudable, Recfishwest believes this will not

sufficiently offset the impact of increased fishing pressure. Instead, we believe that the

proponent should look to provide offsets for the project impacts such as fish stocking or

habitat enhancement reefs. We believe that investment in these initiatives will provide

longer-term benefits for the environment and the community.

Recfishwest does not object to this development in principle. We strongly believe that more

knowledge is required as to its potential impacts on the fish and invertebrate fauna of the

estuary. We believe the same due diligence which has been applied to terrestrial

communities must also be applied to aquatic communities, particularly since a large

proportion of this development will occur in the estuarine environment. We expect this

project to provide no net loss of marine ecological function or loss of access for the

recreational sector.

Recfishwest believes that this development has the potential to offer benefits to the

recreational fishing community when completed. However, the potential risks and

environmental impacts of this development must be clearly identified so that measures can be

taken to minimise these impacts during construction and ongoing maintenance.

 

http://www.recfishwest.org.au/content/submissions/

Salmo's picture

Posts: 913

Date Joined: 15/08/05

sorry about the formatting

Mon, 2011-05-09 10:38

had issues with converting pdf file

Salmo's picture

Posts: 913

Date Joined: 15/08/05

recfishwest member

Wed, 2011-05-11 22:09

Meglodon are you a member of your peak body?
Interested in your views of the submission above.
Member feedback- negative or positive is always welcomed.

Always interested to hear from anglers with their concerns but a better way of finding out is call direct on 9246 3366

Membership is just $20pa and you receive regular updates on topical issues like marine planning, fish stocking projects, artificial reefs planned for around the state, kids fishing clinics - including remote communities, negotiation on wrl management changes, resource sharing agreements, wilderness fishing conservation strategies, initiatives for expenditure of licence fee funds, Young Future Leaders program identifying smart upcoming anglers who want to make a difference, future research, new recangler survey methodology, and a few other things they are working on

New board election in Oct where you get to put your hand up or vote for someone.

Best money passionate anglers can spend