❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses sand accumulation and seagrass wrack management at Port Geographe, questioning the adherence to original EIA predictions and seeking funding for wrack investigations. The answer clarifies sand bypassing expectations, details historical advice regarding wrack management, and denies additional funding due to the developer's existing obligations.
AnsweredQoN 1310Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Is sand accumulating on the west side of the Port Geographe groyne field as was expected by the proponent and the various Government agency reports that were prepared as part of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) proposal for the development some 10 years ago?
(2) If not, how is sand accumulation differing from what was expected?
(3) What did your department’s coastal engineers advise the Environmental Protection Authority at the time of the original EIA about the movement and accumulation of seagrass wrack on the west side of the groyne field?
(4) Recognising that funding has been provided for investigations into seagrass wrack accumulations at the Two Rocks marina, is funding also available for wrack investigations at Port Geographe if the need for research was demonstrated?
(2) If not, how is sand accumulation differing from what was expected?
(3) What did your department’s coastal engineers advise the Environmental Protection Authority at the time of the original EIA about the movement and accumulation of seagrass wrack on the west side of the groyne field?
(4) Recognising that funding has been provided for investigations into seagrass wrack accumulations at the Two Rocks marina, is funding also available for wrack investigations at Port Geographe if the need for research was demonstrated?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
12 August 2003
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
132 days
(2) It was expected that the accumulated sand would be bypassed artificially, and that sand buildup would be minimised. However, it is accumulating in a manner which was expected if the sand bypassing was not carried out properly. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) has not been able to locate the original advice to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) given in the 1980’s prior to the preparation of the EPA Report and Recommendations. However, EPA Bulletin 386 “Port Geographe – Report and Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority” May 1989, reports extensively on the advice received from the then Department of Marine and Harbours (DMH) in regard of the expected erosion problem and the need to nourish the beaches to the east of the harbour, but is silent in regard of seagrass wrack. In correspondence in December 1990 to Riedel and Byrne, the consultants preparing the Environmental Monitoring and Management Program (EMMP), DMH stated “On the issue of seagrass wrack, it is known that natural forces do not clear weed within a groyne field until the groynes are saturated with sand sufficiently for sand bypass to occur. Groynes which are not saturated will trap weed, and will normally require mechanical assistance to dislodge it. Since the entrance training walls will never be saturated, it will be necessary for mechanical assistance to be readily available, and to have easy access during the storm season. It is desirable that the other groynes be designed to be saturated, or else have easy access for mechanical equipment.” When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
(3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) has not been able to locate the original advice to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) given in the 1980’s prior to the preparation of the EPA Report and Recommendations. However, EPA Bulletin 386 “Port Geographe – Report and Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority” May 1989, reports extensively on the advice received from the then Department of Marine and Harbours (DMH) in regard of the expected erosion problem and the need to nourish the beaches to the east of the harbour, but is silent in regard of seagrass wrack. In correspondence in December 1990 to Riedel and Byrne, the consultants preparing the Environmental Monitoring and Management Program (EMMP), DMH stated “On the issue of seagrass wrack, it is known that natural forces do not clear weed within a groyne field until the groynes are saturated with sand sufficiently for sand bypass to occur. Groynes which are not saturated will trap weed, and will normally require mechanical assistance to dislodge it. Since the entrance training walls will never be saturated, it will be necessary for mechanical assistance to be readily available, and to have easy access during the storm season. It is desirable that the other groynes be designed to be saturated, or else have easy access for mechanical equipment.” When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
In correspondence in December 1990 to Riedel and Byrne, the consultants preparing the Environmental Monitoring and Management Program (EMMP), DMH stated “On the issue of seagrass wrack, it is known that natural forces do not clear weed within a groyne field until the groynes are saturated with sand sufficiently for sand bypass to occur. Groynes which are not saturated will trap weed, and will normally require mechanical assistance to dislodge it. Since the entrance training walls will never be saturated, it will be necessary for mechanical assistance to be readily available, and to have easy access during the storm season. It is desirable that the other groynes be designed to be saturated, or else have easy access for mechanical equipment.” When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
(4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
(3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) has not been able to locate the original advice to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) given in the 1980’s prior to the preparation of the EPA Report and Recommendations. However, EPA Bulletin 386 “Port Geographe – Report and Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority” May 1989, reports extensively on the advice received from the then Department of Marine and Harbours (DMH) in regard of the expected erosion problem and the need to nourish the beaches to the east of the harbour, but is silent in regard of seagrass wrack. In correspondence in December 1990 to Riedel and Byrne, the consultants preparing the Environmental Monitoring and Management Program (EMMP), DMH stated “On the issue of seagrass wrack, it is known that natural forces do not clear weed within a groyne field until the groynes are saturated with sand sufficiently for sand bypass to occur. Groynes which are not saturated will trap weed, and will normally require mechanical assistance to dislodge it. Since the entrance training walls will never be saturated, it will be necessary for mechanical assistance to be readily available, and to have easy access during the storm season. It is desirable that the other groynes be designed to be saturated, or else have easy access for mechanical equipment.” When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
In correspondence in December 1990 to Riedel and Byrne, the consultants preparing the Environmental Monitoring and Management Program (EMMP), DMH stated “On the issue of seagrass wrack, it is known that natural forces do not clear weed within a groyne field until the groynes are saturated with sand sufficiently for sand bypass to occur. Groynes which are not saturated will trap weed, and will normally require mechanical assistance to dislodge it. Since the entrance training walls will never be saturated, it will be necessary for mechanical assistance to be readily available, and to have easy access during the storm season. It is desirable that the other groynes be designed to be saturated, or else have easy access for mechanical equipment.” When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
When commenting to the EPA in December 1990 on the draft EMMP prepared by Riedel and Byrne, DMH stated that “Seagrass wrack will be more of a problem at the western entrance training wall than elsewhere, and ideally there should be easy access for shore-based management equipment…” The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
The EPA Bulletin 783 “Port Geographe Harbour Development, Busselton, Change to Environmental Conditions.” June 1995 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a seagrass wrack management program. (4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
(4) No. At Two Rocks funding has been provided to investigate a problem for which a private developer has no obligation to resolve. At Port Geographe there is a clear and documented obligation on the part of the developer to manage the sand bypassing and seagrass wrack.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.