A parliamentary question regarding the environmental impact of dredging on seagrass in Champion Bay, specifically concerning turbidity and habitat loss. The Minister denies accepting long-lived turbidity damage, citing EPA advice that impacts would be localized and temporary.

AnsweredQoN 1127Legislative Council
Asked
30 November 2004
Portfolio
Environment

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the Champion Bay seagrass survey by Michael Mulligan for the Geraldton Port Authority, tabled on 26 November 2002, which states - The project’s PER concluded that there would be some permanent loss of seagrass in the vicinity of the shipping channel due to sedimentation, and some loss of vigour in the seagrasses of Champion Bay due to the turbidity plume generated and smothering effect. (1) As page 14 of the public environmental review project summary actually claims that the light attenuation impacts on seagrass and algal growth during the summer period of construction would be “temporary and not result in long term loss of habitat”, will the minister advise what and where she was advised by the proponent about the likely extent of damage to seagrass from turbidity and the smothering effect of the dredging plume? (2) Is it true that long-lived turbidity damage associated with the dredging was “accepted by the Minister for the Environment in granting approval for the project”; and, if so, will the minister advise where that is documented? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response - (1) The proponent advised in table 2 of the “Geraldton Port Enhancement and Preparatory Works Town Beach Foreshore Redevelopment PER - URS November 2001” that in relation to marine biota and associated habitats, the actual and/or potential impacts will be a small loss - 22.5 hectares - of reef, sand and seagrass habitat in Champion Bay. (2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.
(2) Is it true that long-lived turbidity damage associated with the dredging was “accepted by the Minister for the Environment in granting approval for the project”; and, if so, will the minister advise where that is documented? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response - (1) The proponent advised in table 2 of the “Geraldton Port Enhancement and Preparatory Works Town Beach Foreshore Redevelopment PER - URS November 2001” that in relation to marine biota and associated habitats, the actual and/or potential impacts will be a small loss - 22.5 hectares - of reef, sand and seagrass habitat in Champion Bay. (2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response - (1) The proponent advised in table 2 of the “Geraldton Port Enhancement and Preparatory Works Town Beach Foreshore Redevelopment PER - URS November 2001” that in relation to marine biota and associated habitats, the actual and/or potential impacts will be a small loss - 22.5 hectares - of reef, sand and seagrass habitat in Champion Bay. (2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response - (1) The proponent advised in table 2 of the “Geraldton Port Enhancement and Preparatory Works Town Beach Foreshore Redevelopment PER - URS November 2001” that in relation to marine biota and associated habitats, the actual and/or potential impacts will be a small loss - 22.5 hectares - of reef, sand and seagrass habitat in Champion Bay. (2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.
(1) The proponent advised in table 2 of the “Geraldton Port Enhancement and Preparatory Works Town Beach Foreshore Redevelopment PER - URS November 2001” that in relation to marine biota and associated habitats, the actual and/or potential impacts will be a small loss - 22.5 hectares - of reef, sand and seagrass habitat in Champion Bay. (2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.
(2) No. The Environmental Protection Authority advised the minister that the extent of dredge plumes were likely to be localised and temporary, and concluded that dredging operations will not cause persistent and significant declines to light levels reaching the sea floor. This is documented in EPA Bulletin 1050 of June 2002.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more