❓ A parliamentary question regarding a fish kill in the Serpentine River, focusing on the Department of Environment's (DoE) testing procedures for heavy metals and iron monosulphides in relation to acid sulphate soils. The Minister's response details the testing conducted and explains the rationale behind the chosen methodology.
AnsweredQoN 1788Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
In relation to the recent fish kill in the Serpentine River -
(1) Did the DoE test the river area around the fish kill for the presence of heavy metals?
(2) If not, why not given the presence of extensive and disturbed Acid Sulphate Soils in the region which are known to mobilise heavy metals in the soil?
(3) Did the DoE test for the presence of iron monosulphides around the fish kill area?
(4) If not, why not given that iron monosulphide is a known leachate in areas affected by Acid Sulphate Soils and are known to cause severe deoxygenation of water?
(5) Is the Minister aware that a 1998 Agriculture WA study found the Peel Harvey esterine water bodies had suffered levels of heavy metals above ANZECC standards in 1996 and 1997?
(1) Did the DoE test the river area around the fish kill for the presence of heavy metals?
(2) If not, why not given the presence of extensive and disturbed Acid Sulphate Soils in the region which are known to mobilise heavy metals in the soil?
(3) Did the DoE test for the presence of iron monosulphides around the fish kill area?
(4) If not, why not given that iron monosulphide is a known leachate in areas affected by Acid Sulphate Soils and are known to cause severe deoxygenation of water?
(5) Is the Minister aware that a 1998 Agriculture WA study found the Peel Harvey esterine water bodies had suffered levels of heavy metals above ANZECC standards in 1996 and 1997?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
30 March 2004
Responded by
Minister for Local Government and Regional Development representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
21 days
(1) Yes, several samples were obtained for heavy metal analysis from sites located upstream, downstream and within the stretch of river affected by the fishkill. The following metals were tested for total concentration in both water and sediments; Arsenic Selenium Aluminum Cadmium Copper Iron Lead Zinc (2) N/A. (3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
Arsenic Selenium Aluminum Cadmium Copper Iron Lead Zinc (2) N/A. (3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(2) N/A. (3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
Arsenic Selenium Aluminum Cadmium Copper Iron Lead Zinc (2) N/A. (3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(2) N/A. (3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(3) No, the department tested for metals, organophosphates, organchlorines, total acidity, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and sulphate in water samples. The same suite with the exception of BOD was also analysed in sediment samples. The department followed the standard fish kill protocol that was developed in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries. (4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(4) It was considered inappropriate to sample for iron monosulphate due to its rapid oxidisation and breakdown in the environment. Total acidity and sulphate were analysed upon the advice the department’s own acid sulphate soils experts. These analytes are recognised as the most accurate indicators of acid sulphate soils. (5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
(5) Yes. The study referred to is based on a survey to establish background metal levels in the Peel-Harvey coastal catchment, to compare with sites treated with bauxite residue. This was a requirement of the Public Environmental Review of the use of bauxite residue as a soil amendment. The metals found were in no way connected with the bauxite residue. The survey looked at total metals, not filterable-dissolved bioavailable metals, in both standing and flowing waters. The results can not be used to determine the metals availability to biota. Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
Metal levels detected in that study were not compared to any standards but were used to discuss the likely origins. The study found that the concentration of metals appeared to peak in response to episodic rainfall events associated with the onset of winter. The study also found these concentrations were attributable to both man made and natural processes such as the use of fossil fuels and acid sulphate soils.
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.