Original source · versioned page text
Annex 1 - Noosa River Habitat Survey Report - ESP
Attached to the e-mail DA Application - Noosa Oyster Project (1 of 3).
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Craig Bohm Our Reference: 2020.002L3
Oceans Coordinator Queensland
The Nature Conservancy
PO Box 5681
WESTEND QLD 4101
02 August 2021
RE: Marine Plant and Habitat Assessment Tewantin
Dear Craig,
Please find below a description of the benthic habitat (including a description of the
composition of marine plant assemblages, coverage and condition) in each of five proposed
oyster reef restoration areas. This work has been completed to support an application by The
Nature Conservancy (TNC) to restore oyster ecosystems on tidal land in the Noosa Estuary.
1. Scope of Work
The aim of the targeted benthic survey and habitat mapping in the proposed restoration
areas in the Noosa Estuary was to identify and map the distribution, coverage and condition
of seagrass and macroalgae and presence of other benthic habitats within the designated
areas and adjacent channel. Fringing mangrove and saltmarsh habitat was also mapped
along the coastline. A brief assessment of the temporary impacts to marine plants is
provided, based on information provided by TNC to date.
2. Methodology
Desktop Mapping
An initial marine plant / benthic habitat map was created using expert visual interpretation of
current aerial imagery that was rectified using ESRI ArcGIS at 1:1000m scale to create a
high-resolution photo mosaic. Aerial imagery was sourced from QLD Globe (QLD
Government 2021).
Field Surveys
A targeted survey of benthic habitats was completed over four days (7–8 September and 4–5
November 2020).
Noosa Estuary: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 1
© Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd
The contents of this report is protected by copyright. All contents shall remain the intellectual property of
Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd, unless prior arrangement has been made.
A| PO Box 5815 Manly QLD 4179 T| +61 428 118 496 E| [email protected] W| ecosp.com.au ABN| 84 169 274 391
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 24 pages
Page 2
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
The study area covered five investigation areas within the Noosa Estuary (Table 2.1; Figure
2.1). The boundary of each area typically extended along the channel from approximately
Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) to a depth of 2 metres.
Table 2.1 Approximate location of each investigation area
Investigation Area Extent Latitude Longitude
Noosa Sound Upstream -26°23’38.33” 153°04’51.88”
Downstream -26°23’23.49” 153°05’23.35”
Goat Island Upstream -26°23’38.05” 153°02’40.51”
Downstream -26°23’41.36” 153°03’12.69”
Tewantin Upstream -26°23’29.06” 153°02’26.13”
Downstream -26°23’33.92” 153°02’29.34”
Upper Weyba Creek Upstream -26°24’33.47” 153°04’26.91”
Downstream -26°24’28.63’ 153°04’34.37”
Lower Weyba Creek Upstream -26°24’26.29” 153°04’39.40”
Downstream -26°24’21.36” 153°04’53.13”
Tewantin
Goat Island
Noosa Sound
Upstream Downstream
Weyba Creek Weyba Creek
Figure 2.1 Map of the five investigation areas assessed in the Noosa Estuary
Survey Methods
Surveys were completed using a combination of remote techniques from a vessel, and visual
assessments on foot at low tide (where possible) to verify the presence of the mapped
marine plants / habitats, and to update the initial habitat mapping layers where required.
Additional detailed assessments were completed in areas where seagrass or macroalgae
were present, to determine the species composition, coverage and condition (where
Noosa Estuary: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 2
Page 3
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
possible). These detailed assessments were completed using a combination of visual
assessment on foot at low tide, underwater georeferenced photo transects and underwater
spot checks using a surface view camera. Where visibility was low (due to turbidity of
waters), spot snorkel surveys and grapple were used to confirm the presence of subtidal
seagrass and macroalgae, where safe to do so and following a strict risk assessment
protocol.
Habitat Categories
The study area covered both intertidal and subtidal zones, with several dominant habitat
types known to be present in each area. Intertidal and subtidal habitats mapped included
mangroves, seagrasses, unvegetated sandy and muddy sediments, and oyster and rock
rubble habitats.
The condition of habitats in the study area, such as seagrass beds, rocky reefs and bare
sand and mud were also considered (e.g. based on their structural complexity, the presence
of burrows, and the abundance of marine plants or sessile invertebrates growing on the
surface).
Opportunistic sightings of marine megafauna (e.g. marine reptiles and mammals) were
recorded throughout the study area.
GIS Mapping
A detailed map based on the initial desktop mapping and the field data was produced using
ESRI ArcGIS, showing the extent of habitat present in each of the five survey areas,
including other broad marine habitats (e.g. bare substrate, rocky rubble or oyster reef) and
marine plants (including seagrass and macroalgae). The area (m2) covered by each habitat
type was calculated in the GIS based on the spatial layers using the GDA2020 datum.
3. Results
A variety of benthic habitat types were mapped in each of the five proposed investigation
areas including mangroves, seagrasses, unvegetated sandy and muddy sediments, gravel
and rock rubble (Table 3.1; Figure 3.1 to Figure 3.4). The dominant habitat type in the
Noosa Sound and Goat Island investigation areas was unvegetated (bare) sand (>83% of
mapped habitat). In the Tewantin area, the benthic habitat was dominated by patchy rock
rubble and gravel with sparse oysters and macroalgae.
Noosa Estuary: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 3
Page 4
Table 3.1 Area (m2) of habitat categories and percentage of total area recorded in each investigation area in November 2020
Habitat Category Noosa Sound Goat Island Tewantin Upstream Weyba Downstream
Creek Weyba Creek
Area (m2) % of total Area (m2) % of total Area (m2) % of total Area % of Area % of
(m2) total (m2) total
Mangrove 2806 9.5 4092 5.9 770 5.6 4138 24.5 14641 39.5
Seagrass – – 563 0.8 649 4.7 – – – –
Saltmarsh 690 2.3 – – – – 270 1.6 3179 8.6
Casuarina forest 724 2.5 6961 10.0 – – – – – –
Leaf Oyster Bed – – – – – – – – 1041 2.8
Rock Rubble Oyster Reef & Macroalgae – – – – 3126 22.6 – – – –
Gravel & Oyster Shell – – – – 3017 21.8 – – – –
Oyster Rubble & Mud – – – – 1670 12.1 – – – –
Rock Rubble 77 1.4 – – 1647 11.9 – – – –
Gravel – – 789 5.7 – – – –
Unvegetated (Sand/Mud) 25098 85.4 58166 83.4 1988 14.4 12500 73.9 18214 49.1
Existing infrastructure – – – – 161 1.2 – – – –
Total Area (m2) 29397 69782 13815 16908 37076
– Not recorded
Noosa Estuary: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 4
Page 5
Ecological Service Professionals Sustainable Science Solutions Legend Habitat Category Casuarina HEE Mangrove Mud Seagrass Rock Rubble Oyster Reef [EM sattmarsh Sand 0 50 100 200 300 Metres Noosa Estuarine Habitat Noosa Sound Restoration Area Project Reference: 2020 Author: SW Datum: GDA 2020 Units: Meter Plan to illustrate location of marine habitats Plan not to be used for construction ata Sources: State of Queensland jamages and costs incurred due to the data being incomplete or inaccurate Figure 3.1 Map of habitat categories in the Noosa Sound investigation area Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment
Page 6
Ecological Service Professionals Sustainable Science Solutions Noosa Estuarine Habitat Legend Goat Island Restoration Area Habitat Categor Saltmarsh cory Ml . Project Reference: 2020 Author: SW HE Mangrove Casuarina Datum: GDA 2020 Seagrass Sand Units: Meter N Pian to illustrate location of marine habitats Plan not to be used for construction. Data Sources: tate of Queensland cological Service Professionals Pty Ltd. (ESP). All care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of data. However, ES ESP make no representations oF Warranties about the aeourec, reliability or suitability and disclaims all liability for expenses 0 50 100 200 300 Metres damages and costs incurred due to the data being incomplete or inaccurate Figure 3.2 Map of habitat categories in the Goat Island investigation area Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 6
Page 7
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Legend Noosa Estuarine Habitat
Tewantin Restoration Area
Habitat Category Gravel Shell
Project Reference: 2020 Author: SW
Mangrove Mud
Datum: GDA2020
Seagrass Sand Units: Meter
±
Rock Rubble Gravel
Rock Rubble Oyster Reef Macroalgae Boat Ramp Plan to illustrate location of marine habitats
Plan not to be used for construction.
Oyster Rubble & Mud Data Sources:
© State of Queensland
© Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd. (ESP).
All care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of data. However,
ESP make no representations or warranties about the accuracy,
reliability or suitability and disclaims all liability for expenses,
0 25 50 100 150 Metres damages and costs incurred due to the data being incomplete or
inaccurate.
Figure 3.3 Map of habitat categories in the Tewantin investigation area
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 7
Page 8
Ecological Service Professionals Sustainable Science Solutions Legend InvestigationArea Habitat Category HEE Mongrove Seagrass. [DU Leet Oyster Reef [a Sand 0 50 100 200 300 Metres Noosa Estuarine Habitat Weyba Restoration Areas Project Reference: 2020 Author: SW Datum: GDA 2020 Units: Meter Plan to illustrate location of marine habitats Plan not to be used for construction. Data Sources: te of Queensland ‘ological Service Professionals Pty Ltd. (ESP) re has been taken to ensure the accuracy of data. However, damages and costs incurred due to the data being incomplete or inaccurate Figure 3.4 Map of habitat categories in the upstream (left) and downstream (right) Weyba Creek investigation areas Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment
Page 9
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Seagrass
Seagrass species recorded in the intertidal and subtidal zone of the Noosa Estuary included
dense beds dominated by Zostera muelleri subsp. capricorni, with sparse patches of
Halophila ovalis. Where Zostera was present, it usually formed dense patches with plants
having a long blade length of approximately 50-60 cm. The epiphyte load on each blade
varied throughout the estuary from less than 10% coverage to more than 60% coverage of
blades. Halophila was recorded in sparse patches (<10% cover) or on the fringe of dense
Zostera beds. A description of the seagrass communities recorded in each of the
investigation reaches is provided in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Seagrass description with each investigation area
Area Description Photo
Noosa No seagrass was recorded within No Seagrass observed
Sound the reach, intertidal and subtidal
habitats were dominated by
unvegetated sand.
Goat Several small patches of seagrass
Island generally less than 5 m in diameter
were observed growing along the
channel edge adjacent to Goat
Island. The patches were dominated
by Zostera with long blades and
covering more than 75% of the
patch area (typically more than
90%).
The seagrass was in good condition
with low epiphyte growth; however,
some patches were being actively
Dense small patch of Zostera
smothered by unconsolidated sand.
Numerous boats are moored in the
vicinity of the seagrass patches.
Tewantin Several small patches of seagrass
generally less than 5 m in diameter
were observed along the channel
edge north of the investigation area.
The patches were dominated by
Zostera with long blades (>50 cm)
and covering more than 75% of the
patch area (typically more than 90%
of the patch area). A much larger
continuous Zostera bed extends
throughout the small bay to the
north of the restoration area, with
Patchy seagrass at upstream end of
smaller patches of seagrass
investigation area
growing upstream along the main
river channel.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 9
Page 10
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Area Description Photo
The seagrass was typically in good
condition with low epiphyte growth.
There was a high fine sediment load
with small disturbances mobilising
the sediment within the bed.
Extensive seagrass bed upstream of
investigation area
Upper No seagrass was observed growing
within the investigation area. There
Weyba
were dense Zostera beds recorded
Creek
immediately upstream of the
investigation area, and a dense but
narrow patch of Zostera on the
opposite (eastern) side of the
channel (downstream of the
investigation area).
Narrow patch of Zostera on eastern bank
Lower A continuous narrow patch of
seagrass was recorded growing
Weyba
along the channel edge within the
Creek
investigation area. The patch was
dominated by Zostera with long
blades and covering between 40
and 90% of the patch area.
The seagrass had a moderate to Moderately dense Zostera (60% cover)
high epiphyte load on the blades,
with some areas becoming
smothered by sediment at the
upstream and downstream end of
the beds. The seagrass was
generally in moderate condition.
Dense Zostera bed along channel edge
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 10
Page 11
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Mangroves
Several mangrove species were growing adjacent to the investigation areas. The mangrove
assemblages were dominated by red mangroves (Rhizophora stylosa) and grey mangroves
(Avicennia marina) with occasional orange mangroves (Bruguiera gymnorhiza)
predominantly growing along the edge of the channel. These assemblages transitioned to a
low canopy of yellow mangroves (Ceriops tagal var australis), river mangroves (Aegiceras
corniculatum) and mangrove fern (Acrostichum speciosum) landwards.
Generally, mangroves grew in a narrow fringe along the sections of the proposed restoration
areas (Table 3.3). The mangrove patches were not continuous along the channel, being
separated by coastal forests growing on top of steep banks that did not support mangroves.
The canopy height of mangroves was no greater than 5 m and the trees were in moderate to
good condition, with some signs of insect damage and yellowing of leaves.
Table 3.3 Mangrove community in each reach in November 2020
Area Description Photo
Noosa Narrow fringing mangrove forest
Sound between coastal rainforest communities
dominated by red and grey mangroves
with occasional orange and yellow
mangroves. The lower canopy was
dominated by jointed rush (Juncus
kraussii), rusty sedge (Fimbristylis
ferruginea), and saltcouch (Sporobolus
virginicus) occurring particularly
towards the mouth of Weyba Creek.
While the mangrove fringe was
generally <10 m wide, the mangroves
were generally in good condition.
There is a small creek halfway along
the reach which extends to a large
wallum swamp, landward of the
investigation area.
Goat Patchy and narrow fringing mangrove
Island forest between coastal rainforest
communities dominated by grey
mangrove. Canopy height of 4 to 6 m.
Forest extends to a large low canopy
forest to the north east of the island,
away from the restoration area.
The mangroves in this reach are in
good condition.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 11
Page 12
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Area Description Photo
Tewantin A narrow (<5 m wide) fringing forest
dominated by grey and river
mangroves, with an upper canopy of
coastal hibiscus.
Mangroves are in moderate condition,
growing on rock and gravel on an
erosion prone bank.
Upper Dense low canopy forest dominated by
red mangroves (2-3 m high) with a
Weyba
sparse upper canopy of grey
Creek
mangroves (4-5 m high). The forest is
continuous across the small island and
is generally in good condition, however
some mangroves were showing signs
of stress (high leaf loss, dead limbs)
and some had collapsed into the
channel due to erosion and
undercutting of the bank.
Lower Dense low canopy forest dominated by
red mangroves (2-3 m high) with a
Weyba
sparse upper canopy of grey
Creek
mangroves (4-5 m). The forest is a
continuous patch extending landward to
terrestrial forest. The large patch is
generally in good condition. There is a
fringing seagrass bed along the channel
which may be reducing channel erosion
in this reach.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 12
Page 13
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Saltmarsh
Saltmarsh was recorded within 20 metres of the proposed restoration areas adjacent to the
Noosa Sound site and along the channel at Goat Island. The saltmarsh at Noosa Sound was
dominated by salt couch (Sporobolus virginicus) with jointed rush (Juncus kraussii), and rusty
sedge (Fimbristylis ferruginea) (Figure 3.5). At Goat Island the saltmarsh was dominated by
salt couch. Coastal she oak (Casuarina glauca) grew landward of the saltmarsh along the
Noosa sound and on Goat Island. Saltmarsh and casuarina forest are not expected to be
impacted by the restoration works, so no further assessment of these habitats was
completed.
Figure 3.5 Fringing saltmarsh and mangrove communities adjacent to the Noosa Sound
investigation area
Figure 3.6 Fringing saltmarsh, sparse casuarina and mangrove communities adjacent to the
Goat Island investigation area
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 13
Page 14
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Subtidal Leaf Oyster Bed
Living oyster aggregations were found in the Noosa Estuary only where hard surfaces
protruded from the sediment, or on hard surfaces where fine sediment could not settle (i.e.
on vertical surfaces or those in the intertidal where wave action removes fine sediment).
An oyster bed dominated by leaf oysters (Isognomon ephippium, a large flat oyster species
which can provide substrate for rock oysters) was previously found in Weyba Creek in 2016
(Figure 3.7) and was still present in the 2020 survey (Figure 3.8), covering approximately
4,050m2 adjacent to the downstream Weyba Creek investigation area. The low relief bed
(<0.25 m) was growing on soft sediment and provided substrate for rock oysters and other
sessile organisms to survive.
Figure 3.7 Leaf oyster reef in the downstream Weyba Creek investigation area in 2016
Figure 3.8 Leaf oyster reef in the downstream Weyba Creek investigation area in 2020
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 14
Page 15
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Rock and Rubble Reefs
The Tewantin reach has several large areas of gravel with dead oyster shell (Figure 3.9) and
rocky rubble (Figure 3.10) that have been buried in places by up to 0.5 m of fine sediment
(Figure 3.11), particularly in areas of accretion adjacent to seagrass beds and upstream of
the rocky reef surrounding an existing channel marker (Figure 3.3). In intertidal habitat,
oysters aggregated in a narrow band in moderate to low densities on the rock rubble
adjacent to the existing mangroves along the bank edge (Figure 3.10). The densest
aggregation of oysters were limited to intertidal areas on existing pylons and the rock around
jetties.
Figure 3.9 Gravel with dead oyster shell at Tewantin
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 15
Page 16
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Figure 3.10 Narrow area of rock rubble with rock oysters adjacent to council chambers with narrow
band of grey mangroves further landward
Figure 3.11 Intertidal rock rubble and gravel adjacent to the existing boat ramp and jetty
In subtidal areas, exposed rock surfaces had a high coverage of fine algal turf that trapped a
thick sediment layer. Macroalgae growing on rocks was dominated by Padina sp.,
particularly in shallow subtidal areas along the edge of the existing navigation channel and
around the existing channel marker (Figure 3.12). These species were generally restricted to
subtidal areas and cover was typically sparse (less than 15% of the surface area),
particularly in rocky areas close to the shoreline (Figure 3.12). There was a small section of
more substantial rocky reef with high vertical relief around the existing channel marker sign,
where the densest aggregation of macroalgae (<30% cover) occurred (Figure 3.14). There
was also denser macroalgae growing on rubble at the edge of the main river channel and
also south of the existing boat ramp adjacent to the bathing area and marina (Figure 3.15).
The macroalgal assemblages were in relatively poor condition due to high sediment loads
observed on and around the existing rocky reef and rubble areas, with some sections of reef
having a high coverage of fine sediment (Figure 3.16).
Given the speed at which Padina can colonise hard surfaces (dead oyster shell) elsewhere in
the estuary (ESP 2021), it is anticipated that supplementary habitat provided as part of the
proposed restoration project would be colonised rapidly within 1 year of deployment, and that
coverage would be similar to the current condition within 2 to 3 years post deployment,
particularly in sections that remain subtidal and not covered by fine silt.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 16
Page 17
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Figure 3.12 Sparse macroalgae (Padina sp.) growing on rock at Tewantin
Figure 3.13 Turfing algae and oysters on rocky rubble at the edge of the main river channel with
gravel and shell grit between rocks
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 17
Page 18
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Figure 3.14 High relief rocky reef at existing channel marker with aggregation of oysters and turf
algae over surface of rocks
Figure 3.15 Rocky reef with oysters and macroalgae to the south of the investigation area
seaward of Tewantin baths
Figure 3.16 Patchy rock surrounded by fine mud in the north of the investigation area
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 18
Page 19
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
A small rock rubble area was recorded at the western end of the Noosa Sound investigation
area around an existing 6 knot sign at the mouth of Weyba Creek. The rock was mostly
intertidal and had a moderate coverage of rock oysters.
Coffee rock occurs on the bank opposite the downstream Weyba Creek investigation area,
with a band of oysters aggregating in the intertidal zone. There was high sedimentation on
much of the surfaces on this rock. The coffee rock extended to a subtidal leaf oyster bed
(refer to section above).
No rock or rubble was observed at the upstream Weyba Creek investigation area.
Figure 3.17 Coffee rock with narrow band of rock oysters adjacent to downstream Weyba Creek
area
Unvegetated (Bare) Sediment (Sand/Mud)
The most dominant habitat in most of the investigation areas was unvegetated (bare)
sediments, which ranged in particle size from soft muds (usually next to seagrass and
mangroves) to well sorted sand, which covered the majority of habitats within each of the
reaches investigated particularly in channel habitat (Figure 3.18 to Figure 3.21). No epifaunal
invertebrates were recorded on the surface of the unvegetated habitats during the survey
and there was typically a low density of burrows observed in most reaches.
Some sections of the sediment in Noosa Sound were covered by benthic microalgae,
particularly where there were freshwater inputs.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 19
Page 20
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Figure 3.18 Bare sand with sparse yabby burrows in Noosa Sound
Figure 3.19 Bare sand adjacent to Goat Island
Figure 3.20 Bare sand in the upstream Weyba Creek reach
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 20
Page 21
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Figure 3.21 Bare sand in the downstream Weyba Creek reach
4. Assessment of Potential Disturbance to Marine Plants
The advice below is based on the implementation plan (TNC 2021) and International Coastal
Management indicative site layouts (NROR-2021-03 to NROR-2021-06) provided, which
place restoration structures primarily on bare sand, gravel and mud. We note the provision
to allow for suitable relocation of structures within the restoration area to adapt to localised
conditions and any changes in the distribution of marine plants prior to construction. A buffer
has been provided between mangroves and seagrass, to ensure that there is no direct
impact to the distribution of seagrass and mangroves adjacent to the restoration structures.
We are of the opinion that it is possible to avoid negative impacts on seagrass, mangroves
and saltmarsh at the sites, based on the information provided in the implementation plan,
lack of impact to marine plants during a previous trial deployment of restoration structures in
the Noosa Estuary (and positive impacts on macroalgal assemblages) (ESP 2021), and
where suitable management controls are employed (i.e. monitoring impacts on water quality
before during and after construction, using suitable construction materials, and locating
construction equipment a suitable distance away from mangroves). Due to the separation of
each patch of rubble (patchwork), the structures are not expected to present any potential
impact to fish passage, allowing fish to easily pass between and around each patch at high
tide.
With respect to each restoration area:
• In the Noosa Sound restoration area, the proposed restoration structures (rubble)
would be placed on bare sand adjacent to marine plants with a minimum distance of
2 m to mangroves (including pneumatophores) has been provided. The restoration
structures have been designed to prevent shoreline erosion and provide complex
habitat that would restore the diversity of estuarine habitats within the seascape.
• In the Goat Island restoration area, restoration structures would be placed on bare
sand adjacent to marine plants, with a minimum of 2 m from mangroves (including
pneumatophores) and 10 m from seagrass to prevent any physical damage. The
restoration structures have been designed to prevent shoreline erosion.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 21
Page 22
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
• In the Tewantin restoration area, the proposed restoration patches would be placed
primarily on bare sand and gravel (with dead oyster shell) and on rocky rubble
adjacent to marine plants in the intertidal zone, which are the dominant habitat types
covering 80% of the 2254 m2 within the restoration area (Figure 4.1; Table 4.1). The
proposed restoration patches will cover a total area of approximately 1326 m2 and be
at least 10 m from seagrass and 2 m away from mangroves (including
pneumatophores) to prevent any direct damage to those marine plant assemblages.
The proposed restoration patches will be primarily placed on bare gravel with dead
oyster shell which makes up 39% of the 1326 m2 area covered by restoration patches
(Figure 4.1; Table 4.1). In addition existing patchy rock and rubble which covers 24%
of the benthic habitat in the proposed restoration patch areas will be supplemented
with additional rock (Table 4.1; i.e. Rock Rubble - 246 m2 & Oyster, Rubble & Mud –
77 m2). A relatively small section of patchy rock was covered by sparse oysters and
sparse patches of macroalgae (Padina sp. and turfing algae), based on this habitat
survey, less than 479 m2 of this patchy rock and rubble habitat supporting a degraded
macroalgal assemblage would be temporarily disturbed by the proposed restoration
activity (Table 4.1). Although, the area to be disturbed is likely to be an overestimate
as it is planned to place the majority of substrate onto bare gravel and sand between
existing rock patches where possible and thereby minimise potential disturbance. A
pre-deployment survey will be completed to assist in the suitable placement of
substrate during construction as movement of sand and fine sediment may alter the
distribution of rocky patches in the area over time. It is expected that marine
macroalgae will regrow on the restoration structures within a year of initial
deployment based on trial restoration elsewhere in the estuary (ESP 2021).
• Restoration of habitat areas in Weyba Creek will not proceed as part of the current
application, pending a review of additional habitat availability and suitability along the
creek and the outcomes of the initial phase of oyster reef deployment.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 22
Page 23
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Table 4.1 Area of each habitat category recorded in the Tewantin Restoration Area and potential
area to be disturbed by restoration patches
Habitat Category Tewantin Potential Area of Disturbance
Restoration Area (Restoration Patches)
Area % of Area % of Total
(m2) total (m2) Restoration
Patch Area
Mangrove 0 0 0 0
Seagrass 0 0 0 0
Rock Rubble Oyster Reef & Sparse 779 34.6 479* 36.2
Macroalgae
Gravel with Oyster Shell 1025 45.5 522 39.2
Oyster, Rubble & Mud 96 4.3 77 5.8
Rock Rubble 347 15.4 246 18.6
Bare gravel 3 0.1 1 0.1
Unvegetated (Sand/Mud) 4 0.2 1 0.1
Existing infrastructure (Boat Ramp) 0 0 0 0
Total Area (m2) 2254 1326
*Note that the majority of the area to be covered in this habitat type is patchy low relief rock and rubble with less
than 10% coverage of macroalgae and surrounded by gravel and dead shell. The proposed restoration patches
have been designed according to strict design criteria including to avoid mangroves, seagrass, existing
infrastructure and the majority of existing high vertical relief reefs with denser macroalgae surrounding the existing
channel marker.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 23
Page 24
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
Legend Noosa Estuarine Habitat
Restoration Area Oyster Rubble & Mud Tewantin Restoration Area
Restoration Patch Gravel Shell Project Reference: 2020 Author: SW
Mud Datum: GDA2020
Habitat Category
Units: Meter
Sand
±
Mangrove
Seagrass Gravel
Plan to illustrate location of marine habitats
Rock Rubble Boat Ramp Plan not to be used for construction.
Data Sources:
Rock Rubble Oyster Reef Macroalgae © State of Queensland
© Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd. (ESP).
All care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of data. However,
ESP make no representations or warranties about the accuracy,
reliability or suitability and disclaims all liability for expenses,
0 7.5 15 30 45 Metres damages and costs incurred due to the data being incomplete or
inaccurate.
Figure 4.1 Proposed restoration area footprint in the Tewantin restoration area noting that the
exact area for restoration patches may change during construction based on
conditions at the time.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 24
Page 25
Ecological Service Professionals
Sustainable Science Solutions
5. Recommendations
We would recommend that a suitable monitoring program is implemented in accordance with
the monitoring program outlined in the implementation plan (TNC 2021), including the
following:
• Implementation of a suitable Construction Environmental Management Plan to
support works including marine biosecurity measures for construction vessels;
• Have a suitably qualified person monitor the success of the restoration effort in
accordance with the parameters identified in the implementation plan, including
stability of the reef and successful recruitment of oysters to the substrate;
• Have a suitably qualified person monitor the distribution, composition and condition of
marine plant assemblages within 50 m of the reef patches before construction, and
post deployment until it is demonstrated that restoration of oyster reefs is complete
(i.e. approximately 3 years post deployment); and,
• Have a suitably qualified person monitor water quality at each site, upstream and
downstream of the sites, pre-, during and post-construction. A suitable suite of
parameters should be measured including turbidity, salinity, dissolved oxygen and pH
in accordance with Noosa River environmental values and water quality objectives
(DERM 2010) and Plan WQ1401.
Craig, if you have any questions or require any modifications to the above scope, please let
me know.
Regards,
Dr Simon Walker | Principal Ecologist
Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd
6. References
ESP 2021. Noosa Estuary Trial Oyster Reef Restoration: Final Monitoring Report. Report prepared on
behalf of Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation for Noosa Council.
DERM 2010. Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009, Noosa River Environmental Values and
Water Quality Objectives.
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 2021. Noosa River Oyster Ecosystem Restoration Project:
Implementation Plan.
Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration: Marine Benthic Habitat Assessment 25