Original source · versioned page text
2020-07-07 P&E Agenda - Item 3 - Attachment 1 - TNC Project Management Plan
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
Plans and drawings
This document appears to be plans or drawings. Its page text below holds only the words printed on the drawings, without the drawings themselves, so it may be jumbled or hard to follow. To see the plans as drawn, choose Original above or download the file (both need you to log in).
Log in to see the plans as drawn Planning & Environment
Committee Agenda
7 July 2020
Item 3 - Attachment 1
Bring Back the Fish
Restoration and conservation of shellfish ecosystems in the Noosa River
estuary
Project Management Plan
25th of July 2019 – 30th of September 2022
June 2020
© The Nature Conservancy Australia
This project was made possible by The Nature Conservancy, Noosa Shire Council, The Thomas Foundation
and Australian Marine Conservation Society. The project is located on Kabi Kabi Sea Country.
1
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
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 88 sections
Section 2
2
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
{heNature (py | @.| NOOSA
— 7 mm i Keeleons
2
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLANSection 3
Contents
1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Purpose and scope...................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Project background..................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Project objectives and deliverables ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.4 Project stakeholders, roles and responsibilities and team structure .................................................................... 16
3. Objective One: Project establishment and management ............................................................................................................ 19
3.1 Purpose and deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 19
3.2 Code of conduct and procurement principles ........................................................................................................ 20
3.3 Project workflow ...................................................................................................................................................... 21
3.4 Deliverables checklist .............................................................................................................................................. 23
4. Objective Two: Site Selection ...................................................................................................................................................... 24
4.1 Purpose and deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 24
4.2 Data procurement and licensing .............................................................................................................................. 24
4.3 Project workflow ............................................................................................................................................... 24
5. Objective Three: Community engagement .................................................................................................................................. 28
5.1 Purpose and deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 28
5.2 Project workflow ....................................................................................................................................................... 28
6. Objective Four: Shellfish restoration ........................................................................................................................................... 30
6.1 Purpose and deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 30
6.2 Background to shellfish ecosystems and rationale for restoration ....................................................................... 30
6.3 Shellfish ecosystem loss and historical significance in the Noosa Estuary ............................................................ 30
6.4 Process for undertaking restoration ........................................................................................................................ 31
6.5 Defining the targets .................................................................................................................................................. 32
6.6 Shellfish ecosystem substrate composition and configuration considerations .................................................... 34
6.7 Project workflow ....................................................................................................................................................... 34
7. Objective Five: Noosa River Plan ................................................................................................................................................. 36
7.1 Purpose and deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 36
7.2 Revised deliverables ................................................................................................................................................. 37
7.3 Project workflow ....................................................................................................................................................... 37
8. Project risk assessment ............................................................................................................................................................... 41
9. Project budget ............................................................................................................................................................................. 46
10. Project milestones..................................................................................................................................................................... 47
11. Appendices................................................................................................................................................................................ 48
Appendix 1. Project Communications Plan ................................................................................................................... 48
3
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 4
Appendix 2. Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting Plan ............................................................................................... 53
Version History
Version/Date Issued as Author Approved
V1/20.12.2019 For TNC and NSC review TNC
V2/17.01.2019 For TNC and NSC review TNC
V3/24.01.2019 For NSC review TNC
V4/22.04.2020 For NSC review TNC
V5/05.05.2020 For NSC review TNC
V6/06.05.2020 For Noosa Technical Advisory Group (TAG) review TNC
V7/12.05.2020 For Noosa Technical Advisory Group (TAG) review TNC
V8/27.05.2020 For NSC review/approval TNC
V9/16.06.2020 For NSC submission TNC
V10/23.06.2020 For NSC submission TNC
V11/26.06.2020 For NSC submission TNC
4
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 5
1. Executive Summary
This Project Management Plan (Plan) details the work-flow associated with The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC) and Noosa
Shire Council’s (NSC) Bring Back the Fish conservation project for the Noosa River Estuary. The period of the plan is
the 25th of July 2019 to the 30th of September 2022, as per the related TNC-NSC Alliance and Funding Agreement for
this project.
The project proposes to establish an innovative and regionally significant Noosa River Partnership, amongst Noosa
Shire Council, The Nature Conservancy and the Noosa Community, to improve the health and resilience of the Noosa
River estuary and the industries and local communities that rely on its long-term health.
The focus of the Partnership is to:
• Improve the health and resilience of Noosa’s marine and estuarine environment through innovative
restoration and coastal resilience projects;
• Capitalize on the expertise of The Nature Conservancy’s global networks and experience (through knowledge
brokering, mentoring, study tours and access to subject matter experts) to improve Noosa River
management and strengthen the long-term social, environmental and economic health and resilience of the
Noosa River and surrounding marine environment;
• Demonstrate a leading example of a replicable, environmentally-focused, collaborative alliance that achieves
superior outcomes for the environment and local communities compared to existing river and marine
management models; and,
• Increase government (State and Federal), private, industry and community support for restoration and
conservation-focused activities that improve the long-term social, economic and environmental health and
resilience of the Noosa River and surrounding marine environment.
The Partnership, delivered through this Project, will initially prioritize the restoration of shellfish ecosystems in the
lower estuary (as described below) in addition to:
• Providing general strategic support/advice for planning, management and evaluation associated with the
new Noosa River Plan and Noosa Environment Strategy and other initiatives and projects associated with the
river system;
• Engaging the Noosa community and businesses in meaningful volunteering, citizen science and marine
education opportunities;
• Coordination of research and associated projects that will inform and contribute to implementation of the
Noosa River Plan and Noosa Environment Strategy, with a particular focus on seagrass mapping and
restoration and living shorelines; and,
• Critical evaluation and potential reform of current and future management activities with a particular focus
on opportunities for sustainable commercial and recreational fishing and associated activities.
Shellfish ecosystem restoration methodology will follow standards aligned with best practice shellfish restoration and
the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) global guidelines.
A number of previous projects, including a three-year study led by the University of Sunshine Coast, established the
feasibility of shellfish ecosystem restoration by demonstrating sufficient shellfish recruitment and survival, and
invertebrate colonization, at a number of locations throughout the lower estuary. Following on from this initial work,
5
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 6
this Project is split into three work sequences or phases, to reduce ecological and financial risks through the
application of an adaptive management framework whereby learnings from previous phases are included in future
phases to consider prior learning and minimize risk:
1. Optimal design and siting (2020) which includes pre-planning to determine the optimal design, locations
and most cost-effective method of shellfish ecosystem restoration;
2. First site implementation (2020-2021) which will restore full sized shellfish ecosystems at two sites in the
estuary to test initial restoration methods and designs; and,
3. Full restoration (2021-2022) which restore shellfish ecosystems at all suitable (and approved) sites within
the estuary.
Project management will be led by TNC in partnership with NSC and the Noosa community. A Technical Advisory
Group will oversee scientific and technical aspects of the project and include representatives from TNC, NSC, State
Government, Kabi Kabi and other experts as required.
The Partnership commenced on 25 July 2019 and will run for three years and three months till the 30th of September
2022, with the outcomes of the Partnership to be reviewed in July 2022. The total operating budget is $2.4M, inclusive
of $1.2M from The Nature Conservancy (which includes $200,000 from the Australian Marine Conservation Society)
and $1.2M from Noosa Council, with the expectation that TNC will raise further funding from a variety of other sources
to support further delivery of shellfish bed restoration. The governance arrangements for this Project are defined in
the Alliance and Funding Agreement between The Nature Conservancy and Noosa Shire Council executed on the 25th
July 2019.
.
6
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 7
2. Introduction
2.1 Purpose and scope
The purpose of this Plan is to detail the workflow necessary to successfully deliver the Project (Bring Back the Fish,
defined in the TNC-NSC Alliance and Funding Agreement) including project timelines, activities, methodology and
budget. It provides an overview of the restoration targets, goals and objectives associated with the shellfish
restoration sub-project. It also provides the basis for the development of more detailed implementation plans such
as the Communication Plan and Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting Plan.
The Project involves the delivery of multiple objectives, each with multiple activities required to deliver the Project
goal (see below). The primary objective involves the restoration of shellfish ecosystem (created predominantly by
Saccostrea glomerata, rock oyster) initially at two locations and then subject to successful establishment at these
sites, at other locations throughout the estuary.
The Project commenced on 25th July 2019, and is scheduled to be completed by 30th September 2022.
The geographical boundaries of the project include all estuarine waters of the Noosa River Estuary including up to the
high water mark (Figure 1). The political, social and community boundaries include all parties required to successful
deliver on the project objectives including local and state governments, Commonwealth Government, community
groups, private corporations, private trusts and foundations and individuals.
7
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 8
Figure 1. Geographic extent of the Project area within the Noosa River system.
8
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 9
2.2 Project background
Over the last four years, Noosa Shire Council (NSC) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) have worked together to build
a deeper understanding of the environmental significance and long-term sustainable management options for the
Noosa River. This has included:
Noosa River Expert Workshop, Powerhouse Museum, 2014
A two day workshop, hosted by TNC on behalf of The Thomas Foundation and Noosa Parks Association, comprising
12 academic and NGO estuary scientists. The workshop identified 14 conservation activities that could lead to a
healthier Noosa River, with shellfish ecosystem restoration listed as a priority action in addition to prawn restocking
and Kin Kin sediment management. These activities (including further scoping studies) were later jointly funded by
NSC, Noosa Parks Association, The Thomas Foundation and the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation.
TNC Oyster Restoration Scoping Study, 2015
TNC and Ecological Service Professionals Pty on behalf of NSC and others undertook a short, five-month ecological
assessment to quantify oyster densities across 11 intertidal and subtidal sites within the estuary. The study confirmed
high densities of oyster recruitment particularly around Weyba Creek, the main channel around Tewantin, and in the
narrow channel between Goat Island and Noosa North Shore. The project recommended installing a number of pilot
reefs for further assessment.
University of Queensland Historical Ecology of the Noosa Estuary fisheries, 2015
Ruth Thurston from the University of Queensland undertook a historical ecology study on behalf of TNC and NSC in
the Noosa River estuary to develop an understanding of historical fisheries productivity, including shellfish. The study
confirmed shellfish ecosystems used to exist in the estuary and were commercial harvested in the early 1900s. Fish
populations were also significantly larger in the past than they are today.
University of Sunshine Coast, Bring Back the Fish, 2018-2020
A three-year study which installed a series of experimental ‘reef units’ consisting of coir bags filled with oyster shell
at 15 sites across the estuary. The project studied the structural integrity, oyster recruitment, fish and invertebrate
community assemblages and human interactions with the reefs. This project collected important ecological
information that will support the final design and implementation of shellfish ecosystem restoration in this Project.
NSC and TNC in addition to other organizations with an interest in the River’s sustainability (including Noosa Parks
Association, The Thomas Foundation and Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation), through a series of dialogue and
presentations to Noosa Shire Council, have recognized the strategic priorities of both organizations and of others
would be more effectively served through a formal partnership, rather than on an individual project basis. This
agreement led to the development of this Project which is the main delivery mechanism of the TNC-NSC Partnership.
2.3 Project objectives and deliverables
The Project has a number of objectives and deliverables, each managed as separate sub-projects (Table 1) and
described in further detail in the following chapters. Deliverables marked with (*) in Table 1 are at the discretion of
NSC (i.e. if required). Further dialogue between TNC and NSC since July 25th 2019, has resulted in the prioritization
and emphasis on delivering the following conservation initiatives:
9
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 10
1. Restoration of Noosa’s shellfish ecosystems (Objectives two and four)
2. Engage the Noosa community and local businesses in meaningful volunteering and marine education
opportunities (Objective three)
3. Exploration of the potential to restore seagrass habitats in Lake Cooroibah (and potentially elsewhere) to
reduce sediment resuspension and increase invertebrate and fish biomass in the estuary (to be delivered as
part of Objective two and five)
4. Provide technical advice to NSC in identifying opportunities for sustainable commercial and recreational
fisheries in the Noosa River (to be delivered as part of Objective five)
These conservation priorities will be delivered within the framework outlined in Table 1 and project budget (Chapter
9) with further details provided in the following chapters.
10
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 11
Table 1. Project goal, objectives and deliverables.
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
(A1.1) A Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) is established
Terms of reference for the
to provide project TNC
TAG developed, TAG is
oversight. This will include a 3 months from
established and at least one
clear terms of reference appointment of
meeting held.
and consist of Project Manager
representatives from key
Evidence of Kabi Kabi
stakeholders (NSC, TNC, TNC
involvement.
Kabi Kabi and at least two
other independent parties).
(A1.2) Appointment of
A-1 Project dedicated project manager
establishment who is a marine biologist Appointment of Project
6 months
and with extensive project Manager to oversee the TNC
management management experience, Project.
for the term of the
Establish Agreement.
effective project (A1.3) A Project
A Project Implementation
governance, Implementation Plan
Plan produced by TNC,
management, detailing at a minimum:
endorsed by Technical
communication A detailed risk assessment
Advisory Group, and
and reporting associated with the project.
delivered by TNC to Noosa
sufficient to A communications and
Council for presentation and TNC
successfully media plan, outlining media
approval by Noosa Council
implement protocols, opportunities
its approval.
shellfish and the role of TNC and 6 months
A Project Implementation
restoration NSC.
Plan presented to Noosa
project A monitoring, evaluation
Council by TNC in
and reporting plan which
conjunction with Council TNC & NSC
identified ecological and
officers for its approval, and
social monitoring programs,
(if acceptable) approved in
how they will be reported
writing by Noosa Council by
on and how this will fed
no later than two months
back into the project.
after delivery.
Participate in at least three TNC
(A1.4) Participate in public Ongoing for the
public presentations/forums
forums to provide the duration of the
in the first 12 months
Noosa community project
(ideally within first 9
11
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 12
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
opportunities to learn about months) with the purpose to TNC
the project and TNC. provide the Noosa
community opportunities to
learn about the project and
TNC.
TNC &
Participate in at least six Noosa
public presentations/forums Council
in years 2 and 3, with the
purpose to provide the
Noosa community
opportunities to learn about
the implementation and
outcomes of the project.
A minimum three media
statements throughout
duration of project
An annual project report
(and, when applicable, final
report) is prepared and
(A1.5) Annual project
produced by TNC, endorsed
reports and final report
by Technical Advisory Group,
each of which address, at a
and delivered by TNC to
minimum:
Noosa Council, within 60
Activities undertaken during
For each annual days of the end of each
the subject financial year,
project report financial year during the TNC
status and progress against
- Yearly term of the Agreement.
deliverables, budget
progress, income and
For the final The annual report (and,
expenditure, report against
report – 30th when applicable, final
monitoring and evaluation
September 2022 report) in Measurable TNC & NSC
program and measurable
Outcome 9 is presented to
outcomes and outline of
Noosa Council by TNC in
proposed upcoming
conjunction with Noosa
works/activities for future
Council officers for its
period.
approval for endorsement
within 90 days of the end of
each financial year during
the term of the Agreement,
12
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 13
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
and (if acceptable) approved
by Noosa Council.
6 monthly status and
(A1.6) 6 monthly status and
progress reports, and
progress reports which
financial statement, are
address, at a minimum:
produced, endorsed by the
Progress against
Technical Advisory Group,
deliverables and monitoring
and provided to NSC, within
and evaluation report. 6 monthly TNC
30 days of end of each six (6)
6 monthly financial
month period. Reports and
statements including
financial statements due at
a statement of Project
the end of the financial year
income/funding and
may be included with annual
expenditure
reports and the final report.
(A2.1) Shellfish restoration
suitability model Restoration suitability model
incorporating physical which incorporates industry,
12 months
parameters of oysters and Kabi Kabi knowledge and TNC
public and industry usage, public interests.
A-2: Site
access etc. to identify
selection
priority sites for restoration.
(A2.2) Obtain necessary
Identify suitable
State government
restoration sites Outcomes:
permits/authorities
for Phase II and (a) Obtain all required State
including particular
Phase III and government
resource allocation
appropriate permits/authorities for
authority, for shellfish 13(a) - TNC
shellfish oyster ecosystem
ecosystem restoration
substrate design 18 months restoration.
Obtain necessary local
and (b) Obtain all required Local
government 13(b) –
configurations government
permits/approvals including NSC
that minimize permits/approvals for
in particular fisheries
estuary-user oyster ecosystem
development approval for
conflict whilst restoration are obtained.
oyster ecosystem
optimizing
restoration
rehabilitation
(A2.3) Community, industry
Records of public and
and stakeholder
stakeholder consultation,
consultation sufficient to
18 months including one-on-one TNC
gain majority support for
meetings, open forums,
oyster ecosystem
media, etc.
restoration locations.
13
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 14
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
(A3.1) Community, industry
A-3 Community
and stakeholder
engagement
consultation to identify Records of public and
most appropriate stakeholder consultation, TNC &
Strengthen
community volunteering 18 months including one-on-one Noosa
community
opportunities (e.g. shell meetings, open forums, Council
interest, support
recycling, oyster gardens, media, etc.
and participation
oyster watch, video
in Noosa River
monitoring).
restoration by
(A3.2) Establish at least one
establishing a Record of volunteer hours
community volunteering
community dedicated to community
program identified from the
volunteering volunteering programs, such
above process which takes 18 months TNC & NSC
program to as: shell recycling, oyster
into account current and
support oyster gardens, oyster watch, video
future resources,
restoration monitoring.
management and interest.
(A4.1) Restoration at two
sites (approx. 40m-50m At least two (2) sites with at
shore length per site) which least overall 80m shore
24 months
tests oyster substrate length of oyster ecosystem TNC
design, configuration and restored and being actively
deployment methods and monitored.
A-4 Oyster oyster growth and survival.
ecosystem In addition to the two pilot
(A4.2) Restoration across
restoration sites, a number of sites
multiple sites, as
comprising a minimum of a
determined by restoration 36 months
Restore oyster further aggregated 600m2 TNC
suitability modelling and
ecosystems surface area of restored
outcomes of community
across the lower oyster ecosystems in the
consultation.
estuary Noosa River estuary.
(A4.3) Monitoring and
evaluation study for both
Ongoing for Annual monitoring and
pilot and full restoration
duration of evaluation report card with
sites. Monitoring to include TNC
project, at least 6 monthly status reports to
oyster metrics,
6 monthly be provided.
invertebrates and fish use
(detailed in MER plan).
(A5.1) Run workshop with
A-5 Noosa River
NSC to identify ongoing
Plan 9 months Workshop completed. TNC & NSC
focus areas for TNC
support.
14
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 15
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
Provide Minimum 5 peer review
technical and reports completed during
expert support the three year term of this
to Noosa for *(A5.2) Provide Agreement, if requested by
planning, technical/peer review on NSC. If NSC requests a peer
Ongoing for
implementation minimum five review, TNC will provide a
duration of TNC
and evaluation plans/reports/studies if minimum of 3 experts who
project
associated with requested by Noosa are qualified in the relevant
appropriate Council. area of expertise for NSC
elements of the consideration and Noosa
Noosa River Plan Council’s acceptance of one
and other expert for the peer review.
coastal and *(A5.3) Facilitate a
marine minimum of three study
management tours of relevant sites in line
plans with objectives and scope of
Minimum three individuals
the program in Australia/US
on study tours completed
if requested by Noosa 36 months
during the three year term TNC & NSC
Council (flights and
of this Agreement, if
incidentals covered
requested by Noosa Council.
separately by Noosa
Council, accommodation
and in-country travel
covered by this Grant).
*(A5.4) Develop a
Conservation Action Plan
for specific issues (not yet
Conservation Action Plan
determined) relevant to the 36 months
and Community Workshops TNC & NSC
Noosa Estuary (including
completed as required.
community workshops) if
requested by Noosa
Council.1
*(A5.5) Facilitate access to A number of new
TNC conservation networks Ongoing for contacts/networks to assist
and researchers if duration of Noosa Council with ongoing TNC
requested by Noosa project and future marine
Council. conservation activities.
1
Note, deliverable changed to Coda Fellowship on commercial fishing (see Chapter 7). An additional deliverable for
seagrass restoration (A5.8) has also been added (see Chapter 7).
15
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 16
To improve the environmental health of the Noosa River Estuary through active restoration
Project Goal and conservation activities that engage the Noosa Community in meaningful conservation
and support economic and community wellbeing.
Expected
Party
completion date
responsible
Objectives Deliverables (from 1 July 2019 Measurable outcomes
for
unless otherwise
Deliverable
stated)
(A5.6) Promote Noosa
Council’s Noosa River Plan
Presentation to at least one
and shellfish restoration 36 months
national and one TNC & NSC
project in at least one
international conference.
national and one
international conference.
(A5.7) Promote Noosa
Council’s Noosa River Plan
and shellfish restoration
project to corporate, A number of new corporate/
philanthropic and Ongoing for government/ philanthropic
state/federal government duration of alliances and new in-kind TNC & NSC
audiences to establish project support/financial funding
further support for contributions.
conservation activities that
support the Noosa River
Plan.
2.4 Project stakeholders, roles and responsibilities and team structure
Project stakeholders
The innovative and applied nature of the TNC-NSC partnership and genesis of the Bring Back the Fish project has
resulted in significant government, community, private sector and academic interest. The below list of project
stakeholders is not exhaustive and will be updated regularly throughout the project:
Government and Community
• Noosa Shire Council – Project Supporter, Technical Advisor
• Tourism Noosa - Technical Advisor, Community Partner
• Queensland Government Department of Agriculture & Fisheries – Regulator, Technical Advisor
• Maritime Safety Queensland – Regulator, Technical Advisor
• Queensland Government Department of Environment & Science – Regulator, Technical Advisor
• Queensland Government Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy – Regulator, Technical Advisor
Community
• Kabi Kabi – Traditional Owner, Technical and Cultural Advisor
• The Thomas Foundation – Project Supporter
• Australian Marine Conservation Society – Project Supporter
• Noosa Parks Association – Community Partner
16
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 17
• Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation – Community Partner
• Sunfish and Ozfish Unlimited – Community Partner
• Noosa Integrated Catchment Association (NICA) - Community Partner
• Noosa North Shore Association Inc. – Community Partner
• Local residents - Community Partner
Private sector
• Unitywater – (potential) Project Supporter
• Suez – (potential) Project Supporter
• Ecological Service Professionals – Technical Advisor, (potential) Project Delivery Partner
• Queensland Seafood Industry Association and local commercial fishers – Technical Advisors, Community
Partner
• Restaurants, seafood wholesalers (various) – Community Partner
• Local businesses associated with the Noosa River (e.g. boat hire, fishing tackle shops, tourism) –
Community Partner
• Shellfish growers/aquaculture industry – Project Partner
• Commercial maritime, construction and diving businesses – Project Partner
Academic
• University of Sunshine Coast - Technical Advisor, (potential) Project Partner
• University of Queensland - Technical Advisor, (potential) Project Partner
• Central Queensland University - Technical Advisor, (potential) Project Partner
• James Cook University/Tropwater - Technical Advisor, (potential) Project Partner
Roles and responsibilities
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is the Project Lead and is accountable for all deliverables, engaging and managing
subcontractors and working with community delivery partners. In collaboration with NSC and the Noosa community,
TNC will also undertake project monitoring, evaluation and reporting and lead or support community education,
volunteering and communications.
Noosa Shire Council (NSC) will provide planning, consultation and implementation functions associated with the
Project to ensure it can be effectively embedded within local government policy and management for the benefit of
Noosa residents, businesses and visitors. This includes NSC contributing to communications and public engagement,
as well as the monitoring, evaluation and reporting.
Kabi Kabi are recognized as traditional owners of the Noosa region and will be engaged at key stages of the project to
provide advice on how best to incorporate Indigenous needs, knowledge and culture into the planning and long-term
management of oyster ecosystems and other project outcomes.
The purpose of this Technical Advisory Group (TAG) is to:
• Support detailed project planning for the Noosa Oyster Restoration Project that will see oyster
ecosystems re-established in the Noosa River estuary by June 2022.
• Provide ongoing expert advice on the implementation of the Project Plan, and support in overcoming
legislative, scientific and practical barriers that occur during the term of the project.
• Ensure that the Project meets all technical, statutory and policy requirements in a timely manner to the
satisfaction of relevant decision-making authorities.
17
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 18
• Ensure actions within the Project Plan are effectively delivered and communicated to all stakeholders.
Project Supporters provide financial and in-kind support for the project and may be involved in further fundraising
activities.
Community Delivery Partners provide in kind support and may be responsible for leading or participating in
community-based activities such as volunteering and citizen science.
Project Delivery Partners may be responsible for delivering and leading project activities as third party vendors.
Technical Advisors provide in kind and potentially paid technical support to the project usually but not limited to
science and research.
18
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 19
3. Objective One: Project establishment and management
3.1 Purpose and deliverables
The purpose of Objective 1 is to establish good project governance through efficient project oversight and
management, adherence to procurement procedures, adequate staffing and good reporting. Deliverables include:
1. A1.1 Hiring of full time Project Manager and allocation of TNC and NSC support staff to the project
2. A1.2 Delivery of Project Plan (this Plan), communication plan, and risk assessment(s)
3. A1.3 Establishment of a Project Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for oyster ecosystems restoration and
associated science/research activities
4. A1.4 Participation and delivery of public education and engagement forums and media statements
5. A1.5 Annual and six-monthly project reporting
This objective will be led by the Project Manager with support from project advisors (Figure 2), overseen by the TNC
Operations Manager and NSC Environmental Services Manager. TNC uses a standard project management framework
called Highly Effective Teams and various project management tools and training to support project staff to deliver
projects on time and within budget, and manage unplanned situations as they arise. The Project will follow the
principles of Adaptive Management (Figure 3) which is intimately connected to the monitoring and evaluation process
and annual review cycles (i.e. Deliverable’s A1.2 and A1.5).
Figure 2. Project Delivery Team, including Project Sponsors, Technical Advisory Group and Subject Matter Experts.
19
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 20
Figure 3. The adaptive management cycle showing the outer learning cycle where lessons inform the next formal
phase of planning and implementation. The inner learning loops are small changes that are made based on learnings
that occur between major planning reviews. The inner loops effectively allow progress in the outer loop in both
directions. Reproduced from Webb et al. 20172.
3.2 Code of conduct and procurement principles
TNC is committed and takes seriously its core Values and Code of Conduct and requires all staff and contractors to
live by these Values. They are:
• Integrity Beyond Reproach
• Respect for People, Communities, and Cultures
• Commitment to Diversity
• One Conservancy
• Tangible, Lasting Results
Further information on how our Values and Code of Conduct are executed by staff and supporters can be found on
TNC’s website: https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/who-we-are/accountability/code-of-conduct/
All contracts executed with subcontractors as part of the implementation of this Project, will require adherence to
TNC’s Standard Operating Procedures on Purchasing, Conflict of Interest and Anti-Corruption Compliance which
describe in detail TNC’s policies on ethical procurement. These detailed documents are available on request from
2 Webb, J.A., Watts, R.J., Allan, C. and Warner, A.T., 2017. Principles for monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management of environmental
water regimes. In Water for the Environment (pp. 599-623). Academic Press.
20
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 21
TNC. TNC also recognize NSC’s procurement principles3 which identify similar values to TNC’s Standard Operating
Procedures. These are:
• Value for money
• Open and effective competition
• Development of competitive local business and industry
• Environmental protection
• Ethical behaviour and fair dealing
All third party contracts are reviewed by TNC’s legal counsel and senior management in adherence to TNC’s Values,
Code of Conduct and Standard Operating Procedures. Approval is determined by senior management with
delegation of authority from the CEO.
3.3 Project workflow
A1.1 Hiring of full time Project Manager and allocation of TNC and NSC support staff to the project:
Timeline: Within 6 months
• TNC-NSC agree project manager position functions and attributes
• TNC-NSC agree on project team structure (Figure 2)
• TNC develops project manager position description, advertises role and undertakes recruitment
• TNC-NSC onboarding for new project manager and support staff
A1.2 Delivery of Project Plan (this document), Communication Plan, and Risk assessment(s):
Timeline: Within 6 months
• TNC Draft Project Plan (this document), Communications Plan (Appendix 1) and shellfish restoration
Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting template (Appendix 2) and associated risk assessments (provided
within each document) developed by project staff
• TNC to undertake in-field and desktop shellfish restoration risk assessment
• All documentation approved by NSC and Technical Advisory Group (within 9 months) (restoration-related
work only)
• Documentation reviewed annually as part of Deliverable A1.5
Document titles and owners associated with this project are:
Table 2. Documents and reports associated with this project.
Document name Owner Status
Alliance Funding Agreement TNC-NSC TNC- NSC Signed 25/7/19
Project Management Plan (this document) TNC Living document
Project Communications Plan TNC Draft (Appendix 1)
Project Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting Plan TNC Draft (Appendix 2)
3
https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/council-procures-goods-services/suppliers-contractors-portal?documentId=203&categoryId=411
21
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 22
Annual/Final progress reports (2020,2021,2022) TNC Not Started
Six monthly report cards (2020,2021,2022) TNC Submitted
A1.3 Establishment of a Project Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for shellfish ecosystems restoration and associated
activities:
Timeline: 3 months from appointment of Project Manager
• Terms of reference drafted, including meeting timeframes, rolling agenda items, roles and responsibilities
• Committee members nominated as representatives
• Committee members invited/confirmed as representatives
• Regular meetings chaired by TNC Project Manager
A1.4 Participation and delivery of public education and engagement forums (9) and media statements (3)
Timeline: Three forums within first 12 months. Additional 6 forums in years 2 and 3.
• Forums and key audiences identified, feedback forms/surveys developed
• Key messages, presentations and external documents (i.e. project brochures) developed
• Forums delivered
• Media statements drafted by TNC, approved by NSC
• Media statements jointly released, media monitoring engaged
A1.5 Annual and six-monthly project reporting
Reports must include details on progress made against deliverables, monitoring and evaluation and financial
expenditure (income/expenditure).
Timeline: Ongoing over 3 years
• Reporting templates, developed and agreed (template attached as Annex 3)
• Draft reports sent to NSC (and where appropriate, Technical Advisory Group) four weeks prior to final
completion date
• Final report revised and completed
Reporting Milestones
Table 3. Reporting dates and milestones over the three year project period.
Report Type Draft Due Final Due
st
Year 1 Annual Report 2020 31 July 2020 31st August 2020
Six Monthly Status Report 2021 31st December 2021 31st January 2021
Year 2 Annual Report 2021 31st July 2021 31st August 2021
Six monthly Status Report 2022 31st December 2021 31st January 2022
Final Report 2023 31st July 2022 31st August 2022
22
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 23
3.4 Deliverables checklist
Table 4. Deliverable checklist for Objective 1 (to be completed in six monthly, annual and final reports).
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Status and notes
(Not Started/In
Progress/Delayed/Completed)
A1.1 Hiring of full-time Project • PM in place
Manager and allocation of TNC
and NSC support staff to the
project
A1.2 Delivery of Project Plan (this • Project Plan completed
Plan), communication plan, and and endorsed
risk assessment(s) • Comms Plan completed
and endorsed
• Monitoring and
Evaluation Plan
completed and endorsed
A1.3 Establishment of a Project • TAG in place
Technical Advisory Group for • Evidence of Kabi Kabi
shellfish ecosystem restoration engagement
and associated activities
A1.4 Participation and delivery of • 9 community
public education and engagement engagement forums
forums and media statements • 3 media statements
released
A1.5 Annual and six-monthly • 3 six monthly status
project reporting updates
• 3 annual reports
23
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 24
4. Objective Two: Site Selection
4.1 Purpose and deliverables
The purpose of this objective is to identify suitable areas for shellfish and potentially seagrass restoration in the Noosa
Estuary. The end goal is to spatially identify all areas where restoration is possible (maximum restorable bottom) by
considering ecological, social, cultural and regulatory input. Multiple data sets are used and overlaid on a bathymetric
map to create a habitat suitability index. This data is then cross-referenced with observations from the field to develop
a robust assessment of suitable suites. Using the habitat suitability index, priority areas can then be identified for
restoration. By considering a diverse range of data (e.g. salinity, temperature, shoreline, navigation, cultural sites) the
risk of siting restoration within ecological, social or culturally inappropriate locations is reduced.
The deliverables associated with this objective include:
• (A2.1) Shellfish ecosystem restoration suitability model incorporating physical parameters of oysters and
public and industry usage, access etc. to identify priority sites for restoration.
• (A2.2) Obtain Local and State Government permits/authorities including particular resource allocation
authority, for shellfish ecosystem restoration
• (A2.3) Community, industry and stakeholder consultation sufficient to gain majority support for shellfish
restoration locations.
4.2 Data procurement and licensing
Where required, TNC will enter into data sharing agreements with third party data holders to obtain access to
ecological and physical data required for project planning and decision making. Ecological data collected as part of
this project (i.e. all data associated with Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting) will be freely available by TNC on
request and licensed under Creative Commons with attribution to TNC. All ecological data associated with shellfish
monitoring is stored in perpetuity and freely available on Atlas of Living Australia upon completion of the Project.
4.3 Project workflow
(A2.1) Shellfish restoration suitability model incorporating physical parameters of oysters and public and industry
usage, access etc. to identify priority sites for restoration.
Timeline: 12 months
TNC uses a standardized methodology for developing habitat suitably models that consists of identifying a suite of
ecological, social and cultural values and condition thresholds for each of these values. An initial list of habitat
attributes is developed (Table 4) which is then refined through discussions with the Technical Advisory Group, project
technical advisors and the community. The model is then validated with observations from the field. A preliminary
field observation was completed in December 2019 to assist with site selection.
A spatial example of the process is displayed in Figure 4.
24
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 25
Table 5. Example list of ecological restoration suitably attributes that underpin the restoration suitability model. The
list of attributes will be refined and expanded to include cultural and social values.
PARAMETER ENVELOPE CRITERIA (more suitable = 4, less = 0)
Bathymetry 0-9 m 2-9m = 4; 0-2m = 3; >9m=0
Salinity Av 25-35ppt 35-30=4; 30-25=3; <25=0
Temperature Max 8-29C 8-24C= 4; 24-28 = 2; >28=0
DO Min >4mg/L >4mg/L = 4; <4mg/L= 0
Substrate sand/soft sediment Sand/soft sediment = 4; all other areas =0
Seagrass avoidance + 5m buffer from areas >20% coverage Areas outside = 4; Known patches = 0
Seagrass proximity 5m - 500m Areas within 5-500m buffer =4; all other areas =2
Rocky reef proximity 5m - 500m Areas within 5-500m buffer =4; all other areas =2
Shipping channel + 50m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
avoidance -small craft
channels
Shipping channel + 250m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
avoidance- large craft
channels
Recreation/ski/watercr + 250m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
aft zones avoidance
Aquaculture zones + 500m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
avoidance
Commercial fishing + 250m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
zones avoidance
MPAs + 500m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
Culturally sensitive + 250m buffer Areas within buffer = 0; all other areas =4
areas avoidance
Historical reefs Within 250 m Within 250m = 4; all other areas = 2
proximity
Remnant reefs/known Within 250 m Within 250m = 4; all other areas = 2
areas of high density of
oyster proximity
Distance from shore Within 2 km All areas within 2 km =4, clip out all other areas
• Develop draft list of habitat suitability model attributes
• Refine these with TAG, Project Expert Advisors and community
• Identify appropriate data sets and enter data licensing agreements (if required)
• Conduct data analysis using GIS software
• Produce draft and review preliminary findings
• Adjust criteria thresholds based on field observations, community input
• Produce final suitability maps and select sites
25
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 26
Figure 4. Example of different data layers that support development of a habitat suitability index. (Left to right:
Boating navigation, Indigenous culture, commercial fishing zones, seagrass distribution, Habitat Suitability Index.
Example provided for Oyster Harbour, WA).
(A2.2) Obtain necessary State Government permits/authorities including particular resource allocation authority, for
shellfish ecosystem restoration
Timeline: 18 Months
TNC recognizes permitting can be a long and sometimes arduous task. The process of permitting includes not just the
physical application but regular open dialogue and feedback between the permitting agencies and project
proponents. This includes engagement in the TAG, departmental briefings, invitations to workshops and community
forums and one-one meetings. This allows regulators to have a more complete understanding of the project objectives
and processes in order to effectively apply policy and permits. Key activities include:
• Identify all necessary legislation and permits required to undertake shellfish restoration
• Engage with relevant government departments, provide briefings, meetings, one-one meetings as required
• Confirm site locations, restoration design, risk assessments and mitigation procedures
• Apply for relevant permits
• Negotiate conditions as needed
The likely relevant permits required for restoration are:
❖ Beneficial Reuse Permit - Queensland Government Department of Environment and Heritage
❖ Resource Allocation Authority - Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
❖ Development application for Prescribed Tidal Works – Noosa Council
This list of permits will be reviewed once the site locations and restoration designs are finalized.
(A2.3) Community, industry and stakeholder consultation sufficient to gain majority support for shellfish ecosystem
restoration locations.
26
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 27
Timeline: 18 months
As part of Objective A1.4, TNC will engage with the community and stakeholders through the TAG, organized
community forums, media and one-one meetings. The process involves socializing both the method and end result of
site selection and allowing the community and stakeholders to have sufficient input into the site selection process in
order to minimize the number of individuals and groups opposed to the location. Regular input and feedback will
reduce the risk of stakeholders objecting to sites.
Table 6. Deliverable checklist for Objective 2 (to be completed in six monthly, annual and final reports).
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Status and notes
(Not Started/In
Progress/Delayed/Completed)
(A2.1) Shellfish restoration suitability • Habitat suitability model
model incorporating physical which incorporates industry,
parameters of oysters and public and Kabi Kabi and public
industry usage, access etc. to identify interests.
priority sites for restoration.
(A2.2) Obtain necessary State
Government permits/authorities
including particular resource • All relevant permits secured
allocation authority, for shellfish
ecosystem restoration
(A2.3) Community, industry and • Records of public and
stakeholder consultation sufficient to stakeholder consultation,
gain majority support for ecosystem including one-on-one
restoration locations. meetings, open forums,
media, etc.
27
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 28
5. Objective Three: Community engagement
5.1 Purpose and deliverables
The purpose of this objective is to strengthen community interest, support and participation in local conservation
activities by establishing a community volunteering program to support shellfish ecosystem restoration. Community
volunteering and support can occur at all stages of the restoration process including initial design and concept,
planning, site surveys, material procurement and cleaning, construction and monitoring. This objective will identify
activities that match the skills and enthusiasm of community volunteers with the needs of the project.
During early discussions between TNC and NSC, the feasibility of a shell recycling program to assist with the
procurement of shells was determined as a high priority. A feasibility study has since been conducted to determine if
shell recycling is possible within the local Noosa area. The results of the study suggest that a small recycling program
could be viable in Noosa.
Other activities that are possible and will be explored during community workshops include:
• Participatory/community planning
• Shell recycling
• Shell cleaning and bagging
• Video monitoring (e.g. Remote Underwater Videos)
• Oyster, invertebrate and fish monitoring
• Oyster gardening (oyster growth study)
• Oyster watch (oyster recruitment study)
These activities can be undertaken and led by a range of groups such as schools, restaurants, corporates,
environmental groups, fishing clubs, ‘friends of’ groups and NSC.
5.2 Project workflow
(A3.1) Community, industry and stakeholder consultation to identify most appropriate community volunteering
opportunities (e.g. shell recycling, oyster gardens, oyster watch, video monitoring).
Timeline: 18 months
• Identify likely participatory and lead groups and organizations (e.g. Noosa Parks Association, high schools,
restaurants)
• Establish workshop and present options
• Identify lead organizations and volunteer projects, scope resources required
(A3.2) Establish at least one community volunteering program identified from the above process which takes into
account current and future resources, management and community interest.
Timeline: 18 months
• Establish delivery model, budget and project plan
28
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 29
• Provide resource support as required
• For shell recycling, follow TNC standard process for Shuck don’t Chuck
Table 7. Deliverable checklist for Objective 3 (to be completed in six monthly, annual and final reports).
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Status and notes
(Not Started/In
Progress/Delayed/Completed)
(A3.1) Community, industry and • Records of public and
stakeholder consultation to stakeholder consultation,
identify most appropriate including one-on-one
community volunteering meetings, open forums,
opportunities (e.g. shell recycling, media, etc.
oyster gardens, oyster watch,
video monitoring).
(A3.2) Establish at least one • Record of volunteer hours
community volunteering program dedicated to community
identified from the above process volunteering programs, such
which takes into account current as: shell recycling, oyster
and future resources, gardens, oyster watch, video
management and interest. monitoring.
29
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 30
6. Objective Four: Shellfish restoration
6.1 Purpose and deliverables
The purpose of this objective is to restore shellfish (native rock oyster-dominated) ecosystems in the Noosa River
estuary. This objective is the primary in-water conservation outcome of the overall TNC-NSC Project. The deliverables
associated with the objective are:
• (A4.1) Restoration at two sites (approx. 40m-50m shore length of substrate laid, per site) which tests substrate
selection, deployment techniques, in-situ substrate configurations, system efficiencies as well as oyster growth
and survival.
• (A4.2) Restoration across multiple sites, as determined by restoration suitability modelling and outcomes of
community consultation.
• (A4.3) Monitoring and evaluation study for both pilot and full restoration sites. Monitoring to include oyster
metrics, invertebrates and fish use (detailed in MER Plan).
A more extensive overview of the restoration process and rationale is provided below.
6.2 Background to shellfish ecosystems and rationale for restoration
Shellfish ecosystems are intertidal or subtidal three-dimensional ecosystems formed by oysters, razorfish and/or
mussels at high densities 4 . Shellfish ecosystems can vary in appearance depending on the dominant ecosystem-
forming species. Common attributes of shellfish ecosystems include:
• High (i.e. reefs) and low (i.e. beds) hard biogenic substrates, created by oysters and/or mussels, on
otherwise soft sediment or rocky areas, which are often interspersed with sand/silt or rubble matches
and/or seagrass;
• Provision of habitat and refuge for other species including sessile and mobile organisms, and thereby
supporting high levels of species diversity and unique assemblages;
• Accreting dead shell material, such that the shellfish ecosystem grows in size and mass over time; and
• Provision of food for other organisms, either when consumed directly or through the species assemblages
they support.
Shellfish are ecosystem engineers, providing important habitat for many species of finfish (e.g. snapper and whiting),
elasmobranchs (e.g. stingrays) and invertebrates (e.g. shrimps and crabs) through their high structural complexity,
including for many important recreational and commercial fishery species. Additionally, shellfish ecosystems provide
water filtration, sediment stabilization and the transfer of nutrients from the water column to the surrounding
community, as well as enhanced removal of potentially damaging nutrients through processes such as denitrification.
6.3 Shellfish ecosystem loss and historical significance in the Noosa Estuary
The underwater environment of the lower estuary in the Noosa River was once dominated with extensive shellfish
ecosystems created primarily by the Australian rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata). These ecosystems provided food
and habitat for many other species including desirable fish species such as whiting, bream and snapper whilst also
filtering and removing nutrients from the water column. A single oyster can filter up to 100 L of water a day. Oyster
4 Gillies et al. 2018. Australian Shellfish Ecosystems: past distribution, current status and future management. PLoS ONE 13(2):e0190914.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190914
30
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 31
ecosystems were largely lost in the late 1800s to early 1900s. At the peak of the wild oyster harvest industry (1906-
1907), it is estimated that 2-3 million oysters were harvested in the lower estuary each year5 .
The loss of oyster biomass likely resulted in the ecosystem collapsing, with shellfish ecosystems now replaced primarily
by soft (sandy and muddy) sediments. Changes to the estuary’s physical-chemical condition, canal development and
shoreline armoring have also likely contributed to the decline of the ecosystem or inhibited its natural recovery. Today,
no substantial shellfish ecosystems exist in the Noosa River estuary, despite the presence of individual and small
populations of rock oysters. The closest known intact oyster-dominated shellfish ecosystem is found near North
Stradbroke Island in Morton Bay. Notably, a recent study4 identified that the Australian rock oyster-dominated
shellfish ecosystem is the most threatened marine ecosystem in Australia, with up to 94% of the ecosystem lost
throughout Australia since European settlement.
6.4 Process for undertaking restoration
This Project will follow the eight principles for ecological restoration established by the international Society of
Ecological Restoration (SER)6, which have been newly interpreted for shellfish restoration7. The definition of ecological
restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed.
The process involves moving a destroyed or degraded ecosystem along a measurable trajectory of recovery that is
persistent in the future and reflective of a natural evolutionary path. Key summary steps critical to the process of
restoration are:
1. The need to clearly identify and describe a target (reference) ecosystem or model for which restoration
targets and metrics can be derived for the degraded ecosystem;
2. The ability to design restoration interventions based on the combination of the desired restored state
(adapted from the physical structure and biological attributes of the reference ecosystem) and overcoming
stressors;
3. The ability to set achievable and time-bound ecological objectives and indicators; and
4. The ability to monitor the ecosystem towards it recovery trajectory.
The process for how the project will achieve these four steps is described more fully in the Project Monitoring
Evaluation and Reporting (MER) Plan and summarized in Figure 6. The MER process is guided by best-practice
ecological restoration and shellfish restoration monitoring guidelines, including the Open Standards for the Practice
of Conservation8, the Society for Ecological Restoration International Standards6 and TNC’s Oyster Habitat Restoration
Monitoring and Assessment Handbook9.
In addition to ecological targets, the Project will also use the MER Plan to track progress against socio-economic and
project efficiency targets.
5
Thurston R. 2015. Historical ecology of the Noosa Estuary fisheries. Report to: Noosa Council, The Nature Conservancy and The Thomas
Foundation (available on request from TNC).
6 Gann GD, McDonald T, Walder B, Aronson J, Nelson CR, Jonson J, Hallett JG, Eisenberg C, Guariguata MR, Liu J, Hua F, Echeverría C, Gonzales E,
Shaw N, Decleer K, Dixon KW (2019) International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restoration
Ecology 27(S1): S1–S46
7 Fitzsimons, J., Branigan, S., Brumbaugh, R.D., McDonald, T. and zu Ermgassen, P.S.E. (eds) (2019). Restoration Guidelines for Shellfish Reefs. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington VA, USA.
8
Conservation Measures Partnership (2013) Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation Version 3.0, accessed online via http://cmp-
openstandards.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CMP-OS-V3-0-Final.pdf
9
Baggett LP, Powers SP, Brumbaugh R, Coen LD, DeAngelis B, Greene J, Hancock B and Morlock S (2014). Oyster habitat restoration monitoring
and assessment handbook. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA. 96 pp.
31
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 32
Figure 5. Framework of the monitoring, evaluation and reporting process for Noosa shellfish restoration, which
follows the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation8. Definitions of the Monitoring, Evaluation and
Reporting level terminology are shown on the left and an example of each on the right. Project targets are
considered the highest level measurable attributes, which articulate the ultimate vision of key aspects of the
project. The goals, objectives and indicators that are nested under each target are Specific, Measurable, Achievable,
Relevant and Time-based (SMART).
6.5 Defining the targets
The ecological target is to re-establish a self-sustaining population of S. glomerata that will create a resilient shellfish
ecosystem consisting of diverse biological communities, fish populations and their interactions.
The nearest known reference rock oyster-dominated shellfish ecosystem is located in Moreton Bay, near North
Stradbroke Island, approximately 150 km away. Rock oyster-dominated shellfish ecosystems have been described in
McLeod et al. (2019) 10 which will be used as the basis to develop an ecological model of the Noosa shellfish
ecosystems. Further studies describing the ecosystem (currently in review e.g. MacAfee et al.) and new data as part
of the monitoring program will be used to identify the ecosystem attributes that will guide the process of restoration.
10
McLeod, I.M., Boström-Einarsson, L., Creighton, C., D’Anastasi, B., Diggles, B., Dwyer, P.G., Firby, L., Le Port, A.,
Luongo, A., Martínez-Baena, F. and McOrrie, S., 2019. Habitat value of Sydney rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata)
reefs on soft sediments. Marine and Freshwater Research.
32
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 33
The monitoring program will use a Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) design for community structure and function
attributes as recommended by Baggett et al. (2014)9. Multiple control sites will be used to assess the relative influence
of spatial variation among them compared to differences between control and impact sites, i.e. beyond BACI designs11.
The socio-economic target is to create opportunities for the local community, recreational users and businesses in
the Noosa Shire through shellfish ecosystem restoration.
The focus of this target will be to develop new economic and community volunteering benefits throughout the Project.
By engaging project partners, stakeholders and the local community and businesses in project activities, and training
(including citizen science and hands-on restoration), the project will not only provide direct economic benefits to local
contractors engaged in restoration activities, but also foster ownership of the project, and help build capacity in others
to undertake similar restoration projects in the future.
The project efficiency target is to deliver the project on time and within budget and additional funding is leveraged to
support project deliverables. The partnership agreement between TNC and NSC will be used as a reference for this
target.
The MER workflow associated with shellfish ecosystem restoration uses a nested approach where restoration
objectives are nested within high level restoration goals which deliver the three restoration targets (described above)
(Figure 7).
Figure 6. Summary of restoration targets, goals and objectives. Further detail is provided in the Project Monitoring Evaluation
and Reporting Plan.
11
Underwood, A.J. (1992) Beyond BACI - the detection of environmental impacts on populations in the real, but variable, world. Journal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 161(2):145-178.
33
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 34
6.6 Shellfish ecosystem substrate composition and configuration considerations
The environmental and ecological considerations relevant for the selection of shellfish restoration sites is guided by
the approaches outlined in the recently released shellfish restoration guidelines6.
The basic design principles of shellfish restoration include:
1. Identification of suitable locations within the system that maximize connectivity between shellfish
ecosystems and other associated ecosystems such as rocky reefs, seagrasses and muddy bottoms, to
minimize human, biological and physical threats;
2. The laying of a locally sourced rock/rubble substrate onto the seafloor, for oysters and other associated
species to attach to. This habitat substrate will be a composite of locally sourced igneous rock mixed with
recycled, dried oyster shell, offering an optimal low-relief habitat on which oysters, and associate species
such as pearl oysters, hairy mussels, tunicates, macroalgae, can readily settle and grow. The composite
substrate provides elevation, to raise the oysters above the sediment, and hard calcareous surfaces,
attractive to rock oysters in particular. This composite substrate is designed to mimic the natural shell ‘hash’
that would otherwise be formed by generations of oysters recruiting onto themselves, but which has since
been lost from the estuary;
3. Consideration of physical features, such as aspect, height, dimensions and rugosity, in a way that can help
mitigate physical and biological threats such as smothering, heat, erosion, predation and human disturbance;
and,
4. Seeding of the substrate with live oysters, while the target density of adult oysters is achieved, and/or timing
of the laying of the substrate to coincide with peak natural oyster recruitment periods.
The final composition, configuration and deployment methods for the habitat substrate are determined by a team of
ecological and engineering advisors using physical, ecological, social and engineering parameters. Designers
particularly consider the need to balance the stability of the structure, during significant weather events, and in
consideration of edge effects and ecological resilience and the need to recover shellfish ecosystems of adequate size,
to be self-sustaining and effective, within the available project budget.
For the pilot shellfish ecosystems, two sites will be selected to test the overall replicable patch size that can be
reproduced at other locations identified by the habitat suitability analysis. The composite substrate bases at each site
are likely to be long and narrow (e.g. 50 m x 5 m) and run parallel to the shoreline occupying the lower intertidal
region or perpendicular to the shore, from the intertidal into the sub-tidal zone. The final configuration and locations
of restoration sites in the Noosa River estuary will be assessed and approved by the TAG.
6.7 Project workflow
(A4.1) Restoration at two sites (approx. 40m-50m shore length per site) which test substrate design, deployment and oyster
growth and survival.
Timeline: 24 months
• Review and synthesis of existing research (described in 2.2)
34
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 35
• Field surveys to assess site conditions
• Development of draft restoration design and management interventions including ongoing management
• Review by TAG, Expert Project Advisors and Stakeholders
• Permit applications
• Material procurements and third-party contracts
• Substrate configuration and deployment
(A4.2) Restoration across multiple further sites, as determined by habitat suitability modelling and outcomes of
community consultation.
Timeline: 36 months
• Review of pilot MER site results and Restoration Suitability Model
• Field surveys to assess site conditions
• Development of draft restoration design and management interventions including ongoing management
• Review by TAG, Expert Project Advisors and Stakeholders
• Permit applications
• Material procurements and third-party contracts
• Substrate deployment
(A4.3) Monitoring and evaluation study for both initial and full restoration sites. Monitoring to include oyster metrics,
invertebrates and fish use (detailed in MER Plan).
Timeline: 36 months
• Draft MER plan developed including:
o Review of existing research, reference sites and models
o Specific restoration attributes identified (i.e. oyster density, patch size, patch height, patch
location, invertebrate biodiversity)
o BACI experimental design developed including control and reference site selection
o Reporting templates
• Review by TAG, Expert Project Advisors and Stakeholders
• MER Plan revised and endorsed by TNC-NSC
• Regular monitoring conducted
• Reports produced
Table 8. Deliverable checklist for Objective 4 (to be completed in six monthly, annual and final reports).
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Status and notes
(Not Started/In
Progress/Delayed/Completed)
(A4.1) Restoration at two sites
• At least two (2) sites with at
(approx. 40m-50m shore length
least overall 80 m shore
per site) which test substrate
length of shellfish ecosystem
design, configuration,
restored and being actively
deployment techniques and
monitored.
oyster growth and survival.
35
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 36
(A4.2) Restoration across multiple • In addition to the two initial
further sites, as determined by sites, a number of sites
restoration suitability modelling comprising a minimum of a
and outcomes of community further aggregated 600m2
consultation. surface area of restored
oyster ecosystem in the
Noosa River estuary.
(A4.3) Monitoring and evaluation • Annual monitoring and
study for both pilot and full evaluation report card with 6
restoration sites. Monitoring to monthly status reports to be
include oyster metrics, provided.
invertebrates and fish use
(detailed in MER Plan).
7. Objective Five: Noosa River Plan
7.1 Purpose and deliverables
The purpose of objective five is to provide technical and expert support to NSC particularly in regards to planning,
implementation and evaluation associated with the draft Noosa River Plan and other coastal and marine management
plans including the Noosa Environment Strategy.
The objective recognises that TNC has technical skills and experiences across a broad range of marine and coastal
management areas and that these skills and experiences would benefit NSC staff overseeing the implementation of
the Noosa River Plan and Noosa Environment Strategy. Delivery mechanisms include:
• Informal advice through meetings and one-one dialogue
• Formal requests for peer review
• Structured decision-making workshops and trainings
• Study tours
• Coda Fellowships (internal TNC temporary work placements)
Access to experts in relevant fields can include TNC local staff, TNC international staff and TNC external networks.
Deliverables associated with this objective are:
(A5.1) Run workshop with Noosa Council to identify ongoing focus areas for TNC support.
*(A5.2) Provide technical/peer review on minimum five plans/reports/studies if requested by Noosa Council.
*(A5.3) Facilitate a minimum of three study tours of relevant sites in line with objectives and scope of the program in
Australia/US if requested by Noosa Council (flights and incidentals covered separately by Noosa Council,
accommodation and in-country travel covered by this Grant).
*(A5.4) Develop a Conservation Action Plan for specific issues (not yet determined) relevant to the Noosa Estuary
(including community workshops) if requested by Noosa Council.
36
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 37
*(A5.5) Facilitate access to TNC conservation networks and researchers if requested by Noosa Council.
(A5.6) Promote Noosa Council’s Noosa River Plan, Noosa Environment Strategy and shellfish restoration project in at
least one national and one international conference.
(A5.7) Promote Noosa Council’s Noosa River Plan, Noosa Environment Strategy and shellfish restoration project to
corporate, philanthropic and state/federal government audiences to establish further support for conservation
activities that support the Noosa River Plan
Several of the objectives marked with a * are discretionary based on the outcomes of A5.1 and future needs of NSC.
7.2 Revised deliverables
Over the course of the first six months of the project TNC and NSC further refined and agreed on the scope of Objective
5 (i.e. as a result of conversations related to delivery of A5.1). Deliverable A5.4 is no longer required as it is superseded
by the draft Noosa River Plan. Instead, deliverable A5.4 has been revised to:
Review and feasibility of opportunities for sustainable commercial and recreational fishing management options for
the Noosa River.
This deliverable will assist NSC to understand options for revised fisheries management arrangements. The deliverable
will be implemented through a TNC Coda position in either year two or three of the project. The position will recruit
an experienced fisheries manager from TNC US to undertake the review and provide recommendations.
It was also agreed that the feasibility of seagrass restoration as a method of reducing sediment resuspension and
increasing invertebrate biodiversity should be explored. A new deliverable has therefore been added:
A5.8 Assess feasibility of seagrass restoration in Lake Cooroibah as a method of reducing sediment resuspension and
increasing invertebrate biodiversity
7.3 Project workflow
(A5.1) Run workshop with Noosa Council to identify ongoing focus areas for TNC support.
Timeline: 9 months
This workshop has been completed and resulted in changes to Objective 5 deliverables described above in 7.2.
*(A5.2) Provide technical/peer review on minimum five plans/reports/studies if requested by Noosa Council.
• NSC to identify feedback opportunities to TNC at earliest opportunity
• TNC to identify suitable staff(s)
• Template/process for feedback identified prior to review
• Review completed
Note: TNC has already undertaken peer review on both drafts of the Noosa River Plan and the Noosa Fishing Futures
research paper.
37
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 38
*(A5.3) Facilitate a minimum of three study tours of relevant sites in line with objectives and scope of the program in
Australia/US if requested by Noosa Council (flights and incidentals covered separately by Noosa Council,
accommodation and in country travel covered by this Grant).
Timeline: 36 months
• TNC and NSC identify objectives for study tour and key personnel
• TNC coordinate study tour itinerary and logistics
• TNC oversee in country/on site logistics
*(A5.4) Review and feasibility of opportunities for sustainable commercial and recreational fishing management
options for the Noosa River.
Timeline: 36 months
• TNC- NSC agree on scope of review and project deliverables
• Establish terms of reference for Coda Fellowship
• Recruit Coda Fellow
• Undertake desktop review, onsite and in person interviews including with stakeholders and State
Government
• Produce draft report
• TAG, NSC, Project Technical Advisors provide review
• Final report presented to NSC
*(A5.5) Facilitate access to TNC conservation networks and researchers if requested by Noosa Council.
Timeline: 36 months
• TNC to provide introductions and facilitate dialogue and expert feedback as required
(A5.6) Promote Noosa Council’s Noosa River Plan and shellfish restoration project in at least one national and one
international conference.
Timeline: 36 months
• Potential high-profile conferences identified
• Abstract developed, submitted
• Presentations provided
Timeline: 36 months
• Key messages agreed in Communications Plan
• Partnership brochures drafted and finalised
• PowerPoint slide content agreed
• Incorporate key messages into meetings
Timeline: 36 months
38
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 39
• Review of existing seagrass information/maps
• Commission seagrass mapping by third party (preferably local university)
• Develop habitat suitability model for seagrass (using same processes as described in Objective 2)
• Commission PhD or alternate research arrangement on practical restoration solutions (preferably local
university)
• Produce executive summary of options/feasibility in final report (Deliverable A1.6)
Table 9. Deliverable checklist for Objective 5 (to be completed in six monthly, annual and final reports).
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Status and notes
(Not Started/In
Progress/Delayed/Completed)
(A5.1) Run workshop with Noosa • Workshop completed.
Council to identify ongoing focus
areas for TNC support.
• Minimum 5 peer review
*(A5.2) Provide technical/peer reports completed during the
review on minimum five three year term of this
plans/reports/studies if requested Agreement, if requested by
by Noosa Council. Noosa Council. If Noosa
Council requests a peer
review, TNC will provide a
minimum of 3 experts who
are qualified in the relevant
area of expertise for Noosa
Council consideration and
Noosa Council’s acceptance
of 1 expert for the peer
review.
*(A5.3) Facilitate a minimum of • Minimum three study tours
three study tours of relevant sites in completed during the three
line with objectives and scope of year term of this Agreement,
the program in Australia/US if if requested by Noosa
requested by Noosa Council (flights Council.
and incidentals covered separately
by Noosa Council, accommodation
and in country travel covered by
this Grant).
*(A5.4) Review and feasibility of • Conservation Action Plan and
opportunities for sustainable Community Workshops
commercial and recreational fishing completed as required.
management options for the Noosa
River.
*(A5.5) Facilitate access to TNC • A number of new
conservation networks and contacts/networks to assist
researchers if requested by Noosa Noosa Council with ongoing
Council.
39
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 40
and future marine
conservation activities.
(A5.6) Promote Noosa Council’s • Presentation to at least one
Noosa River Plan and shellfish national and one
restoration project in at least one international conference.
national and one international
conference.
(A5.7) Promote Noosa Council’s • A number of new corporate/
Noosa River Plan and shellfish government/ philanthropic
restoration project to corporate, alliances and new in-kind
philanthropic and state/federal support/financial funding
government audiences to establish contributions.
further support for conservation
activities that support the Noosa
River Plan
(A5.8) Assess feasibility of seagrass
restoration in Lake Cooroibah as a
• Habitat mapping report,
method of reducing sediment
habitat suitability model, PhD
resuspension and increasing
study or similar
invertebrate biodiversity
40
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 41
8. Project risk assessment
Risks and management interventions associated with the Project are outlined in Table 9. These risks describe the project operational risks only. Risk associated with
shellfish ecosystem restoration (e.g. impacts to habitat, marine species and users) are located within the MER Plan (Appendix 2).
Table 10. Project risks and management actions
Risk category Risk Description Pre- Management interventions Final rating
management
risk rating
Reputational Stakeholders not Project Lead fails to sufficiently engage MEDIUM 1. Key stakeholders mapped and identified during LOW
supportive of project stakeholders throughout duration of early planning phase of project.
project, leading to poor stakeholder 2. Open community forums held during planning
support, negative media, political phase and at key stakes thereafter. Listen and
intervention and potentially, project delays. respond to community views and perspectives.
3. Where possible, include methods of co-design
and/or consider community advisory groups.
4. Provide regular and transparent updates to
general public at key stages of the process (e.g.
through website, social media, presentations,
forums, media releases).
5. Provide opportunities for community to
participate and lead component of the project
(e.g. historical mapping, ecosystem building,
shell preparation, citizen science, ‘Friends of’
groups).
Traditional Owners Project Lead fails to sufficiently engage MEDIUM 1. Identify Traditional Owners and elders who can LOW
not supportive of Traditional Owners in co-design practices or speak for Country through Indigenous advisory
project seek advice on culturally sensitive issues groups, prescribed body corporates, or other
leading to alienation, negative media, government registers.
political intervention and potentially, 2. Identify cultural/environmental aspirations and
project delays. consider opportunities for incorporating into
planning and design (e.g. cultural mapping
included in habitat suitability models,
consideration of Traditional Ecological
41
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 42
Knowledge into project planning, ranger
programs).
3. Establish process for regular engagement with
Traditional Owners, based on their preferred
method.
4. Consider appropriate remuneration for
consultation.
5. Consider Welcome to Country, Indigenous
names for new shellfish restoration sites and
support for cultural ceremonies/practices.
Poor performances of Threat or danger to the good name or MEDIUM 1. Undertake due diligence on all third-party LOW
TNC or partners standing of a business or entity as the result subcontractors and avoid working with those
negatively impacts of the actions by a project partner, due to with compromising or non-aligned values.
project the actions of an employee, or through 2. Listen and consider opinions of stakeholders on
other peripheral parties and subcontractors and an individual’s reputation.
subcontractors. 3. Request all project partners understand and
honor TNC’s Code of Conduct and Values and
include clauses in third party contracts.
4. Suspected concerns to be mitigated through
prompt damage control measures such as direct
communications with relevant individuals or
businesses and terminating working
relationships early.
5. Prepare key messages for any media response as
part of an agreed communications protocols
with project partners.
Environmental Rock oysters, and Oyster recruitment, growth and survival is MEDIUM 6. Use science and habitat suitability models to LOW
associate species, fail lower than anticipated and fails to meet inform the site selection process (e.g. water
to grow and restoration benchmarks. Alternate, rocky- quality, topography, hydrodynamic, sediment
consolidate and reef or sediment habitats form or persist analysis, benthic habitat type, historic shellfish
function like a instead of shellfish ecosystem resulting in ecosystem locations)
shellfish ecosystem lower biodiversity and environmental value. 7. Establish TAG review process and provide
opportunities for stakeholder workshops to peer
review the data and process,
8. Consult with key experts and relevant
authorities and draw upon experience gained
from other projects and processes.
9. Develop full ecological risk assessment for
shellfish restoration.
42
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 43
10. Follow best practice guidelines and methods for
shellfish restoration.
11. Apply adaptive management principles and scale
restoration over multiple timeframes to
incorporate prior learning.
Operational Misalignment of Governance issues relating to poor MEDIUM 1. Clearly define partner roles and discuss LOW
project goals communication, and conflict within partner preferred ways funding or partner organisations
delivered with organization resulting in misaligned want to be involved.
funding/ partner objectives, breakdown of relationship and 2. Establish deliverables based on project plan and
organisations potential legal action. agreed timelines.
3. Establish regular communication and feedback
opportunities with key stakeholders
4. Submit reports and communication materials
that are high quality and on time.
5. Outline an agreed communications plan with
project partners.
Contract deliverables Project Lead and/or third party vendors not MEDIUM 1. Prepare contracts one month in advance (where LOW
are not met delivering on time or as agreed, potentially possible) according to TNC standard operating
leading to project delays and potential legal procedures and relevant funder policy.
action. 2. Establish deliverables based on project plan and
agreed timelines.
3. Establish regular communication and feedback
opportunities with key stakeholders.
4. Ensure flexibility around timing of works is built
into contracts (e.g. adverse weather, hatchery
delays).
5. Regular communication with contractors with
clearly defined timelines to ensure that due
dates for deliverables are met.
6. Identify alternative options that can be used to
undertake the works if contractor fails to deliver.
Project schedule The risk that activities will take longer than HIGH 1. Communicate with project partners the key MEDIUM
delayed expected. dates and deliverables required to advance to
schedule (update every 2 weeks).
2. If relevant, politicians, councilors and Mayor
informed of upcoming dates where input is
required.
3. Provide generous timing where possible for
contingency.
43
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 44
4. Any events which may compromise the timing
are managed where possible, and any necessary
changes to the timeline are negotiated with
partners.
5. Project management timelines will be reviewed
in relation to the impacts on the project as a
result of COVID-19, with special consideration
given to the likely impacts on community
engagement timing and modalities, fundraising
and expenditure profiles.
Legal risks Arising from legal and regulatory LOW 1. Contracts TOR be reviewed by TNC’s legal team LOW
obligations, including contract risks and in accordance with Standard Operating
litigation brought against TNC Procedures and NSC policies.
2. All communications between principal and
contractors will be recorded and filed.
3. Any conflicts or disputes with contractors first
discussed informally to try and resolve issues
prior to legal intervention.
4. Discuss legal proceedings with TNC leadership
team if conflict cannot be resolved.
Poor implementation Includes risks from process problems such LOW 1. Develop implementation plans based on lessons LOW
as materials, procurement and delivery. learnt from other projects and peer reviewed by
colleagues and project partners.
2. Project Manager to draw upon the resources
and expertise in the organization, having worked
in shellfish ecosystem restoration in Australia
and overseas over the past 15 years.
Financial Over budget Escalation of project costs due to cost MEDIUM 1. Base costs on previous comparable projects. LOW
estimating accuracy and scope creep. 2. Align scope to the contract agreement.
3. Closely monitor the budget and review
frequently.
4. Explore opportunities to advance the project
with further attraction of funding.
Personnel Injury or death to Activities that involve field work, diving, use HIGH 1. Identify all hazards and risks at early stages of LOW
project staff and of heavy machinery or marine works may planning and complete activity-based risk
subcontractors result in personal harm, injury or death. assessments.
2. Communicate risks to participants at the start of
field work activities.
44
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 45
3. Follow TNCs Standard Operating Procedures and
relevant work health safety policies
4. Conduct due diligence on all subcontractors
undertaking construction works and ensure
WH&S is addressed in all relevant contracts.
SEVERE HIGH MEDIUM LOW NEGLIGIBLE
45
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 46
9. Project budget
The following project budget includes all costs associated with project delivery including project staff salaries, third
party vendors, materials and supply associated with all project objectives. This budget is reflected in the TNC-NSC
Agreement.
Please note that Year 1 budget will be amended downwards to reflect delays in commencement and the impact of
COVID-19 on activities. Underspend will be moved into Year 2.
Table 11. Project budget
Total Year 3
Activity Total Year 1 Total Year 2 (15 months) Total
Activity #1
109145 AUST Reef Building 122,824 225,599 513,559 861,982
Activity #2
109146 AUST Hatchery and seeding 30,800 148,681 113,851 293,332
Activity #3
109147 AUST Reef integrity & performance
assessment 46,200 227,186 306,903 580,289
Activity #4
109148 AUST Community engagement,
capacity build, media 148,240 135,518 140,639 424,397
Activity #5
109149 AUST Project Management 131,215 48,349 60,436 240,000
Grant Total 479,279 785,332 1,135,389 2,400,000
Note: The budget period is by financial year. The project periods are: Year 1 – 25 July 2019 – 30 June 2020, Year 2 – 1
July 2020 – 30 June 2021, Year 3 – 1 July 2021 – 30 September 2023
46
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 47
10. Project milestones
The anticipated project milestones are presented in Table 12. Achievement of these milestones may be subject to
government requirements placed on the project that are not foreseeable at the time of writing.
Table 12. Major project milestones - anticipated
No. Project Milestone Indicative Action Date
1 Technical Advisory Group established and first quarterly meeting 13 May 2020
2 All Project Plans (Communications, Project Management, risk assessment, 31 May 2020
Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting) completed
3 Initial round of community workshops completed 30 July 2020
4 Seagrass surveys completed 30 November 2020
5 Shellfish Restoration Suitability Index (HSI) Completed 30 July 2020
6 Shell recycling commences# 30 August 2020
7 Seagrass Restoration Suitability Index (HSI) completed 30 November 2020
8 Citizen science activities commence# 1 February 2021
5 Design for pilot sites completed 30 June 2020
6 Seagrass restoration trials commence 30 June 2021
7 All permits and approvals for pilot sites obtained 31 October 2020
8 Restoration works at pilot sites completed 31 May 2021
9 Design for large-scale restoration works completed 30 June 2021
10 All permits and approvals for large-scale restoration works obtained 31 August 2021
11 All restoration contracts and plans established 31 October 2021
12 Large-scale restoration works completed 31 May 2022
13 All post-restoration monitoring and evaluation completed 30 June 2022
14 Complete Monitoring and Evaluation Report 15 July 2022
15 Project Review 20 July 2022
16 Completion of Final Project Report 30 July 2022
47
BRING BACK THE FISH: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 48
11. Appendices
Appendix 1. Project Communications Plan
Purpose
The purpose of this Communications Plan is to establish agreed communications guidelines between all delivery
and funding partners for the Bring Back the Fish Project – The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Noosa Shire Council
(NSC) and Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS).
.
About the project
This project proposes to establish an innovative and regionally significant Noosa River Partnership, between the
NSC and the global conservation organization, TNC. The partnership seeks to improve the health and resilience of
the Noosa River and the industries and local communities that rely on its long-term wellbeing.
The focus of the Partnership is to:
• Capitalize on the expertise of TNC’s global networks and experience (through knowledge brokering,
mentoring, study tours and access to subject matter experts) to improve River management and
strengthen the long-term social, environmental and economic health and resilience of the River;
• Demonstrate a leading example of a replicable, environmentally focused NGO-local government
partnership that achieves superior outcomes for the environment and local communities compared to
existing river management models; and,
• Increase government (State and Federal), private, industry and community support for restoration and
conservation-focused activities that improve the long-term social, economic and environmental health
and resilience of the River.
The Partnership is delivered through the Bring Back the Fish Project which prioritises the restoration of shellfish
ecosystems in the Noosa River estuary, in addition to supporting activities such as seagrass restoration and review
of commercial fishing identified in the draft Noosa River Plan.
The partnership commences July 2019 and continues for at least three years, with the outcomes of the first three
years of the partnership to be reviewed in July 2022. The total operating budget is $2.4M, inclusive of $1.2M from
The Nature Conservancy which includes a $200,000 gift from AMCS and $1.2M from Noosa Council, with the
expectation that further funding will be secured, from a variety of other sources, to support on ground
management activities. The majority of this funding is quarantined for shellfish ecosystem restoration.
Our vision is a clean and productive Noosa River estuary with a vibrant living oyster-dominated shellfish ecosystem
that provides abundant fish and rich biodiversity for the benefit of the Noosa community.
Notable media-friendly deliverables from the project include:
• Launch of the partnership/project
• Community forums, presentations
• Citizens involved in restoration actions
• Shell recycling
• Restoration substrate deployment
• Shellfish monitoring results
• Seagrass study
• Novel commercial fishing feasibility study
48 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 49
Examples of Key messages
Primary message
1 Restoring shellfish ecosystems will re-establish a previously common ecosystem in the Noosa River estuary
and boost estuary health by helping to clean the water, enhance biodiversity and increase fish life.
2 This project is part of a suite of environmental initiatives delivered under the Noosa River Plan designed to
improve the environmental health and recreational vale of the estuary.
3 This project is part of TNC’s national shellfish restoration project that aims to rebuild 60 shellfish
ecosystems across Australia. If achieved, the project will proclaim Australia the first nation in the world to
have recovered a critically endangered marine ecosystem. Shellfish restoration projects in Melbourne’s
Port Phillip Bay and South Australia’s Gulf St Vincent have already been completed with others underway
near Adelaide, SA; Perth and Mandurah, WA, and now Noosa, QLD.
Secondary messages
• Shellfish ecosystem restoration works in tandem with various other estuary and catchment management
initiatives to support the health of the Noosa River under increasing challenges such as population
growth and climate change impacts (they are not a silver bullet but enhance overall estuary resilience).
• Shellfish ecosystems were once common in the Noosa River estuary. These were extensively
commercially harvested in the late 1800s and along with changes in catchment land use and urban
development, these impacts are collectively responsible for their decline.
• This project is a collaborative effort. Its success depends on working with a wide range of stakeholders
including government, scientists, industry, indigenous groups and community groups.
• As well as improving estuary health, this project provides opportunities for community engagement,
education and industry participation through shell recycling and ecosystem monitoring.
• Previous trials undertaken in the Noosa River were just that – trials. It was not anticipated at the time
that the final shellfish ecosystems would look anything like the initial experimental shell-filled coir bags.
Previous trials, and studies, have helped answer questions around oyster spat availability, interaction
with adjacent habitats, human recreation impacts and siltation.
• This project has been made possible by the generous support of Noosa Shire Council, The Nature
Conservancy, The Thomas Foundation and Australian Marine Conservation Society.
• People interested in learning more about the project, becoming involved or providing a donation, can
contact Project Manager, Craig Bohm ([email protected]), or visit The Nature Conservancy website at
http://natureaustralia.org.au
Communication goals
A. Improve awareness amongst local community, businesses and visitors on the objectives and outcomes of the
project and need for the Noosa River Plan and associated activities.
B. Spark greater community interest and stewardship in supporting shellfish restoration and wider estuary
health.
C. Encourage further funding support in the project (i.e. to support more habitat restoration, ongoing
monitoring, and/or local training and/or employment opportunities.
D. Acknowledge project funders and supporters and demonstrate our commitment to project delivery.
We will do this by:
i. Promoting all newsworthy stages of the project to print, TV, radio and online media through media
statements, media briefings and social media channels.
ii. Building general community awareness of the project through face-to-face interactions such as guest
presentations and workshops.
iii. Building key stakeholder and donor awareness of the project through targeted briefings and site trips.
Primary media contact for all media queries
Tony Jupp, Associate Director of Communications, The Nature Conservancy. Email: [email protected]
49 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 50
Ken Furdek, Communications & Community Engagement Manager, Noosa Shire Council. Email:
[email protected]
Primary partners & roles
The Nature Conservancy (TNC): is the world’s largest conservation organisation working around the
globe to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends. TNC is a foundation partner that is
responsible for leading the management and delivery of all components of the project, including
planning, implementation and monitoring as well as other associated initiatives.
Noosa Shire Council (NSC): is the local government agency who manages the Noosa region, an area about
130 kilometres (81 mi) north of Brisbane. The Shire is known for its sustainability and design principles
and as a tourism destination of choice for Australians and international visitors. NSC is a foundation
partner who is responsible for supporting project implementation.
Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS): AMCS was founded 50 years ago by a community of
scientists and ocean conservationists, who came together to take action to protect our marine life. They
advocate for real, evidence-based solutions based on the best available science. AMCS work closely with
research centres across the globe and employ conservation experts to safeguard the future of Australia's
amazing oceans. AMCS is a funding partner.
The Thomas Foundation: In 1998 David and Barbara Thomas established The Thomas Foundation to
pursue their long-time philanthropic interests. Initially the Foundation supported projects in Education,
the Arts and Conservation. In 2013 the Foundation’s focus shifted to marine issues. The Thomas
Foundation is a funding partner.
Secondary partners
All project stakeholders identified in the Noosa Project Management Plan (Chapter 2.4) could be considered
secondary partners involved in delivering or engaged in some aspect of the project. Where these groups produce
their own media and communication related to the Project or are incorporated in media and communications
produced by Primary Partners, all groups must adhere to the communication protocols detailed (below) in this
Communications Plan.
Communication Protocols
1. For all jointly branded communications that involve Primary Partner logos, all Primary Partners must agree
to the content before publication. Timeframes agreed include:
• Joint Media Releases – 48 hours
• Promotional materials – 2 weeks
• Community notices to attend public events (e.g. workshops, volunteering days, seminars) – 1 week
2. Primary Partner staff designated to talk to media will be nominated by each organisation during the notice
and approval period described above.
3. For all individual Primary Partner communications and secondary partner communications, all parties agree
to reference The Nature Conservancy, Noosa Shire Council, The Thomas Foundation and Australian Marine
Conservation Society as project funders. However, there is the joint understanding that media may not always
acknowledge all partners in any published communication.
4. All public documents including scientific papers and reports published by Primary Partners, Secondary
Partners and third-party recipients of project funding (e.g. Universities) MUST include the following
statement as acknowledgment:
This project was supported by Bring Back the Fish, a three-year initiative to restore shellfish
ecosystems and improve estuary health in the Noosa River estuary, funded by The Nature
50 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 51
Conservancy, Noosa Shire Council, The Thomas Foundation and Australian Marine Conservation
Society.
5. For media approaches, each partner’s spokesperson has the autonomy to engage in interviews, however,
this is also subject to individual partner internal communication approval processes.
6. All media spokespeople agree to use the key messages in this communications agreement as a guide to frame
project messages and comments.
7. All nominated media spokespeople have the permission of their respective organisations and all partners, to
be a representative of the project to the media, including print, TV, radio and online.
8. All partners agree to share media clips about the project that are picked up by their media monitoring
services.
Target Audiences
Government
• Federal government
• Queensland Government
• Other Local Governments (i.e. councils adjoining Noosa)
Environmental and other NGOs
• Community conservation groups
• Peak stakeholder bodies
Corporate
• Financial supporters (current and new)
• Local businesses
• Tourism associations
General Public
• Recreational fishers
• Community conservation groups
• Diving groups
• Recreational boating community
• River foreshore communities
Media Targets
• TV news – Channel 7/9, ABC
• The Courier Mail
• Noosa News
• Websites and social media feeds of relevant organisations, e.g. peak stakeholder bodies, conservation-
based groups, fishing groups
• Fishing magazines.
Potential Communication Tools
TNC will lead the media relations and public engagement for this project. Below is a list of potential tools that
could be created to promote the project:
• Media Statements
• Fact sheets/brochures
• Project videos/vignettes
• Still photographs
• Webpages
• Facebook and other social media posts
• Infographics
• Site visits
51 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 52
Issues management
The primary risk identified for the project is reputational. This means that the reputation of TNC and/or any of
the partners would be a risk should an operational matter or communication activity associated with the project
(or a perception of either) generate negative public opinion or negative stakeholder feedback.
The table below is not exhaustive. Rather, it lists some known reputational risks for issues management and the
recommended communication responses. As predicted at the commencement of the project, the likelihood of
these risks occurring is very low as there are no negative outcomes and only supportive stakeholders.
Risk Communication Response
Recreational fishing/conservation NGO alliance is • Improving the health of the Noosa River and
seen as inappropriate restoring fish habitats is a focus for both
partners
Government/conservation NGO alliance is seen as • Improving the health of the Noosa River and
inappropriate restoring fish habitats is a big part of this unique
partnership
Partnership and/or project criticised as having no • Regular updating of key stakeholders
practical benefits
Partnership and/or project do not deliver on • Honest, regular communications
particular objectives • Focus on progress & other outcomes achieved
Negative commentary circulates on social media • Partners to all monitor own social media
• Respond with appropriate key messages to
manage concerns/comments raised
Negative mainstream media commentary • Targeted media approaches around milestones
• Media monitoring
• Letters to the editor
Negative commentary that TNC is a big US NGO • TNC is working around the world in more than
70 countries, including many marine
conservation programs
Stakeholders do not engage with project • Strong project branding
• Possible rolling calendar of briefings, site visits &
conference speaking
• Regular stakeholder engagement
• Engaging materials
52 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 53
Appendix 2. Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting Plan
Bring Back the Fish
Restoration and conservation of shellfish ecosystems in the Noosa River estuary
Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Plan 2020-2022
June 2020
This monitoring plan will be reviewed and updated as new information specific to the Noosa project becomes
available.
Noosa River mouth © Marcos Barboza
This project was made possible by The Nature Conservancy, Noosa Shire Council, The Thomas Foundation and
Australian Marine Conservation
Purpose
The purpose of this Plan is to outline the Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) approach for the Bring Back
the Fish conservation project for the Noosa River Estuary. The Plan details the environmental, social and economic
targets and goals of the project. This plan includes information on performance metrics, monitoring methods,
analyses and reporting. The Project’s timeframes, organisational roles and responsibilities for collecting and
analysing data are also provided.
53 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 54
The project follows the MER principles of the international Society for Ecological Restoration (SER), the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation (OSPC) and best practice methods for shellfish ecosystem restoration. This includes establishing project targets, goals and objectives and using a reference ecosystem, or reference model, as a predefined ecological target. Reporting of project indicators includes both reporting of trends towards an ecological trajectory and standard project inputs and outputs (e.g. oysters deployed, m 2 of habitat provided). The execution of this Plan will enable project partners and funding bodies to determine whether the project is successful in achieving predefined environmental, social and economic targets. By monitoring a common set of ecological indicators, we will also be able to compare these results with other restoration projects in Australia and globally. Introduction Shellfish ecosystems, which are created predominately by the rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata), and native flat oyster (Ostrea angasi), were historically extensive along the coastline of southern and eastern Australia. Since European arrival, these bivalve ecosystems have declined in extent and condition largely as a result of unsustainable fishing methods which removed much of the shellfish ecosystem structure12. This loss was further aggravated by a decline in water quality, sedimentation of bays and estuaries and possibly the introduction of new diseases. Since the loss of shellfish ecosystems in Australia largely occurred outside of living memory, only recently have we begun to understand the true historic extent of shellfish ecosystems and the critical role they play in supporting fish production, natural water purification and biodiversity. Oyster-dominated shellfish ecosystems were once a dominant feature of the Noosa River estuary, feeding the local Kabi Kabi Traditional Owners and early European settlers in the region. The commercial oyster industry, in the Noosa River, commenced in the 1870’s or 1880s, and ceased, having become economically unviable, by the 1940’s13. The Nature Conservancy will work alongside the Noosa Shire Council (NSC), commercial and recreational fishers, and the community to restore rock oyster-dominant shellfish ecosystems in the Noosa River estuary. The primary activity of the project involves laying a composite substrate, or bed of local rock rubble and dried oyster shell, on which rock oysters, and associated species, settle, grow and eventually ‘cement’ together to form the oyster-dominated ecosystem. To restore shellfish ecosystems, juvenile native oysters (pre-seeded onto recycled shells in a hatchery) will be mixed with a local igneous rock/rubble and deployed into carefully selected, intertidal and shallow subtidal areas and positioned parallel to depth contours. These ecosystems will be accessible to the general public. Activities associated the project, and consequent improvement in the ecological health of the estuary, will help support the regional economy through job creation and ecotourism. The project is modelled on successful shellfish restoration projects in Victoria, South Australia and the United States14. The underlying habitat substrate, which is deployed by the project, and on which the oysters and other invertebrate species settle and grow naturally, will be designed by TNC technical staff in collaboration with members of the Project’s Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and will be assessed/reviewed by engineers, where necessary. The project is split into three distinct phases that allows for examination and learning of lessons from previous phases of the project that can be incorporated into subsequent phases (i.e. adaptive management principles). These phases commenced with Phase I, an external experimental project, in which -small-scale experimental 12 Gillies CL, McLeod IM, Alleway HK, Cook P, Crawford C, Creighton C, et al. (2018) Australian shellfish ecosystems: Past distribution, current status and future direction. PLoS ONE 13(2): e0190914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190914 13 Thurstan, R. H. (2015). Historical ecology of the Noosa Estuary fisheries. Report to Noosa Council, The Thomas Foundation and The Nature Conservancy. 14 The Nature Conservancy (2015) Measuring the Recreational Fishing Benefits of a Restored Oyster Habitat, online via http://www.nature.org/media/texas/hmr_final_distribution.pdf 54 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 55
units, comprised of shell enclosed in coir netting, were set at 14 sites throughout the estuary and the settlement, growth and use patterns of river organisms interacting with these units were measures and analysed. In phase II, the project will apply successful restoration methodologies accredited by the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER). The project will deploy into two carefully selected sites in the river composite of locally sourced rock rubble, mixed, in part with dried oyster shell. This substrate will be laid in carefully designed configurations to maximise it’s potential to recruit oysters naturally and promote oyster survivability. These two sites will be carefully monitored and evaluated before phase III commences. In phase III, after analysis of the construction, ecological and social successes and challenges experienced in phase II, additional substrate will be deployed at the same and/or additional sites in the estuary, as suitable deployment sites, and community will, allow. This MER Plan is focused primarily on the delivery of Phase II, with refinements to be added for adoption in Phase III. More detail about each phase is presented below: Phase I (2018-2020) Phase I was delivered by the University of the Sunshine Coast. It entailed a three-year study which installed 14 trial ‘reef’ units consisting of coir bags filled with oyster shell at sites throughout the estuary. The project studied the structural integrity, oyster recruitment, fish and invertebrate community assemblages and human interactions with the structures. This project collected important ecological information that will support Phases II and III – this project. 55 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 56
Figure 1: Map of Phase 1 small scale research locations in the Noosa River estuary, QLD Phase II (2019-2020) Phase II of the project is led by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in partnership with Noosa Shire Council (NSC), and directly involves the community and key operational partners in the collection and deployment of restoration substrate (including oyster shell), monitoring of oyster recruitment (and related habitat parameters), evaluating success and reporting to interested stakeholders and the wider community. 56 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 57
Within Phase II, the following outputs are expected to be achieved:
• Restoration works completed at two restoration sites (approx. 40 m - 50 m shore length per site) which
examines design and oyster growth and survival.
• Monitoring and evaluation study, with monitoring to include oyster metrics, invertebrates and fish use
(detailed in MER plan).
• Engage community members in citizen science and/or restoration activities.
• Promotion of project and objectives to wider community through the media; and
• Improve skills and confidence of local partners/community in delivering large scale marine restoration
projects.
The ecological objective of Phase II is to establish a viable breeding population of native rock oysters that can form
the basis of self-sustaining shellfish ecosystems in the future. At this scale, the aim is to make a measurable
difference to fish abundance and the productivity of the Noosa River estuary at the site scale – which are long-
term outcomes coveted by the local Noosa community, visitors and government.
Notionally, a composite substrate, on which oysters and other invertebrates will settle and grow, will be
comprised primarily of locally-sourced rock/rubble and dried oyster shell will be laid in configurations specific to
each site, but which will be deployed, from a barge, with the following dimensions:
• Row dimensions: 0.1 – 0.3 H x 4 - 5 W x 40-50 L (metres) – in single line or patch configurations,
depending on the nature of each site)
• Total Substrate Area: 400 m2seafloor area will be restored
• Substrate sinkage: 200 millimeters tolerance (to be determined)
• Volume of substrate: TBD
The outcomes of Phase II will demonstrate the environmental, social and economic benefits of undertaking
shellfish ecosystem restoration in QLD estuaries whilst also providing tangible environmental and social benefits
to the local community.
Phase 3 (2020-2022 and beyond)
Phase 3 will seek to undertake system (estuary)-wide restoration using an assisted restoration approach, whereby
shellfish ecosystems (a further 600 m2 of aggregated reef substrate) are restored at multiple locations throughout
the estuary.
Additionally, the project will explore and test the feasibility to restore seagrass habitats in Lake Cooroibah (and
potentially elsewhere) to reduce sediment resuspension and increase invertebrate and fish biomass in the
estuary.
The long-term goal of Phase III is to measurably improve the health (including fish productivity and water quality)
of the entire estuary (i.e. at the system or estuary scale) of the Noosa river, thereby increasing the environmental,
social and economic benefits provided by the estuary to the local community (with a focus on benefits to shellfish
aquaculture, fisheries and ecotourism industries as well as amenity and recreational value for the local
community).
Project team
The following is a list of the core group of practitioners who are responsible for designing, implementing, and
monitoring the restoration sites:
Craig Bohm, The Nature Conservancy - Project Coordinator - Responsible for monitoring design, planning and
overall project coordination
Dr. Simon Reeves, The Nature Conservancy – Monitoring Manager - Responsible for managing data collection and
analysis and coordinating the diving plan (see Appendix 1), Reef Life Survey, oyster density/growth fieldwork and
Report cards
Simon Branigan, The Nature Conservancy – Operations Manager (Oceans) – Responsible for oversite of project
delivery and technical advisor.
57 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 58
Dr. Chris Gillies, The Nature Conservancy – Project Sponsor and advisor, responsible for approving resources, monitoring design and undertaking Reef Life Survey and oyster density/growth fieldwork Additional divers will be engaged as required to undertake fieldwork. Subject Matter Experts will be consulted with at key times during the monitoring program for guidance, expertise and review. These experts include, but not limited to: Dr. Boze Hancock, The Nature Conservancy – Expert Restoration Scientist with TNC’s Global Oceans Team focusing on providing science support for marine habitat restoration, particularly through quantifying the ecosystem services these habitats provide human communities, such as coastal protection, fish production and improved water quality. Project Technical Advisory Group (TAG), representatives from project stakeholder groups with an interest in technical delivery of the project, including monitoring and evaluation. Other experts will be included as required to provide advice on MER components throughout the project’s delivery. The framework for monitoring activities and responsibilities can be seen in Figure 2. Figure 2: Monitoring project team chart with key responsibilities for project deliverables 58 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 59
Timeline Figure 3: Project timeline identifying project deliverables and indicative timing for monitoring and restoration activities. Ongoing monitoring will be required to evaluate the success of the restoration works against the Project’s Targets, Goals and Performance Indicators. For more detail of monitoring activities within the Project, see Annex 2: Draft monitoring Timeline. 59 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 60
Targets, goals and objectives
The development of the monitoring, evaluation and reporting (MER) process follows a MER framework as outlined
in
Figure 4: Framework of monitoring, evaluation and reporting process for TNC shellfish restoration projects, which
follows the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. Definitions of MER level terminology is show on the
left and an example of each.
At the highest level, there are broad restoration targets with goals and objectives which hierarchically convey the
objectives of the project. Each target can have multiple goals and objective. Each objective can have at least one
indicator (but potentially more) that assesses whether the objective has been met. Thus, each target could have
single or multiple goals that can be outlined by single or multiple objectives that are in turn measured by single
or multiple indicators, with each indicator being measured by a specific method. The process outlined here is
derived from the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation 15.
Figure 4: Framework of monitoring, evaluation and reporting process for TNC shellfish restoration projects,
which follows the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. Definitions of MER level terminology is show
on the left and an example of each on the right
15
http://cmp-openstandards.org/
60 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 61
It is now commonly accepted that restoration of ecosystems can not only provide environmental benefits but also
community, social and economic benefits too. With this in mind, the Project has established three targets that
encompass these multiple benefits, in addition to ensuring the project is delivered cost-effectively and in a timely
manner.
The targets identified in Table 1 are to be achieved by the end of Phase 2 of the Project.
Table 1: Project targets and descriptions
Project Targets Description
Ecological To re-establish a self-sustaining population of S. glomerata that will, with associate
species, create a resilient shellfish ecosystem consisting of diverse biological
communities, fish populations and their interactions.
Socio-economic To create opportunities for the local community, recreational users and businesses
in the Noosa Shire through shellfish restoration actions.
Project efficiency To deliver the Project on time and within budget and additional funding is
leveraged to support project deliverables
61 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 62
Ecological target and reference ecosystem
The ecological goals and objectives underlying the Project’s ecological target have been developed in accordance
with best practice restoration monitoring guidelines16 17 18 and current research that defines ecological attributes
to guide the restoration of rock oyster (S. glomerata) dominated ecosystems19 i.e. an ecological reference model.
Ultimately, the ecological target of this phase of the project is to restore a biogenic shellfish ecosystems in multiple
locations in the Noosa River estuary. These biogenic habitats will be dominated by native oysters (S. glomerata)
and colonised by a diverse assemblage of associated organisms such as other shellfish, bryozoans, crustaceans,
barnacles and calcareous polychaetes and fish.
Through restoration efforts, the current site will shift from an existing bare sandy and/or rubble bottom, with low
species diversity (
Figure 5a) to mixed habitats with high diversity (
Figure 5b, c). The conceptual diagram below shows the expected stages of ecosystem transition and restoration:
from substrate deployment, partly seeded with juvenile oysters, to a biodiverse, self-sustaining living shellfish
ecosystem (
Figure 6).
Figure 5: Sandy bottom substrate (a) compared to natural oyster ecosystem in George’s Bay Tasmania displaying
different vertical profiles and structure (b,c). © C Gillies, The Nature Conservancy.
c
Figure 6: Stages of development to create a living shellfish ecosystem © The Nature Conservancy
16 The Nature Conservancy et al, Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook
17 Mcdonald et al (2016). National standards for the practice of ecological restoration in Australia, Restoration
Ecology, Vol. 24, No. S1, pp. S4–S32.
18 Conservation Measures Partnership (2013) Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation Version 3.0, accessed
online via http://cmp-openstandards.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CMP-OS-V3-0-Final.pdf
19 McLeod, I. M., Boström-Einarsson, L., Creighton, C., D’Anastasi, B., Diggles, B., Dwyer, P. G., ... & McOrrie, S. (2019).
Habitat value of Sydney rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata) reefs on soft sediments. Marine and Freshwater
Research.
62 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 63
Socio-economic target The goals and objectives underlying the Project’s socio-economic target have been developed to align with practice restoration monitoring guidelines. Through the restoration of a biogenic shellfish ecosystems in the Noosa River estuary, it is expected that maritime construction (provision and deployment of restoration substrate) and recreational fishing opportunities will be enhanced, leading to improved social and economic benefits for the local community such as: new opportunities for community volunteering and environmental stewardship, job creation and flow on economic benefits for local businesses related to the tourism and service industries (who will benefit from a healthier Noosa River estuary). Ultimately, the socio-economic outcomes sort from this phase of the project include enhanced local capabilities to deliver nature-based restoration projects; elevated awareness and support for shellfish restoration efforts, through community volunteering and citizen science activities; improved recreational fisher satisfaction, with the government’s estuary management approach; and, the creation of employment opportunities in the research, restoration and monitoring components of the project. Project efficiency target The goals and objectives underlying the project efficiency target have been developed to assess the effectiveness of the project in delivering outcomes on time and within budget and additional funding is leveraged to support project deliverables. The project efficiency target involves the effective management of the project’s finances, appropriate planning and project management and establishment of project governance processes including review of key documentation by the projects Technical Advisory Group (a group of stakeholders with expertise that will provide advice and direction related to project delivery). Within this phase of the project, the project efficiency target is to deliver project documentation, and other project outputs on time and within budget, whilst acquiring all relevant permits in line with an approved project management plan. Indicators and methods The indicators and methods used to monitor and evaluate the project are aligned with the project’s goals and objectives and will in-turn contribute to the targets. The matrix presented at Attachment 1, shows how the Targets flow on to Goals, Objectives, Indicators and Methods. The draft Monitoring Timeframe for delivery of MER actions is presented in Attachment 2. The methods for monitoring the ecological indicators are adapted from the Shellfish Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook20 with detailed methods provided in Annex 3: Monitoring methods. Methods for monitoring socio-economic indicators are mostly developed around measuring community involvement and stakeholder satisfaction with project outcomes. This is done through a range of tools including surveys, semi-structured interviews and collection of project metrics (e.g. number of attendees, number of media mentions). Details for these methods are provided in Annex 4: Monitoring methods: socio-economic. Methods for monitoring project efficiency indicators are mostly developed around tracking expenditure and financial support, technical assistance and project planning documentation as established in the Alliance & Funding Agreement established for the project. Data aligning to the project efficiency indicators will be collected by the project lead and compiled in financial and progress reports to be completed throughout the project. 20 The Nature Conservancy et al, Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook 63 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 64
Evaluation Ecological performance indicator evaluation The experimental design for ecological indicators (listed in Annex 1: Draft table outlining targets, goals, objectives and associated performance indicators for the ) is based on a Before-After- Control-Impact (BACI) design21, adapted to shellfish ecosystem restoration as outlined in the Universal Oyster Metrics in the Oyster Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook22. To evaluate the ecological impact, and to assess the performance of the shellfish ecosystems in meeting their restoration goals, it is necessary to perform both pre- and post-construction monitoring and assess these against control sites located in two different adjacent habitats: soft sediments and seagrass habitats. In the absence of a suitable local reference ecosystem being available, the project will use an interim target reference system developed from research (i.e. Mcleod et al. 2019) for the purpose of guiding S. glomerata ecosystem restoration. The inclusion of a reference system or target is considered best practice approach to restoration 23. Two control monitoring locations, one for seagrass and one for sandy substrate, will be established near the proposed shellfish ecosystem restoration impact area. An indicative diagram of the Impact and Control sites is shown below (see Figure 7). Figure 7: Impact site (proposed 200 m2 shellfish ecosystem area) and sandy substrate-control (200 m2 bare sand habitat). TBD once site assessment has been completed. The sandy control and seagrass site are positioned at a minimum distance 500 m from the impact site, but still within an area of equivalent environmental conditions in order to evaluate changes as a result of the “Impact” action. Socio-economic performance indicators Socio-economic indicators will be evaluated by analysing data collected by the Project Coordinator and pre- and post-substrate deployment socio-economic testimonials from key stakeholders and the community. Evaluation of performance indicators will be done by standard analysis workflows ensuring clear and consistent evaluation products. Each indicator will be assessed against a planned benchmark (planned output and timeframe) and will be allocated a score relating to the how the results of the metric measures up against the benchmark. This scoring will be consistent with those allocated for the ecological and socio-economic target indicators. Project efficiency indicators Project efficiency indicators will be evaluated by reviewing the project deliverables and budget against established outputs and timing established for contracts, the Project Business Case and Project Summary Investment Plan (to be developed later in the project). Each indicator will be assessed against a planned benchmark (planned output and timeframe) and will be allocated a score relating to the how the results of the metric measures up against 21 Underwood, A. J. (1994). On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecological applications, 4(1), 3-15. 22 The Nature Conservancy et al, Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook 23 Gillies CL, Crawford C, Hancock B (2017) Restoring Angasi oyster reefs: What is the endpoint ecosystem we are aiming for and how do we get there? Ecological Management & Restoration 18:214-222 64 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 65
the benchmark. This scoring will be consistent with those allocated for the ecological and socio-economic target indicators. Evaluation steps Summarise Initially for each performance indicator, where applicable, the data will be compiled and summarised returning mean, standard deviation, standard error, coefficient of variation (CV) and a simple calculation of sample size (n) to understand if increased sampling effort is required. Metrics will also be visualised by plotting time series plots that visualise how the metric has varied through time. Score Following summarising the data a score will be calculated in reference to a benchmark. This benchmark will be either a pre-defined benchmark in reference to a known condition i.e. 50 shellfish per m2 that defines a viable population density similar to that found in natural shellfish ecosystems (Gillies et al. 2017). If no pre-determined benchmark exists, the indicator will be measured against a benchmark defined by the mean of the value of the indicator as measured at control sampling locations. The results will then be standardised by providing % of the measure compared to the benchmark and categorised into one of six score categories (see Figure 8). Trend The trend for each indicator will be assessed by fitting the raw data for each site as a linear model. The significance of the t-value, that assesses whether the coefficient is significantly different to zero will first be examined. If the metric is not significantly different to zero, the slope will then automatically be assigned to the ‘Stable’ category. If slope is significant the value of the slope coefficient is then categorized into one of 6 categories (see Figure 8). Additional analysis Where necessary additional analyses will be undertaken to statistically assess differences of metrics between sites i.e. impact versus control. These analyses will be univariate (Analysis of variance - ANOVA) or multivariate analyses (permutational multivariate analysis of variance) where appropriate. The data will be evaluated using the R language and environment for statistical computing alongside RStudio which allows scripts of code to be created ensuring standard analysis workflows and evaluation products 65 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 66
How the scores are calculated The restoration score is calculated by comparing indicators (underlying the restoration targets) to defined benchmarks (see appendix 1). From this the results are classified into scores depending on how the results of the metric measures up against the benchmark (https://ecoreportcard.org/the-process/) The trend for each indicator is also evaluated, where applicable, to understand if the indicator is increasing or decreasing. An indicator’s trend will receive a ‘No Data’ categorisation with only one sampling event as a trendline through a single point is meaningless. Scores and trends are combined into an overarching score for each target and an overall score. All scores are evaluated against the Restoration Index. The region-wide scores are derived by combining the site-based scores for each restoration target. Figure 8: How score and trend is calculated and categorized. Reporting The evaluation products will be used to produce three reporting documents able to be communicated to stakeholders as per the Project Communication Plan. Project reporting products to be developed are described below and in Financial and audited annual reports will be provided to project funders in line with requirements specified within contracts. This includes cumulative expenditure reports (due 10 business days after predetermined dates annually) and audited annual reports for each financial year expenditure (due within 3 months after the end of financial year). Each of these reports will provide a summary of outputs and progress 66 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 67
against specified benchmarks and/or milestones and will form the basis for the evaluation of the indicators that sit under the project efficiency targets. Table 2 1. Progress Summaries Annual progress summaries will be produced outlining the progress of the restoration sites against the targets, goals and performance indicators. The summaries will be produced annually following completion of monitoring fieldtrips. The progress summaries will be easily interpreted and include infographic displays aimed at donors, project partners, restoration practitioners, community groups and the general public. 2. Technical report A technical report will be produced that reports on progress against targets, goals and performance indicators throughout the project. The technical report will be detailed scientific report providing details on the monitoring data collected and an evaluation of how this relates back to the primary targets for the project. The audience for the annual technical report is academic and government scientists, project partners, restoration practitioners. 3. Financial and audited annual project reports Financial and audited annual reports will be provided to project funders in line with requirements specified within contracts. This includes cumulative expenditure reports (due 10 business days after predetermined dates annually) and audited annual reports for each financial year expenditure (due within 3 months after the end of financial year). Each of these reports will provide a summary of outputs and progress against specified benchmarks and/or milestones and will form the basis for the evaluation of the indicators that sit under the project efficiency targets. Table 2: Project reporting schedule Report Due date Cumulative Expenditure Report #1 Audited Annual Report #1 2019-20 Project Summary (Baseline) September 2020 Cumulative Expenditure Report #2 Audited Annual Report #2 2018-19 Project Summary Phase 2 Technical Report Figure 9 provides an outline of the monitoring, evaluation and reporting workflow described in the sections above. 67 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 68
Figure 9: Restoration targets and MER workflow
Data management
The project will follow global best practice in data management as outlined in the British Ecological Society’s Guide
to Data Management in Ecology and Evolution 24. Principles include standardized and consistent procedures to
collect, process, check, validate and verify data. Data and information will be openly shared, proactively released,
licensed to promote re-use and housed on the Australian Ocean Data Network (AODN).
24 Alpert P, Baier A, Baker L, Bartomeus I, Beckerman A, Brophy C, Buckley Y, Burdon R, Canham C, Coulson T, Demes
K, Dray S, Dyer A, Freckleton R, Gibson D, Newton E, O’Hara B, Hill C, Pearse W, Pettorelli N, Piper F, Raby C,
Salguero-Gomez R, Suryawanshi K, Warren P, Wilson K (2014) A Guide to Data Management in Ecology and
Evolution. British Ecological Society, London
68 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 69
Annex 1: Draft table outlining targets, goals, objectives and associated performance indicators for the Bring Back the Fish project for
the Noosa River estuary
Planned Frequency/Timin
Goal Objective Indicators Metric Method Responsibility Notes
Output g
ECOLOGICAL TARGET: to re-establish a self-sustaining population of S. glomerata that will create a resilient reef consisting of diverse biological communities, fish
populations and their interactions.
i 1. Total area of Area (summed) of
shellfish patches of living and
Multi-beam
ecosystem non-living shellfish (or
bathymetry/fiel One survey post TNC/
restored – habitat substrate with 800m²
d surveys and construction Contractors
GOAL 1: monitors habitat and without live
GIS
Within the loss (burial) or oysters) within the
OBJECTIVE 1.
timeframe of spread (slumping) project footprint
Deploy
the project i 2. Total
substrate to
build a restoration
meet tolerance
resilient footprint – Total area of seafloor Multi-beam
outlined in One survey early
structure for Total area of encompassing all bathymetry/fiel TNC/
design and 1ha post
the “Living seafloor deployed substrate d surveys and Contractors
project outputs construction.
Shellfish encompassing all (ha) GIS
Ecosystem” deployed
substrate
i 3. Total substrate Order and
During TNC/
deployed (t) or tonnes/m3 delivery 400m³
construction Contractors
(m3) dockets
Measure change
GOAL 2. against benchmark - Before and after
Within the i 4. Survival of Diver surveys: 30%/m2 on
>30%/m2 on reef S. glomerata TNC
timeframe of shellfish shellfish metrics reef
OBJECTIVE 2. ((count live/(count seeding
the project live+dead))*100)
Demonstrate
create a
survival of Salinity, temperature,
self- i 5. Physical
target shellfish pH and dissolved Monthly
sustaining conditions within Water Quality
shellfish oxygen within Various throughout ?
tolerance ranges Monitoring
population tolerance range of project
for target shellfish
target shellfish
69
Section 70
OBJECTIVE 3.
i 6. Number of Measure against Diver surveys: %
Demonstrate Before and after
recruits of target benchmark: % shellfish metrics; Recruitmen
natural S. glomerata TNC
shellfish increased Recruitment > Settlement t > mortality
recruitment of seeding
from baseline mortality (count/m2) Panels (count/m2)
target shellfish
Data collected
Once following
i 7. Total shellfish Total number of by Project Mgr
TBD S. glomerata TNC/ Hatchery
OBJECTIVE 4. deployed individuals deployed in consult with
seeding
Demonstrate a Hatchery Mgr
density of Measure against
target shellfish benchmark: Density
similar to pre- of target shellfish, on
i 8. Total number Before and after Mean density on
defined average > Field surveys:
of live target TBD S. glomerata TNC remnant reefs is 300
reference benchmark for the shellfish metrics
shellfish (#/m2). seeding m2 25
system pre-defined
reference system (i.e
(count/m2).
GOAL 3. i 9. Total
Within the Measure against RLS and/or Total Before and after TNC/ Rec Fishing
biomass/abunda
timeframe of OBJECTIVE 5. To benchmark: BACI stereo/single biomass > S. glomerata Volunteers/DPRI
nce of fish (g.m2
the project demonstrate (g/m2 or g/m3) BRUV baseline seeding D
or g.m3 /ind.m2)
demonstrate more fish post
the creation ecosystem i 10. Abundance
Measure against RLS and/or Before and after TNC/ Rec Fishing
of habitat restoration of recreational/ Biomass >
benchmark: BACI stereo/single S. glomerata Volunteers/DPRI
that benefits commercially baseline
(g/m2 or g/m3) BRUV seeding D
fish important fish
GOAL 4. i 11. Richness:
Within the increased mobile
timeframe of OBJECTIVE 6. To epifauna richness Diver surveys: Richness >
Change compared Before and after
the project demonstrate an compared to RLS; intertidal control/
to baseline and S. glomerata TNC
demonstrate increase in control and surveys; oyster baseline
control (#/m2) seeding
that biodiversity before monitoring baskets (#/m²)
construction (Total number of
of the reef species)
25
McLeod, I. M., Boström-Einarsson, L., Creighton, C., D’Anastasi, B., Diggles, B., Dwyer, P. G., ... & McOrrie, S. (2019). Habitat value of Sydney rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata)
reefs on soft sediments. Marine and Freshwater Research.
70 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 71
enhances i 12. Benthic
marine functional groups:
biodiversity Increased Functional
Diver surveys:
benthic Change compared Groups > Before and after
RLS; intertidal
functional to baseline and control/ S. glomerata TNC
surveys; oyster
diversity in control (#/m2) baseline seeding
baskets
contrast to (#/m²)
control and
before monitoring
GOAL 5.
Monitor
water quality
OBJECTIVE 7. Monthly.
to Change compared
Explore the Baseline and
demonstrate i 13. Turbidity/susp to baseline and
capacity for the Secchi throughout
that solids around controls for turbidity turbidity/secchi
developing depth > project. Unlikely ?
construction restoration site (NTU/mg.L) and disk
ecosystem to baseline to see change
of the reef reduced water clarity (Secchi
reduce water until reef
enhances depth)
turbidity matures.
marine
ecological
health
Performance Planned Frequency/Timin
Goal Objective Metric Method Responsibility
indicator Output g
SOCIO-ECONOMIC TARGET: To create opportunities for the local community, recreational users and businesses in the Noosa Shire through shellfish reef restoration.
i 13. Stories/ Written,
OBJECTIVE 8. To
testimonials. recorded
qualitatively #stories/ Ongoing
Qualitatively (audio & video)
GOAL 6. demonstrate TBD testimonials throughout TNC
describe benefits of testimonials
Within the benefits to the / mentions project
to the local collected by
timeframe of local economy
economy. Project staff.
the project
demonstrate i 14. No of local Summarise number Ongoing
Data collected
the benefit full-time jobs to of local jobs used in >baseline throughout TNC
by Project Mgr
of shellfish OBJECTIVE 9. To deliver project Project project
reefs to local demonstrate
economy delivery of jobs Summarise number
i 15. Number of Ongoing
of local Data collected
local contractors >baseline throughout TNC
contractors/business by Project Mgr
engaged project
es used
71 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 72
i 16. Total no. of
full-time jobs
Summarise total Ongoing
within the entire Data collected
number of FTE used in >baseline throughout TNC
project (local + by Project Mgr
project project
national +
International)
> the
number of
No of community
planned
events for the project
events at
(i.e. friends of the
i 18. Total number the Ongoing
reef meetings, Data collected
of community inception throughout TNC
fundraisers, public by Project Mgr
events of the project
information
OBJECTIVE 8. project i.e.
meetings, volunteer
Demonstrate >3 public
events)
GOAL 7. engagement consultatio
Within the by the local n meetings
timeframe of community i 19. Attendees at
No of attendees at Ongoing
the project public Data collected
public/consultative >100 throughout TNC
engage the consultation by Project Mgr
forums project
community meetings
in long-term i 20. Community Number of
stewardship and partner community and Data collected Baseline and at
> baseline
of the organisations partner groups by Project Mgr end of project
shellfish reef engaged engaged
No of times the
project is mentioned
in the media -
Media
excludes project Ongoing
i 21. Media Monitoring.
organisation's >5 throughout TNC
engagement Data collected
OBJECTIVE 8. (projects facebook project
by Project Mgr
Demonstrate page/Twitter
media account) social
engagement media
72 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 73
i 22. Improved
knowledge and Data collected Project to
education for Number of students TNC
by Project Mgr set target ?
OBJECTIVE 9. individuals and (secondary, tertiary
Demonstrate end users and postgraduate)
improved Number of resources
knowledge and available to
GOAL 8. education for individuals (videos,
Within the individuals in i 23. Improved practitioner reports,
timeframe of marine educational academic articles, Data collected Project to
TNC
the project restoration resources for workshops, by Project Mgr set target ?
improve individuals conference
knowledge, presentations,
education podcasts,
and infographics etc.)
practical OBJECTIVE 10.
skills in Demonstrate
i 24. Individuals
marine improved
and end users
restoration practical skills Number of interns or Data collected Project to
improve practical TNC
for for individuals work placements by Project Mgr set target ?
skills in marine
practitioners, to undertake
restoration
users and marine
community restoration
members OBJECTIVE 10. No of community
Demonstrate volunteers Ongoing
i 17. Total no. of Data collected 20
involvement contributing to citizen throughout TNC
opportunities volunteers by Project Mgr volunteers
science or restoration project
for community activities
members to
undertake No of volunteer hours Ongoing
i 18. Volunteer Data collected
marine donated over >100 hrs throughout TNC
hours donated by Project Mgr
restoration project project
Performance Planned Frequency/Timin
Goal Objective Metric Method Responsibility
indicator Output g
PROJECT EFFICIENCY TARGET: To deliver the project on time and within budget and additional funding is leveraged to support project deliverables
Goal 9. OBJECTIVE 10. Summarise leverage
i 23. Total Ongoing
Demonstrate How has investment/co- Data collected
financial TBD throughout TNC
responsible financial investment include by Project Mgr
investment project
fiscal investment in-kind
73 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 74
managemen been leveraged
t throughout leveraged (including In-kind)
the project
OBJECTIVE 11. Cumulative
i 24. Project 8 month
Project expenditure report, Data collected
outputs delivered TBD cumulative and TNC
delivered within Annual progress by Project Mgr
within budget annual report
budget report
OBJECTIVE 12.
Demonstrate
effective i 25. TAG
Summarize TAG
technical meetings Data collected
Goal 10. meeting details, # TBD Quarterly TNC
advice coordinated by Project Mgr
Demonstrate attendees
provided quarterly and
Technical
throughout attended by key
Advisory
project personnel
input
OBJECTIVE 13.
throughout Data collected
Restore each To be determined TBD in
the project by Project Mgr TNC/ Agencies/
site to meet i 26. Permit once conditions consultation with
and TBD Contractors/
environmental conditions met have been set compliance
Contractors as Experts
conditions set through approvals officers
required
in approvals
Goal 11.
OBJECTIVE 14.
Demonstrate
Demonstrate i 27. No of project
effective Milestones
timely and milestones Ongoing
project Data collected delivered
effective delivered within % delivered on time throughout TNC
managemen by Project Mgr effectively
project specified project
t throughout on time
management timeframe
project
and delivery
delivery
74 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 75
Annex 2: Draft monitoring Timeline (TBC prior to pilot substrate deployment)
YYYY YYYY YYYYY
Sept-Oct
Sept-Oct
Nov-Dec
Nov-Dec
May-Jun
May-Jun
Mar-Apr
Mar-Apr
Monitoring Objectives
Jan-Feb
Jan-Feb
Jul-Aug
Jul-Aug
ECOLOGICAL TARGET: to re-establish a self-sustaining population of S. glomerata that will help create a resilient ecosysetem consisting of diverse biological
communities, fish populations and their interactions.
OBJECTIVE 1. Restore the shellfish ecosystem to meet tolerance
outlined in design and project outputs
OBJECTIVE 2. Demonstrate survival of target shellfish
OBJECTIVE 3. Demonstrate natural recruitment of target shellfish
OBJECTIVE 4. Demonstrate a density of target shellfish similar to pre-
defined reference system
OBJECTIVE 5. To demonstrate more fish post restoration
OBJECTIVE 6. To demonstrate an increase in biodiversity
SOCIO-ECONOMIC TARGET: To create opportunities for the local community, recreational users and businesses in the Noosa Shire through shellfish restoration
restoration.
OBJECTIVE 7. To demonstrate benefits to the local economy,
recreational fishers and the community
OBJECTIVE 8. Demonstrate engagement by the local community
PROJECT EFFICIENCY TARGET: To deliver the project on time, within budget and funding is leveraged to support project deliverables
OBJECTIVE 9. How has financial investment been leveraged
OBJECTIVE 10. Project delivered within budget
OBJECTIVE 11. Demonstrate effective technical advice provided
throughout project
OBJECTIVE 12. Restore the sites to meet environmental conditions set in
approvals
OBJECTIVE 13. Demonstrate timely and effective project management
and delivery
75 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 76
Annex 3: Monitoring methods: Ecological
An overview of monitoring methods deployed in the TNC’s shellfish restoration program is provided below
together with the associated key performance indicators. The monitoring methods described here are adapted
from the Shellfish Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook 26. Some methods may be adapted,
or omitted, as practically and efficiency demands.
Mapping restoration sites and monitoring sampling sites
Method: Multi-beam sonar
To map the dimensions, bathymetry monitoring area of subtidal shellfish restoration sites,
multibeam sonar is often used. Using this method, a multibeam sonar ‘towfish’ is deployed
from a vessel and transects are run in a grid pattern over the potential, or pre-determined restoration site/s. Echo
soundings using multibeam sonar is are accurate to 0.1 m. The survey grid is provided in ASCII format to Chart
Datum at both 5 m and 25 m grid spacings, or is determined using one of the following formulas:
Side-scan Sonar Lane width = Range – (Altitude + Overlap)
Altitude is the altitude (height) of the ‘towfish’ scanning unit above the seafloor (this would be a value equal to
10% of the range), and overlap is the desired overlap between lanes (overlap of 10%).
Multi-beam Sonar Lane width = Total Range – Overlap
The total range is determined by the frequency used (generally 3 times the water depth but check manufacturer’s
specifications) and desired overlap is ideally 10 percent of the total swath width).
The results of the scans are then presented for interpretation.
Method: aerial/satellite imagery/GPS
For mapping the total area and monitoring areas of shallow-subtidal and intertidal restoration sites, multi-beam
sonar is not a practical survey method. Instead, aerial/satellite imagery or drones and a GIS are employed.
Alternately, for intertidal/shallow subtidal sites, the edge of the reef can be walked around using a handheld GPS
logging the track and the area can be calculated by the internal area of the track.
Determining shellfish restoration impact by area
Method: Physical measurement
The vertical growth of the shellfish ecosystem can be measured by periodically placing a ruler (or meter stick or
graduated rod) vertically on the site, with careful contact at the sediment surface, and then using another ruler
(or other thin, flat, rigid object) to lie horizontally on top of the shell and against the stick to make the height
observation. The average of these measurements is taken to determine the mean height.
Key Performance Indicators
i1. Total area of restoration substrate deployed (m3) – Total area of patches/rows of substrate, with and without
live oysters, deployed within the project footprint.
i2. Total restoration footprint (m3) – Total area of seafloor encompassing all substrates deployed in a given
restoration site and/or all sites throught the estuary.
i3. Total restoration substrate deployed (t) or (m3) – As deterined by the quantity of substrate, usually rubble/rock
+ dried oyster shell + spat on shell + adult oysters (or combinations thereof) that is deployed from the vessel, or
set on the seabed at a given restoration site, or deployed across all restoration sites.
26
The Nature Conservancy et al, Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook
76
Section 77
Measuring shellfish survivorship and growth (Shellfish metrics) Shellfish restoration, in this project, primarily relies on the natural recruitment of rock oyster spat onto the restoration substrate. Scientists have determined that the Noosa River estuary is primarily ‘substrate limited’, meaning there is insufficient substrate, of suitable configurations and locations, in the estuary, on which can settle, bind together and form self-sustaining shellfish ecosystems. Fortunately, surveys indicate that there in sufficient numbers of rock oysters growing individually, or in small clusters, in the estuary to provide oyster ‘spat’, or juvenile oysters, to colonise the restoration substrates deployed by the project. Relying exclusively on natural oyster spat recruitment, and growth, on the restoration substrate, however, would be risky. Rock oysters face many recruitment limitations in the estuary. Rock oysters spawn seasonally, and the quantity of spat released into the estuary can vary significantly between seasons. High suspended sediment loads in the estuary readily smother juvenile oysters, causing high mortalities of settled individuals. Other oyster and non-oyster species, including pearl oysters, hairy mussels and fast-growing macroalgae, readily settle on the same substrates as rock oysters, thus providing direct competition for colonization space. These other rapid colonizers do not in themselves create the vertical relief, and habitat complexity, that rock oysters provide. Pathogens, which infest and kill oysters are also ever present in the estuary sediments, and a multitude of vertebrates and invertebrates, from stingrays to finfish, shorebirds to gastropods, predate directly on oysters. These limitations have collectively prevented the natural restoration of shellfish ecosystems in the Noosa River estuary to date, so restoration efforts must augment the natural recruitment and growth of oysters and associated species. In response, it is often necessary for the project to seed the restoration sites with live adult and/or juvenile oysters. Juvenile oysters may be settled onto shell in a hatchery. Adult oysters may be translocated from oyster growing areas, as individual oysters or ‘clumps’, and set on the restoration substrate using direct hand-setting or vessel deployment techniques. Method: Hatchery-produced juvenile oysters For hatchery-produced live oysters, destined for restoration deployment, an initial average density of juvenile oysters (spat) is calculated by the hatchery by counting how many spat have settled onto 50 individual shell ‘culch’ (dried, sterile oyster shell put in a tank for the purpose of spat settlement). This count gives an estimated total number of total individual juveniles will be deployed onto the restoration substrate from the hatchery-cultured oyster batch. These estimates of ‘live spat on shell’, are provided pre-deployment to monitor the impact of translocation on oyster survivorship. Method: Translocation of adult oysters Where aquaculture-produced rock oysters have been grown out to adult size, these may be available locally, from hatcheries or oyster farms. These need to be collect, in a timely manner, housed in suitable transport containers and translocated to the restoration site in a timely way to minimize stress and mortality. Individual oysters, and even clumps of oysters may be scattered onto the restoration substrate from a vessel, or laid, by hand, by suitability qualified divers, or through placing the oysters onto the substrate, again by hand, at low tide. At the time of collection, a sample of oysters are counted, or weighted, and the total number, or weight of the oysters, to be used in the restoration effort determined. This counting allows for survivorship post deployment to be measured and reported. The precise locations where adult oysters are set on each site may be determined using GPS coordinates and digital mapping software. Method: Survivability and Growth - In-water sampling Shellfish are collected by sampling two transects per site with five quadrats (0.25 m2) on each side of the transect line (i.e. 10 quadrats per transect). 77 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 78
During sampling, divers collected all bivalve shellfish within the quadrat area. If the shellfish were on hard
substrate, divers collected 10 cm into the substrate. All shellfish are placed into mesh collection bags and are
carefully checked. The mesh collection bags are attached to the shotline and pulled to the surface for
measurement on the research vessel or nearby shoreline.
Using calipers, shellfish are measured for height (the distance from the hinge axis to the distal margin of the shell),
length (the distance from left and right distal margins) and width (thickness of both valves) to the nearest
millimetre (see Figure 1). Oysters are returned to the restoration substrate after sampling. Oyster density is
calculated by Equation 1. Twenty adult oysters (≥2 years old) per transect are shucked and visually assessed for
gravid condition for each survey.
Figure 1: Measurement guide for bivalve shellfish
Key Performance Indicators
i4 Survival of shellfish – The percentage of live shellfish per m2. If survival is ≥ the number of dead shellfish then
the population is stable or growing
Equation 1: 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ. 𝑚2 = (𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟. 0.25𝑚2 ) ∗ 4
Equation 2: 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ𝑖 = 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑚2 ∗ 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑓(𝑚2 )
𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ.𝑚2
Equation 3. 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑙 = ( ) ∗ 100
𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒+𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑖𝑠ℎ.𝑚2
i5. Physical conditions within tolerance ranges for target shellfish
i6. Number of recruits increased from baseline – Count of recruits per m2. Recruits are either counted in situ or
defined as oyster <10mm. If recruitment is greater than the number of dead shellfish, then the population is
being maintained by natural recruitment.
i7. Total shellfish deployed
i8 Density of live shellfish – the number of live shellfish, including recruits, per m2. The mean density (Equation
1) of live oysters provides a measure when compared to the benchmark of 50 shellfish per m2 that defines a
viable population density similar to that found on natural oyster reefs (Gillies et al. 2017).
78 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 79
Measuring natural oyster recruitment
Method: Settlement Panels
Settlement panels units constructed, as per Figure 2, are deployed to monitor rates, and composition, of spatfall
and recruitment of oysters onto the restoration substrate. Settlement panel units are deployed at both impact
and control sites. The panels are initially deployed and then replaced twice through the spawning season.
The plates may be inspected in water or above water, as described below:
Sampling in-water
1. Label the bags according to their location – Northern most block = 1, Highest pole = High
2. Navigate to the plates, take photos as you approach the plates
3. Move on any large mobile critters off the plates (e.g. urchins, fish)
4. Snip the cable tie at the top and ease plate assemblage off the pole
5. Gently place the plate assemblage into the labelled bag with the top of the plate facing the labelled
side of the bag
6. Close bag, place in catch bag and continue sampling until finished
Sampling above-water
1. Take the plates out in the order shown on the data sheet
2. Place them right way up
3. Keeping both plates in the same orientation, place them side by side
4. Place a label by the plate noting site, orientation and height, photograph the panel and label for both
sides of each panel.
5. Examine it for oysters and mussels and measure and record note the species and the lengths on the
data sheet
6. Repeat the steps above working through all the plates
Figure 2: Diagram of settlement panel unit
79 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 80
Monitoring species interactions with restoration sites
Method: Reef life survey
Visual census techniques provide an effective, non-destructive way to monitor species, which
inhabit or visit the restoration sites because large amounts of data on a broad range of species
can be collected within a short dive period, with little post-processing time required.
The surveys include visual observations of mobile fish, cryptic fish, mobile epifauna, encrusting invertebrates,
algae and benthic substrate.
The method is based on the Reef Life Survey approach and includes:
• Fishes to be surveyed in two 5m wide by 5m high “blocks” parallel along 40m transects at each site.
• Invertebrates and cryptic fishes to be surveyed in two 1m wide “blocks” on either side of the transect
line.
Photo Quadrats: Digital photo-quadrats (~30cm of substrate) are taken at 2.5 m intervals along the
transect line for algae, sessile invertebrates and benthic substrate (e.g. sand and seagrass).
For detailed Reef Life Survey methodology see (https://reeflifesurvey.com/reef-life-survey/about-rls/methods/)
Additionally, fish biomass is calculated by using a and b from the Length-Weight relationship of specific species
from Fishbase (http://www.fishbase.org/search.php).
Key Performance Indicators
i9. Total biomass/abundance of fish (g.m2 or g.m3 /ind.m2) – Total biomass of the fish assemblage over the area
of survey.
i10. Abundance of recreational/ commercially important fish – Biomass of species of fish that are of interest to
fishers (Snapper, King George Whiting, Flathead).
i11. Richness: increased mobile epifauna richness compared to control and before monitoring (Total number of
species) – Count of species found on the reef; a key measure of biodiversity.
i12. Benthic functional groups: Increased benthic functional diversity in contrast to control and before monitoring
– Increased benthic functional diversity in contrast to control and before monitoring
Method: Baited/ remote underwater video system (B/RUVS)
Baited/ Remote Underwater Video Systems (B/RUVS) are temporary stationary, seafloor camera
stations that use either bait (to attract the fish in their vicinity) or no bait and record species that
are utilising the habitat in the vicinity. Unbaited RUVs are useful in estuarine systems where
multiple structured habitats are in close vicinity (i.e. mangroves, seagrass and shellfish reefs) this
ensures that the fish observed in the videos are from the habitat that is being samples and not being
attracted from other nearby habitats using bait. B/RUVs can be used as single or stereo BRUVs i.e. using one or
two cameras. Stereo BRUVs give the added benefit of being able to accurately measure the length of fish from
video.
Utilising B/RUVS for sampling provides:
• Precise length measurements and therefore biomass estimates with analysis of paired images when
cameras are used in stereo-pairs.
• Recording of detailed images of habitat types, which can be incorporated into the analysis.
80 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 81
• Capture of information on recreationally important species and large, mobile animals such as sharks,
rays and sea snakes, that normally avoid scuba divers or towed video cameras.
BRUVS
Single or stereo-BRUVS will be deployed at each monitoring site with a soak time of 60-minute periods to quantify
differences in fish abundances, species and sizes (if stereo-BRUVs are used). Nominally, BRUV drops should be
separated by >200 m radius from the camera (if deployed at the same time) to ensure independence of sampling
due to the bait plume. For national recommended BRUV sampling methods see:
https://www.nespmarine.edu.au/sites/default/files/FieldManuals_NESPMarineHub_Chapter5_BRUV_v1.pdf
RUVS
Single RUVS will be deployed at each site concurrently in all structured habitats requiring monitoring for 1 hour and
25 minutes at high tide. At each site, the targeted habitats (e.g. restored and remnant shellfish ecosystems, seagrass
meadows, mangroves and bare sediment) need to be adjacent to each other with the whole study site ranging from
0.5 to 1 km2 a minimum distance between habitats of 20 - 50 m should be maintained. If undertaking multiple
camera drops within a habitat a minimum distance of 5 m should be maintained to ensure independence. Cameras
are deployed (looking away from the sun) 1 m away from and facing the targeted habitat. Visibility can be measured
by a visibility meter at each site and habitat to ensure similar visibility between sampling locations.
The video footage will be analysed using SeaGIS EventMeasure (see http://www.seagis.com.au/event.html). In video
analysis, overestimates of abundance can occur through double counting fish. This occurs when the same
individual/s are viewed at different time points throughout a deployment. To overcome this, counts of the
maximum number (MaxN) of individuals of any one species seen over the recording period are used27.
Key Performance Indicators
i9. Total biomass/abundance of fish (g.m2 or g.m3 /ind.m2) – Total biomass of the fish assemblage over the area
of survey.
i10. Abundance of recreational/ commercially important fish – Biomass of species of fish that are of interest to
fishers (Snapper, King George Whiting, Flathead).
i11. Richness: increased mobile epifauna richness compared to control and before monitoring (Total number of
species) – Count of species found on the restoration site; a key measure of biodiversity.
27
Langlois T, Williams J, Monk J, Bouchet P, Currey L, Goetze J, Harasti D, Huveneers C, Ierodiaconou D, Malcolm H,
Whitmarsh S. 2018. Marine sampling field manual for benthic stereo BRUVS (Baited Remote Underwater Videos). In Field
Manuals for Marine Sampling to Monitor Australian Waters, Przeslawski R, Foster S (Eds). National Environmental Science
Programme (NESP). pp. 82-104.
81 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 82
Annex 4: Monitoring methods: socio-economic Where relevant, surveys and/or semi-structured interviews are used to collect information of the social and economic benefits of restoration activities and level of community satisfaction with the project. Surveys/interviews investigate: 1. Community awareness of the restoration project 2. Community use of the restoration sites 3. Community satisfaction with the restoration project 4. Demographics and motivators of respondents Method: Social-response surveys In-person interviews with key stakeholders are undertaken to gain feedback and to ascertain overall support for restoration efforts. Online surveys may be used to access some groups and/or give to all contractors, involved in the restoration works, to record the total number of people and hours worked on the project. The economic and social impacts of the restoration works in terms of job creation, volunteers, community attendance at events/meetings, are also be collected and reported. Media presence of the project is also tracked and reported. Key Performance Indicators i14. Stories/ testimonials. Qualitatively describe benefits to the community i15. No of local full-time jobs to deliver project i16. Number of local contractors engaged i17. Total no. of full-time jobs within the entire project (local + national + International) i18. Total number of community events i20. Community and partner organizations engaged i21. Media engagement i22. Improved knowledge and education for individuals and end users i23. Improved educational resources for individuals i24. Individuals and end users improve practical skills in marine restoration i25. Total no. of volunteers i26. Volunteer hours donated 82 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 83
Purpose: Why are we collecting the data?
The project collects key data to:
• Demonstrate the importance and value of shellfish restoration, resources and services to the general public,
stakeholder groups and decision-makers, which can help generate greater support for shellfish restoration
programs.
• To measure the effectiveness of shellfish restoration in achieving its socio-economic target, goals and
objectives.
• To gather public views and perceptions to support adaptive management and improve the way shellfish
restoration sites are managed in the future.
• To assess the positive and negative impacts of management measures
• To build stakeholder participation and awareness of the project’s objectives
• To identify threats, problems, solutions and opportunities
83 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 84
Annex 5: Six-monthly report card template Bring Back the Fish Restoration and conservation of shellfish reefs in the Noosa Estuary Six month Report Card Date Project overview: Summary text here…. Overview of progress against deliverables: Summary text here…. Overview of unforeseen issues arising and project adaptation: Summary text here…. Project outcomes and media completed since last report: Summary text here…. Anticipated upcoming media and events: Summary text here…. Detailed tracking: Summary text here…. 84 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 85
Deliverables Measurable outcomes Tracking Progress and notes
(A1.1) Hiring of full • PM in place
time Project
Manager and
allocation of TNC and
NSC support staff to
the project
(A1.2) Delivery of • Project Plan
Project Plan (this completed and
Plan), endorsed
communication plan, • Comms Plan
and risk completed and
assessment(s) endorsed
• Monitoring and
Evaluation Plan
completed and
endorsed
(A1.3) Establishment • TAG in place
of a Project Technical • Evidence of Kabi
Advisory Group for Kabi engagement
reef restoration and
associated activities
(A1.4) Participation • community
and delivery of public engagement
education and forums
engagement forums • 3 media
and media statements
statements released
(A1.5) Annual and • 3 six monthly
six-monthly project status updates
reporting • 3 annual reports
(A2.1) Shellfish • Shellfish
restoration suitability restoration
model incorporating suitability model
physical parameters which
of oysters and public incorporates
and industry usage, industry, Kabi Kabi
access etc. to and public
identify priority sites interests.
for restoration.
(A2.2) Obtain • All relevant
necessary State permits secured
Government
permits/authorities
including particular
resource allocation
85 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 86
authority, for shellfish ecosystem restoration (A2.3) Community, • Records of public industry and and stakeholder stakeholder consultation, consultation including one-on- sufficient to gain one meetings, majority support for open forums, shellfish restoration media, etc. locations. (A3.1) Community, • Records of public industry and and stakeholder stakeholder consultation, consultation to including one-on- identify most one meetings, appropriate open forums, community media, etc. volunteering opportunities (e.g. shell recycling, oyster gardens, oyster watch, video monitoring). (A3.2) Establish at • Record of least one community volunteer hours volunteering dedicated to program identified community from the above volunteering process which takes programs, such into account current as: shell recycling, and future resources, oyster gardens, management and oyster watch, interest. video monitoring. (A4.1) Restoration at • At least two (2) two sites (approx. sites with at least 40m-50m shore overall 80 m shore length per site) length of oyster which test reef ecosystem substrate, restored, and configuration and being actively deployment and monitored. oyster growth and survival. (A4.2) Restoration • In addition to the across multiple two initial sites, further sites, as a number of sites determined by comprising restoration suitability a minimum of a 86 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 87
modelling and further
outcomes of aggregated 600m2
community surface area of
consultation. restored shellfish
ecosystem in the
Noosa River
estuary.
(A5.1) Run workshop • Workshop
with Noosa Council completed.
to identify ongoing
focus areas for TNC
support.
*(A5.2) Provide • Minimum 5 peer
technical/peer review reports
review on minimum completed during
five the three-year
plans/reports/studies term of this
if requested by Agreement, if
Noosa Council. requested by
Noosa Council. If
Noosa Council
requests a peer
review, TNC will
provide a
minimum of 3
experts who are
qualified in the
relevant area of
expertise for
Noosa Council
consideration and
Noosa Council’s
acceptance of 1
expert for the
peer review.
*(A5.3) Facilitate a • Minimum three
minimum of three study tours
study tours of completed during
relevant sites in line the three year
with objectives and term of this
scope of the Agreement, if
program in requested by
Australia/US if Noosa Council.
requested by Noosa
Council (flights and
incidentals covered
separately by Noosa
Council,
accommodation and
87 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 88
in country travel
covered by this
Grant).
*(A5.4) Review and • Conservation
feasibility of Action Plan and
opportunities for Community
sustainable Workshops
commercial and completed as
recreational fishing required.
management options
for the Noosa River.
*(A5.5) Facilitate • A number of new
access to TNC contacts/networks
conservation to assist Noosa
networks and Council with
researchers if ongoing and
requested by Noosa future marine
Council. conservation
activities.
(A5.6) Promote • Presentation to at
Noosa Council’s least one national
Noosa River Plan and and one
shellfish restoration international
project in at least conference.
one national and one
international
conference.
(A5.7) Promote • A number of new
Noosa Council’s corporate/
Noosa River Plan and government/
shellfish restoration philanthropic
project to corporate, alliances and new
philanthropic and in-kind
state/federal support/financial
government funding
audiences to contributions.
establish further
support for
conservation
activities that
support the Noosa
River Plan
(A5.8) Assess • Habitat mapping
feasibility of seagrass report,
restoration in Lake restoration
Cooroibah as a suitability model,
method of reducing PhD study or
sediment similar
resuspension and
88 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022
Section 89
increasing invertebrate biodiversity Summary of financial expenditure: Summary text here…. 89 | Bring Back the Fish MER plan 2020 – 2022