2021-12-07 Planning & Environment Committee Meeting Agenda - Updated

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                   7 DECEMBER 2021


percentile data for records collected prior to 2004. It is considered that the proposed WQO should
only be supported where they are better than the 20th, 50th and 80th percentile data measurements
in 2004 as a reasonable basis.
More Stringent WQOs compared to 2010
In many incidents the long-term water quality data records show that the water quality in the Noosa
Basin is better than the criteria set in the 2010 WQOs.
This suggests the WQO that currently apply to Noosa River, and that are based on Victoria and
Tasmanian ecosystems, were more lenient than they need to be. As the current Noosa River
Report Card score is determined partly from WQO, that means that deterioration of water quality
will not be picked up early because it is still within the water quality objectives that were not
customised to Noosa.
In these instances where the long-term water quality data are well within the existing 2010 WQO
criteria, the state government is proposing for those water quality objectives to instead be replaced
with 20th, 50th and 80th percentiles consistent levels as measured in the area the water quality
applies to.
This approach is supported, as measured water quality data is likely more appropriate to the
location, and also that by tightening the water quality criteria to reflect the existing status quo, any
decline in those water quality objectives will likely be noticed earlier in annual report card
evaluations, and therefore facilitate proactive response.
Less Stringent WQOs compared to 2010
There are other instances where the long-term data show that the historical and current water
quality is worse than the 2010 water quality objectives. In these instances, it is considered that the
reflection the 20th, 50th or 80th percentiles of the site-specific historical data not be supported and
instead requested that the 2010 WQO be retained. Reasons include:
a)    risk that providing less stringent water quality objectives compared to 2010 WQO could risk
      creation of a perception that Noosa Council is endorsing for a reduction in water quality, even
      where that is not the case
b)    Given that, to date, the report card for Noosa has remained within a range of A, A- and B+
      without change to the WQO, then the 2010 WQOs are considered achievable. The exception
      is Nitrogen and Phosphorous in Burgess Creek and Phosphorous in Lake Cootharaba
      discussed further below
Summary of Position
In summary the recommended position on changes to the existing 2010 WQO as detailed in
Attachment 2 are that:
a)    where the proposed WQOs are more stringent than 2010 WQO and more stringent than
      historical data up to 2004 for the equivalent Low or High low splits, the change is supported;
      or
b)    where the proposed WQOs are less stringent than the historical data up to 2004 for the
      equivalent Low or High low splits, but more stringent than the 2010 objectives, then our
      request is that the new objectives are based on relevant percentiles for historical data up to
      2004, this is to facilitate no worsening over time; or
c)    where the proposed WQOs are more stringent than the historical data up to 2004 for the
      equivalent Low or High splits, but less stringent than the 2010 objectives, they are not
      supported, and the request is to keep objectives at 2010 WQOs;
d)    where the proposed WQOs are less stringent than 2010 objectives, they are not immediately
      supported, and the request is that the 2010 objectives remain in place until the need for the
      change can be attributed to something in the existing environment that cannot be changed
      or better managed.

                                                                                     Page 116 of 140