Original source · versioned page text
3. Noosa Project Restoration Plan V12
Attached to the e-mail Noosa Oyster Project _ Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
Attached to the e-mail DA Application - Noosa Oyster Project (1 of 3).
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 Noosa Oyster Ecosystem Restoration Project
Project Restoration Plan
In support of application for development approval from government authorities
for oyster ecosystem restoration works in the Noosa River estuary
January 2022
Photo: Craig Bohm
1
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 74 pages
Page 2
Contents
SECTION 1 – CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Objective ....................................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Rationale ....................................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Restoration approach ................................................................................................................... 8
1.5 Timeline......................................................................................................................................... 9
1.6 Governance ................................................................................................................................. 10
1.7 Past actions ................................................................................................................................. 12
1.8 Definitions ................................................................................................................................... 13
1.9 Summary of restoration targets.................................................................................................. 14
1.10 Qualifications ............................................................................................................................ 14
1.11 Guarantees ................................................................................................................................ 15
SECTION 2 – RESTORATION MODELS.................................................................................................... 16
2.1 Habitat suitability ........................................................................................................................ 16
2.3 Restoration suitability ................................................................................................................. 18
2.4 Habitat mapping ......................................................................................................................... 21
SECTION 3 – RESTORATION SITES ......................................................................................................... 22
3.1 Tewantin ..................................................................................................................................... 23
3.2 Goat Island .................................................................................................................................. 29
3.3 Noosa Sound East ....................................................................................................................... 33
3.4 Noosa Sound West ...................................................................................................................... 35
3.5 Public land ................................................................................................................................... 38
SECTION 4 - PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT ................................................................. 39
4.1 Face-to-face meetings................................................................................................................. 39
4.2 Community engagement workshop............................................................................................ 39
4.3 Public consultation sessions ....................................................................................................... 39
4.4 Recreational fisher engagement ................................................................................................. 40
4.5 Commercial fisher engagement .................................................................................................. 40
4.6 Riverside homeowners ............................................................................................................... 41
4.7 Additional communications ........................................................................................................ 42
4.8 Project-based engagement actions ............................................................................................ 42
SECTION 5 – RESTORATION SUBSTRATE ............................................................................................... 43
5.1 Rock substrate............................................................................................................................. 43
5.2 Substrate augmentation ............................................................................................................. 44
2
Page 3
5.3 Shell recycling.............................................................................................................................. 45
5.5 Composite substrate ................................................................................................................... 47
5.5 Oyster cultch ............................................................................................................................... 48
5.6 Hatchery ...................................................................................................................................... 48
5.7 Oyster gardening......................................................................................................................... 48
SECTION 6 – CONSTRUCTION................................................................................................................ 52
6.1 Methodology............................................................................................................................... 52
6.2 Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................... 53
6.3 Impact Minimisation ................................................................................................................... 54
6.4 Sediment management............................................................................................................... 56
SECTION 7 – SIGNAGE + AIDS TO NAVIGATION .................................................................................... 60
SECTION 8 – PERFORMANCE MEASURES.............................................................................................. 66
8.1 Public Safety ................................................................................................................................ 66
8.2 Visual amenity ............................................................................................................................. 67
8.3 Environmental performance and safeguards ............................................................................. 68
8.4 Erosion control ............................................................................................................................ 71
8.5 Complaints management ............................................................................................................ 72
8.6 Contingency plan ........................................................................................................................ 73
SECTION 9 - ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................... 75
Annex 1 - Noosa River Habitat Survey Report - ESP ......................................................................... 75
Annex 2 - Noosa River MSES Map - Tewantin & Goat Island ............................................................ 75
Annex 3 - Noosa River Environ Values & Water Quality Map .......................................................... 75
Annex 4 - Noosa River Fish Habitat Area .......................................................................................... 75
Annex 5 - Community Engagement Workshop Report ..................................................................... 75
Annex 6 - Public Information Sessions Report .................................................................................. 75
Annex 7 - Engineering Specifications ................................................................................................ 75
Annex 8 - Safety in Design Report..................................................................................................... 75
Annex 9 - Code 7 - Maritime Safety .................................................................................................. 75
Annex 10 - Code 8 - Coastal Development & Tidal Works ................................................................ 75
Annex 11 - Code 11 - Marine Plants.................................................................................................. 75
Annex 12 - Code 12 - Declared fish habitat area .............................................................................. 75
Annex 13 - Schedule 3 - Prescribed Tidal Works............................................................................... 75
Annex 14 - Engineering Drawings NROR-2021 ................................................................................. 75
3
Page 4
TheNature Conservancy WP Australia
Page 5
SECTION 1 – CONTEXT
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the restoration work is to restore rock oyster ecosystems to the Noosa River estuary
and therewith the ecology services and benefits to fish habitats and fisheries resources they provided.
1.2 Objective
Restoration of oyster beds in the Noosa River estuary at locations that historic records, assessments
of shell middens and sediments and assessment of a high potential for restoration success indicate.
1.3 Rationale
Rock oysters (Saccostrea spp.) are natural and historic residents of the Noosa River. Rock oysters
colonise natural hard substrates (e.g. gravel, rock, tree roots) and create three dimensional, rugose,
and heterogeneous structures, which are subsequently colonised by successive generations of oysters
as well as an array of aquatic flora and fauna.
Rock oyster ecosystems are important ecological system and high value fish habitats that have been
lost from the Noosa River estuary and which this project aims to restore.
Historic occurrence
The estuarine environment of the Noosa River was once dominated with extensive rock oyster
ecosystems. Oyster ecosystems were largely lost however, 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 year1.
The commercial oyster industry in the Noosa River commenced in the 1870’s or 1880s, and ceased,
having become economically unviable, by the 1940’s. Oyster lease areas were dredged intensively for
oysters in the early 1900’s, resulting in the removal of live oyster beds and the underlying bedrock.
From 1934, oystering locations were recorded by local fisheries officials, and defined by the extent of
the oyster lease areas allocated by the government for commercial exploitation3. These leases
(presented in Figure 1.1) indicate the most probable historical range of extensive oyster beds (intertidal
and sub-tidal) within the Noosa River estuary.
1
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).
5
Page 6
.
Figure 1.1: Historic commercial oyster leases in the Noosa River Estuary. Hand-drawn chart from
1934, made by the Fisheries Inspector to highlight the areas in the Noosa River closed to net fishing.
The red numbers indicate the locations of all known Noosa oyster sections. Source: Queensland State
Archives.
Historic records also show extensive shell middens present at Tewantin, Noosaville and Hays Island
(now Noosa Sound), and that substantial oyster beds occurred in Lake Weyba1. Noosa residents once
collected oysters from rock outcrops in Lake Weyba (Figure 1.2), and the extent of oysters in the lake
is thought to have been extensive1, possibly growing on low gravel beds and other hard structures that
today are buried under sediment (Simon Walker, ESP, pers com).
6
Page 7
Figure 1.2: Lake Weyba Oyster Collecting circa 1914. Source: Sunshinecoast.spydus.com
Of note is the that due to the conversion of Hays Island into the Noosa Sound canal estate in the 1960s,
evidence of oyster beds from this area has been lost. Oysters persist though on rocks, gravel and pylons
along the southern fringes of Noosa Sound, indicating that oyster spat still settle and grow in the area.
The potential for restoration of oysters in the Noosa Sound therefore remains possible (TNC shellfish
ecologist, Boze Hancock, pers com).
In 2016, Ecological Service Professionals (ESP) quantified the historic spatial extent of oyster beds in the
Noosa River and concluded that it was likely to have been in the range of 41,530m2 to 207,650 m2, of
which approximately 16,850m2 of old oyster beds and oyster rubble remain buried by sediment in the
historical oyster lease areas2.
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 armouring have also likely contributed to the decline of
the ecosystem or inhibited its natural recovery.
Today, no extant rock oyster 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 study3 identified that
rock oyster dominated shellfish ecosystems are the most threatened marine ecosystem in Australia,
with up to 94 percent of the ecosystem lost throughout Australia since European settlement.
2
Walker, S. 2016. Assessment of Oyster Habitat in Noosa River Estuary. Report to Noosa Shire Council by Ecological Service Professionals
(ESP). October 2016.
3
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
7
Page 8
The works proposed in this submission are intended to restore 3,600m2 of oyster beds in phase 1 of
the project. That equates to between 1.7 and 9 percent of the original area expected to have been
covered by oyster beds in the Noosa River estuary.
Restoration Benefits
The benefits of restoring rock oyster ecosystems to the Noosa River estuary are extensive. Oysters are
ecosystem engineer species capable of improving ecosystem function and providing habitat for other
organisms4. Oyster ecosystems added extensive ‘natural infrastructure’ to the estuary and provided the
estuary with a range of environmental benefits.
These benefits include:
• Providing complex habitats for marine species (the diverse habitats typically consist of fish,
invertebrates, corals, ascidians, lace corals, encrusting sponges and algae).
• Filtering water and removing suspended sediment and pollution.
• Processing nutrients; providing bank stabilization and protection.
• Providing complex vertical and horizontal living spaces, and feeding grounds, for a multitude of
intertidal and marine creatures.
• Enhancing marine and coastal lifestyle and tourism activities such as fishing, diving and bird
watching.
The recognition of the significant contribution of oyster ecosystems led to their recognition as an
important wetland habitat type in the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (The
Ramsar Convention – habitat type ‘Ga’)5.
1.4 Restoration approach
The restoration approach follows 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 project approach is also guided by best-practice ecological restoration and shellfish
restoration monitoring guidelines, including the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation8, the
4
Jonathan H. Grabowski, Robert D. Brumbaugh, Robert F. Conrad, Andrew G. Keeler, James J. Opaluch, Charles H. Peterson, Michael F.
Piehler, Sean P. Powers, Ashley R. Smyth, Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services Provided by Oyster Reefs, BioScience, Volume 62, Issue
10, October 2012, Pages 900–909, https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.10.10
5
Kasoar, T., zu Ermgassen, P.S.E., Carranza, A., Hancock, B., Spalding, M., 2015. New opportunities for conservation of a threatened
biogenic habitat: a worldwide assessment of knowledge on bivalve-reef representation in marine and coastal Ramsar Sites. Mar. Freshw.
Res. 66, 981e988.
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
8
Page 9
Society for Ecological Restoration International Standards6 and TNC’s Oyster Habitat Restoration
Monitoring and Assessment Handbook9.
The definition of ecological restoration applied 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.
Importantly, ecological restoration, as applied in this project, differs from artificial reefs, in that their
purpose is to restore oyster ecosystems in areas where they once existed, or are currently degraded,
rather than introducing artificial substrates (e.g. concrete reef balls).
This project responds to the loss of natural hard substrates in the Noosa River by re-introducing locally
sourced rock in configurations that rock oysters and associated species (e.g. pearl oysters, leaf oysters,
hairy mussels, tunicates and macroalgae) readily colonise. The design and placement of the rock
substrate considers historic location of oyster beds plus physical features, such as aspect, height,
dimensions and rugosity in a way that can help mitigate physical and biological threats to the recovering
ecosystem such as smothering, heat, erosion, predation and human disturbance.
To some of the rock substrate, the project adds relatively small volumes of desiccated (cured) oyster
shell to create a composite base of rock and shell. The combination of rock and shell mimics the shell
‘hash’ that would otherwise be formed by generations of oysters recruiting onto themselves, but which
has since been lost from the estuary.
Rock substrates are also hand-seeded with oyster shell (cultch) seeded with oyster spat, and/or live
oysters. Seeding of the substrate with live oysters ensures the target density of oysters is achieved,
effectively ‘kick starting’ and accelerating the restoration process. Augmentation also acts as an
insurance policy against low natural oyster recruitment onto the restoration substrate. Brood stock for
oyster seeding is collected from the Noosa River. The seeding process is undertaken in a bio-secure
facility in close liaison with government biosecurity officers.
Restoration targets for oysters are presented in Section 8.3 Environmental Safeguards. Table 8.3.
1.5 Timeline
Phase I Pilot Phase – 2021-2023
Phase I works involve deploying oyster bed restoration substrates, i.e. rock (augmented with small
volumes of oyster shell and seeded oyster ‘cultch’), in the following restoration sites:
1. Tewantin
2. Goat Island
3. Noosa Sound East
4. Noosa Sound West
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.
9
Page 10
Construction works (deployment of the restoration substrates) is planned between October and April
(2021-2023), subject to permitting. This timeframe takes advantage of natural oyster spawning and
recruitment in the Noosa River during this period.
Phase I restoration sites are presented in the plans, and have already been subject to:
a. Detailed bathymetric mapping
b. Detailed habitat mapping
c. River user analysis
d. Habitat suitability modelling
e. Restoration suitability modelling
f. Community consultation
g. Detailed site engineering
Phase II –2022 to 2024
Phase II works will take place the following spring through autumn period (2022-2023), and if
resources allow the following spring through autumn (2023-2024). Specific sites for this work have yet
to be identified, and authorities will be approached separately to approve plans for Phase II works,
possibly as an addendum of some form to this restoration plan approval.
In Phase II, works will entail:
• Augmenting restoration sites 1-4 from Phase I with additional restoration substrate, as
required; and,
• Identifying new restoration sites in Restoration Zones 1 to 5 and deploying restoration
substrates into those sites in accordance with the restoration processes outlined in this
submission.
For phase II works, the process includes:
I. Identifying additional restoration sites using the restoration suitability model and stakeholder
discussions
II. Checking, and, if necessary, remapping habitats at the new proposed sites
III. Consulting publicly on the additional proposed restoration sites
IV. Undertaking detailed bathymetric mapping
V. Applying existing engineering and design criteria and mapping restoration substrates onto the
sites
VI. Submitting updated restoration plans to agencies
VII. Undertaking construction works
VIII. Applying site demarcation and management measures to the new sites
IX. Submitting ‘as built’ maps of new substrates to authorities
1.6 Governance
The Noosa Oyster Ecosystem Restoration Project is a partnership between The Nature Conservancy
(TNC) and Noosa Shire Council (NSC) formed to deliver oyster ecosystem restoration in the Noosa River.
The Project is framed by a formal partnership agreement between TNC and NSC. This partnership is
specified in the Alliance and Funding Agreement, which came into effect on 25 th July 2019. The
agreement is effective for three years and two months and the project is scheduled to be completed
10
Page 11
by 30th September 2022. The terms of the partnership will be reviewed prior to July 2022. Funds for
this project are provided by Noosa Shire Council (NSC), TNC, The Thomas Foundation (TTF) and
Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS).
In September 2020, Noosa Shire Council formally endorsed the Project Management Plan for this
project. The plan presents the project measures, general construction methodologies, risk assessment
and broad monitoring, evaluation and reporting plan. This Project Restoration Plan operationalises the
project management plan.
The project is led by TNC.
The Project is overseen by an executive level forum comprising two key Contact Officers, those being
the Lead Scientist (TNC) and Director of Environment & Sustainable Development (NSC). The
governance of the activities for the project are the responsibility of the Executives of TNC and NSC, or
their nominated delegate/s and day-to-day operations the responsibility of TNC and its appointed
Project Manager for that purpose.
The TNC-contracted Project Manager is supported by the Noosa Technical Advisory Group (TAG). The
TAG’s purpose is to:
• Support detailed project planning for the Noosa Oyster Reef Restoration Project that will see
reefs 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.
• Ensure actions within the Project Plan are effectively delivered and communicated to all
stakeholders.
The composition of the Noosa TAG is:
• Department of Agriculture & Fisheries (3) – aquaculture, marine plants and biosecurity experts
• Maritime Safety Queensland (1) – Regional Manager
• Kabi Kabi Traditional Owner (1) – For technical expertise
• Independent aquatic ecologist/biologist (1) – With in depth ecological knowledge of the Noosa
River estuary (from Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd).
• Noosa Shire Council (1) – Environmental Services Manager
• The Nature Conservancy (3) – Oceans Operations Manager + Oceans Restoration Scientist +
QLD Oceans Coordinator (Chair)
The Noosa TAG held its inaugural meeting on the 15th May 2020. TAG meetings are held on a semi-
regular basis, as required to drive the project forward. Specialised work is often undertaken out of
session including providing advice to TNC QLD Oceans Coordinator on all aspects project
implementation.
11
Page 12
1.7 Past actions
In recent years, TNC, NSC, TTF and a range of local stakeholders have worked together to build a deeper
understanding of the environmental significance and long-term sustainable management options for
the Noosa River. The key actions that lead to the formation of the Noosa Oyster Ecosystem Restoration
Project are summarised below.
Noosa River Expert Workshop, Powerhouse Museum, 2014
A two-day workshop, hosted by TNC on behalf of TTF and Noosa Parks Association (NPA), comprising
12 academic and NGO estuary scientists. The workshop identified 14 conservation activities that could
lead to a healthier Noosa River, with oyster reef restoration listed as a priority action in addition to
prawn restocking and sediment management in Kin Kin in the upper Noosa River catchment. 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 oysters. The study confirmed oyster reefs 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 ‘oyster habitat restoration units’ consisting
of coir bags filled with oyster shell at 14 sites across the estuary. The project studied the structural
integrity of the units, oyster recruitment, fish and invertebrate community assemblages and human
interactions with the trail reefs.
NSC-TNC Partnership Agreement 2019
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 that the strategic
priorities of both organisations, and of others, would be more effectively served through a formal
partnership, rather than on an individual project basis. This led to the development of this Project, and
associated formal agreement between NSC and TNC, and is the main delivery mechanism of the TNC-
NSC Partnership.
12
Page 13
TNC Project Management Plan 2020
The TNC Project Management Plan was formally adopted by the project’s Technical Advisory Group
(TAG) and Noosa Shire Council in September 2020. The Plan, available on request, broadly scopes the
restoration project and includes:
a. Risk Assessment
b. Communications Plan
c. Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) Plan
1.8 Definitions
Restoration zone
· An area of the estuary, with distinguishable physical and ecological characteristics in which specific
restoration sites are selected.
Restoration site
· A specific area of riverbed where restoration works are undertaken.
· A restoration site is larger than the restoration footprint to allow for the expansion of the
restoration footprint in the future.
Restoration footprint
· The area of the rock and/or rock + shell composite substrate in direct contact with the riverbed
within a restoration site.
· The footprint comprises a series of oyster reef patches, which are the on-site placement of modular
designs.
· The footprint area is the sum of the area of oyster reef patches on a given restoration site, or across
restoration sites.
· The footprint area of a restoration site is less than the area of the restoration site in which they
site.
Oyster reef patch
· An area rock or rock + shell placed on a restoration site as the foundation for oyster ecosystem
restoration, and which is readily discernible from all other oyster reef patches.
· Oyster reef patches are placed in association with each other, to maximise ecological interaction
(as a reef complex) and are placed on site to best match the profile and ecological character of a
restoration site.
· Oyster reef patches are separated to maximise water flow between and around each patch, to
reduce sedimentation potential, reduce erosion potential (of the patch itself – undercutting, and
shoreline – by refraction waves), and to not impede fish passage.
· The number of oyster reef patches on a restoration site in a series may vary reflect the site
characteristics.
· The number of rows of oyster reef patches may vary to reflect the site characteristics, particularly
bathymetry.
· If more than one row of oyster reef patches is placed on a site, the rows of oyster reef patches are
offset.
13
Page 14
· The distance between oyster reef patches is specified in the engineered drawings for each
restoration site. The relief and profile of each patch is specified in the engineered drawings for each
restoration site.
Restoration modules
· Engineering concepts to show how oyster reef patches may be placed in association with each
other on a restoration site, while meeting specific engineering requirements.
1.9 Summary of restoration targets
An oyster ecosystem restoration site should over time demonstrate an increase in abundance and
density of rock oysters and increased diversity of epifauna comparative to the surround sediments.
Specifically, within 6-8years of oyster reef patches being deployed, a restoration site should
demonstrate:
• Density of rock oysters at restoration site average of > 200 individuals/m2
• 4+ age classes of rock oysters present at restoration site (= approx. 2 cohorts of oysters
reproductive)
➢ 5% of rock oyster population at the site is 3+ years old
• Increased density of oyster recruits with 3-4 reproductive cycles
• 5 times more epifauna on oyster habitat than on surrounding sediment10
1.10 Qualifications
All information in this submission, and attached code assessments, relating to the design, footprint
minimisation, specification, construction, movement, sinkage, stability, erosion minimisation, risks and
management and substrate rectifications relating to the restoration substrates (of rock, or rock and
shell), are made with the approval of the project’s consultant engineers, International Coastal
Management (ICM).
All information in this submission, and attached code assessments, relating to oyster ecosystem
restoration, fish habitats and marine plants in the Noosa River, have been reviewed by TNC ecologists
as well as TNC’s independent consultant ecologists, Ecological Service Professionals (ESP).
In 2020, TNC also contracted ESP to map the extend of seagrass and other marine habitats throughout
the Noosa River estuary. The results of that work are incorporated into on the restoration drawings and
advised the placement of the restoration substrates (the footprint) in each restoration site so as to
avoid impact on marine plants, or to cause only temporary impact on marine plants, as is the case at
the Tewantin restoration site.
10
McAfee et al 2020. The value and opportunity of restoring Australia's lost rock oyster reefs. Restoration
Ecology Volume 28, Issue 2 March 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13125
14
Page 15
1.11 Guarantees
Bathymetric information
All matters described in this plan, and in the associated government code assessments, related
bathymetric/hydrographic information, which was undertaken to MSQ specifications (with MSQ input
to the contracting process) have been provided by the project consultants:
NorthGroup Consulting engineers
Contact: [email protected]
Ecological information
All matters described in this plan, and in the associated government code assessments, related
ecological information, have been provided or reviewed by the TNCs professional ecologists and by the
project consultants, and specialists in the ecology of the Noosa River estuary:
Ecological Service Professionals Pty Ltd
Contact: [email protected]
Engineering information
All matters described in this plan, and in the associated government code assessments, and drawings,
related to engineering design, engineering specifications or descriptions relating to engineering
performance of the restoration substrates (e.g. reef patch positioning, stability, erosion potential) have
been provided or reviewed by the project consultant engineers and are certified by them for
engineering integrity within the scope of their remit:
International Coastal Management (ICM) – Specialist Coastal Engineers
Contact: [email protected]
15
Page 16
SECTION 2 – RESTORATION MODELS
Habitat and restoration suitability modelling are analytical techniques used to select broad restoration
zones and local restoration sites that are suitable for oyster ecosystem restoration within an estuary.
It is within the restoration sites that restoration substrates (in this case principally rock riprap) is
placed to form the foundation of new oyster beds.
2.1 Habitat suitability
Where shellfish ecosystem restoration is conducted often determines how successful an effort is. In
Noosa, TNC used standardized habitat suitability indices and geospatial decision support tools to
confirm the suitability of the Noosa River estuary for oyster ecosystem restoration.
Known environmental and biological criteria of the dominant rock oyster species, Sydney Rock Oyster
(Saccostrea glomerata), were compared with the physical parameters of the estuary (i.e. bathymetry,
salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen,). Areas of the estuary which are suitable for rock oyster
restoration were then rated for their suitability (Table 2.1) and presented, geospatially, in the Habitat
Suitability Model (Figure 2.1).
While the Habitat Suitability Model indicates that large areas of Lake Doonella and Lake Weyba would
be suitable for rock oyster restoration, practically, this would not be the case (as per the Restoration
Suitability Model presented further on in this submission). Further challenges in the lakes include high
sediment loads, high retention of suspended sediments after storms and low flow regimes. These
possible limitations would need to be tested as part of Phase II restoration works.
Table 2.1: Habitat suitability parameters and criteria for Sydney rock oysters
PARAMETER ENVELOPE CRITERIA Rationale Source
(more
suitable = 4,
less = 0)
Bathymetry 0-9 m 0-9m = 4 Within ecological tolerances. (Powers et al. 2009, Gillies et
>9m = 0 Below LAT weighted higher as al. 2018)
subtidal restored oyster
ecosystems have been seen to
perform better than intertidal
ecosystems.
Salinity Av 25-35ppt 35-30=4; Within ecological tolerances. (Nell and Gibbs 1986, Nell
30-25=3; Lower salinities scored lower as and Holliday 1988, Holliday
<25=0 linked to outbreaks of the 1995, Dove 2003, Butt et al.
protozoan parasite QX 2006, Dove and O’Connor
(Marteilia 16ydney). 2007, Diggles 2013,
Schrobback et al. 2014)
Temperature 8-29C 8-24C= 4; Within ecological tolerances. (Holliday 1995, Butt et al.
Max 24-28 = 2; Temperatures above 28 °C 2006, Diggles 2013,
>28=0 scored lower as linked to Schrobback et al. 2014,
outbreaks of the protozoan Snyder et al. 2017)
parasite QX (Marteilia sydneyi).
DO Av >4mg/L >4mg/L = 4; Within ecological tolerances. (Schrobback et al. 2014)
<4mg/L= 0
16
Page 17
TheNature Ge
Conservancy
Australia
Noosa River Estuary
Habitat Suitability Model
Suitability
S x =m
Vv 0 400800
Figure 2.1: Habitat Suitability Model for Sydney rock oysters in the Noosa River estuary
17
Page 18
2.3 Restoration suitability
TNC overlayed the Habitat Suitability Model with ecological considerations, logistical constraints, and
details of the built infrastructure and human uses of the Noosa River. These parameters were then
allocated exclusion criteria, to minimise potential interactions of the river users with restoration sites
(e.g. distances from tidal works, foreshore access points, moorings, submarine cables) (Table 2.2). The
results of this analysis are presented, geospatially, in the restoration suitability model (Figure 2.2). The
exclusion criteria where determined in consideration of regulated distances applied to vessels (e.g.
distances from moorings) and on practical consideration of river uses (e.g. access to foreshores from
the river, distances from navigation channels). This assessment was undertaken in consultation with
Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ) and NSC and reviewed by the Noosa TAG.
Table 2.2: Restoration suitability parameters and exclusion criteria for rock oyster ecosystems in the
Noosa River estuary
PARAMETER ENVELOPE CRITERIA (more RATIONALE SOURCE
suitable = 4, less
= 0)
Marine plants 10m – Areas within 10- Connectivity to other structured habitats such as (Duncan et
proximity 500m 500m buffer =4; seagrass, mangroves, increases diversity. 10m al. 2019)
(including all other areas minimum distance used to mitigate damage to Confirmed
seagrasses) =2 marine plants and 2m from mangroves, aerial with
mangrove roots and fallen timber, but ensuring engineers
connectivity.
Rocky reef 2m – 500m Areas within 5- Connectivity to other structured habitats
proximity 500m buffer =4; increases diversity. 2 metre minimum distance
all other areas included to mitigate damage to rock substrates
=2 while maintaining connectivity. Direct
augmentation of degraded rocky reef by permit
only.
Extant oyster 2m – 250m Within 2m – Connectivity to other structured habitats (Boor et al.
ecosystems 250m = 4; all increases biodiversity. Connection to other oyster 2018, Guy
proximity other areas = 2 reefs increases meta-population connectivity, et al. 2018,
successful reproduction and oyster recruitment. 2 Duncan et
metre minimum distance included to mitigate al. 2019)
damage to extant oyster ecosystems but ensuring
connectivity.
Historical oyster Within 250 Within 250m = Sites which have historically supported oyster (Gillies
ecosystem m 4; all other areas ecosystems are thought to be able to support 2018)
proximity =2 future oyster ecosystems. Restoration takes place
on the sites of historic oyster ecosystems, which
may now be lost, where known and practical.
Mobile seabed Exclusion Within exclusion Highly mobile seabeds generally offer unsuitable Agreed
area area = 0, all substrates for shellfish restoration. with TNC
other areas = 4 restoration
scientists
Mangroves +2m Within exclusion Minimum distance of 2m maintained between (Boor et al.
(including minimum area = 0, all intertidal marine plants and oyster ecosystems to 2018, Guy
pneumatophores), distance other areas = 4 protect plants, as well as fallen trees (which are et al. 2018,
fallen trees and also important habitats) from works associated Duncan et
timber in with the oyster ecosystem. Relatively close al. 2019).
waterways. proximity maintained to maximise ecological Discussed
connectivity. with
engineers
18
Page 19
Small craft + 10 m Areas within Minimum channel width of 10m in constrained Discussed
channels width buffer = 0; all river channels maintained to oyster ecosystems with MSQ
channel other areas = 4 do not impede on safe navigation.
maintained
Tidal Works + 30 m Within 250m = Minimum distance of 30m maintained between Discussed
(pontoons, jetties, distance 4; all other areas tidal works and oyster ecosystems. Reduce the with MSQ
boat ramps) maintained =2 chance of damage to the oyster ecosystems, but
also protects vessels and ensures general public
safety when using these facilities.
Moorings + 30 m Within 30 m = 0, Minimum distance of 30m maintained between Discussed
distance all other areas = official moorings and oyster ecosystems to reduce with MSQ
maintained 4 chances of damage to moored vessels oyster
ecosystems. The distance also takes into
consideration the maximum possible length of a
vessel attached to a mooring in the river.
Foreshore Access + 10 m Within exclusion Minimum distance of 10m either side of public Discussed
(beaches and distance area = 0, all foreshore access points maintained for ease of with MSQ
parks) maintained other areas = 4 vessel access to useable shorelines.
In-water urban +5m Within exclusion Minimum distance of 5m maintained between Discussed
utilities distance area = 0, all submarine cables and pipelines and oyster with
(submarine cables maintained other areas = 4 ecosystems. No anchoring of construction vessels engineers
& pipelines) or monitoring vessels within 200m of in-water
urban utilities.
In-water transport + 30 m Within exclusion Minimum distance of 30m maintained between Discussed
utilities (cross- distance area = 0, all in-water transport utilities and oyster ecosystems with MSQ
river cable barges, maintained other areas = 4 to maintain safe operation of public transport
ferry terminals, services in the river.
etc.)
Seaward extent < 30 m* Within exclusion Sites for oyster ecosystem restoration extend Discussed
from area = 0, all from the intertidal zone to a maximum distance of with MSQ
shorelines other areas = 4 30m from the associated shoreline to minimise and DAF
impacts on river users. Exceptions would be Fisheries
subject to careful assessment and the written and Boating
approval of Maritime Safety Queensland. Patrol
Water depth < 2m Within exclusion Oyster ecosystems are only established in water (Gillies et al
below area = 0, all depths less than 2m below the Mean Low Water 2018)
MLWS other areas = 4 Spring tidal line at a restoration site. This
maximised the chance of restoration success.
19
Page 20
Figure 2.2: Restoration Suitability Model for rock oyster ecosystem restoration in the Noosa River
estuary
20
Page 21
2.4 Habitat mapping
TNC contracted the consultancy firm Ecological Service Professionals (ESP) to map the extent and
condition of marine and fringing habitats adjacent to the proposed restoration sites (see Annex 1:
Noosa River Habitat Survey Report. This information has been incorporated into the engineered
diagrams and layouts of oyster reef patches on the restoration sites developed specialist coastal
engineers, International Coastal Management (ICM) who were contracted to this project. The results
are presented in Annex: 14: Engineering Drawings. The information is also incorporated into the
descriptions of the restoration sites under Section 4: Restoration Sites.
21
Page 22
SECTION 3 – RESTORATION SITES
Restoration works are planned in four restoration sites. These sites are located at Tewantin, Goat Island,
Noosa Sound East and Noosa Sound West as indicated in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: Above left, Location of the Tewantin and Goat Island restoration sites in the Main Channel
Restoration Zone; Above right, Location of the Noosa Sound East and Noosa Sound West restoration
sites in the Noosa Sound Restoration Zone. Source: International Coastal Management (ICM)
Marine habitats report
In September 2020, TNC contracted Ecological Service Professionals (ESP) to undertake benthic surveys
in the Tewantin, Goat Island and Noosa Sound restoration sites and surrounds, as well as upper and
lower Weyba Creek. The report is presented in (Annex 1: Noosa River Habitat Survey Report). The
Weyba Creek sites are not part of this restoration plan and information specific to the proposed
restoration footprints has been extracted and included in the refined restoration site descriptions
below.
ESP completed their habitat surveys over four days (7–8 September and 4–5 November 2020). ESP’s
survey results advised the positioning of the oyster reef patches within the sites. The benthic maps
produced by ESP have been incorporated in the site diagrams (Annex 14: Engineering Drawings).
The ESP report specifically discusses the Tewantin restoration site, where temporary disturbance of
macroalgae is anticipated.
22
Page 23
Please note, that in line with the ESP report, no impact to mangroves or seagrass as a result of the
works is expected at any of the proposed restoration sites.
3.1 Tewantin
The Tewantin Restoration Site is located along the southern shoreline of the Noosa River. The site lays
adjacent to Tewantin Park, more than 100m upstream of the Tewantin boat ramp.
A port channel marker is located seaward at the downstream end of the site. A Telstra-owned
submarine telecommunications cable bisects the site at the upstream end. The cable is relatively
accurately mapped but its exact position will be confirmed and mapped, by geographic survey, prior to
construction work commencing. Exclusions are imposed for the telecommunications cable. A small
beach intersects the fringe and has been excluded from the restoration footprint.
A narrow strip (5m wide canopy) of cotton wood (Hibiscus tiliaceus), interspersed with grey mangroves
(Avicennia marina) and river mangroves (Aegiceras corniculatum) occupy the shoreline fringe.
Mangroves are in moderate condition, growing on rock and gravel on an erosion prone bank. A public
walkway lies landwards of the fringing mangroves.
The proposed oyster reef patches would be placed primarily on bare sand and gravel (with dead oyster
shell) and on rocky rubble adjacent to marine plants in the intertidal zone. The patches will cover a total
area of 1326 m2 and be at least 10 m from seagrass and 2 m away from mangroves (including
pneumatophores) to prevent any direct damage to those marine plant assemblages.
As per Annex 1, ESP has confirmed that the oyster reef patches will be placed primarily on bare gravel
with dead oyster shell which makes up 42 percent of the 1326 m2 area covered by restoration patches.
23
Page 24
In addition, existing patchy rock and rubble, which covers 24 percent of the benthic habitat in the
proposed restoration patch areas will be supplemented with additional rock (i.e., Rock Rubble - 246 m2
& Oyster, Rubble & Mud – 77 m2).
ESP also confirmed that a relatively small section of patchy rock was covered by sparse oysters and
sparse patches of macroalgae (Padina sp. and turfing algae). Based on this habitat survey, less than 479
m2 of this patchy rock and rubble habitat supporting a degraded macroalgal assemblage would be
temporarily disturbed, although the area to be disturbed is likely to be an overestimate as it is planned
to place the majority of substrate onto bare gravel and sand between existing rock patches where
possible and thereby minimise potential disturbance.
The macroalgal assemblages were also in relatively poor condition due to high sediment loads observed
on and around the existing rocky reef and rubble areas, with some sections of reef having a high
coverage of fine sediment.
Given the speed at which Padina can colonise hard surfaces (dead oyster shell) elsewhere in the estuary,
ESP anticipates that supplementary habitat provided as part of the proposed restoration project would
be colonised rapidly within 1 year of deployment, and that coverage would be similar to the current
condition within 2 to 3 years post deployment, particularly in sections that remain subtidal and not
covered by fine silt. Related images are presented in Figures 3.2 to 3.5 below. Additional images are
provided in the ESP report.
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
.
Figure 3.2: Tewantin Restoration Site lies adjacent to this shoreline. Noosa Shire Council chambers is
in the background. Public park fringes the site. The Tewantin boat ramp is to the far left behind the
trees and 30m from the edge of the restoration site.
24
Page 25
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 3.3: Tewantin restoration site looking upriver from the middle of the intertidal section of the
site. The intertidal zone is dominated by a rock and rubble base interspersed with loose rock with low
density oyster coverage.
Photo: Simon Walker, ESP
Figure 3.4: Upstream end of the Tewantin Restoration Site. Loose rocks over a rock rubble base
dominate the site. Aerial mangrove roots are interspersed by mostly landward of the lose rock. Rock
oysters grow on the lose rocks. Source: Simon Walker (ESP)
25
Page 26
Photo: Simon Walker, ESP
Figure 3.6: Sub-tidally the habitat is characterised by having patchy small rock outcrops with sparse
coverage of foliose and turfing macroalgae (primarily Padina and turf forming algae) separated by
bare sand, gravel and mud patches. Source: Simon Walker, ESP.
Simon Walker, ESP
Figure 3.6: Sparse macroalgae (Padina sp.) growing on rock at Tewantin restoration site. Source: Simon
Walker, ESP.
26
Page 27
Matters of State environmental significance (MSES) - Tewantin
Refer to attached plans – MSES (Annex 2), MQ1401 (Annex 3), Noosa River FHA (Annex 4)
• High Ecological Value Waters (wetland)
• High Ecological Significance Wetlands
• Noosa River Declared Fish Habitat (A) Area
High Ecological Value (HEV) Waters (wetland) / High Ecological Significance (HES) Wetlands
The oyster ecosystem restoration works are designed to enhance the values of the wetland by restoring
a complex ecosystem to what is currently a degraded aquatic environment.
Mangroves and seagrasses are not within the footprint of this project and will not be impacted.
A small stand of mangroves is shoreward of the proposed restoration footprint. Mangrove areal roots
extend into the intertidal zone adjacent to the proposed restoration footprint. Mangrove roots are
excluded from the restoration footprint at a minimum distance of 2m. Seagrass is found upstream and
outside of the restoration footprint and is excluded from the footprint at a minimum distance of 10m
from the footprint.
According to project consultants, ESP, macroalgae growing on rocks, dominated by Padina sp. is sparse
(less than 15% of the surface area), with a footprint of less than 479m 2. The macroalgal assemblages
are in relatively poor condition due to high sediment loads observed on and around the existing rocky
reef and rubble areas, with some sections of reef having a high coverage of fine sediment.
ESP also confirmed that given the speed at which Padina can colonise hard surfaces (dead oyster shell)
elsewhere in the estuary, it is anticipated that supplementary habitat provided as part of the proposed
restoration project would be colonised rapidly within 1 year of deployment, and that coverage would
be similar to the current condition within 2 to 3 years post deployment, particularly in sections that
particularly in sections that remain subtidal and not covered by fine silt.
The proposed oyster reef patches are designed and certified by engineers. The oyster reef patches are
spaced (1-4m apart) so as not to not impede fish passage, cause significant or impact negatively on
natural hydrological processes of the waterway. The oyster reef patches are set away from the
shoreline and will not interfere with overland flow and runoff as a result of floods.
Water quality will be maintained at the restoration sites during the construction phase in accordance
with the sediment management protocol outlined in this Restoration Plan (see Section 6.4: Sediment
Management). The restored oyster ecosystems will enhance water quality by filtering estuarine water,
removing algae and particulate matter from the water column and converting nutrients, such as
nitrogen and phosphorus, into biogenic oyster growth as well as binding these into the surrounding
sediments[1].
Water quality will be monitored at the restoration sites using standard parameters (pH, temperature,
dissolved oxygen, salinity, total dissolved solid) and significant changes reported.
The works will maintain recreational access to shorelines or the waters in which the oyster ecosystems
grow. All shorelines with recreational access have been excluded from the selection process. Visual
[1]
Kellogg, M. & Cornwell, Jeffrey & Owens, Michael & Paynter, Kennedy. (2013). Denitrification and nutrient
assimilation on a restored oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 480. 1-19. 10.3354/meps10331.
27
Page 28
amenity will be maintained, as less than one third of the reef patch area will be exposed to view at low
tide. Signage used to indicate the location of the restoration footprints will be optimised, with agency
input, and will generally be considered temporary until the oyster ecosystems are established, at which
time most signage, if not all will be removed from the river (as per government direction).
The work also enhances cultural and spiritual connection to place, enjoying the support of Kabi Kabi
Traditional Owners. Kabi Kabi Elders are providing the project with valuable cultural and historic
information and share the common interest of restoring oyster beds and reefs to the Noosa River
system.
Declared FHA (A areas) – Noosa River
Works propose to restore ecological values and enhance fisheries resources at the site by the
restoration of oyster ecosystem to the site, which provide habitat and food resources, breeding sites
and nursery areas for marine fish.
The works at the Tewantin restoration site will not impact on mangroves or seagrass. According to
project consultants, ESP, macroalgae growing on rocks, dominated by Padina sp. is sparse (less than
15% of the surface area), with a footprint of less than 479m2. The macroalgal assemblages are in
relatively poor condition due to high sediment loads observed on and around the existing rocky reef
and rubble areas, with some sections of reef having a high coverage of fine sediment.
ESP also confirmed that given the speed at which Padina can colonise hard surfaces (dead oyster shell)
elsewhere in the estuary, it is anticipated that supplementary habitat provided as part of the proposed
restoration project would be colonised rapidly within 1 year of deployment, and that coverage would
be similar to the current condition within 2 to 3 years post deployment, particularly in sections that
particularly in sections that remain subtidal and not covered by fine silt.
28
Page 29
3.2 Goat Island
The Goat Island Restoration Site lies approximately mid-section along the southern shoreline of Goat
Island. The site is shoreward of the main boating channel and sites on a large sand bank that extends
along the entire length of Goat Island.
The site avoids public moorings and marine habitats, and these are excluded with minimum distances.
The site is within the declared fish habitat (A) management area.
The shoreline is a patchy and narrow fringing mangrove forest between coastal rainforest communities
dominated by grey mangrove (Avicennia marina). Canopy height of 4 to 6 m. Forest extends to a large
low canopy forest to the north-east of the island, away from the restoration site. The mangroves in this
reach are in good condition.
Well sorted sand sub-tidally and no epifaunal invertebrates were recorded on the surface of the
unvegetated habitats. There was typically a low density of burrows observed in most reaches.
Mangroves and seagrass are excluded from the site. No impact to the mangroves and seagrass is
expected.
Related images are presented in Figures 3.7 - 3.9.
29
Page 30
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 3.7: The Goat Island Restoration Site fringes the southern shoreline of the Goat Island
Conservation Reserve.
Photo: Craig Bohm,
TNC
Figure 3.8: Sub-tidally, the site is dominated by a sand bank with few ecological features. Consolidated
soft sand overlaying compact sand fringes the shoreline. Mangroves, aerial mangrove roots and
associated vegetation are present along the shoreward margins.
30
Page 31
Simon Walker, ESP
Figure 3.9: Bare sand adjacent to Goat Island. Source: Simon Walker, ESP
Matters of State environmental significance (MSES) – Goat Island
The Goat Island site is within the following MSES:
• High Ecological Value Waters (wetland)
• Declared FHA (A and B areas)
• Protected Area (estates)
High Ecological Value Waters (wetland)
The oyster ecosystem restoration works are designed to enhance the values of the wetland by restoring
a complex ecosystem to what is currently a degraded aquatic environment.
Marine plants are not within the footprint of this project and will not be impacted.
A small stand of mangroves is shoreward of the proposed restoration footprint. Mangrove areal roots
extend into the intertidal zone adjacent to the proposed restoration footprint. Mangrove roots are
excluded from the restoration footprint at a minimum distance of 2m. Seagrass is found outside of the
restoration footprint and is excluded from the footprint at a minimum distance of 10m from the
footprint.
The proposed oyster reef patches are designed and certified by engineers. The oyster reef patches are
spaced (1-4m apart) so as not to not impede fish passage, cause significant erosion or impact negatively
on natural hydrological processes of the waterway. The oyster reef patches are set away from the
shoreline and will not interfere with overland flow and runoff as a result of floods.
Water quality will be maintained at the restoration sites during the construction phase in accordance
with the sediment management protocol outlined in the Restoration Plan (Section 6.4: Sediment
Management). The restored oyster ecosystems will enhance water quality by filtering estuarine water,
removing algae and particulate matter from the water column and converting nutrients, such as
31
Page 32
nitrogen and phosphorus, into biogenic oyster growth as well as binding these into the surrounding
sediments[1].
Water quality will be monitored at the restoration sites using standard parameters (pH, temperature,
dissolved oxygen, salinity, total dissolved solid) and significant changes reported.
The works will maintain recreational access to shorelines or the waters in which the oyster ecosystems
grow. All shorelines with recreational access have been excluded from the selection process. Visual
amenity will be maintained, as less than one third of the reef patch area will be exposed to view at low
tide. Signage used to indicate the location of the restoration footprints will be optimised, with agency
input, and will generally be considered temporary until the oyster ecosystems are established, at which
time most signage, if not all will be removed from the river (as per government direction).
The work also enhances cultural and spiritual connection to place, enjoying the support of Kabi Kabi
Traditional Owners. Kabi Kabi Elders are providing the project with valuable cultural and historic
information and share the common interest of restoring oyster beds and reefs to the Noosa River
system.
Declared FHA (A and B areas)
Works propose to restore ecological values and enhance fisheries resources at the site by the
restoration of oyster ecosystem, which provides habitat and food resources, breeding sites and nursery
areas for marine fish.
The works at the Goat Island restoration site will not impact on marine plants.
Protected Area (estates)
The Goat Island Conservation Park is a protected area that is estuarine in nature and protects
mangroves, related tree communities and tidal flats of Goat Island. The park sits adjacent and landward
of the proposed Goat Island restoration footprint. The values of the park are protected from the
restoration works as all mangrove and tree communities within the park are outside of the restoration
footprints. Aerial mangroves roots, fallen timber and other marine plants encountered on the tidal flats
are further protected by a 2m separation area between them and the oyster reef patches as per this
Restoration Plan (Section 2.3, Table 2.2., line 1).
The proposed works are designed to minimise the potential for erosion of the park shoreline. On the
contrary, it is expected that the works may enhance protection of the park shoreline by attenuating
some wave action due to the high rugosity and positioning of the oyster reef patches, which will
attenuate wave energy before it reaches the shoreline at all but the highest points of the tidal cycle
(see Section 7.4. Erosion control).
[1]
Kellogg, M. & Cornwell, Jeffrey & Owens, Michael & Paynter, Kennedy. (2013). Denitrification and nutrient
assimilation on a restored oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 480. 1-19. 10.3354/meps10331.
32
Page 33
3.3 Noosa Sound East
The Noosa Sound East Restoration Site is located in an embayment along the south-eastern shoreline
of the Noosa River estuary, opposite the Noosa Sound canal estate. The site lies outside of the declared
fish habitat area and adjacent to private land. Associated housing lies on a ridgeline above the site and
at considerable distance from the shoreline.
Relevant shoreline infrastructure includes a small beach, boat ramp and small wooden jetty associated
with the resorts on the ridgeline. All infrastructure is buffered to prevent intrusion of restoration works
on these structures and their use.
Narrow fringing mangrove forest between coastal rainforest communities dominated by red and grey
mangroves with occasional orange and yellow mangroves. While the mangrove fringe was generally
less than 10m wide, it is in good condition.
Well sorted sand, which covered most habitats within each of the reaches investigated particularly in
channel habitat. No epifaunal invertebrates were recorded on the surface of the unvegetated habitats
during the survey and there was typically a low density of burrows observed in most reaches. Some
sections of the sediment in Noosa Sound were covered by benthic microalgae, particularly where there
were freshwater inputs.
Isolated seagrass patches but not within 10m of planned restoration footprint. Mangroves and
seagrass are excluded from the site. No impact to the mangroves and seagrass is expected.
Related images are presented in Figures 3.10-3.12.
33
Page 34
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 3.10: Noosa Sound East Restoration site lies in the embayment on the right side of the image
(facing) up to the white 6 knot sign against the shoreline on the far right. The site avoids the main
navigation channel. There is no housing along this shoreline.
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 3.11: Landward, the shore is mixed vegetation and mangroves. Sub-tidally, fine sediments
overlay a hard base with no distinguishable habitat features.
34
Page 35
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 3.12: Fallen vegetation occurs in this site and will be protected from construction works with
minimum distances to minimise disturbance. Where vegetation falls onto the restoration site from
overhanging trees, this will be left where it falls.
3.4 Noosa Sound West
The Noosa Sound East Restoration Site is located in an embayment along the south eastern shoreline
of the Noosa Sound upstream of the Noosa Sound East Restoration Site. The site lies adjacent to the
Weyba Creek Bushland Reserve. The site lies within the Noosa Sound Restoration Zone and not within
a declared fish habitat area.
35
Page 36
There is no shoreline infrastructure adjacent to this site. Downstream of the site is a public jetty. The
jetty is excluded from the site.
Fringing mangrove forest between coastal rainforest communities dominated by red and grey
mangroves with occasional orange and yellow mangroves. While the mangrove fringe was generally
less than 10m wide, it is in good condition. The lower canopy dominated by jointed rush (Juncus
kraussii), rusty sedge (Fimbristylis ferruginea), and saltcouch (Sporobolus virginicus) occurring
particularly towards the mouth of Weyba Creek.
Well sorted sand, which covered most habitats within each of the reaches investigated particularly in
channel habitat. No epifaunal invertebrates were recorded on the surface of the unvegetated habitats
during the survey and there was typically a low density of burrows observed in most reaches. Some
sections of the sediment in Noosa Sound were covered by benthic microalgae, particularly where there
were freshwater inputs.
Isolated seagrass patches but not within 10m of planned restoration footprint. Mangroves and
seagrass are excluded from the site. No impact to the mangroves and seagrass is expected.
Related images are presented in Figures 4.13 - 4.16.
The site sits within the embayment to avoid the main navigation channel.
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 4.13: Noosa Sound West Restoration Site lies opposite Noosa Sound canal estate. The image
looks along the site downstream from the upstream end of the site towards the public jetty (white
area), which lies outside the site.
36
Page 37
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 4.14: The downstream area of the site features compact sand substrate with fine sediments
overlaying. A combination of sedge and mangroves (with aerial roots) occur along the littoral fringe.
Photo: Craig Bohm, TNC
Figure 4.15: The mid and upstream sections of the site feature compact sand substrate with fine
sediments overlaying. Mangroves with aerial roots dominate the littoral fringe.
37
Page 38
Simon Walker, ESP
Figure 4.16: Bare sand with sparse yabby burrows. Source: Simon Walker (ESP)
3.5 Public land
Detail of public land adjacent the restoration sites is presented in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Public land adjacent to restoration sites
Noosa Sound Noosa Sound
Restoration Zone Tewantin Goat Island
East West
Lot 326 35 604
Plan CP855842 MCH4795 SP188270
Property ID 145672 154048 132663
Private land. Weyba Creek
Goat Island
Houses on ridge Bushland
(Noosa River)
Property Name Tewantin Park line Reserve
Conservation
Park
Lot Area 13280.81 203141.32 62229.91
Council and Boat
Ramp Car Park, Goat Island, 1B Serenity Cl,
Address Pelican St, NOOSA NORTH NOOSA HEADS
TEWANTIN QLD SHORE QLD 4565 QLD 4567
4565
38
Page 39
SECTION 4 - PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT
The Noosa community overwhelmingly supports this project and the restoration sites selected.
4.1 Face-to-face meetings
Since February 2020, the project team has met face-to-face with over 70 Noosa stakeholder groups and
including local recreational and active commercial fishers, tourism and recreational groups and Noosa
Council approved indigenous representatives to discuss the project and to present the proposed
restoration sites. The overwhelming feedback from these meetings was supportive.
Traditional owners, senior land claimants from the Kabi Kabi Nation, as identified by Noosa Council,
support the project and are involved in project activities. Kabi Kabi elders also provide technical input
to the historic assessments of oyster presence and uses in the Noosa River. TNC has been given approval
verbally by the traditional owners, and permission to incorporate local indigenous knowledge into the
project and its activities.
Commercial, recreational fishers and indigenous elders have already provided invaluable insights to the
history of the Noosa River, its uses and current extractive and non-extractive practices. Indigenous
engagement actions are planned as part of structured school and community engagement programs
that the project is helping resource.
Feedback from these numerous meetings was incorporated into the design process and reported to
Noosa Shire Council in the project annual report (2019-2020).
4.2 Community engagement workshop
On the 7th of December 2020, the project also facilitated a community engagement workshop in which
18 participants from local Noosa groups gathered and discussed partnership projects. From the
workshop 9 community projects were refined and are being implemented (see Annex 5: Community
Engagement Workshop Report).
4.3 Public consultation sessions
On the 14th of December 2020, the project facilitated 9 widely publicised public consultation sessions
about the project, the restoration projects and the Phase I restoration sites. During these sessions, 38
locals met face-to-face with TNC staff in small groups, and discussed the project purpose, methodology
and restoration sites and opportunities for restoration throughout the estuary (see Annex 6: Public
Consultation Sessions Report).
Most participants expressed overwhelming support for the project. Some 4-6 participants expressed
concerns about the need of the project, the integrity of the project’s local partners and the
transparency in the sources of funding. One concern was expressed about the expected success of the
project given that the past oyster restoration project, led by the University of the Sunshine Coast (USC)
and Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation (NBRF)11 did not deliver oyster reefs at the end of that
project. The project team clearly explained that in that project shell was placed in coir bags but the bags
11
Gilby, B. et al 2020. Bringing fish life back to Noosa: restoring lost oyster reef habitats in the Noosa Biosphere. Final Project Report.
University of the Sunshine Coast, School of Science and Engineering.
39
Page 40
rapidly deteriorated or were damaged by anchors, thus preventing the reef formation. The team also
explained how in this project, a different methodology was being used.
Most participants were impressed by the tried and tested restoration methodology proposed for this
project. Many participants subsequently joined the project mailing list, some with the intention of
volunteering in project, while some local community groups are entering into formal and informal
partnerships with the project to undertake community outreach activities.
4.4 Recreational fisher engagement
TNC has a formal agreement with Ozfish nationally and works closely with them in Noosa.
4.5 Commercial fisher engagement
Outside of formal consultations, TNC has also regularly engaged the commercial fishing sector in Noosa,
keeping them up to date on project progress, sharing information and seeking their input on sites and
monitoring criteria.
While TNC would characterise the engagement with the active commercial sector as cordial, and
fruitful, the position of four of the six active commercial fishers regarding the project was not
supportive. When directly asked if the project would impact on their commercial interests, their
responses did not relate to specifically to commercial interests but to broader concerns. These
presented in italics below, followed by TNC’s responses.
Goat Island restoration site would narrow an already narrow section of the river
The width of the Noosa River at its narrowest point in the upper lower section is approximately 160
metres wide. The proposed works extend a maximum of 14 metres from shore, so less than 9 percent
of the width of the narrowest part of this section of the river.
The site is also at the northern landward margin of a very wide and shallow sand bank, which extends
more than 50 metres out into the estuary. This sand bank generally constrains most boat traffic to the
river channel south of the bank, far from the restoration site, leaving the bank available for formal and
informal moorings. The restoration site is proposed shoreward of the moorings.
Goat Island restoration site raises environmental concerns over hydrology and sand movement
TNC consultant coastal engineers, ICM, have certified that the oyster reef patches proposed for Goat Island have
been designed to minimise impacts to river flows and sand movement. Despite this, the reef patches at Goat
Island are anticipated to act as a segmented reef and provide some sheltering to the shoreline from wave action
and vessel wake which is anticipated to result in reduced erosion in the lee of the reefs. The reef patches have
been aligned with the river flows and incorporate spaces between the reef patches to minimise any impacts on
river flows.
Goat Island restoration site poses a navigational hazard
TNC has visited Goat Island on two occasions with Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ). MSQ has
confirmed that the Goat Island site is not a significant navigation hazard, being set against the shoreline
away from official moorings and at a reasonable distance from the main navigation channel.
40
Page 41
Restoration efforts are unlikely to get oysters to grow
TNC will augment the natural oyster recolonisation process using oyster spat set on shell cultch that is
placed on the oyster reef patches (see Section 5: Substrate augmentation). This is a tried and tested
method of offsetting natural variable recruitment of oysters in restoration projects. Oyster
augmentation would be repeated seasonally, if necessary, until recruitment is successful. The oyster
reef patches will also naturally attract invertebrates and marine plants such as macroalgae, important
components of oyster ecosystems and of benefit to the ecological health of the river.
Salinity and lack of river flow will be the enemy of the restoration effort
The salinity at the proposed restoration sites is well within the tolerances of oyster survivability and
growth as per Section 2.1, Table 2.1 Habitat suitability parameters and criteria for Sydney rock oysters.
Oysters are found growing across the lower estuary, including in relatively proximity to the planned
restoration sites.
Potential introduction of new species and structures to an already over used and abused system
The project will only use oyster brood stock sourced from the Noosa River. This brood stock will be used
to seed cured oyster shell with oyster spat in a bio secure hatchery. The seeded oyster cultch will then
be set onto the oyster reef patches. The methodology complies with strict state biosecurity protocols
for shell and live oyster handling. The activity will also occur under the conditions of a general fisheries
permit secured for that purpose and with regular communication with state biosecurity officers.
The project uses the oyster reef patches as the structural foundation of oyster ecosystem restoration.
The details of what the project will place in the river, and how it is prepared is outlined in detail in
Section 5. Restoration substrate.
4.6 Riverside homeowners
The TNC/Noosa Integrated Catchment Association (NICA) Oyster Gardening Project has spent the last
6 months talking about the project and oyster gardening with virtually all estuary side jetty owners. The
project also held an oyster gardening basket making workshop on Gympie Terrace, Noosaville, where
the public could come and discuss the project.
In talking to locals and numerous jetty owners, NICA reports that they have a few people who asked
probing questions about where the oyster restoration sites were exactly and the nature of the
restoration work. However, most people showed positive interest, or at least will towards the project.
No direct animosity about the project has been expressed.
TNC also wrote to three tourism operators who have jetties or boat ramps entering Noosa Sound. TNC
sent profiles of the project and requested meetings with the operators, but they did not respond to
TNC’s requests.
Prior to construction, TNC has agreed with Noosa Council to meet with tourism operators in proximity
to the construction load out site on Hilton Esplanade and with households living opposite the Noosa
Sound East and Noosa Sound West restoration sites.
41
Page 42
4.7 Additional communications
TNC has produced special fact sheets about the project’s construction methodology, site designs, shell
recycling and biosecurity measures and have distributed these widely. TNC is currently producing a
special fact sheet about the biosecurity measures in place for this project. This will also be distributed
widely.
TNC and Noosa Council are also collaborating to produce a package of construction communications
and TNC will manage a public complaints mechanism during and post construction for the project,
whereby requests for information or concerns will come to TNC directly.
4.8 Project-based engagement actions
TNC has also established a series of local partnerships to support the imbedding of this initiative in the
Noosa community. These initiatives include:
Noosa Shuck Don’t Chuck – shell recycling by 3 local Noosa restaurants, who collect and wash oyster
shells for use in oyster seeding, as well as community based shell-washing – where local volunteers help
TNC wash, bag and store over 9 tonnes of cured oyster shell ready for use in the project.
Noosa Junior Schools Project – local partner organisation, Noosa Community Biosphere Association,
works with local junior schools to deliver activities which celebrate shellfish restoration efforts and
conservation of the Noosa River.
Noosa Senior Schools Project – local partner organisation, Noosa Environmental Education Hub works
with local senior schools to imbed shellfish restoration activities into curriculum subjects.
Noosa Oyster Gardening Project – local partner organisation, Noosa Integrated Catchment Association,
works with local jetty owners and businesses to grow local Noosa oysters in baskets, which are then
released onto the project’s rocky restoration substrates
Noosa Estuary Sediment Study – local partner organisation, Noosa Parks Association, works with
partner ecological firm, Ecological Service Professionals, to map the sediment distribution in the Noosa
River (sediment being recognised as one of the major impediments to natural oyster ecosystem
formation.
Other actions include presentations to local community groups, working with recreational fishing
groups such as Ozfish to collect underwater video footage of the restoration sites, and plans with
Tourism Noosa to imbed marine restoration key messages into tourism information products
throughout the Noosa Shire.
42
Page 43
SECTION 5 – RESTORATION SUBSTRATE
The restoration process involves the deployment of igneous rock, sourced from a local quarry, as the
primary restoration substrate. The rock will be augmented, at some sites, with a mix of oyster shell,
which forms a composite substrate. Upper surfaces of the rock substrate are augmented with oyster
shell, which may be seeded with live oysters and which locks into the rock substrate. Live oysters may
also be added to the substrate.
The design specifications and placement of restoration substrates, as described below and presented
in the attached specifications and drawings, have been certified by the project’s consulting coastal
engineers, International Coastal Management (ICM). The rock substrate is stable, and the shell stability
has been optimised by hand placement within the rocky matrix. The configuration has been optimised
to provide characteristics suitable for the desired habitat and minimises potential impacts on coastal
processes and the surrounding environment.
5.1 Rock substrate
The project will use a locally sourced igneous rock as the primary restoration substrate. The rock is in
the size range 150-500mm diameter and deployed in configurations, as oyster reef patches, that meet
engineering requirements related to movement, stability, erosion avoidance and minimisation of
sediment accretion as per the specifications for each restoration site.
Using rock (as opposed to oyster shell) as the primary restoration substrate has many advantages.
These include:
• Highly suitable as an oyster settlement substrate (rock oysters settle readily onto rock)
• Resembles natural oyster bed substrates
• Can be readily configured to meet engineering specifications for movement and stability under
varying estuarine conditions
• Does not require complex engineering structures to support the shell to create vertical relief
• Can be deployed and configured using standard construction equipment and practices
• Readily meets ecological criteria for heterogeneity and rugosity and provision of habitats
historically present in the estuary
• Raises the oysters above the benthic sediments of the river, helping ensure oysters attached
to the rock are free from benthic sediments and have maximum exposure to water flow
• Offers multiple habitat opportunities across the intertidal and shallow subtidal ranges for
multiple species
• Can be readily augmented with cured oyster shell to enhance rugosity, heterogeneity or
chemical cues for oyster spat
• Is economically efficient to use, particularly if restoration is to occur at scale
• More ready passes the ‘naturalness’ test with stakeholders than shell in bags or cages (for
example)
The use of local rock as a restoration substrate has been tried and tested by TNC and its state and local
government partners in sub-tidal oyster ecosystem restoration in Victoria, South Australia, Western
Australia and by the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) New South Wales in Port Stephens (Figures
5.1 and 5.2) for intertidal rock oyster ecosystem restoration.
43
Page 44
Figure 5.1: Rock oyster restoration substrate deployed by DPI NSW in Port Stephens estuary in
February 2021. The rock is an igneous andesite in the 100-300mm diameter size range, though some
individual rocks are up to 500mm in diameter.
Figure 5.2: Rock oyster recruitment onto the underside of andesite rock in the Port Stephens
restoration project after 12 months of rock deployment. Native rock oysters typically recruit to the
underside of the restoration substrate, then progressively colonise the upper surfaces over time,
where environmental conditions allow. Source: Craig Bohm. TNC.
5.2 Substrate augmentation
The Noosa River estuary experiences some natural oyster recruitment due to the presence of a remnant
population of rock oysters (Saccostrea spp.). The timing of natural oyster recruitment, however, is
highly variable, generally seasonal (occurring throughout the warmer months) and is difficult to predict.
The fate of the oyster larvae (where they settle) is also not well understood, and the volume of a given
44
Page 45
larval plume may be small. Rapid algal growth and colonisation of newly placed restoration substrates
by a range of flora and fauna also competes with the natural recruitment of rock oyster larvae onto the
substrate, thus posing some risk to restoration success. The impact of predation on natural oyster
recruitment during the larval and young spat stages (by finfish and macro-invertebrates) may also be
significant.
For these reasons, the project augments, or ‘kick start’ the oyster ecosystem restoration process by
adding cured (by desiccation) oyster shell and live oysters to the rock substrate.
The cured shell is added as:
a. Seeded cultch – cured oyster shell seeded with oyster spat at the Bribie Island Research Centre
(BIRC), and placed in voids in the rock substrate,
b. Unseeded cultch – cured oyster shell placed in voids in the rock substrate to encourage natural
recruitment of oyster spat to the shell and rock,
c. Composite substrate – cured oyster shell mixed with rock prior to the rock deployment
Live oysters, grown for this purpose in oyster gardens, are also placed in voids in the rock substrate (see
Section 5.5: Oyster Cultch for detail).
5.3 Shell recycling
Oyster shells are collected and prepared for use as part of TNC’s Shuck Don’t Chuck shell recycling
project (see: https://www.natureaustralia.org.au/what-we-do/our-priorities/oceans/ocean-
stories/shuck-dont-chuck-shell-recycling/).
Since September 2020, TNC has been collecting and curing oyster shell at the project’s dedicated oyster
shell curing site at the Doonan Solid Waste Depot (Figure 5.3). Shell has been supplied in bulk by
Mooloolaba Fish Market. She shell is principally half shell from shucked Pacific oysters (Magallana
gigas) with an average shell diameter of 60mm. Since March 2021, the project has begun collecting
rock oyster half shells from local seafood restaurants in Noosa and adding these to the curing site.
Resource Recovery Australia (RRA), who operates a recycling facility at the Doonan Solid Waste Depot,
is contracted to TNC to transport the shell from the wholesaler and retailers to the shell curing site.
For this purpose, TNC is a registered as a ‘resource provider’ with the Department of Environment and
Science, as per the Queensland End of Waste Code - Oyster shells (ENEW07278317) and Waste
Reduction and Recycling Act 2011. TNC cures the oyster shell against best practice, in compliance with
the Code, and in consultation with DAF biosecurity, who also sits on the project’s Technical Advisory
Group.
Shell curing occurs against the following protocol:
I. Shell is only cured at the designated and sign-posted shell curing site
II. Clean, shucked oyster shell is collected by the contractor from wholesaler/s, in bulk, in 1 tonne
food-safe seafood transport containers and delivered to the shell curing site
III. Pre-washed shell is also collected by the contractor from oyster retailers in Noosa in clean 20
litre buckets, and delivered to the designated shell curing site
IV. All containers used for shell transport are thoroughly washed and disinfected before storage
and re-use
45
Page 46
V. At the shell curing site, shell is placed on the ground in rows separated and sign-posted by
month collected
VI. The shell is dried and cured (desiccated) in direct sunlight for 6 months, which is two months
more than is required by the End of Waste Code
VII. The shell is also turned after three months of curing, as an additional desiccation measure
VIII. Each shell pile is no higher than 1 metre, which further enhances the desiccation process
IX. The site is regularly monitored and maintained to reduce contamination of the shell piles
X. The curing site is in located in an isolated area of the depot, so the risk of contamination from
the depot’s other waste management activities is negligible
XI. Once cured, and prior to its removal from the depot, oyster shell may be washed with
freshwater to remove any cumulated sediment or dried organic matter, if found
XII. The shell, when needed, is transported in clean containers
Photos: Craig Bohm
Figure 5.3: Oyster shell curing by desiccation in sunlight at shell curing site at the Doonan Solid Waste
Depot. Top left, The curing site is located in a remote area of the depot and is well sign-posted.
Bottom left, A tipper truck is used to transport the shell onto site. Right, Shell transport contractor,
Resource Recovery Australia’s manager, Russell Ping, inspects the September 2020 shell pile at the
curing site.
46
Page 47
5.5 Composite substrate
A small portion (<20 percent) of the restoration substrates will be a mixture of rock and cured oyster
shell as per the specifications. This composite is being used to further explore whether oyster
recruitment is enhanced by mixing oyster shell with the rock or not. Restoration scientists generally
expect that oyster shell provides chemical cues that may attract oyster larvae to settle on a particular
restoration site, but this has not yet been fully tested.
The composite mix will comprise up to 10 percent shell. In lower flow locations, such as in Noosa Sound,
the proportion of shell may be increased to 20 percent, subject to confirmation of the stability of the
structure by engineers. A higher proportion of shell may be considered subject to constructability and
monitoring outcomes, as per the specifications.
When used as a composite, the cured oyster shell will be evenly mixed through the rock to achieve
good interlocking. The shell will not be placed in alternating layers with rock. Mixing will occur in small
volumes on the barge immediately prior to placement to avoid shell damage due to rehandling. An
example of a rock oyster restoration substrate displaying a mix of rock and shell is given in Figure 5.5.
Figure 5.5: An example of rock oyster restoration substrate (augite) augmented with oyster cultch
(unseeded) in Port Stephens, NSW. Source: Craig Bohm, TNC.
47
Page 48
5.5 Oyster cultch
Seeded and unseeded oyster cultch will be added to the rock substrates in volumes up to 10 kilograms
of cultch per metre square of rock substrate as per the specifications. The cultch will be interlocked
with rock by hand-placing the cultch into voids to minimise displacement. Oyster shell that is displaced
more than 5m from a restoration site, is to be removed in the event that it is resulting in negative
impacts.
If displaced oyster shell extends more than 5 metres beyond the drawn restoration site, and results in
negative impacts to the environment, the displaced shell will be collected by hand, removed from the
estuary, or reinstated on the restoration substrate (structure). Shell movement will be monitored six-
monthly using visual observation. The risk of shell displacement will reduce over time as the natural
oyster bed develops (see Annex 7: Engineering Specifications, Rectifications Table, as provided by ICM
engineers).
5.6 Hatchery
Oyster cultch will be seeded with oyster spat at the Bribie Island Research Centre (BIRC). The cultch will
be sourced exclusively from the project shell curing site and oyster brood stock from the Noosa River.
The hatchery will be responsible for spawning the oysters and seeding the shell cultch with oyster larvae
in ponds configured under controlled hatchery conditions. The hatchery will follow all required
environmental and biosecurity protocols and will liaise with government biosecurity offers to confirm
those protocols.
TNC will be responsible for preparing and supplying the cultch to the hatchery, collecting brood stock
from the Noosa River and for the use of the seeded cultch in oyster gardening and deployment onto
the restoration substrates in accordance with the conditions of a General Fisheries Permit secured for
that purpose.
TNC is currently negotiating with the BIRC to provide hatchery services under contract to TNC.
5.7 Oyster gardening
The project plans to use oyster gardening to further augment the oyster restoration process and to
engage with the local Noosa community. In oyster gardening, seeded oyster cultch is supplied by the
project to local jetty owners and interest groups, who then grow the oysters in oyster baskets, which
are suspended from docks and jetties in the Noosa River.
Once the oysters reach a sufficient size, to minimise losses due to predation, the project will remove
the oysters and cultch from the oyster gardens and hand place the oysters and settlement cultch into
voids in the restoration substrate.
Oyster gardening will be a community-led project, with oversight from TNC, and occur under the
conditions of a General Fisheries Permit secured for that purpose.
TNC has engaged local group the Noosa Integrated Catchment Association (NICA) to help coordinate
oyster gardening. The project is already oversubscribed with local jetty owners wishing to be involved
in the project (once a permit is secured). Our other partners, Noosa Environmental Education Hub
(EEHub) and Noosa Community Biosphere Association (NCBA) who are engaging with local schools and
48
Page 49
the general community about the oyster restoration work, are super excited by oyster gardening and
the potential opportunities it affords for local awareness raising and education.
Oyster gardeners will be trained and supplied with appropriate equipment and advice and will be
registered with the program. The methodology that will be applied is summarised in Table 5.1 below.
Table 5.1 Oyster gardening methodology
Gardening Steps Description
1. Community register of Interested community members register with the project.
interest Maximum subscription is 40 oyster gardeners.
Extra gardeners will join a waiting list.
2. Potential oyster gardeners Every potential oyster gardener will be interviewed for physical
assessed for suitability by site ability, suitability of jetty, access, and reason for being involved
visit and interview prior to be invited to participate.
3. Selected oyster gardeners Registration includes:
are formally registered with · Personal and household details and location map
the project · Number of baskets to be supplied
· Registration number
· Permit number
4. Oyster gardeners inducted Project team (NICA+TNC) supplies oyster gardeners with:
to the project · Oyster gardening guidelines.
· Rules and obligations, insurances, and permit conditions.
· Opportunity to participate in a workshop about oyster
gardening.
5. Oyster baskets prepared Project team prepares oyster baskets with new mooring lines and
a wash. The baskets have been provided by the Bribie Island
oyster gardening project.
The baskets are bio-secure, having been desiccated for 2 years,
but will be cleaned again with fresh water prior to issuing to
oyster gardeners.
Additional baskets will be constructed using the same design, if
required.
Oyster baskets, when in operation will be secured at the opening
with zip ties to prevent loss of seeded cultch.
6. Oyster gardening kits The project team provides each oyster gardener with a gardening
prepared kit including:
Gloves, spare rope, tags, zip ties, record sheets, oyster gardening
guidelines, rules and obligations, copy of liability and insurance
information, safety guidelines.
7. Oyster gardening baskets Project teams delivers each oyster gardener their kit and baskets
and kits distributed to oyster just prior to, or as they receive their allocation of seeded oyster
gardeners cultch.
8. Oyster gardens are stocked The project team delivers 5-10kg of seeded oyster cultch per
basket to each oyster gardener direct from the Bribie Island
Research Centre and assists the gardener with setting the oyster
basket/s in place in the river.
49
Page 50
9. Oyster gardeners care for Oyster gardeners are responsible for:
oysters · Monitoring of gardens every couple of days and shaking
the baskets to release pseudo-faeces.
· Inspecting and hosing down the baskets at least one per
month (more often in areas where high algal growth or
sedimentation occurs)
· Affixing repairs to the mooring lines or baskets, as
required. Oyster gardeners may seek assistance from the
project team.
Oyster gardeners are encouraged to record observations (rate of
algae growth, interesting species, any wear and tear of gardens).
The project team will inspect oyster baskets periodically and take
measurements. Oyster gardeners may assist.
10. Records Project team will keep accurate records of oyster gardeners,
contacts, number of baskets, maintenance activities undertaken
and eventual fate of baskets.
11. Decommissioning Oyster gardens remain in commission for 6 to 12 months.
Oyster gardens are then inspected by the project team and the
oysters and cultch released onto the oyster restoration sites by
TNC as per the project specifications.
After the oysters and cult are released, the baskets will be
collected by TNC/NICA, dried and repaired for future use,
returned to Bribie Island or disposed of at the Doonan Solid
Waste Facility.
12. Reporting Project partner, NICA, is required every 6 months to report to
TNC on project progress.
TNC reports twice per year on project progress to agencies.
TNC remains in close contact with NICA throughout project
implementation and assists technically with project
implementation.
The oyster gardening techniques applied in Noosa are adapted from the Bribie Island oyster gardening
project led by Dr Ben Diggles. Dr Diggles has been consulted during the formation of this project. Dr
Diggles has also provided the Noosa project with 70 pathogen free oyster baskets for use in the project.
The project also draws on TNC’s success with the mussel gardening in Western Australia
(https://www.natureaustralia.org.au/newsroom/mandurah-mussel-gardens/) and with oyster
gardening caried out by TNC and its partners in the USA.
Shellfish gardening is practiced worldwide, and the methodologies are simple, safe and prevent the
spread of disease through simple design and tried and tested methodologies and sound record
keeping12. An example of a rock oyster garden that will be used in Noosa is presented in Figure 5.5.
12
Examples: TNC’s major mussel gardening project in the Peel/Harvey Inlet, Western Australia with over 100
mussel gardeners engaged (see: https://www.natureaustralia.org.au/what-we-do/our-priorities/oceans/ocean-
stories/shellfish-garden/); the Restore Pumicestone Passage community alliance who recently ran a successful
oyster and mussel gardening project on Bribe Island (see http://restorepumicestonepassage.org/oyster-
50
Page 51
Figure 5.5: An example of oyster gardening bag stocked with seeded oyster cultch and ready for
deployment and grow out under a jetty on Bribe Island as part of the Save Pumicestone Passage project.
Source: Ben Diggles, Digfish Services.
gardening/); the Maryland Oyster Gardening Program in Chesapeake Bay, USA (see https://www.cbf.org/how-
we-save-the-bay/programs-initiatives/maryland/oyster-restoration/oyster-gardening).
51
Page 52
SECTION 6 – CONSTRUCTION
Construction standards applied in this project align with shellfish restoration best practice and the
Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Principles and Standards for the Practice of
Ecological Restoration global guidelines6.
The construction methodology described here has been successfully employed by TNC construction
contractors in shellfish restoration projects in Port Philip Bay (VIC), Adelaide (SA), Albany and Swan River
(WA). This methodology was also employed by the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) for the
restoration of rock oyster ecosystems in Port Stephens, NSW. TNC also has 25 years of experience in
utilising similar deployment methodologies in projects throughout the United States.
6.1 Methodology
The construction contractor engaged to handle and deploy the restoration substrate will have
experience with tidal works in the Noosa River, or similar sized estuaries, and preferably have
experience with shellfish restoration projects.
The contractor will acquire and manage the rock substrate from its source to its deployment. TNC will
supply the cured oyster shell to be used as a composite mixture with rock.
The contractor will stockpile the rock at an agreed load out site, selected with Noosa Shire Council, and
managed in accordance with the Site Management Plan and Construction and Environmental
Management Plan (CEMP), which meets with permit conditions.
In the appropriate weather window, related to suitable construction safety and operational
requirements (so as to avoid any potential damage to the receiving environments as well as staff), the
contractor will load the substrate onto a small barge from the load out site, transport the substrate to
the restoration site, and deploy the substrate onto site using an excavator (Figure 6.1).
Where a composite of rock and shell is used, the contract will mix this on the barge immediately prior
to placement to avoid shell damage due to rehandling (unless another method which achieves the same
objective is identified). The contractor will lay the substrate in configurations and clearances specified
for the site.
The first deployment of substrate will be closely supervised by the TNC monitoring team and the
configuration of the substrate inspected, in-water, to confirm accuracy of placement. Once TNC is
satisfied with the accuracy and appropriateness of the deployment technique, the contractor will be
permitted to continue with the deployment and subsequent deployments.
The contractor may use GPS, site markers or similar equipment to accurate mark the depositional sites.
The deployment barge only anchors at the restoration site where the minimum distance specifications
for marine plants, marine habitats and infrastructure can be met. Sediment plumes are managed in
accordance with the management protocol outlined in Section 6.4: Sediment management.
Once restoration substrates are in place, and signage and aids to navigation installed, authorities are
notified and accurate ‘as constructed’ drawings with RPEQ certification are provided as per permit
conditions.
52
Page 53
Photos: Kirk Dahle
Figure 6.1: The contractor using a shallow-draft barge and excavator to carefully position restoration
substrate onto site Port Stephens, NSW. The barge operator uses sponsons to orient the barge,
sometimes only setting one sponson, and marker stakes, to help guide the substrate placement. Source:
Kirk Dahle, DPI NSW.
6.2 Responsibilities
The contractor will be responsible for:
o Ensuring they have access to the equipment of the appropriate size for operating in the Noosa
River estuary, experience with rock construction in the Noosa River estuary, or other
constrained estuaries, and preferably will have had exposure to ecological restoration work in
the past.
o Acquiring the rock as per the specifications and stockpiling it at designated load out site.
o Managing the oyster shell to be used in the composite mix at the stockpile site.
o Developing and implementing a Site Management Plan for the stockpile and Construction and
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). These will be approved by TNC and meet with any
permit conditions, prior to the commencement of works.
o Managing all site marking, load out processes, material transport, works and signage at the
restoration site until such time as the restoration substrates are laid and configurations and
positions of substrates against the plans are confirmed by engineers as meeting permit
conditions.
o Undertaking all construction monitoring, compliance and reporting against permit conditions.
o Posting all construction notifications will be as per permit conditions. TNC will augment these
notifications with public media and social media announcements.
53
Page 54
6.3 Impact Minimisation
All works undertaken will minimise disturbance to marine plants during and after the construction
phase. Any impact to marine plants will be temporary. Any use of temporary equipment, such as
sediment curtains, will be placed to avoid contact with marine plants or the impediment of fish passage.
Table 6.1 presents an assessment of the actions, impact minimisation actions and alternatives
considered.
Table 6.1: Impact minimisation actions and alternatives considered
Action Impact minimisation (environmental + Alternatives considered
social)
Site selection Site selection guided by Restoration Zones Areas unsuitable or inappropriate for
and Restoration Suitability Modelling and oyster restoration are excluded by the
extensive associated use of minimum selection and consultation processes.
distances to minimise negative impact of
construction or restoration substrates,
once established, on marine species and
habitats, navigation, built infrastructure
and river access.
Extensive liaison and formal consultation
processes are used to ensure planned
actions meet with community
expectations.
Restoration Only locally occurring igneous or Rock oysters are opportunists and will
materials metaphoric rock is selected as the primary grow on rock, rubble, mangrove roots,
selection restoration material, as per the design oyster shell (etc) and artificial
specifications. This material optimises substrates such as tin, concrete, steel.
ecological and physical performance, The project objective is to restore
while minimising risk of introducing oyster ecosystems by providing an
foreign materials and pathogens to the ecologically (and engineered) design
river. which mimics natural foundations of
oyster ecosystems. The project
To minimise contamination, the rock may therefore employs locally occurring
be treated prior to deployment by natural materials.
cleaning with freshwater, if contamination
(most likely lose soil) exceeds 50 percent Oyster shell piled on the riverbed or
coverage of each rock per given volume. placed in bags or cages placed on the
riverbed are, by design, artificial
Oyster shell and oyster shell cultch will be structures, thus introducing artificial
treated as per the QLD End of Waste – materials and shapes to the estuary.
Shell Code, and pre-washed prior to use. Such materials and shapes may select
for certain species mixes or
Live oysters will be handled and deployed abundances, which may not naturally
as per conditions of a General Fisheries occur in the estuary. The bag material
Permit secured for that activity. may exacerbate sedimentation and
achieving relief to counter
sedimentation challenges is difficult
54
Page 55
and further distorts any potential
natural character of the substrate.
Placing shell in cages, which
decompose by rusting over time, may
allow time for oyster shells to cement
together by natural biogenic
processes, prior to the supporting
cage structure disappearing. However,
this design is yet to be fully tested and
is possibly best suited for sub-tidal
environments where the biogenic
structures are not subject to high
current and wave energy, which may
cause movement or erosion of the
biogenic reef structures.
Not augmenting the restoration
substrate with oyster shell and seeded
oyster cultch and live oysters risks
slow ecological recovery, or possibly
low recruitment due to the variable
nature of oyster recruitment.
Substrate Substrates are designed to maximise Alternative configurations could
design stability, durability, rugosity, include larger substrate footprints of
engineering heterogeneity, prevent impediment to continuous rock, but such structures
fish passage, avoid pooling, minimise would likely affect river flow, may
wave refraction, and erosion of create barriers to fish passage,
shorelines. enhance the erosion potential and
sediment accretion potential of the
substrates to the adjacent shoreline
and shoreline upstream and
downstream of the restoration site.
Works The construction contractor will be The work methods are standard
methods responsible for all works, from material practice which are refined for each
storage and load out to construction, estuary situation. Work methods are
construction monitoring, risk adaptively refined, if required, but the
management and reporting. conservation of existing habitats is
paramount to the methods.
The contractor will operate in accordance
with the specifications in this plan, Site The use of larger deployment
Establishment and Management Plan and equipment, deployment of smaller
Construction and Environmental amounts of substrate but this is
Management Plan (CEMP) and all relevant neither economically efficient nor
permit conditions. enables the project to meet minimum
restoration targets in an effective
Substrate deployment is timed to coincide timeframe.
with periods of the highest natural oyster
55
Page 56
recruitment in the estuary. This period Winter deployment considered
falls over the summer months. possible but the risk of the substrate
being covered with algae and non-
Sediment plumes associated with the habitat forming species is assessed as
works will be as per the protocol outlined high and not desirable.
in Section 6.4: Sediment management
6.4 Sediment management
Sediment plumes associated with restoration works may impact on seagrass and are principally caused
by using substrates (rock /shell) fouled with loose organic and inorganic matter collected by the
substrate in its acquisition from the quarry, during storage at the load oust site, or during handling and
deployment onto the barge. The resuspension of river sediments caused by the placement of the rock
on site may also be an issue but would be temporary and may be insignificant in comparison to the
generally very high background suspended sediment load of the estuary.
The construction contractor will be required to implement the following sediment plume minimisation
protocol and must incorporate this into the Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
The protocol includes the following:
o Preferential selection of rock from the quarry with minimum fracking (if possible).
o Organising the transport of rock to minimise contamination from lose material.
o Washing the rock prior to use, preferably at the quarry, if the rock is contaminated with loose
material is greater than 50% by area.
o Managing the rock at the load out site to minimise significant fouling by ground sediments, if
detected. This may include measures such as laying a bed of gravel on which the rock sits at
the load out site, loading rock directly from the truck onto the barge, minimising the movement
of barge equipment on and off the barge to avoid contamination from the tracks of the
equipment.
o Washing oyster shells prior to mixing this into a composite substrate with rock. Washing will
occur at the Doonan Solid Waste Facility.
o Deploying the rock on site by placing it on site carefully, rather than dumping it off the side of
the barge, if plumes are caused.
o Inspection and physical marking of the seagrasses in closest proximity to the site is to be
undertaken prior to commencement of works. During works visual monitoring of the sediment
plume is to be undertaken. Where the visible plume extends to within 5m of seagrass beds,
turbidity monitoring is to be undertaken.
o The extent and duration of the anticipated sediment plume is such that mangrove species are
unlikely to be impacted and do not require monitoring unless significant sediment plumes are
observed.
If seagrass remains at risk of sediment smothering (if turbidity monitoring indicates turbidity
(NTU) is more than 10% above background), then employ a combination of the following:
o Deployment of silt curtains around the seagrass beds, or in close proximity to the restoration
site and/or,
56
Page 57
o Deploy substrate down current of the seagrass bed (e.g. on a falling tide for seagrasses located
upstream of the works), or within an hour of high or low tide (slack water).
o Ensuring silt curtains do not interact with marine plants and are deployed for the absolute
minimum possible soak time required to achieve the rock deployment at the site.
o Constant monitoring of the silt curtains to ensure they to not move and interact with marine
plants, impede fish passage or impose unreasonable imposition on other waterway users.
o Review substrate handling protocols and enhance the substrate cleaning/preparation efforts
until plumes are minimised.
o Review construction operations procedures and amend as required to minimise potential for
impacts.
o Consider implementing additional operational measures.
o Inspect the seagrass beds to determine if there is evidence of sediment smothering compared
to pre-works inspection.
o Report any impacts on seagrass to authorities as per permit conditions.
6.5 Load out site management
The proposed load out site is at the western end of Hilton Esplanade, Noosaville (figure 6.5). The load
out site is configured in two sections leaving sufficient space for recreational boaters and commercial
companies to access the shoreline (Figure 6.5b). The 15.4m long exclusion line between the two
sections is to separate the movement of rock between the two sections from boaters using the
shoreline. This section will be managed by the contractor using traffic cones, NOT fencing. The cones
will be removed when there is no movement of material between the two sections.
57
Page 58
Figure 6.5: Location of proposed load out facility located at the end of Hilton Esplanade, Noosaville
The site will be managed by the project’s contracted construction company that is experienced with
this work, having previously been contracted to the Department of Primary Industries in NSW to
undertake a similar intertidal shellfish restoration project.
The operational parameters for the site are presented in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2 Operational parameters
Parameter Proposal
Timeframe: February – April 2022 subject to permits
Duration of use: 40 days including mobilisation, demobilisation and potential stand down days
Management: Contracted commercial construction company
Site area: Exclusive use of 540m2 of road reserve (350m2 at high tide) at the end of
Hilton Esplanade (Figure 6.5b)
Load out area A = 300m2 area (150m2 at high tide)
Load out area B = 200m2 area
Load out area connection = 40m2
Area A is primarily for rock and equipment loading/unloading operations in
association with the barge.
Area B is primarily for rock and equipment storage.
The load out area connection creates a safe fenced corridor for the movement
of the Posi-track loader between Areas A and B.
Nature of uses: Movement of up to 7 commercial trucks per day to the site to delivery
porphyry rock.
Storage of up to 90m3 of rock (150mm to 500mm diameter) per day
Loading of rock and dried oyster shell onto the barge using an excavator +
Posi-track
Storage of loading ramps, vehicle and heavy equipment
No chemicals, fuels or liquids will be stored at the site.
Frequency of 12 hour/day operational. 6am to 6pm including site management.
use:
Expected up to 7 truck movements per day along Hilton Esplanade to deliver
rock to the load out site per day.
Barge will ferry rock to restoration sites as needed from the load out facility
with expected 2- 5 loadings per day subject to tides.
58
Page 59
Public access: A dual carriage way with a minimum of 8m width will be maintained to allow
access to the boat ramp along Hilton Esplanade.
A dual public boat launch area 12m wide will be maintained along the
shoreline. Note that the formal dual boat ramp at Tewantin is 10m wide.
Adequate vessel reversing area will be maintained between site areas A and B.
Access to Hilton Esplanade from Hilton Terrace via the pathway leading from
Hilton Terrace will be maintained.
Commercial operators wishing to use the ramp may negotiate temporary
access to the shoreline directly with the project’s construction contractor.
Public safety: Load out site areas A and B will be fenced using commercial fencing as will a
2.5m corridor joining areas A and B.
Signage will be used on the fencing to inform the public about the site, its
purpose and cautions.
The barge will only come ashore within site area A.
The construction company will use standard traffic control methods to ensure
the public is separated from truck movements at the end of Hilton Esplanade
and operations between site area A and B.
Public A public notification regarding the works will be printed in the Noosa News
notifications two weeks prior to commencement of activities.
An announcement will be made in the Noosa Council’s circular.
Relevant authorities will be notified of works prior to commencement.
Public notification signage will be posted at the site and will include a QR code
which connects to online information about the construction process:
Timeframe, purpose, activities, further information.
Tourism facilities adjacent to the site will be specifically notified and met with
to explain the work schedule.
Noise Truck movements and barge loading will take place between 7am and 6pm
management: weekdays, and between 8am and 5pm on weekends.
Environmental Trees will be protected from harm from machinery and fencing. Fencing will
management: be placed at a distance from the tree line and visible tree roots will be
avoided.
The site will be kept clear of debris/refuse.
The site will be rehabilitated to its pre-use condition or better.
59
Page 60
SECTION 7 – SIGNAGE + AIDS TO NAVIGATION
TNC proposes the installation of moderate signage and essential aids to navigation. To improve visual
amenity, the signs may be placed on top of navigation markers, rather than being standalone signs on
pole structures. TNC is working with MSQ to refine signage for each site and possibly at boat ramps.
If independent signposts are installed, they would be erected in bare sediment close to the oyster reef
patches. Moorings for any buoys used for navigation purposes would also be places onto bare sediment
but close to the oyster reef patches. Signage is suggested as per the specifications given (see Figures
7.1 and 7.2) but we would prefer smaller signage, if agreeable to MSQ and other agencies. The size of
the signs given here can be amended.
Navigation aids will not impact on tidal fish habitats or marine plant communities and will be positioned
or configured to avoid the risk of trimming of marine plants e.g., seagrasses.
The suggested wording for signage includes text for restoration sites inside and outside of the declared
fish habitat areas. The wording of the signage; however, could be more ‘public friendly’ and if
permitted, will design this in contact with local MSQ, DAF and NSC offices. The signage also does not
have to be Noosa Councils specific.
The suggested signage includes a recommendation for the public not to consume oysters from the
restoration sites. While it is legal to eat wild oysters, some oysters on the restoration sites will be
derived from oyster culture and oyster gardening. These oysters will not settle naturally on the site and
may be selected by the public for consumption. Human consumption of these oysters introduces
increased risk to TNC, as the project lead. Appropriate signage can reduce the risk to consumers while
also limiting TNC’s liabilities associated with food poisoning from eating contaminated oysters.
Reducing losses of oysters from the restoration sites, due to collection, is an additional benefit.
The signage suggested here has been engineered and is RPEQ certified (Registered Professional
Engineer of Queensland) and the certification presented in Figure 7.3. The signs are re-purposed from
the previous Noosa Oyster Restoration Trial Project implemented between 2016-2020 by the University
of the Sunshine Coast (USC) and Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation (NBRF). The signs were removed
from the Noosa River in 2020, as per permit conditions for that project, and gifted to TNC for use in this
project.
Two of these signs have already been repurposed to mark the oyster shell curing site at Doonan Solid
Waste Depot (refer to Section 6, Figure 6.3). The signboards, brackets and poles are in near new
condition and will not be modified in any way part from changing the wording as per permit conditions.
The poles will be cleaned of any lose material and disinfected prior to re-deployment. The signboards
and brackets have been stored well and are in clean and good working order.
TNC may also place temporary signage at boat ramps, at least during the construction phase, to better
inform river users of the construction activity being undertaken.
TNC proposes the use of SL – B600 marker buoys (Figure 7.4) as suggested by MSQ as the appropriate
aid to navigation (underwater obstruction). One buoy may be placed at each end of a restoration site,
and in the middle, but this will be confirmed formally with local MSQ prior to aid selection and
deployment.
60
Page 61
Aids to navigation and signage shall be placed in close association with the substrate footprint and
positioned to minimise impacts on marine plants and habitats. Signage and aids to navigation installed
by a qualified contractor and removed as per permit conditions. Once positioned, signage and aids to
navigation will be included with ‘as constructed’ drawings of the restoration substrate footprints and
submitted to authorities, as per permit conditions. Signage and aids to navigation will be maintained,
removed or relocated during the permit period, as required with the written direction of authorities.
61
Page 62
Figure 7.1: Signage specifications proposed for restoration sites that occur in declared fish habitat
areas. Signage includes preferred wording.
62
Page 63
Figure 7.2: Signage specifications proposed for restoration sites that occur outside declared fish
habitat areas. Signage includes preferred wording.
63
Page 64
Figure 7.3: Signage was previously certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland
(RPEQ Certification) and will not be modified from the engineered specifications for use in this
project.
64
Page 65
Figure 7.4: Proposed Aid to Navigation – SLB600 Marker Buoy as suggested by Noosa MSQ. Source:
SPEC_SL-B600.pdf (sealite.com).
65
Page 66
SECTION 8 – PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The objectives of the performance management framework are to:
• Maximise public safety
• Maintain visual amenity of the Noosa River (through optimal signage)
• Enact environmental safeguards to protect marine plants and natural processes
• Monitor for potential erosion
• Monitor and manage community feedback or complaints
• Ensure contingency measures are in place
8.1 Public Safety
The key hazards associated with public safety at the restoration sites during construction and site
management, their likelihood and consequence, and proposed treatment are presented in Table 8.1.
Public safety is further analysed and presented in Annex 8: Safety in Design Report.
Table 1: Primary hazards of restoration substrates to public safety and their treatment
Hazard Likelihood Consequence Treatment
Physical interaction LOW MEDIUM Gaps around oyster reef patches to be 1m-4m
with the restoration at seabed. Rock stable under its own weight
substrate (Monitoring and by interlocking of material. Oyster shell to
Personnel or Public) be placed towards the middle of individual
reef patches to minimise potential of
displacement from structure. Works to be
appropriately signposted in consultation with
MSQ. Works to be certified by a coastal
engineer on completion as conforming with
the specifications.
Works pose a risk to LOW MEDIUM Oyster reef patches laid as per specifications
navigation and locations selected with wide consultation
and MSQ input. Restoration sites marked as
per MSQ requirements.
Public information products imbedded locally
through public and social media to advise of
site locations and hazards including signage at
boat ramps or as directed by authorities.
Works pose a risk to LOW LOW Restoration sites selected to avoid all known
public access to river shoreline access points. No works within 10m
shoreline either side of a public park, shoreline beach
(of any size) or shoreline or within 30m of a
pontoon or jetty. No site directly adjacent to
shoreline houses or public or commercial
facilities.
66
Page 67
Gaps between the oyster reef patches gives
direct access to shorelines to small and
medium vessels (e.g. kayaks, tinnies).
Position of works clearly marked with signage.
Members of the LOW HIGH Consumption of oysters in the Noosa River
public eating oysters expected to be low but may change.
from the oyster beds
possess health risk Project signage to discourage oyster
consumption at restoration sites. Project
brochure, online Q&As and project media
encourages consumers to purchase oysters
from seafood suppliers, thus supporting local
business and reducing risks to health from
consumption of wild oysters.
An oyster bed cause LOW MEDIUM Coastal fringes and property upstream and
erosion to downstream within 100m of a given
infrastructure such as restoration footprint monitored for signs of
to cause risk to public erosion visually every 6 months and by a
safety comparison of images every 12 months.
Significant erosion directly attributable to
restoration works will be remediated in
consultation with authorities. See Section 8.6
Contingency Plan
8.2 Visual amenity
Maintaining the visual amenity of the Noosa River estuary is important to many river users. The project
therefore aims to minimise its impact on the visual amenity value of the river during construction and
management of the restoration sites.
The project’s potential threats to visual amenity and prescribes treatments and rationale are outlined
in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2: Threat of oyster restoration to visual amenity and their treatment
Threat Likelihood Consequence Response
Oyster bed construction, MEDIUM MEDIUM Optimise Construction Environmental
monitoring and Management Plan (CEMP) to minimise
maintenance works noise, dust and disruption to river users
generate public complaints
or vandalism due to impact Public notifications as per
on visual amenity (or requirements.
undefined reasons)
Public awareness actions about the
project purpose and activities produced
and distributed (brochure, fact sheets,
67
Page 68
news articles, radio interviews, website
and social media presence).
Public complaints record, feedback and
reporting mechanism operationalised.
Signage and aids to MEDIUM LOW Signage and aids to navigation
navigation generate public monitored monthly. Signage and aids to
complaints or vandalism navigation managed as per Section 8.6
due to impact on visual Contingency plan
amenity
Sediment plumes caused by MEDIUM MEDIUM Sediment management measures
construction or implemented as per Section 6.4
maintenance works Sediment management
8.3 Environmental performance and safeguards
Maintaining environmental safeguards during the site management phase, when oyster beds are in the
process of growing, is fundamental. These safeguards are presented in Table 8.3 as part of the projects
Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) system.
The project also maintains a separate comprehensive MER plan for the project. The MER Plan
encompasses a wide range of ecological, social and economic parameters and reporting
responsibilities. The subset presented in Table 8.3 are the key MER performance measures relevant to
this application. These will be augmented with any subsequent additional permit conditions as
required.
Table 8.3: Environmental safeguards
Performance Objective Monitoring Frequency of Corrective action
Method/Target Monitoring (where performance
objective not met)
1. Restoration bed stability
Oyster restoration Visually inspect oyster After deployment (to Any restoration
substrate remains restoration substrates ensure conformity to substrate that moves
within a restoration and record the precise the restoration plan). out of the designated
site GPS position and size restoration site will be
of each. After every 6 months rectified as per the
in the first year, then specifications. See
Use GIS software to once every year for Annex 7: Engineering
contrast the position, the following two Specifications
footprint, size and years.
area of each Any shell added to a
restoration substrate restoration site also
between monitoring monitored.
events and assess any
potential movement.
2. Oyster recruitment – ecosystem formation
Oysters and associated Measured against After every 6 months Substrate height
sessile benthic benchmark: % in the first year, then adjusted to optimise
68
Page 69
invertebrates recruit Recruitment > once every year for oyster recruitment, as
to the restoration mortality (count/m2) the following years. per specifications. See
substrates10 per restoration site Annex 7: Engineering
Specifications –
Within 6-8years: Rectifications Table
Density of rock oysters Seeded oyster cultch
at restoration site and live oysters added
average of > 200 to rock substrate to
individuals/m2 augment recruitment
as per specifications.
4+ age classes of rock Substrate height
oysters present at adjusted to optimise
restoration site (= oyster recruitment, as
approx. 2 cohorts of per specifications. See
oysters reproductive) Annex 7: Engineering
Specifications
> 5% of rock oyster
population at the site
is 3+ years old
Increased density of
oyster recruits with 3-
4 reproductive cycles
5 times more epifauna
on oyster habitat than
on surrounding
sediment
3. Community use and enjoyment of oyster restoration sites
Oyster beds do not Visually monitor Ongoing - report Maintain complaints
significantly impact community use of the significant complaints mechanism as per
community safety, restoration sites or incidents to Section 8.5 Complaints
access and/or use of authorities management
the Noosa River If a site needs closer
estuary including Fish monitoring, as Annually - report Modify oyster reef
Habitat Areas. directed by a public feedback received and patch/es or signage,
authority, then the responses in project aids to navigation as
project will establish a report per Section 8.6
specific action for that Contingency plan
purpose.
Report feedback and
Maintain records of adaptive management
partner or community responses in the
feedback and reported project annual report.
evidence of substrate
or signage vandalism
or vessel strike.
Records will include:
69
Page 70
i. Number and type of
compliant received
ii. The types, number
and severity of any
acts of wilful
vandalism
iii. The type and
severity of any boat
strike
4. Additional potential affects
Deleterious interaction Adopt minimum Prior to deployment of Modify oyster reef
with marine plants distances between substrate check for patches as per Section
mapped marine plants marine plants visually 8.6 Contingency plan.
and construction at the site and adjust
works as per the works to avoid, if Report changes in
specifications marine plants found associated plant
communities and
Post deployment remediation actions in
survey and mapping of annual report.
‘as built’ structures in
relation to marine
plans and submit to
authorities with RPEQ
certification
Annually - monitor
changes in nearby
plant communities
70
Page 71
8.4 Erosion control
TNC’s consultant engineers have confirmed:
The purpose of these works is not to provide erosion protection but to restore rock oyster ecosystems
throughout the Noosa River.
Natural erosion can be the result of tidal or flood flows, but in many locations within the Noosa River
erosion is strongly influenced by wind waves and vessel wake. Hard structures have the potential to
result in reduced (or increased) erosion because of changes to river flows or wave action, changes to
sediment transport patterns as well as end effects. Hard structures can also result in shoreline
protection that reduces erosion.
Even though the works are not intended to provide erosion protection, the nature of the works are
generally expected to result in reduced severity of coastal erosion adjacent to the structures. The oyster
reef patches in this project are engineered to reduce any potential for these structures to result in
increased erosion of adjacent shorelines, including shorelines upstream and downstream of the works.
Features of the oyster reef patches (the works) that consider coastal processes include:
Concept module layout - Concept Layouts 2 & 3 (segmented longshore modules) show how oyster reef
patches are configured to minimise impacts to littoral drift and coastal processes by being aligned with
river flows and providing gaps between oyster reef patches. Despite this, the oyster reef patches are
anticipated to act as a segmented reef and provide some sheltering to the shoreline from wave action
and vessel wake and result in reduced erosion. Reef has been segmented to limit this impact and allow
penetration of waves and flows without resulting in pockets of increased erosion.
Concept layout 1 provides habitat that extends out perpendicular from the shore similar to observed
development of oyster reef habitats. This layout is only suitable in locations with low sediment
transport and not within Restoration Zone 1 Main Channel. In these locations there is limited risk of
the works acting as a submerged groyne, which would have the potential to impact on littoral drift,
erosion, and accretion patterns (as well as result in undesirable burial of sections of the structure).
Shaped oyster reef patches – Oyster reef patches may be curved or shaped to reflect the local
bathymetry and site-specific conditions. Alignment with the shoreline or directing flows away from
the shoreline reduces the potential for focussing of tidal or flood flows. Tapering of the reef ends
reduces the potential for flow disturbances (such as eddies) to develop.
Crest level – Crest levels are dictated by desirable water depths for the target species and do not extend
above MHWS. As with many natural oyster reefs, they are exposed during lower tides and inundated
during higher tides (or flood events). When water levels are close to or over the crest of the reef, wave
action and vessel wake would be expected to overtop the structure. As such, wave energy reaching the
shoreline (especially for Layout 2 & 3) will be reduced but not eliminated. While natural erosion may
continue to occur, it is expected to be reduced.
Access space – The provision of an access space facilitates monitoring of the reef habitat, but also
provides space for natural flows to occur between oyster reef patches.
Porous rock substrate – waves impacting with the substrate are dissipated into the voids in the
substrate, with reduced wave energy impacting on the adjacent shoreline and reduced wave reflection
compared with solid structures.
71
Page 72
Engineering design by coastal specialist – Final oyster reef patch layout is to be confirmed by the
certifying coastal engineer post construction. For Phase 1 sites, this is undertaken by International
Coastal Management. For Phase 2 sites, this is a requirement prior to construction (refer Drawing
NROR-2021-02 note 1.6).
Erosion monitoring and mitigation
The restoration sites, as well as shoreline 100m upstream and downstream of the sites, will be
monitored visually every 6 months to check for signs of exacerbated shoreline erosion. Every 12
months, photographs will be used to compare changes in the shoreline shape. Where significant
erosion is detected and is directly attributable to the presence of the restoration works, remedial
actions will be undertaken in consultation with authorities, such as the modification of the height or
form of related oyster reef patches to reduce the erosion hazard (see Section 8.6 Contingency plan).
8.5 Complaints management
TNC has developed a self-explanatory project brochure and answers to Frequently Asked Questions
about the project. TNC has also published and distributed site maps and will disseminate information
about the construction and most construction management phase via mailouts. These are also made
widely available via the TNC website - see https://www.natureaustralia.org.au/what-we-do/our-
priorities/oceans/ocean-stories/noosa-river/noosa-faqs/ and will be promoted through project
partners and authorities to help spread information about the project and thus help to manage
inquiries.
TNC, as the project lead, will manage the response to all complaints in liaison with relevant authorities
as well as the contracted construction company. The rating and intended responses to complaints is
given in Table 8.5. The complaints record keeping system is as per Table 8.5a.
Complaints and responses will be included, in general terms, in annual reports. Relevant agencies may
access the detail of complaints, as per tables.
Table 8.5: Complaint rating and response
Complaint Nature Response Timeframe
severity
Low General concerns and Phone call and/or email Within 48 hours
questions about project response giving
activities, timeframes or response or source of
details. information.
General inquires not directly Refer to appropriate
related to the project agency
Medium Concerns related to specific Phone call and/or Within 24 hours
project actions and impact on formal written response
visual amenity or environment, depending on nature.
as they occur
Consultation with
Specific complaints about the relevant agencies
project in general regarding the response,
if required.
72
Page 73
Additional actions, as
required
High Concerns that a specific project Phone call and/or Within 12 hours
activity is posing an immediate formal written response
and significant threat to life, depending on nature.
property or natural
environment Consultation with
relevant agencies
regarding the response,
if required.
Additional actions, as
required
Table 8.5a: Complaints Record Management
Details of Plaintiff Description of Severity Response/s
Complaint
Date of complaint Detailed description Low/Medium/High - Date/s taken
Full name of plaintiff including any historic - Description
Contract details or contextual - Persons involved in the
Contact modality information response
(email, phone, etc) Chronological log, if
multiple actions taken and
multiple responses from
plaintiff received
8.6 Contingency plan
The contingency plan outlined in Table 8.6 specifies remedial actions that will be undertaken in the
event that oysters fail to recruit to the oyster reef patches, vessel strike an oyster reef patch/es, visual
amenity is significantly impacted by the presence of the works, or associated signage, or where
erosion as a result of the restoration works causes impacts to shorelines or property.
Where remedial action demands changes to an oyster reef patch configuration, these changes will be
made consistent with the engineering specifications (Annex 14: Engineering Drawings). The engineers
will also be consulted prior to any changes being made.
Table 8.6 – Contingency plan
Challenge Contingency response
Limited oyster recruitment Oyster reef patches will be seeded with oyster spat settled onto
dried oyster cultch, as is described in detail in Section 5.2 Substrate
augmentation. Reef seeding is used widely in shellfish restoration
as a back stop to highly variable natural oyster recruitment.
Seeding will be repeated at a restoration site until natural
recruitment at the site is achieved and is demonstratable.
Vessel strike on oyster reef Restoration sites will be sign posted, with MSQ guidance, and
patch information about the sites widely distributed. A notice to mariners
73
Page 74
will be issued as required, and the inclusion of restoration sites into
local navigational guides explored with MSQ. If an oyster reef patch
encounters repeated vessel strikes then signage and information
products will be reviewed with MSQ and NSC, and, as a last resort,
the height of an oyster reef patch may be lowered, or shape of an
oyster reef patch, or patches, modified to reduce the navigation
hazard to an acceptable level.
Extensive public complaint Where extensive public complaints are received specifically relating
about visual amenity of an to the position or configuration of reef patch/es, or signage, and
oyster reef patch or series of these concerns are validated by TNC and local authorities, then the
reef patches respective oyster reef patch/es will be modified in height or shape
to alleviate the concerns, once all other avenues to address the
concerns have been exhausted.
Erosion caused by oyster reef Where significant erosion is detected within 100m of a restoration
patches site and is shown to be directly attributable to the presence of the
oyster reef patches, remedial actions will be undertaken in
consultation with authorities. Remedial actions may include
modification of the height or form of oyster reef patches, to reduce
the erosion hazard, and/or remedial actions to the affected
shorelines or property.
74
Page 75
SECTION 9 - ANNEXES
Annex 1 - Noosa River Habitat Survey Report - ESP
Annex 2 - Noosa River MSES Map - Tewantin & Goat Island
Annex 3 - Noosa River Environ Values & Water Quality Map
Annex 4 - Noosa River Fish Habitat Area
Annex 5 - Community Engagement Workshop Report
Annex 6 - Public Information Sessions Report
Annex 7 - Engineering Specifications
Annex 8 - Safety in Design Report
Annex 9 - Code 7 - Maritime Safety
Annex 10 - Code 8 - Coastal Development & Tidal Works
Annex 11 - Code 11 - Marine Plants
Annex 12 - Code 12 - Declared fish habitat area
Annex 13 - Schedule 3 - Prescribed Tidal Works
Annex 14 - Engineering Drawings NROR-2021
75