Overall loss of wetlands
The construction of the
watersports complex across Belmont Common will see the smaller wetlands on the golf course
completely destroyed. Common Galaxid fish known to exist in at least one of these (DNRE).
Swans have nested. Used by variety of waterbirds and others. Deep water of
‘channel’ not suitable for these species. The ephemeral wetlands add to the
overall biodiversity of the area.
Many productive
drain-type wetlands will be lost. Currently used by Latham's Snipe, support vegetation
such as Water Plantain (uncommon west of Melbourne).
No guarantee that
wetlands to the south of the golf course car park will be retained. COGG has consistently
refused to include them in lease for Jerringot Wildlife Reserve, although they are
ecologically part of the Jerringot system. Baillon's Crake is known to breed here (see
below).
Wetlands outside the golf
course will be at risk during construction work and may be modified so that they lose
their present flora and fauna values.
Although it is proposed
to create some new wetlands on the ‘island’, part of this area is already
wetland. The amount $15000 proposed in the Feasibility Study for their creation would
barely dig the hole. Properly designed and constructed wetlands would cost far more than
this.
The watersports channel
itself cannot be considered a wetland in the true sense, since it is largely open water,
is too deep to encourage invertebrate life to support bird life, and any birds resting on
it would be disturbed by the level of watersports activity that would be envisaged to make
the complex viable.
Threats
to Jerringot Wetlands
Changes to the hydrology
of the Belmont Common have not been sufficiently investigated. The groundwater study was
inadequate, the siting of the test bores was very ad hoc and there is no real proof that
creation of a 2.25-km long channel 3 metres deep would not change the water regime.
Jerringot's importance to wildlife, and particularly to the Latham's Snipe habitat,
depends on the particular ecosystem that has developed there, which is as yet poorly
understood.
There is possibility of
leaching of contaminants from the former tip site. This has been known to happen elsewhere
e.g. the Northcote municipal tip was closed in 1975 and it was considered ‘safe’
to create a park on the site. By 1987 a severe leachate problem had arisen and under
threat of heavy fines from the EPA, an expensive system of treatment plant and artificial
wetlands has had to be put in place.
The drainage and flood
regimes that flood and flush the Jerringot wetland will be upset. Jerringot fills
initially by drainage from the Belmont escarpment and some of this will be diverted under
the water channel. The wetland needs regular recharging from minor floods to keep it
healthy. There is no guarantee that Jerringot would receive natural, enriching flood water
at times other than a 100-year flood.
Conversely, the pattern
of drying out and low water levels to expose mudflats in extreme summer conditions is of
benefit to many species, such as the Spotless Crake. Any regular release of water from the
channel would not address this need.
Threats to important flora and fauna
Latham's Snipe -
The Latham's Snipe study
commissioned by COGG and carried out by Ecology Australia warned that, in spite of
protective measures proposed, Jerringot Wildlife Reserve and adjacent swamps could be
abandoned or partially abandoned. This would have an impact of State significance. Mist
netting studies and observations by the GFNC and others have led to the site being
acknowledged as one of Australia's top sites for Latham's Snipe, both in numbers present
at any one time and total numbers passing through. Latham's Snipe are protected by the
Japan-Australia Migratory Birds Agreement (JAMBA) and the Council has an obligation to
enhance their habitat, rather than possibly degrade it. Snipe have a high profile in other
parts of Australia. When their habitat was destroyed at Homebush Bay through works for the
Sydney Olympics, a thorough study, involving radio-tracking of the birds' movements was
commissioned, and expensive new wetlands are being created to encourage snipe to return.
Geelong could regret neglecting the needs of a bird with worldwide significance already
attracts birdwatchers from outside the region.
Baillon's Crake -
Baillon's Crake is now listed (no. 447) on Schedule 2 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act
1988. Part of the evidence for that listing was its known breeding in the wetland next to
the Barwon Valley Golf Course. Ecology Australia in its study commissioned by COGG
recognised that Baillon's Crake could fail to breed in, or abandon the wetlands as a
result of high levels of disturbance during and after the construction of the complex.
This would have a State significant impact.
Buff-banded Rail -
Regionally significant impact if failed to breed or abandoned the Common wetlands.
Spotless Crake -
Regionally significant if failed to breed or abandoned the Common wetlands.
Cattle Egret -
Direct loss of feeding habitat and probable disappearance from the Common. Regionally
significant impact.
Growling Grass Frog
- This species is regarded as vulnerable Australia-wide and is the subject of a Recovery
Plan under the Endangered Species Program of Environment Australia, which is a Federal
government body. It has been recorded from Jerringot Wildlife Reserve and from the
southern swamp adjoining the reserve on the golf course. This wetland would probably
disappear with the construction of the water channel.
Common Nardoo -
This plant, uncommon in southern Victoria, occurs in the less frequently flooded parts of
Jerringot Wildlife Reserve and would probably disappear unless regular inundations were
guaranteed.
Water Plantain - Occurring
in few sites in southern Victoria, this plant would be lost from its present habitat in
drains adjoining Jerringot.
Degradation
of the Barwon River environment
There is a distinct
possibility that reduced flows in the Barwon River would occur, since the river would be
split in two at the entry point of the water channel. This would have significant impact
on the riverine ecosystem. Trees, invertebrates, fish and bird life would all be affected,
including the Grayling, a ‘threatened’ fish species. Pollution could increase
through loss of reed beds in the South Geelong area and the river would be more vulnerable
to blue-green algal blooms, which have already occurred on the river. The natural beauty
of the fiver and the enjoyment of it by the people of Geelong would be lessened.
Similar damage would
occur by the release of harmful buried chemicals.
Changes
to the flood plain and flood regime
The construction of the
water channel would irrevocably damage the structure of the flood plain.
Flood modelling as
carried out for the feasibility study does not appear to have taken into account new levee
bank constructed around the Godfrey Hirst property and other levees on the eastern bank of
the river as recommended to the City of Greater Geelong in its flood study. The banks of
the water channel would act as levee banks, which is contrary to best floodplain
management. Any permanent structures on the floodplain would be contrary to floodplain
management guidelines.
Severe floods can take
place at any time without warning. Floods have occurred in the past in every month of the
year. It seems foolish to construct a rowing channel for international and national events
on land subject to inundation. Apart from damage to the course, the possibility of events
having to be cancelled should be given due consideration.
In times of flood, could
the proposed culverts under the channel cope with normal runoff from the Belmont
escarpment and floodwaters from the river into which these culverts normally empty?
Loss of
biodiversity
The present mixed
woodland/wetland/grassland/riparian environment will be degraded to a much simpler
ecosystem, based on a long stretch of relatively sterile open water with steep grassed
banks. It will be 25 years before any tree plantings reach the current level and there
will be an overall loss of wetlands.
Blue-green
algae problem
The cause of blue-green
algal blooms is as yet imperfectly understood, although they appear related to low water
flows, temperature and nutrient availability. The Barwon River has been closed to some
watersports activities during the past few summer seasons because of the high toxic levels
of blue-green algae. The same situation could easily occur in the new water channel,
causing cancellation of events.
Availability
of water
There is a limited amount
of water available to fill and maintain the level of water in the proposed channel.
Geelong has had water restrictions continuously for nearly three years, an indication of
the seriousness of this problem.
Barwon River water is
needed for town water supply, for agricultural uses and to maintain environmental flows
uses and priority must be given to these needs over any sporting need. Water allocations
for the Barwon River are administered by Southern Rural Water and there are few available
to legitimate water users.
No consideration has been
given to the annual loss of water through evaporation. This has been calculated at 1 metre
per annum. The amount of water needed to ‘top up’ the facility represents
several water allocations. If this water were available, it would be more cost effective
to use it for high-value industries, such as vegetable or flower production for export. |
