Australian Local Government Association

Search for:

Coastal survey report

7 February 2005

Angela Shepherd

Contents

2004-05 National NRM survey of coastal councils

Executive summary

During November and December 2004, the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA), with financial assistance from the Australian Government, undertook a survey of coastal councils. There are around 230 councils who manage Australia's coastline, however there are some issues around what constitutes a coastal council. Some shires may not border the coastline, but the council is responsible for the management of estuary and intertidal areas. It was thought that a sample of 30 councils could provide an insight into:

• the level of awareness of the issues councils are facing in relation to coastal zone management
• the activities councils have undertaken in response to these issues
• council training needs to assist them to manage coastal natural resources
• councils level of awareness and involvement in regional natural resource management (NRM) groups.

By 23 December 2004, 82 responses had been received, with councils in all states and the Northern Territory responding. Almost half of all Queensland coastal councils and 44 per cent of New South Wales coastal councils responded.

A quarter of all Australians live within three kilometres of the coast, and this proportion continues to increase. The survey found that 87 per cent of councils experienced population increases over the last five years and of these, over 60 per cent have experienced annual growth rates of three per cent or more. This massive population influx makes planning and provision of infrastructure and services difficult for many councils.

In addition, 67 per cent of coastal councils reported experiencing increased pressure from tourism over the last five years. For instance, on average, coastal shires in Victoria must plan for their population to increase two and a half fold during peak tourism periods.

The biggest environmental issue coastal councils are dealing with is adequate water supply. Large increases in population over a relatively short period of time have greatly increased demand for resources which has highlighted the inadequacy of water infrastructure development and capacity.

Councils are responding to a range of environmental pressures by developing new planning policies and environmental plans. In addition, many are providing incentives, such as extension services, to help conserve resources. However the main barriers to improving the management of their natural resource base is the lack of adequate funding, trained staff and planners.

Councils were critical of the ad hoc nature of environment grants with few programs providing recurring funding. As such, council staff must continually prepare submissions for funding, a task requiring the use of scarce council resources.

Councils expressed significant demand for training, ranging from basic environmental skills to training in biodiversity conservation mapping. In New South Wales and Queensland, councils were concerned they were unable to keep up to date with changes in legislation such as native vegetation and environmental protection legislation.

Around 90 per cent of councils currently work with other councils in the area. Ninety five per cent of councils knew which regional natural resource management(NRM) group they are in and the majority of those councils actively participated in regional activities. This provides an opportunity to learn from the knowledge and experience of others.

Around 43 per cent of councils believe their regional plan and strategies adequately address the coastal zone management issues the region faces. However, councils expressed concern that NRM groups do not seem to be aware of the extent of the development pressures councils are facing and how this impacts on their natural resources, or appreciate councils need for assistance. This lack of understanding of the problems results in coastal management issues not being given a high enough priority to receive adequate funding through the regional Natural Heritage Trust(NHT) processes. Councils believe the plans focus too highly on inland issues and sometimes plans are too broad to achieve NRM outcomes locally.

Key facts

• Coastal councils are facing significant pressures on their natural resource bases from rising populations and tourism.
• Water supply and quality issues are the primary environmental problems facing coastal councils. Improved infrastructure is needed.
• Councils are undertaking a range of coastal zone management activities, but they require more funding to maintain programs.
• Councils are in urgent need of training for staff working in planning and environmental management areas.
• Most councils are participating in their regional NRM groups, however most do not believe their regional plan adequately addresses their local coastal zone management issues.

Background

Rising development pressures

The natural beauty of our coastline and the many great initiatives undertaken by coastal councils has resulted in record numbers of visitors and people choosing to move to these areas. This huge shift in population creates challenges for councils in a number of areas which can all impact on the environment:

• how to meet lifestyle and housing demands
• how to provide sufficient infrastructure
• changing demographics and their differing needs
• ensuring council planning capacity is sufficient
• ensuring adequate community consultation.

These challenges put huge pressure on the natural resource base of an area. The rapid expansion and lack of readily available and useable scientific information has meant many councils have reacted in an ad hoc manner, particularly in regards to planning, infrastructure provision and protecting the natural resource base.

In order to undertake natural resource management (NRM) activities, councils have drawn significantly on their general revenue. In addition however, councils have also relied on either government grants, such as the Natural Heritage Trust and a number of state and territory government programs. Local governments themselves undertake significant environmental spending. In 2002-03, local government spent $2.6bn on environmental protection activities and $1.5bn on NRM activities¹. In recent years, some councils have added environment levies to their rates to allow them to undertake necessary environment programs.

The ALGA Coastal zone management project

At the November 2004 National General Assembly of Local Government, ALGA launched their coastal zone management project. The project, developed with the assistance of the Australian Government, was designed in response to the rising development pressures facing coastal councils. The project aims to:

• improve the management of Australia's coastline by sharing information and knowledge between local governments and regions
• provide information on the capacity of councils to manage their coastal resources
• obtain information on the resource needs of councils to improve coastal zone management.

There are four components to the project. The first stage was to provide a symposium on integrated coastal zone management to delegates at the 2004 National General Assembly of Local Government. This survey and analysis form the second component. In February and March 2005, ALGA will be undertaking case study analysis of coastal councils around Australia - the third component of the project. The case studies will identify innovative approaches undertaken by councils and will demonstrate what can be achieved though the use of scientific data. The effective use of scientific data is a key to making informed decisions. A variety of councils - small, large, urban and rural, will participate. Fourthly, ALGA is compiling an online information resource for councils and will hold information forums around Australia to promote the outcomes of this project.

The information generated by ALGA's project will inform and assist all spheres of government with future policy formation. ALGA would like to thank all those councils who participated in the survey - information collection and exchange is not possible without your assistance. Councils and other parties interested in managing Australia's coastal resources are encouraged to sign up and participate in the ALGA Coastal zone management discussion group.

Why undertake a survey?

The Intergovernmental Coastal Advisory Group (ICAG) has representatives from the Australian Government, all states and the Northern Territory governments and local government. The group reports to government committees set up under the NRM Ministerial Council. ICAG members share information on coastal issues and initiatives being undertaken in an attempt to better integrate coastal policy making and improve environmental outcomes.

IGAG is close to finalising the implementation plan for the Framework for a National Cooperative Approach to Integrated Coastal Zone Management. The Framework was endorsed by the Natural Resource Ministerial Council in 2003. A number of the priority areas highlighted in the implementation plan centre around core council activities and needs. For example, the need to build the capacity of councils in coastal management and the need to take into account population trends when managing the coastal zone. The information collected in this survey will assist ALGA and the Australian Government in the further development and implementation of the Framework and to identify local government needs in coastal zone management.

ALGA undertook the survey to collect information on councils level of awareness of their natural resource issues, the measures put in place to deal with any pressures and to determine what resources would assist councils to better manage their coastal resources.

With the introduction of the Natural Heritage Trust II (NHT2), the Australian Government, in partnership with the state and territory governments, moved towards regional arrangements for program delivery. As a result, councils can no longer directly apply for NHT funding of environment projects, but rather must work with their regional NRM group.

It is hoped that local government priorities can be addressed by the regional NRM group and that local and regional NRM activities are compatible. The last section of the survey gathered some information on the level of awareness of the regional arrangements by councils and how involved they are in these arrangements.

The survey

The survey was conducted online, accessed through the ALGA website. There were 20 questions which can be found at Appendix A. Paper copies of the survey were distributed at the Integrated Coastal Zone Management symposium held at the 2004 National General Assembly of Local Government. However, respondents were encouraged to fill the survey in on line.

The survey was also promoted through ALGA news through the SeaChange group of councils² and other ALGA contacts. All coastal councils were notified by email of the survey and asked to complete it.

² The SeaChange group of councils was formed following a meeting of concerned council Chief Executive Officers in February 2004. The councils are concerned about rising development pressures in coastal areas. They are undertaking research and holding forums looking at ways to address infrastructure and social issues.

Who responded to the survey?

ALGA aimed to get a sample of 30 councils from around Australia. By the completion date of 23 December, 82 councils had responded to the survey, reflecting a high level of interest and support for the survey. Councils continue to ring asking if it is too late to respond.

Graph 1: Coastal councils who responded to the 2004 survey, by state.

Link: Data source for Graph 1

The response rate was particularly high in Queensland and New South Wales. Around 49 per cent of Queensland's coastal councils responded, along with 44 per cent of NSW coastal councils. A healthy response rate from South Australian was also achieved, particularly from councils close to Adelaide.

Graph 2: The percentage of coastal councils who responded to the survey, by state

Link: Data source for Graph 2

Level of awareness of current and emerging problems

Coastal populations rising rapidly

Around 85 per cent of Australia's population live within 50km of the coastline, and a quarter of all Australians live within three kilometres of the coast³.This places significant pressure on these fragile environments. A booming property market, a healthy tourism industry and Australians desire to live by the sea have resulted in a large influx of residents, both permanent and part-time to coastal shires.

Eighty seven per cent of councils responding to the survey reported that they had experienced an increase in population in the last five years. It was not surprising that all the New South Wales councils and all but three Queensland shires reported rising populations. The influx of people moving to the coast is expected to continue in coming years.

Around 62 per cent of councils who experienced rising populations in the last five years reported annual increases of three per cent or higher. In comparison, Australia's population rose by 1.2 per cent in the year to 30 June 2004, with Queensland experiencing the greatest rise at 2.1 per cent⁴. The large rises in coastal populations have occurred relatively quickly with governments struggling to adequately address the economic, environmental and social impacts such large and rapid change can bring.

Graph 3: Degree of annual population increase experienced by councils

Link: Data source for Graph 3

Of those councils with rising populations, 26 per cent have experienced growth rates greater than 4 per cent per annum. It stands to reason that many councils are struggling to keep pace with the adequate provision of services and infrastructure, particularly when combined with the added demand for additional infrastructure and services required during peak tourism season.

Increased tourism pressure

Of the councils surveyed, 67 per cent are experiencing increased tourism pressure. For example, coastal shires in Victoria have a population, on average, of two and a half times their normal population during peak tourist periods. This places pressure on the natural resources (especially the beaches and sand dunes), the water supply, services and roads. South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland coastal towns nearly double in size and Tasmania and New South Wales coastal towns experience an average of 80-85 per cent increase in population during the peak tourist season. Many coastal towns, particularly those within easy access of larger centres, face significant traffic congestion during this time.

Graph 4: Councils experiencing increased pressure from tourism over the last five years.

Link: Data source for Graph 4

Towns in all states are experiencing the same problems, albeit on a different scale. The top five shires facing the largest increases come from different states. While the towns in Tasmania and South and Western Australia often have lower base populations, a doubling still creates problems for the council as they have a low rate base and income and therefore little financial capacity to respond. Many people move to these areas because they are small and quiet townships. The often competing expectations of new and old residents and tourists need to be effectively managed.

Lack of water infrastructure and pressure on natural resources

The influx of people to coastal towns changes the amenity, lifestyle and physical infrastructure of these towns. Councils were asked to nominate the three biggest impacts on the environment resulting from rising populations. Pressure on the water supply was identified as the primary issue, followed by degradation of sand dunes and beaches and vegetation degradation.

Most coastal towns have not been planned as high growth regions. Water supply is an issue as many small coastal towns do not even have mains water supply. For those towns that do, the infrastructure was not set up to accommodate such large populations as the towns are now servicing.

Interestingly, shires in Queensland and New South Wales also highlighted urban sprawl as one of their biggest environmental impacts, along with erosion, runoff and sedimentation of waterways. This is probably a direct result of higher base populations and a greater demand by part time residents.

Urban sprawl needs to be addressed through community consultation and planning initiatives. Pollution of water ways can be caused by a variety of factors, not least of all a lack of infrastructure in the water cycle and from increased development in close proximity to water courses. Inappropriate development can increase erosion, runoff and sedimentation of waterways. Councils identified increased pressure from invasive species and increased pressure on threatened species habitat as other big impacts on the environment, from rising populations.

Natural resource management (NRM) and planning

Natural resource management covers a wide variety of activities, from biodiversity and native vegetation conservation, to water supply and cycling, landcare activities, dune and estuary management, erosion control, waste management and planning controls.

Planning within councils

Around 83 per cent of councils completing the survey incorporate NRM issues into their strategic plan. This demonstrates that NRM is recognised as important at the highest level of planning within council and is incorporated into council activities. Western Australia led the way, with around 94 per cent of responding councils incorporating NRM into council strategic plans.

Through state and territory planning laws, councils are legally bound to produce long term plans, such as local environment plans. However, 45 per cent of councils surveyed did not believe their current long term plans could adequately deal with the development pressures they were facing. Western Australia and Queensland councils reported higher rates, at 56 per cent, of councils with sufficient long term plans, while councils in other states reported levels below 40 per cent.

Adequate planning instruments allow councils to appropriately engage the community in the development of their shire, provide transparent tools to assist developers and residents to make planning decisions, and can improve the environmental outcomes from planning decisions. However, councils, particularly those in high growth areas, tend to face significant pressure from developers and others with influence when making planning decisions.

In some areas it may be appropriate to form a community coastal advisory group to assist councils with the provision of independent advice. This can reduce conflict, whether real or perceived, over development decisions. Providing councils with adequate resources to undertake appropriate planning activities is urgently required. Involving the community in this process can increase the capacity of the community and improve the implementation of plans.

Changes to council planning and zoning requirements

Councils were asked if they had altered their planning or zoning activities in the last three years in response to increased pressure for development - around 68 per cent of surveyed councils had. Queensland had the highest proportion of councils who have not made any changes (44 per cent).

Graph 5: The proportion of councils who have altered their planning or zoning activities in response to the increased development pressure.

Link: Data source for Graph 5

Councils have undertaken a range of activities to deal with the increased development pressure. The most common response by councils was to develop new planning policies (46 per cent). In a bid to reduce pressure on water cycle infrastructure, 35 per cent of councils who altered their planning or zoning activities, made changes to water management requirements in new residential areas. These requirements may include recycling of grey water and the use of appliances to reduce water use in new houses.

Table 1: How the councils who have altered their planning or zoning activities have responded.

Council response to development pressure	Percentage that undertook the measure
Developed new planning policies	46
Required changes to water management in new residential areas	35
Implemented biodiversity measures	32
Limited the area available for development	30
Improved use of science and processes in undertaking development assessments	30
Released more areas for development	27
Changed the lot size in newly released areas	24
Rezoned areas for green space	16
Introduced an integrated water cycle policy	11
Reduced council green space	2

Local governments have also changed planning and zoning requirements in relation to land use. Councils respond in varying ways to the increased demand for land. For example, 30 per cent of councils limited the area available for development, while 27 per cent released more areas for development. Some councils recognise the importance of the agricultural industry to the shire, in terms of diversified employment, economic development and amenity. As such, some councils have undertaken planning activities setting out areas that are to remain as agricultural farmlands and buffer zones.

Provision of incentives

To encourage their communities to protect and manage their environment and to reduce resource use, 37 per cent of surveyed councils provide incentives. Councils in Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales lead the way, with 56, 50 and 42 per cent of councils, respectively, providing incentives to their community for environmental protection measures.

The provision of Commonwealth and state/territory government funded extension officers has fallen dramatically in recent years. At the same time, the pressure on the natural resource base in coastal areas has significantly increased. Councils are taking on the role of providing technical expertise to fill the gap. The provision of technical expertise was the most common and widespread incentive offered by councils (Table 2), however councils need sufficient funding to provide these extension services. It is important for local governments and their regional NRM groups to form stronger partnerships, and through these partnerships address the provision of technical expertise. As new residents move to coastal areas, it is likely that demand for extension services will continue to increase.

Table 2. The proportion of councils providing each incentive⁵

Incentive	Percentage
Provision of technical experts	31
Financial grants	16
Voluntary conservation covenants	13
Rainwater tanks	12
Rate rebates	11
Conservation management agreements	11
Planning concessions	10

Of the councils providing incentives, 16 per cent provide financial grants, such as for fencing to protect vulnerable areas. Other measures include voluntary conservation agreements, rainwater tank incentives, rate rebates, conservation management agreements and planning concessions. Planning concessions are provided where one part of the property with high conservation value is conserved (such as through a management agreement) while development is allowed on another, low conservation value part of the property.

Only councils in Queensland and Victoria reported providing rate rebates and only the mainland eastern states provide rainwater tank incentives. Councils in Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia provided planning concessions. All other measures, as listed in Table 2, were provided around the country.

Development of environment plans

Around 67 per cent of surveyed councils have an environmental management plan, such as for biodiversity conservation or estuary management. Most of these plans are also being implemented. Environmental plan development is most prevalent in Victoria and New South Wales where 88 and 79 per cent, respectively, of councils have developed an environmental strategy.

Nearly half of all responding councils reported having and implementing an invasive species strategy. The rates differed greatly around the states, however this may be influenced by state government requirements. For instance, 83 per cent of Queensland councils have a strategy. Councils in Queensland are now required by the state government to have regional pest management plans, a process that can assist councils to develop their own local invasive species strategy. Only 15 per cent of South Australian councils reported having such a strategy.

Council resource needs to improve integrated coastal zone management

Insufficient resources

Of the surveyed councils, only 10 per cent reported having sufficient resources to manage their natural assets. By far the biggest constraint identified by councils was a lack of funding. This was followed by both a lack of staff and a lack of appropriately trained staff. Many councils, not just those in coastal areas, have a shortage of planning staff. This is compounded in coastal areas where councils have a high demand for strategic planning and development assessment.

There is a significant need to capacity build councils so they have the necessary skills to both manage their natural resources and to educate and train their community to do so. Councils also identified a lack of scientific information as a barrier to more effective natural resource management. Councils require scientific information at the local scale as well as the regional scale. Councils are hopeful that some of this scientific information can be provided through the catchment groups set up around Australia under the Natural Heritage Trust.

Seventy four per cent of councils reported experiencing difficulties in managing rising populations or tourist numbers. Once again, the main barriers identified were a lack of money and a shortage of planners. A lack of resources to enforce regulations, inappropriate expectations of landholders including their lack of awareness of planning issues, and pressure from developers arising from the profit motive were other significant issues for councils.

It is difficult to get the community involved in planning processes and environmental protection if they do not understand the issues, if they are part-time residents or if they are new to the area. Better environmental outcomes are possible if the capacity of the community to participate is increased. Support from the community for council actions can increase volunteerism within the community.

A lack of planning staff can result in less than optimal development. High demand for infrastructure such as water, sewerage and roads, and services such as health facilities, places increased pressure on planning staff.

The profit motive has seen many people benefit from development in coastal areas and the pressure these people, and potential developers place on councils can be significant. Councils need good planning tools, developed with strong community support, to ensure planning decisions are transparent. Transparency also assists developers with their decision making.

Changes in government funding

In recent years, local government has had to find more funding to undertake environmental programs. In 2002-03, government subsidies and grants for local government environmental protection activities comprised just over 5 per cent of local government environment revenue. This was down from 21 per cent two years earlier. Similarly, government funding for local government NRM activities was 4 per cent of NRM revenue in 2002-03, down from 8 per cent two years earlier⁶.

Councils have a high reliance on other funding sources to undertake environmental protection activities, with 76 per cent of responding councils receiving specific grants from other sources, primarily other spheres of government. The main two sources are the NHT program and state government programs. Other sources were catchment groups, Australian Government programs (other than NHT) and the local Water Authority. In particular, councils highlighted coastcare and landcare type programs as being critical. A popular source of funding identified in the survey was the Coasts and Clean Seas program, however this program no longer exists.

The main criticism councils had was the ad hoc nature of grants. Most programs were for a single year or project, and councils are continually forced to apply for program funding. This process consumes precious resources. In fact, the processes needed to acquire funding for coastal zone projects may even limit councils ability to apply for funding to manage their natural resource base.

At the time of writing, it is unlikely that councils have been able to access replacement funding under the NHT as most regions are still at the stage of developing regional plans and investment strategies.

Training for staff required

Around 80 per cent of responding councils highlighted a definite need for training. The three main areas they identified were improved planning, a greater understanding of legislation, responsibilities and prosecution powers, and training in coastal processes. Councils have a range of skill levels and capacity. Small and remote coastal councils identified a severe lack of environmental management skills and large high growth councils are seeking to build on skills they already have, for example, in land use planning and the capacity of the environment to house more people.

High growth councils identified a need for biodiversity conservation mapping, training to assist development assessment staff and better evaluation skills. Councils indicated they felt that there was little point in undertaking extensive planning exercises if the council does not have the resources and staff to implement the plans. As part of the planning process some councils need help to improve their community consultation processes.

Both Queensland and New South Wales councils called for a clarification of responsibilities and enforcement powers between the spheres of government. Training to assist staff to keep up to date with legislation changes was identified as a priority by a number of councils. The rate of change in native vegetation and environment protection laws has been extensive in recent years and councils need to ensure the skills of staff remain relevant.

Training in coastal processes will assist councils with planning. The risks of climate change on coastal terrestrial, intertidal and estuary biodiversity was highlighted and is likely to increase in importance. Field work and experience in interpreting quality indicators and attendance at coastal management fora were also highlighted as important.

Whilst the above mostly relate to training of council staff, a number of responses noted that councillors often have limited knowledge of the environment and planning and have a lack of NRM skills. Elected officials require some basic training to assist their decision making.

One way to increase coastal zone management knowledge within council is to employ a dedicated environment or coastal officer. Fifty five per cent of responding councils do so. The majority of these people are funded by council, out of general revenue. Those councils with an environment levy are able to employ a greater range of skilled staff to manage their natural resources. Other sources of funding for either full-time or part-time staff were through catchment groups, NHT funding and state government programs.

Council involvement in regional NRM activities

With the introduction of the second stage of the NHT program, the Australian Government moved the focus of the program to regional implementation groups. Prior to this, councils could apply directly to the Australian Government for funding. Councils must now work with their regional NRM group to ensure local priorities are included in regional plans. These priorities are then eligible to be funded. Through this process, local and regional groups can work together to improve environmental outcomes.

By working together, councils can improve their NRM skills and learn from the experiences of other councils. The survey found that 90 per cent of councils work with other councils in their area on NRM issues. It also found that 95 per cent of councils were aware of what NRM group they belong to, and 74 per cent of councils believe their local and regional environment activities are compatible.

Nine per cent of councils believe the NRM activities undertaken at a regional scale are not compatible with NRM activities undertaken at a local scale. It may be possible to address this issue on a state by state basis, as all responses came from Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland. Those councils who did not know what the regional activities were, also came from these three States.

Around 83 per cent of councils are working with their regional NRM group on a range of activities. Seventy per cent of councils attend meetings and workshops held by their relevant regional NRM group. Other activities where councils worked with their NRM groups included project implementation, steering groups, strategic planning and on ground works.

Those councils not involved with their regional NRM group cited a number of reasons, including a lack of capacity, not enough funding and the regional planning processes were not seen as worthwhile. Other than resource constraints, reasons given included that the NRM group is not established enough to participate at this stage, they are in dispute as to which NRM group they belong to and council environment priorities are not included as priorities by the NRM group.

Forty three per cent of responding councils believe their regional plan and strategies adequately address the coastal zone management issues they face. The main reasons given were the lack of recognition of the development, population and land use issues and pressures councils face. Most plans focus on inland issues. In addition, it is difficult for regional groups to prioritise issues and actions from a range of councils, therefore regional plans can sometimes be too broad to achieve local objectives.

Councils believe some regional groups do not understand coastal issues and hence do not assign coastal issues a high priority during the planning process. Councils also believe some regional NRM groups do not fully understand the resource constraints councils are under and plans do not prioritise urban issues such as vegetation clearance, stormwater management and coastal erosion.

Conclusion

Middle (2004)⁷ identified a range of barriers to good policy making, including:

• lack of integration
• inadequate or inappropriate public participation and involvement
• lack of resources for both policy making and implementation
• lack of appropriate capacity and skills
• a shift in emphasis by key agencies from a local to regional scale.

This survey of coastal councils has identified all of the above to be of concern to councils. These barriers obviously impact on councils ability to develop good coastal management policy. In the survey, respondents identified a need for more resources, better planning processes and a greater recognition by funders, such as the regional NRM groups, of the coastal zone management issues they face. Coastal issues need to be given a higher priority in order to receive NHT funding.

Ironically, many regions rely on tourism and development for prosperity. Many people move to or visit coastal areas for lifestyle and amenity reasons. By not preserving the natural resource base, these assets can be lost, which would have significant economic costs to coastal shires.

Councils are mostly aware of the issues they face, however many lack the capacity to adequately deal with the development pressures. Given the way NHT funding is now delivered, it is essential that all groups work together to improve the capacity of councils and their community to better manage coastal resources. Local and regional leaders need to work together to improve the environmental outcomes that can be achieved.

Contact

Rosemary James
Environment/NRM Policy
Australian Local Government Association
Phone: 02 6122 9433   
Email: rosemary.james@alga.asn.au

Download report

A copy of the report is available for download in PDF format. Please conatct ALGA is you require a text version.

Download Coastal survey report (PDF 199 kb)