great lakes local government area · coastal public safety risk assessment: great lakes local...

watersafety.nsw.gov.auA NSW Government water safety initiative

Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water Safety

Black Spots Fund

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment Great Lakes Local Government Area

June 2016

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment: Great Lakes Local Government Area

Page ii

© Surf Life Saving New South Wales, Belrose 2015 All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer

This work is copyright. However, material from this publication may be copied or published by State

Government agencies without the permission of Surf Life Saving NSW (SLSNSW) on the condition that the

meaning of the material is not altered and SLSNSW is acknowledged as the source of the material. Any other

persons or bodies wishing to use the material must seek permission. The views expressed herein do not

necessarily reflect the views of the NSW Government.

Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water Safety Blacks Spots Fund


Page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. VIII

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. X

1 INTRODUCTION, SCOPE & CONTEXT ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 CONTEXT AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 4

1.4 DEFINITION OF TERMS .................................................................................................................................. 5

1.5 PROJECT TEAM / AUTHORS ............................................................................................................................ 7

2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 8

2.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 SITE IDENTIFICATION .................................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................. 13

2.4 BEACH HAZARD RATINGS AND OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 15

2.5 ABSAMP TYPES AND RATINGS .................................................................................................................... 16

2.6 ABSAMP BEACH TYPE CHARACTERISTIC OVERVIEW AND HAZARDS .................................................................... 19

2.6.1 Rhythmic Bar and Beach ............................................................................................................... 19

2.6.2 Transverse Bar and Rip ................................................................................................................. 19

2.6.3 Low Tide Terrace ........................................................................................................................... 20

2.6.4 Reflective....................................................................................................................................... 21

2.6.5 Rock Platforms and Rocky Coasts ................................................................................................. 22

2.7 FACILITY VISITATION RATES (FVR) ................................................................................................................ 23

2.7.1 Facility Visitation Rating (FVR) Reference Tables ......................................................................... 23

2.8 FACILITIES AUDIT ....................................................................................................................................... 28

2.9 POPULATION, DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM................................................................................................... 29

2.9.1 Population Statistics ..................................................................................................................... 29

2.9.2 Development Plans in Great Lakes................................................................................................ 30

2.9.3 Tourism Information ..................................................................................................................... 32

2.9.4 Beach Usage Statistics .................................................................................................................. 35

2.9.5 Drowning Incidents ....................................................................................................................... 40

2.9.6 Emergency Callouts ....................................................................................................................... 43

2.10 COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTATION ......................................................................................................... 46

3 RISK ASSESSMENT FINDINGS .................................................................................................................. 49

3.1 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY (INHERENT GROSS RISK) ...................................................................................... 49

3.1.1 Action Planning Priority Index ....................................................................................................... 49

3.1.2 Australian Beach Safety and Management Program ................................................................... 49

3.1.3 Local Population Rating ................................................................................................................ 51

3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction Rating ............................................................................................... 52

3.1.5 Access Rating ................................................................................................................................ 54

3.1.6 Action Planning Priority Score ....................................................................................................... 55

3.2 OVERVIEW OF PRINCIPAL RISK TREATMENTS ................................................................................................... 63


Page iv

3.2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 63

3.2.2 Hierarchy of Risk Treatments (Controls) ....................................................................................... 63

3.2.3 Education and Awareness Programs ............................................................................................ 64

3.2.4 Safety Signage .............................................................................................................................. 72

3.2.5 Emergency Marker System ........................................................................................................... 84

3.2.6 Access Infrastructure and Ongoing Capital Works/Maintenance Programs ................................ 85

3.2.7 Public Rescue Equipment .............................................................................................................. 91

3.2.8 System of Supervision ................................................................................................................... 94

4 EMERGENCY RESPONSE ......................................................................................................................... 99

4.1 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTING ................................................................................................. 99

4.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACONS ............................................................................................................... 101

4.3 EMERGENCY SERVICE RESPONSE ................................................................................................................. 102

4.4 COMMUNICATIONS .................................................................................................................................. 104

4.5 JOINT EMERGENCY RESPONSE (LIFESAVERS AND LIFEGUARDS) .......................................................................... 106

5 MONITOR AND REVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 107

6 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 108

APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Access and Signage Schedule APPENDIX B - Risk Register and Treatment Plan APPENDIX C - Public Rescue Equipment APPENDIX D - Facilities Audit APPENDIX E - Coverage Maps APPENDIX F - Stakeholder Engagement APPENDIX G - Life Saving Service Level Calculator


Page v

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1.1 THE INTERNATIONAL LIFE SAVING FEDERATION DROWNING CHAIN. ................................................................... 2

FIGURE 2.2.1: GREAT LAKES LGA – ASSESSED LOCATIONS SITE INSPECTION (MAP 1 & 2). ....................................................... 9

FIGURE 2.2.2: GREAT LAKES LGA – ASSESSED LOCATIONS SITE INSPECTION (MAP 3). ........................................................... 10

FIGURE 2.3.1: RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS (STANDARDS AUSTRALIA, 2009). ..................................................................... 14

FIGURE 2.6.1 ILLUSTRATION OF A RHYTHMIC BAR & BEACH. ............................................................................................. 19

FIGURE 2.6.2: ILLUSTRATION OF A TRANSVERSE BAR AND RIP. ........................................................................................... 19

FIGURE 2.6.3: ILLUSTRATION OF A LOW TIDE TERRACE. .................................................................................................... 20

FIGURE 2.6.4: ILLUSTRATION OF A REFLECTIVE BEACH. ..................................................................................................... 21

FIGURE 2.9.1: ILLUSTRATION OF THE TUNCURRY NORTH MASTER PLAN (NORTH TUNCURRY, 2014). ....................................... 30

FIGURE 2.9.2: ILLUSTRATION OF THE SEVEN MILE BEACH DEVELOPMENT. ........................................................................... 31

FIGURE 2.9.3 THE INTERNATIONAL LIFE SAVING FEDERATION DROWNING CHAIN. ................................................................. 32

FIGURE 2.9.4 AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE STATISTICS RECORDED BY SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB VOLUNTEERS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA

(JULY 2010 TO JUNE 2015). ............................................................................................................................... 35

FIGURE 2.9.5 RESCUE STATISTICS RECORDED BY SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB VOLUNTEERS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO JUNE

2015). ............................................................................................................................................................ 36

FIGURE 2.9.6 FIRST AID STATISTICS RECORDED BY SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB VOLUNTEERS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO

JUNE 2015). .................................................................................................................................................... 37

FIGURE 2.9.7 PREVENTION STATISTICS RECORDED BY SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB VOLUNTEERS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO

JUNE 2015). .................................................................................................................................................... 37

FIGURE 2.9.8 AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE STATISTICS RECORDED BY PAID LIFEGUARDS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO

JUNE 2015). .................................................................................................................................................... 38

FIGURE 2.9.9 RESCUE STATISTICS RECORDED BY PAID LIFEGUARDS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO JUNE 2015). ........... 38

FIGURE 2.9.10 FIRST AID STATISTICS RECORDED BY PAID LIFEGUARDS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO JUNE 2015). ....... 39

FIGURE 2.9.11 PREVENTION STATISTICS RECORDED BY PAID LIFEGUARDS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (JULY 2010 TO JUNE 2015).... 39

FIGURE 2.9.12 GREAT LAKES LGA – DROWNING AND VICTIM POSTCODE. ........................................................................... 42

FIGURE 2.10.1: PROJECT BLUEPRINT FLYER.................................................................................................................... 47

FIGURE 3.2.1: DON’T PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE™ ........................................................................................................ 65

FIGURE 3.2.2: SURVIVE A RIP....................................................................................................................................... 65

FIGURE 3.2.3: OLD 4 NEW ......................................................................................................................................... 65

FIGURE 3.2.4: SWIM BETWEEN THE FLAGS. .................................................................................................................... 65

FIGURE 3.2.5 RECREATIONAL FISHING ALLIANCE ROCK FISHING SCHOOL. .............................................................................. 66

FIGURE 3.2.6 GREAT LAKES ADVOCATE. ........................................................................................................................ 67

FIGURE 3.2.7 SURF SAFETY PRESENTATION AT NEWPORT BEACH (PITTWATER LGA). ............................................................. 69

FIGURE 3.2.8: AN EXAMPLE OF RIP CURRENT SIGN ON PUBLIC AMENITY BLOCKS. .................................................................... 69

FIGURE 3.2.9: EXAMPLE OF A NATIONAL PARKS VISITOR INFORMATION ............................................................................... 69

FIGURE 3.2.10: LARGE ACCOMMODATION PROVIDER AT FORSTER MAIN BEACH. .................................................................. 70

FIGURE 3.2.11: COUNCIL ACCESS SIGN. ........................................................................................................................ 72



FIGURE 3.2.14: CAUTION – SAND EROSION. .................................................................................................................. 72

FIGURE 3.2.15: NATIONAL PARKS ACCESS SIGN. ............................................................................................................. 73

FIGURE 3.2.16: NATIONAL PARKS SAFETY SIGN – UNSTABLE GROUNDS. .............................................................................. 73

FIGURE 3.2.17: CROWN LANDS SAFETY SIGN ON THE TUNCURRY BREAK WALL. ..................................................................... 73

FIGURE 3.2.18: ALCOHOL SIGN THAT COULD BE PROHIBITED. ............................................................................................. 75

FIGURE 3.2.19: SIGNAGE THAT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE REMOVED. ............................................................................. 75


Page vi

FIGURE 3.2.20: SIGNAGE AT BURGESS BEACH. ............................................................................................................... 76

FIGURE 3.2.21: AN EXAMPLE OF RIP EDUCATION SIGNAGE. ............................................................................................... 76

FIGURE 3.2.22: EXAMPLE OF ROCK FISHING SIGNAGE. ..................................................................................................... 77

FIGURE 3.2.23: PROPOSED LOCATION SIGN. .................................................................................................................. 77

FIGURE 3.2.24 BOATING SAFETY INFORMATION. ............................................................................................................ 78

FIGURE 3.2.25 BAR CROSSING AT WALLIS LAKE ON A CALM DAY......................................................................................... 78

FIGURE 3.2.26: AN EXAMPLE OF A SET OF LIGHTS USED BY THE ROYAL NATIONAL LIFEBOAT INSTITUATION FOR SAFETY REASONS IN

REGARDS TO TIDAL CHANGES. ............................................................................................................................... 79

FIGURE 3.2.27: EXAMPLE OF TEMPORARY SIGNAGE DIRECTING PATRONS TO THE PATROLLED LOCATION. .................................... 79

FIGURE 3.2.28: EXAMPLE OF EMERGENCY MARKER SIGN. ................................................................................................. 84

FIGURE 3.2.29: FORMAL ACCESS AT BOOMERANG BEACH................................................................................................. 85

FIGURE 3.2.30: INFORMAL ACCESS AT BENNETTS HEAD. ................................................................................................... 85

FIGURE 3.2.31: AN EXAMPLE OF ACCESS REDIRECTION AT ONE MILE BEACH. ....................................................................... 86

FIGURE 3.2.32: EVIDENCE OF TYRE MARKS ON A NON PERMITTED 4WD BEACH. ................................................................... 87

FIGURE 3.2.33: TUNCURRY ROCK POOL. ....................................................................................................................... 88

FIGURE 3.2.34: THE LITTLE RIPPER LIFESAVER UAV CURRENTLY BEING TRIALLED IN NSW. ..................................................... 93

FIGURE 4.1.1: SUGGESTED EMERGENCY 'TRIPLE ZERO' INFORMATION FOR SIGNAGE. .............................................................. 99

FIGURE 4.1.2: ‘EMERGENCY +’ APPLICATION ................................................................................................................ 100

FIGURE 4.2.1: EXAMPLE OF A MOBILE EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACON ON A BEACH. ............................................................ 101

FIGURE 4.3.1: EMERGENCY SERVICES LOCATED EAST OF THE PRINCES HIGHWAY IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA............................... 103

FIGURE 4.4.1: SIGNAL STRENGTH OF THE FORSTER REPEATER. ......................................................................................... 104

FIGURE 4.4.2: SIGNAL STRENGTH OF THE PACIFIC PALMS REPEATER. ................................................................................. 104

FIGURE 4.4.3: SIGNAL STRENGTH OF THE SEAL ROCKS REPEATER. ..................................................................................... 105

FIGURE 4.4.4: SIGNAL STRENGTH OF THE HAWKS NEST REPEATER. ................................................................................... 105


Page vii

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1.4.1: DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS......................................................................................................................... 5

TABLE 2.2.1: ASSESSED LOCATIONS AND ASSESSMENT DATES. ............................................................................................ 11

TABLE 2.4.1: ABSAMP BEACH HAZARD RATINGS. ......................................................................................................... 15

TABLE 2.4.2: BEACH HAZARD RATING CALCULATION MATRICES FOR WAVE DOMINATE BEACHES. ............................................... 15

TABLE 2.5.1: ABSAMP BEACH HAZARD RATINGS – GREAT LAKES LGA. ............................................................................. 16

TABLE 2.7.1: TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT AND NATURAL HAZARDS RATING FOR RESERVES – NON BEACH ENVIRONMENTS. ................ 23

TABLE 2.7.2: TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT RATINGS FOR BEACHES. ............................................................................................ 24

TABLE 2.7.3: TYPICAL POPULATION USE RATING FOR A FACILITY. ......................................................................................... 24

TABLE 2.7.4: SUGGESTED FREQUENCY USE RATING FOR A FACILITY. .................................................................................... 24

TABLE 2.7.5: FACILITY VISITATION RATES – FOR ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ................................................................................ 24

TABLE 2.8.1: TOP 10 MOST COMMON COASTAL FACILITIES. .............................................................................................. 28

TABLE 2.8.2: TOP 10 LOCATIONS FOR FACILITIES. ............................................................................................................ 28

TABLE 2.9.1 GREAT LAKES POPULATION DATA (ABS, 2011). ............................................................................................ 29

TABLE 2.9.2 POPULATION COUNT OF COASTAL STATE SUBURBS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA (ABS, 2011). ................................... 29

TABLE 2.9.3 TOURISM DATA AND VISITOR INFORMATION FOR GREAT LAKES LGA. ................................................................. 32

TABLE 2.9.4 DOMESTIC OVERNIGHT VISITOR INFORMATION FOR GREAT LAKES LGA. ............................................................. 32

TABLE 2.9.5 DOMESTIC DAY TRIP VISITOR INFORMATION FOR GREAT LAKES LGA. ................................................................. 33

TABLE 2.9.6 INTERNATIONAL VISITORS INFORMATION FOR GREAT LAKES LGA. ..................................................................... 33

TABLE 2.9.7 ACCOMMODATION PROVIDERS WITH DIRECT COASTAL ACCESS IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. ...................................... 34

TABLE 2.9.8 VOLUNTEER SURF LIFE SAVING TOTAL PREVENTATIVE ACTIONS AND RESCUES FOR BEACHES IN GREAT LAKES LGA ..... 39

TABLE 2.9.9 LIFEGUARD SERVICES TOTAL PREVENTATIVE ACTIONS AND RESCUES FOR BEACHES IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. ............ 40

TABLE 2.9.10 DROWNING INCIDENTS FROM 01/07/04 TO 30/06/15 IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. .......................................... 40

TABLE 2.9.11 EMERGENCY CALLOUTS THROUGH THE SRES FROM 01/01/08 TO 30/06/15 IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. ............. 43

TABLE 3.1.1 ABSAMP MODAL RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ......................................................................... 49

TABLE 3.1.2 LOCAL POPULATION RATING DESCRIPTORS. .................................................................................................... 51

TABLE 3.1.3 LOCAL POPULATION RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ........................................................................ 51

TABLE 3.1.4 HUMAN/ACTIVITY INTERACTION DESCRIPTORS. ............................................................................................. 52

TABLE 3.1.5 HUMAN/ACTIVITY INTERACTION RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ....................................................... 52

TABLE 3.1.6 ACCESS RATING DESCRIPTORS. .................................................................................................................... 54

TABLE 3.1.7 ACCESS RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ........................................................................................ 54

TABLE 3.1.8 SUMMARY OF ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY CALCULATIONS FOR EACH ASSESSED LOCATION. ..................................... 55

TABLE 3.1.9: KEY TO LAND MANAGEMENT OF LOCATIONS. ................................................................................................ 57

TABLE 3.1.10 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY SCORES FOR ASSESSED LOCATIONS. ..................................................................... 57

TABLE 3.2.1: EXAMPLES OF EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAMS. ............................................................................... 64

TABLE 3.2.2 SUMMARY TABLE OF AQUATIC AND RECREATIONAL SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GREAT LAKES COUNCIL. ......... 80

TABLE 3.2.3: SUMMARY TABLE OF AQUATIC AND RECREATIONAL SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE

SERVICE. .......................................................................................................................................................... 81

TABLE 3.2.4: ACCESS PROVISION WITHIN LANDS MANAGED BY GREAT LAKES COUNCIL. .......................................................... 88

TABLE 3.2.5: ACCESS PROVISION WITHIN LANDS MANAGED BY THE NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. ............................ 89

TABLE 3.2.6 AN OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC RESCUE EQUIPMENT (PRE) (BRADSTREET, ET AL., 2012). ............................................ 91

TABLE 3.2.7 PRIORITY ORDER FOR LIFE RINGS. ................................................................................................................ 92

TABLE 3.2.8 VOLUNTEER LIFESAVING SERVICES IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. .......................................................................... 95

TABLE 3.2.9 PAID LIFEGUARD SERVICES IN THE GREAT LAKES LGA. .................................................................................... 96

TABLE 4.3.1 COASTAL EMERGENCY SERVICE LOCATIONS FOR GREAT LAKES LGA (<10KM FROM THE COAST). .......................... 102

TABLE 4.4.1: KEY TO RADIO COVERAGE STRENGTH. ........................................................................................................ 104


Page viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report contains findings and treatment options which align with current International and Australian

standards, guidelines and best practice risk management processes. The report contains information specific

to locations under the authority of Great Lakes Council, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and Crown

Lands.

These locations include (north to south):

1. Nine Mile Beach 26. Blueys Beach

2. Tuncurry Beach 27. Blueys Head

3. Tuncurry Rock Pool 28. Danger Point

4. Forster Main Beach 29. Bald Head

5. Second Head 30. Sandbar / Cellito Beach

6. Pebbly Beach 31. Number Six Beach

7. The Tanks 32. Number Five Beach

8. Bennett’s Head 33. Number Four Beach

9. One Mile Beach 34. Number Three Beach

10. Burgess Beach 35. Number Two Beach

11. Cape Hawke Headland 36. Number One Beach

12. McBrides Beach 37. Seal Rocks Point

13. Cape Hawke North Beach 38. Boat Beach

14. Cape Hawke South Beach 39. Sugarloaf Point

15. Janies Corner 40. Lighthouse Beach

16. Seven Mile Beach 41. Treachery Head

17. Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 42. Treachery Beach

18. Lindeman Cove 43. Yagon Head

19. Yes I Know Rock 44. Submarine / Fiona / Yagon Beach

20. Elizabeth Beach 45. Big Gibber Headland

21. Shelly Beach 46. Mungo Beach

22. Seagull Point 47. Dark Point North Beach

23. Charlotte Head 48. Dark Point / Little Gibber

24. Boomerang Beach 49. Bennett’s Beach

25. Boomerang Point 50. Yacaaba Headland


Page ix

Activities/Facilities

The Great Lakes Local Government Area (LGA) is a popular destination which sees year round public usage and

recreational activity, including swimming, surfing (including all surfcraft), fishing, snorkelling/diving, boating,

and walking.

A number of facilities support coastal usage and activities including well maintained car parks and beach

access, lifeguard and lifesaving supervision, coastal walks, a number of public amenity blocks, BBQs, and picnic

tables.

Hazards/Risks

The Great Lakes LGA has a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the

area. These are outlined in detail in ‘Appendix B’.

Based on the risk assessment in ‘Appendix B’, the following hazards have been rated with the greatest

inherent risk for the Great Lakes LGA:

Strong currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type

Waves/waves overwashing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells

Inshore holes/drop off/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type

Slippery rocks/uneven surfaces: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action

Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type

Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement

Cliffs/dangerous access: As a result of coastal geography

Boating traffic/collision: As a result of human interaction

It has been identified that the hazards listed above pose risk to the following types of recreational users:

Strong currents/rip currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users

Waves/waves overwashing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users

Inshore holes/drop off/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen

Slippery rocks/uneven surfaces: Fishermen, rock platform users

Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users

Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen

Cliffs/dangerous access: Fishermen, walkers, sight seers

Boating traffic/collision: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters

Existing Risk Treatments

Land Managers in partnership with a number of other organisations have implemented the following risk

treatment initiatives within the Great Lakes LGA:

o System of supervision

o Education and awareness programs

o Public rescue equipment

o Safety signage


Page x

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Please note:

o The below recommendations are provided as options for guidance only and will not be binding to the Land Manager.

o The below recommendations are in no particular order in regards to prioritisation.

o Further explanation to the recommendations should also be referenced and can be found on the corresponding pages.

o Some treatment options may be relevant for two or more agencies.

Recommendation 1

Great Lakes Council should consider implementing the following risk treatment options:

Strategic Coordination:

1.1 Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Great Lakes Local Government Area

e.g. Nine Mile Beach (Tuncurry) and Seven Mile Beach, should consider the impact of increased

coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue

equipment and supervision. (p.31)

1.2 Coastal usage and incident data (e.g. drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard

statistics) should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk

treatments for coastal safety. (p.45)

1.3 Land Managers in the Great Lakes Local Government Area should meet with Surf Life Saving Lower

North Coast and other related coastal safety agencies as an effective forum which raises safety issues

and implements coastal safety strategies. It is encouraged that the treatment options found in this

report be addressed as part of this meeting. After an initial meeting, participants are encouraged to

meet at least twice a year, before and after the surf life saving season. (p.48)

1.4 As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using

a staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence. (p.62)

Education:

1.5 Education and awareness programs within the Great Lakes Local Government Area should continue to

be implemented, reviewed and supported. Land Managers and key stakeholder groups who may not

have the expertise to implement educational programs should approach peak water safety

organisations to assist in delivery. (p.71)

1.6 Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are

recognised by the aquatic industry (e.g. http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/). (p.71)

1.7 Land Managers should ensure that patrolled locations and surf safety information is promoted

through any websites, specific promotional material, newsletters and social media pages. (p.71)

1.8 Peak coastal water safety agencies currently provide surf education to local schools and community

groups upon request. Great Lakes Council should continue to work with these agencies to promote

these programs and encourage enhanced participation at a local and regional level. (p.71)


Page xi

1.9 Surf safety information, should be strategically placed in visual form at various coastal locations.

Specific examples can be referenced in the report. (p.71)

1.10 Approach tourism and holiday rental real estate organisations with the aim of distributing

standardised surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers) to all coastal accommodation providers.

Collateral could also be made available at the Visitor Information Centres in Forster and Tea Gardens

and at local shops such as newsagents or bakeries. (p.71)

1.11 Land Managers should assist peak water safety organisations to promote existing educational

programs encouraging rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets. (p.71)

Safety Signage:

1.12 Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should

be implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and

upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing

signs into a single sign (less signs), sign relocation or the removal of unnecessary signage. (p.82)

1.13 Existing access signage that does not meet a consistent adopted style should be replaced through

natural attrition. (p.82)

1.14 As the majority of access locations lead to unpatrolled sections of beaches ‘rip current’ educational

signage should be implemented at main car parks or at high usage access areas. The sign should

inform beachgoers of how to identify a rip current and what options to take to escape the rip current.

(p.82)

1.15 Signage that encourages rock fishermen to wear lifejackets can assist peak water safety agencies in

promoting this key safety message. Specific signs relating to rock fishing could be implemented at

popular rock platforms / headlands and break walls. A specific example of this type of sign is outlined

in the main report. (p.82)

1.16 Great Lakes Council should approach the Roads and Maritime Service to implement specific boat

safety signage (outlined in the report) at all boat ramp locations. (p.83)

Access:

1.17 Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than

informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage

needed. (p.90)

1.18 Informal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should be considered for redirection or consolidation,

in order to promote/facilitate the use of formal access. (p.90)

1.19 Land Managers should ensure all emergency service gates that lead to coastal locations are well

known to emergency services, lifeguarding/lifesaving services and that key personnel should be

provided with keys. (p.90)


Page xii

1.20 In some instances CoastSafe Assessors noticed tyre marks on beaches / sections of beaches that do

not permit 4WD. This was seen on Seven Mile Beach, Mungo Beach and Tuncurry Beach. Land

Managers should continue to ensure that strategies are put in place and monitored to deter access.

(p.91)

1.21 Following the completion of studies in relation to the Tuncurry Rock Pool area, Great Lakes Council

should review and implement the findings to ensure that inexperienced swimmers and / or children

aren’t swept out beyond the enclosure during periods of hazardous conditions e.g. strong outgoing

tidal currents. (p.91)

Supervision/Surveillance:

1.22 Great Lakes Council should explore the means to fund the expansion of the lifeguard service at

Forster Main Beach to provide supervision every day (weekdays) from December to February in

addition to the autumn and spring services already provided. (p.98)

1.23 A lifeguard service at Tuncurry should be strongly considered when the proposed large development

at North Tuncurry has been finalised. (p.98)

1.24 The level of lifeguarding services provided (staffing levels, operational dates, patrol hours and

locations) should be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure the most suitable and effective service is

provided. (p.98)

Emergency Response:

1.25 In consultation with the Local Emergency Management Committee, Land Managers have an

opportunity to promote the ‘Emergency +’ smart phone application throughout the local community.

(p.100)

1.26 Emergency Response Beacon technology should be considered for Tuncurry Beach, Boomerang Beach

and ‘The Ruins’ at the southern end of Seven Mile Beach. (p.101)

1.27 When Land Managers and tourism agencies promote the coastline i.e. coastal walks, people should be

aware that phone reception may be very limited in some areas. The use of personal locater beacons

could also be encouraged. (p.105)

1.28 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Lower North Coast Branch Duty

Officers/Support Operations, Great Lakes Lifeguards and the local emergency services once a year

before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.106)

Monitor & Review:

1.29 In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure

the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been

implemented and where future funding opportunities can be directed. (p.107)


Page xiii

1.30 All drowning prevention strategies have the opportunity to be documented and incorporated into the

relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management

area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.107)

Recommendation 2

The National Parks and Wildlife Service should consider implementing the following risk treatment options:


2.1 Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Great Lakes Local Government Area

e.g. Nine Mile Beach (Tuncurry) and Seven Mile Beach, should consider the impact of increased

coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue

equipment and supervision. (p.31)

2.2 Coastal usage and incident data (e.g. drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard

statistics) should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk

treatments for coastal safety. (p.45)






2.4 As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using

a staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence. (p.62)

Education:

2.5 Education and awareness programs within the Great Lakes Local Government Area should continue to

be implemented, reviewed and supported. Land Managers and key stakeholder groups who may not

have the expertise to implement educational programs should approach peak water safety

organisations to assist in delivery. (p.71)

2.6 Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are

recognised by the aquatic industry (e.g. http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/). (p.71)

2.7 Land Managers should ensure that patrolled locations and surf safety information is promoted

through any websites, specific promotional material, newsletters and social media pages. (p.71)

2.8 Surf safety information, should be strategically placed in visual form at various coastal locations.

Specific examples can be referenced in the report. (p.71)

2.9 Land Managers should assist peak water safety organisations to promote existing educational

programs encouraging rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets. (p.71)


Page xiv

Safety Signage:

2.10 Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should

be implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and

upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing

signs into a single sign (less signs), sign relocation or the removal of unnecessary signage. (p.82)

2.11 As the majority of access locations lead to unpatrolled sections of beaches ‘rip current’ educational

signage should be implemented at main car parks or at high usage access areas. The sign should

inform beachgoers of how to identify a rip current and what options to take to escape the rip current.

(p.82)

2.12 Signage that encourages rock fishermen to wear lifejackets can assist peak water safety agencies in

promoting this key safety message. Specific signs relating to rock fishing could be implemented at

popular rock platforms / headlands and break walls. A specific example of this type of sign is outlined

in the main report. (p.82)

Access:

2.13 Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than

informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage

needed. (p.90)

2.14 Informal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should be considered for redirection or consolidation,

in order to promote/facilitate the use of formal access. (p.90)

2.15 Land Managers should ensure all emergency service gates that lead to coastal locations are well

known to emergency services, lifeguarding/lifesaving services and that key personnel should be

provided with keys. (p.90)

2.16 The National Parks and Wildlife Service should hold discussions with the operators of Treachery Camp

in regards to providing them with keys to be able to gain entry to the emergency vehicle access at the

middle of Treachery Beach for emergency purposes.(p.90)

2.17 In some instances CoastSafe Assessors noticed tyre marks on beaches / sections of beaches that do

not permit 4WD. This was seen on Seven Mile Beach, Mungo Beach and Tuncurry Beach. Land

Managers should continue to ensure that strategies are put in place and monitored to deter access.

(p.91)

Public Rescue Equipment

2.18 Land Managers should consider implementing life rings at the proposed locations identified in

‘Appendix C’. The Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational

Fishing Alliance of NSW will be able to provide guidance on costings, suppliers and ongoing

maintenance. (p.93)


Page xv

Emergency Response:

2.19 In consultation with the Local Emergency Management Committee, Land Managers have an

opportunity to promote the ‘Emergency +’ smart phone application throughout the local community.

(p. 100)



2.21 When Land Managers and tourism agencies promote the coastline i.e. coastal walks, people should be

aware that phone reception may be very limited in some areas. The use of personal locater beacons

could also be encouraged. (p.105)

Monitor & Review:

2.22 In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure

the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been

implemented and where future funding opportunities can be directed. (p.107)

2.23 All drowning prevention strategies have the opportunity to be documented and incorporated into the

relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management

area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.107)

Recommendation 3

The Water Safety Advisory Council should consider implementing the following risk treatment options:

Education:

3.1 Approach tourism and holiday rental real estate organisations with the aim of distributing

standardised surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers) to all coastal accommodation providers.

Collateral could also be made available at the Visitor Information Centres in Forster and Tea Gardens

and at local shops such as newsagents or bakeries. (p.71)

Emergency Marker Signage:

3.2 With guidance from the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services and Lands and Property

Information, a state aligned emergency marker system at all identified access locations should be

considered. (p.84)

Public Rescue Equipment:

3.3 Explore the means to fund the expansion and continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in

consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the

Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in ‘Appendix C’. Final positioning should

be determined by these fishing associations. (p.93)


Page xvi

Recommendation 4

Surf Life Saving (State, Branch and Club) should consider implementing the following risk treatment options:


4.1 Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and

Surf Life Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky

coast should be commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related

to rocky coasts in this report should be reviewed. (p.18)






Education:

4.3 The Surf Life Saving Clubs in the Great Lakes Local Government Area should participate in the annual

Rip Current Awareness Day. (p.71)

Safety Signage:

4.4 Temporary signage should be used at coastal access points from the coastal tourist parks to inform

guests of when conditions warrant the ‘closing of a beach’. Surf Life Saving NSW will be able to alert

park operators when dangerous swell events are predicted through the dangerous surf advisory

process. (p.83)

4.5 Temporary signage should continue to be used at access locations near patrolled areas to direct

patrons to a supervised swimming area and where here is a higher risk of injury due to temporary

hazards such as strong currents, creek openings and pollution. (p.83)

Public Rescue Equipment:

4.6 Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with the NSW Department of Primary Industries to

investigate effective shark mitigation and surveillance strategies for NSW beaches. (p.93)

Supervision/Surveillance:

4.7 Surf Life Saving NSW should meet with Lower North Coast Surf Life Saving and Forster Surf Life Saving

Club to discuss the benefits and limitations of providing an outpost patrol at Tuncurry Beach during

the summer school holiday period. (p.98)

4.8 Branch and club procedures should continue to ensure that roving patrols are performed on a regular

basis to cover a nearby beach/section of a beach that is not patrolled. (p.98)


Page xvii

Emergency Response:



4.10 Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to hold discussions with Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast and

Hunter Branch to raise any current issues and opportunities which could see further radio

infrastructure installed to improve communication. (p.105)

4.11 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Lower North Coast Branch Duty

Officers/Support Operations, Great Lakes Lifeguards and the local emergency services once a year

before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.106)

4.12 Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with and develop relationships with the Forster Marine

Rescue Unit. (p.106)

Recommendation 5

Marine Rescue NSW and the Roads and Maritime Service NSW should consider implementing the following

risk treatment options:

5.1 Marine Rescue NSW in conjunction with NSW Roads and Maritime Services should investigate

possible options to warn boat uses when crossing river bars. (p.83)


Page 1 of 110

1 INTRODUCTION, SCOPE & CONTEXT

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Project Background:

Surf Life Saving New South Wales (SLSNSW) is undertaking a significant state-wide drowning prevention

project, known as Project Blueprint. As a core component of the project, every accessible coastal beach and

rock platform in New South Wales (NSW) are being assessed using industry leading systems and processes. The

outcomes will include evidence based drowning prevention treatment options to stakeholders and

government, both at a local, regional and state level.

Project Blueprint is being delivered by Australian CoastSafe, as the leading coastal public safety risk

management authority in Australia. Australian CoastSafe is the strategic and intelligence beach safety unit of

Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA) – visit www.coastsafe.org.au for more information.

This document is a coastal public safety risk assessment and treatment plan specific to water safety related

issues identified at every beach and rock platform located on the coast of the Great Lakes LGA. The Land

Managers of this area include Great Lakes Council, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and Crown Lands.

The Drowning Issue:

Tragically, NSW accounts for 50% of the national coastal drowning toll annually. As of 30 June 2015, there have

been 403 coastal drowning deaths in NSW since 1 July 20041. The vast majority of these can be attributed to

swimming/rip-currents, rock-fishing and boating, with a high majority occurring at unpatrolled locations/times,

where no expert assistance is immediately available.

Accidental drowning deaths in the coastal aquatic environment can be accounted for through a number of

factors known as the ‘drowning chain’ and these are:

o Lack of knowledge, disregard or misunderstanding of the hazard

o Uninformed or unrestricted access to the hazard

o Lack of supervision or surveillance

o An inability to cope once in difficulty

The strategies that have been identified to address the drowning chain are:

o Education and information

o Denial of access, improvement of infrastructure and/or provision of warnings

o Provision of supervision

o Acquisition of survival skills

1 Surf Life Saving Incident Reporting Database

http://www.coastsafe.org.au/


Page 2 of 110

Figure 1.1.1 The international Life Saving Federation Drowning Chain. Source: International Life Saving Federation

Treatment Options:

This report will be fundamental in addressing the coastal drowning issue in NSW both in the short, mid and

long term. The report will do this by providing a sustainable and effective drowning prevention strategy with

clear supporting evidence/data, engagement of relevant stakeholders, and the application of effective risk

mitigation and drowning prevention initiatives where and when they are required.

It is acknowledged that Land Managers have many competing priorities and limited resources. Land Managers

should balance water safety land management activities within the context of their broader role to provide

services and facilities to meet the current future needs of their local communities as a whole, all within a

limited budget.

This report recognises that there are many inherent risks associated with the NSW coastline and that in most

instances these risks associated with the NSW coastline cannot be eliminated and can only be managed within

the operations contexts of the Land Manager, taking into account all of their responsibilities and available

resources. This report also recognises that visitors to these areas also have a personal responsibility for their

own safety and those they are responsible for.

The treatment options found in the report are representative of Australian CoastSafe’s opinion in relation to

risk management at the locations assessed and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSW Government.


Page 3 of 110

1.2 CONTEXT AND SCOPE

Project Context:

SLSNSW received funding as part of a NSW Government water safety initiative through the Water Safety Black

Spots Fund to deliver coastal public safety risk assessments on the NSW coastline (beaches and rock

platforms). The program will be staged over several years with phase four (the final phase) to include the

Kempsey, Port Macquarie Hastings, Greater Taree, Great Lakes, Port Stephens, Newcastle and Lake Macquarie

LGAs.

The report provides risk treatment options about how to improve risk and safety management in line with

current industry standards:

o AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management – Principles and Guidelines,

o AS/NZS2416.1:2010 Water Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags,

o ISO 7001:2007 Graphical symbols – Public information symbols,

o AS2342 – 1992 Development, Testing and Implementing of Information and Safety Symbols and Symbolic

Signs, and

o ISO9001:2008 Quality Management Systems – Requirements.

Project Scope:

This coastal risk assessment and treatment plan has been prepared following an on-site risk assessment

undertaken by Australian CoastSafe of the Great Lakes LGA which commenced on Thursday 25th June and

concluded on Tuesday 30th June, 2015.

The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment, including but not

limited to; signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user

groups, conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people

to visit the location.

The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of

the Great Lakes LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this

report.

Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in

nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the

coastal aquatic environment. While recreational and commercial boating occur in these waters the detailed

assessment of hazards and their treatments specific to boating activities with then areas falls outside the

scope of this report. Information on boating safety can be found at

http://maritimemanagement.transport.nsw.gov.au/

The engagement of Land Managers and other key local stakeholders was also a vital part of this risk

assessment.



Page 4 of 110

Australian CoastSafe assessed the following in detail:

o Access locations, classifying these as formal or informal access tracks and recommending treatment

options. Signage that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current signage Appendix A.

o Hazards, their potential risks, risk groups, risk scores and treatment options Appendix B.

o Public rescue equipment that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current public rescue

equipment Appendix C.

o Facilities and points of interest that may attract members of the public to coastal locations Appendix D.

Other appendices include:

o Coverage maps of assessed locations Appendix E.

o Stakeholder Engagement Appendix F.

o Life Saving Service Level Calculator Appendix G.

At no time during the inspection was the water entered. The assessments were performed from the land,

along the edges of the water, along rocky outcrops, headlands, access tracks and car park access points.

1.3 LIMITATIONS

The following are acknowledged as limitations of this coastal public safety risk assessment.

o The absence of an agreed and recognised methodology for rating the hazardousness of rock platforms.

o Difficulty in gaining feedback from all identified stakeholders.

o Limited timeframes allowed for stakeholders to provide feedback on consultative draft versions of the

main report and appendices as a result of the project timeframes.


Page 5 of 110

1.4 DEFINITION OF TERMS

Definitions of the key terms used within this report are provided below.

Table 1.4.1: Definitions of key terms.

ABSAMP Australian Beach Safety and Management Program.

Attendance A snapshot of the on-beach and in-water attendance taken every two hours on a

daily basis.

ATV All-terrain vehicle.

CALD Culturally And Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities.

Coastal

The foreshore, seabed, coastal water, and airspace above a large body of water

(harbour/bay/inlet), including areas up to 2NM offshore and of which the

landward boundary is the line of mean high water, except that where that line

crosses a river/inlet, the landward boundary at that point shall be the point

upstream that is calculated by multiplying the width of the river/inlet mouth by 5

(Adapted from the Resource Management Amendment Act 1991 – New Zealand).

Coastal Waterway A coastal body of water e.g. river/creek opening.

Consequence Outcome or impact of an event.

Control An existing process, policy, device, practice or other action that acts to minimise

negative risk or enhance positive opportunities.

Emergency Action Plan A plan that outlines the procedures to be used in the event of an emergency.

First Aid A lifesaver/lifeguard treating either a minor or major first aid incident, which may

require further assistance from NSW Ambulance e.g. broken bones or stings/bites.

Formal Access

Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating

the use of a generally safer ‘track’, effectively exposing people to the relevant

safety signage/information, reducing the quality of signage required and

enhancing emergency reporting/location identification.

Frequency A measure of the number of occurrences per unit of time.

Geomorphology Is the scientific study of landforms and the processes that shape them.

Hazard A source of potential harm.

Hazard Symbols A graphical symbol used together with a safety colour and safety shape to form a

safety sign.

Inaccessible A location that is not able to be accessed from land by standard reasoning and/or

entry is prohibited by private access.


Page 6 of 110

Informal Access

Informal access ways may create higher risk through use (uneven

ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/sink-holes),

may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make

emergency location reporting difficult (location awareness).

Inherent Risk The risk that an activity would pose if no controls or other mitigating factors were

in place.

IRB Inflatable Rescue Boat.

LGA

Local Government Area – for the purposes of this report this area is used to

determine the scope of the assessment (i.e. the coastal boundary of the Local

Government Area). This may include lands managed by Councils, Crown and

National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Lifesaving Service

An organised and structured service comprised of paid lifeguards and/or

volunteer lifesavers and appropriate rescue and first aid equipment supported by

a coordinated backup team.

Likelihood Used as a general description of probability or frequency.

Modal The conditions that occur most frequently, or more often than other conditions.

Monitor

To check, supervise, observe critically or measure the progress of an activity,

action or system on a regular basis in order to identify change from the

performance level required or expected.

Peak Water Safety

Agencies

A peak body is defined as a state, territory or national non-profit organisation

established to cater for the needs, interests and aspirations of its members.

Members may include individuals or organisations, but they will all have a

common interest. Peak bodies in the water safety sector may include agencies

such as Surf Life Saving, Royal Life Saving, Surf Educators Australia, Austswim,

Australian Professional Ocean Lifeguard Association, Surfing NSW and the Office

of Boating Safety who represent the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council as a

committee member.

Prevailing The conditions existing in a particular place or at a particular time.

Preventative Action /

Prevention

A lifesaver/lifeguard simply providing proactive direction or advice to beachgoers

in a ‘preventative action’ for the beachgoer to avoid finding themselves in a

position beyond their capability.

Probability A measure of the chance of occurrence expressed as a number.

Rescue A lifesaver/lifeguard rendering direct assistance to a beachgoer in difficulty in the

water.

Residual Risk Risk remaining after implementation of risk treatments.


Page 7 of 110

Rip Current Channelled currents of water flowing away from shore, typically extending from

the shoreline, through the surf zone, and past the line of breaking waves.

Risk Standards Australia defines risk as the effect of uncertainty on objects (AS/NZS

31000:2009).

Risk Analysis Systematic process to understand the nature of and to the level of risk.

Risk Assessment Standards Australia defines a risk assessment as the overall process of risk

identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation (AS/NZS 31000:2009).

Risk Evaluation Process of comparing the level of risk against criteria.

Risk Identification The process of determining what, where, when, why and how something should

happen.

Risk Management Standards Australia defines risk management as coordinated activities to direct

and control an organisation with regard to risk (AS/NZS 31000:2009).

Risk Register

A table summarising the identified risks, the location, why it has been identified as

a risk, and what current treatments are in place to lessen the risk and an overall

hazard rating.

Risk Treatment Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify risk.

Risk Treatment Plan A table summarising how to deal with the identified risks, including a list of

potential risk treatments, the risk treatments currently and any residual risk.

RWC Rescue water craft (jet ski).

SLS Branch Surf Life Saving Branch, a regional body of Surf Life Saving formed to further the

objects of surf lifesaving in a particular geographic area.

Stakeholders Those people and organisations who may affect, be affected, or perceive

themselves to be affected by a decision, activity or risk.

1.5 PROJECT TEAM / AUTHORS

Project Team:

Adam Weir, Operations Manager, [email protected]

Luke Stigter, Coastal Risk Co-ordinator, [email protected]

Chris Twine, Coastal Risk Officer, [email protected]

Australian CoastSafe

Surf Life Saving New South Wales

Ph: 02-9471 8000| F: 02-9471 8001

W: www.coastsafe.org.au/blueprint

mailto:[email protected]



http://www.coastsafe.org.au/blueprint


Page 8 of 110

2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The methodology included site identification, site inspection, hazard identification, data analysis, beach hazard

ratings, beach identification, facility visitation ratings, facilities, beach usage, tourism data, incident data,

communication and consultation.

2.2 SITE IDENTIFICATION

The map on the following page provides an overview of the locations of beaches and rock platforms within the

Great Lakes LGA subject to the coastal risk assessment. The specific locations can be referenced in ‘Appendix

E’. All together the Australian CoastSafe team assessed approximately 152km of coastline in the Great Lakes

LGA.

The area includes locations and/or facilities under the administration of:

o Great Lakes Council

o National Parks and Wildlife Service

Darawank Nature Reserve

Booti Booti National Park

Myall Lakes National Park

o Crown Lands

The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment and is not limited to

signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user groups,

conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people to visit

the location.

The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of

the Great Lakes LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this

report.

Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in

nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the

coastal aquatic environment.


Page 9 of 110

Figure 2.2.1: Great Lakes LGA – Assessed Locations Site Inspection (Map 1 & 2).


Page 10 of 110

Figure 2.2.2: Great Lakes LGA – Assessed Locations Site Inspection (Map 3).


Page 11 of 110

Table 2.2.1: Assessed locations and assessment dates.

Location Land Management Authority Date

Nine Mile Beach Great Lakes Council /

National Parks and Wildlife Service Thursday 25 June, 2015

Tuncurry Beach Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

Tuncurry Rock Pool Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

Forster Main Beach Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

Second Head Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

Pebbly Beach Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

The Tanks Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

Bennett’s Head Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June, 2015

One Mile Beach Great Lakes Council Thursday 25 June and Friday 26 June, 2015

Burgess Beach Great Lakes Council Friday 26 June, 2015

Cape Hawke Headland National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

McBrides Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Cape Hawke North Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Cape Hawke South Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Janies Corner National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Seven Mile Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Lindeman Cove National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Yes I Know Rock National Parks and Wildlife Service Friday 26 June, 2015

Elizabeth Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Shelly Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Seagull Point National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Charlotte Head National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Boomerang Beach Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Boomerang Point Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Blueys Beach Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Blueys Head Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Danger Point Crown Lands Not Accessible

Bald Head Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Sandbar / Cellito Beach Great Lakes Council /

National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Number Six Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Not Accessible

Number Five Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Not Accessible

Number Four Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Not Accessible

Number Three Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Not Accessible

Number Two Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Not Accessible

Number One Beach Great Lakes Council /

National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Seal Rocks Point National Parks and Wildlife Service Saturday 27 June, 2015

Boat Beach Great Lakes Council Saturday 27 June, 2015

Sugarloaf Point National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June, 2015

Lighthouse Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June, 2015

Treachery Head National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June, 2015


Page 12 of 110

Location Land Management Authority Date

Treachery Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June, 2015

Yagon Head National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June, 2015

Submarine / Yagon Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Sunday 28 June and

Tuesday 30 June, 2015

Big Gibber Headland National Parks and Wildlife Service Tuesday 30 June, 2015

Mungo Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Tuesday 30 June, 2015

Dark Point North Beach National Parks and Wildlife Service Monday 29 June, 2015

Dark Point / Little Gibber National Parks and Wildlife Service Monday 29 June, 2015

Bennett’s Beach Great Lakes Council /

National Parks and Wildlife Service Monday 29 June and

Tuesday 30 June, 2015

Yacaaba Headland National Parks and Wildlife Service Tuesday 30 June, 2015


Page 13 of 110

2.3 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT

During the site inspection hazards were identified within the area inspected and assessed in terms of their

individual risk to public safety (extreme, high, medium, low) using a risk assessment matrix ‘Appendix B’.

The risk assessment matrix considers both the type of harm that could be sustained as a result of an individual

hazard and the likelihood of this harm actually occurring.

Hazards/Risks:

The Great Lakes LGA has a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the

beaches in the area.

Based on the risk assessment in ‘Appendix B’, the following hazards have been rated with the greatest

inherent risk for the Great Lakes LGA:

Strong currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type

Waves/waves over washing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells

Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type

Slippery rocks/uneven surfaces: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action

Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type

Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement

Cliffs/dangerous access: As a result of coastal geography

Boating traffic/collision: As a result of human interaction

It has been identified that the above listed hazards pose risk to the following types of recreational users:

Strong currents/rip currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users

Waves/waves over washing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users

Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen

Slippery rocks/uneven surfaces: Fishermen, rock platform users

Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users

Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen

Cliffs/dangerous access: Fishermen, walkers, sight seers

Boating traffic/collision: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters

This coastal public safety risk assessment aligns with the international standard of risk management ‘AS/NZS

ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines’ (Standards Australia, 2009).


Page 14 of 110

Figure 2.3.1: Risk management process (Standards Australia, 2009).


Page 15 of 110

2.4 BEACH HAZARD RATINGS AND OVERVIEW

The ABSAMP (Australian Beach Safety and Management Program) was developed by Professor Andrew Short

from the University of Sydney Coastal Studies Unit in conjunction with Surf Life Saving Australia. The program

has identified coastal hazards that affect bathers and rates the safety of the beach on a scale of one to ten,

where one (1) is the least hazardous and ten (10) is the most hazardous. The beach hazard ratings and

definitions are provided below. Table 2.4.1: ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings.

The beach hazard rating is calculated by determining the beach type and wave height. This can be done under

either modal (average) or prevailing (current) conditions. The beach hazard rating is then calculated by using

the following table. Table 2.4.2: Beach hazard rating calculation matrices for wave dominate beaches.

Wave Height

Beach Type

< 0.5 (m)

0.5 (m) 1.0 (m) 1.5 (m) 2.0 (m) 2.5 (m) 3.0 (m) > 3.0 (m)

Dissipative 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10

Long Shore Bar Trough

4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10

Rhythmic Bar Beach

4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10

Transverse Bar Rip

4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Low Tide Terrace 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

Reflective 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

The beach hazard ratings used in risk based calculation throughout the report relate to modal beach

conditions and as such the hazard rating of a beach may increase when conditions alter e.g. with increasing

wave height, winds, strong tides and high tide. Furthermore, a hazard rating is also applied to an average

person and therefore the hazard may in fact be greater or less, depending upon an individual’s own skill, and

understanding and competence in relation to a certain area. The ABSAMP hazard ratings for the inspected

areas of the Great Lakes LGA are detailed within the next section of the report.

Hazard Rating Details

1 – 3

Least Hazardous: Low danger posed by water depth and/or weak currents; however, supervision still required, in particular for children and poor swimmers.

4 – 6

Moderately Hazardous: The level of hazard depends on wave and weather conditions, with the possibility of strong rips and currents posing a moderate risk.

7 – 8

Highly Hazardous: Experience in strong surf, rips and currents required, with beaches in this category considered dangerous.

9 – 10

Extremely Hazardous: Identifies beaches that are considered extremely dangerous due to strong rips and currents, and large breakers.


Page 16 of 110

2.5 ABSAMP TYPES AND RATINGS

The ABSAMP Hazard Rating for the assessed locations listed in Table 2.5.1 below. The table provides both a

modal and a prevailing ABSAMP rating. The modal ABSAMP rating represents the average conditions for each

location, which has been extracted from the Australian Beach Safety and Management Program. The prevailing

ABSAMP rating represents the conditions observed by Australian CoastSafe on the day each audit took place.

Table 2.5.1: ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings – Great Lakes LGA.

Location Name ABSAMP

No.

ABSAMP

Rating

(Modal)

ABSAMP Type

(Modal)

ABSAMP Rating

(Prevailing)

ABSAMP Type

(Prevailing)

Nine Mile Beach nsw195 7 Transverse Bar

and Rip 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Tuncurry Beach nsw195s 7 Transverse Bar

and Rip 4 Low Tide Terrace

Tuncurry Rock Pool nsw195a 2 Reflective 3 Reflective

Forster Main Beach nsw196 4 Low Tide

Terrace 4 Low Tide Terrace

Second Head nsw196RPa 4* Rock Platforms 4* Rock Platforms

Pebbly Beach nsw197 4 Reflective +

Rocks 3 Reflective + Rocks

The Tanks nsw197RPa 5* Boulders 4* Boulders

Bennett’s Head nsw197RPb 5* Rock Headland 4* Rock Headland

One Mile Beach nsw198 6 Transverse Bar

and Rip 5

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Burgess Beach nsw199 4 Low Tide

Terrace + Rocks 4

Low Tide Terrace +

Rocks

Cape Hawke

Headland nsw199RPa 4* Rock Platforms 4* Rock Platforms

McBrides Beach nsw200 4 Reflective 3 Reflective

Cape Hawke North

Beach nsw201 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip +

Rocks

Not assessed – inaccessible

Cape Hawke South

Beach nsw202 7

Rhythmic Bar

and Beach +

Rocks

Not assessed – inaccessible

Janies Corner nsw203 7 Transverse Bar

and Rip 7

Rhythmic Bar and

Beach

Seven Mile Beach nsw204 6 Rhythmic Bar

and Beach 7

Rhythmic Bar and

Beach - Transverse

Bar and Rip

Booti Hill / Flat

Rock Point nsw204RPa 7* Rock Platforms 6* Rock Platforms

Lindeman Cove nsw205 7 Low Tide


Yes I Know Rock nsw205RPa 6* Rock Platforms 4* Rock Platforms


Page 17 of 110


No.

ABSAMP

Rating

(Modal)

ABSAMP Type

(Modal)

ABSAMP Rating

(Prevailing)

ABSAMP Type

(Prevailing)

Elizabeth Beach nsw206 4 Low Tide


Shelly Beach nsw207 3 Reflective 3 Reflective

Seagull Point nsw207RPa 5* Rock Platforms 5* Rock Platforms

Charlotte Head nsw207RPb 5* Rock Platforms Not assessed – inaccessible

Boomerang Beach nsw208 6 Transverse Bar

and Rip 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Boomerang Point nsw208RPa 6* Rock Headland 7* Rock Headland

Blueys Beach nsw209 6 Transverse Bar

and Rip 6

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Blueys Head nsw209RPa 6* Rock Headland 6* Rock Headland

Danger Point nsw209RPb 6* Rock Headland 6* Rock Headland

Bald Head nsw209RPc 6* Rock Platforms 6* Rock Platforms

Sandbar / Cellito

Beach nsw210 6

Transverse Bar

and Rip 6

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Number Six Beach nsw211 5 Transverse Bar

and Rip Not assessed – inaccessible

Number Five Beach nsw212 5 Transverse Bar


Number Four

Beach nsw213 5

Transverse Bar


Number Three

Beach nsw214 4

Transverse Bar


Number Two Beach nsw215 4 Reflective +

Rocks Not assessed – inaccessible

Number One Beach nsw216 4 Low Tide


Seal Rocks Point nsw216RPa 4* Rock Platforms 4* Rock Platforms

Boat Beach nsw217 3 Reflective 3 Reflective

Sugarloaf Point nsw217RPa 5* Rock Headland 5* Rock Headland

Lighthouse Beach nsw218 7 Transverse Bar

and Rip 6

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Treachery Head nsw218RPa 7* Rock Headland 6* Rock Headland

Treachery Beach nsw219 7 Transverse Bar

and Rip 6

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Yagon Head nsw219RPa 7* Rock Headland 7* Rock Headland

Submarine / Fiona

/ Yagon Beach nsw220 7

Rhythmic Bar

and Beach 7

Rhythmic Bar and

Beach

Big Gibber

Headland nsw220RPa 7* Rock Headland 8* Rock Headland

Mungo Beach nsw221 7 Rhythmic Bar

and Beach 8

Rhythmic Bar and

Beach


Page 18 of 110


No.

ABSAMP

Rating

(Modal)

ABSAMP Type

(Modal)

ABSAMP Rating

(Prevailing)

ABSAMP Type

(Prevailing)

Dark Point North

Beach nsw222 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip

Dark Point / Little

Gibber nsw222RPa 7* Rock Platforms 7* Rock Platforms

Bennett’s Beach nsw223 7

Transverse Bar

and Rip – Low

Tide Terrace

7 - 4

Transverse Bar

and Rip – Low Tide

Terrace

Yacaaba Headland nsw223RPa 7* Rock Headland 4* Rock Headland

* Great Lakes LGA Rock Platform Ratings

Currently there is no method of rating the hazardousness of the rocky coast, in an equivalent manner to the

ABSAMP beach hazard rating system for sandy beaches. Research is currently underway; Dr. David Kennedy

has utilised a grant from Melbourne University to pilot the methods for the development of a risk classification

study on rocky coasts (Kennedy, et al., 2013). This research has now received funding under an Australian

Research Council linkage grant. Professor Colin Woodroffe (University of Wollongong) presented the

methodology for this project at the NSW Coastal Conference in Kiama (November, 2012). An update of this

research was provided by Dr. David Kennedy at the NSW Coastal Conference in Ulladulla (November, 2014).

As an interim method of providing an indication of the hazardousness of rock platforms the ABSAMP beach

hazard ratings for the beaches on either side of the each rock platform have been averaged. Since the beaches

on either side of a rock platform would be exposed to similar prevailing and modal wind, wave and weather

conditions and these sandy beaches have a recognised and accepted method of rating the associated

hazardousness taking the average of the beaches bordering a rock platform will provide an indication as to the

potential hazard associated with the modal conditions affecting the rock platform.

It is a limitation of the report that there is no available method of calculating the specific hazard rating of a

rock platform. In order to allow the risk calculations used in this report to be processed the interim solution,

which takes into account the local conditions and geomorphology detailed above, has been applied. Once the

research being conducted by Dr. David Kennedy and Prof. Colin Woodroffe is completed then these

calculations should be revisited.

Treatment Option 4.1

Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and Surf Life

Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky coast should be

commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related to rocky coasts in this

report should be reviewed.


Page 19 of 110

2.6 ABSAMP BEACH TYPE CHARACTERISTIC OVERVIEW AND HAZARDS

The modal beach characteristics and associated hazards for each location are as follows:

2.6.1 RHYTHMIC BAR AND BEACH

Rhythmic bar and beach type commonly occurs

around the southern Australian coast. They

usually consist of relatively fine-medium (0.3

mm) sand and exposure to waves averaging

more than 1.5 m. They are characterised by an

outer bar which is separated from the beach by

a deep trough, however unlike the longshore

bar and trough type, the bar varies in width and

elevation alongshore, and it is rhythmic.

Waves break more heavily on the shoreward-

protruding rhythmic bar sections with the

broken wave and white water flowing shoreward as a wave bore. The bore then flows off the bar into the

deeper tough, where it moves shoreward and longshore as a rip feeder current. Part of the wave reforms in

the trough and breaks again on the shore.

The water from both the wave bore and the swash piles up in the rip feeder channel and moves sideways

toward the adjacent rip embayment. The converging feeder currents turn and flow seaward as a rip current

through the trough and across the deeper seaward-protruding sections of the rhythmic bar.

The following beaches within the Great Lakes LGA are classified as rhythmic bar and beach:

o Cape Hawke South Beach

o Seven Mile Beach

o Submarine / Fiona / Yagon Beach

o Mungo Beach

2.6.2 TRANSVERSE BAR AND RIP

Transverse bar and rip (TBR) type is the most

common and extensive of Australia’s wave-

dominated beach types. They occur primarily on

beaches composed of fine to medium sand (0.3

mm) and exposed to waves averaging 1.5 m.

This beach type received its name from the fact

that the bars are transverse or perpendicular to

and attached to the beach, separated by deeper

rip channels.

The bars and rips are usually regularly spaced

and range from 150 m on the lower energy sea-

dominated northern Australian beaches to 250 m along the higher energy southeast coast and 350 m along

the exposed southern coast. Waves break heavily on the shallower bars and less in the deeper rip channels

Figure 2.6.1 Illustration of a Rhythmic Bar & Beach.

Figure 2.6.2: Illustration of a Transverse Bar and Rip.


Page 20 of 110

resulting in lower energy swash in lee of the bars and higher energy swash/shore break in lee of the rips. The

shoreline is rhythmic building a few metres seaward behind the attached bars as deposition occurs forming the

mega cusp horns and being scoured out and often scarped in lee of the rips forming the embayments. The surf

zone has a cellular circulation pattern. Waves tend to break more on the bars and move shoreward as wave

bores. This water flows both directly into the adjacent rip channel and, closer to the beach, into the rip feeder

channels located at the base of the beach. The water in the rip feeders converge and return seaward as a

strong rip current.

The following beaches within the Great Lakes LGA are classified as transverse bar and rip:

o Nine Mile Beach

o Tuncurry Beach

o One Mile Beach

o Cape Hawke North Beach

o Janies Corner

o Boomerang Beach

o Blueys Beach

o Sandbar / Cellito Beach

o Number Six Beach

o Number Five Beach

o Number Four Beach

o Number Three Beach

o Lighthouse Beach

o Treachery Beach

o Dark Point North Beach

o Bennetts Beach

2.6.3 LOW TIDE TERRACE

Low tide terrace beaches tend to occur when

waves average about 1m and sand is fine to

medium. They are characterised by a moderately

steep beach face, which is joined at the low tide

level to an attached bar or terrace, hence the

name – low tide terrace. The bar usually extends

between 20-50m seaward and continues

alongshore, attached to the beach. It may be flat

and featureless, have a slight central crest, called

a ridge, and may be cut every several tens of

metres by small shallow rip channels, called mini

rips.

At high tide when waves are less than 1m, they may pass right over the bar and not break until the beach face,

which behaves much like a reflective beach. At spring low tide, however, the entire bar is usually exposed as a

ridge or terrace running parallel to the beach and waves break by plunging heavily on the outer edge of the

bar.

At mid tide, waves usually break right across the shallow bar, when they are most likely to generate rip

currents. The water is returned seaward, both by reflection off the beach face, especially at high tide, and via

Figure 2.6.3: Illustration of a Low Tide Terrace.

http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/glossary/def_a-b.jsp#Beach_face

http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/glossary/def_s-t.jsp#Spring

http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/glossary/def_q-r.jsp#Rip_current

http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/glossary/def_q-r.jsp#Rip_current


Page 21 of 110

the mini rips, even if no rip channels are present. The rips, however, are usually shallow, ephemeral or

transient meaning they will flow strongly for a few minutes then dissipate.

The following beaches within the Great Lakes LGA are classified as low tide terrace:

o Forster Main Beach

o Burgess Beach

o Lindeman Cove

o Elizabeth Beach

o Number One Beach

o Bennetts Beach

2.6.4 REFLECTIVE

Reflective sandy beaches lie at the lower energy

end of the wave-dominated beach spectrum.

They are characterised by relatively steep, narrow

beaches usually composed of coarser sand (0.4

mm). On the open Australian coast, sandy

beaches require waves to be less than 0.5 m to be

reflective. For this reason they are also found

inside the entrance to bays, at the lower energy

end of some ocean beaches and in lee of the reefs

and islets that front many beaches.

Reflective beaches are Australia's most common beach type occurring in every state though they are more

common around the southern half of the continent. Reflective beach morphology consists of the steeper,

narrow beach and swash zone, with beach cusps commonly present in the upper high tide swash zone. They

have no bar or surf zone as waves move unbroken to the shore, where they collapse or surge up the beach

face.

The following beaches within the Great Lakes LGA are classified as reflective:

o Tuncurry Rock Pool

o Pebbly Beach

o McBrides Beach

o Shelly Beach

o Number Two Beach

o Boat Beach

Figure 2.6.4: Illustration of a Reflective beach.

http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/glossary/def_q-r.jsp#Rip_channel


Page 22 of 110

2.6.5 ROCK PLATFORMS AND ROCKY COASTS

Rock platforms and rocky coasts are wave eroded regions that exist at the base of rocky cliffs and headlands.

They are typically influenced by tides and waves. For coastal hazards, rocky coasts can therefore be considered

static features unable to adjust their morphology during storms unlike sandy beaches (Kennedy, et al., 2013).

The following regions within the Great Lakes LGA are classified as Rock Platforms or Rocky Coast:

o Second Head

o The Tanks

o Bennetts Head

o Cape Hawke Headland

o Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point

o Yes I Know Rock

o Seagull Point

o Charlotte Head

o Boomerang Point

o Blueys Head

o Danger Point

o Bald Head

o Seal Rocks Point

o Sugarloaf Point

o Treachery Head

o Yagon Head

o Big Gibber Headland

o Dark Point / Little Gibber

o Yacaaba Headland


Page 23 of 110

2.7 FACILITY VISITATION RATES (FVR)

The Facility Visitation Rate (FVR) is a quantitative assessment system developed by State-wide Mutual as ‘Best

Practice’ for Signage As Remote Supervision (2007). The FVR can be used by NSW Local Government to

determine the most appropriate signage schedule for a facility (venue or location).

The FVR is calculated using data collected during the assessment process and includes site population use and

frequency of use. Since the FVR calculation is used to determine aquatic recreational warning signage

requirements, the figures used are those of the peak period of beach usage.

The following information is used to calculate the FVR:

1. Observational data collected during the site assessment; (only during peak summer periods do we rely on

observational data)

2. Stakeholder observation, consultation and feedback; and,

3. Historical statistical data

The Facility Visitation Rate is calculated using the following formula:

FVR = (Development x Population) + Frequency

Where:

Development* = the level of facilities and infrastructure that exist within or about the facility.

Population = the average number of people that use the facility at any point in time.

Frequency = the number of times that the facility is used by patrons.

* Note: Development ratings were calculated with reference to 2.7.2

2.7.1 FACILITY VISITATION RATING (FVR) REFERENCE TABLES

Table 2.7.1: Typical Development and Natural Hazards Rating for Reserves – non beach environments.

Rating Development Natural Hazards

1 Virginal bush, cleared land, no infrastructure No hazardous features

2 Cleared land, static infrastructure e.g. grass area with

tables and chairs, toilet block, lookout

Sloping ground; no natural water;

walking track around reserve

3

Cleared land with mobile infrastructure e.g. grassed area

with play equipment, cycle way, market, leash free dog

areas

Reserve contains natural waterway that

runs during wet weather, drops less

than 1 meter

4

Land manager owned infrastructure with no artificial

lighting e.g. golf course, football field, recreational

ground, caravan park

Creeks, ponds and ledges between 1

meter and 3 meters

5 Extensively developed infrastructure with artificial

lighting e.g. sporting complex, artificially lit courts

Contains rivers, dams and cliffs greater

than 3 meters


Page 24 of 110

Table 2.7.2: Typical development ratings for beaches.

Rating ABSAMP Beach Rating

1 Beach hazard rating 1 and 2





Table 2.7.3: Typical population use rating for a facility.

Rating Population Use

1 Less than 5 people at a time

2 5 to 50 people at a time



5 Greater than 500 people at a time

Table 2.7.4: Suggested Frequency use rating for a Facility.

Rating Frequency of Use

1 An annual activity or event is held at the facility

2 An activity event takes place in the facility on a monthly basis

3 An activity event takes place in the facility on a weekly basis

4 An activity event takes place in the facility on a daily basis

5 The facility is in continuous use for the majority of the day

The FVR values for assessed locations in the Great Lakes LGA are provided in Table 2.7.5.

Table 2.7.5: Facility Visitation Rates – for assessed locations.

LOCATION NAME DEVELOPMENT

RATING X POPULATION + FREQUENCY = FVR

Nine Mile Beach 4 x 3 + 3 = 15

Tuncurry Beach 4 x 4 + 4 = 20

Tuncurry Rock Pool 1 x 4 + 4 = 8

Forster Main Beach 2 x 5 + 5 = 15

Second Head 2 x 2 + 3 = 7

Pebbly Beach 2 x 2 + 4 = 8

The Tanks 3 x 2 + 4 = 10

Bennett’s Head 3 x 1 + 3 = 6

One Mile Beach 3 x 4 + 4 = 16

Burgess Beach 2 x 2 + 3 = 7

Cape Hawke Headland 2 x 1 + 3 = 5

McBrides Beach 2 x 1 + 3 = 5

Cape Hawke North Beach 4 x 1 + 1 = 5

Cape Hawke South Beach 4 x 1 + 1 = 5

Janies Corner 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Seven Mile Beach 3 x 4 + 4 = 16

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Lindeman Cove 4 x 1 + 2 = 6


Page 25 of 110

LOCATION NAME DEVELOPMENT

RATING X POPULATION + FREQUENCY = FVR

Yes I Know Rock 3 x 2 + 3 = 9

Elizabeth Beach 2 x 5 + 5 = 15

Shelly Beach 2 x 3 + 4 = 10

Seagull Point 3 x 1 + 3 = 6

Charlotte Head 3 x 1 + 2 = 5

Boomerang Beach 3 x 4 + 4 = 16

Boomerang Point 3 x 1 + 2 = 5

Blueys Beach 3 x 4 + 4 = 16

Blueys Head 3 x 1 + 2 = 5

Danger Point 3 x 1 + 1 = 4

Bald Head 3 x 2 + 2 = 8

Sandbar / Cellito Beach 3 x 4 + 4 = 16

Number Six Beach 3 x 1 + 1 = 4

Number Five Beach 3 x 1 + 1 = 4

Number Four Beach 3 x 1 + 1 = 4

Number Three Beach 2 x 1 + 1 = 3

Number Two Beach 2 x 1 + 1 = 3

Number One Beach 2 x 4 + 4 = 12

Seal Rocks Point 2 x 2 + 4 = 8

Boat Beach 2 x 3 + 4 = 10

Sugarloaf Point 3 x 2 + 3 = 9

Lighthouse Beach 4 x 3 + 3 = 15

Treachery Head 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Treachery Beach 4 x 3 + 3 = 15

Yagon Head 4 x 1 + 1 = 5

Submarine / Yagon Beach 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Big Gibber Headland 4 x 1 + 2 = 6

Mungo Beach 4 x 3 + 3 = 15

Dark Point North Beach 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Dark Point / Little Gibber 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Bennett’s Beach 4 x 5 + 5 = 25

Yacaaba Headland 4 x 2 + 3 = 11

Given the FVR scores listed in Table 2.7.5, the most appropriate signage characteristics for each location are

listed below.

FVR Score between 4 and 6

o Bennett’s Head

o Cape Hawke Headland

o McBrides Beach



o Lindeman Cove

o Charlotte Head

o Boomerang Point


Page 26 of 110

o Blueys Head

o Danger Point

o Number Six Beach

o Number Five Beach

o Number Four Beach


o Number Two Beach

o Yagon Head

This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided

by Land Manager have signage and spaced no greater than 1000 metres apart around the beach perimeter.

Additionally the signage should contain the following:

o The name of the facility

o A general warning message

o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms

o Any information symbols relevant to the facility

NB: The sign does not require the depiction of warning symbols.


o Tuncurry Rock Pool

o Second Head

o Pebbly Beach

o The Tanks

o Burgess Beach

o Yes I Know Rock

o Shelly Beach

o Bald Head

o Seal Rocks Point

o Boat Beach

o Sugarloaf Point


by Land Managers have signage and are spaced no greater than 500 metres apart around the beach perimeter.





o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top hazard should appear



o Nine Mile Beach

o Forster Main Beach

o Janies Corner

o Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point

o Elizabeth Beach

o Number One Beach


Page 27 of 110

o Lighthouse Beach

o Treachery Head

o Treachery Beach

o Submarine / Yagon Beach

o Mungo Beach

o Dark Point North Beach

o Dark Point / Little Gibber

o Yacaaba Headland








as warning symbols. If no highs then the top two hazards should appear



o Tuncurry Beach

o One Mile Beach

o Seven Mile Beach

o Boomerang Beach

o Blueys Beach

o Sandbar / Cellito Beach







as warning symbols. If no highs then the top three hazards should appear



o Bennett’s Beach








as warning symbols. If no highs then the top four hazards should appear



Page 28 of 110

2.8 FACILITIES AUDIT

Facilities in the coastal risk management process are any item of infrastructure which is situated close to the

beach/access. The 10 most common coastal facilities along the Great Lakes LGA coastline are shown in the

table below.

Table 2.8.1: Top 10 most common coastal facilities.

Rank Facility Type Count

1 Bench 108

2 Car Park 89

3 Rubbish Bins 44

4 Picnic Table 27

5 Sheltered Picnic Table 25

6 Accommodation 23

7 Amenities 21

8 Shower 20

9 Viewing Platform 18

10 Barbecue Area 12

Why do we record facilities?

Facilities are recorded because it is important for the Land Manager to recognise that by providing the above

facilities it is expected that there will be an increase in people visiting these areas. This increase can correlate

to the likelihood of a risk occurring in a coastal environment. Treatment plans identified in the report should

be implemented in these areas to reduce the risk of a particular event occurring.

Below is a list of the top ten locations for facilities within the Great Lakes LGA:

Table 2.8.2: Top 10 locations for facilities.

Rank Location Count

1 One Mile Beach 56

2 Forster Main Beach 51

3 Bennetts Beach 41

4 Tuncurry Beach 31

5 Seven Mile Beach 28

6 Boomerang Beach 26

7 Tuncurry Rockpool 23

8 The Tanks 21

9 Elizabeth Beach 19

10 Pebbly Beach 18

Refer to Appendix D for a further breakdown of facilities at the assessed locations within the Great Lakes LGA.


Page 29 of 110

2.9 POPULATION, DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM

Population growth is an important consideration when evaluating and predicting beach usage trends.

Increasing beach usage due to population growth relates to an increase in the probability of an event

occurring. Tourism operations and development proposals are also associated with population growth, and

these should also be considered when determining suitable risk treatment options.

2.9.1 POPULATION STATISTICS

The 2011 census recorded a population count of 34,430 in the Great Lakes LGA. Over the last 10 years, the

population has increased by 3,164 people (10.12% growth). The first table lists the male, female and total

population in the Great Lakes LGA for the last three Census counts. The second table lists the 2011 population

of the suburbs that are situated along the coast of the Great Lakes LGA.

Table 2.9.1 Great Lakes population data (ABS, 2011).

Table 2.9.2 Population count of coastal state suburbs in the Great Lakes LGA (ABS, 2011).

State Suburb Males Females Total

Tuncurry 2,756 3,044 5,800

Forster 6,251 6,865 13,116

Green Point 295 292 587

Elizabeth Beach 112 118 230

Boomerang Beach 217 217 434

Smith’s Lake 551 525 1,076

Bangawahl

(Inc. Seal Rocks) 142 112 254

Hawks Nest 575 548 1,123

Great Lakes Local Government Area – Population

Year Males Females Total

2011 16,860 17,570 34,430

2006 16,091 16,675 32,766

2001 15,339 15,867 31,266


Page 30 of 110

2.9.2 DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN GREAT LAKES

Existing and future coastal development plans (government and private) scheduled for the Great Lakes LGA

should consider the impact of increased beach usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education,

signage, beach access and supervision.

One particular example includes the development behind Nine Mile Beach (Tuncurry North). The North

Tuncurry Development Project involves a proposal to re-zone a 615 hectare parcel of Crown Lands –

illustration figure below (North Tuncurry, 2014).

Figure 2.9.1: Illustration of the Tuncurry North Master Plan (North Tuncurry, 2014).

There are also plans for development to be undertaken at the northern end of Seven Mile Beach behind the

Booti Booti National Park. This development includes 199 houses and 118 apartments built on 70 hectares of

land (Wellings, 2008). The below figure is an artist’s impression of what the site may look like and the YouTube

link – ‘https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mb6FHfzH1Q’ provides potential buyers with the benefits of

living in the area.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mb6FHfzH1Q


Page 31 of 110

Figure 2.9.2: Illustration of the Seven Mile Beach Development.

The project has currently stalled because of financial pressures of the current developers.

Beach Usage:

It is expected that attendance to Nine Mile Beach - Tuncurry and Seven Mile Beach will increase rapidly once

these developments have been finalised.

These developments will:

1. Improve access to the coast.

2. See an increase in facilities such as car parks, foreshore BBQ’s and picnic tables etc.

3. See an increase with interaction activities such as swimming, surfcraft use and fishing.

There is also mention and preliminary discussions of a possible new Surf Life Saving Club at North Tuncurry.

Treatment Options 1.1 & 2.1

Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Great Lakes Local Government Area e.g. Nine

Mile Beach (Tuncurry) and Seven Mile Beach, should consider the impact of increased coastal usage, discussing

possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue equipment and supervision.


Page 32 of 110

2.9.3 TOURISM INFORMATION

The following table shows the number of domestic overnight visitors, domestic day trippers and international

visitors over a four year annual average to the year ending September 2014 (Destination NSW, 2015).

Table 2.9.3 Tourism data and visitor information for Great Lakes LGA.

Overall Tourist Figures (‘000)

Domestic Overnight 585

Domestic Day Trip (>50km) 401

International Visitors 12

Domestic overnight visitors are the most common visitor type followed by domestic day tripper, while

international visitors only make up around 1% of total visitors.

Figure 2.9.3 The international Life Saving Federation Drowning Chain. Source: International Visitor Survey and National Visitor Survey, Tourism Research Australia (TRA).

Since December 2008 the number of total visitors has risen by approximately 100,000 people (11% increase).

Table 2.9.4 Domestic Overnight visitor information for Great Lakes LGA.

Top 5 Activities (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Go to the beach 315 54 23

Eat out at restaurants 288 49 58

Visiting friends/relatives 229 39 49

General sight seeing 179 31 25

Go shopping (pleasure) 145 25 26

Origin (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Sydney 245 42 28

Regional NSW 284 49 41

Victoria 19 3 11

Queensland 24 4 11

Top 5 Accommodation (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Caravan park/camping 645 28 13

Rented house/apartment 608 26 10


Page 33 of 110

Friends or relatives 515 22 39

Hotel, resort or motel 212 9 25

Own property 159 7 4

Age Group (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

15 - 24 years 82 14 15

25 - 34 years 89 15 17

35 - 44 years 99 17 18

45 - 54 years 104 18 19

55 - 64 years 109 19 16

65 years or over 103 18 15

Travel Party (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Travelling with Children 223 38 26

Adult couple 200 34 27

Friends or relatives

(no children) 90 15 15

Travelling alone 53 9 26

Purpose of Visit (Visitors) (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Holiday 394 67 42


Other 15 3 6

In summary, beaches in the Great Lakes LGA are the number one attraction for domestic overnight travellers

and this is considerably higher than the NSW average of 23%. 49% of these people live in Regional NSW while

42% come from Sydney. 28% stay at caravan parks and commercial camping grounds which also exceeds the

NSW average of 13%. The number of visitors from each demographic is fairly even with only slightly more

visitors within the 55 to 64 age bracket. The majority of visitors travel with children and overall visitors come

to the Great Lakes LGA for a holiday.

Table 2.9.5 Domestic Day Trip visitor information for Great Lakes LGA.

Top 5 Activities (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

Eat out at restaurants 155 39 44


Go to the beach 95 24 10

Go shopping (pleasure) 78 20 21

In summary, the most popular activity for domestic day trippers is to eat out at restaurants. Around 24% of

domestic day trippers will visit the beach and this exceeds the NSW average of 10%.

Table 2.9.6 International visitors information for Great Lakes LGA.

Top 4 Origin Markets (‘000) Great Lakes % NSW Average %

UK 3 26 11

New Zealand 2 13 13

Germany 1 10 4

USA 1 10 10

In Summary, visitors from the UK make up the highest proportion of international visitors to the region with

26%. This exceeds the NSW average of 11%, while German visitors also exceed the NSW average of 4%.


Page 34 of 110

Local Accommodation Providers

Local accommodation providers also attract beach users to the coast especially during school holiday periods.

The beachside suburbs of the Great Lakes LGA have many holiday apartments/houses, caravan parks/camping

grounds and hotels/motels. The accommodation providers that have direct access to coastal waters are listed

below:

Table 2.9.7 Accommodation providers with direct coastal access in the Great Lakes LGA.

Venue Type Location Park Owner

Approx.

Max

Capacity

Tuncurry Beach Holiday Park Camping, cabins

and caravans Tuncurry Beach

North Coast

Holiday Parks 1,500

Forster Beach Holiday Park Camping, cabins

and caravans Forster Beach

North Coast

Holiday Parks 1,100

Ocean Front Motor Lodge Self-contained

apartments Forster Beach Private 32

The Dorsal Hotel Hotel Forster Beach Private 60

Camp Elim Cabins Seven Mile Beach Private 300

Sundowner Tiona Holiday Park Camping, cabins

and caravans Seven Mile Beach Private 650

The Ruins Campground Camping Seven Mile Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service 500

Pacific Palms Holiday Park Camping, cabins

and caravans Elizabeth Beach Private 500

Moby’s Beachside Retreat Self-contained

apartments Boomerang Beach Private 1,300

Sandbar Caravan Park Camping, cabins

and caravans Sandbar/Cellito Private 920

Seal Rocks Holiday Park Camping, cabins

and caravans

Number One/

Seal Rocks

North Coast

Holiday Parks 600

Treachery Camp Camping, cabins

and caravans Treachery Private 500

Yagon Head Campground Camping Submarine /

Fiona / Yagon

National Parks and

Wildlife Service 148

Boomeri Campground Camping Mungo Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service 80

Wells Campground Camping Mungo Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service 48

White Tree Bay Campground Camping Mungo Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service 60

Dees Corner Campground Camping Mungo Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service 64

Banksia Green Campground Camping Mungo Beach National Parks and

Wildlife Service

60

Stewart and Lloyds

Campground Camping Mungo Beach

National Parks and

Wildlife Service 48


Page 35 of 110

Venue Type Location Park Owner

Approx.

Max

Capacity

Oceanside Hawks Nest Self-contained

apartments Bennett’s Beach Private 200

Hawks Nest Beach Holiday

Park

Camping, cabins

and caravans Bennett’s Beach

North Coast

Holiday Parks 2,000

Note: There are also numerous inland caravan parks, motels and holiday rentals.

The Great Lakes LGA has a transient population meaning that some coastal locations may see limited activity

for the majority of the year until peak holiday times where the population dramatically increases.

Caravan parks/camping grounds that have direct access to coastal waters are of significance when determining

the level of risk at a certain location. As most guests are domestic or international visitors their knowledge of

the beach conditions will be less than local residents and therefore there is a higher chance of visitors getting

into difficulty.

Many access points from caravan parks and camping grounds also lead to unpatrolled beaches or sections of a

beach which may also increase the level of risk.

Some treatment options regarding accommodation providers that have direct access to coastal waters can be

found in Sections 3.2.3 – Education and Awareness Programs and 3.2.4 – Safety Signage.

2.9.4 BEACH USAGE STATISTICS

Volunteer Lifesaving Statistics:

The following statistics have been recorded by the lifesaving (volunteers) operating within the Great Lakes

LGA. Figures for are over five patrolling seasons (2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2013/14, 2014/15). Statistics for

lifesavers have been sourced from the Surf Life Saving internal management database known as ‘SurfGuard’.

Attendances:

The graph below provides the average daily attendances as recorded by lifesavers (weekends and public

holidays) for the services operating within the Great Lakes LGA.

Figure 2.9.4 Average daily attendance statistics recorded by Surf Life Saving Club volunteers in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).


Page 36 of 110

Notes to graph:

o Forster SLSC (Forster Beach) recorded the highest average daily attendance compared with other Surf Club

beaches for each patrolling season.

o The highest average daily attendance was recorded by Forster SLSC (Forster Beach) and this occurred in

season 2011/12.

o Cape Hawke SLSC (One Mile Beach) recorded the lowest average daily attendance compared with other

Surf Club beaches for each patrolling season.

o The lowest average daily attendance was recorded by Cape Hawke SLSC (One Mile Beach) and this

occurred in season 2012/13.

Rescues:

The graph below provides the rescues as recorded by lifesavers (weekends and public holidays) for the services

operating within the Great Lakes LGA.

Figure 2.9.5 Rescue statistics recorded by Surf Life Saving Club volunteers in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o Hawks Nest SLSC (Bennetts Beach) recorded the highest number of rescues in season 2010/11 and

2011/12.

o Cape Hawke SLSC (One Mile Beach) recorded the second highest number of rescues.

o Pacific Palms SLSC (Elizabeth Beach) and Forster SLSC (Forster Beach) recorded the least amount of rescues

and this is reflected by these two beaches being more protected from prominent south east swells than

Bennetts Beach and One Mile Beach.

First Aid and Preventative Actions: The graphs below display the first aid and prevention statistics for lifesavers (weekends and public holidays).

Preventative Actions may include:

o Swimmers advised/warned

o Craft users advised/warned

o Beach users advised/warned

o Warning signs erected

o Shark alarm

o Searches/lost children

First Aid cases may include:

o Minor injuries/first aid

o Major injures/hospitalisation

o Marine stings

o Spinal injuries

o Shock


Page 37 of 110

Figure 2.9.6 First Aid statistics recorded by Surf Life Saving Club volunteers in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o Pacific Palms SLSC (Elizabeth Beach) recorded the highest total number of first aids.

o The highest amount of first aid cases occurred in season 2010/2011 at Pacific Palms SLSC (Elizabeth

Beach).

o The lowest amount of first aid cases occurred in season 2013/14 at Forster SLSC (Forster Beach).

Figure 2.9.7 Prevention statistics recorded by Surf Life Saving Club volunteers in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o The graph shows that overall Hawks Nest SLSC (Bennetts Beach) recorded more preventative actions

compared with other Surf Life Saving Clubs in the Great Lakes LGA.

o Pacific Palms SLSC (Elizabeth Beach) recorded the least amount of preventative actions. Paid Lifeguard Statistics:

The following statistics have been recorded by the paid lifeguards operating within the Great Lakes LGA.

Figures are over 5 patrolling seasons (2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2013/14, 2014/15).

Attendances:

The graph below provides the average daily attendances as recorded by paid lifeguards (weekdays) for the

services operating within the Great Lakes LGA.


Page 38 of 110

Figure 2.9.8 Average daily attendance statistics recorded by paid lifeguards in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o Elizabeth Beach lifeguards recorded the highest average daily attendance figures compared with other

lifeguard locations.

o The highest average daily attendance was recorded by Elizabeth Beach and this occurred in season

2011/12.

o One Mile Beach lifeguards recorded the lowest average daily attendance figures compared with other

lifeguard locations.

o The lowest average daily attendance was recorded by One Mile Beach lifeguards and this occurred in

season 2011/12.

Rescues:

The graph below provides the rescues as recorded by lifeguards (weekdays) for the services operating within

the Great Lakes LGA.

Figure 2.9.9 Rescue statistics recorded by paid lifeguards in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o One Mile Beach lifeguards recorded the highest number of rescues in all seasons except 2014/15.

o Elizabeth Beach lifeguards recorded the least number of rescues for all combined seasons.

First Aid and Preventative Actions:

The graphs below display the first aid and prevention statistics for lifeguards (weekdays).


Page 39 of 110

Figure 2.9.10 First Aid statistics recorded by paid lifeguards in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o The highest amount of first aid cases occurred in season 2010/2011 at Forster Beach.

o The lowest amount of first aid cases occurred in season 2011/2012 at One Mile Beach.

Figure 2.9.11 Prevention statistics recorded by paid lifeguards in the Great Lakes LGA (July 2010 to June 2015).

Notes to graph:

o The graph shows that overall Bennetts Beach recorded more preventative actions than any other lifeguard

service in the Great Lakes LGA.

o One Mile Beach recorded the least amount of preventative actions.

Rescues/Preventative Actions:

The following tables show the cumulative statistics for both Preventative Actions and rescues which are then

used to determine the Preventative Actions: rescues ratio. In theory, the more Preventative Actions a

club/service makes, the number of rescues that are required to be conducted will decrease e.g. Tea Gardens

Hawks Nest SLSC makes 54 Preventative Actions before having to conduct a single rescue. These statistics may

highlight which clubs/services have the opportunity to be more proactive in making Preventative Actions with

the aim of reducing the amount of rescues that need to be performed.

Table 2.9.8 Volunteer Surf Life Saving total Preventative Actions and rescues for beaches in Great Lakes LGA (June 2010 – July 2015).

Forster SLSC Cape Hawke

SLSC Pacific Palms

SLSC

Tea Gardens Hawks Nest

SLSC

Total Preventative Actions 2,037 1,953 1,692 6,092

Total Rescues 29 64 42 111

Ratio Preventative Actions: Rescues 70:1 31:1 40:1 54:1


Page 40 of 110

Notes to table:

o The most effective ratio was recorded by Forster SLSC and the least effective was recorded by Cape Hawke

SLSC.

Table 2.9.9 Lifeguard services total Preventative Actions and rescues for beaches in the Great Lakes LGA (June 2010 – July 2015).

Forster Beach One Mile Beach Elizabeth Beach Bennetts

Beach

Total Preventative Actions 7,051 4,583 10,671 23,381

Total Rescues 19 68 13 40

Ratio Preventative Actions: Rescues 371:1 67:1 820:1 584:1

Notes to table:

o The most effective ratio was recorded by Elizabeth Beach lifeguards and the least effective was recorded by

One Mile Beach lifeguards.

2.9.5 DROWNING INCIDENTS

The drowning incidents that have occurred in the Great Lakes LGA from the 1st of July 2004 are provided

below. The table excludes any inland drowning incidents.

Table 2.9.10 Drowning Incidents from 01/07/04 to 30/06/15 in the Great Lakes LGA.

*The Coroner is still yet to determine if drowning was a contributing factor to this fatality.

Notes to table:

o The average age of drowning victims was 55.

o 77% of victims were male.

o 66% of people who drowned reside outside of the Great Lakes LGA.

o Three of the most recent drowning incidents occurred from fishing from rocks or a boat

o 55% of incidents occurred after 12:00hrs.

o It is acknowledged that the incidents at Seven Mile Beach and McBrides Beach were a result of Self-harm.

Date Location Time Age &

Gender Nationality

Residential Status

Activity Victim

Postcode

19/11/2006 Bennett's

Beach 13:00 30 / M Australian

Australian Resident

Swimming 2017

7/02/2009 Jimmy's Beach 19:15 31 / F Chinese Australian Resident

Surfcraft 2600

25/01/2010 Blueys Beach 18:45 61 / M Australian Australian Resident

Swimming 2042

8/02/2010 Wallis Lake Entrance

7:00 76 / M Australian Australian Resident

Boating 2428

31/08/2012 Seven Mile

Beach n/a 82 / F Australian

Australian Resident

Self Harm 3689

6/04/2014 McBrides

Beach 13:30 54 / M Australian

Australian Resident

Self Harm 2428

7/05/2014 Sugarloaf

Point 12:30 45 / M Australian

Australian Resident

Rock Fishing 2580

09/06/2015 Tuncurry * 11:30 75 / M Australian Australian Resident

Rock Fishing 2423

27/06/2015 Broughton

Island 10:00

40’s / M

Australian Australian Resident

Boating 2322


Page 41 of 110

While data surrounding incident location/time has been referenced, specific environmental conditions at the

time of incidents have not been adequately assessed to identify causal factors and specific trends. This

information exists and is held in raw format by the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), including wave

height/direction, tides, wind speed/direction, temperature, and visibility.

The Bureau of Meteorology and Surf Life Saving Australia are currently undertaking a retrospective analysis of

meteorological and oceanographic conditions prevalent at the time of drowning cases between 2003 and 2013

to identify trends and inform the refinement of the hazardous surf warning system.

Review and assessment of this data may identify environmental trends which may encourage/discourage

recreational activities, impact hazard/risk perception and risk taking behaviour, identify higher-risk conditions

for types of localities, and specific ‘Blacks spot’ locations. Dangerous surf warnings and education/awareness

programs may be improved as a result.


Page 42 of 110

Figure 2.9.12 Great Lakes LGA – Drowning and Victim Postcode.


Page 43 of 110

2.9.6 EMERGENCY CALLOUTS

There have been 76 emergency callouts through the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (SRERS) from

1st January 2008 to 30th June 2015 in the Great Lakes LGA. The SRERS involves callout teams

(lifesavers/lifeguards) including ‘after hours’ responding to emergencies that have been tasked by the Police.

As a result of the 76 callouts, 24 persons were rescued and 53 callouts resulted in ‘no further action’ or ‘stood

down before response’ meaning resources were ultimately not required. Such cases include self rescue, rescue

by another member of the public, rescue by another emergency response organisation, and false alarms.

Unfortunately, 5 of these callouts were a result of coastal drowning.

Note: The data below does not incorporate incidents from other emergency services where the SRERS may not have been

tasked e.g. Water Police, Ambulance and Marine Rescue data.

Table 2.9.11 Emergency Callouts through the SRES from 01/01/08 to 30/06/15 in the Great Lakes LGA.

Date Incident Location Season Day Time Job Type Summary Outcome

23/04/2008 Lighthouse Beach Autumn Wed 8:00 Rock Related 1 Person Rescued

24/04/2008 Elizabeth Beach Autumn Thu 14:51 Rockfishing Stood Down

30/12/2008 Bennetts Beach Summer Tue 14:56 Shark Sighting No Further Action

23/12/2008 One Mile Beach Summer Tue 14:05 Swimming 2 Persons Rescued

7/02/2009 Sandbar/Cellito Summer Sat 14:26 Shark Sighting No Further Action

10/04/2009 Pebbly Beach Autumn Fri 11:23 Diving/

Snorkelling No Further Action

23/04/2009 Wallis Lake

Entrance Autumn Thu 10:28 SurfCraft 1 Person Rescued

31/10/2009 Bennetts Beach Spring Sat 11:09 Shark Sighting No Further Action

1/01/2010 Jimmys Beach Summer Fri 13:01 Self Harm 1 Person Found


Entrance Summer Mon 7:19 Rockfishing 1 Coastal Drowning


Entrance Autumn Mon 11:23 Environmental No Further Action

23/03/2010 Blueys Beach Autumn Tue 16:14 Swimming 1 Person Rescued


Entrance Autumn Sun 14:47 Vessel 1 Person Rescued

16/01/2011 Pebbly Beach Summer Sun 16:42 Swimming 2 Persons Rescued


Entrance Summer Tue 8:23 Vessel No Further Action

30/01/2011 Nine Mile Beach Summer Sun 9:45 Shark Sighting No Further Action

13/02/2011 Bennetts Beach Summer Sun 14:05 Shark Sighting No Further Action

1/03/2011 Boomerang Beach Autumn Tue 17:35 Vessel No Further Action

17/06/2011 Seal Rocks Point Winter Fri 13:29 Rockfishing 1 Person Rescued

19/11/2011 Bennetts Beach Spring Sat 10:00 Shark Sighting No Further Action


Entrance Spring Sat 16:40 Vessel 1 Person Rescued

31/12/2011 Blueys Beach Summer Sat 11:43 Swimming 3 Persons Rescued

18/01/2012 One Mile Beach Summer Wed 14:35 Swimming No Further Action

18/01/2012 Forster Main Beach Summer Wed 9:49 Swimming No Further Action


Page 44 of 110


10/05/2012 Elizabeth Beach Autumn Thu 15:12 Swimming No Further Action

29/06/2012 Elizabeth Beach Winter Fri 8:44 Swimming No Further Action

16/07/2012 Bennetts Beach Winter Mon 10:46 Shark Sighting No Further Action

5/10/2012 Seal Rocks Spring Fri 14:52 Shark Sighting No Further Action

28/10/2012 Boat Beach Spring Sun 9:05 SurfCraft No Further Action

11/12/2012 Forster Summer Tue 10:33 Swimming No Further Action

22/12/2012 Boomerang Beach Summer Sat 15:45 Swimming No Further Action

29/12/2012 Bennetts Beach Summer Sat 10:36 Shark Sighting No Further Action

4/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Fri 9:28 Shark Sighting No Further Action

5/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Sat 10:28 Shark Sighting No Further Action

7/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Mon 8:35 Shark Sighting No Further Action

7/01/2013 Forster Summer Mon 10:06 Other No Further Action

8/01/2013 Nine Mile Beach Summer Tue 9:45 SurfCraft No Further Action

11/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Fri 14:23 Other No Further Action

23/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Wed 9:05 Shark Sighting No Further Action

24/01/2013 Bennetts Beach Summer Thu 8:38 Shark Sighting No Further Action


Entrance Summer Thu 17:24 Vessel 1 Person Rescued

2/02/2013 Tea Gardens Summer Sat 17:13 Vessel 1 Person Rescued


Entrance Autumn Thu 9:22 Swimming No Further Action

17/03/2013 Forster Autumn Sun 13:07 Swimming 1 Person Rescued


Entrance Spring Wed 10:16 SurfCraft No Further Action

12/10/2013 Seven Mile Beach Spring Sat 16:10 SurfCraft No Further Action

22/10/2013 Seven Mile Beach Spring Tue 15:32 Swimming 1 Person Rescued

7/12/2013 One Mile Beach Summer Sat 16:56 Swimming No Further Action

17/12/2013 Seven Mile Beach Summer Tue 11:32 Swimming No Further Action

26/12/2013 Jimmy’s Beach Summer Thu 16:14 Vessel No Further Action

2/01/2014 Bennetts Beach Summer Thu 16:13 Shark Sighting No Further Action

21/01/2014 Seven Mile Beach Summer Tue 17:20 Swimming No Further Action

11/03/2014 Booti Hill /

Flat Rock Point Autumn Tue 17:15 Vessel 1 Person Rescued

17/03/2014 Forster Autumn Mon 13:54 SurfCraft No Further Action

6/04/2014 McBrides Beach Autumn Sun 13:30 Rockfishing 1 Coastal Drowning

14/04/2014 Boomerang Beach Autumn Mon 12:57 Swimming 2 Persons Rescued

21/04/2014 Sandbar / Cellito Autumn Mon 13:58 Other No Further Action

7/05/2014 Sugarloaf Point Autumn Wed 12:31 Rockfishing 2 Persons Rescued,

1 Coastal Drowning

9/06/2014 Elizabeth Beach Winter Mon 10:26 SurfCraft No Further Action

22/07/2014 Boat Beach Winter Tue 9:48 Rock Related No Further Action


Entrance Winter Mon 9:56 Swimming No Further Action


Page 45 of 110


23/09/2014 One Mile Beach Spring Tue 13:47 Swimming No Further Action

23/09/2014 One Mile Beach Spring Tue 15:01 Swimming 2 Persons Rescued

29/09/2014 One Mile Beach Spring Mon 11:44 Shark Sighting No Further Action

15/10/2014 Forster Spring Wed 13:58 Other 1 Inland Drowning

21/10/2014 Boat Beach Spring Tue 14:40 SurfCraft No Further Action

1/11/2014 Seal Rocks Spring Sat 15:36 Swimming No Further Action

9/11/2014 Forster Spring Sun 11:56 Swimming No Further Action

23/11/2014 Forster Spring Sun 15:15 Swimming No Further Action


Entrance Spring Sun 19:26 Swimming No Further Action

4/01/2015 Forster Summer Sun 8:06 Shark Sighting No Further Action

21/01/2015 Nine Mile Beach Summer Wed 17:11 Swimming No Further Action

31/01/2015 Nine Mile Beach Summer Sat 15:25 Swimming No Further Action


Entrance Summer Thu 15:49 SurfCraft No Further Action

2/03/2015 Bennett’s Head Autumn Mon 8:47 Rock Related No Further Action

09/06/2015 Tuncurry Winter Tue 11:30 Rock Fishing 1 coastal drowning /

death

Notes to table:

o 16% of all emergency incidents occurred at Wallis Lake Entrance.

o 89% of emergency incidents were located in lands managed by Great Lakes Council and 11% were located

in lands managed by the National Parks and Wildlife Service.

o 46% of emergency incidents occurred within the Tuncurry to Cape Hawke area, 23% within the Seven Mile

Beach to Sandbar / Cellito area and 31% within the Seal Rocks to Hawks Nest area.

o 35% of emergency incidents were a result of swimming, 22% from shark sightings, 12% from rock fishing /

rock related incidents, 12% from surf craft, 10% from vessels and 9% from other unique means.

o 45% of emergency incidents occurred during summer, 24% during autumn, 8% during winter and 23%

during spring.


Coastal usage and incident data (e.g. drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard

statistics) should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for

coastal safety.


Page 46 of 110

2.10 COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTATION

Communicating with stakeholders about risk perception and tolerance is a core component of the risk

assessment and management process.

Stakeholder Consultation

Consultation with a number of stakeholders was formally undertaken to ensure Land Managers and other key

stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide local input and knowledge i.e. validation of strategies in

place, risk management issues and opportunities that may exist.

Local stakeholder meetings were conducted with:

o Andrew Staniland, Manager – Parks and Recreation, Great Lakes Council

o Rachel Kempers, Area Manager – Great Lakes, National Parks and Wildlife Service

o Brett Cann, Senior Ranger, National Parks and Wildlife Service

The consultation process has been aided in the following ways:

o Open community forums and workshops,

o Print and radio media announcements of workshops and consultation,

o Written and verbal follow ups post workshops,

o Use of social media – Twitter,

o Web based surveys,

o Web based information submissions,

o On-site communication and distribution of flyers,

o On-site one-to-one surveying, and

o Draft reports circulated to the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council.

Consultation Workshop

Two separate community forums were held in the Great Lakes LGA to engage with the local community. These

were advertised in local media and pre-identified stakeholders were notified via email and follow up phone

calls. The community forums were open to any member of the public including surf lifesavers, lifeguards,

fishing groups, surfing associations, emergency services personnel, boaters, residents, etc.

The first community forum was held at Cape Hawke Surf Life Saving Club on Wednesday 24th June, 2015 and

was attended by:

o Simon Lee, Forster Surf Life Saving Club and the Australian Lifeguard Service Coordinator – Great Lakes /

Taree

o Grahame Burns, Local resident

o Nathan De Rooy, Cape Hawke Surf Life Saving Club and Professional Lifeguard

o Julie Wilcox, Director of Lifesaving Lower North Coast Surf Life Saving and Forster Surf Life Saving Club

o Brian Wilcox, President Lower North Coast Surf Life Saving and Forster Surf Life Saving Club

The second community forum was held at Hawks Nest Golf Club on Monday 29th June, 2015 and was attended

by:

o Rhonda Scruton, CEO Hunter Surf Life Saving

o Henry Scruton, President Hunter Surf Life Saving

o Brad Love, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club

o Dan Chester, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club and Fire and Rescue NSW

o Kate Maddison, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club


Page 47 of 110

o Debbie Booth, Director of Education Hunter Surf Life Saving and Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving

Club

o Peter Weir, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club

o John Esters, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club

o Phillip Everett, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club

o Tony Logue, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Surf Life Saving Club

o Trevor Jennings, Tea Gardens Hawks Nest Progress Association

Figure 2.10.1: Project Blueprint Flyer.

Consultation Survey

The consultation process also involved the introduction of two online surveys which has been useful to capture

input from a wide range of key stakeholders, at local/regional level. The first survey was sent to both internal

and external stakeholders (total of 128 stakeholders). Questions focused on drowning identification and

prevention. The second survey was sent to internal stakeholders only e.g. lifesavers and lifeguards (total of 101

stakeholders). Questions focused on visitation numbers and incidents. Specific questions and answers can be

referenced in ‘Appendix F’ (to be included with final report).

Stakeholder communication

The process of communicating risk estimates from the assessment process to decision-makers and ultimately

to the public, sometimes referred to as risk education, is only one part of the communication process. In

getting those affected by risk to accept risk mitigation measures, and in providing decision-makers and

communities with the information they need to tolerate and deal with risks, there needs to be two-way

communications that includes those affected by risk, the public, into the decision-making process.

Great Lakes Council, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast and other

relevant coastal safety agencies should hold regular liaison meetings as an effective forum which raises safety

issues and implements coastal safety strategies in the Great Lakes LGA. It is acknowledged that this concept

would need the establishment of a ‘terms of reference’ with clear structural and governance arrangements. It

is recommended that the committee could have a standing item on all future meeting agendas titled ‘coastal

risk management – status and issues’, or similar. Treatment options found in this report can then be addressed


Page 48 of 110

in this agenda item. After an initial meeting, participants are encouraged to meet at least twice a year (before

and after) the surf life saving season.

The Local Emergency Management Committee is an effective group in the Great Lakes LGA which discuss

emergency management processes, opportunities and issues (including coastal). The group is made up of

representatives from NSW Police, NSW Fire and Rescue, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW Ambulance Service,

State Emergency Service, Marine Rescue, Great Lakes Council, Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast, Local

Government Departments (Education, Communication Services) and the Roads and Maritime Services.

Treatment Options 1.3, 2.3 & 4.2

Land Managers in the Great Lakes Local Government Area should meet with Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast

and other related coastal safety agencies as an effective forum which raises safety issues and implements

coastal safety strategies. It is encouraged that the treatment options found in this report be addressed as part

of this meeting. After an initial meeting, participants are encouraged to meet at least twice a year, before and

after the surf life saving season.


Page 49 of 110

3 RISK ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

3.1 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY (INHERENT GROSS RISK)

3.1.1 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY INDEX

The Action Planning Priority Index can be viewed as the gross risk score for a beach. The index seeks to identify

the risks associated with the broader coastal environment under assessment, rather than specific hazards and

risks present at a particular location or site. The majority of information detailed in this section of the report

will be identified through pre-existing data (where available), with new data sourced where gaps are present

or the data is not reliable.

The total score for the Action Planning Priority Index is intended to be used for the purpose of prioritising risk

mitigation strategies provided for consideration in this report. The individual components of the Action

Planning Priority Index should not be considered in isolation from the total scores outlined in Table 3.1.8.

The information is based on modal data for peak visitation during the busiest season(s).

The Action Planning Priority Index uses the following risk identification information:

1. Australian Beach Safety & Management Program (ABSAMP) Rating

2. Local Population Rating (LPR)

3. Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR)

4. Access Rating (AR)

3.1.2 AUSTRALIAN BEACH SAFETY AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Table 3.1.1 ABSAMP modal ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Name ABSAMP Rating

Nine Mile Beach 7

Tuncurry Beach 7

Tuncurry Rock Pool 2

Forster Main Beach 4

Second Head 4*

Pebbly Beach 4

The Tanks 5*

Bennett’s Head 5*

One Mile Beach 6

Burgess Beach 4

Cape Hawke Headland 4*

McBrides Beach 4

Cape Hawke North Beach 7

Cape Hawke South Beach 7

Janies Corner 7


Page 50 of 110

Location Name ABSAMP Rating

Seven Mile Beach 6

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 7*

Lindeman Cove 7

Yes I Know Rock 6*

Elizabeth Beach 4

Shelly Beach 3

Seagull Point 5*

Boomerang Beach 6

Boomerang Point 6*

Blueys Beach 6

Blueys Head 6*

Danger Point 6*

Bald Head 6*

Sandbar / Cellito Beach 6

Number Six Beach 5

Number Five Beach 5

Number Four Beach 5

Number Three Beach 4

Number Two Beach 4

Number One Beach 4

Seal Rocks Point 4*

Boat Beach 3

Sugarloaf Point 5*

Lighthouse Beach 7

Treachery Head 7*

Treachery Beach 7

Yagon Head 7*

Submarine / Yagon Beach 7

Big Gibber Headland 7*

Mungo Beach 7

Dark Point North Beach 7

Dark Point / Little Gibber 7*

Bennett’s Beach 7

Yacaaba Headland 7*

* Great Lakes LGA Rock Platform Ratings


Page 51 of 110

3.1.3 LOCAL POPULATION RATING

The Local Population Rating (LPR) expands on the information obtained from the Facility Visitation Rating. This

additional population rating identifies the population of residents and/or non-residents located within 2km’s

of a coastal location under assessment. The highest figure (resident or non-resident) will be recorded.

Table 3.1.2 Local population rating descriptors.

Population Rating Qualifying Description (all staying/living within 2km of beach)

1 < 50 residents and/or < 20 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

2 50 – 250 residents and/or 21 – 100 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)



5 2500 + residents and/or 1000 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

Table 3.1.3 Local population ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location LPR Total

Nine Mile Beach 5

Tuncurry Beach 5



Second Head 5

Pebbly Beach 5

The Tanks 5

Bennett’s Head 5

One Mile Beach 5

Burgess Beach 5

Cape Hawke Headland 2

McBrides Beach 2



Janies Corner 1

Seven Mile Beach 4

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 3

Lindeman Cove 3

Yes I Know Rock 5

Elizabeth Beach 5

Shelly Beach 4

Seagull Point 4

Boomerang Beach 5

Boomerang Point 4

Blueys Beach 4

Blueys Head 4

Danger Point 4

Bald Head 4


Number Six Beach 1


Page 52 of 110

Location LPR Total

Number Five Beach 1

Number Four Beach 1


Number Two Beach 4

Number One Beach 4

Seal Rocks Point 4

Boat Beach 4

Sugarloaf Point 4

Lighthouse Beach 4

Treachery Head 3

Treachery Beach 3

Yagon Head 2


Big Gibber Headland 1

Mungo Beach 3


Dark Point / Little Gibber 1

Bennett’s Beach 5

Yacaaba Headland 1

3.1.4 HUMAN/ACTIVITY INTERACTION RATING The Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR) identifies any conflicts present at the coastal environment between the number of people and activities taking place. Activities include both those in the water and those on the beach.

Table 3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction descriptors.

Population

(in-water) Conflicting activities

Population

(on beach) Conflicting activities

100+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5 1000+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5

75-100 4 Persistent 4 750-1000 4 Persistent 4

50-75 3 Regular 3 500-750 3 Regular 3

25-50 2 Isolated conflicts 2 250-500 2 Isolated conflicts 2

1-25 1 No conflicts reported 1 1-250 1 No conflicts reported 1

Table 3.1.5 Human/Activity Interaction ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Population

(in water) Conflict

Population

(on beach) Conflict HAI Total

Nine Mile Beach 2 2 1 3 8

Tuncurry Beach 5 2 1 2 10

Tuncurry Rock Pool 3 2 1 2 8

Forster Main Beach 5 2 3 2 12

Second Head 1 1 1 1 4

Pebbly Beach 1 2 1 2 6

The Tanks 1 2 1 2 6

Bennett’s Head 1 1 1 1 4


Page 53 of 110

Location Population

(in water) Conflict

Population

(on beach) Conflict HAI Total

One Mile Beach 5 2 2 2 11

Burgess Beach 1 2 1 2 6

Cape Hawke Headland 1 1 1 1 4

McBrides Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Cape Hawke North Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Cape Hawke South Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Janies Corner 1 1 1 1 4

Seven Mile Beach 4 2 1 2 9

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 1 1 1 1 4

Lindeman Cove 1 1 1 1 4

Yes I Know Rock 1 1 1 1 4

Elizabeth Beach 5 3 4 3 15

Shelly Beach 2 2 1 2 7

Seagull Point 1 1 1 1 4

Boomerang Beach 4 2 1 2 9

Boomerang Point 1 1 1 1 4

Blueys Beach 3 2 1 2 8

Blueys Head 1 1 1 1 4

Danger Point 1 1 1 1 4

Bald Head 1 1 1 1 4

Sandbar / Cellito Beach 3 2 1 3 9

Number Six Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Number Five Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Number Four Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Number Three Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Number Two Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Number One Beach 4 2 1 2 9

Seal Rocks Point 2 2 1 2 7

Boat Beach 3 2 1 3 9

Sugarloaf Point 1 1 1 1 4

Lighthouse Beach 3 2 1 3 9

Treachery Head 1 1 1 1 4

Treachery Beach 3 2 1 2 8

Yagon Head 1 1 1 1 4

Submarine / Yagon Beach 2 2 1 1 6

Big Gibber Headland 1 1 1 1 4

Mungo Beach 2 2 1 2 7

Dark Point North Beach 1 1 1 1 4

Dark Point / Little Gibber 1 1 1 1 4

Bennett’s Beach 5 2 3 3 13

Yacaaba Headland 2 1 1 2 6


Page 54 of 110

3.1.5 ACCESS RATING

Beaches or coastal environments that have increased accessibility (i.e. near major roads, cities, public

transport, car parks, boat ramps, maintained access paths etc.) increase the likelihood of users at that beach.

This directly increases the level of risk of drowning and or injury.

Table 3.1.6 Access rating descriptors.

Table 3.1.7 Access ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Access Rating

Nine Mile Beach 3

Tuncurry Beach 4



Second Head 2

Pebbly Beach 3

The Tanks 3

Bennett’s Head 2

One Mile Beach 4

Burgess Beach 3

Cape Hawke Headland 2

McBrides Beach 2



Janies Corner 2

Seven Mile Beach 4

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 2

Lindeman Cove 2

Yes I Know Rock 2

Elizabeth Beach 4

Shelly Beach 3

Seagull Point 2

Boomerang Beach 4

Access Rating Qualifying Description

1 No identifiable access via road or track, no facilities, car parking or obvious access

points

2 Access via un-maintained track with no facilities and/or via water access

3

Access via any form of track or walkway (either maintained or un-maintained) AND any

provision of facilities or services including (but not limited to) public transport, shower,

public toilet, payphone, kiosk, significant roadway, parking

4

Access via maintained tracks with clearly identified parking area AND/OR provision of

basic facilities (i.e. public toilets, public shower/ wash down area) AND/OR within 10km

of moderate sized town or city (population greater than 5,000)

5

Clearly evident, marked or signposted and maintained access points AND/OR within

10km of major town or city (population greater than 25,000) AND/OR car parking for 50

or more vehicles/boat trailers. Public transport provided within 250m of a beach access

point


Page 55 of 110

Location Access Rating

Boomerang Point 2

Blueys Beach 3

Blueys Head 2

Danger Point 1

Bald Head 2


Number Six Beach 1

Number Five Beach 1

Number Four Beach 1


Number Two Beach 1

Number One Beach 3

Seal Rocks Point 2

Boat Beach 3

Sugarloaf Point 2

Lighthouse Beach 3

Treachery Head 3

Treachery Beach 3

Yagon Head 2


Big Gibber Headland 2

Mungo Beach 3


Dark Point / Little Gibber 2

Bennett’s Beach 4

Yacaaba Headland 2

3.1.6 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY SCORE

The action planning priority score provides an indicator for the overall level of risk of the location. The scores

range from 0 to 60. These scores can be used to prioritise the order in which risk treatments described in the

next section of this report are implemented.

Table 3.1.8 Summary of action planning priority calculations for each assessed location.

Location

AMSAMP

X 2

(Out of 20)

Population

Support

X 2

(Out of 10)

Human

Activity/

Interaction

(Out of 20)

Access

X 2

(Out of 10)

Total Score

(Out of 60)

Nine Mile Beach 14 10 8 6 38

Tuncurry Beach 14 10 10 8 42

Tuncurry Rock Pool 4 10 8 10 32

Forster Main Beach 8 10 12 10 40

Second Head 8 10 4 4 26

Pebbly Beach 8 10 6 6 30

The Tanks 10 10 6 6 32

Bennett’s Head 10 10 4 4 28


Page 56 of 110

Location

AMSAMP

X 2

(Out of 20)

Population

Support

X 2

(Out of 10)

Human

Activity/

Interaction

(Out of 20)

Access

X 2

(Out of 10)

Total Score

(Out of 60)

One Mile Beach 12 10 11 8 41

Burgess Beach 8 10 6 6 30

Cape Hawke Headland 8 4 4 4 20

McBrides Beach 8 4 4 4 20

Cape Hawke North Beach 14 2 4 2 22

Cape Hawke South Beach 14 2 4 2 22

Janies Corner 14 2 4 4 24

Seven Mile Beach 12 8 9 8 37

Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point 14 6 4 4 28

Lindeman Cove 14 6 4 4 28

Yes I Know Rock 12 10 4 4 30

Elizabeth Beach 8 10 15 8 41

Shelly Beach 6 8 7 6 27

Seagull Point 10 8 4 4 26

Boomerang Beach 12 10 9 8 39

Boomerang Point 12 8 4 4 28

Blueys Beach 12 8 8 6 34

Blueys Head 12 8 4 4 28

Danger Point 12 8 4 2 26

Bald Head 12 8 4 4 28

Sandbar / Cellito Beach 12 8 9 6 35

Number Six Beach 10 2 4 2 18

Number Five Beach 10 2 4 2 18

Number Four Beach 10 2 4 2 18

Number Three Beach 8 2 4 2 16

Number Two Beach 8 8 4 2 22

Number One Beach 8 8 9 6 31

Seal Rocks Point 8 8 7 4 27

Boat Beach 6 8 9 6 29

Sugarloaf Point 10 8 4 4 26

Lighthouse Beach 14 8 9 6 37

Treachery Head 14 6 4 6 30

Treachery Beach 14 6 8 6 34

Yagon Head 14 4 4 4 26

Submarine / Yagon Beach 14 4 6 6 30

Big Gibber Headland 14 2 4 4 24

Mungo Beach 14 6 7 6 33

Dark Point North Beach 14 2 4 4 24

Dark Point / Little Gibber 14 2 4 4 24

Bennett’s Beach 14 10 13 8 45

Yacaaba Headland 14 2 6 4 26


Page 57 of 110

Where limited resources prohibit the implementation of all risk treatments recommended in this report, those

beaches that have received a high action planning priority score should be treated first, then beaches with a

medium, low and very low score.

Table 3.1.9: Key to land management of locations.

Council Managed NSW National Parks and Wildlife

Managed Mixed Land Managers

Table 3.1.10 Action Planning Priority scores for assessed locations.

Priority Priority location Total Score Comments

1 Bennett’s Beach 45

High – this location should be

considered as a priority for

implementation of identified risk

treatment options

2 Tuncurry Beach 42




treatment options

3 One Mile Beach 41




treatment options

3 Elizabeth Beach 41




treatment options

5 Forster Main Beach 40

Medium – this location should be

considered for implementation of

identified risk treatment options after

locations rated as high or as funding

becomes available

6 Boomerang Beach 39





becomes available

7 Nine Mile Beach 38





becomes available

8 Seven Mile Beach 37





becomes available


Page 58 of 110


8 Lighthouse Beach 37





becomes available

10 Sandbar / Cellito

Beach 35





becomes available

11 Blueys Beach 34





becomes available

11 Treachery Beach 34





becomes available

13 Mungo Beach 33





becomes available

14 Tuncurry Rock Pool 32





becomes available

14 The Tanks 32





becomes available

16 Number One Beach 31





becomes available

17 Pebbly Beach 30

Low – this location should be



locations rated as medium or as

funding becomes available


Page 59 of 110


17 Burgess Beach 30






17 Yes I Know Rock 30






17 Treachery Head 30






17 Submarine / Yagon

Beach 30






22 Boat Beach 29






23 Bennett’s Head 28






23 Booti Hill / Flat Rock

Point 28






23 Lindeman Cove 28






23 Boomerang Point 28







Page 60 of 110


23 Blueys Head 28






23 Bald Head 28






29 Shelly Beach 27






29 Seal Rocks Point 27






31 Second Head 26






31 Seagull Point 26






31 Danger Point 26






31 Sugarloaf Point 26






31 Yagon Head 26







Page 61 of 110


31 Yacaaba Headland 26






37 Janies Corner 24






37 Big Gibber Headland 24






37 Dark Point North

Beach 24






37 Dark Point / Little

Gibber 24






41 Cape Hawke North

Beach 22






41 Cape Hawke South

Beach 22






41 Number Two Beach 22






44 Cape Hawke Headland 20

Very Low – this location should be



locations rated as low or as funding

becomes available


Page 62 of 110


44 McBrides Beach 20





becomes available

46 Number Six Beach 18





becomes available

46 Number Five Beach 18





becomes available

46 Number Four Beach 18





becomes available

49 Number Three Beach 16





becomes available


As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using a

staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence.

Key High 41+ Medium 31-40 Low 21-30 Very Low 0-20


Page 63 of 110

3.2 OVERVIEW OF PRINCIPAL RISK TREATMENTS

3.2.1 INTRODUCTION

There are a range of risk treatment options that can be considered in the context of coastal risk management.

The selection of the most appropriate option involves balancing the financial, social and environmental

impacts of implementing each against the benefits derived from each. These may include any combination of

the following:

o Spread (share) risk – insurance,

o Engineer (structural and technological) risk treatment – include modified practices,

o Regulatory and institutional – change through revised regulations and planning,

o Avoid – isolate the risk, move people away,

o Research to better understand, and

o Educate and inform stakeholders.

3.2.2 HIERARCHY OF RISK TREATMENTS (CONTROLS)

In determining the most appropriate and cost effective option, it is important to consider the hierarchy of risk

treatments (controls). The hierarchy is a sequence of options which offer a number of ways to approach the

hazard control process.

o Hard controls deal with the tangible such as:

Eliminate the hazard which in a coastal context is often difficult to achieve.

Isolate the hazard which in a coastal context can be difficult due to the dynamic nature of

environmental and weather conditions.

Use engineering controls such as design of access paths, installation of appropriate signage, and

revegetation.

Use administrative controls such as supervision, emergency action plans, other documented policies,

practices and procedures.

Use of personal protective equipment such as lifejackets and public rescue equipment.

o Soft controls deal with human behaviour such as:

Use of effective leadership, management, trust, ethics, integrity, and building relationships

Education

Outlined below are principal risk treatment solutions that expand upon those listed within the Risk Register

and Treatment Plan in ‘Appendix B’. The solutions outlined endeavour to provide specific and detailed

information relative to the beach locations; however due to the diverse nature of location characteristics,

recommendations are at times mainly generic in nature.

Land Managers should plan to adopt the most appropriate treatments specific to their organisations

capabilities and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders. The principal risk treatments are outlined on the

following pages.


Page 64 of 110

3.2.3 EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAMS

Public education and awareness programs are a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy,

and target both the pre-arrival and early arrival periods (prior to hazard exposure).

Key factors pertaining to effective education and awareness programs include:

o Consistency in safety messaging (elimination of confusing/unclear or dissipative information).

o Consistency in the method of provision (ongoing information provided at regular locations/times).

o Longevity in the provision of information (ongoing, not a one-off).

Education Summary:

The following table outlines a range of education and awareness programs that can be adopted by Land

Managers within the Great Lakes LGA. Table 3.2.1 is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all education

and awareness programs available to Land Managers, it is intended to provide examples of a range of

programs that are available and delivered within the context of coastal aquatic safety. Land Managers are not

limited to the organisations listed in the table below, however they should ensure that any provider engaged

to act on their behalf is adequately licensed, qualified, regularly audited and insured.

Table 3.2.1: Examples of Education and Awareness programs.

Organisation Program Focus Area

Australian Professional

Lifeguard Association Backpack Beach Survival Guide Swimming / Rip Currents

AustSwim Learn to Swim Swimming

Marine Rescue NSW Log on and off Boating

Marine Rescue NSW Using your marine radio Boating

NSW Department of Primary

Industries (Fisheries) Get hooked – It’s fun to fish Fishing

Paddle NSW Paddle Safe Watercraft

Surf Educate Australia Kids Academy of Surf Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Educate Australia Corp Surf Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW Nippers Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW Surf Ed. Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW Beach to Bush Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW Western Sydney Blackspot Project Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW BeachSafe Swimming / Rip Currents

Surf Life Saving NSW Coastal Accommodation Safety

Network Swimming / Rip Currents

Surfing NSW Vegemite Surf Groms Surfing / Rip Currents

Surfing NSW Surfers Rescue 24/7 Surfing / Conducting Rescues

Recreational Fishing

Alliance NSW Rock Fishing Safety Awareness Rock Fishing

Royal Life Saving Society Swim and Survive Swimming

Transport NSW (Maritime) Old 4 new lifejacket upgrade Boating & Fishing

Transport NSW (Maritime) Wear a Lifejacket Boating & Fishing

Transport NSW (Maritime) Boating Education Officers Boating


Page 65 of 110

The figures below are not intended as a comprehensive display of all education and awareness collateral

available to Land Managers, rather to provide examples of a range of collateral that are available and can be

provided to Land Managers upon request. Land Managers are not limited to the education collateral shown in

the figures below, however they should ensure that any education collateral distributed or displayed is aligned

to the key water safety messages promoted by the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council.

Figure 3.2.1: Don’t put your life on the line™2

Figure 3.2.2: Survive a rip current.

Figure 3.2.3: Old 4 New Lifejacket Upgrade.

Figure 3.2.4: Swim between the flags.

3.2.3.1 EXISTING CONTROLS:

During the course of the assessment and throughout the consultation process, Australian CoastSafe were

made aware of various beach safety information sources and education programs that are currently in place to

educate and inform the public at a local level in the Great Lakes LGA. These programs as well as any other

initiatives within and around the Great Lakes LGA should continue to be implemented, reviewed and

supported by Land Managers and key stakeholder groups.

It is acknowledged that Land Managers or key stakeholder groups may not have the capacity or expertise to

implement surf education programs, and where this is the case they should work with peak water safety

organisations to enhance the delivery of education programs within these areas.

Swimming Safety:

Nippers:

The nippers program is a junior activities program that introduces children aged 5 to 13 to surf lifesaving. It is a

fun outdoors activity that develops a child’s confidence, teaches valuable life skills and safety knowledge.

Nippers are held every Sunday between October to March at Forster SLSC, Cape Hawke SLSC, Pacific Palms

SLSC and Tea Gardens Hawks Nest SLSC (Surf Life Saving NSW, 2015).

Surf Awareness School:

Volunteers from the Forster Surf Life Saving Club organise a surf awareness school that is staged over a three

weekly period during the summer holiday period. The programme is aimed at holiday makers and in three

years has reached 360 people. The majority of participants involved come from country NSW and Sydney. The

programme has gained a positive reputation with the Forster community as a fun and worthwhile Christmas

School holiday activity.

2 Don’t put your life on the line is a registered trade mark of the NSW Recreational Fishing Alliance NSW.


Page 66 of 110

The club also runs an educational programme for local indigenous teenagers as well as running programs for

local schools upon request.

These programs in particular should continue to be supported by Great Lakes Council and could be expanded

to other areas outside of Forster such as Bennetts Beach.

Surfing Safety:

Surf Schools/Surf Groms:

The Great Lakes Surf School operates around the Forster area. This school provides surfing lessons, surfing

tours and most importantly provides beginner surfers with key surf safety knowledge and awareness.

Surfers Rescue 24/7:

Surfing NSW, with support of the NSW Government are giving surfers in NSW the opportunity to do a free CPR

and Board Rescue Course (Surfers Rescue 24/7, 2015). Any competent surfer from a recreational grass roots

boardrider to professional surfers can participate in this course.

Rock Fishing Safety:

The Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW has produced the Safe Fishing website, which also provides

multilingual information and resources to promote safer recreational rock fishing (Recreational Fishing

Alliance, 2011). Part of this initiative has been the provision of multilingual flyers and DVDs to promote rock

fishing safety.

Education days are also organised for rock fishers to provide educational learning and fishing techniques that

will provide rock fishers with more information to make an informed decision about where they decide to fish

as well as communicating key safety messages. One of these education days has also been filmed and is

available through the YouTube channel ‘ACFishing’.

Figure 3.2.5 Recreational Fishing Alliance rock fishing school.

Boating Safety:

Lifejackets:

Nine out of ten people who drowned when boating in NSW were not wearing a lifejacket (Roads and Maritime

Services 2014). On 1 November 2010, the rules governing the use of lifejackets on recreational vessels were

strengthened to prevent loss of life on waterways. Lifejackets must be worn in the following circumstances:

1. By children less than 12 years old at all times when aboard a vessel less than 4.8 metres long and when

aboard a vessel less than 8 metres long which is underway.


Page 67 of 110

2. By anyone being towed, including waterskiing, wakeboarding or parasailing and those being towed on

tubes, sea biscuits or similar towable devices.

3. Boating at night and boating alone when aboard a vessel less than 4.8 metres long.

4. By a person on a PWC (Jet Ski) at all times.

5. By anyone aboard a canoe or kayak when more than 100 metres from shore.

6. By a person kitesurfing alone more than 400 metres from shore.

7. In certain situations of heightened risk including, but not limited to bad weather and crossing bars.

8. By anyone at any time when directed by the skipper.

Boating Education Officers:

Boating Education Officers support Boating Safety Officers to help raise boating safety awareness and provide

public safety information. Boating Education Officers visit boat ramps and retailers to directly engage

recreational boaters to deliver information about the latest safety gear. They can also visit schools to deliver

interactive boating safety presentations.

Smart Phone App:

The Marine Rescue smartphone app provides boaters with a range of valuable safety tools and information.

The app enables boaters to log on directly with Marine Rescue and there is also a safety tracking option,

updating a boats position every 30 minutes (Marine Rescue NSW 2015).

General Water Safety:

Smart Phone App:

The Beachsafe smartphone app provides beach goers with detailed information about Australia’s beaches,

including full weather and forecast information, tide, swell and water temperature. Most importantly the app

shows which locations are patrolled by either paid lifeguards or volunteer lifesavers and the dates / times the

beach is supervised (Beachsafe 2015).

Media:

Throughout the year, local radio and print media play a key role in delivering key safety messages as well as

informing the public when dangerous surf warnings are in place.

Figure 3.2.6 Great Lakes Advocate.


Page 68 of 110

3.2.3.2 RECOMMENDED CONTROLS:

Educational Messages:

Land Managers should continue to provide public education/awareness programs which include standardised

key safety messages and align/reference to peak coastal water safety agency websites such as:

NSW Water Safety Advisory Council: http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/beach-safety/

Together with the following referenced websites of the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council for beach safety:

o BeachSafe: www.BeachSafe.org.au

o Safe Fishing: http://www.safefishing.com.au

o Boating: http://maritimemanagement.transport.nsw.gov.au

Online Education:

The Great Lakes Council (2015) website provides a list of beaches which are patrolled and unpatrolled. This

webpage could be further enhanced by providing a detailed list of the patrol dates and times. The webpage

could also provide surf safety tips and refer back to the BeachSafe website - www.BeachSafe.org.au.

The Great Lakes Tourism website provides a short description and the facilities available at main beaches

within the LGA (Great Lakes, 2015). These webpages could also be further enhanced by providing a detailed

list of the patrol dates and times together with surf safety tips.

The National Parks and Wildlife Service (2015) website provides a list of safety advice for all water related

activities and provides a link to the NSW Water Safety website.

Land Managers may also be able to utilise social media through its Facebook account to communicate safety

messages or advise when dangerous surf warnings are in place.

Community Education:

School Programs:

Providing surf education is a key component in addressing the drowning chain and has the opportunity to

reach a key target group. Surf education is not a core responsibility for Land Managers however they are still

encouraged to assist with school participation levels. This type of promotion could include joint media

releases, website promotion or written communication from council to target groups in local/regional areas.

Surf education (theory and application) can be very beneficial for primary and high school students. This type

of education can include but is not limited to:

o Class room based surf safety presentations

o Swim and survive

o Surf education programs at the beach

Apart from education within schools the Great Aussie Bush Camp (located outside of Tea Gardens) is another

example of where surf education could take place.

http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/beach-safety/

http://www.beachsafe.org.au/

http://www.safefishing.com.au/


http://www.beachsafe.org.au/


Page 69 of 110

Figure 3.2.7 Surf Safety Presentation at Newport Beach (Pittwater LGA). (Photo Courtesy of Surf Life Saving Sydney Northern Beaches)

Water Safety Information:

Displaying posters which promote water safety at locations such as public amenity blocks, Surf Life Saving

Clubs and visitor information displays directly located around coastal beach access is a great opportunity for

the exposure of messages.

Figure 3.2.8: An example of rip current sign on public amenity blocks.

Figure 3.2.9: Example of a National Parks visitor information board where water safety information could be displayed.

Educational posters/signage should not be placed in positions where they would compete with formal aquatic

and recreational safety signage which is usually placed around formal access points and high traffic areas (see

Section 3.2.4 Safety Signage).

Quick Response (QR) codes may also be able to be utilised on any posters and visitor information

noticeboards. QR codes involve the use of smart phone technology to provide location based safety

messaging. They also allow for the embedding of additional detailed information for beach users that are

interested in knowing more, without competing with other relevant information in visitor information boards.

The system works by scanning a smart phone over the QR Code. These codes can be linked to specific water

related safety information about a specific location, with the potential for multilingual messages. Information

may also be able to include when dangerous surf warnings occur.

Tourists and Visitors:

The Great Lakes LGA is a popular destination for domestic travellers, especially through the school holiday

periods. A number of caravan and tourist parks within the Great Lakes LGA provide direct access to the coast,

often to unpatrolled sections of a beach. A recent study has found that “visitors to coastal tourist parks are at a

greater risk when swimming and bathing due to a high percentage of parks being close to unpatrolled beaches


Page 70 of 110

with hazardous swimming conditions” (McKay, et al., 2014). It is therefore important to ensure that the guests

of these accommodation providers have some understanding of beach safety.

Education Collateral:

The distribution of surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers) to all coastal accommodation providers

(including holiday rental real estate organisations) in the Great Lakes LGA could be implemented on an

ongoing basis to ensure the collateral is part of the welcome information package for guests. Brochures and

flyers about surf safety could also be made available at the Visitor Information Centres in Forster and Tea

Gardens and at local shops such as newsagents or bakeries.

Figure 3.2.10: Large accommodation provider at Forster Main Beach.

Rip Current Awareness Day:

Over the past few years, Surf Life Saving Clubs have participated in an annual day to raise awareness about rip

currents through an educational and visual demonstration. As part of these scheduled events, coloured dye is

released by club members at various beaches around Australia to show the speed and distance of which a rip

current can flow. Surf clubs can organise to participate in these educational demonstrations. Surf Life Saving

Australia can provide the necessary resources to branches and clubs upon request.

Personal Protective Equipment:

Water safety agencies actively promote the use of lifejackets for fisherman and recreational boaters.

Educational and awareness programs in the Great Lakes LGA should also promote and encourage these user

groups to wear lifejackets. These messages could be included in community based education programs or the

use of educational signage at well-known rock fishing locations.

The NSW Ministry for Police and Emergency Services has prepared a report on behalf of the Water Safety

Advisory Committee on the outcome of consultation undertaken in 2013 on the wearing of lifejackets by rock

fishers. The report, which includes a number of options to increase the wearing of lifejackets by rock fishers,

will be submitted to the NSW Government for consideration.

A coronial inquest was also held in June 2015 focusing on the deaths of nine rock fishermen. Magistrate C

Forbes, Deputy State Coroner made the following recommendation to the Minister for Justice and Police.

“To the Minister for Justice and Police

I recommend the introduction of legislation required the mandatory use of life jackets by those

engaged in rock fishing including:


Page 71 of 110

a) A requirement that the life jackets comply with the Australian Standards,

b) The consideration of a twelve month grace period,

c) The legislation be introduced with a dedicated education campaign, and

d) The consideration of accompanying the introduction of mandatory life jackets with initiatives to

facilitate the wearing of appropriate life jackets such as coupons or gift vouchers for free or subsided

life jackets or life jacket borrowing schemes for those engaged in rock fishing.”3


Education and awareness programs within the Great Lakes Local Government Area should continue to be

implemented, reviewed and supported. Land Managers and key stakeholder groups who may not have the

expertise to implement educational programs should approach peak water safety organisations to assist in

delivery.


Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are recognised by

the aquatic industry (e.g. http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/).


Land Managers should ensure that patrolled locations and surf safety information is promoted through any

websites, specific promotional material, newsletters and social media pages.


Peak coastal water safety agencies currently provide surf education to local schools and community groups

upon request. Great Lakes Council should continue to work with these agencies to promote these programs

and encourage enhanced participation at a local and regional level.


Surf safety information, should be strategically placed in visual form at various coastal locations. Specific

examples can be referenced in the report.


Approach tourism and holiday rental real estate organisations with the aim of distributing standardised surf

safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers) to all coastal accommodation providers. Collateral could also be

made available at the Visitor Information Centres in Forster and Tea Gardens and at local shops such as

newsagents or bakeries.


Land Managers should assist peak water safety organisations to promote existing educational programs

encouraging rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets.

Treatment Option 4.3 The Surf Life Saving Clubs in the Great Lakes Local Government Area should participate

in the annual Rip Current Awareness Day.

3 Coroners Court New South Wales 2015


Page 72 of 110

3.2.4 SAFETY SIGNAGE

Safety signage is a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy and targets the in-transit and

on-arrival periods pertaining to a person/s arriving at a hazardous location.

Key factors relating to effective safety signage include:

o a risk assessment process used in the identification of priority information to display,

o alignment to Australian Standards for signage content (AS/NZS2416:2010),

o consistency in signage layout/display (Australian Water Safety Council, 2013),

o consistency in the appropriate positioning of signage, to maximise exposure to the public prior to arriving

in a hazardous location, with the minimum number of signs, and

o a consistent process of signage maintenance as part of the Land Managers annual planning.

3.2.4.1 EXISTING CONTROLS:

Existing safety signage within the Great Lakes LGA in regards to coastal safety is below and includes:

o warning signage at coastal access points,

o warning signage at popular cliff edge locations,

o warning signage due to sand erosion,

o warning signage at breakwater locations, and

o temporary signage in place when lifesavers and lifeguards are on duty. Great Lakes Council

Figure 3.2.11: Council Access Sign.



Figure 3.2.14: Caution – Sand Erosion.


Page 73 of 110

National Parks and Wildlife Service

Figure 3.2.15: National Parks Access Sign.

Figure 3.2.16: National Parks Safety Sign – unstable grounds.

Crown Lands

Figure 3.2.17: Crown Lands Safety Sign on the Tuncurry break wall.

3.2.4.2 RECOMMENDED CONTROLS:

Proposed Signage:

As funding becomes available, Appendix A outlines where access signage has the opportunity of being

implemented. The Action Planning Priority Index should be used to assist in prioritisation: Land Managers

should implement signage at high and medium ranked locations before lower ranked locations.

Signage Types (National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual)

Level 1 Road Signs: Land Managers have the option to place this type of signage at the closest intersection

location for directional purposes.

Level 2 Car Park Signs (Primary access sign): Land Managers have the option to place this type of signage at the

main entrance/car park to an aquatic environment. The recommended content includes location name,

emergency contact information, safety hazards/prohibitions and lifesaving/lifeguard service information.

Level 3 Access Signs (Secondary access sign): Land Managers can place this type of sign at access points or

pathways that lead to the aquatic environment (beach, rock pool or rock platform). Level 3 access signs follow

the same principles as those of Level 2 car park signs and typically display the location name, emergency

contact information, safety hazards/prohibitions and lifesaving/lifeguard service information.


Page 74 of 110

Level 4 Individual Hazard and Regulation sign: Land Managers have the option to us this sign where a hazard is

localised and has been identified at a level of risk that warrants sign posting.

Examples of these signs can be referenced in ‘Appendix A’.

When implementing future signage, the following points are recommended:

1. Safety signs as recommended in this report should meet Australian Standard ‘AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 Water

Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags’, and align signage style/layout with the ‘National Aquatic and

Recreational Signage Style Manual, 3rd

Edition, July 2006’ or the State-wide Mutual guide. It is the

recommendation of this report that style is aligned to the former.

2. Signage layout (top-down order) consists of the following:

a) Location name and emergency marker (if/when applicable) or street address

b) Hazards and warnings within the designated area

c) Safety information or general location/area details

d) Regulations

e) Facility / Land Manager

3. Safety signs should meet the size/height/placement specifications outlined in ‘AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 Water

safety signs and beach safety flags’.

4. ‘Diamond’ hazard symbols should be utilised (not triangle). Context: AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 provides for the

use of either ‘diamond’ or ‘triangle’ hazard symbols. For consistency with existing signage and across local

government areas the more effective diamond symbols should be utilised.

5. Effective placement of aquatic and recreational safety signage in a public reserve cannot be

underestimated. Location, height and existing visual distractions are major factors which contribute to

the effectiveness of a sign when installed.

6. Signs positioned in car parks should be placed central to the parking area and where parked vehicles will

not obscure the sign.

7. Signs that are positioned in relation to open access areas should be spaced at regular intervals, with the

distance between individual signs dependent upon the calculated Facility Visitation Rate (FVR).

8. Signs that are positioned in relation to defined access points should be sited as close as practical to the

access point, or other appropriate location, and need to be consistently applied where possible e.g. on the

left of the track entrance.

To effectively capture the attention of visitors, improve overall visual amenity and avoid confusion as a result

of too many signs. Repetitive and/or unnecessary information and signs should be removed. Further, any non-

essential signage (not related to location, safety, hazard, prohibition information) that is present at a location

should be considered for removal or re-located as appropriate so as not to impact on the recognition of the

safety orientated priority signage


Page 75 of 110

Consistent Signage:

It is the view of Australian CoastSafe that a consistent strategy of signage should be implemented within an

LGA. Consistent signs are encouraged to avoid confusion and give a clear and consistent message. Below is an

excerpt from AS 2416:2010 Water Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags, Part 3, Guidance for Use (p.iv).

The standard states that “a standardized method of signing with the use of appropriate supplementary text

throughout the working and public environment assists the process of education and instruction on the

meaning of water safety signs and beach safety flags, and the appropriate actions to take.” The intention of

AS2416:2010 Part 3 is “to ensure a uniformity of application of water safety signs and beach safety flags which

leads to increased familiarity, and therefore improved safety, for the users including visitors and for the

general public.”

As seen in the signage example above, Great Lakes Council currently have a few access signs that are

inconsistent which can be updated.

Signage Consolidation/Removal:

It is important to note that at most locations, an improved safety signage system usually results in an overall

reduction in the quantity of signage due to the elimination of duplicate or ineffectual signs and the

consolidation of key information into other signs. Excessive signage at coastal access points can cause people

to become desensitised to the information presented to them and have the opposite effect of their intended

purpose. Signage consolidation may see a reduction in the implementation and maintenance costs related to

signage and a reduction in the visual pollution of a site. ‘Appendix A’ references those few signs that have the

opportunity to be consolidated/removed.

Figure 3.2.18: Alcohol sign that could be prohibited.

Figure 3.2.19: Signage that has the opportunity to be removed.

Safety Symbols:

As outlined in the Facilitation Visitation Rating – Section 2.7, all potential hazards identified within the facility

that have a risk rating of high should appear on the sign as warning symbols. There are some instances in the

Great Lakes LGA where existing signs have an insufficient number of hazard symbols when compared to the

Risk Register and Treatment Plan – Appendix B. It is recommended that the required hazard symbols are

updated on these signs through the use of stickers or natural attrition. Below is an example of an access sign at

Burgess Beach where the hazard of submerged rocks / shallow sandbanks could be included as a symbol.


Page 76 of 110

Figure 3.2.20: Signage at Burgess Beach. Education Signage:

Rip currents are the number one cause of drowning along the coastline of NSW (SLSNSW, 2015). 90% of the

25,000 surf rescues each year are also rip related (Science of the Surf, 2015).

As the majority of access locations lead to unpatrolled sections of beaches where rip currents can occur

educational signage could be implemented at main car parks or at high usage access areas. An example of this

sign can be viewed below, however it is suggested that proposed educational signage should be larger than

this example. The sign informs beachgoers of how to identify a rip current and what options to take to escape

the rip current.

If implemented, this type of signage should not be placed in positions where they would compete with already

existing access signage.

Figure 3.2.21: An example of rip education signage.

Rock Fishing Signage:

Signage that encourages rock fishermen to wear lifejackets can assist peak water safety agencies in promoting

this key safety message. Below is an example of a specific sign related to rock fishing that could be

implemented at popular rock platforms / headlands. The sign notifies rock fishermen of hazards such as

dangerous waves and slippery rocks and provides this warning in different key languages. Some options for the

implementation of this sign could include Cape Hawke Headland, Booti Hill / Flat Rock Point, Seagull Point /

Charlotte Head and Sugarloaf Point.


Page 77 of 110

Figure 3.2.22: Example of Rock Fishing Signage. Proposed Location Signs:

Figure 3.2.23: Proposed Location Sign. The sign shown above has been recommended at locations which score between a 4 and 6 as per the Facility Visitation Ratings (p.23). This signage should contain the following:

o The name of the facility,

o A general warning message,

o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms, and

o Any information symbols relevant to the facility.

Note: The sign does not require the depiction of warning symbols. Appendix A outlines where these signs can

be implemented. Boat Ramp Locations:

As boating is a significant activity within Great Lakes, boat ramp locations are of significance to the people who

use them. Adequate signage situated at boat ramps will be a beneficial method in promoting boating safety

practices. The below example is of a sign located at a boat ramp in Batemans Bay. This signage has relevant

warning symbols and provides general safety advice and information fit for the activity of boating. As such, this

signage would be a good benchmark template for implementation at other boat launching locations identified

in Appendix A.


Page 78 of 110

Figure 3.2.24 Boating Safety Information.

It should be noted that the hazard symbols may change depending on the specific location (see Appendix A)

and that the general safety advice can also be interchangeable with relevant boating safety campaigns. Bar Crossing Signage:

As highlighted in section 2.9.6, 16% (11) of all emergency incidents within the Great Lakes LGA occur at the

river entrance to Wallis Lake. This is a result of vessels that are in need of assistance.

Figure 3.2.25 Bar crossing at Wallis Lake on a calm day.

A similar sign to the example below could be implemented at boat ramps or break wall locations to determine

the safety level of river bar crossings e.g. during calm conditions a green light may be displayed, an orange

light during moderate conditions, and during high conditions a red light may be displayed.

An advantage of the below example is that the sign can be controlled from a central location i.e. an operations

centre or headquarters, meaning that specific personnel would not have to manually change the safety rating

on a daily basis.

NSW Marine Rescue in conjunction with NSW Roads and Maritime Services should investigate possible options

to warn boat uses when crossing river bars.


Page 79 of 110

Figure 3.2.26: An example of a set of lights used by the Royal National

Lifeboat Instituation for safety reasons in regards to tidal changes.

Temporary Signage:

Temporary individual hazard signs may be used where a hazard is localised, has been identified at a level of

risk that warrants a sign posting and is not permanent in nature.

Temporary hazards signs can be utilised in the following ways:

1. Where there is a higher risk of injury from temporary hazards

2. Where a hazard may exist at a patrolled beach either side of the flags

3. To direct patrons to a flagged area

Figure 3.2.27: Example of temporary signage directing patrons to the patrolled location.

Tourist Parks:

Accommodation providers that have direct coastal access at unpatrolled locations are well positioned to

implement temporary signage to inform people park guests of when beach conditions warrant the ‘closing of a

beach’. Surf Life Saving NSW will be able to inform park managers of when dangerous swell events are

occurring through a media release. A temporary sign could be positioned in front of the main access paths that

lead to the beach.


Page 80 of 110

Signage Summary Table:

Great Lakes Council

Table 3.2.2 Summary table of aquatic and recreational signage recommendations for Great Lakes Council.

Locations Existing

Signs Maintenance

Required

Possible Consolidate/

Remove/ Relocate/ Replace

Proposed Level 3 Access

Proposed Level 4 Hazards

Proposed Location

Sign

Boating Information

Sign

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Nine Mile

Beach 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tuncurry Beach 29 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 -1

Tuncurry Rock

Pool 25 0 4 1 0 0 0 1 -3

Forster Main

Beach 38 1 4 1 0 0 0 1 -3

Second Head 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

Pebbly Beach 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

The Tanks 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1

Bennett’s Head 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

One Mile Beach 40 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 -3

Burgess Beach 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 -1

Boomerang

Beach 28 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 -1

Boomerang

Point 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Blueys Beach 12 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1

Blueys Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Danger Point 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bald Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sandbar /

Cellito Beach 15 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 2

Number One

Beach 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Boat Beach 8 0 1 1 1 0 1 3 2

Bennett’s Beach 31 2 7 5 0 0 0 5 -2

Totals 273 3 24 14 3 0 1 18 -6

Note: Net signage = proposed signage minus consolidated/removed/replaced signage. So, 18 signs have been

proposed and 24 existing signs have the opportunity to be consolidated/removed/relocated, leaving a net sum

of negative 6 signs.


Page 81 of 110


Table 3.2.3: Summary table of aquatic and recreational signage recommendations for National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Locations Existing

Signs Maintenance

Required





Proposed Location

Sign

Boating Information

Sign

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Nine Mile

Beach 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cape Hawke

Headland 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

McBrides

Beach 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Cape Hawke

North Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cape Hawke

South Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Janies Corner 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

Seven Mile

Beach 42 0 1 3 0 0 0 3 2

Booti Hill / Flat

Rock Point 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lindeman Cove 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Yes I Know

Rock 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Elizabeth Beach 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Shelly Beach 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 -2

Seagull Point 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Charlotte Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Six

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Five

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Four

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Three

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Two

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number One

Beach 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Seal Rocks

Point 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 -1

Sugarloaf Point 25 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 -1

Lighthouse

Beach 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1

Treachery Head 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 -1


Page 82 of 110

Locations Existing

Signs Maintenance

Required





Proposed Location

Sign

Boating Information

Sign

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Treachery

Beach 8 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 2

Yagon Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Submarine /

Fiona / Yagon

Beach

20 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 -3

Big Gibber

Headland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mungo Beach 45 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0

Dark Point

North Beach 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dark Point /

Little Gibber 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bennett’s

Beach 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Yacaaba

Headland 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Totals 253 7 10 7 1 1 0 9 -1

Note: Net signage = proposed signage minus consolidated/removed/replaced signage. So, 9 signs have been

proposed and 10 existing signs have the opportunity to be consolidated/removed/relocated, leaving a net sum

of -1 signs.


Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should be

implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and upgrade of existing

signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less

signs), sign relocation or the removal of unnecessary signage.


Existing access signage that does not meet a consistent adopted style should be replaced through natural

attrition.


As the majority of access locations lead to unpatrolled sections of beaches ‘rip current’ educational signage

should be implemented at main car parks or at high usage access areas. The sign should inform beachgoers of

how to identify a rip current and what options to take to escape the rip current.


Signage that encourages rock fishermen to wear lifejackets can assist peak water safety agencies in promoting

this key safety message. Specific signs relating to rock fishing could be implemented at popular rock platforms

/ headlands and break walls. A specific example of this type of sign is outlined in the main report.


Page 83 of 110


Great Lakes Council should approach the Roads and Maritime Service to implement specific boat safety

signage (outlined in the report) at all boat ramp locations.

Treatment Options 4.4

Temporary signage should be used at coastal access points from the coastal tourist parks to inform guests of

when conditions warrant the ‘closing of a beach’. Surf Life Saving NSW will be able to alert park operators

when dangerous swell events are predicted through the dangerous surf advisory process.


Temporary signage should continue to be used at access locations near patrolled areas to direct patrons to a

supervised swimming area and where here is a higher risk of injury due to temporary hazards such as strong

currents, creek openings and pollution.


Marine Rescue NSW in conjunction with NSW Roads and Maritime Services should investigate possible options

to warn boat uses when crossing river bars.


Page 84 of 110

3.2.5 EMERGENCY MARKER SYSTEM

When an incident occurs at a specific street address, it is relatively simple for emergency services to identify

the location of the caller/incident. However, when an incident occurs at locations such as open-space

parkland, walking trails, beaches or rock platforms (where no cross-street or other reference point is available)

it can delay the identification of a location and the subsequent emergency service response.

Emergency location markers enable triple zero call takers to immediately and accurately verify the location of

an emergency triple zero call.

Figure 3.2.28: Example of emergency marker sign.

Emergency markers display a unique number to a specific location, most commonly on existing access/safety

signage. These emergency marker displays could be a sticker placed over already existing signage.

For an emergency marker system to be effective, a standardised state-wide program is required, that engages

Police and other emergency service CAD systems and land management authority signage plans. No current

program exists in NSW.

Australian CoastSafe is currently working with key government departments and emergency services to

develop a best practice emergency marker system which can be rolled out on a state-wide basis in the near

future.


With guidance from the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services and Lands and Property Information, a

state aligned emergency marker system at all identified access locations should be considered.


Page 85 of 110

3.2.6 ACCESS INFRASTRUCTURE AND ONGOING CAPITAL WORKS/MAINTENANCE

PROGRAMS

The way the coast is accessed is a significant factor in the management of coastal risk. While preventing public

access/use to the coastal environment is not desired, a number of options exist to minimise the risks

associated with the access way itself and the hazards that may be encountered on the coast (via that access

way).

In reference to the assessment process, access points have been broken down into formal (defined), and

informal (undefined) access.

Access issues are interrelated to other risk management initiatives/options such as water safety signage,

emergency access numbering/reporting, supervision (lifeguard) information and public rescue equipment. An

effective access plan for an area may optimise the effectiveness and efficiency of other initiatives.

Figure 3.2.29: Formal access at Boomerang Beach. Figure 3.2.30: Informal access at Bennetts Head.

Formal Access:

The majority of formal access tracks in the Great Lakes LGA are well maintained. Land managers conduct

inspections due to vegetation overgrowth, degraded footings and unattached fence posts when required.

Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating the use of a generally safer

‘track’, exposing people to the relevant safety signage/information, reducing the quantity of signage required

and enhancing emergency access, reporting and location identification.

Informal Access:

A number of informal access tracks also exist. Informal access ways may create higher risk through use

(uneven ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/unstable and uneven surfaces),

may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make emergency location reporting

difficult (location awareness).

Options for formalising, redirecting or consolidating informal access use may include man-made barriers,

vegetation growth and fencing. It is noted that for some locations and situations it may be difficult to formalise

access and/or restrict the use of informal access.


Page 86 of 110

Figure 3.2.31: An example of access redirection at One Mile Beach.

Restricted Access:

During the course of the assessment Australian CoastSafe endeavoured to reach every beach and rock

platform within the Great Lakes LGA. However a few identified locations were unable to be assessed as they

were either restricted by private road/property, or there was no identifiable or safe way of reaching these

locations from land. Although some determined people may be able to get to these locations on foot by

walking around rocky headlands, CoastSafe assessors were of the opinion that these locations would be

inaccessible to a reasonable person and were unsafe.

These locations included:



o Charlotte Head

o Danger Point

o Number Six Beach

o Number Five Beach

o Number Four Beach


o Number Two Beach Four Wheel Drive Access:

There are a number of vehicle entry points for four wheel driving (4WD), see ‘Appendix A’ for specific

locations. Great Lakes Council have developed a fact sheet on 4WD that has information relating to driving

permits, a detailed list of locations that are permitted and a list of do’s and don’ts (Great Lakes Council, 2015).

Some of the main regulations include:

o A speed limit is a maximum of 40km/h

o Drivers are required to slow to a speed of not more than 15 km/h when within 50 metres of people on

beaches and when accessing the beach

o Pedestrian beach users have right of way over motor vehicles at all times

o Motor vehicles must be kept at least 15 metres from other beach users

o Current tide charts should be in all vehicles

In some instances CoastSafe assessors noticed tyre marks on beaches / sections of beaches that do not permit

4WD. This was seen on Seven Mile Beach and Tuncurry Beach. Land Managers should continue to ensure that

strategies are put in place to deter access to non 4WD beaches.


Page 87 of 110

Figure 3.2.32: Evidence of tyre marks on a non permitted 4WD beach.

Open Access:

Open access occurs where there are no channels of barriers restricting where visitors can access the aquatic

environment.

Emergency Vehicle Access:

Access for emergency and lifeguarding/lifesaving services should be well known to key personnel. These access

paths are regularly monitored to ensure that emergency vehicles are able to access a coastal location. All

emergency vehicle access locations are recorded in ‘Appendix A’.

One particular emergency vehicle access at Treachery Beach was raised by the owners of Treachery Camp. As

this location is remote and the response time for emergency services can be extensive it was requested by the

camp owners that they have keys to be able to access the 4WD vehicle track at the middle of Treachery Beach

as they are often the first responders to incidents. The National Parks and Wildlife Service should hold

discussions with Treachery Camp to discuss further.

Boat Ramp Access:

There were 3 coastal boat ramp locations within the assessed area of the Great Lakes LGA and specific

locations can be found in ‘Appendix A’. It is necessary for these boat ramps to have appropriate warning

signage (see section – 3.2.4).

Marine Parks Authority:

Marine parks conserve the marine biodiversity along the coastline. This may impact on the access to specific

locations of the coast for recreational fishing activities. The Port Stephens–Great Lakes Marine Park extends

from Cape Hawke Surf Life Saving Club south to Birubi Beach Surf Life Saving Club at the northern end of

Stockton Beach (NSW Marine Estate, 2015).

The zoning map outlines the sanctuary zones within the Great Lakes LGA:



o The eastern tip of Yacaaba Headland

Recently the NSW Government proposed to rezone the shoreline at the following from sanctuary zones to

habitat protection zone to permanently allow shore-based recreational line fishing:

o South end of Sandbar / Cellito Beach

o Submarine / Fiona / Yagon Beach


Page 88 of 110

Infrastructure Zoning:

Tuncurry Rock Pool has a beach hazard rating of 2 which falls into the least hazardous category. Under modal

conditions there is low danger posed by water depths and weak currents. However during larger swells and

strong outgoing tidal currents this location can become more hazardous particular with children and poor

swimmers.

As reported in the Great Lakes Advocate on April 30, 2014 an experienced off duty volunteer surf life saver on

holiday from Sydney was required to rescue 12 Indian tourists who were struggling against the strong tidal

surge and being swept out into deeper water. If it wasn’t for the quick reaction from the rescuer the outcome

may have been devastating. An external company specialising in coastal hydrology is undertaking a study of the Tuncurry Rock Pool area. This will determine the best way to minimise the risk to swimmers by the strong tidal currents in the enclosure. As seen in the below figure there is currently a gap in the enclosure where people may be swept out during hazardous conditions. There is safety signage already present at this location and the results of the hydrology study should be examined and implemented.

Figure 3.2.33: Tuncurry Rock Pool. Access Summary Table: Great Lakes Council Table 3.2.4: Access provision within lands managed by Great Lakes Council.

Location Open

Access Formal

Pedestrian

4WD Vehicle Access/

Boat Ramp

Informal / Old Access

Private / Restricted

Access

Total Access

Possible Redirection

Net Access

Nine Mile Beach 0 1 6 5 0 12 2 10

Tuncurry Beach 0 8 0 0 0 8 0 8

Tuncurry Rock Pool 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2

Forster Main Beach 0 9 0 2 0 11 1 10

Second Head 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Pebbly Beach 0 3 0 2 0 5 1 4

The Tanks 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 2

Bennett’s Head 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3

One Mile Beach 0 13 0 3 0 16 3 13

Burgess Beach 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 1

Boomerang Beach 0 8 0 1 1 10 1 9

Boomerang Point 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 1


Page 89 of 110

Location Open

Access Formal

Pedestrian

4WD Vehicle Access/

Boat Ramp



Access

Total Access


Net Access

Blueys Beach 0 4 0 1 3 8 1 7

Blueys Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Danger Point 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bald Head 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2

Sandbar / Cellito

Beach 0 2 1 1 0 4 0 4

Number One Beach 1 2 0 2 0 5 2 3

Boat Beach 0 1 2 14 0 17 7 10

Bennett’s Beach 1 8 7 3 1 20 2 18

Totals 5 62 16 42 5 130 22 108

Note: Net Access = the total of all access types minus consolidated/redirected access. In other words, 130 access points have been located, however 22 of these access points have the opportunity to be redirected, leaving a net access of 108.


Table 3.2.5: Access provision within lands managed by the National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Location Open

Access Formal

Pedestrian

4WD Vehicle Access/

Boat Ramp



Access

Total Access


Net Access

Nine Mile Beach 0 0 4 0 0 4 2 2

Cape Hawke

Headland 0 2 0 5 1 8 1 7

McBrides Beach 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1

Cape Hawke North

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cape Hawke South

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Janies Corner 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Seven Mile Beach 1 11 0 5 1 18 4 14

Booti Hill /

Flat Rock Point 0 1 0 3 0 4 0 4

Lindeman Cove 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Yes I Know Rock 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 4

Elizabeth Beach 0 5 1 0 0 6 0 6

Shelly Beach 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 2

Seagull Point 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Charlotte Head 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Six Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Five Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Four Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number Three

Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Page 90 of 110

Location Open

Access Formal

Pedestrian

4WD Vehicle Access/

Boat Ramp



Access

Total Access


Net Access

Number Two Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Number One Beach 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Seal Rocks Point 0 0 0 3 0 3 2 1

Sugarloaf Point 0 1 0 3 0 4 0 4

Lighthouse Beach 0 4 1 3 0 8 0 8

Treachery Head 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 3

Treachery Beach 0 5 1 1 0 7 1 6

Yagon Head 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0

Submarine / Fiona /

Yagon Beach 0 3 0 4 0 7 4 3

Big Gibber Headland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mungo Beach 0 9 2 3 0 14 3 11

Dark Point North

Beach 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1

Dark Point /

Little Gibber 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Bennett’s Beach 1 1 1 2 0 5 1 4

Yacaaba Headland 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 3

Totals 2 51 10 42 2 107 19 88

Note: Net Access = the total of all access types minus consolidated/redirected access. In other words, 107

access points have been located, however 19 of these access points have the opportunity to be redirected,

leaving a net access of 88.


Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through ongoing

infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal),

enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed.


Informal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should be considered for redirection or consolidation, in order

to promote/facilitate the use of formal access.


Land Managers should ensure all emergency service gates that lead to coastal locations are well known to

emergency services, lifeguarding/lifesaving services and that key personnel should be provided with keys.


The National Parks and Wildlife Service should hold discussions with the operators of Treachery Camp in

regards to providing them with keys to be able to gain entry to the emergency vehicle access at the middle of

Treachery Beach for emergency purposes.


Page 91 of 110

Treatment Option 1.20 & 2.17

In some instances CoastSafe Assessors noticed tyre marks on beaches / sections of beaches that do not permit

4WD. This was seen on Seven Mile Beach, Mungo Beach and Tuncurry Beach. Land Managers should continue

to ensure that strategies are put in place and monitored to deter access.


Following the completion of studies in relation to the Tuncurry Rock Pool area, Great Lakes Council should

review and implement the findings to ensure that inexperienced swimmers and / or children aren’t swept out

beyond the enclosure during periods of hazardous conditions e.g. strong outgoing tidal currents.

3.2.7 PUBLIC RESCUE EQUIPMENT

The table below provides an overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) currently in or available for use in

Australia.

Table 3.2.6 An overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) (Bradstreet, et al., 2012).

PRE Type

Morphology

of current

installations

Advantages Disadvantages

Extensive

Training

Required

Recommended

uses in NSW

Rescue Tube

Sandy

beaches and

rock pools

Can be thrown

short distances

Requires the rescuer

to enter the water

themselves

Yes None

Throw Bag Not in use Distance of

deployment

Risk of theft, risk of

using the line to

return the patient

towards the rocks,

not strong/tough

enough to be

resilient from

environmental

conditions

No

May be used on a

case by case basis.

Further

effectiveness

investigation

required.

Throw Sticks

(Stormy

grenades)

Personal

device

(mobile)

Mobility – easily

deployed to

incident locations

Effective mid-range

(thrown)

Requires 2 to off-set

‘miss-throw’ of the

first

No

Yes. Relevant

personnel /staff

(emergency

services/SLS

/rangers)

Life Ring

(Angel ring)

Steep

rampart rock

platforms

Ease of use.

Rugged design.

Awareness

campaign

established.

Single use device.

Distance of

deployment.

Requires rescuer to

approach the

platform edge.

Weight.

No

Steep (>1:1)

rampart rock

platforms


Page 92 of 110

Silent Sentry Sloping

platforms

EPIRB unit

immediately alerts

emergency

services. Multiple

balls can be rolled

down slopes to the

patient keeping the

rescuer at a safer

distance

EPIRB units were

vulnerable to

vandalism and

disabled

No

Sloping (<1:1)

rampart rock

platforms.

Recommended

redesign to

remove EPIRB

housing.

Life Rings (Angel Rings™4):

Life rings are an instantly recognised lifesaving mechanism and their functionality is easily understood by both

a rescuer and the casualty. The national ‘Angel Ring ™ Project’ has seen the installation of 131 rings in NSW

with 62 confirmed rescues involving their use (ANSA, 2014).

On 4 February 2014, The Australian National Sports Fishing Association received additional funding for the

expansion and maintenance of the Angel Ring Project through the NSW Recreational Fishing Trust.

There are currently 3 life rings situated in the Great Lakes LGA, however 4 life rings have been proposed. These

locations are below and are in priority order for implementation. Further information can be found in

Appendix C.

Table 3.2.7 Priority order for Life Rings.

In regards to any maintenance issues that may arise, ANSA NSW has stated the following:

“ANSA NSW will maintain contact with the local clubs, NSW Government agencies

and individuals who have installed or agreed to manage the angel rings and

continue communication to ensure that management targets are met.

As a minimum ANSA NSW or its nominated management team must complete a

visual check at least every 2 months to determine the rings status.” (ANSA, 2013)

Global Positioning Satellite (GPS):

GPS technology is available to be used within public rescue equipment such as life rings. Recreational fishing

bodies have already trialled certain tracking devices in some areas and should be consulted with in relation to

this matter. This technology may be beneficial by the way of a daily audit that can record when a life ring has

been washed away or stolen as part of an asset management system.

4Angel Ring is a registered trade mark of the Australian National Sportfishing Association.

Priority Order Location

1 Tuncurry Break Wall

2 Forster Break Wall

3 Sugarloaf Point

4 Yes I Know Rock


Page 93 of 110

Shark Surveillance/Protection:

The use of drones was discussed as an option at the Hawks Nest community forum to monitor shark activity

during patrols. UAVs for surveillance are currently being trialled at some coastal locations, however a report

prepared for the NSW Department of Primary Industries (Bryson and Williams 2015) suggests that there are

still many limitations about the practicality and effectiveness of drones.

A separate report (Cardno 2015) lists a range of other shark mitigation strategies including electrical deterrent

barriers, physical and visual barriers, detection methods and personal deterrents.

Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with the NSW Department of Primary Industries to investigate

effective shark mitigation and surveillance strategies for NSW beaches.

Figure 3.2.34: The Little Ripper Lifesaver UAV currently being trialled in NSW.

Treatment Options 2.18

Land Managers should consider implementing life rings at the proposed locations identified in ‘Appendix C’.

The Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW

will be able to provide guidance on costings, suppliers and ongoing maintenance.


Explore the means to fund the expansion and continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in

consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing

Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in ‘Appendix C’. Final positioning should be determined by these

fishing associations.


Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with the NSW Department of Primary Industries to investigate

effective shark mitigation and surveillance strategies for NSW beaches.


Page 94 of 110

3.2.8 SYSTEM OF SUPERVISION

The supervision of aquatic coastal locations is often required to manage the risk of the location, whether due

to prevailing weather and beach conditions, the proximity to large population bases, or the attendance of the

beach/coastal area due to its location or attractiveness.

The primary decision to be made by Land Managers before establishing a lifesaving/lifeguard service is to

determine which areas will be patrolled or unpatrolled. A patrolled beach is one at which a trained lifesaver

and/or lifeguard is stationed during prescribed times and designated by the flying of red and yellow flags. A

mobile lifesaver/lifeguard or lifeguard vehicle that periodically visits or checks a location may be effective as a

proactive education initiative but should not be considered as providing a patrolled swimming location.

Uncertainties may exist when deciding whether supervision at a given location is appropriate, since:

o The provision of a service may encourage attendance at a non-suitable location, such as when the beach

topography and morphology create a highly hazardous location. This factor would be reflected in the

ABSAMP beach hazard rating;

o Such services may be deemed too expensive and therefore not provided by the responsible land manager;

o The patronage of the location is low and the assessed risk level is minimal.

There are a range of aquatic supervisory services that should be considered, as it is not “one size fits all”. They

include:

o Full time comprehensive lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, fixed and

portable facilities, equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services.

o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, portable facilities,

equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services.

o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard service with trained personnel, portable facilities, some equipment and craft,

and links to a command centre.

o A flexible demand based service with trained personnel provision which allocates resources to where they

are most needed.

o Surveillance cameras.

o No service, but the provision of safety signs and controlled access.

Lifesaving Service Level Calculator:

The lifesaving service level calculator takes into consideration the ABSAMP beach hazard ratings, visitation

levels, frequency of use, residency of visitors, incident history and remoteness of location to determine best

practice lifesaving service levels.

The first decision that needs to be made by a Land Manager is whether or not a location should be patrolled.

The Action Planning Priority Index should be used to guide decision making on which locations are of greater

inherent risk and therefore a higher priority for a lifesaving service. The lifesaving service level calculations

should not be used in isolation to determine whether or not a lifesaving service should be provided, however

once a decision has been made to provide a service the calculations should be referred to for guidance on the

minimum service level required. Calculations for all beaches can be found in ‘Appendix G’.

International Best Practice:

The International Life Saving Federation (ILSF) is the peak body for lifeguard and water safety organisations

internationally.


Page 95 of 110

Lifeguard/Lifesaving Uniforms:

The ILSF recommends the colours for uniforms be red & yellow5. Lifeguards/lifesavers throughout the world

are called upon to provide safety services at a range of water environments that include swimming pools,

beaches, lakes, river front and other waterfronts. In providing these aquatic safety services, it is important that

the people using these environments for aquatic activity can readily identify the lifeguards/lifesavers for:

o Guidance on safety issues, and

o Assistance in times of need

As such the lifeguards should be readily distinguishable against the many people and colours they may be

wearing while in, on or around these aquatic environments.

The red and yellow colours have been used by a number of International Lifesaving Member Federations for

many years to such an extent and with much success that red and yellow has become synonymous with

lifesavers and lifeguards in these countries.

Lifeguard uniforms within the Great Lakes LGA are consistent with the with ISLF position statement.

Volunteer Lifesaving Service - Existing:

Below are the patrol dates and hours for the 2015/2016 season over weekends and public holidays. Table 3.2.8 Volunteer Lifesaving Services in the Great Lakes LGA.

Club Patrol Dates Saturdays, Sundays & Public Holidays

Start Time Finish Time

Forster SLSC

19/09/2015 - 13/12/2015 9am 1pm (Sat)

4pm (Sun + PH)

19/12/2015 - 26/01/2016 9am 5pm

30/01/2016 - 25/04/2016 9am 1pm (Sat)

4pm (Sun + PH)

Cape Hawke SLSC

19/09/2015 - 13/12/2015 9am 1pm

19/12/2015 - 26/01/2016 9am 5pm

30/01/2016 - 25/04/2016 9am 1pm

Pacific Palms SLSC

19/09/2015 - 13/12/2015 10am 2pm

19/12/2015 - 26/01/2016 9am 5pm

30/01/2016 - 25/04/2016 10am 2pm

Tea Gardens Hawks Nest SLSC

19/09/2015 - 05/10/2015 10am (Sat)

9am (Sun + PH) 3pm (Sat)

4pm (Sun + PH)

10/10/2015 - 13/12/2015 10am (Sat)


4pm (Sun + PH)

19/12/2015 - 26/01/2016 9am 5pm

30/01/2016 - 19/03/2016 10am (Sat)


4pm (Sun + PH)

25/03/2016 - 25/04/2016 10am (Sat)


4pm (Sun + PH)

5 ILSF Lifesaving Position Statement - LPS 05 - Lifesaver And Lifeguard Uniforms


Page 96 of 110

Regular roving patrols are also encouraged as part of SLSNSW Standard Operating Procedures and are

incorporated into a Clubs Patrol Operation Manual. Roving patrols can be conducted by ATV, IRB/RWC or

walking and should continue to be conducted at the following locations throughout a patrol.

o Forster SLSC: Break wall (north) to ocean pool (south)

o Cape Hawke SLSC: North Headland (north) to Konda Place (south)

o Pacific Palms SLSC: North end of Elizabeth Beach (north) to Shelly Beach (south)

o Tea Gardens Hawks Nest SLSC: Sanderling Ave (north) to Deadmans car park (south)

Westpac Lifesaver Rescue Helicopter:

The Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter (Hunter Area) is also a vital service that operates around the Great

Lakes LGA. This service is activated through the triple zero ambulance service and can respond to coastal

incidents that may be remote for emergency services attending by road. At times, the service can also conduct

roving patrols, looking out for swimmers, surfcraft users, rock fishermen and boaters who may be in need of

assistance as well as scanning for dangerous marine life around patrolled locations.

RWC Patrols:

It is also acknowledged that the Lower North Coast Branch through its support services conducts three roving

patrols through an RWC on Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays through the school holiday periods (9am –

1pm during autumn and spring) and (9am – 5pm during summer). The first area falls within the Greater Taree

LGA, the second are covers from Nine Mile Beach to Cape Hawke and the third area covers from Seven Mile

Beach to Seal Rocks. These services are also available for callouts that occur through the surf rescue

emergency response system.

Paid Lifeguard Service – Existing:

The Great Lakes lifeguard patrol dates and hours from the 2014/2015 season are provided below. Table 3.2.9 Paid Lifeguard Services in the Great Lakes LGA.

Beach Patrol Dates Days of Service Patrol Times

Forster Beach

22/09/2014 - 03/10/2014 5 days 9am – 5pm

22/12/2014 - 23/01/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

07/04/2015 - 17/04/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

One Mile Beach

22/09/2014 - 03/10/2014 5 days 9am – 5pm

22/12/2014 - 23/01/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

07/04/2015 - 17/04/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

Elizabeth Beach

22/09/2014 - 03/10/2014 5 days 9am – 5pm

22/12/2014 - 23/01/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

07/04/2015 - 17/04/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

Bennett’s Beach

22/09/2014 - 03/10/2014 5 days 9am – 5pm

22/12/2014 - 23/01/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

07/04/2015 - 17/04/2015 5 days 9am – 5pm

Lifeguards also provide supervision at Tea Gardens Pool from the start of the spring school holidays through to

the end autumn school holidays.


Page 97 of 110

Marine Rescue:

Marine Rescue plays a key role in boating safety and response within the Great Lakes LGA and is stationed at

Wallis Lake entrance. These units are able to respond to incidents via a number of vessels. Roads and Maritime Services (RMS): The RMS website lists coastal bars at http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/navigation-communication/coastal-bars.html. Some have web cam vision which can be accessed http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/web-cameras/index.html System of Supervision – Proposed: Paid Lifeguards Australian CoastSafe acknowledges the challenges that arise for regional coastal councils in regards to funding lifeguard services.

Some options to assist in funding lifeguard services may include:

1. Slight levy applied to rates at Tourist Parks.

2. Paid parking at the main car parks for non-residents.

3. Joint funding arrangements with tourism organisations and local businesses.

4. Future grant funding.

The lifeguard treatment options listed below are based upon the research and data contained within this

Project Blueprint coastal public safety risk assessment:

o Lifesaving service level calculator ‘Appendix G’,

o Anecdotal evidence and feedback obtained through the various methods of consultation,

o Historical drowning and emergency response incidents,

o Historical beach visitation data (where available), and

o Tourism NSW and ABS population data.

Forster Main Beach:

The main beach in Forster is currently patrolled during the school holiday periods. As a highly popular tourism

destination, Forster still experiences high beach usage outside of the school holiday periods as many couples,

young families, university students and retirees choose to travel at these times. The beach is surrounded by

numerous accommodation providers e.g. caravan park, resorts/hotels/motels and apartments. Peak visitation

occurs during summer and it’s important for the people staying near Forster to have the option to swim at a

patrolled beach throughout this period. The suburb of Forster has the highest population count as shown in

section 2.9.1 and as the most centrally located beach within the immediate Forster area Great Lakes Council

should consider the provision of supervision every day (weekdays) from December to February in addition to

the autumn and spring services.

Tuncurry Beach:

In reference to section 2.9.2, beach visitation at Tuncurry Beach will continue to increase when the large

development at North Tuncurry has been finalised and therefore a lifeguard service at this location should be

strongly considered. This future increase in visitation is also supported by current high beach visitation during

school holiday periods as the beach is backed by a large coastal accommodation provider that can

accommodate up to 1,500 people and the large car park and attractive facilities at the very southern end of

the beach. As the beach is more exposed to swells and rip currents, incidents at this beach may see an increase

if no means of supervision is provided.

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/navigation-communication/coastal-bars.html

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/navigation-communication/coastal-bars.html

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/web-cameras/index.html


Page 98 of 110

Volunteer Lifesavers:

Tuncurry Beach:

As outlined earlier the southern end of Tuncurry Beach can experience high visitation during the school holiday

periods and especially during the summer holidays. Surf Life Saving NSW should meet with Lower North Coast

Surf Life Saving and Forster Surf Life Saving Club to discuss the benefits and limitations of providing an outpost

patrol at Tuncurry Beach during the summer school holiday period.

With reference to the Standard Operating Procedures – Lifesaving Services, an outpost patrol is defined as a

sub patrol that has no patrol flags, and operates as an extension of the base patrol to provide surveillance at

an area of high risk.


Great Lakes Council should explore the means to fund the expansion of the lifeguard service at Forster Main

Beach to provide supervision every day (weekdays) from December to February in addition to the autumn and

spring services already provided.


A lifeguard service at Tuncurry should be strongly considered when the proposed large development at North

Tuncurry has been finalised.


The level of lifeguarding services provided (staffing levels, operational dates, patrol hours and locations)

should be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure the most suitable and effective service is provided.


Surf Life Saving NSW should meet with Lower North Coast Surf Life Saving and Forster Surf Life Saving Club to

discuss the benefits and limitations of providing an outpost patrol at Tuncurry Beach during the summer

school holiday period.


Branch and club procedures should continue to ensure that roving patrols are performed on a regular basis to

cover a nearby beach/section of a beach that is not patrolled.


Page 99 of 110

4 EMERGENCY RESPONSE

Consideration of issues in relation to emergency response is extremely relevant to a drowning prevention

strategy for the Great Lakes LGA.

Emergency response considerations include but are not limited to:

o Emergency communications/reporting Triple Zero (000),

o Emergency phones/alarms,

o Emergency response beacons,

o Emergency service response,

o Radio coverage, and

o Emergency service communications (internal and joint service).

4.1 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTING

The ability of members of the public to request assistance in an emergency is an important component of a

drowning prevention strategy.

The Australian Government, through the Attorney-General’s Department are currently running a national

Triple Zero (000) campaign which aims to build awareness of the Triple Zero (000) number and educate the

community about when to use the number. The campaign serves to reinforce to members of the public their

responsibilities when calling the Triple Zero (000) emergency number both in nominating the required

emergency service and identifying the location they are calling from. The campaign uses the internet,

newspapers, radio and television to promote messages of Triple Zero (000). In addition, elements of the

campaign have been translated to reach culturally and linguistically diverse communities throughout Australia.

In addition, “Triple Zero (000) should not be referred to as 'Triple Oh', as this can cause confusion and could

result in people incorrectly dialling 666 on some alpha-numeric keypads. If dialled within Australia, emergency

calls to 666 will not be re-routed to Triple Zero (000)” (Australian Government, Attorney's-General

Department, 2012).

Figure 4.1.1: Suggested emergency 'Triple Zero' information for signage.


Page 100 of 110

Emergency Services Smart Phone Application

‘Emergency +’ is an application developed by emergency services, the federal government and industry

partners. The application uses a mobile phone's GPS functionality so callers can provide emergency call-takers

with their exact location information. ‘Emergency+’ also includes SES and Police Assistance Line numbers as

options, so non-emergency calls are made to the most appropriate number (Apple 2014).

One disadvantage of the application is that you are required to have phone coverage for it to work. Dependent

on phone providers, many Black spot locations exist in remote areas.

Figure 4.1.2: ‘Emergency +’ Application for smart phones.

In reference to coastal environments, while the application provides the latitude/longitude and a nearest

street reference, it does not inform emergency services of what is the most effective and efficient way to

access the person who is need of assistance. This is where the Emergency Marker System (section 3.2.5) will be

a beneficial ‘value-add’ as all access locations to the coastline will be mapped, potentially including all the

routing information, outlining to responding emergency services of how to best enhance responsiveness to a

particular point of interest.


In consultation with the Local Emergency Management Committee, Land Managers have an opportunity to

promote the ‘Emergency +’ smart phone application throughout the local community.


Page 101 of 110

4.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACONS

Emergency Response Beacons (ERB) can be positioned in high use/risk areas. They are highly visible and once

activated, link via radio to lifesaving/lifeguard services.

The two main types of ERB are:

Mobile: A movable unit which can be placed at a designated location for a limited period (usually daylight

hours) before being removed for security/monitoring reasons. They usually complement an existing on-beach

lifesaving/lifeguard service (nearby) or on-duty staff hours (non-lifesaving).

Fixed/permanent: A unit which is permanently or semi-permanently positioned (secured) at a location, and

provides 24/7 capacity. Such an ERB should fit within a coordinated emergency communications system,

whereby the unit is monitored 24/7 and complemented with specific procedures for emergencies by those

monitoring the ERB.

Fixed ERBs are generally only considered for use in high risk locations, where:

o Limited or no mobile phone coverage exists,

o A service can consistently monitor the beacon, and

o A daily process of equipment checking/testing is in place.

More information about ERB can be provided by Surf Life Saving New South Wales.

Figure 4.2.1: Example of a mobile emergency response beacon on a beach.

Possible locations for emergency response beacons or radio technology in the Great Lakes LGA could be used

at Tuncurry Beach, Boomerang Beach and ‘The Ruins’ at the southern end of Seven Mile Beach.

Treatment Options 1.26, 2.20 & 4.9

Emergency Response Beacon technology should be considered for Tuncurry Beach, Boomerang Beach and ‘The

Ruins’ at the southern end of Seven Mile Beach.


Page 102 of 110

4.3 EMERGENCY SERVICE RESPONSE

Emergency services and support organisations play a vital role in responding to coastal emergencies within the

Great Lakes LGA (see table and figure below). Resources that may respond include:

o NSW Police (including Water Police),

o NSW Ambulance,

o NSW Fire and Rescue,

o State Emergency Service (SES),

o Marine Rescue NSW,

o Westpac Lifesaver Rescue Helicopter – Hunter Region

o Great Lakes Council Lifeguards,

o Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast (Branch and Club Callout Teams), and

o Surf Life Saving Hunter (Branch and Club Callout Teams). Table 4.3.1 Coastal Emergency Service locations for Great Lakes LGA (<10km from the coast).

Emergency Services – Great Lakes Local Government Area

Emergency Service Street Address Suburb

NSW Police 83 Albert Street Forster

NSW Police 51 – 53 Marine Drive Tea Gardens

NSW Ambulance Service Manning Street Tuncurry

NSW Ambulance Service 103 Myall Street Tea Gardens

NSW Fire and Rescue 22 Lake Street Forster

NSW Fire and Rescue 135 Marine Drive Tea Gardens

Marine Rescue NSW Oyster Parade (nearest cross street) Forster

Marine Rescue NSW Lighthouse Road Nelson Bay

State Emergency Service 200 Charlotte Bay Street Pacific Palms

Surf Life Saving and Lifeguards Beach Street Forster

Surf Life Saving and Lifeguards Underwood Road (nearest cross street) Cape Hawke

Surf Life Saving and Lifeguards Lakeside Crescent Pacific Palms

Surf Life Saving and Lifeguards Corner Booner Street and Beach Road Hawks Nest


Page 103 of 110

Figure 4.3.1: Emergency services located east of the Princes Highway in the Great Lakes LGA.


Page 104 of 110

4.4 COMMUNICATIONS

Radio Coverage

The State Operations Centre in Belrose (SLSNSW) assist lifeguards and lifesavers during normal operations and

emergency incidents via UHF radio communication. The UHF radio signal strength on the Great Lakes coastline

uses the repeaters at Forster, Pacific Palms, Seal Rocks and Hawks Nest. Below are the coverage maps for each

of these repeaters. Table 4.4.1: Key to radio coverage strength.

Figure 4.4.1: Signal strength of the Forster Repeater.

Figure 4.4.2: Signal strength of the Pacific Palms Repeater.

As seen in the above figures signal strength around the Tuncurry and Forster areas is strong. The Cape Hawke

area has average to limited coverage. The majority of Seven Mile Beach and Pacific Palms have strong

coverage. The very southern end of Seven Mile Beach has average to limited coverage.

No coverage (Blacks spot)

Signal strength (limited)

Signal strength (average)

Signal strength (strong)


Page 105 of 110

Figure 4.4.3: Signal strength of the Seal Rocks Repeater.

Figure 4.4.4: Signal strength of the Hawks Nest Repeater.

As seen in the above figures signal strength around the Seal Rocks Area is strong. The southern end of

Boomerang Beach, Sandbar/Cellito and Submarine/Fiona/Yagon Beach has average signal strength. Signal

strength along Bennetts Beach has strong coverage however Mungo Beach has average to limited signal

strength.

Phone Coverage:

Due to the remote location and topography of the Great Lakes LGA, phone coverage in the area is often

limited. Larger phone providers such as Telstra and Optus are more reliant than other smaller providers like

Vodaphone, however there are still areas where Telstra and Optus coverage are limited. Areas within the

Myall Lakes National Park are one example where phone coverage is very limited. Non reliant phone coverage

may impact on an effective emergency response, and it is advised that when Land Managers and tourism

agencies promote coastal walks for example, people are well informed that only specific phone providers may

gain coverage, and even then phone reception may still be very poor in some areas. Personal locater beacons

could also be encouraged.


Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to hold discussions with Surf Life Saving Lower North Coast and Hunter

Branch to raise any current issues and opportunities which could see further radio infrastructure installed to

improve communication.


When Land Managers and tourism agencies promote the coastline i.e. coastal walks, people should be aware

that phone reception may be very limited in some areas. The use of personal locater beacons could also be

encouraged.


Page 106 of 110

4.5 JOINT EMERGENCY RESPONSE (LIFESAVERS AND LIFEGUARDS)

Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (SRERS)

The Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (NSW) was established in January 2008 and provides a single

point of contact for emergency services when there is a need to utilise surf rescue assets in coastal incidents.

The emergency number can be contacted 24/7 and operators (State Duty Officers) can task/notify any surf

rescue asset in NSW.

Through the growth of this system the Lower North Coast Branch have an effective Branch Duty Officer system

and dedicated Club Callout Teams that can respond to incidents outside of patrolled locations/after hours.

Lifeguards and lifesavers do an outstanding job responding to emergency incidents (many of which occur at

unpatrolled locations and/or after hours).

The most appropriate resource at the time of the incident are notified first and activated i.e. volunteer

lifesavers, paid lifeguards or other emergency services.

Marine Rescue NSW:

Marine Rescue NSW is at times the most appropriate resource to respond to incidents along the coastline

(particular vessel incidents). As part of the SRERS, Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with and

develop relationships with the Forster Marine Rescue Unit.

Emergency Scenario Training

Communications and emergency response could be enhanced by conducting an annual emergency response

scenario training day for lifesaving and lifeguarding services. Such exercises help to establish and cement the

chain of command, cooperation and adherence operational procedures in the event of a joint emergency

response with local emergency services. A suitable location to hold this scenario could be in Forster.


An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Lower North Coast Branch Duty

Officers/Support Operations, Great Lakes Lifeguards and the local emergency services once a year before the

commencement of the surf life saving season.


Surf Life Saving NSW should continue to work with and develop relationships with the Forster Marine Rescue

Unit.


Page 107 of 110

5 MONITOR AND REVIEW

The process of monitor and review ensures that risk treatment options are meeting their objectives, new

hazards and risks are identified in a timely manner and evolving strategies are in line with community

expectations.

Land Managers are encouraged to ensure that a there is a process of regular review of the effectiveness of any

risk mitigation strategies that have been implemented. This can include a process for the review of any

drowning or emergency response incidents affecting public safety at the locations assessed. The treatment

options outlined in this report can also be used as a benchmark as future funding opportunities become

available and when budget preparations occur annually.

Land Managers may determine to further engage peak water safety organisations to assist with the monitor

and review process. The process should include the review of all incident data, access points, signage,

education, public rescue equipment, supervision and emergency response.


In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure the

effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented

and where future funding opportunities can be directed.


All drowning prevention strategies have the opportunity to be documented and incorporated into the relevant

strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a

structured approach to maintenance.


Page 108 of 110

6 REFERENCES

Apple 2015, Emergency + Preview, viewed 13 August 2015,

<https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/emergency-+/id691814685?mt=8>

Australian Bureau of Statistics 2014, Quick Stats, viewed 27 July 2015,

<http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/map>

Australian National Sports Fishing Association 2014, Angel Ring Project, viewed 27 July 2015,

<http://angelrings.com.au/>

Attorney Generals’ Department 2014, Triple Zero (000) awareness campaign and promotional material, viewed

13 August 2015,

<http://www.triplezero.gov.au/Pages/TripleZero(000)AwarenessCampaignandpromotionalmaterial.aspx>

Australian Water Safety Council 2006, National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual, State

Government of Victoria, Melbourne.

Bradstreet, A, Sherker, S, Brighton, B, Weir, A, Thompson, M 2012, Research Review of Rock Fishing in New

South Wales, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney.

Bryson, M and Williams, S 2015, Review of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for Marine Surveys: Literature

Review and Suggestions for Future Research, Report prepared for NSW Department of Primary Industries

Bureau of Meteorology 2014, ‘Hazardous surf climatology’, Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne.

Cardno 2015, Shark Deterrents and Detectors – Review of Bather Protection Technologies, Report prepared for

NSW Department of Primary Industries

Connor 2014, ‘Drones flying high for beach safety’ Bay Post 11 September, viewed 31 July 2015,

<http://www.batemansbaypost.com.au/story/2549994/drones-flying-high-for-beach-safety/>

Destination New South Wales 2014, ‘LGA Profile – Great Lakes, Destination New South Wales, Sydney.

Great Lakes Council 2015, Pools and Beaches, viewed on 24 July 2015,

<http://www.greatlakes.nsw.gov.au/Community/Parks_and_Recreation/Pools_and_Beaches#Vehicles_on_Bea

ches>

Great Lakes 2015, Beaches, viewed on 24 July 2015

<http://www.greatlakes.org.au/spaces/beaches>

International Life Saving Federation 2008, A framework to reduce drowning deaths in the aquatic environment

for nations/regions engaged in lifesaving, The International Life Saving Federation, Belgium.

Kennedy, D, Sherker, S, Brighton, B, Weir, A, Woodroffe, C 2013, ‘Rocky coast hazards and public safety:

Moving beyond the beach in coastal risk management. Ocean and Coastal Management’, Volume 82, pp. 85-

94.


Page 109 of 110

Marine Parks Authority 2015, Port Stephens – Great Lakes Marine Park, viewed 28 July 2015,

<http://www.mpa.nsw.gov.au/psglmp.html>

Marine Rescue NSW 2015, Marine Rescue App, viewed 28 July 2015,

http://www.marinerescuensw.com.au/marinerescue-app

McKay, C, Brander, R, Goff, J 2014, ‘Putting tourists in harms way - Coastal tourist parks and hazardous

unpatrolled surf beaches in New South Wales’, Tourism Management, Volume 45, pp. 71-84.

New South Wales Division of Local Government 2012, ‘Practice Note No. 15 – Water Safety’, Department of

Premier and Cabinet, New South Wales Government.

New South Wales Marine Estate 2015, Marine protected areas, viewed 28 July 2015,

<http://www.marine.nsw.gov.au/nsw-marine-estate/marine-protected-areas>

New South Wales National Parks and Wildlifes 2014, Staying Safe in National Parks, veiwed 29 July 2015,

<http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/safety>

Recreational Fishing Alliance 2011, Safe Fishing, viewed 24 September 2013,

<http://www.safefishing.com.au/index.html>

Roads and Maritime Services 2014, Lifejacket Wear It, viewed 24 July 2015,

<http://www.lifejacketwearit.com.au/>

Roads and Maritime Services 2015, Web Cameras, viewed 27 July 2015,

<http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/web-cameras/index.html>

Science of the Surf 2015, Why do we need SOS, viewed 29 July 2015,

<http://www.scienceofthesurf.com/about.html>

Short, A 2006, Australian Beach Safety Management Program, Coastal Studies Unit, University of Sydney,

Sydney.

Standards Australia 2009, ‘AS/NZS ISO31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines’, Standards

Australia, Sydney.

Standards Australia 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 1: Specifications

for water safety signs used in workplaces and public areas’, Standards Australia, Sydney.

Standards Australia 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 2: Specifications

for beach safety flags – “colour, shape, meaning and performance’, Standards Australia, Sydney.

Standards Australia 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 3: Guidance for

use’, Standards Australia, Sydney.

Statewide Mutual 2007. ‘Signage As Remote Supervision’, Statewide Mutual, Sydney.


Page 110 of 110

Surf Life Saving Australia 2014, Beachsafe, viewed 24 July 2015, <http://beachsafe.org.au/>

Surf Life Saving Australia 2010, ‘The Australian Coastal Public Safety Guidelines, 2nd edition’, Surf Life Saving

Australia, Sydney.

Surf Life Saving New South Wales 2015, Incident Reporting Database, Surf Life Saving New South Wales,

Sydney.

Surfing New South Wales 2015, Surfers Rescue 24/7, viewed 24 July 2015,

<http://www.surfersrescue247.com.au/>

Urban Growth 2015, North Tuncurry, viewed 29 July 2015,

<http://northtuncurry.com.au/>

Wellings 2008, ‘Give me the resort life’ The Sydney Morning Herald 5 January, viewed 29 July 2015,

<http://www.smh.com.au/news/australian-capital-territory/give-me-the-resort-

life/2007/12/12/1199554550494.html> White 2014, ‘Twelve rescued at Tuncurry Rockpool’ Great Lakes Advocate 30 April, viewed 31 July 2015 <http://www.greatlakesadvocate.com.au/story/2247860/twelve-rescued-at-tuncurry-rockpool/>

great lakes local government area · coastal public safety risk assessment: great lakes local...

Documents