water quality improvement in the mackay whitsundays region · treatment, industrial waste, mining...

Appendix I – Demonstration Case Water Quality Improvements I-1

Water Quality Improvement in the Mackay Whitsundays

Region

Demonstration case jointly prepared with the GBRMPA

Relevance to Queensland Program

Queensland Program Component

MNES and OUV

Type of activity

Effectiveness measure

Overall effectiveness

Effectiveness of actions at reducing impacts on water quality and enhancing resilience of the GBR

Water Quality Improvement Plan

EP Act

Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009

Water Act

Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Guidelines

Paddock to Reef program

All All land use Avoid

Mitigate

Enhance

Effective

Appendix I – Demonstation Case Water Quality Improvements I-2

1.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The decline in the quality of water entering the Great Barrier Reef from adjacent catchments is one of the most significant impacts on the health of the Great Barrier Reef. This demonstration case llustrates how Queensland and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (the Authority) programs work with the regional Natural Resource Management Body (Reef Catchments) and its programs to manage the potential impacts on Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) from poor water quality.

A recent report from the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) showed a 50 per cent decline in coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef, 42 per cent of which could be attributed to crown-of-thorns1, the outbreaks of which are thought to be closely linked to excess nutrient runoff2,3. This strengthens the case for continuing to improve water quality to reduce the risk of future crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks, which will provide the best chance for the Great Barrier Reef to recover from the decline in coral cover in the medium term.

This demonstration case explores how the Queensland and Australian governments are working to halt and reverse the decline in water quality entering the Great Barrier Reef. Specifically it highlights some of the work being done to improve water quality flowing to the Great Barrier Reef from the Mackay Whitsundays region, including work through the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan (Reef Plan). It demonstrates development of best management practices supported by the Queensland Government and the Reef Rescue Program delivered by the Australian Government. The majority of vegetation in the catchment is classed as ‘non-remnant’, that is it has been modified to the extent that it is no longer recognised as a functioning habitat. Much has been changed from forest to grassland for grazing purposes (based on Informing the outlook for Great Barrier Reef coastal ecosystems4).


Figure 1.2.1 Coastal ecosystems in the Mackay Whitsunday natural resource management region in 2009


1.2 PRESSURES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

1.2.1 PRESSURES

Despite having only 3.8 per cent of the state’s population, the MIW region is currently the third strongest economy in Queensland, contributing approximately 7.3 per cent of the Queensland’s Gross State Product in 2011/2012 (Mackay Whitsunday Regional Economic Development Corporation, 2013). Current growth in the region has been driven by global demand for mineral resources, although the Mackay Whitsunday region continues to have economically important agriculture, tourism and fishing industries.

Geographically, mining, grazing and cropping dominate areas in the western parts of the Mackay Whitsunday region. The coastal parts of the Mackay Whitsunday region is dominated by sugar, horticulture, tourism, commerce and has the majority of the residential population. The Mackay Whitsunday region also has significant industry and port facilities that support both western and coastal area industry.5 Past developments have changed the nature and functions of the landscape and affected water quality and ecosystems in the region.4

The Reef Plan’s First Report Card Mackay regional summary6 provides a useful summary of the key land uses and pressures on water quality in the Mackay Whitsundays region through a conceptual model (Figure 1.2-1).

Many of the pressures on water quality are reflective of the land use pattern in the region. The dominant land uses are grazing (44 per cent per cent), sugarcane production (19 per cent), National Parks and Reserves (22 per cent) (Figure 1.2-2).4,6 Modelled estimates of the relative contribution to the regional diffuse source pollutant loads (i.e. that don’t come out of a pipe) show sugarcane production consistently higher for most of the pollutants of concern for the Great Barrier Reef ecosystems, particularly pesticides and nutrients.7

The current population is approximately 180 000, with an estimated 100 000 additional people expected to be living in the region by the 2031 (Queensland Government, 2012). It is estimated that this population growth will generate demand for an additional 43 300 dwellings and an extra 152 100 jobs (Queensland Government, 2012). Notwithstanding past, current and predicted urban and associated development, the major and primary impact on MNES in this region is historic land use change (primarily broadscale clearing for agriculture) and ongoing sources of land-based pollution, particularly rural diffuse pollution. Urban landuse within the Mackay Whitsunday region is approximately 3 per cent of the catchments (refer Figure 1.3.2), while the current broad influence on coastal ecosystem and functions continues to be through grazing (~44 per cent of the catchments) and irrigated production (~19 per cent of the catchments). Although small by area, urban development is generally located close to the coast and can have a significant localised impact on coastal ecosystems and modify catchment functions at a local scale. The picture is similar with intensive agriculture.


Figure 1.2-1

Figure 1.2-2

While the largest load contribution tends to come from agricultural land use activities in the catchment areas, historic vegetation clearing (Figure 1.2-2) has exacerbated the problem by reducing the extent of coastal ecosystems. This is particularly true for wetland and riparian habitats that previously served trapping and filtering functions. Broadscale clearing in the Mackay Whitsundays region is, however, lower relative to some other regions, with 67 per cent of the catchment still covered by woody vegetation8 and 88 per cent of wetlands still remaining from pre-European times.6 However, some catchments within the region have been more significantly impacted, with the Pioneer and O’Connell catchments showing significant loss of wetlands since pre-European time (84 per cent and 62 per cent of vegetated freshwater swamps lost respectively)6 and 66 per cent and 64 per cent respectively of their woodlands lost or modified4.


The Mackay Whitsunday Water Quality Improvement Plan (the WQIP) identified the main sources of pollutants for the region. Overall, 90 per cent of the pollutants are from diffuse sources. Of these:

Cane produces approximately 77 per cent of the dissolved nitrogren and 29 per cent of the suspended sediment.

Grazing produces over 30 per cent of the particulate nutrients and suspended sediment.

National parks and reserves contribute a large amount of suspended sediment although this is considered natural due to their general location on steep slopes and with high runoff volumes.

Horticulture and other intensive uses (eg rural residential, urban and transport corridors) make minor contributions.

There are also a number of minor contributions from land based point sources. This includes sewage treatment, industrial waste, mining and aquaculture. However, these are minor relative to diffuse sources of pollution and have generally been significantly reduced over the last decade as a result of improved waste water treatment processes, particularly for sewage treatment and management of aquaculture.9

Within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (the Marine Park), sources of poor water quality include spills, ballast water exchanges, sewage and wastewater from shipping and boating activity, dredging and sea dumping as well as a number of point sources with outfalls that directly discharge into the marine waters. Weather patterns such as tropical cyclones and strong winds can also result in resuspension of sediments in the inshore reef lagoon.

1.2.2 DIRECT IMPACTS

Water quality impacts directly and indirectly in this region on a range of MNES, including the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, listed threatened species, migratory species, Commonwealth marine areas and the Marine Park.

MNES Description of water quality impacts Magnitude of water quality impacts on MNES

World heritage properties Overall, water quality is one of the most significant and widespread impacts on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area as identified in the 2009 Outlook Report. Sediments, nutrients and pesticides impact on a range of values including inshore coral and seagrass. Impacts of water quality in the outer reef are likely to be low due to the impacts of dilution but links to Crown of Thorns outbreaks extend impacts potentially to over 1000 midshelf and offshore reefs..

High (but low offshore)

National heritage places Values, spatial extent, pressures and impact overlap with those of the World Heritage Area.

Largely unknown

Wetlands of international importance (listed under the Ramsar Convention)

None in the Mackay Whitsundays region High but not relevant in this region


MNES Description of water quality impacts Magnitude of water quality impacts on MNES

Listed threatened species and ecological communities

Some threatened species such as turtles and dugongs are strongly affected during periods of significant runoff impacting seagrass food resources. Some heavy metals can accumulate in species with high fat content (eg whales).

High for impacts on key communities eg. seagrasses which underpin health of inshore species like dugong but lower for species and communities further offshore

Migratory species protected under international agreements

Migratory species such as waders strongly affected due to impacts on food resources, turtles and dugong in inshore areas strongly affected during periods of significant runoff impacting seagrass food resources. Outer reef species and populations not impacted or low impacts.

High for inshore species, such as dugong and green turtles graduating to low for offshore species

Commonwealth marine areas Values, spatial extent, pressures and impact overlap with those of the World Heritage Area.


The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

Values, spatial extent, pressures and impact overlap with those of the World Heritage Area. Significant social and economic values as this region is the second most important in the Great Barrier Reef for tourism, especially the domestic market


The understanding of the impact of water quality on the Great Barrier Reef has changed from a debate on whether an impact is actually occurring to a consensus that water quality has degraded many inshore reef areas10,11. A weight of evidence indicates that parts of the Great Barrier Reef are now facing eutrophic conditions, with nutrient enrichment12,13,14,15,16, high phytoplankton biomass12,17 potential changes in the phytoplankton food web structure and increased competition at the coral reef level40, 67. This has resulted in shifts in trophic food webs seen in the proliferation of crown-of-thorns starfish in areas that receive terrestrial runoff2,3,18.

The 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement (DPC, 2013) overall conclusion was ‘that key Great Barrier Reef ecosystems are showing declining trends in condition due to continuing poor water quality, cumulative impacts of climate change and increasing intensity of extreme events.’ The Scientific Consensus Statement found that :

1. The decline of marine water quality associated with terrestrial runoff from the adjacent catchments is a major cause of the current poor state of many of the key marine ecosystems of the Great Barrier Reef.

2. The greatest water quality risks to the Great Barrier Reef are from nitrogen discharge, associated with crown of thorns starfish outbreaks and their destructive effects on coral reefs, and fine sediment discharge which reduces the light available to seagrass ecosystems and inshore coral reefs. Pesticides pose a risk to freshwater and some inshore and coastal habitats.


3. Recent extreme weather—heavy rainfall, floods and tropical cyclones—have severely impacted marine water quality and Great Barrier Reef ecosystems. Climate change is predicted to increase the intensity of extreme weather events.

4. The main source of excess nutrients, fine sediments and pesticides from Great Barrier Reef catchments is diffuse source pollution from agriculture.

5. Improved land and agricultural management practices are proven to reduce the runoff of suspended sediment, nutrients and pesticides at the paddock scale.

The supporting relative risk assessment showed that relative to other regions, Mackay Whitsundays is medium risk. The key pollutants of concern in the region are pesticides and dissolved inorganic nitrogen. The 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement again confirmed that the main source of pollutants entering the Great Barrier Reef is from diffuse agricultural sources. The loads from point sources of pollution, such as mining, urban development, ports or shipping, are relatively small but can be locally important and, over short time periods, highly significant.


Long-term monitoring indicates that inshore seagrass meadows along the Great Barrier Reef developed coast have been declining over the last 3-5 years and are currently in a poor condition;19 Chronic and intermittent increases in turbidity20 reduces light available for photosynthesis resulting in shedding of leaves on shoots, reducing seagrass leaf area and eventual leading to plant death21. Burial of seagrass during sediment deposition can also occur when seagrass meadows grow close to river mouths with large sediment discharge.22,23 Additional nutrients enhance seagrass growth24,25, but


elevated water column nutrients can favour the growth of plankton, macroalgae and epiphytic algae, all of which attenuate light availability to seagrass leaves. Inshore seagrass meadows of the Great Barrier Reef are also exposed to herbicides26,27 and the latest Reef Plan Scientific Consensus Statement rate the risk to inshore seagrass communities and thus, iconic species such as dugong and turtles as equal to that of coral reef communities28.

There is common agreement that management of this issue can aid in building ecosystem resilience to other pressures that cannot be managed under the Program, such as those associated with extreme weather events and changing climate.29,30,31

Its recognised that the catchment and the Great Barrier Reef are closely linked, especially by water quality but more recently the biological and ecological connections are showing that these historic changes to catchment functions are also affecting the Great Barrier Reef.4

Catchments and river systems that support them are ancient. The formation of catchment systems is a natural balance and interplay of the underlying geology and soils, weather and climate condition, and biological systems.

If flood frequency and / or magnitude is changed, then it is likely that the floodplain coastal ecosystem and associated ecosystem services will change. The frequency and magnitude of floods is one of the main factors determining the type of natural vegetation that grows in the floodplain. Flood frequency is affected by such things as:

changes in overland flow and infiltration rates due to a change in the coastal ecosystem type to allow use of land for agriculture

dams and water diversions capturing and storing water, and releasing water at different times in the season, outside natural cycles

changes in rainfall intensity and duration under a changing climate. These changes in land use lead to changes in erosion rates and the loads of sediment and nutrients leaving the catchment.32,33

The First Report Card’s Mackay regional summary provides data on the total modelled loads of pollutants out of the catchment and estimates how much is from human activity and how much is natural (Figure 1.3.3). The total suspended solids load leaving the catchments of the Mackay Whitsunday region is an estimated 1.5 million tonnes per year. Of this, 1.3 million tonnes are from human activity.34

The modelled long term annual average nitrogen load leaving the catchments of the Mackay Whitsunday region is 8100 tonnes per year, of which 7200 tonnes are from human activity. The modelled long term annual average phosphorus load leaving the catchments of the Mackay Whitsunday region is 2200 tonnes per year, of which 2000 tonnes are from human activity. The dissolved nitrogen load is 3300 tonnes per year, of which 2500 tonnes are from human activity. The dissolved phosphorus load is 370 tonnes per year, of which 310 tonnes are from human activity (Figure 1.2-3).6

The total photosystem inhibiting (PSI) pesticide load leaving the catchments of the Mackay Whitsunday region is an estimated 10,000 kilograms per year.6 The pesticide residues most commonly found in surface waters from areas of sugarcane cultivation are diuron, atrazine, ametryn and hexazinone.27 It is important to note that this estimate does not include several land uses known to leak PSII pesticides (e.g. grazing, forestry, urban) and non-PSII pesticides, indicating that the total pesticide pollutant load to the Great Barrier Reef is likely to be higher.


The 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement on water quality issues in the Great Barrier Reef and its catchment concludes that these pollutants are present in the Great Barrier Reef at concentrations likely to cause environmental harm. It also noted that studies have shown that:

Seagrass declines with increasing concentrations of herbicides

Macroalgae increase and coral species richness declines with increasing turbidity and nutrients

Nutrient enrichment is linked to crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks

Research published since 2008 noted that water quality flowing from the catchments remains a major issue for the Great Barrier Reef37. However, the conclusion from the 2008 Consensus Statement that ‘current management interventions are not effectively solving the problem’ has now decisively changed with the improved focus of Reef Plan35 including the introduction of the Reef Rescue Initiative and the Reef Protection Package36.

Figure 1.2-3 Catchment loads from the Mackay Whitsundays region (DPC, 2011).

The 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement37 and the associated risk assessment (Brodie et.al. 2013(c)) identified the Mackay Whitsunday region as posing a significant risk to the inshore waters with respect to PSII herbicide exposure (Figure 1.3-4). These risk are associated with not only the loads of herbidices but also the nature of the agricultural practices, being dominated by irrigatation, leading often to higher herbicide concentrations leaving the farms during the dry season. The implications for inshore seagrass communities were significant with the area of seagrass within in the high class of PSII herbicide modelled concentration being greatest in the Mackay Whitsunday region (57 km2), 82 km2 in the medium class representing 19 per cent and 13 per cent of the seagrass in the region respectively 37).


Figure 1.3-4 Risk areas of additive PSII herbicide residues modelled in the Great Barrier Reef Region.The model r

The model calculated additive photosystem II inhibiting (PSII) herbicide concentrations using end-of-river monitoring data and applied the established relationship of concentration of dissolved organic matter to salinity to corresponding satellite images of flood plumes to predict the additive PSII concentrations. Conservative mixing processes in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon were assumed. Consequence categories are based on known toxicity data to coral and seagrass species and these thresholds, where they were reached, were mapped using the modelled concentrations37.


1.2.3 INDIRECT IMPACTS

Seagrass meadows are recognised as a critical component of the Great Barrier Reef inshore ecosystems, supporting marine megafauna such as dugong and turtles, and the productivity of adjacent ecosystems including coral reefs and mangroves 66. There are a number of nationally listed threatened and migratory species that are reliant on seagrass or corals for habitat or food that are indirectly impacted by poor water quality. For example, as a result of a decline in water quality caused by extreme weather flooding and cyclone damage in 2011, seagrass meadows were significantly impacted and this led to an increase in turtle and dugong strandings along the entire Queensland coastline, although Mackay was not a major hot spot area (compared to Townsville and Gladstone).38

In addition to the various species that may be impacted due to seagrass loss, a wide range of species can be indirectly impacted by loss of coral. Outbreaks of crown of thorn starfish are estimated to have caused 42 per cent of the loss of coral cover on midshelf reefs on the Great Barrier Reef over the last 27 years.1 These outbreaks are now known to be caused by high nutrient loads, particularly off the Wet Tropics where the outbreaks start.2 As a fourth wave of crown-of-thorns commences, this has the potential to impact significantly on a number of values that underpin the MNES and the OUV of the World Heritage Area. Inshore and fringing coral reefs have historically been even more affected by development in the adjacent catchment39 and poor water quality has seen ongoing losses of around 34 per cent of corals in coastal areas south of Port Douglas since 200540.

Year 2012 2011 2010 2009 Marine turtles

Mackay 10 13 0 5

All of Queensland 474 verified on StrandNet (incl. 100 released alive)

27 require verification

498 302 330

Dugong

Mackay 0 3 1 0

All of Queensland 12 total (incl. 2 released alive) 54 27 9

1.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The cumulative impacts of poor water quality are relatively well understood and led to the development of Great Barrier Reef specific Water Quality Guidelines in 2009. A 2013 scientific consensus statement37, has clearly identify the various sources of pollutants and the relative risks of different pollutants. This provided a useful analysis of the cumulative impacts on water quality from multiple activities and has helped inform development of the new Reef Water Qaulity Protection Plan, also released in July 2013. Monitoring against the Authority’s Water Quality Guidelines provides a mechanism to track and hopefully address the cumulative impacts on water quality from multiple sources especially when incorporated into all decision making process. This can be through the application, for example, of the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy (EPP Water) via scheduling of local and regional environmental values and water quality objectives. The WQIP provides a regional mechanism to consider the various sources of pollutants, including agriculture, urban and industrial development and their contribution to declining water quality.


1.3 HOW THE PROGRAM IDENTIFIES AND PROTECTS IMPORTANT VALUES THAT UNDERPIN MNES, INCLUDING OUV

There are a range of policies, plans and programs in place that identify the environmental values in the Great Barrier Reef Region (the Region) that are reliant on good water quality. These provide different functions, including natural resource management, underpinning monitoring or linking to land use planning and development assessment (Figure 1.3-1).

Figure 1.3-1 Mechanisms for identifying and protecting water quality values

1.3.1 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN

The WQIP for Mackay Whitsundays, established in 2008, identifies community environmental values (EVs) for fresh, estuarine and coastal/marine waters in the Mackay-Whitsunday region.7 These include human uses (e.g. irrigation, recreation, stock watering) and aquatic ecosystem values. For the aquatic ecosystem EVs, some waters have been identified for a High Ecological Value (HEV) level of protection, reflecting the intent to maintain/achieve effectively unmodified condition. HEV waters


identified in the WQIP are typically in relatively undeveloped areas. In other areas, the management intent is to prevent decline and where possible improve water quality and ecosystem health. The WQIP also identifies Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) and targets to protect these EVs and HEV waters. The WQIP is currently being reviewed and updated.

1.3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (WATER) POLICY

Under the EPP Water, draft EVs and water quality objectives (WQOs) have been developed for the waters in the Mackay Whitsundays region. These were made available for public comment in mid 2012.41,42 They include waters in rivers, streams, wetlands, lakes, aquifers, estuaries and coastal areas. The objective under the EPP Water is to:

identify EVs for aquatic ecosystems and for human uses (e.g. water for drinking, farm supply, agriculture, industry and recreational use)

determine water quality guidelines (WQGs) and WQOs to enhance or protect the environmental values.

The processes to identify EVs and to determine WQGs and WQOs are based on the National Water Quality Management Strategy43 and related Implementation Guidelines (1998) and further outlined in the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality.44 The relationship between the planning, legislative and policy environments is complex but effective (Table 1.4.2).

The draft EVs and WQOs for the Mackay Whitsundays region are based on: stakeholder EVs consultations undertaken by the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) and Reef Catchments as part of the Mackay Whitsunday region WQIP. These use the latest available technical guidelines (particularly the Queensland45 and Great Barrier Reef water quality guidelines46). Additional stakeholder consultation has been undertaken by DEHP, with assistance from Authority, and incorporates comments from the public review period for the draft EV documents and plans.

The draft maps for the relevant basins and coastal waters are provided at Appendix 1. The maps highlight the key environmental values across the region and the management intent for waterways to either achieve or maintain HEV waters.

1.3.3 GREAT BARRIER REEF WATER QUALITY GUIDELINES

The Water Quality Guidelines for the Marine Park describe the concentrations and trigger values for sediment, nutrients and pesticides that have been established as necessary for the protection and maintenance of marine species and ecosystem health of the Great Barrier Reef.46

These guidelines define trigger values that will be used to:

Support setting targets for water quality leaving catchments

Monitor trends and respond where necessary where trigger levels are exceeded

Encourage strategies to minimise release of contaminants

Identify further research into impacts of contaminants in the Marine Park

Assess cumulative impacts on the Great Barrier Reef ecosystems at local and regional levels

Provide an information source for Natural Resource Management (NRM) bodies, industry, government and communities.


Water quality trigger levels established in the 2010 edition of the Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Guidelines have been used as the starting point for draft marine WQOs under the EPP Water and where applicable are supported by monitored data from the marine monitoring program or other long term monitoring sites.

Water quality parameters monitored under the Reef Rescue Marine Monitoring and Reporting Program are compared and reported against the Water Quality Guidelines for the Marine Park. Exceedances of the guidelines are used to identify areas at the highest risk of potential impacts and to provide guidance on where more investment might be needed.47

A comprehensive list of water quality and ecosystem health indicators are measured under the Marine Monitoring Program and a sub-set of these are selected to calculate Water Quality, Seagrass and Coral scores for the Report Card (see Section 1.8), based on monitoring data and expert opinion.

Table 1.4-2 Relationship of management mechanisms in planning for water quality improvement Marine water

quality Catchment water

quality Water resource allocation

Strategies Reef Water

Quality Protection Plan

National Water Quality Management Strategy

Reef Water Quality Protection Plan

Legislation Great Barrier reef

Marine Park Act 1975

Environmental Protection Act 1994

Water Act 2000

Environmental

Protection (Water) Policy 2009

Plans Water Quality

Improvement Plans

Healthy Waters Management Plans

Water Resource Plans

Resource Operating Plans

Values and targets

Environmental Values

Water use allocations

Water Quality Objectives

Environmental flows

Monitoring Marine

ecosystem health (water quality)

Catchment ecosystem health (water quality)

Catchment ecosystem health (environmental flow regimes)

Guidelines Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water

quality

Queensland Water Quality Guidelines

Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Guidelines


1.4 MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (QUEENSLAND) Accelerated actions under Reef Plan since 2009 have significantly increased the effectiveness of the Program and are expected to drive major reductions in pollutant loads and improvements in marine health over the longer term. Reef Plan has been shown to be an effective mechanism for coordinating and integrating actions across governments in close partnership with industry, regional NRM bodies and conservation groups. It is also an appropriate mechanism to ensure adaptive management based on sophisticated and integrated monitoring and modelling programs and the application of water quality guidelines, as well as leading to regularly updated scientific consensus statements that ensure management is based on the best available science.

The report from the recent visit by UNESCO praised the efforts by government and partners on actions to improve water quality. This was also reflected by the World Heritage Committee which at its July 2012 meeting “welcomed the initial positive results of the Reef Plan and associated measures to address major long-term impacts on the property from poor water quality”.

Establishment of the EPP Water in 2009 and subsequent work on setting water quality objectives and guidelines for the region has also ensured that development adequately considers water quality in planning, construction and operation.

Component

Very

eff

ectiv

e

Effe

ctiv

e

Part

ially

Ef

fect

ive

Inef

fect

ive

Confidence Trend Summary of evidence

Demonstrated ability to identify MNES including OUV

WQIP, EP (Water) and GBRMPA guidelines are identifying values based on rigorous, scientifically justified frameworks

Demonstrated ability to identify and assess impacts

Significant investment in monitoring and R&D is continually improving knowledge of impacts, but gaps still remain. Scientific consensus statements every five years inform reviews of water quality programs.

Effectiveness in avoiding impacts

EP (Water) and Wetlands SPP are avoiding impacts through development assessment.

Effectiveness in mitigating impacts

Reef Plan is delivering coordinated programs to mitigate impacts from agricultural sources. WQIPs and EPP provide mechanisms to address broader wate quality issues. Report Cards are showing reductions in


Component

Very

eff

ectiv

e

Effe

ctiv

e

Part

ially

Ef

fect

ive

Inef

fect

ive

Confidence Trend Summary of evidence

loads entering the Great Barrier Reef though this will take time to translate into improved water quality in the Reef Lagoon’s waters.

Effectiveness in offsetting unavoidable impacts

- - - - - - NA

Contribution to enhancement of MNES including OUV and management of existing pressures

Improving water quality is a major contributor to building reef resilience and improving MNES and OUV

Demonstrated ability to adapt system over time to incorporate new knowledge

Reef Plan is an effective mechanism for adaptive management and is reviewed every five years. Integration with other activities around port, urban and industrial water quality would be beneficial and will be considered at its next review point.

Resourcing, monitoring and compliance

There are significant investments in Reef Plan and other related programs.

Overall effectiveness

Significant progress is being made to improve water quality, but it will take time for it to be seen in the marine system.


1.5 MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (GBRMPA)* The independent assessor of the Authority’s management program identified that ‘the Authority has a lead role for the management activities that impact water quality within the Marine Park, as well as an advisory or partnership role with other agencies in relation to activities that occur outside the Region that may impact on the water quality in the Marine Park.

The Authority’s management of water quality is through legislation and permits for point source discharges into the Marine Park, as well as undertaking the marine monitoring functions of the Reef Plan35. However, the most significant contribution to water quality decline in the Great Barrier Reef is from activities outside the Marine Park associated with agricultural practices. This limits the Authority’s capacity to take direct action with respect to the main drivers of water quality decline. The non-point source discharges, such as runoff from agriculture, is managed through partnerships with the Queensland Government, the Commonwealth Government, regional natural resource management bodies, land holders, industry groups, non-government organisations and through education and community awareness, stewardship and best practice programs.

The assessment for management effectiveness undertaken for the 2009 Outlook Report concluded there was slow progress being made towards the attainment of the desired outcomes and to reducing the risks and threats to the Reef’s values. The Outlook Report recognised the positive work that was being done through the Reef Plan, but highlighted the little evidence of change through a lack of monitoring, and the lack of delivery within the planning framework.48

Since the 2009 Outlook Report, a review of Reef Plan has provided better focus and direction for managers, including targets for water quality and land management improvement.’.. Reef Plan 2009 provided a much better focus and direction and included quantitative targets for water quality and land management improvement. A similar model has been utilised in the 2013 update. A Paddock to Reef monitoring program is also in place to evaluate the performance of Reef Plan. There are now annual report cards, the most recent of which was released in July 2013 and showed good progress towards targets. The 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement also recognises that positive progress is being made in our scientific understanding of the impacts of poor water quality, the relative risks of different pollutants and in actions that will reduce total pollutant loads to the Reef. However, the consensus statement also concluded that while current management interventions are starting to address water quality in the Great Barrier Reef, sustained and greater effort will be needed to achieve the ultimate goal of no detrimental impact on the health and resilience of the Reef. The recently released Reef Plan 2013 and the recommitment by both the Australian and Queensland Governments to investing a further $375m through to 2018 provides ongoing support for improving water quality entering the Great Barrier Reef. The reviewed Reef Plan 201349 actions provide for improved focus on catchment repair and links to the Authority’s Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Guidelines. Water Quality Guidelines for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park50, released in 2009, identify trigger levels for specific pollutants in water entering the Marine Park,

The assessors also noted that, ‘the development of a Coastal Ecosystems Assessment Framework51 provides a framework for assessment of ecosystem services within the basins located in the catchment with a focus on improving the health and resilience of the Great Barrier Reef...6,52,53

The values that underpin the matters relevant to water quality are well understood by the Authority. While many of the direct and indirect impacts of poor water quality are well known, knowledge is not as comprehensive concerning the consequential and cumulative impacts of water quality. Current condition and trend are known for specific species such as corals and seagrass; however, despite


early evidence of a reduction in loads of pollutants, there is still little documented evidence concerning actual improvements in water quality in the Region.

The Authority engages with key stakeholders and has expanded the Reef Guardians Program (which commenced with schools and local councils), to include farmers, graziers and fishers. However, as the management of water quality leaving the Great Barrier Reef catchment is significantly within the Queensland Government’s jurisdiction, the Authority generally works with the community and stakeholders to encourage the uptake of best practice land management.

The Authority has its greatest direct influence on water quality through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act and Regulations under which it is illegal to discharge waste into the Marine Park except for some permissible actions. Permitting the discharge of wastewater into the Great Barrier Reef is assessed on a case by case basis against, amongst other things, guideline trigger levels.

The Authority has allocated significant resources into understanding the water quality issues from a biophysical aspect, though information is still limited with respect to the socio-economic impact of loss of ecosystem services from poor water quality. The Authority monitors the long-term health of key marine ecosystems and the condition of water quality in the inshore lagoon.47

The downstream effects from land-based water quality from recent and proposed changes to Queensland Government policy and legislation, such as the coastal plan, are unknown at this stage; however, it is likely they will hamper rather than improve the current water quality situation.’

* The management effectiveness assessment above was completed in March 2013 and was undertaken by independent assessors. The text in italics is quotes directly from that report, which makes up Chapter 8 of the Authority’s Strategic Assessment Report.. Additional text reflects a number of things that have happened since this work was undertaken, including the finalisation of Reef Plan 2013, the updated Reef Plan 2013 Scientific Consensus Statement and the release of the 2011 Reef Plan Report Card.

Management effectiveness scores for catchment runoff (water quality protection)

Water quality protection

Effe

ctiv

e

Mos

tly e

ffect

ive

Part

ially

effe

ctiv

e

Inef

fect

ive

Context

Planning

Inputs

Processes

Outputs

Out

com

es

Overall

Biodiversity


1.6 MEASURES TO AVOID, MITIGATE AND OFFSET IMPACTS ON MNES

1.6.1 MANAGEMENT OF LAND USE

Good vegetation management is recognised as critical in controlling and minimising the erosive forces of rain, wind and flooding, reducing the loss of sediment to the Great Barrier Reef.11 In coastal catchments with high rainfall like Mackay, high grass cover may also help prevent erosion.55 The Vegetation Management Act 1999 regulates clearing of native vegetation. In 2006, broadscale clearing for agricultural purposes was prohibited and this has helped in reducing erosion from further forest clearing. In 2009, clearing of remnant vegetation within 50m of a watercourse was prohibited in three priority reef catchments – Mackay Whitsundays, Burdekin and Wet Tropics – providing further protection for riparian areas and preventing streambank erosion.. Recent changes to Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act have maintained the protection for watercourses in these catchments. Woodland and forest ecosystems meeting minimum standards of naturalness (defined as “remnant vegetation”) also remain protected. Greater flexibility has been provided to freehold landholders to allow clearing of “regrowth” vegetation (mature native vegetation that hasn’t been cleared since 31 December 1989) in certain circumstances. Queensland continues to monitor tree clearing through its SLATS (Statewide Landcover and Trees Study) program.

The high level of protection provided to marine plants (including mangrove wetlands, saltmarshes and seagrass meadows) and fish habitats under the Fisheries Act 1994 continues to be instrumental in maintaining the integrity of coastal habitat functions that are essential for water quality. Marine plants and wetlands trap sediments, process nutrients and protect coastal areas from excessive erosion.56,57 The Fisheries Act prohibits the unlawful destruction, removal, or damage of any marine plants and unlawful works within declared Fish Habitat Areas.

The Queensland State Planning Policy 4/11: Protecting Wetlands of High Ecological Significance in Great Barrier Reef Catchments seeks to ensure development in or adjacent to wetlands of high ecological significance in the Great Barrier Reef catchments. Any works proposed in or near these wetlands needs to be appropriately planned, designed, constructed and operated to prevent the loss or degradation of the wetlands and their environmental values, or to enhance these values. Under this State Planning Policy, development that involves high impact earthworks are not permitted within or near high value wetlands (including but not limited to RAMSAR wetlands). This policy is currently under review and being consolidated into a single State Planning Policy, with the intent it will remain the same.

Under the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009, environmental values and water quality objectives for fresh waters, estuaries and coastal waters inform statutory planning and decision-making for development approvals and environmental authorities under the Environmental Protection Act 1994, and certain approvals under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. Environmental values and water quality objectives also inform non-statutory water quality planning and decision-making by a range of authorities and the community.

The Queensland State Planning Policy 4/10 for Healthy Waters and the State Planning Policy Guideline for Healthy Waters became effective in May 2011, after extensive public information and training sessions. This State Planning Policy ensures that development for urban purposes under the Sustainable Planning Act including community infrastructure, is planned, designed, constructed and operated to manage stormwater and waste water in ways that protect the scheduled environmental values for specific waters as prescribed in the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009. This


policy is also currently under review and being consolidated into a single State Planning Policy, with the intent it will remain the same.

1.6.2 MANAGEMENT OF POINT SOURCE POLLUTION

1.6.2.1 AQUACULTURE Traditionally, land-based aquaculture farms have often discharged high concentrations of suspended solids and nutrients into nearby waterways. The potential impacts on the Great Barrier Reef environment associated with land-based aquaculture facilities include: increased loads of sediment and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) in discharged wastewater; clearing or modifying coastal habitats; modifying hydrologic processes; disturbing acid sulphate soils; introducing marine species; genetic pollution; and introducing disease.58

However, this situation has improved with the use of new techniques in new and existing aquaculture farms such as increasing the area of settlement and bio-filtration ponds that also contain algae, bivalves or fish to to capture recycle excess nutrients.

Discharges from aquaculture farms are now better regulated to make sure they protect the water quality of local waterways and the Great Barrier Reef. In 2005, the Commonwealth Minister for Environment and Heritage accredited Queensland law under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (Aquaculture) Regulations 2000. Based on this agreement, Queensland improved it legislative and policy requirements for both existing and new aquaculture farms. The accreditation meant no permission is required from the Authority for a land-based aquaculture facility, discharging waste water into coastal streams adjacent to the World Heritage Area, where no infrastructure is required in the Marine Park. Queensland is presently reviewing its management of aquaculture and like other agricultural industries has a policy of increasing production by 50 per cent.

Aquaculture operations within the Marine Park itself are permitted in certain zones but require approval from Authority in those zones and are only permitted where any potential impacts are judged to be of an accectable nature.

1.6.2.2 SEWAGE The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 requires a permission for discharge of sewage effluent directly into the Marine Park. The policy Sewage Discharges from Marine Outfalls into the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, originally established in 1991, sets out requirements for a permission to discharge treated sewage into the Marine Park with improvements in effluent discharges to meet tertiary or tertiary equivalent standards by 1998. Further revision in 200559 provided an incentive for operators to reduce nutrient loads in sewage effluent using a sliding Environmental Management Charge based on loads of nitrogen and phosperous.

Mainland city and town sewage discharges are generally within the jurisdiction of Queensland and require approval from DEHP as an Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA63) and as such require a development approval for a material change of use under the Environment Protection Act 1994. DEHP rigorously assess applications and applies conditions to avoid and minimise potential impacts. Conditions that are placed on an approval will specify the capacity, operating and reporting requirements of the sewage treatment plant. Currently most large population centres adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef either do not discharge to waterways (with up to 100 per cent reuse), or have been upgraded to meet tertiary treatment standards.9


Vessel based sewage discharges must comply with strict regulations administered by Authority and those for Queensland coastal waters requirements (administered by Maritime Safety Queensland). The regulations vary depending on:

The type of waterway in which the vessel activities will take place

The number of people that intend to be onboard the vessel

The amount of time to be spent in the different waterways

The discharge requirements of those waterways

The discharge requirements with respect to distance from reefs and other sensitive environments

1.6.3 MANAGEMENT OF DIFFUSE SOURCES OF POLLUTION

1.6.3.1 URBAN RUNOFF The management of urban stormwater, sewage and trade waste are key Local Government water quality policy, planning and investment areas. The EPP Water requires specific Local Governments to undertake this responsibility within a total water cycle management (TWCM) context. The TWCM concept addresses the different elements of the water cycle within an urban area and its catchment, advancing a whole system approach to the management of water, whilst enhancing and protecting the environmental values of receiving waters. Examples include reducing demands for new and existing water supplies (such as incentives to lower consumptive rates and re-using stormwater) and reducing the disposal of pollutants (such as re-using waste water and managing sediment production on construction sites). To support TWCM, Queensland Government produced the Urban Stormwater Quality Planning Guidelines in 2010 which provides direction on the development of strategies for improved environmental management of urban catchments and waterways. This includes the preparation of urban stormwater quality management plans as part of the total water cycle management plans required under the EPP Water taking into account any EVs and WQOs in waterways where discharges may occur. Guidelines also exist to support the implementation of Australia’s National Water Quality Management Strategy for a range of issues including sewage, stormwater management, groundwater management, effluent from intensive animal production systems and designing monitoring programs.44

1.6.3.2 DREDGING Three ports, two of which are classed as major coal ports, are located along the Mackay Whitsunday coast. Dredging that occurs in these ports to improve vessel access and the installation, operation and maintenance of infrastructure, is affecting habitats and species in the adjacent inshore waters.60,61 Ports and associated access channels have been dredged since their establishment within the region and elsewhere along the Queensland coast, often well before the Marine Park was declared. Today, both capital and maintenance dredging are undertaken within and adjacent to the Marine Park. Sites for the disposal of dredge material (sediments from the seafloor) may be out to sea or on land. Existing ocean disposal sites are located both within and adjacent to the Marine Park. Most large-scale dredging and dredge material disposal is associated with the larger and busier ports such as Cairns, Townsville, Abbott Point, Hay Point and Gladstone.62

The potential impacts of marine disposal of dredge material depends on a number of factors including the volume and composition of the dredge material and the disposal location including the oceanographic conditions of the site and proximity to sensitive species and habitats. A study of the bed shear-stress (an index of resistance and mobilisation of the seabed) in the vicinity of 12 major Queensland trading ports found the seabed between Gladstone and Hay Point to be energetic (i.e.


dispersive), with the potential to remobilise unconsolidated material up to coarse sand under average conditions63.

Marine disposal results in direct impacts, such as removal, smothering and burying of habitats and organisms within the dredging and disposal sites, and may result in indirect impacts, from resuspension and dispersion of the material by waves, wind, tides and currents. A recent study looked at the long-term re-suspension processes and found that fine sediments are continually re-mobilised and re-deposited with re-suspension plumes likely to travel further than previously thought (SKM, 2013). The research was the first to incorporate the combined influence of waves, tides, local winds and large-scale currents when modelling the movement of dredge material over 12 months at multiple locations. Scientists and stakeholders agreed that the model was robust, but recognised there were some limitations and uncertainties associated with some of the model inputs. The information generated by this study is high level and is not intended to replace the detail required as part of an environmental impact assessment process for any future dredge material placement operations. The Authority manages these impacts and potential impacts at present using a case by case assessment process which limits the capacity of being able to address some of the cumulative pressures from multiple developments in any specific location or region.

1.6.3.3 AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF Reef Plan

The Reef Water Quality Protection Plan was established between the Australian and Queensland Governments in 2003 to halt and reverse the decline in water quality from diffuse agricultural sources.

It was updated in 2009 following the release of a Scientific Consensus Statement on water quality in the Great Barrier Reef, which stated that management interventions at that time were not effectively solving the problem and that accelerated action was needed. Another Scientific Consensus Statement was released in July 2013 and has informed development of Reef Plan 2013, also released in July 2013.

Reef Plan 2013 includes ambitious targets to reduce runoff of nutrients by 50 per cent, pesticides by 60 per cent and sediment by 20 per cent by 2018. Reef Plan 2013 includes a range of direct actions to avoid and mitigate the impacts of poor water quality from agricultural sources, which is the greatest contributor. This includes water quality grants under the Australian Government’s Reef Rescue initiative, the development of industry led best management practice programs supported by the Queensland Government, education and extension services, and a range of other initiatives (Figure 1.6-1).

The reduction in loads in this region in the report cards from the baseline of 2011 for 2012 and 2013 respectively have been from 4 per cent to 13 per cent for nitrogen and 18 per cent to 31 per cent for pesticides.52,53


Figure 1.6-1 Programs and activities that support the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan

Australian Government’s Reef Rescue Initiative

Reef Rescue is a $400 million ten year initiative under the Caring For Our Country program and is the Australian Government’s contribution to Reef Plan. The first phase of the program ended in June 2013. In April 2013, the Australian Government announced a further $200m investment in Reef Rescue 2013-18, including $98m in water quality grants and partnerships and $50m in system repair and coastal best management practices.

The targets for land manager adoption of improved runoff management in the first five years of the program are 1300 farmers and 650 pastoralists. In the first four years of the program, across all regional groups, around 1800 farmers and almost 950 pastoralists have improved management practices through Reef Rescue funded projects 68.

To date, Reef Catchments, the Natural Resource Management Group for the Mackay Whitsundays region, has received $27.5 million of Reef Rescue funding matched by $29.5million from farmers and graziers through Water Quality Grants and Partnerships. Reef Catchments have administered grants to over 650 individual land managers (around 500 farmers and 150 pastoralists) through more than 900 projects in the first four years of Reef Rescue (Reef Catchments Will Higham pers comm). On average, land managers have contributed $1.80 for every $1 of Reef Rescue investment for on-ground projects.64


Queensland Government Reef Water Quality Program

The Queensland Government is working with the cane and grazing industries to develop a voluntary Best Management Practice (BMP) system, similar to the successful Cotton BMP and Grain BMP models. BMP provides confidence in the industries’ land and water stewardship performance, particularly in managing soil, nutrients and chemicals. The BMP system aims to improve farm productivity and profitability. Adoption of BMP would be a big contributor to reducing inputs such as fertiliser and chemicals, and this would deliver direct benefits to the Great Barrier Reef.

Prior to 2012, the Australian Government’s Reef Rescue program provided funding for development of three grazing BMPs. The Queensland Government is supporting BMP development to transition from regulation to industry-led best practice, underpinned by profitability, productivity and stewardship. The regulatory approach currently in place under the Environment Protection Act will remain in force until such time as the BMPs take effect.

An agreement has been signed between the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) and CANEGROWERS to lead the development of a BMP for the cane industry, to be ready by June 2014. It will include modules that focus on plant nutrients, soil health, and weed management—directly relevant to managing nutrients, soils and chemicals in the Mackay Whitsundays catchment. CANEGROWERS and the government are aiming for certain targets, such as an adoption rate among growers, that provide confidence that the Cane BMP can replace the current regulation.

Concurrently, DEHP and the Grazing BMP partnership, consisting of the Fitzroy Basin Association, AgForce and the Queensland Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, have set in place a similar agreement to develop and roll-out a BMP for the northern grazing industry. While initially focused in the Fitzroy and Burdekin catchments, the Grazing BMP has also been discussed in Mackay Whitsunday region with grazing stakeholders.

BMP systems will provide for data collection and reporting systems to support Reef Plan, as well as public reporting on BMP module adoption. The design and piloting of these systems is planned for early 2013, and will make provision for adopting the best available science and evidence collated under Reef Plan research programs. Additionally, as part of the Reef Water Quality program, additional extension, research and industry development has been supported to help cane growers adopt improved practice uptake within the Mackay Whitsunday region. For example:

the Reef Catchments’ adaptive management project will run through to 2014 to validate and extend the economic and environmental benefits of adopting improved nutrient and chemical management, co-ordinate support services to growers, and reduce end-of-catchment pollutant loads

in early 2012, environmental characteristics maps have been developed and published that provide property-level information such as drainage patterns, soil type and slope that influence pollutant transport through overland flow

regional DEHP officers have worked with growers to review their nutrient and chemical application rates, helping to identify where further assistance could be provided

DEHP is supporting SafeGauge for nutrients, a decision support tool for cane growers that assesses the relative risk of off-site movement from an individual cane block because of its position in the landscape, soil characteristics and nutrient management practices

extension activities through the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry include the Model Farms Project, developed to showcase how sugar producers could incorporate environmentally sensitive management measures into their farming system without compromising profitability.


The regional Water Quality Improvement Plan

The local regional NRM body, Reef Catchments, has established its regional WQIP in 2007. This WQIP provided the mechanism for identifying the high risk areas for the range of pollutants, the targets to achieve the EVs and WQOs identified by the community and the links to the actions needed to achieve them. The WQIP guides investment into the critical areas for improving water, quality linked to aquatic and marine assets.7 It also provides the tool for assessing the effectiveness of that investment. As such the WQIP has been recognised as setting a benchmark in establishing WQOs and EVs linked to inshore protected marine water/fish habitat areas. The WQIP is also recognised as setting scientifically robust targets supported by practical on-ground solutions. This has been the primary tool for directing Reef Rescue investments.

The WQIP defines and uses a best management practice framework (the ABCD framework) to guide a continuous improvement process. These fameworks were developed with each of the industry partners and community stakeholder working groups have effectively implemented actions for each of the ABCD frameworks. Several of the frameworks have already had reviews and updates as practice change and targets become more sophisticated. The working groups established to facilitate this implementation have proven to be an excellent mechanism to carry out this adaptive management role. It is important for the frameworks to be able to apply to the holder of the parcel of the land, thus the functional relationship must be validated at the property scale, and site specific actions developed with the landholder. This is how the ABCD management frameworks operate in the Mackay Whitsunday region (Figure 1.6-2).

Figure 1.6.2 – Example of the Mackay Whitsunday WQIP implementation and targets table for actions to improve ecosystem health outcomes

Through the WQIP processes, there is the opportunity to improve the recognition of important ecosystem functions in the landscape and establish water quality objectives more closely linked to improving the health of the inshore World Heritage Area. There are already prioritised coastal ecosystems, and developed objectives and strategies in the WQIP and a new focus on investment through the Reef Rescue 2013-2018 program should support action in this area.


1.6.4 PARTNERSHIPS AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

The local regional NRM body, Reef Catchments, has also established a broader Natural Resource Management Plan which also guides investment into improving land, water, biodiversity and marine assets. This helps direct on ground activities that improve water quality and aligns to various funding sources including the Australian Government’s Caring for Our Country program and Queensland’s regional NRM program.

GBRMPA also works closely with the regional councils through its Reef Guardian Program. The Reef Guardian Council program recognises the effective management and protection of the Great Barrier Reef requires a coordinated effort from industries, communities and all levels of government.

Many local residents assume their councils only deal with rates, roads and rubbish but Reef Guardian Councils are doing much more than this in an effort to protect the Great Barrier Reef. Reef Guardian Councils undertake environmental initiatives in the following areas:

Water management - waterways rehabilitation, water monitoring, urban stormwater treatment, wastewater and trade waste treatment

Waste management - waste avoidance, waste reuse and recyclingLand management - vegetation and pest management,

Land management - resource assessment, erosion control, and land (reserve) planning and management

Climate change - planning and policy, energy and resource efficiency, and community education

Community - education, capacity building and developing partnerships.

There are currently 13 councils between Bundaberg and Cooktown, including all the councils in the Mackay, Whitsunday and Isaac region, in the Reef Guardian Councils program. Reef Guardian Councils have an important role in natural resource management and are undertaking a range of projects in planning and manging for sustainable population growth, approving environmentally sound developments, and preparing the community for climate change impacts.

For example, the Mackay Regional Council is well progressed in development of water sensitive urban design suitable for this region and the use of the MUSIC modelling for urban sub-catchments. It is also presently working on development of innovative wetland management strategies and technologies with support from Reef Catchments (Sal Gray pers comm).

GBRMPA has also released its report Informing the Outlook for Great Barrier Reef Coastal Ecosystem4 to help inform a range of NRM and partner activities undertaken across the Great Barrier Reef catchments. The report highlights that coastal ecosystems play a vital role for the Great Barrier Reef. Not only do they contribute to the quality of water entering the Great Barrier Reef, they are a vital link between the land, freshwater and marine environments biological and ecological resources. Extensive areas of wetland habitats that support the Great Barrier Reef ecosystem have been infilled, modified or cleared. The Authority’s report is supported by a series of vulnerability assessments that are being completed to identify services provided to the Great Barrier Reef by its coastal ecosystems and risks to those systems and how actions, such as those identified through WQIPs and Reef Plan, can reduce the threats and pressures. Identifying priority habitats and species is vital when managing such a large, complex ecosystem as it allows resources to be directed where help is most needed.


1.7 INFORMATION GAPS AND HOW THEY ARE BEING ADDRESSED

There has been a significant improvement in the knowledge around water quality in the last decade as a result of investment in research and monitoring programs such as MTSRF, NERP, Paddock to Reef, Reef Protection Research and Development, Reef Rescue Research and Development and the Coastal Catchments Initiatives. However, continuing knowledge gaps remain, the most critical of which is understanding with greater certainty what reduction in catchment loads is required to ensure the marine water quality guidelines are not exceeded. This is being addressed in part by the innovative eReefs program which is developing a receiving waters model for the Great Barrier Reef to track the movement of pollutants in the marine system. To inform development of Reef Plan 2013, a number of scenarios were run through the Source Catchments modeling which underpins the Reef Plan annual report cards to investigate what load reductions may be likely under different management scenarios. The modelling suggested that, for the Mackay Whitsundays region, adoption of best practice land management would deliver pollutant load reductions close to the Reef Plan targets. This contrasted some of the other regions, particularly the Wet Tropics, where best practice alone would deliver reductions signficiantly short of the targets and that transformational changes would be required.

As part of Reef Plan, priority research questions are identified every year to better inform management.65 GBRMPA also identifies research priorities through its Information Needs for the Great Barrier Reef. Both of these processes help ensure that research is directed in the most critical areas to inform future management.

The 2012 R&D evaluation report52 outlines the range of projects being delivered to answer some of the most critical questions. Highlights include a risk assessment of key pollutants, further research on the economic benefits of improved management practices and better information on the half lives of key pesticides. Figure 1.7.1 below shows Paddock to Reef monitoring sites.


Figure 1.7-1 Paddock to Reef monitoring sites


1.8 RESOURCING, MONITORING, EVALUATION AND COMPLIANCE REGIMES

1.8.1 MONITORING

There is significant investment dedicated to monitoring water quality in the Mackay Whitsundays region. Monitoring occurs as part of the $9 million per year Great Barrier Reef wide Paddock to Reef Integrated Monitoring and Modelling Program (Figure 1.7-1). The program involves monitoring at the paddock scale, through the catchment scale to the marine environment. The program incorporates the Marine Monitoring Program which tracks any exceedances in the Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Guidelines.

The program measures and reports on the marine health of the region in terms of water quality, corals and seagrass. Results from the baseline Report Card (released in 2011) and the 2011 Report Card (released in 2013) are presented below. The Mackay Whitsunday’s overall marine condition was poor and was a decline from the moderate score in the Second Report Card. This was largely due to the assessment following significant flooding in central and southern sections of the Great Barrier Reef in early 2011, cyclone Yasi and the second wettest summer on record. Of the three elements, inshore water quality declined from moderate to poor, inshore seagrass meadows declined from poor to very poor and coral reefs remained in moderate condition.

Figure 1.8.1 Baseline report card (2009) 2011 Report Card


The Program also monitors uptake of improved practices and the estimated annual load reduction as a result. The 2011 Report Card, released in July 2013, confirms the positive trends seen on the ground and shows that across the Great Barrier Reef estimated average annual pollutant loads have been reduced – in Mackay nitrogen by 13 per cent, sediment by 6 per cent and pesticides by 31 per cent.53 These reductions are being driven by significant uptake of improved practices by landholders. A total of 30 per cent of sugarcane growers, 36 per cent of graziers and 47 per cent of horticulture producers all adopted an improved practice up to June 2011. Substantially more have taken up improved practices since that time and will be reported on in future report cards. While progress towards targets has been very encouraging, it is recognised that it will take time for these achievements to be translated into improve marine conditions.

Figure 1.8-2 Progress towards targets for the Mackay Whitsundays regions

1.8.2 RESOURCING

The Queensland Government has committed to maintaining the level of funding applied to Great Barrier Reef water quality initiatives ($35 M per year). The Australian Government has also announced that it will continue to invest in the Caring for Our Country Program and recently released its guidelines for $200 M Reef Rescue 2013-18. These funds in part support the work of the regional NRM Body Reef Catchments Pty Ltd. The Queensland Government also announced the continuation of the state NRM Investment Program, which complements the Australian Government’s Caring for Our Country program. A total of $30 million has been allocated to the reef regions over 5 years.

Significant financial resources, in the order of many hundreds of millions of dollars, has been invested over the last decade through local governments to upgrade the sewage treatment plants adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef to ensure they are at a tertiary treatment standard. This includes an investment of $130m to upgrade the Mackay sewage treatment facilities, which were completed in 2009. This innovative program will recycle around 80 per cent of the water and remove 250 tonnes of nitrogen each year from the system. A Queensland Government subsidy program supported 40-50% of the capital cost to local government to upgrage these sewage treatment facilities.

There are also significant staffing resources applied to manage land uses and administer regulations under the Vegetation Management Act 1999, Environment Protection Act 1994, Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and Fisheries Act 1995 and by the Authority under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975.


1.9 PROJECTED CONDITION, IMPROVEMENTS AND KEY OUTCOMES

With continuing efforts to improve land management practices it is expected that catchment loads in the Region will be reduced over time.

Predicted changes in Great Barrier Reef status if triggers are not exceeded

It is expected that the following changes in reef status, predicted by the models for coastal and inner shelf reefs in each region, if water quality improves to ensure GBRMPA’s guideline trigger levels are not exceeded:46

a) Macroalgal cover: In coastal reefs of all regions other than Cape York, macroalgal cover would approximately halve if water clarity and chlorophyll were to be simultaneously improved. Water clarity has a greater effect on macroalgal cover than changes in chlorophyll. Benefits are also great for inner shelf reefs of the Mackay Whitsundays and Fitzroy reefs. Due to the natural north-south gradient in macroalgal cover, macroalgal cover would still be higher in the southern three regions than the northern regions after water quality improvements were implemented

b) Hard coral richness: The simultaneous improvement of water clarity and chlorophyll would have greatest benefits in the southern regions. Coral richness on coastal reefs in the Burnett Mary, Fitzroy and Wet Tropics would increase by 44 – 47 per cent compared to present-day values, and in the Mackay Whitsundays and Burdekin by ~30 per cent. Changes in water clarity would have slightly greater benefits for coral richness than changes in chlorophyll. On inner shelf reefs, hard coral richness would still increase by about 20 – 25 per cent in the Fitzroy and Mackay Regions, and 4 – 11 per cent in the northern regions.

c) Richness of phototrophic octocorals: The simultaneous improvement of water clarity and chlorophyll concentrations would increase the richness of phototrophic octocorals on coastal reefs in all regions except Cape York by 63 – 84 per cent compared to present-day values. On inner shelf reefs, the benefits would still be substantial (44 – 51 per cent) in the Fitzroy and Mackay Whitsundays region, and 5 – 15 per cent further north. Changes in chlorophyll will have a far greater effect on coral richness than changes in water clarity.

d) Richness of heterotrophic octocorals: A reduction in chlorophyll would lead to gains in the richness of heterotrophic octocorals, while increased water clarity would lead to slight losses of heterotrophic taxa. The simultaneous improvement of chlorophyll and water clarity would lead to 13 – 34 per cent gains in the southern three regions (greater gains inner shelf than on coastal reefs), and small changes (ranging from 6 per cent gains to 9 per cent losses) on coastal and inner shelf reefs of the three northern regions.

Based on this, and water quality report cards, the projected condition of coral, seagrass and water quality in the Mackay region, is provided below.


VALUE: CORAL

Current condition and trend

MODERATE (corals)

Inshore coral reefs remained in moderate condition; however, coral cover showed very poor recovery from past disturbances. When considered in combination with poor densities of juvenile colonies, decreases in cover may have implications for the long-term resilience of coral communities in the region. The low cover of macroalgae was rated as very good, which offset the poor or very poor ranking of most of the coral community attributes (GBRMPA 2013)..

Cumulative pressures

POOR The regions corals have been affected by a series of cyclones and floods in recent years which have had significant impact on their resilience and will affect their recovery. The Mackay region is a significant growth area with expanding coastal development pressures

Management effectiveness EFFECTIVE Significant progress is being made to improve water quality through Reef Plan related initiatives. The 2011 Report Card shows demonstrable progress towards targets.

Response time / resilience to pressure

VERY POOR Response time for coral is slow (decades). Improving water quality will however improve coral communities resilience to other pressures.

Projected condition (25 years)

MODERATE The projected condition for coral is to remain in moderate condition, but improve in trend as the decline in water quality is reversed. Coral cover will however be heavily influenced by extreme weather and crown-of-thorns outbreaks.

VALUE: SEAGRASS


VERY POOR The overall condition of inshore seagrass in the Mackay Whitsundays region is very poor and has progressively declined since 2005/06 to the lowest levels reported since 1999. The decline in seagrass condition reflects very poor abundance, very poor reproductive effort and increased nutrient enrichment of seagrass tissue (GBRMPA 2013).


VERY POOR The regions seagrass have been affected by a series of cyclones and flooding in recent years which have had significant impact on their resilience and will affect their recovery The Mackay region is a significant growth area with expanding coastal development pressures including 2 major ports.

Management effectiveness EFFECTIVE Significant progress is being made to improve water quality through Reef Plan related initiatives.


MODERATE

Response time for seagrass is not as slow as for corals. However its response will in part be dependent on the level of rainfall and exposure to flood plumes and subsequent water quality. Seagrass communities have shown a continuing decline is most parameters over the last 3-5 years and recovery if water quality improves significantly is likely to take at least similar time frames


MODERATE The projected condition for seagrass is to improve from very poor to moderate condition as a result of water quality improvements in the catchment.


VALUE: WATER QUALITY


POOR Inshore water quality for the region declined sharply from moderate to poor overall, having been relatively stable since 2005/06. Chlorophyll a and suspended solids also declined to poor and very poor, respectively. Site-specific water quality for the region was moderate at Daydream and Pine Islands, and good at Double Cone Island, reflecting increasing water quality away from river mouths in the inshore area. In 2010/11, chlorophyll a was rated as poor, with concentrations exceeding the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Water Quality Guideline for 99 and 44 per cent of the inshore area, in the dry and wet season, respectively. Areas of exceedance in the wet season were mainly around the mouths of the Proserpine, O’Connell, Pioneer and Plane Rivers. Total suspended solids were rated as very poor, with concentrations exceeding the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Water Quality Guideline for 59 and 69 per cent of the inshore area, in the dry and wet season, respectively (GBRMPA 2013)


POOR The Mackay Whitsunday region is one of the growth centres on the Queensland coast with high population growth rates, significant port and mining expansion underway and potential for expanded intensive agriculture. These have the potential to have further detrimental impacts on water quality.

Management effectiveness EFFECTIVE Significant progress is being made to improve water quality through Reef Plan and WQIP related initiatives


MODERATE Response time for water quality is variable depending on the parameter being measured and is dependent on rainfall patterns and flood plume extent.


MODERATE The inshore open water habitat in this region is now in poor condition, as a result of catchment run-off and recent extreme weather. Time lags in sediments and nutrients reaching the Region and sinks of such pollutants within the Region mean it may be decades before the positive effects of improved land management in the catchment are realised. Resuspension of pollutants, for example during cyclones, degrades the quality of the open water habitat especially in inshore waters.However given the good progress on the reduction of loads of pollutants in this area (reported above) and under more normal rainfall conditions it is possible for the trend to stabilise.

1.9.1 POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROGRAM

Reef Plan has recently been updated and was released by both governments in July 2013. The Australian Government’s Caring for our Country program also commenced a new phase in July 2013 and the Reef Rescue program will continue to provide a critical investment in improving agricultural land management practices for improved outcomes for water quality and ecosystem health.

Significant investment in research will produce results in the next couple of years, and combined with the recent relative risk assessment and scientific consensus statement, will allow for more effective and targeted management actions in the coming years.

The continuation of the Paddock to Reef Program, including the critical long term monitoring aspects, is important for the future to ensure that investment is strategically and appropriately applied and outcomes for MNES can be monitored over time.


At Reef Plan’s next review point in 2018, consideration will be given to expanding its scope to incorporate other sources of pollution (ie urban, port, etc).

1.9.2 KEY OUTCOMES AND LEARNINGS FROM THE DEMONSTRATION CASE

Measures to improve water quality represent one of the best opportunities to improve the condition of the World Heritage Area and provide improved resilience to other impacts such as climate change. Recent research on coral decline on the Great Barrier Reef1 reinforces the need to continue to improve water quality to prevent future outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish. A range of legislation and policies are in place to regulate the various sources of pollutants, but by far the greatest contributor is broadscale agriculture, which represents the dominant land use in this region. The package of water quality management tools, that are coordinated through Reef Plan, demonstrate how government, working with industry and the community, can address the very complex issue of poor water quality in the GBRWHA.

While this demonstration case has analysed water quality in the Mackay Whitsundays region, the same programs apply across the majority of the other regions. The only exception is Queensland’s Reef Protection Program which only applies in the regulated catchments of Wet Tropics, Mackay Whitsundays and the Burdekin.

Even if any further coastal development was to cease tomorrow, the Great Barrier Reef would still be faced with a significant legacy of poor water quality from past changes in land use. It is critical that across the Great Barrier Reef catchment, this legacy is addressed by continuing the range of programs designed to improve land management and water quality flowing to the Great Barrier Reef. This will significantly improve and enhance the condition of the Great Barrier Reef, including its OUV.


1.10 REFERENCES 1. De'ath, G., Fabricius, K.E., Sweatman, H. and Puotinen, M. 2012, The 27–year decline of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef and its causes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Early view: 1-5.

2. Brodie, J., Fabricius, K.E., De'ath, G. and Okaji, K. 2005, Are increased nutrient inputs responsible for more outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish? An appraisal of the evidence, Marine Pollution Bulletin 51(1-4): 266-278.

3. Fabricius, K.E., Okaji, K. and De'ath, G. 2010, Three lines of evidence to link outbreaks of the crown-of-thorns seastar Acanthaster planci to the release of larval food limitation, Coral Reefs 29: 593-605.

4. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2012a, Informing the outlook for Great Barrier Reef coastal ecosystems, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, .

5. State of Queensland 2012, Mackay, isaac and whitsunday regional plan: Planning for a resilient, vibrant and sustainable community, Queensland Government, Mackay.

6. Department of Premier and Cabinet, State of Queensland 2011, Great Barrier Reef First Report Card (2009 Baseline), Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Brisbane, .

7. Drewry, J., Higham, W. and Mitchell, C. 2008, Water quality improvement plan. Final report for the Mackay Whitsunday region, Mackay Whitsunday Natural Resource Management Group, Mackay Whitsunday Natural Resource Management Group, Mackay.

8. Department of Environment and Resource Management 2009, Land Cover Change in Queensland 2008–09: A Statewide Landcover and Trees Study (SLATS) Report, .

9. Brodie, J. and Waterhouse, J. 2012, A critical review of environmental management of the 'not so Great' Barrier Reef, Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 104-105: 1-22.

10. Department of Premier and Cabinet 2008, Scientific consensus statement on water quality in the Great Barrier Reef, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Brisbane, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.reefplan.qld.gov.au/library/pdf/publications/Scientific%20Consensus%20Statement%20on%20Water%20Quality%20in%20the%20GBR.pdf>.

11. Brodie, J.E., Binney, J., Fabricius, K., Gordon, I., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Hunter, H., O’Reagain, P., Pearson, R., Quirk, M., Thorburn, P., Waterhouse, J., Webster, I. and Wilkinson, S. 2008, Synthesis of evidence to support the Scientific Consensus Statement on water quality in the Great Barrier Reef, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Queensland Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Brisbane, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www-public.jcu.edu.au/actfr/publications/jcuprd_054988>.

12. Fabricius, K.E. 2005, Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs: review and synthesis, Marine Pollution Bulletin 50(2): 125-146.

13. Fabricius, K.E. 2007, Conceptual model of the effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs<br />of the GBR. Unpublished report to the Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility (MTSRF), Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Limited, Cairns, .

14. Wooldridge, S.A. 2009, Water quality and coral bleaching thresholds: formalising the linkage for the inshore reefs of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, Marine Pollution Bulletin 58: 745-751.


15. De'ath, G. and Fabricius, K.E. 2010, Water quality as a regional driver of coral biodiversity and macroalgae on the Great Barrier Reef, Ecological Applications 20(3): 840-850.

16. Brodie, J.E., Devlin, M., Haynes, D. and Waterhouse, J. 2011, Assessment of the eutrophication status of the Great Barrier Reef lagoon (Australia), Biogeochemistry 106(2): 281-302.

17. Cooper, T.F., Ridd, P.V., Ulstrup, K.E., Humphrey, C., Slivkoff, M. and Fabricius, K.E. 2008, Temporal dynamics in coral bioindicators for water quality on coastal coral reefs of the Great Barrier Reef, Marine and Freshwater Research 59: 703-716.

18. Moran, P.J. and De'ath, G. 1992, Estimates of the abundance of the crown-of-thorns starfish Acanthaster planci in outbreaking and non-outbreaking populations on reefs within the Great Barrier Reef, Marine Biology International Journal on Life in Oceans and Coastal Waters (113): 509-515.

19. McKenzie, L.J., Collier, C. and Waycott, M. 2012, Reef Rescue Marine Monitoring Program: inshore seagrass, annual report for the sampling period 1st July 2010 – 31st May 2011, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation (Fisheries Queensland), Cairns, .

20. Schaffelke, B., Carleton, J., Skuza, M., Zagorskis, I. and Furnas, M.J. 2012, Water quality in the inshore Great Barrier Reef lagoon: Implications for long-term monitoring and management, Marine Pollution Bulletin 65: 249-249-260.

21. Collier, C.J., Waycott, M. and McKenzie, L.J. 2012, Light thresholds derived from seagrass loss in the coastal zone of the northern Great Barrier Reef, Australia, Ecological Indicators 23(0): 211-219.

22. Campbell, S.J. and McKenzie, L.J. 2004, Flood related loss and recovery of intertidal seagrass meadows in southern Queensland, Australia, Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 60(3): 477-490.

23. Cabaço, S., Santos, R. and Duarte, C.M. 2008, The impact of sediment burial and erosion on seagrasses: a review, Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 79(3): 354-366.

24. Udy, J.W. and Dennison, W.C. 1997, Physiological responses of seagrasses used to identify anthropogenic nutrient inputs, Marine and Freshwater Research 48: 605-614.

25. Udy, J.W., Dennison, W.C., LeeLong, W.J. and McKenzie, L.J. 1999, Responses of seagrass to nutrients in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, Marine Ecology Progress Series 185: 257-271.

26. Haynes, D., Ralph, P., Prange, J. and Dennison, W. 2000, The impact of the herbicide diuron on photosynthesis in three species of tropical seagrass, Marine Pollution Bulletin 41(7-12): 288-293.

27. Lewis, S.E., Brodie, J.E., Bainbridge, Z.T., Rohde, K.W., Davis, A.M., Masters, B.L., Maughan, M., Devlin, M.J., Mueller, J.F. and Schaffelke, B. 2009, Herbicides: a new threat to the Great Barrier Reef, Environmental Pollution 157(8-9): 2470-2484.

28. Brodie, J., Waterhouse, J., Schaffelke, B., Furnas, M., Maynard, J., Collier, C., Lewis, S., Warne, M., Fabricius, K., Devlin, M., McKenzie, L., Yorkston, H., Randall, L. and Bennett, J. 2013a, Relative risks to the Great Barrier Reef from degraded water quality, in Synthesis of evidence to support the Reef Water Quality Scientific Consensus Statement<br /> Department of Premier and Cabinet, Queensland Government, Brisbane.

29. McCook, L.J., Folke, C., Hughes, T., Nystrom, M., Obura, D. and Salm, R. 2007, Ecological resilience, climate change and the Great Barrier Reef, in Climate change and the Great Barrier Reef: a vulnerability assessment, eds J.E. Johnson and P.A. Marshall, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and Australian Greenhouse Office, Townsville, pp. 75-96, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/4445/chpt-4-McCook-et-al-2007.pdf>.


30. Wooldridge, S.A. and Done, T.J. 2009, Improved water quality can ameliorate effects of climate change on corals, Ecological Applications 19: 1492-1499.

31. Hughes, T.P., Graham, N.A.J., Jackson, J.B.C., Mumby, P.J. and Steneck, R.S. 2010, Rising to the challenge of sustaining coral reef resilience, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25(11): 633-642.

32. Brodie, J.E. and Mitchell, A.W. 2005, Nutrients in Australian tropical rivers: changes with agricultural development and implications for receiving environments, Marine and Freshwater Research 56(3): 279-302.

33. Turner, R. and Queensland. Dept. of Science, Information Technology,Innovation and the Arts 2012, Sediment, Nutrient and Pesticide Loads: Great Barrier Reef Catchment Loads Monitoring 2009-2010, Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts.

34. Kroon, F.J., Kuhnert, P.M., Henderson, B.L., Wilkinson, S.N., Kinsey-Henderson, A., Abbott, B., Brodie, J.E. and Turner, R.D.R. 2012, River loads of suspended solids, nitrogen, phosphorus and herbicides delivered to the Great Barrier Reef lagoon, Marine Pollution Bulletin 65(4-9): 167-181.

35. Department of Premier and Cabinet 2009, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan 2009 for the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and adjacent catchments, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Brisbane, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.reefplan.qld.gov.au/resources/assets/reef-plan-2009.pdf>.

36. Department of Environment and Resource Management 2012, Reef protection package impact statement 2012, Queensland Government, Brisbane, Queensland.

37. Brodie, J., Waterhouse, J., Schaffelke, B., Johnson, J., Kroon, F., Thorburn, P., Rolfe, J., Lewis, S., Warne, M., Fabricius, K., McKenzie, L. and Devlin, M. 2013b, Reef Water Quality Scientific Consensus Statement 2013, Department of Premiers and Cabinet, Queensland Government, Brisbane, .

38. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2011, Extreme weather and the Great Barrier Reef, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/14308/GBRMPA-ExtremeWeatherAndtheGBR-2010-11.pdf>.

39. Wachenfeld, D. 1997, Long-term trends in the status of coral reef-flat benthos - the use of historical photographs, in State of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area Workshop: proceedings of a technical workshop held in Townsville, Queensland, Australia, 27-27 November 1995, eds. D. Wachenfeld, J. Oliver and K. Davis. , Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, pp.134-148viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.reefed.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/4281/ws023_paper_09.pdf>.

40. Thompson, A., Costello, P., Davidson, J., Schaffelke, B., Uthicke, S. and Liddy, M. 2012, Reef Rescue Marine Monitoring Program: Report of AIMS activities - Inshore coral reef monitoring 2012. Report for Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, .

41. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection 2012a, Draft Pioneer River and Plane Creek basins environmental values and water quality objectives, State of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/water/policy/pdf/documents/pioneer-plane-draft-ev-2012.pdf>.

42. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection 2012b, Draft Proserpine River, Whitsunday Island and O'Connell River basins environmental values and water quality objectives, State of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, viewed dd/mm/yyyy,


<http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/water/policy/pdf/documents/proserpine-oconnell-whitsunday-draft-ev-2012.pdf>.

43. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC).andAgriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand 1994, National water quality management strategy, Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC).;Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory.

44. ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000, Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. National Water Quality Management Strategy Paper No 4. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, .

45. Department of Environment and Resource Management Queensland water quality guidelines 2009, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/environmental_management/water/queensland_water_quality_guidelines/queensland_water_quality_guidelines_2009.html> .

46. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2010, Water quality guidelines for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, GBRMPA, Townsville, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/4526/GBRMPA_WQualityGuidelinesGBRMP_RevEdition_2010.pdf>.

47. Johnson, J.E., Brando, V.E., Devlin, M.J., Kennedy, K., McKenzie, L., Morris, S., Schaffelke, B., Thompson, A., Waterhouse, J. and Waycott, M. 2011, Reef Rescue Marine Monitoring Program: 2009/2010 synthesis report, Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Limited, Cairns, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.rrrc.org.au/mmp/downloads/MMP_2009-10_Synthesis_FINAL.pdf>.

48. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2009a, Great Barrier Reef Outlook Report 2009, GBRMPA, Townsville, .

49. Department of Premier and Cabinet 2013, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan 2013, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Brisbane, .

50. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2009b, Water quality guidelines for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, .

51. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2013, Great Barrier Reef Coastal Ecosystems Assessment Framework, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, .

52. Department of Premier and Cabinet, State of Queensland 2013, Great Barrier Reef Second Report Card 2010, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Brisbane, Australia, .

53. Department of Premier and Cabinet, State of Queensland in press, Great Barrier Reef Third Report Card 2011, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Brisbane, Australia, .

54. DAFF & DSEWPC 2012, Caring for our Country - Reef Rescue, Australian Government, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.nrm.gov.au/about/key-investments/reef-rescue.html> .

55. McKergow, L.A., Prosser, I.P., Grayson, R.B. and Heiner, D. 2004, Performance of grass and rainforest riparian buffers in the wet tropics, Far North Queensland. 1. Riparian hydrology, Soil Research 42(4): 473-484.


56. Davis, L., Negus, P. and Mackenzie-Smithr, F. 2007, Understanding ecological and biophysical processes in Queensland's wetlands: Literature review and gap analysis, The State of Queensland, Department of Natural Resources and Water, Indooroopilly, Queensland, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/resources/static/pdf/resources/reports/qw-eco-bio-process.pdf>.

57. McJannet, D., Wallace, J., Keen, R., Hawdon, A. and Kemei, J. 2011, The filtering capacity of a tropical riverine wetland: I. Water balance, Hydrological Processes 25(15): in press.

58. Lucas, J.S. and Southgate, P.C. 2005, Aquaculture Farming Aquatic Animals and Plants, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

59. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2005, Sewage discharge policy 2005: Sewage discharges from marine outfalls to the great barrier reef marine park, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Queensland.

60. Erftemeijer, P.L. and Lewis, R.R. 2006, Environmental impacts of dredging on seagrasses: a review, Marine Pollution Bulletin 52(12): 1553-1572.

61. Smith, A., Foster, T., Corcoran, E. and and Monkivitch, J. 2007, Dredging and material relocation in sensitive environments. in Proceedings Eighteenth World Dredging Conference, Florida, eds. Anonymous , Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, pp.945-955.

62. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2012b, Ports and Shipping Information Sheet, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Online, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/26775/Ports-and-Shipping-Information-sheet-Aug-2012.pdf>.

63. SKM and APASA 2013, Improved dredge material management for the Great Barrier Reef Region, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, .

64. Australian Government Land and Coasts Caring for our Country Review Team 2012, Report on the review of the Caring for our Country initiative, Australian Government, Canberra, ACT, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.nrm.gov.au/about/caring/review/pubs/c4oc-report-on-review-2012.pdf>.

65. Department of Premier and Cabinet, State of Queensland 2009, Great Barrier Reef First Report Card (2009 Baseline), Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, Brisbane, viewed dd/mm/yyyy, <http://www.reefplanqld.gov.au/measuring-success/report-cards/first-report-card.aspx> .

66. Waycott, M., McKenzie, L., Mellors, J., Ellison, J., Sheaves, M., Collier, C., Schwarz, A., Webb, A., Johnson, J. Payri, C., 2011. Vulnerability of mangroves, seagrasses and intertidal flats in the tropical Pacific to climate change. In: J. Bell, J. Johnson (eds). Vulnerability of fisheries and aquaculture in the Pacific to climate change. Chapter 6. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea, New Caledonia. pp97-168.

67. DeVantier L.M., De’ath G.,Turak E., Done T.J. and Fabricius K.E., 2006, Species richness and community structure of reef-building corals on the nearshore Great Barrier Reef, Coral Reefs 25: 329–340,

68. Reef Alliance 2012. Reef Rescue Extension – the next level on investment of sustainable land management in Great Barrier Reef Catchments, a new business case for investment. The Reef Alliance, Brisbane Qld

Appendix I – Demonstration Case Water Quality Improvements I-42

Appendix 1: Map 1-Mackay Whitsunday coastal


Appendix 1 continued: Map 2 Pioneer-Plane creek


Appendix 1 continued: Map 3 Proserpine-O’Connell rivers

water quality improvement in the mackay whitsundays region · treatment, industrial waste, mining...

Documents