Marine park planning

Extract from Hansard
[COUNCIL — Wednesday, 30 November 2011]
p3d-11a
Hon Kate Doust; Hon Lynn MacLaren; Hon Matt Benson-Lidholm; Hon Donna Faragher; Hon Phil Edman

MARINE PARK PLANNING

Motion

Resumed from 23 November on the following motion moved by Hon Sally Talbot —
That this house condemns the government for taking an old-fashioned piecemeal and politically driven
approach to marine park planning in Western Australia.

HON LYNN MacLAREN (South Metropolitan) [2.32 pm]: I rise to support the motion. As the house had
already heard from Hon Giz Watson, the view of the Greens (WA), as it has been of other speakers in this
debate, is that the house should condemn the government for taking an old-fashioned, piecemeal and politically
driven approach to marine park planning in Western Australia.

I begin my remarks by hooking into what Hon Kate Doust has just focused on, which is science and whether our
marine park planning and management is based on science, and to what degree the state government uses that
science to adequately conserve and protect the environment and the uses we make of marine parks. In
responding to this motion, I wanted to look at the South Metropolitan Region and the interest my electors might
have in marine park planning, and there is no more obvious issue than the proposed inland canals marina at Point
Peron. I wanted to look carefully at whether marine park planning has been adequately prioritised by the
government in its decision to construct a marina at Point Peron.

The proposed development at Point Peron abuts the seagrass beds of Shoalwater Islands Marine Park. Members
would know that, yesterday, the Cockburn Sound Management Council tabled its annual report in this house, and
I look forward to seeing whether we have managed to protect and preserve some of the seagrass that has been
under threat because of the deteriorating health of Cockburn Sound. But according to the “Shoalwater Islands
Marine Park Management Plan 2007–2017”, which was approved in 2007, Shoalwater Islands Marine Park is an
A-class reserve and so it is covered by some of those marine park protections we have been talking about. It was
gazetted on 25 May 1990, and covers 6 658 hectares. That amazing environment has a diverse range of habitats,
and I will quote from the management plan —

… including seagrass meadows, subtidal and intertidal macroalgal limestone reefs and the silty basin of
Warnbro Sound … These habitats are home to a diverse range of finfish and invertebrates and a variety
of wildlife including little penguins —

Many of us have been there and seen the penguins. The management plan continues —

other sea and shore birds and marine mammals such as bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and
Australian sea lions …

Members can see that the values that the marine park has managed to protect include a diverse range of animals.
As to the ideas about marine parks and why we use them, they are not only a habitat for animals, but also there is
a thriving tourism industry in this marine park that caters for local and regional communities; it is also an area
that is popular for commercial and recreational fishing. There are many reasons to preserve marine parks.
Shoalwater Islands Marine Park has high scientific research and educational value, and it has been well utilised
by many visiting schoolchildren over the years. It is a pleasant place to live and visit, and it is a highly valued
coastal resource. It is fair to say that the values that we want to protect and preserve in Shoalwater Islands
Marine Park affect a wide number of people. They affect jobs, and they affect not only the ecosystem that we
seek to protect, but also our lifestyle and our social enjoyment of the Western Australian environment. I quote
again from the management plan —

Much of the marine biodiversity of the State is poorly described, particularly along the south-west and
south coasts where many endemic species are likely to occur.

I digress to note that the Save our Marine Life campaign, which has been running for several years in an attempt
to get commonwealth protection of our biodiversity, has pointed out that there is much that we have not yet
identified that is valuable in and around our coast. I return to the quote —

The conservation of Western Australia’s marine biodiversity is not only important from an intrinsic
point of view but also as the fundamental basis of major recreation, nature-based tourism, fishing and
potentially, pharmaceutical industries.

The proper protection and management of marine parks has flow-on effects throughout the economy.

I want to talk about the threatened impacts of the Point Peron—also known as Mangles Bay—tourism marina. In
1983, the Department of Conservation and Environment published “Conservation Reserves for Western
Australia: The Darling System – System 6”, which identified the waters between Cape Peron and Port Kennedy
as being of regional significance for conservation, recreation and education, and it recommended that the area
become a marine reserve. If members want to see what can happen after the introduction of a marina to an area
already identified as an important regional area, members need look no further than the seagrass beds. The
management plan states that —

The area has a high diversity of seagrass, with 10 species recorded in Perth’s southern metropolitan
waters … Most of the seagrass meadows in the marine park consist of … (i.e. long-lived) genera …
There are also short-lived species. The seagrass meadows are important habitat and nursery areas.

I know from my time in the South Metropolitan Region that quite a big whitebait nursery sits off Port Kennedy.
That whitebait is a key food source for the penguins that we visit at Penguin Island, which is not far from the
Shoalwater Islands Marine Park. There is a high diversity of marine species, including important commercial and
recreational species. Seagrasses are an important food source for some species and might help maintain water
clarity and light penetration to the seabed.

The marine management plan identifies the risks to the seabed and to the seagrasses that grow there. There can
be physical disturbance from vessel activity, such as anchoring, the installation of moorings and propeller scour,
and from coastal developments such as marinas. There can be discharges of toxicants from urban stormwater
runoff, treated waste water and sewage, and shipping-related waste and spillages, such as the accidental spillage
of fuel and chemicals associated with the boating industry. Therefore, already in 2007, when we established the
“Shoalwater Islands Marine Park Management Plan” we identified potential risks to that very important area.
However, we failed to adequately take those risks into consideration when this state government thought it
would be a great idea to construct the Mangles Bay marina. It is completely incompatible with the objectives of
no loss of seagrass and no loss of perennial seagrass biomass as a result of human activities. The “Mangles Bay
Marina Based Tourist Precinct Scoping Document” identifies these risks. It states —

As the proposed marina will have lesser water quality than in Mangles Bay, outflow of marina water
has the potential to affect water quality in Mangles Bay and adjacent waters in Cockburn Sound and the
Shoalwater Islands Marine Park.

Why would we locate a canal estate, a marina-based boating home, adjacent to, in this case, a marine park of
such high values as Shoalwater Islands Marine Park?

Hon Simon O’Brien interjected.

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: Hon Simon O’Brien would never do it. Even Strategen Environmental Consultants,
which prepared this environmental scoping report, which we considered way back in February—it has been
sitting around since February—identified that —

The following aspects of the Proposal may affect marine water quality values:

• dredging of the seabed to allow for the construction of the access channel...
• seepage of return water from bunded areas...
• placement of limestone for the marina breakwaters and leaching of fines from the limestone…
• creation of land-based marina which may potentially affect the water quality within Mangles Bay … on an ongoing basis, due to outflow of lesser water quality from the marina.
• increased boat numbers increasing the potential for pollution.

Hon Phil Edman interjected.

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: Therefore, I say and I continually ask Hon Phil Edman who seeks to interrupt me —

The PRESIDENT: Order!

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: Hon Phil Edman seeks to interject. I welcome Hon Phil Edman’s contribution to this
debate.

Hon Phil Edman interjected.

The PRESIDENT: Order!

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: As someone who has an interest in marine industries, the member should make a
very good contribution to this debate, rather than interject on mine.

The Point Peron area is of enormous value and has been recognised as such for many decades. It has been used
by not only recreational and commercial fishing but also the tourism industry. It even, as we would say, has
intrinsic value as a habitat for animals. The proposed development also takes land from the Rockingham Lakes
Regional Park. We are now talking about terrestrial parks, which is very important to take into account as well.

Hon Phil Edman interjected.

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: That includes a Bush Forever site that is also a class A reserve. The land was handed
over for the benefit of all Western Australians, not the select few who can afford to live in a luxury canal estate.
It is appalling that the state government has already committed $3.7 million of taxpayers’ funds to subsidise
what is little more than a land grab for private developers but even more than that is just on the edge of this
highly valued marine park. The conservation of our marine habitats, going back to what Hon Kate Doust —

Hon Phil Edman interjected.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon Phil Edman, you cannot make a speech from your chair by interjection.
Opportunities arise for members to make speeches at various times and that is when you need to take the
advantage of the call.

Hon LYNN MacLAREN: Thank you, Mr President; it was growing increasingly difficult to hear myself, so I
appreciate that.

I just want to conclude and bring it back to the beginning when Hon Kate Doust was talking about the
importance of science. The conservation of our marine habitats should be science-based to ensure that these
valuable resources are preserved for the enjoyment of future generations. I made the point that our planning
systems need to honour the values that we have already identified in these marine parks and not threaten them
with developments that may undermine those environmental values. Our resources should not be undermined
because of pressure from developers who are out to make a quick buck from our environment. Therefore, we
remain entirely opposed to proposals such as the Point Peron or Mangles Bay tourism precinct located right on
the edge of the Shoalwater Islands Marine Park and we support the motion. That is why we support this motion
that condemns the government for its piecemeal and old-fashioned approach, which seems to place under threat
these resources that we would hold dear for all generations to come and which should not be put under threat by
this generation and the need for some quick profit.