Botany Bay and Catchment Alliance

Recent concerns, regarding beach erosion appearing in our local newspaper has an opposite reaction from residents at Dolls Point, on Botany Bay foreshores.

A local Progress Association has raised concerns about sand building up along the beach near Dolls Point wharf. Lady Robinson’s Beach sweeps the full length of the Bay from Cooks River to Taren Point Bridge at Rocky Point. Dolls Point is a small intrusion into the Bay.

At this point a public wharf was erected, originally to service the pleasure grounds, now Peter Depina Park. In the past, major works have been undertaken along the foreshore to stabilise the beach front. A concrete retaining wall and walkway has been built, alienating the natural sand dune complex which is now suburban streets and housing. Groynes have been built into the Bay, in an effort to change wave and current patterns, protecting the beach.  

Unfortunately the present results have multiplied the sands deposited at Dolls Point and adjoining beaches. At present, one groyne has been completely surrounded by sand and Dolls Point wharf has been closed as it is surrounded by sand, like an eerie picture from the Sahara Desert. To seawards, mooring and navigational posts are completely sand locked.

The causes are many.

Some blame changing wind patterns, others believe man made remediation to the north along Lady Robinson’s Beach, where tonnes of sand was dumped as the desalination pipeline was completed has added to the problem during strong seas.

Botany Bay is becoming more complex as Kingsford Smith Aiport and Port Botany expand, urbanisation encroaches with increased pressure on govenments for more and more infrastructure with little thought for multiplying effects on the Bay’s fragile natural resources.

St George and Sutherland Shire Leader (St George edition 18/09/2010) remembered the great storm and beach erosion in May 1968:-

“HISTORIC pine trees and cannon toppled into the bay, and The Grand Parade was in danger of collapse when huge seas pounded the beachfront at Brighton-Le-Sands in May of 1968.

Freak waves whipped up by cyclonic-strength winds, coupled with 1.9 metre king tides, “tore off a mile-long strip of Brighton foreshore between President Avenue and Bestic Street,” the Leader reported.

Sans Souci water police said the waves were the biggest ever seen in the bay.

“At Brighton, rollers 12 feet [3.6 metres] high thundered against the foreshore, washing over the roadway and crumbling the retaining wall,” the report said.

“A dozen of the famous Norfolk island pines fell into the sea when the wall collapsed.

“Several old cannon, a feature of the Brighton-Le-Sands waterfront for many years, toppled into the bay as huge seas carved into the banks to the parade footpath. Brighton baths was extensively damaged.

“Fibro and iron structures were smashed near the baths entrance, and two-thirds of the heavy planking on the baths walk was dislodged.

“Rockdale Council engineers, fearing the four-lane highway was threatened with destruction, called every available dump truck into action.

“Hundreds of tons of rock filling were transported from Mascot, Taren Point and Bexley to build a new 30 foot [9.1 metre] seawall on the foreshore,” the report said.

“At one stage the toilet block opposite Bruce Street stood on the brink of a vertical drop.

“Scores of men worked through Wednesday night to help build a retaining wall to save The Grand Parade.

“They included 30 volunteers from Brighton RSL Club.”

Rockdale Council blamed the beach erosion, together with other damage from storms in 1966 and 1967, on dredging for the new airport runway into the bay. Kurnell was also hit hard by the storm, with evacuations, and Prince Charles Parade awash with waves.”

It is time Local, State and Commonwealth governments took their responsibilities seriously, protecting the Bay’s health. This is not a political party issue, it is whole of government responsibility.

Botany Bay and Catchment Alliance has become a community representative on the Georges River Combined Councils Committee (GRCCC), a federation of local government organisations with a brief to oversee environmental issues on Georges River.

Other community representative groups are:

Georges River Environmental Education Centre, Gandagarra Local Aboriginal Council, Oceanwatch Australia.

Meeting every second month, reports are given by various officers from GRCCC and member councils on works undertaken to eliminate waterways pollution.

Programs include:-

River Ecosystem Program

Within this program the GRCCC leads an alliance of Councils to improve urban water management with particular focus on stormwater and urban runoff to achieve sustainable water quality and conservation outcomes.  The program also aims to improve and protect urban bushland and creeks, urban wildlife and habitats of rare and endangered flora and fauna.  Finally, the program aims to improve the sustainability performance of local Councils, small businesses, community organisation and householders in urban areas.

Georges River Riverkeeper

The Riverkeeper program cluster is made up of GRCCC technical officers from each member council. The Georges Riverkeeper program is focused on undertaking on ground restoration works for member councils along the river which include rubbish and weed removal, bush regeneration with other conservation works as required by member councils.

The Riverkeeper projects that are undertaken in each LGA are agreed upon in collaboration with member councils. These projects form part of an annual schedule of works. The achievements of the Riverkeeper Program are reported within the GRCCC Annual Report. The Riverkeeper also monitors the health of the Georges River and works to halt pollution. Following negotiations with the National Parks and Wildlife Service the Riverkeeper operations have relocated the Riverkeeper premises to the Georges River National Park.

Upper, Middle and Lower Georges River Urban Sustainability Initiative

The GRCCC plays an active role on the Steering Committees of the Upper and Middle and Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiatives. In addition to supporting the on ground works associated with these projects through our Riverkeeper program, GRCCC continues to play a key role in facilitating the dissemination of information and learnings from these projects across the catchment. GRCCC are uniquely placed to share project outcomes through meetings, program cluster groups and the development of the Georges River Website www.georgesriver.org.au .

River Health Monitoring Program

In collaboration with the combined forces of our nine member councils, the Sydney Metropolitan CMA, and the Georges River Environmental Education Centre new and existing community run streamwatch groups will be trained and resourced to monitor stream health via macroinvertebrate (water-bug) indicators across the catchment.

Georges River Estuary Management Plan

In the last 12 months the GRCCC has also embarked on the development of an Estuary Management Plan for the Georges River. GRCCC are currently progressing the Data Compilation and Estuary Processes study phases of the plan. This will collate all relevant resource information and define the baseline conditions of the various estuarine processes (physical, biological and chemical) and the interactions between them and possible impacts from human uses to enable management options to be meaningfully considered based on the best possible science.

Kurnell 2020

Kurnell is a diverse peninsula extending from Cronulla to Cape Solander and Botany Heads. Within it’s confines are Botany Bay National Park, major industry and international migrating bird habitat.

Kurnell 2020 project’s vision is that by 2020 the condition of the natural ecosystems on public and private lands on the Kurnell Peninsula, will be improved.

Improving Prospect Creek for Water Quality and Habitat

Prospect Creek catchment is one of the most urbanised in Georges River, with regular negative pollution reportings. The Project’s first stage  involves developmenting a Strategic Management Plan for Prospect Creek Riparian Corridor. The plan will incorporate all existing management plans for the riparian corridor and catchment. This plan will be a comprehensive rehabilitation and monitoring strategy for the entire length of Prospect Creek and surrounds. The plan will outline the method for achieving the project objectives and the long-term goals of each Council organisation.

For further information on Georges River Combined Councils Committee visit the website:  www.georgesriver.org.au

Councils involved in Georges River Combined Councils Committee are:

Bankstown City Council, Campbelltown City Council, Fairfield City Council, Hurstville City Council, Kogarah City Council, Liverpool City Council, Rockdale City Council, Sutherland Shire Council, Wollondilly Shire Council.

For information to our World Wide Web www users we recommend the following Facebook pages so you can keep up with our local environmental issues and news:

Botany Bay and Catchment Alliance

City of Hurstville Residents Association

Cooks River

Friends of Royal National Park

Georgesriver Enviroalliance

Kogarah Residents Association

Matraville our community

Ridge Action

Save Dharawal

Stop CSG Sutherland

Sutherland Climate Action Network (SCAN)

Sutherland Shire Environment Centre

Wolli Creek

We encourage reading the following regional newspaper websites:

Campbelltown Macarthur Advertiser

Campbelltown Macarthur Chronicle

Canterbury Bankstown Express

Fairfield Advance

Fairfield Champion

Liverpool Champion

Liverpool Leader

Inner West Courier

Southern Courier

St George and Sutherland Shire Leader

Recent events at Kooragang Island chemical plant in Newcastle, have brought into clear focus, community expectations for law makers and administrators as well as companies involved in polluting industry.

Whether air borne emissions or polluted rivers, New South Wales laws are not strong enough and neither Labor or Liberal National Parties have  moral high ground on this issue. Western governments have long abandoned establishing industries against community protest. But some laws have hidden loop holes through which companies could drive a double decker bus. No community, whether in Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong or outback Bourke, should live with possible life threatening output from what were once called noxious industry.

Industry and infrastructure can only exist with “SOCIAL LICENCE” from local communities.

WHAT IS SOCIAL LICENCE?

At the level of an individual project the Social License is rooted in the beliefs, perceptions and opinions held by the local population and other stakeholders about the project.  It is therefore ‘granted’ by the community. It is also intangible, unless effort is made to measure these beliefs, opinions and perceptions.  Finally, it is dynamic and non-permanent because beliefs, opinions and perceptions are subject to change as new information is acquired.  Hence the Social License has to be earned and then maintained.

The Social License has been defined as existing when a project has the ongoing approval within the local community and other stakeholders, ongoing approval or broad social acceptance and, most frequently, as ongoing acceptance.

A social license is usually granted on a site specific basis.  Hence a company may have a social license for one operation but not for anothers.  Furthermore, the bigger the social, economic and environmental effects of a project, the more difficult it becomes to get the social license. For example, an independent fisherman who is member of an indigenous group will normally get an automatic social license from his community. A mining company wanting to relocate an entire village faces a much bigger challenge. Social Licence does not come from politicians or legislation.

More than fifteen years of accumulated experience has allowed recognition that the normative components Social License comprise the community/stakeholder perceptions of the social legitimacy and credibility of the project, and the presence or absence of true trust.  These elements are acquired sequentially and are cumulative in building towards the Social License.  The project must be seen as legitimate before credibility is of value and both must be in place before meaningful trust can develop.

• Social Legitimacy:  Social legitimacy is based on established norms, the norms of the community, that may be legal, social and cultural and both formal and informal in nature.  Companies must know and understand the norms of the community and be able to work with them as they represent the local ‘rules of the game’.  Failure to do so risks rejection.  In practice, the initial basis for social legitimacy comes from engagement with all members of the community and providing information on the project, the company and what may happen in the future and then answering any and all questions.
•  Credibility:  The capacity to be credible is largely created by consistently providing true and clear information and by complying with any and all commitments made to the community.  Credibility is often best established and maintained through the application of formal agreements where the rules, roles and responsibilities of the company and the community are negotiated, defined and consolidated.  Such a framework helps manage expectations and reduces the risk losing credibility by being perceived as non-compliant with promises made, a situation common where relationships have not been properly defined.  A tip to company people – avoid making verbal commitments since, in the absence of a permanent record, these are always open to reinterpretation at a later date.
•  Trust:  Trust, or the willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another, is a very high quality of relationship and one that takes both time and effort to create.  True trust comes from shared experiences.  The challenge for the company is to go beyond transactions with the community and create opportunities to collaborate, work together and generate the shared experiences within which trust can grow.

The most common problems encountered are:

• The company sees gaining a Social License in terms of a series of tasks or transactions (in effect making a deal), while the community grants the License on the basis of the quality of the relationship – a cultural mismatch that risks failure.
• The company confuses
  • Acceptance for Approval
  • Co-operation for Trust
  • Technical Credibility with Social Credibility
• The company
  • Fails to understand the local community (Social Profile) and the local ‘rules of the game’ and so is unable to establish social legitimacy
  • Delays stakeholder engagement
  • Fails to allocate sufficient time for relationship building
  • Undermines its own credibility by failing to give reliable information or, more commonly, failing to deliver on promises made to the community.
  • Fails to respect and listen to the community
  • Under-estimates the time and effort required to gain a SLO
  •  Over-estimates (or, worse, assumes) the quality of the relationship with the community.

Can Social Licence be withdrawn?

Yes. The community can loose trust in the company when it finds they are not listened to or the company just goes through the motions.

Regarding the Kooragang Island issue, Jeff Angel, Executive Officer for the Total Environment Centre, writing in the Newcastle Herald (12/08/2011) believes, the issue at Kooragang Orica Plant is just the tip of the iceberg, revealing much deeper problems.

He states: “There are obvious grounds for concern and these are in three areas.

Firstly the behaviour of Orica. The plant had been refurbished – one would assume with the latest equipment. However, apparently it could not automatically monitor such a release and trigger alarms.

Secondly, the pollution licence requires notification of environmental harm “as soon as practical”. Clearly this offers a defence for a company to use a range of excuses for not acting urgently. However the term “as soon as practical” is standard and appears in most other pollution licences and in primary legislation.

Thirdly, did the Environmental Protection Authority respond in a timely manner?  This needs to be investigated. The lax “as soon as practical” terminology in pollution licences needs reform.

We have for too long tolerated cumulative emission of dangerous chemicals from big factories. There should be a big push for close to zero release and closed loop operations or industrial precincts. The community and the environment that coexsists with industry deserve best practice.”

Newcastle Herald article on “Arsenic Spill”: www.theherald.com.au/news/local/news/general/orica-spills-arsenic-into-hunter-river/2264389.aspx

Learn more about Social Licence: www.socialicence.com

Read local Orica issues from the Southern Courier and residents concerns:

http://southern-courier.whereilive.com.au/news/story/orica-chemica-spill-stirs-local-council-anger-in-botany/

http://southern-courier.whereilive.com.au/news/story/memories-of-erin-brockovich-in-botany/

Many of us know our neighbours, over the fence and in our street, but for Bay and river dwellers, often our aquatic neighbours are unknown and scary. Having been brought up on stories of killer whales, man eating sharks and things that go bang in the night, it does us good to gain real knowledge.

Nudibranch

Nudibranchs are sea slugs belonging to the suborder Nudibrnchia, the largest suborder of the order Opisthobranchia.

These sea slugs are soft bodied snails. The adult form is without a shell or operculum (a bony plate covering the opening of the shell, when the body is withdrawn.) The word “nudibranch” comes from the Latin nudis meaning “naked”, and Greek branchia meaning “gills”. Nudibranchs have cephalic (head) tentacles, which are sensitive to touch, taste, and smell. Rhinophores detect odors. Nudibranchs are carnivorous. Some feed on sponges, other on hydroids, other on bryozoans, and some are cannibals, eating other sea slugs, or on some occasions, members of their own species. They are hermaphroditic, but can rarely fertilize themselves.

For some beautiful pics:

  www.flickr.com/photos/alastair_pollock/3086183686

  www.flickr.com/photos/alastair_pollock/sets/72157624502137783

  www.michaelmcfadyenscuba.info/viewpage.php?page_id=258 

Sponge Gardens Kurnell

  www.petertrayhurn.com/Underwater/Video…/606922739_MJ4k2

Grey Nurse Shark

What do you know about Grey Nurse Sharks?

Common Names: Grey Nurse, Sand Tiger, Ragged-tooth shark

Scientific Name: Carcharias taurus

Size: 3.6m

Found: Tropical and temperate waters in the Atlantic, Indian and Western Pacific Oceans. Found off all Australian states except Tasmania.

Population Status: Vulnerable to Extinction

Tooth Shape:

Grey Nurse have long slender teeth for grasping prey such as pelagic fish.

Reproduction:

Developing young are enclosed in egg cases within each uterus of the female. They hatch from the egg cases at around 55mm in length and then eat any unfertilised eggs and even their brothers and sisters. This is known as intra-uterine cannibalism. After around 9-12 months, 2 young are born, one from each uterus.

Interesting Facts:

Grey Nurse sharks can swallow air at the surface and hold it in their stomachs. This provides buoyancy and enables the shark to hang almost motionless above the sea floor.

Grey Nurse sharks appear fearsome due to their protruding teeth, however they eat mostly small to medium fishes, squid and lobster.

They are harmless to humans.

http://environment.nsw.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/grey-nurse-shark.pdf

www.saveoursharks.com.au/Save_Our_Sharks_-_Grey_Nurse_Shark.html

Walking in Myles Dunphy Reserve yesterday we met a lady carrying a plastic bag, picking up litter as she went. She liked the natural beauty of the area and wanted to keep is beautiful.

But our waterways are flooded with human made waste, like plastic bottles and bags, washing down stormwater drains or thrown from river banks. Who is cleaning this rubbish.

The Southern Courier reports a diving group has taken the challenge. They have joined a global campaign to clean rubbish from bays and the sea, similar to “Keep Australia Beautiful” campaigns.

Project AWARE:-

is a growing movement of scuba divers protecting the ocean planet – one dive at a time.

Over the past two decades of underwater conservation we’ve learned that divers are true leaders in ocean protection. We’re ocean heroes numbering in the millions across the globe. We believe together our actions will make a huge impact and will help to rescue the ocean.

With new programs and more online resources than ever before, Project AWARE supports an unprecedented global movement of divers acting in their own communities to protect oceans and implement lasting change.

We’re focusing in on two major ocean issues –Sharks in Peril and Marine Debris, or trash in our ocean. Truly, there are many conservation issues converging on our ocean planet at once, but we’re concentrating on these serious problems where scuba divers are uniquely positioned to directly and positively affect real, long-term change in these two areas.

A local campaign was organised recently at Bare Island, near Botany Bay’s entrance by Sydney Dive Academy. Organiser William Moriis told the Southern Courier,

“Marine debris or our trash in the ocean makes its way to our underwater environments by the ton. Divers around the world are demanding a permanent reduction in and prevention of the garbage we create that damages sensitive marine ecosystems – even in some of the most remote corners of the globe.”

“Scuba divers are uniquely positioned to tackle the global marine debris issue, to take action every day and prevent debris from entering the ocean as well as remove it once there.”

Read the article: http://southern-courier.whereilive.com.au/news/story/diving-for-change

Check out the website: www.projectaware.org.

See some of their work on youtube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkwfuJ_jCPU

Recent news from Stockton, a Newcastle suburb, has sent alarm bells ringing in the environmental community.

ORICA’s ammonia plant at Kooragang Island, Newcastle, has been shut down by the State government after plumes of hexavalent chromium escaped on Monday night.

NSW Environment Minister, Robyn Parker told Parliament,  “The Office of Environment and Heritage has issued a prevention notice to Orica. … the plant cannot reopen until appropriate action is completed,” she said.

“I can assure that the Office of Environment and Heritage, jointly with NSW Health, will comprehensively investigate this incident and will provide all relevant information to the community.

“Most importantly, to ensure people, families and the community take the necessary precautionary steps.”

The real problem was the company, ORICA, was too busy containing the problem to advise local residents in Fullerton St. Stockton.

Both the Newcastle Herald and Southern Courier newspapers carried articles of concern as escaped material had potential cancer causing affects in an area where children were active.

Many remembered Erin Brockovich, a Southern Californian legal worker and activist.

Brockovich’s investigation eventually established that the health of countless people who lived in and around Hinkley, California, in the 1960s, 70s and 80s had been severely compromised by exposure to toxic Chromium 6. The Chromium 6 had leaked into the groundwater from the nearby Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Compressor Station. In 1996, as a result of the largest direct action lawsuit of its kind, spearheaded by Brockovich and Ed Masry, the giant utility paid the largest toxic tort injury settlement in U.S. history: $333 million in damages to more than 600 Hinkley residents.

In the same way residents from Botany and adjacent communities heard alarm bells ring during the early part of this century with ground water toxins, HCBs, found in bore water flowing through the ORICA (old ICI) site. A lengthy campaign established community consulation with this multinational corporattion with specialist input from State and Commonwealth departments. It has been established ground water pollution will take 300 years to clean up. It only took 150 years of acqifer polution to establish.

As community members meet regularly with ORICA, monitoring company activities in a volunteer capacity, words of two men float in the air around them.  “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” — Edmund Burke and “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” — Wendell Phillips.

While humans sometimes make mistakes, the alarm bells must be in place, protecting communities against life threatening consequences.

Learn more: Check out the Newcastle Herald and Southern Courier websites.

More info: www.forumonlawcultureandsociety.com/biography/erinbrockovich

This inquiry is a current N.S.W. Legislative Council inquiry conducted by the General Purpose Standing Committee No. 5. This inquiry was established on 5 August 2011, to inquire into and report on the environmental, health, economic and social impacts of coal seam gas activities. The role of coal seam gas in meeting the future energy needs of NSW will also be examined.

Contact: Primary contact: Beverly Duffy, phone (02) 9230 3367, gpscno5@parliament.nsw.gov.au

INQUIRY INTO COAL SEAM GAS

TERMS OF REFERENCE

That General Purpose Standing Committee No. 5 inquire into and report on the environmental, economic and social impacts of coal seam gas (CSG) activities, including exploration and commercial extraction activities, allowable under the NSW Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (the Act), and in particular:

1. The environmental and health impact of CSG activities including the:

a. Effect on ground and surface water systems,

b. Effects related to the use of chemicals,

c. Effects related to hydraulic fracturing,

d. Effect on Crown Lands including travelling stock routes and State forests,

e. Nature and effectiveness of remediation required under the Act,

f. Effect on greenhouse gas and other emissions,

g. Relative air quality and environmental impacts compared to alternate fossil fuels.

2. The economic and social implications of CSG activities including those which affect:

a. Legal rights of property owners and property values,

b. Food security and agricultural activity,

c. Regional development, investment and employment, and State competitiveness,

d. Royalties payable to the State,

e. Local Government including provision of local/regional infrastructure and local planning control mechanisms.

3. The role of CSG in meeting the future energy needs of NSW including the:

a. Nature and extent of CSG demand and supply,

b. Relative whole-of-lifecycle emission intensity of CSG versus other energy sources,

c. Dependence of industry on CSG for non-energy needs (eg. chemical manufacture),

d. Installed and availability costs of CSG versus other stationary energy sources,

e. Proportion of NSW energy needs which should be base load or peaking supply and the extent to which CSG is needed for that purpose,

f. Contribution of CSG to energy security and as a transport fuel.

4. The interaction of the Act with other legislation and regulations, including the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.

1. The impact similar industries have had in other jurisdictions.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 5

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

The Hon Robert Brown MLC Shooters and Fishers Party (Chair)

The Hon Jeremy Buckingham MLC The Greens (Deputy Chair)

The Hon Rick Colless MLC The Nationals

The Hon Greg Donnelly MLC Australian Labor Party

The Hon Scot MacDonald MLC Liberal Party

The Hon Dr Peter Phelps MLC Liberal Party

The Hon Peter Primrose MLC Australian Labor Party.

Cook Park is a Crown Land reserve extending 8.5 klms from Endeavour Bridge, Cooks River, passing through the foreshore of Kyeemagh, Brighton-le-Sands, Monterey, Ramsgate, Sans Souci, Dolls Point and Sandringham until it reaches Captain Cook Bridge at Rocky Point.

The park was once sand dunes and wetlands prior to European settlement.

Cook Park was named after Samuel Cook, who prompted the Lands Minister to proclaim a 100 foot strip from high water mark along the Bay as public reserve. This was accomplished on 30 March 1886, thus preserving the foreshore from development.

In April, 1770 explorer, James Cook and botanist Sir Joseph Banks found this beach much different from what we see today. The land from Cooks River to about President Ave. was large drifting sand dunes, from there to Rocky Point, adjoining Georges River was swamp land. There were encounters with the original Australians the Bediagal people. The area was a place of plenty for those who knew the land. The Bay was called Kamay.

When Governor Phillip arrived in 1788, he found the Bay useless for inhabitation but within a short time the first historic event is recorded for European history. In 1891 a rushcutter named McEntire, had been cruel to local people and was speared by an aboriginal man named Pemelwuy and later died. Pemelwuy caused the Governor to send out troops under Watkin Tench. They were to hunt down aboriginal people and take reprisal. According to Tench, the party crossed a muddy creek and came to a long beach where he saw, away off, a man standing on one leg, holding a spear. This man was either Colbee or Pemelwuy. Tench decided to return to Sydney and near catastrophe befell the party when they tried recrossing the muddy creek. Some of the soldiers nearly drowned.

During the 1830s Robert Cooper took up land at Charlotte Point near Rocky Point and in the mid 1800s Thomas Holt took up land on the Rocky Point end of the penisula, opening a Hotel. It was Holt who gave the name Lady Robinson Beach. He was interested in developing his commercial interests and invited Sir Hercules Robinson and his wife to inspect his land. In a grand sweep, impressing all present the beach was named after the Governor’s wife.

Thomas Saywell, Father of Brighton, was next to develop an entrepreneurial interest in the area, purchasing land at the northern end of the peninsula to become a pleasure grounds on a grand scale. A hotel, baths, pavillion, and tramway was built changing the area from sand dunes to suburbia. Saywell introduced norfolk pines to the area, stablising sand drift. Sand dunes of between 15 and 20 feet were common at the time.

In 1933 sand dunes continued at 15 – 20 feet, but were removed to a depth of 20 feet and land filled with refuse and soil. During the 1960, period large storms carried away the beach, swimming baths and some norfolk pines. During the 1990s the Novotel Hotel replaced Saywell’s New Brighton Hotel and a prominade was built. In later years much work had been undertaken to preserve the sand dunes with grasses being planted.

Close observation show birds and small animals surviving within this narrow sand dune zone. The Bay area fronting Bay Street is a sea grass bed significant to fish within Botany Bay.

Sand dunes are a significant aquifer, running the peninsula’s full length, feeding a wetlands network.

In 1980 an Australian Fur Seal (Arctocephalus pusilius doriferus) was seen on Brighton Beach. This unusual sighting signifies the type of habitat  destroyed around thge Bay in later years.

For more information:

Pemulwuy

http://dictionaryofsydney.org/entry/pemulwuy

Coastal Dunes

www.ozcoasts.org.au/indicators/beach_dunes.jsp

Botany Bay waters are home to many unseen aquatic animals. One of the most interesting is the Leafy Sea Dragon:

LEAFY SEA DRAGONS

• Name Leafy Sea Dragon: Phyllopteryx taeniolatus.
• an animal closely related to sea horses.
• The name comes from their colourful body and leafy appendages.
• They are found in waters off New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. South Australia also has Weedy Sea Dragons.
• They are found in Botany Bay and environ.

For more information on Leafy Sea Dragons:

www.ehow.com/facts_5799492_weedy-sea-dragons.html

For local Botany Bay movie on seagrasses and Leafy Sea Dragons:

http://vimeo.com/6342495