SSEC logo The Hacking River Catchment  
Hacking River Catchment Home | the Protectorate | resources | pictures & maps  





fact sheets

• port hacking vision
• opportunites
• managing hacking
• bonnievale ramp
• minimising nuisence
• stormwater mgnt
• marine heritage
• biodiveristy
• landscape controls

reports

• jetski issues
• cabbage tree basin
• dunecare report

Port Hacking
What is your vision?
In ten years there will be more of everything on the Port - boats of every kind, jetskis, swimmers, tourists. But the Port will be no bigger. There will be no additional seagrass beds, fish populations, beaches, or waters to use. And therefore more crowding, conflicts between low and high impact uses, pollutants from various activities, fishing and foreshore harvesting, sewage from cruisers, safety problems.

Stop for a moment and visualise what the Port could be like if nothing is done to ensure that what you enjoy about the Port is protected from these pressures.
  • If you snorkel, will you enjoy the same diversity you see today?
  • If you swim, will it be as safe and clean as it is today?
  • If you kayak or paddle, will you be able to find the quiet places, or ride the wave unhindered?
  • If you walk by the water, will it be quiet, pristine and relaxing?
  • If you sail, will you be able to enjoy the quiet beauty you enjoy now?
  • If you drive a cruiser, will you be able to find a place to "get away from it all"?
  • If you enjoy the National Park, will you be able to sit by the water and relax, away from the sounds and smells of the city?
  • If you fish, will the big fish still be there to catch?
Now visualise what you want it to be like, and ask yourself "well, what would have to happen to make the future for the Port, the one I want?"

What is the PHPS position?

There is an enormous range of issues, and views about what ought happen with the Port. This summary cannot capture all of this complexity, nor all the issues, but is a reflection of some issues and our views.

Issue and status

PHPS' position

Alternative views
• Management - should there be a single authority? • One management body for the Port would be more efficient • No response from government.
• Seagrasses - should there be protection of these from anchoring or impacts from boats? • Posidonia beds should be protected. Boats should be low speed over shallow seagrasses. Anchoring over seagrass should be discouraged. • Some boat users object to any controls. Fisheries yet to finalise a position. NSW Habitat Protection Plan requests boat users to be considerate.
• The Basin - should there be increased protection for this unique area? • Power boats should not operate in the Basin, because of noise and fuel pollution. Human powered craft should be allowed. • Some boat users say that if power boats are restricted, no boats (viz kayaks) should be permitted.

• Some power boat users say no protection is justified.
• Simpsons Bay - should there be increased controls over power vessels, to better protect the amenity of national park users, and nearby residents? • 4knot speed limit in multi-use areas on the Southern side, to protect low impact users, reduce PWC (jetski) nuisance, and protect amenity of the foreshores. • Some boat users say that no restrictions are acceptable

• Waterways resist increased noise controls over jetskis.

• NPWS is reviewing its management requirements.
• Bonnie Vale - a boat ramp has been long sought by the Waterways Access group. • Bonnie Vale is a poor location for a ramp. An effective management program covering both foreshore and waterway should be a prerequisite to any such facility. • The proponents have declined to consider comprehensive controls.

• National Parks Association argue it should be Council responsibility, on Council land.
• PWC (Jetskis) and power boats - noise nuisance in natural and residential areas. • The present approach is not working, An effective system of noise control zoning is needed. • Waterways resist stronger noise control and fail to enforce the present regulations.
• Safety - protection of low impact users (swimmers, surfers, kayakers etc) • Low speed zones are required where powered vessels pose a threat to other users. • Some boat users accept reduced speeds off Horderns and Gunyah, but not elsewhere.
• Foreshore harvesting - should controls be increased? • Harvesting of the foreshores should be better controlled.

• There shold be a study of sustainability of levels of bait pumping. 		• Fisheries have put in place temporary protection (till December). Awaiting views on bait pumping.
• Facilities - what improvements should be made? • PHPS supports better rubbish collection, foreshore toilets, access. • Other views not known (apart from Bonnie Vale boat ramp).
• Fishing - should there be more controls? • Better policing and education, but no new restrictions on fishing. • Other views not known.
• Dredging - what should be done? • Channel maintenance, dredging but only within a total management program. • Some boat users want dredging on demand, without environment controls.
• Boat sewage - should 'through the hull" disposal be banned? • A 'pump out only' policy if there is no other way to prevent unlicensed discharge of effluent in to the Port (the current law prohibits such discharge). • Some boat users claim sewage causes no harm.

• Many other commentators support a "pump out only" policy.

With creativity and cooperation, we can create a better future.

top of page
 

Site content: office@ssec.org.au | Technical issues: webmaster@ssec.org.au
Site created: 1.5.04 | Last updated: 07.02.08