waterways/wetlands – Page 36

Fish River Station

community, government, waterways/wetlands

May 262013

Today is National Sorry Day, marking the commencement of Reconciliation Week.

This YouTube video by Parks Australia (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) shows us Fish River Station, part of the National Reserve System. Conserved in partnership with traditional owners and managed by indigenous rangers.

History of National Sorry Day

National Sorry Day

from the National Sorry Day Committee

National Sorry Day is an annual day of commemoration and remembrance of all those who have been impacted by the government policies of forcible removal that have resulted in the Stolen Generations.

Sorry Day has been held annually on 26 May each year since 1998, and was born out of a key recommendation made by the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families in the Bringing them home Report that was tabled in Federal Parliament on 26 May 1997:

7a. That the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, in consultation with the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, arrange for a national `Sorry Day' to be celebrated each year to commemorate the history of forcible removals and its effects.

The release of the findings of the National Inquiry in the Bringing them home Report in 1997 had a profound effect on the Australian public. The Report detailed unquestionable evidence about the forcible removal of thousands of Aboriginal and some Torres Strait Islander children from their families and communities. When the knowledge of these policies became public, the National Sorry Day Committee formed soon after, and embarked on an awareness raising campaign with the aim of uniting the Australian public in the annual commemoration and remembrance of the Stolen Generations.

The first Sorry Day was held in Sydney on 26 May 1998, and has been commemorated nationally on 26 May each year since then, with thousands of Australians from all walks of life participating in memorial services, commemorative meetings, survival celebrations and community gatherings, in honour of the Stolen Generations.

The annual Sorry Day commemorations have helped to remind and raise awareness among politicians, policy makers, and the wider public about the significance of the forcible removal policies and the impact that they have had not just on the children that were taken, but also on their families and communities. The intergenerational impact of the forcible removal policies on young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander citizens in the 21st Century have been profound, and the commemoration of National Sorry Day each year helps contribute towards a broader ongoing effort toward healing and social and emotional wellbeing for individuals, families and communities across the country.

The NSDC works to support and encourage schools and community groups across the country each year to plan and hold their own Sorry Day events, whilst holding events itself normally in Canberra and Sydney.

We encourage teachers from across Australia to engage their students and local community members in events that mark both the Anniversary of the Apology and National Sorry Day, in order that they can learn about the experiences of the Stolen Generations, their families and their communities. For Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, these dates hold deep meaning - marking these days respectfully and with sensitivity is vital to building real connections between schools and their local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (as well as non-Indigenous) communities.

At the request of the National Sorry Day Committee, the Australian Parliament passed a motion in 2010 recognising May 26th as National Sorry Day, and as a day to be commemorated annually, as a way of achieving greater healing for the Stolen Generations.

Our hope is that one day soon, dates of significance with regard to the Stolen Generations - National Sorry Day and the Anniversary of the Apology specifically - will be held in as high esteem as other national days of remembrance such as ANZAC Day. This will ultimately help to achieve a broader level of recognition across Australian society of the suffering and trauma experienced by the Stolen Generations and by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and communities across the country.

Scientist calls for wetlands rescue plan

environment, government, waterways/wetlands

May 252013

By Bel Tromp, ABC Rural

Kakadu National Park in the Northern Territory is a wetland of world renown and a haven for birds and plants found nowhere else in the world.

Kakadu National Park. ACF (Australian Conservation Foundation)

But Kakadu and other wetlands around Australia are likely to be severely affected by climate change, according to a leading world expert on wetland ecology.

Professor Max Finlayson is lobbying governments and the scientific community to come up with strategies to protect wetlands.

His efforts are being supported by Professor Nick Davidson, the Deputy Secretary-General of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands.

Professor Davidson, believes that, as a founding Contracting Party to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Autralia "continues to have strong formal commitments to the conservation and wise use of wetlands".

"Over the past 40 years, Australia has designated a national network of 65 Wetlands of International Importance, or Ramsar Sites, covering over eight million hectares.

"But with such a naturally highly variable climate, and with additional change coming from a warming climate and more extreme weather conditions, it is a big challenge to maintain this network.

"Australians may need to change their attitudes and treat wetlands as highly valuable, highly beneficial and critical natural infrastructure needed to help minimise climate impacts and help people adapt to living in a changing world, rather than treating wetlands as competitors for scarce water."

Professor Davidson is based in the Swiss city of Geneva and is in Australia this month to attend a workshop at Charles Sturt University.

Professor Max Finlayson, leading world expert on wetland ecology, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury - Wodonga; Professor Nick Davidson, Deputy Secretary-General of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands.

Can banks make a profit by investing in the Great Barrier Reef?

government, waterways/wetlands

May 252013

By Melissa Bos, James Cook University and Bob Pressey, James Cook University

Earlier this month, Australia’s Big Four banks copped a serve over their support of the coal and gas extraction industries, focusing attention on the ways large banks' investment decisions can put the future of the Great Barrier Reef at risk.

Are there viable investment alternatives to funding coal and energy projects in the Great Barrier Reef region? AAP

A study conducted by Friends of the Earth-affiliate Market Forces with global environmental group 350.org calculated Westpac, the Commonwealth Bank, ANZ and NAB have lent A$3.8 billion since 2008 for energy projects in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.

The groups called for people to “put their banks on notice” that if they “continue to fund dirty coal and gas” they will “risk losing you as a customer”. But focusing on the negative consequences of coal investments is only half the story. The hard reality is that we cannot expect Australian banks to stop funding mining altogether. The question we need to be asking is – can banks make a profit by investing some of that coal money towards reef-friendly businesses?

At the same time, government and non-profit organisations spin in circles trying to find revenue for marine conservation and management, and we are missing the bigger picture.

There are a number of investment options that could prevent adverse impacts on the reef and reduce the current and future needs for marine conservation finance – while creating self-sustaining economic incentives for improving the state of the reef.

Making an impact with investment

“Impact investing” achieves environmental and social benefits while generating financial profit. It is more proactive than socially-responsible investing, which avoids negative external factors, because it requires positive and measurable benefits. Globally, the impact investing market is currently estimated at US$9 billion but investors surveyed by JP Morgan on behalf of the Global Impact Investing Network feel that the industry is “in its infancy and growing”. Experts predict a US$500 billion industry globally by 2019.

In the past, the rate of return on impact investments has been lower than the market rate but, in 2013, it is expected to close to market rates of return. (Investors' expectations and actual financial returns vary widely depending on instrument and region.)

In Australia, a broad range of “first movers” are generating profit by investing in affordable housing, renewable energy, early childhood education, and most famously, a social impact bond in in New South Wales.

Green bonds

Green or environmental bonds operate similarly to other bonds but invest in “green” companies, usually in the renewable energy sector. Seven supranational banks (such as the Asian Development Bank) issued US$4.2 billion in green bonds in 2011-2013. Most notably, in March 2013 the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation issued a $US1 billion green bond.

Korea followed suit a month later by issuing US$500 million of green bonds for low carbon initiatives, with a payout of 1.75%, at 95 basis points above US Treasury bills. The bonds were highly oversubscribed, leaving high demand for similar products.

Banks in Australia could issue green bonds focused on investing in Queensland businesses which create net benefits for the reef and the community. They could fund eco-tourism that provides reef stewardship opportunities, or sustainable agriculture and other uses of land that reduce pollutants flowing to the reef from its catchments.

Revolving loan funds

Revolving loan funds mobilise capital to help businesses change their practices to be more environmentally-friendly. The costs of changing their business can often stop organisations shifting to new ways of doing things, even if there are long-term environmental and economic benefits.

For example, Verde Ventures, a partnership between Conservation International, Starbucks, and KfW Development Bank has to date invested US$23 million in sustainable enterprises and generated US$137 million in sales in addition to achieving biodiversity outcomes.

Revolving loan funds for commercial fisheries could help fund the transition to sustainable fishing. Fish 2.0, a US competition for innovative fishery business plans, uncovered a host of business strategies for sustainable seafood harvest and processing. Similar business strategies could be supported in and around the Great Barrier Reef.

Screening out, and in

A third solution is called “screening”. Investment screening initially encouraged people not to invest in businesses doing unethical things, such as using child labour. The second generation of screening is positive: ensuring that a percentage of investments produce environmental and social returns in addition to financial returns.

In Australia and New Zealand, just under A$20 billion dollars is invested in “responsible investments” through screening, and the market grew 8% from 2010 to 2011. No banks have yet set up an investment product explicitly related to reef health, but current responsible investment products could be adapted to benefit the reef.

If the Big Four banks re-directed 10% or A$300 million over five years into a combination of green bonds, loan funds, and positive-screened investments, this would build momentum towards a more reef-friendly economy in Queensland. The smaller rate of financial return would be offset by conservation and community benefits, as well as protection of the A$5 billion annually flowing from reef-dependent industries.

With UNESCO considering putting the Great Barrier Reef on the “in danger” list, it is urgently necessary for banks and environmentalists come together and invest in the reef’s future.

Melissa Bos receives funding from the National Environmental Research Program.

Bob Pressey does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Australian endangered species: Desert gobies

community, research, threatened species, waterways/wetlands

May 242013

Story by Adam Kereszy, Griffith University, at The Conversation

Male gobies are like peacocks. This is the Edgbaston Goby (Chlamydogobius squamigenus). Adam Kereszy

Gobies are one of the largest and most widespread fish families in the world, but even so, the presence of endemic species in the Great Artesian Basin spring complexes of central Australia is a little surprising. Some of these habitats are more like damp swamps than watery oases, and many are no bigger than a kitchen table.

As a consequence, the gobies that inhabit them are small – no bigger than five or six centimetres – and have the ability to extract oxygen from the air when the springs dry back.

There are five species overall, but all are very similar and their speciation is a result of isolation in separated habitats. What this means is that the Edgbaston Goby, (Chlamydogobius squamigenus) has been ecologically marooned in the springs at Edgbaston in central western Queensland, while the Elizabeth Springs Goby, (Chlamydogobius micropterus) has similarly been stuck at Elizabeth Springs 400-plus kilometres to the south-west. Other relatives are distributed through South Australia and the Northern Territory.

Although they have different names and live in different localities, the various central Australian gobies have much in common. The males are vividly coloured, with a noticeable blue, black and white splash on their dorsal fins.

The males also guard the clutches of eggs, circulating water over them with their fins and tails until they hatch. And, like all gobies, they spend the majority of the time resting on the fused fins on their underside.

Status

Both goby species found in springs in Queensland are listed as critically endangered by the IUCN and endangered under Queensland legislation. Under the federal EPBC Act the Elizabeth Springs Goby is listed as endangered and the Edgbaston Goby is listed as vulnerable.

Elizabeth Springs, like all Great Artesian Basin springs, are threatened by extraction and feral animals. Adam Kereszy

Threats

All gobies (and also all the other endemic plants and animals from Great Artesian Basin springs) are threatened by aquifer drawdown (from extractive water use) and the disruption and destruction from feral and domestic animals.

The Edgbaston Goby is also under threat from the introduced live-bearing fish Gambusia or Mosquitofish which is also present in the springs at Edgbaston.

Strategy

The spring complex at Edgbaston was purchased by the conservation not-for-profit Bush Heritage Australia, and the spring complex at Elizabeth Springs is a national park. This affords Queensland’s endangered spring gobies a measure of protection as these organisations do their best to keep stock and feral animals away from the fragile spring habitats.

At Edgbaston, Bush Heritage Australia has also been developing techniques to control Gambusia, which is also helping the critically endangered Red-finned Blue-eye.

Conclusion

Both Elizabeth Springs Goby and Edgbaston Goby rightfully deserve listing as endangered species due to their limited ranges and specific habitat requirements.

At present, the Edgbaston Goby is under more direct threat than Elizabeth Springs Goby. This is thanks to Gambusia that are found in massive numbers in some of the springs where they have invaded. Observations over the last five years suggest that as Gambusia populations increase, goby populations decrease – a similar situation to the competition and exclusion of Red-finned Blue-eye.

The Conversation is running a series on Australian endangered species. See it here

Adam Kerezsy works for the not-for-profit conservation organisation Bush Heritage Australia.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Native fish get new ‘hotels’ to help with river breeding

community, fisheries, waterways/wetlands

May 232013

Original story: Warwick Daily News

People from the Condamine Alliance, Warwick Fish Stocking Association and YWCA work experience program in Toowoomba worked hard on the fish hotels. Erin Smith

It might just look like a pile of wood sitting on the banks of the Condamine River but these carefully designed structures will soon help improve the population of native fish in the river.

Condamine Alliance principal project officer Kevin Graham said "the hotels and cod holes" would act as a replacement for the recently removed willow trees.

"In the past we have relied on snags in the river to provide homes for our native fish, but with the increasing in clearing over the years there are no longer enough large trees becoming snags so our fish need an extra hand," he said.

The structures will be weighed down with cement sleepers when they are installed by the Southern Downs Regional Council next week. The fish hotels have been built by the YWCA in Toowoomba, who have been working on this project with their work experience program.

And the construction of the first fish hotels is not the only thing the Condamine Alliance is celebrating.

The natural resource group was named a finalist in the United National Association of Australia World Environment Day Awards.

Thinking ‘big’ may not be best approach to saving large-river fish

fisheries, threatened species, waterways/wetlands

May 232013

Original story by Adam Hinterhuer, the University of Wisconsin News

The fate of the blue catfish and more than 60 other species of large-river specialist fishes depends on conservation of suitable habitat and connectivity between the Mississippi River and its tributaries. Photo: Brenda Pracheil

Large-river specialist fishes — from giant species like paddlefish and blue catfish, to tiny crystal darters and silver chub — are in danger, but researchers say there is greater hope to save them if major tributaries identified in a University of Wisconsin-Madison study become a focus of conservation efforts.

The study says 60 out of 68 U.S. species, or 88 percent of fish species found exclusively in large-river ecosystems like the Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio rivers, are of state, federal or international conservation concern. The report is in the April issue of the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

On the other hand, says lead author Brenda Pracheil, a postdoctoral researcher in the UW's Center for Limnology, the study offers some good news, too.

Brenda Pracheil with a longnose gar caught in the Missouri River. Photo: Brenda Pracheil.

Traditionally, the conservation emphasis has been on restoring original habitat. This task proves impossible for ecosystems like the main trunk of the Mississippi River — the nation's shipping, power production, and flood control backbone. While the locks, dams and levees that make the Mississippi a mighty economic force have destroyed fish habitat by blocking off migration pathways and changing annual flood cycles species need to spawn, removing them is not a realistic conservation option.

But, says Pracheil, we're underestimating the importance of tributaries. Her study found that, for large-river specialist fish, it's not all or nothing. Some rivers are just big enough to be a haven.

For any river in the Mississippi Basin with a flow rate of less than 166 cubic meters of water per second, virtually no large-river specialist fishes are present. But in any river that even slightly exceeds that rate, 80 percent or more of the large-river species call it home.

That means Mississippi tributaries about the size of the Wisconsin River and larger are providing crucial habitat for large-river fishes. When coupled with current efforts in the large rivers themselves, these rivers may present important opportunities for saving species.

"Talk to any large-river fish biologist, and they will tell you how important tributaries are to big river fish," says Pracheil. "But, until now, we've not really understood which rivers are most important. Our study tackles that and shows which tributaries in the Mississippi River Basin show the most promise for conservation of large-river fishes."

Current policies governing large river restoration projects are funded largely through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which requires that funds be spent on mainstems — or the big rivers themselves. Pracheil's study suggests spending some of that money on tributary restoration projects might do more conservation good for fish, while also letting agencies get more bang for their habitat restoration buck.

"Tributaries may be one of our last chances to preserve large-river fish habitat," Pracheil says. "Even though the dam building era is all but over in this country, it's just starting on rivers like the Mekong and Amazon —places that are hotspots for freshwater fish diversity. While tributaries cannot offer a one-to-one replacement of main river habitats, our work suggests that [they] provide important refuges for large-river fishes and that both main rivers and their tributaries should be considered in conservation plans."

Journal reference: Brenda M Pracheil, Peter B McIntyre, and John D Lyons (2013) Enhancing conservation of large-river biodiversity by accounting for tributaries. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11:3, 124-128

Woolshed Creek Conservation Reserve

environment, government, threatened species, waterways/wetlands

May 232013

Media release from Ipswich City Council

Koalas set to benefit from new conservation reserve

Ipswich City Council has provided in-principle support to a proposal by the Queensland Government to investigate the potential for a Koala Nature Refuge within the Woolshed Creek Conservation Reserve.

Woolshed Creek near Grandchester, Ipswich

Environment and Conservation Committee Chairperson Councillor Heather Morrow endorsed council support for this plan as a positive step to further strengthen measures to preserve local wildlife.

"Koalas have a special place in all of our hearts as an internationally recognised symbol of Australia and council takes our custodianship of their local habitats seriously," Cr Morrow said.

"When the Queensland government approached council about the possibility of establishing a nature refuge especially for our local koala population at Woolshed Creek Reserve the idea was met with enthusiasm.

"The Queensland Government will need to undertake an assessment of the Reserve before they can give final approval for this program to occur.

"Woolshed Creek Reserve is a 259 hectare property located within the broader Grandchester / Woolshed Creek conservation area - a 1,000 hectare site recently purchased through the Ipswich Enviroplan.

"The Ipswich Enviroplan is a diverse range of measures that protect large areas of natural bushland and provides landowners who sign up to the scheme with support for environmental protection of their land under flexible agreements with council."

The region’s koalas may soon have a new nature refuge to call home. David Nielsen

Division 10 Councillor David Pahlke said the local koala population was special for residents who will welcome news of council's support for this possible refuge.

"Koalas are a great part of living in Division 10, local residents and visitors alike love spotting them in the wild," Cr Pahlke said.

"The Grandchester / Woolshed area was targeted by council for purchase under the Enviroplan in part for the large tracts of high value koala habitat suitable for protection and rehabilitation.

"It's great that the state government has recognised this and are seeking to join us in our efforts to protect the local koala population."

Hundreds of trees planted in group community effort

community, waterways/wetlands

May 202013

WetlandCare Australia staff, Gidarjil Rangers, Impact team members and Landcare volunteers worked together to plant over 950 native trees at Pasturage Reserve last week.

Original story, NewsMail

WETLANDCARE Australia have worked in partnership with Bundaberg Regional Council, Friends of Pasturage Reserve, Bundaberg Landcare, Gidarjil rangers, the local Impact team and the Bargara Lions Club to undertake the planting of 950 local native trees at Pasturage Reserve.

Pasturage Reserve, adjoining the coastal village of Bargara, is one of the 20 important wetlands targeted for environmental restoration works under WetlandCare Australia's $2.5 million Coastal 20 wetlands restoration project, funded under the Australian Government's Caring for our Country program.

The area is of high conservation value because it contains one of the few melaleuca swamp remnants along the Burnett-Elliott coast and provides habitat for threatened species.

Bundaberg Regional Council and the local Impact team had done a fantastic job of preparing the site prior to the planting day on Wednesday, April 17.

More than 950 wetland seedlings had been carefully propagated by the Bundaberg Landcare nursery and the willing and capable hands of the Gidarjil ranger group, Impact team and Landcare volunteers along with WetlandCare Australia staff, making fast work of getting the young plants carefully installed into their new surroundings.

The hard-working team was sustained by a barbecue lunch kindly provided and prepared by the Bargara Lions Club.

WetlandCare Australia regional coordinator Adam Gosling said the tree planting event was highly successful.

"This is a great example of what can be achieved when everyone works together towards a common goal," Mr Gosling said.

"WetlandCare Australia could not have achieved such a great result without the collaboration and support of these groups and local community."

Australia seeks ban on geoengineered oceans

environment, government, waterways/wetlands

May 192013

Sydney - Australia is pressing for a ban on geoengineering the oceans with iron sulfate, a process which came to prominence last year after an attempt was made to augment salmon stocks off the Canadian Pacific coast by adding chemicals to ocean waters.

Yellow and brown colours show relatively high concentrations of chlorophyll off the coast of Haida Gwaii in August, 2012, after iron sulphate was dumped into the Pacific Ocean as part of a controversial geoengineering scheme. (Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center/NASA)

Australia is pushing for an amendment to the London Protocol on Marine Pollution and Dumping at Sea which would introduce a complete prohibition on the practice of fertilizing the oceans without scientific justification, the Australian government announced Thursday.

Pressure for a ban stems from the practice of what, Australia claims, is the unproven technique of trying to geoengineer the oceans by dumping iron into the seas to counter the effects of anthropomorphic (man-made) climate change. This practice, sometimes termed “ocean fertilization” has been proposed as a method of increasing carbon dioxide absorption by the oceans and improving fish stocks.

The controversy stems from the actions of the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, run by a US entrepreneur, which, in 2012, dumped 100 tonnes of iron sulfate, along with iron oxide and iron dust, into the ocean off British Columbia. The company claimed it wanted to encourage the numbers of phytoplankton in the ocean, the theory being that more abundant plankton would mean an increase in salmon numbers. The intention was to benefit an indigenous village, heavily reliant on salmon fisheries, on the Haida Gwai islands(the Queen Charlotte archipelago) off the coast of BC.

Phytoplanktons are microscopic plant-like organisms forming the base layer of the marine food chain. They’re recognized as playing a key role in removing carbon dioxide from oceans. After a brief life, the remains of dead phytoplankton sink to the ocean floor as sediment.

The Haida Gwai dumping was roundly condemned by environmentalists. It resulted in Canada being in the unenviable position of lifting the Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) "Dodo Award" for 2012. The Dodo Award is given to countries judged by the CBD as having “failed to evolve" and whose actions are said to have contributed to loss of biodiversity, rather than prevented it.

The 2012 incident of dumping off Canada’s Pacific coast was condemned by parties to the existing London Protocol. Earlier, in 2009, the scientific journal Nature reported on a study casting doubt on the whole concept of ocean fertilization. According to Nature, Hein de Baar, an oceanographer at the Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research in Texel, said, "Ocean iron fertilization is simply no longer to be taken as a viable option for mitigation of the CO2 problem."

The problem is that the long term effects of fertilization of phytoplankton are unknown. The 1996 London Protocol to guard against marine pollution, which amended the earlier 1972 convention to give it its full title "the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 and 1996" does not go far enough says the Australian government.

Australia, supported by Nigeria and South Korea, wants to introduce a restrictive amendment to the London Protocol which would outlaw all commercial fertilizer dumping in the oceans. Speaking in support of the move, Australian Environment Minister Tony Burke, reports the Sydney Morning Herald, said, "The amendment aims to establish a binding regulation on ocean fertilization. It prohibits commercial fertilization activities seas while allowing legitimate scientific research to identify potential benefits.".

Mr. Burke also cited the potential risks of iron sulfate dumping triggering toxic algal blooms and eutrophication of the oceans — the process whereby a body of water becomes enriched with dissolved nutrients stimulating the growth of aquatic plant life. It usually results in the depletion of dissolved oxygen and eutrophication almost always has disastrous consequences for fish stocks.

Australia’s proposed amendment banning ocean fertilization by geoengineering is due to be considered when representatives of signatory nations next meet to discuss updating the London Protocol in October 2013.

Original story (Australia presses for international ban on geoengineered oceans) from Digital Journal

More about the Haida Gwai dumping incident at The Globe and Mail

Toxic materials caused fish deaths near Busselton, W.A.

environment, fisheries, government, waterways/wetlands

May 192013

The Western Australian Department of Water has released the results of tests conducted following the discovery of large numbers of dead fish near Busselton.

Thousands of dead fish line the Vasse estuary near Wonnerup ABC News: Roxanne Taylor

Thousands of fish were found dead in the Vasse Estuary at Wonnerup last month.

Pathology tests by the Department of Fisheries found the fish reacted to toxic materials in the water.

Tests also revealed the water contained bacteria from the breakdown of high organic loads washed down the drains by the first winter rains.

Low oxygen levels in the water are also believed to have contributed to the deaths.

The City of Busselton is calling for an independent review of water quality in several local waterways.

The city's planning and development services director, Paul Needham, says different government agencies are responsible for different components of the waterways.

He says the State Government needs to appoint an independent person to examine the current management system and recommend ways it can be improved.

"That would give us some expectation that if they were actually implemented, we will - perhaps not immediately, but over a period of time, we'll see significant and possitive change in terms of the health of our waterways," he said.

Original story at ABC News

Older Entries Newer Entries