Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Channel ... - Fremantle Ports

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.3.3 Sediment redistributionRates of sediment erosion or deposition (redistribution) on the new seabed surface createdby the dredge materials may directly affect the recovery of seagrass within and surroundingthe Offshore Disposal Area. Depths of the Offshore Disposal Area will be assessed fordifferences in depth from preceding surveys and the permanent site locations will be overlaidto qualitatively determine if individual sites are being affected by erosion or deposition. Highrates of erosion or deposition (>0.1-0.2 m) may directly affect recovery or recolonisation ofseagrass. The necessary bathymetry data was collected via multi-beam sonar surveys duringDecember 2009, December 2010 and December 2011 (Fremantle Ports).2.4 Statistical analysis2.4.1 Overview of data presentation and statistical analysesSeagrass shoot density data are presented in graphs as means (n=15) encompassed withintwo standard errors (se). Percentage cover of seagrass and sediment PSD are presented asaccumulative bar graphs in which each portion of the bar illustrates the mean (n=50,percentage cover; n=5, sediment PSD). Sediment chemical data are presented in graphs asmeans (n=5) encompassed within two standard errors.Statistical analyses were performed using (PERMANOVA; Anderson et al 2008) and post hoctests were performed using (PRIMER, v. 6.0; Clarke and Gorley 2006).2.4.2 Hypothesis - Phase I surveyFor the Phase I survey, data were collected to produce a "baseline" for further surveys. Assuch the hypothesis for this survey was "sites within zones are not similar".The assessment of seagrass recovery is designed to be undertaken in three phases (seeSection 5). Future survey data will be tested against previous survey data and thus futuresurvey hypothesis testing will be that "sites are not similar between zones and betweenyears".2.4.3 Experimental designBenthic habitat mapsTo assess spatial extent of seagrass recovery, benthic habitat maps will be produced annuallyfrom satellite imagery and ground-truthed habitat data collected from video tows. Todetermine comparable coverage from survey to survey, towed video transects will start at thetarget location and follow the same trajectory and same distance, to the extent possible. Arepeat of approximately 70 towed video transects will be completed during each phase.Seagrass densityDuring this initial survey, shoot counts were analysed by zone, with sites being nested(n=15). Analysis was a three factor design: zone (undisturbed, transition or disturbed), site(1-5) and transects (1-5).In subsequent surveys, shoot counts are designed as fixed permanent quadrats which will beanalysed individually by repeated measures methods.Percentage cover seagrassPercentage cover measurements were derived from independent random 'quadrats' per site(n=50). Each of the ten random frames within the five random videos were consideredindependent and were used for the calculation of the mean and variation of each site. Forthis initial survey, analysis was a three factor design: zone (undisturbed, transition ordisturbed), site (1-5) and frame (1-10).In subsequent surveys, percentage cover will be analysed as a three factor design: time(year 1, 2 etc), zone (undisturbed, transition or disturbed) and site (1-5).16 Oceanica: Fremantle Ports: FP – Gage Roads Offshore Disposal Area Seagrass Recovery Project, Phase I – Initial Survey
Sediment nutrients and metalsNutrient and metals data were analysed by zone, with sites being nested (n=5). Univariateanalysis was a two factor design: zone (undisturbed, transition or disturbed) and site (1-5).Multivariate analysis was conducted using 'BEST' analysis in PRIMER to assess the correlationof whole sediment nutrients and metals versus either a single variable (P. angustifolia shootdensity or percentage cover) or multiple variables (percentage cover of biota categories) (seeTable 2.2). Concentrations of whole sediment nutrient and metals were normalised andstandardised to positive values prior to running the 'BEST' analysis (Clarke and Gorley 2006).'BEST' analysis was limited to five best correlations using a stepwise comparison.2.5 QA/QCQuality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures were in accordance with thosedescribed in the EPA (2005) Manual of Standard Operating Procedures for EnvironmentalMonitoring against the Cockburn Sound Environmental Quality Criteria (2003 – 2004) (SOP)and ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) Australian Guidelines for Water Quality Monitoring andReporting, as described below.2.5.1 Quality assurance and quality control in field samplingA QA/QC program was implemented prior to data collection and continued to the finalreporting stage, including procedures designed to prevent, detect and correct problems in theprocess of operations. It included processes to ensure adherence to protocols, calibration offield instruments and records of field observations.Method StatementsMethod Statements were produced to detail the sampling processes and assist futuresampling campaigns in the form of:dive operations gear list;site diagrams;sediment sampling logs;seagrass survey statement (outlines shoot counts and video procedures for divers); and'TransectMeasure' quick guide (outlines specific video processing tasks for this project).Recording of field proceduresComplete records of all field procedures were maintained, including:updated site locations (data for relocation with GPS coordinates);verification of data collected (number of video, photographs and data sheets);record of dive profile including personnel, gas used, time, date and site number;collection of metadata (general site photographs);daily operations reports (including record of safety meetings); anda field operations summary report.Any circumstances potentially affecting data collection procedures were documented andcorrected for future operations.Maintenance and calibration of field equipmentAll equipment and field instruments were kept clean and in good working order. Calibrations,preventative maintenance actions and pre-dive checks were carried out according to predefinedschedules and procedures. Video cameras were tested for required height (0.84 m)from seabed to produce a 0.5 m belt width along a transect (necessary due to the refractionof water). All camera settings (i.e. exposure, pixel quality, etc.) were verified as correct priorto the diver entering the water.Oceanica: Fremantle Ports: FP – Gage Roads Offshore Disposal Area Seagrass Recovery Project, Phase I – Initial Survey 17
Page 1:
Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Ch
Page 5 and 6:
Client: Fremantle PortsDocument his
Page 7 and 8:
ContentsExecutive Summary .........
Page 9 and 10:
Executive SummaryProject StatusFrem
Page 11 and 12:
1. Introduction1.1 Background and p
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1.1Dredge areas, reclaimed a
Page 15 and 16:
Table 2.2 Audit tableAuditCode801:M
Page 17 and 18:
AuditCodeSubject Action How Evidenc
Page 19 and 20:
3. Annual Survey Footprint of Offsh
Page 21 and 22:
Figure 3.2 Differences in bathymetr
Page 23:
A one in five year storm event (as
Page 26 and 27:
5. SummaryThere were zero non-compl
Page 29: 6. ReferencesDEC (2009) Guidelines
Page 33 and 34: STATUS OF THIS DOCUMENTThis documen
Page 35 and 36: Report shall be 15 months from the
Page 37 and 38: 6-3 If the Water Quality Monitoring
Page 39: Table 2: Summary of key proposal ch
Page 47: Fremantle Ports1 Cliff StreetFREMAN
Page 51: Fremantle Ports - Gage RoadsOffshor
Page 55: Client: Fremantle PortsRevisions hi
Page 58 and 59: Figure 1.1Figure 1.2Figure 1.3Figur
Page 61 and 62: Executive SummaryOceanica Consultin
Page 63 and 64: 1. Introduction1.1 BackgroundThe Ga
Page 65 and 66: Figure 1.2Gage Roads habitat map in
Page 67 and 68: Figure 1.3Bathymetry for Gage Roads
Page 69 and 70: Figure 1.4 Benthic habitat within G
Page 71 and 72: 2. Methods2.1 Benthic habitat surve
Page 73 and 74: 2.2 Seagrass recovery2.2.1 Permanen
Page 75 and 76: Table 2.1Seagrass sites, zone desig
Page 77: Table 2.3Limits of Reporting (LOR)
Page 81 and 82: 3. Results3.1 Benthic habitat mapA
Page 83 and 84: Figure 3.2 Benthic habitat post dis
Page 85 and 86: 3.2 Seagrass recovery3.2.1 Seagrass
Page 87 and 88: Table 3.4PERMANOVA table of results
Page 89 and 90: Table 3.7Data ranges and detection
Page 91 and 92: The bathymetry data for December 20
Page 93 and 94: Bathymetry data from December 2011
Page 95 and 96: 4. DiscussionWithin the Offshore Di
Page 97 and 98: 6. AcknowledgementsThis report was
Page 99: Appendix AGeo Oceans Report
Page 102 and 103: Benthic Habitat AssessmentTowed Vid
Page 104 and 105: 1. IntroductionGeo Oceans was commi
Page 106 and 107: Table 2 Tide predictions for the Po
Page 108 and 109: Figure 1 Substrate and biota habita
Page 110 and 111: Figure 2 Depth data collected durin
Page 112 and 113: Appendix 1: Video analysis biologic
Page 115: Appendix BGeoImage Report
Page 118 and 119: Table of ContentsIntroduction......
Page 120 and 121: Figure 1: Study site overview for s
Page 122 and 123: Project 1Project 1 aimed to generat
Page 124 and 125: Figure 2: Tier 1 classification res
Page 126 and 127: Limitations and assumptionsA number
Page 129:
Appendix CSeagrass Monitoring Site
Page 147:
Appendix ESeagrass Shoot Count Data
Page 155:
Appendix GSediment Field Log
Page 169:
Appendix INutrient and Metals Data
Page 172 and 173:
MarineandFreshwaterResearchLaborato
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180:
show all

Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Channel ... - Fremantle Ports

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?