Post on 12-Apr-2020
HUNTER WATER
Reef Ecology Study
Burwood Beach WWTW
301020-03413 – 103
September 2013
Infrastructure & Environment 3 Warabrook Boulevard Newcastle, NSW 2304 Australia PO Box 814 NEWCASTLE NSW 2300 Telephone: +61 2 4985 0000 Facsimile: +61 2 4985 0099 www.worleyparsons.com ABN 61 001 279 812
© Copyright 2013 WorleyParsons
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page ii 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
SYNOPSIS
The aim of the Burwood Beach Reef Ecology Study was to assess the characteristics of benthic reef
assemblages (flora and fauna) along the effluent and biosolids dispersion pathway from the existing
outfalls to establish the impact footprint, establish the gradient of impact with distance to the edge of
the outfalls and predict the footprint of future impacts. Surveys were undertaken at four increasing
distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids outfall (including 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m).
Four replicate sites were surveyed at each distance, with two replicate sites located in an
approximate NE and SW direction from the outfalls (the direction of the main current flow). Four reef
ecology surveys were undertaken over the study period (December 2011 / January 2012, April 2012,
October 2012 and April 2013). At each site, digital photographs of ten randomly placed 0.25 m2
photoquadrats were collected by SCUBA divers. Digital photographs were analysed in the program
Coral Point Count (CPCe) where reef flora and fauna species were identified and their cover was
determined. Mean species abundance, richness and diversity were then calculated.
During the December 2011 reef survey at Burwood Beach poor visibility and sand inundation over
many of the low profile reefs limited data collection to the 100 m and reference sites south of the
outfalls. All sites were surveyed during the April 2012, October 2012 and April 2013 surveys.
The abundance, richness and diversity of benthic flora and fauna were generally low during all reef
surveys at Burwood Beach. This may be attributed to the reefs being periodically covered by sand.
The most dominant algae recorded at Burwood Beach were red algae. The occurrence of brown
macroalgae was limited to kelp, Ecklonia radiata, at one of the reference sites. The only green
macroalgae observed, Caulerpa filiformis, was rare, and is thought to be an invasive species which
has recently been observed to rapidly dominate algal assemblages in shallow subtidal regions along
the New South Wales (NSW) coast.
The marine fauna recorded at the Burwood Beach outfall sites and surrounding reefs was mainly
comprised of porifera (sponges), followed by cnidarians (hydroids, sea anemones, corals and sea
pens), echinoderms (sea stars, urchins and feather stars) and ascidians (sea squirts).
Multivariate analysis of community composition provided some suggestion of change with distance
from the biosolids outfall on some occasions; however, these relationships were not consistent over
time. Overall, there was no consistent gradient in effect with distance from the outfalls that would
indicate the observed differences in assemblages were attributable to the operation of the Burwood
Beach outfall. This is consistent with the results of previous studies.
It is likely that intermittent sand movement over the low profile subtidal reefs at Burwood Beach has a
large influence on the structure of the benthic communities present. This may contribute to the high
spatial and temporal variability observed in both current and previous studies and also obscure any
impact of the Burwood Beach outfalls on reef communities.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page iii 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
Disclaimer
This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Hunter Water, and is subject
to and issued in accordance with the agreement between Hunter Water and WorleyParsons.
WorleyParsons accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect of any use of or
reliance upon this report by any third party.
Copying this report without the permission of Hunter Water or WorleyParsons is not permitted.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page iv 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
Internal and Client Review Record
PROJECT 301020-03413 – BURWOOD BEACH REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
REV DESCRIPTION ORIG REVIEW WORLEY- PARSONS APPROVAL
DATE CLIENT APPROVAL
DATE
A Draft issued for internal review
Dr M Priestley/ Dr K Newton
Dr M Dommisse
N/A
2 March 2012 N/A
B Draft issued for internal review
Dr M Priestley / Dr K Newton
Hunter Water
5 March 2012
C Draft issued for internal review
Dr K Newton
23 May 2012
D Draft issued for internal review
Dr M Priestley
Dr M Holloway
13 Aug 2012
E Draft issued for internal review
Dr K Newton
Hunter Water / CEE
28 Aug 2012
F Draft issued for internal review
Dr M Priestley
Dr K Newton
3 Dec 2012
G Draft issued for internal review
Dr K Newton
Dr M Holloway
14 Dec 2012
H Draft issued for client review
Dr K Newton
Hunter Water / CEE
31 Jan 2013
I Draft issued for internal review
Dr M Priestley
Dr K Newton
19 July 2013
J Draft issued for internal review
Dr K Newton
K Stewart
17 Aug 2013
K Draft issued for client review
Dr K Newton
Hunter Water / CEE
19 Aug 2013
L FINAL DRAFT
Dr M Priestley / Dr K Newton
EPA
September 2013
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page v 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Burwood Beach WWTW ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Treatment Process ................................................................................................. 1
1.1.2 Environmental Protection Licence Conditions ....................................................... 1
1.1.3 Characteristics of Current Effluent and Biosolids Discharges ............................... 4
1.1.4 Effluent and Biosolids Flow Data ......................................................................... 11
1.1.5 Dilution Modelling / Dispersion Characteristics .................................................... 12
1.2 Burwood Beach Marine Environmental Assessment Program ......................................... 13
1.2.1 Initial Consultation ................................................................................................ 13
1.3 Study Area ........................................................................................................................ 13
1.4 Scope of Works / Study Objectives .................................................................................. 14
1.4.1 Null Hypothesis .................................................................................................... 14
1.5 Review of Previous Reef Ecology Studies at Burwood Beach ......................................... 14
2 METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 17
2.1 Reef Survey Sites ............................................................................................................. 17
2.2 Temporal Assessment ...................................................................................................... 21
2.3 Field Survey Methods ....................................................................................................... 21
2.4 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 21
2.4.1 Image Analysis ..................................................................................................... 21
2.4.2 Species Abundance, Richness and Diversity ...................................................... 22
2.4.3 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................... 23
3 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 24
3.1 Univariate Analyses of Reef Ecology................................................................................ 24
3.1.1 Total Algae ........................................................................................................... 25
3.1.2 Total Fauna .......................................................................................................... 30
3.1.3 Individual Fauna Taxa .......................................................................................... 34
3.2 Multivariate Analyses of Reef Ecology ............................................................................. 42
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page vi 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
3.2.1 December 2011.................................................................................................... 42
3.2.2 April 2012 ............................................................................................................. 43
3.2.3 October 2012 ....................................................................................................... 44
3.2.4 April 2013 ............................................................................................................. 46
3.2.5 Overall Multivariate Analysis of Reef Data .......................................................... 48
4 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................... 53
4.1 Restrictions to Surveys ..................................................................................................... 53
4.2 General Trends ................................................................................................................. 53
4.3 Algae ................................................................................................................................. 54
4.4 Fauna ................................................................................................................................ 55
4.5 Sand Movement ................................................................................................................ 55
5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 57
6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................. 58
7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 59
Figures
Figure 1.1 Location of Burwood Beach WWTW. ................................................................................... 2
Figure 1.2 Burwood Beach WWTW and outfall alignment. .................................................................... 3
Figure 1.3 Effluent and biosolids flow data for the study period (July 2011 - May 2013). ................... 12
Figure 2.1 Location of all reef survey sites. ......................................................................................... 17
Figure 2.2 Location of reef survey sites near to the outfall diffuser. .................................................... 18
Figure 2.3 Images of the low profile rocky reef surveyed. ................................................................... 18
Figure 2.4 Imagery captured at a selection of reef sites which were unsuitable for survey in
December 2011 / January 2012. ........................................................................................................... 20
Figure 2.5 Example of CPCe analysis of a photoquadrat from Burwood Beach indicating randomly
located points assigned by the computer program, for species identification....................................... 22
Figure 3.1 Abundance (percentage cover) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids outfall with four site replicates
surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). .................................................... 27
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page vii 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
Figure 3.2 Richness (number of taxa) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations
were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids outfall with four site replicates surveyed
within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). .................................................................... 28
Figure 3.3 Diversity (Shannon Weiner Index) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 29
Figure 3.4 Abundance (percentage cover) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 31
Figure 3.5 Richness (number of species) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations
were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates
surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). .................................................... 32
Figure 3.6 Diversity (Shannon Weiner Index) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 33
Figure 3.7 Abundance (percentage cover) of porifera (sponges) species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location diffuser (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats)........................ 36
Figure 3.8 Abundance (percentage cover) of ascidian species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 37
Figure 3.9 Abundance (percentage cover) of cnidarian species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 38
Figure 3.10 Abundance (percentage cover) of echinoderm species surveyed at Burwood Beach.
Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site
replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). ................................... 39
Figure 3.11 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for December 2011. Distances
were dependent on reef availability....................................................................................................... 42
Figure 3.12 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for April 2012. Distances included
10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m, with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
............................................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 3.13 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for October 2012. Distances
included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per
distance. ................................................................................................................................................ 45
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page viii 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
Figure 3.14 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for April 2013. Distances included
10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
............................................................................................................................................................... 47
Figure 3.15 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages at distances
across all survey event. Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site
replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance. .......................................................................... 50
Figure 3.16 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by survey event.
Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats /
site) per distance. .................................................................................................................................. 50
Figure 3.17 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by season (cool
water: Dec 2011 / Oct 2012, warm water: April 2012 / 2013). Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m
and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance. ............................. 51
Figure 3.18 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by direction.
Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats /
site) per distance. .................................................................................................................................. 52
Tables
Table 1.1 Load limits for effluent and biosolids discharges. .................................................................. 4
Table 1.2 Summary of physicochemical, metal/metalloid and organics data in Burwood Beach
effluent during 2006 - 2013. .................................................................................................................... 5
Table 1.3 Summary of physicochemical, metal/metalloid and organics data in Burwood Beach
biosolids during 2006 - 2013. .................................................................................................................. 8
Table 1.4 Effluent and biosolids flow data for the study period (July 2011 - May 2013). .................... 11
Table 1.5 Classification of zones based on prior effluent dilution modelling. ...................................... 13
Table 2.1 GPS co-ordinates and depths of each survey site. .............................................................. 19
Table 3.1 Nested factorial ANOVAs on all surveys. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach WWTW biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location
(mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). Note: during December 2011 only the sites 100 SE, 100 SW, >
2,000 SE and > 2,000 SW were available for survey. .......................................................................... 40
Table 3.2 SIMPER analysis results for April 2012. Taxa ranked in order of highest contribution (using
a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance (percentage cover) in brackets
within each location (distance). Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach
biosolids diffuser with four site replicates. ............................................................................................. 44
Table 3.3 SIMPER analysis results for October 2012. Taxa ranked in order of highest contribution
(using a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance (percentage cover) in
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page ix 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT : September 2013
brackets within each location (distance). Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood
Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates. ................................................................................. 46
Table 3.4 SIMPER analysis results for April 2013. Taxa ranked in order of highest contribution (using
a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance (percentage cover) in brackets
within each location (distance). Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood Beach
biosolids diffuser with four site replicates. ............................................................................................. 48
Appendices
APPENDIX 1 – REEF FAUNA AND FLORA PROPORTION DATA
APPENDIX 2 – STATISTICAL OUTPUT: ANOSIM ANALYSES
Abbreviations
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
CEE Consulting Environmental Engineers
EPA Environmental Protection Authority
EPL Environmental Protection License
MDS Multi-Dimensional Scaling
MEAP Marine Environmental Assessment Program
NSW New South Wales
OEH Office of Environment and Heritage
SIMPER Percentage Similarity Analysis
WWTW Wastewater Treatment Works
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 1 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Burwood Beach WWTW
The Burwood Beach Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW) is located on the Hunter Central Coast
of New South Wales (NSW), approximately 2.5 km south of the city of Newcastle (Figure 1.1). The
plant treats wastewater from Newcastle and the surrounding suburbs, servicing approximately
185,000 people and local industry. There is an average daily dry weather flow of 44 million litres of
wastewater (44 ML/d). Over the next 30 years these flows are expected to increase to 55 - 60 ML/d,
even with water conservation measures in place.
1.1.1 Treatment Process
The secondary treatment process at Burwood Beach consists of physical screening to remove large
and fine particulates, biological filtration and activated sludge processing including aeration and
settling stages. Secondary treated effluent from Burwood Beach WWTW is discharged to the ocean
through a multi-port diffuser which extends 1,500 m offshore, with diffusers at a depth of
approximately 22 m (Figure 1.1). Approximately 2 ML/d of activated sludge (i.e. biosolids), which is
surplus to treatment requirements, is also discharged to the ocean via a separate multi-port diffuser
that extends slightly further offshore than the effluent outfall. Both the effluent and biosolids outfalls
have been operating in their current configuration since January 1994.
1.1.2 Environmental Protection Licence Conditions
The Environment Protection Licence (EPL) for Burwood Beach WWTW specifies limit conditions for
the operation of the plant (latest version of licence is January 2012). These conditions provide an
indication of the characteristics of the effluent and biosolids discharged into the ocean. Condition L1
specifies that the operation of the outfall must not cause or permit waters to be polluted (i.e. the
licencee must comply with section 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997).
Condition L2 specifies limits relating to total loads discharged to the ocean (including both the effluent
and biosolids). These limits are provided in Figure 1.1. Condition 3 specifies limits to concentrations
of suspended solids and oil / grease in the effluent discharged to the outfall. The three day geometric
mean concentration limit for suspended solids is 60 mg/L and for oil / grease is 15 mg/L. Condition 4
sets volume and mass limits of effluent and biosolids discharged via the outfalls. The limit for effluent
flow rate is 510 ML/d (to allow for higher flows in wet weather) and for biosolids the flow limit is
5 ML/d. Daily monitoring of flow is required.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 2 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 1.1 Location of Burwood Beach WWTW.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 3 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 1.2 Burwood Beach WWTW and outfall alignment.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 4 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 1.1 Load limits for effluent and biosolids discharges.
Parameter Load Limits
kg/year kg/day
Total suspended solids 4,717,189 12,924
Biochemical oxygen demand - -
Total nitrogen 778,257 2,132
Oil and grease 341,290 935
Total phosphorus - -
Zinc 3,943 11
Copper 2,080 5.7
Lead 1,472 4.0
Chromium 224 0.61
Cadmium 124 0.34
Selenium 14 0.038
Mercury 9 0.025
Pesticides and PCBs 7 0.019
1.1.3 Characteristics of Current Effluent and Biosolids Discharges
The final treated effluent and biosolids from Burwood Beach WWTW has been monitored by Hunter
Water for physicochemical parameters and a suite of metals/metalloids and organic chemicals. A
summary of this data during the period 2006 - 2013 is provided in Table 1.2 (effluent) and Table 1.3
(biosolids) (data provided by Hunter Water 2013).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 5 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 1.2 Summary of physicochemical, metal/metalloid and organics data in Burwood Beach effluent during 2006 - 2013.
Group Parameter (units) Period N Median Mean Min Max Std Error 75%ile 90%ile
Physicochemical Suspended solids (mg/L) 2006-13 449 27 33.6 <1 390 1.6 40 60
UV254nm Transmittance (%T) 2006-13 6 59.2 58.4 43.6 68.31 3.4 62.475 65.705
pH 2006-13 224 7.6 7.6 7 8 0.01 7.7 7.8
Total dissolved solids (mg/L) 2006-13 56 440 448.5 276 734 12.9 487.5 545
Biological Oxygen Demand - total (mg/L) 2006-13 239 23 27.4 <2 144 1.3 36 50
Chemical Oxygen Demand - Flocculated (mg/L) 2006-13 19 42 41.8 32 55 1.6 46 51.4
Grease - total high range (mg/L) 2006-13 3 <5 4.7 <5 10 2.7 6 8.4
Grease - total low range (mg/L) 2006-13 444 <2 2.7 <2 60 0.2 3 5
Ammonium nitrogen (mg/L N) 2006-13 70 23.0 21.7 1 33.1 0.8 26.8 29.4
Nitrate + nitrate oxygen (mg/L N) 2006-13 236 1.0 1.6 <0.05 14 0.1 2.1 3.7
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L N) 2006-13 236 26.9 26.1 2.2 48.7 0.6 33.0 36.9
Total nitrogen (mg/L N) 2006-13 236 28.7 27.6 2.45 48.7 0.6 33.6 37.7
Total phosphorus (mg/L P) 2006-13 236 2.3 2.64 0.09 8.2 0.11 3.625 4.8
Metals / Metalloids
Silver-Ag-AAS furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 31 1 3.1 <1 18 0.9 2.5 13
Silver Ag-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 0.5 0.7 <1 7 0.1 0.5 1
Arsenic As-vga (µg/L) 2006-13 90 1.7 1.8 0.05 3.9 0.1 2.1 2.51
Cadmium Cd-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 5 <1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1
Cadmium Cd-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 <1 0.5 <1 1 <1 <1 <1
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 6 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Group Parameter (units) Period N Median Mean Min Max Std Error 75%ile 90%ile
Chromium Cr-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 31 1 1.9 <1 28 0.9 1.2 2
Chromium Cr- ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 <1 0.7 <1 2 0.1 0.75 1
Chromium Cr VI-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <1 0.7 <1 1 - 1 1
Copper Cu-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 31 17 21.2 4 115 3.5 21 34
Copper Cu-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 93 0.25 0.4 0.04 1.7 - 0.47 0.728
Mercury Hg-VGA (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 1.6 - <0.1 0.2
Manganese Mn-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 31 70 76.0 31 173 6.6 82 105
Manganese-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 61 63.8 27 119 2.0 67.5 80.2
Nickel Ni-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1
Nickel Ni-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 4 5.3 <1 20 0.6 5.5 13.2
Lead Pb-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 90 3 3.1 <1 17 0.3 4 5
Selenium Se-VGA (µg/L) 2006-13 90 0.1 0.3 <0.1 2 - 0.4 0.6
Zinc Zn (µg/L) 2006-13 31 50 49.4 10 120 4.3 55 70
Zinc Zn-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 59 24 31.2 4 164 3.2 35 55.8
Organics
Aldrin (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
α-BHC Bhc-a (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
β-BHC-b (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
α Chlordane (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.000 <0.02 0.003 - <0.01 <0.01
Chlordane (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.001 <0.02 0.020 - <0.01 <0.01
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 7 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Group Parameter (units) Period N Median Mean Min Max Std Error 75%ile 90%ile
λ Chlordane (µg/L) 2006-13 11 <0.01 0.000 <0.02 0.001 - <0.01 <0.01
Chlorpyrifos 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.007 <0.05 0.629 0.007 <0.01 <0.01
Lindane (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.000 <0.01 0.005 - <0.01 <0.01
DDT (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
DDD (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
DDE (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
Diazinon (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.000 <0.1 0.030 - <0.01 <0.01
Dieldrin (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 0.000 <0.01 0.012 - <0.01 <0.01
Endosulfan (µg/L) 2006-13 0 <0.01
Endosulfan-s (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Endosulfan-1 (µg/L) 2006-13 0 <0.01
Endosulfan-2 (µg/L) 2006-13 0 <0.01
Endrin (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Heptachlor (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
HCB (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Heptachlor-epoxide (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Methoxychlor (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Parathion (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.1 0.000 <0.1 0.010 0.000 <0.1 <0.1
Total PCBs (µg/L) 2006-13 90 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 8 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 1.3 Summary of physicochemical, metal/metalloid and organics data in Burwood Beach biosolids during 2006 - 2013.
Group Parameter (units) Period N Median Mean Min Max Std
Error 75%ile 90%ile
Physicochemical
Total solids (%w/w) 2006-13 458 0.41 0.45 0.00 2.42 0.01 0.50 0.67
Volatile solids (%w/w) 2006-13 440 69.12 66.35 20.61 96.72 0.51 72.68 74.60
Ammonium N_Total (mg/L N) 2006-13 440 24.00 25.03 0.01 85.40 0.55 30.13 39.00
Grease – total low range (mg/L) 2006-13 440 153.5 172.0 1.0 841.0 5.5 230.0 328.2
Fluoride (mg/L) 2006-13 3 0.77 0.67 0.42 0.82 0.13 0.80 0.81
Metals / Metalloids
Silver-Ag-AA furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 22 23 4 63 1 29 40
Silver Ag-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 279 11 12 0.5 38 0 15 18
Arsenic As-vga (µg/L) 2006-13 431 14.7 18.33 2.6 130 0.70 19.75 30.5
Cadmium Cd-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 4 5.93 0.5 128 1.04 6 8
Cadmium Cd-ICP (mg/L) 2006-13 279 0.005 0.01 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01
Chromium Cr VI-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 1 1.00 1 1 0.00 1 1
Chromium Cr_VIi-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 279 5 10 5 25 0.00 5 25
Chromium Cr-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 46.5 68.16 1 750 7.41 68.5 105
Chromium cr- ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 279 30 50 5 3200 10 40 70
Copper Cu-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 839 954 125 3930 42.8 1134 1426
Copper Cu-ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 279 830 880 5 3300 20 1000 1300
Mercury Hg- VGA (µg/L) 2006-13 431 3.7 3.93 0.005 10.2 0.08 4.8 6.3
Manganese Mn-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 339 360 33 1270 13.73 446.25 512.5
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 9 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Manganese -ICP (mg/L) 2006-13 279 0.39 0.41 0.06 1 0.01 0.47 0.57
Nickel Ni-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 40 47.21 13 180 2.49 55 77.7
Nickel Ni-ICP (mg/L) 2006-13 279 0.03 0.04 0.005 0.33 0.00 0.05 0.07
Lead Pb-furnace (µg/L) 2006-13 152 187 224 13 900 11.37 269.25 375
Lead Pb ICP (µg/L) 2006-13 279 120 130 10 450 0.01 150 212
Selenium Se-VGA (µg/L) 2006-13 431 0.1 0.91 0.05 5.9 0.06 1.7 2.7
Zinc Zn (mg/L) 2006-13 152 2.4 3.03 0.78 15.6 0.16 3.515 5.39
Zinc Zn-ICP (mg/L) 2006-13 279 2.2 2.46 0.13 6.9 0.06 2.8 3.7
Organics
Aldrin (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
α-BHC Bhc-a (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
β-BHC-b (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
α Chlordane (ug/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlordane (ug/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
λ Chlordane (µg/L) 2006-13 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorpyrifos (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0.003 0 0.239 0.003 0 0
DDT (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DDD (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DDE (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diazinon (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dieldrin (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0.006 0 0.315 0.004 0 0
Endosulfan-s (µg/L)
2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 10 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Endrin (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HCB (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Heptachlor-epoxide (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0.0001 0 0.013 0.0001 0 2.8
Heptachlor (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lindane (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Malathion (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Methoxychlor (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Parathion (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total PCBs (µg/L) 2006-13 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 11 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
1.1.4 Effluent and Biosolids Flow Data
Effluent and biosolids flow data for the study period was obtained from the Burwood WWTW. A
summary of flow data for the period July 2011 to May 2013 is provided in Table 1.4 and Figure 1.3.
Table 1.4 Effluent and biosolids flow data for the study period (July 2011 - May 2013).
Date
Rainfall (mm)
Secondary Flow (ML)
1
By-Pass Flow (ML)
2
Total Flow (ML)
WAS (ML)
3
July 2011 238.2 2068.14 777.24 2845.38 71.66
Aug 2011 47.8 1775.64 0 1775.64 87.73
Sep 2011 136.0 1731.62 205.9 1937.52 82.86
Oct 2011 161.4 1966.85 301.27 2268.12 94.93
Nov 2011 184.5 2004.51 465.58 2470.09 86.71
Dec 2011 110.8 1825.98 6.37 1832.35 92.83
Jan 2012 53.6 1481.64 22.32 1503.96 93.38
Feb 2012 336.7 2296.60 485.42 2782.02 89.47
Mar 2012 188.0 2083.66 403.74 2487.40 96.36
Apr 2012 174.0 1889.04 306.14 2195.18 88.98
May 2012 26.2 1470.51 0 1470.51 94.01
Jun 2012 188.0 2255.16 373.09 2628.25 95.01
Jul 2012 83.5 1839.45 24.17 1863.62 86.77
Aug 2012 71.0 1704.78 62.22 1767.00 93.44
Sep 2012 16.7 1305.15 0 1305.15 87.82
Oct 2012 13.5 1257.72 0 1257.72 76.17
Nov 2012 44.6 1201.80 0 1201.80 86.92
Dec 2012 114.2 1375.59 52.98 1428.57 98.06
Jan 2013 229.0 1488.58 322.25 1810.83 99.86
Feb 2013 175.0 1855.55 397.11 2252.66 87.39
Mar 2013 241.0 1954.00 629.58 2583.58 112.08
Apr 2013 94.5 1702.77 116.92 1819.69 102.98
May 2013 60.0 1538.14 55.7 1593.84 95.64
Note 1. Secondary Flow is total secondary treated flow through the plant (i.e. Total volume of screened and degritted sewage
into secondary plant over a 24 hour period from 12 midnight and discharged to ocean).
Note 2. By-Pass Flow is total volume of screened and degritted sewage which bypasses the secondary plant over a 24 hour
period from 12 midnight and is discharged to ocean.
Note 3. WAS is the volume of Waste Activated Sludge (i.e. biosolids) pumped from the clarifier underflow over a 24 hour period
from 12 midnight and is discharged to ocean.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 12 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 1.3 Effluent and biosolids flow data for the study period (July 2011 - May 2013).
1.1.5 Dilution Modelling / Dispersion Characteristics
Consulting Environmental Engineers (CEE 2007) calculated a predicted initial dilution for the Burwood
effluent outfall, assuming a discharge rate of 43 ML/d and all duckbill valves in operation. The model
predicted a typical dilution of 219:1 for the effluent field. Allowing for the reduction in dilution due to
the orientation of the diffuser ports parallel to the currents, initial dilution is expected to be in the range
of 180:1 to 220:1. The Water Research Lab (WRL 2007) also carried out field tests of effluent dilution
using rhodamine dye. The dilution of the surface field showed a typical dilution of 185:1. WRL (2007)
reported that the average near-field dilution was 207:1 and the 95th percentile minimum dilution was
78:1. CEE (2010) therefore considers it reasonable to base the environmental risk assessment of the
effects of effluent discharge on an effluent plume near the ocean surface with an initial dilution in the
range of 100:1 to 200:1.
The dilution of a combined biosolids and effluent discharge through the biosolids diffuser was also
calculated (CEE 2007). The CEE model predicted a typical dilution of 475:1 for discharged biosolids if
they rose to the ocean surface, or about 250:1 if trapped by stratification at mid-depth (CEE 2007).
The WRL hydrodynamic computer model showed a median dilution of 300:1, with a minimum dilution
of 100:1 when strong stratification decreases the rise and dilution of the small biosolids plumes, and a
maximum dilution at times of strong currents exceeding 1,000:1 (WRL 2007). The WRL model also
showed the biosolids plume is often trapped well below the surface by the natural stratification of the
ocean water column. WRL field tests of the biosolids plume, with dilution measured using rhodamine
dye, showed a typical dilution of 841:1. WRL reported that the average near-field dilution of the
biosolids plume was 268:1 and the 95th percentile minimum dilution was 205:1, for a submerged
plume (WRL 2007). Based on these results, it is considered reasonable to base the assessment of
the effects of biosolids discharge on two conditions; surface plume with an initial dilution of 300:1 and
submerged plume with an initial dilution of 200:1 (CEE 2010). WRL (1999) modelled the biosolids
plume at 10 m depth and showed that at the centre of the plume, at about 10 m depth, the dilution
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 13 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
achieved is between 200:1 and 1,000:1. At a distance of 200 m from the diffuser, the dilution
exceeds 1,000:1 and increases further with distance travelled. The diluted biosolids extends to the
south of the diffuser, but would be indistinguishable except by the sensitive techniques used in the
field studies. Based on the field tests and dilution modelling undertaken by WRL (1999, 2007) and
CEE (2007), the following mixing zones (Table 1.5) were determined for reporting purposes only.
Table 1.5 Classification of zones based on prior effluent dilution modelling.
Distance from Diffuser Zones
< 50 m outfall impact zone outfall impact
> 50 - 100 m
mixing zone
nearfield mixing zone
> 100 - 200 m midfield mixing zone
> 200 - 2,000 m farfield mixing zone
> 2,000 m reference zone reference
1.2 Burwood Beach Marine Environmental Assessment Program
A number of monitoring programs and studies have previously been undertaken to assess the impact
of treated effluent and biosolids discharge on the marine environment at Burwood Beach (e.g. NSW
Environment Protection Authority 1994, 1996; The Ecology Lab 1996, 1998; AWT Ensight 1996,
1998; AWT 2000, 2003; SKM 1999, 2000; ESA 2001, 2005; BioAnalysis 2006; Andrew-Priestley
2011; Andrew-Priestley et al. 2012). While providing a wealth of knowledge on the marine
environment, it is considered that these previous studies have not effectively assessed the spatial
extent and ecological significance of the outfalls impact (CEE 2010). The aim of the Burwood Beach
Marine Environmental Assessment Program (MEAP) was to establish the impact footprint of the
existing outfalls, establish the gradient of impact with distance to the edge of the outfalls and predict
the potential footprint of future impacts.
1.2.1 Initial Consultation
Prior to commencement of the Burwood Beach MEAP, details of the proposed sampling program and
survey methodology were discussed with Hunter Water, CEE and the NSW EPA (then the Office of
Environment and Heritage (OEH) on 10 October 2011. This consultation was undertaken to ensure
that the proposed MEAP was adequate in addressing the requirements of the Client (Hunter Water)
and the Regulator (NSW EPA). During this meeting, any concerns with the proposed program were
raised and the methodology of the assessment program was subsequently altered accordingly.
1.3 Study Area
Burwood Beach is located in Newcastle, on the Hunter Central Coast of NSW. It lies to the south of
Merewether Beach and to the north of Dudley Beach (refer to Figure 1.3). The seabed in the vicinity
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 14 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
of the outfall consists of small areas of low profile patchy rocky reef, which is subject to strong wave
action and periodic sand movement, interspersed between large areas of soft sediment (sandy)
habitat. These low profile reefs are emergent approximately 1 m above the sand. Water depth is
approximately 22 m at the outfall diffuser (refer to Figure 1.3). Fine mobile sandy sediments occur in
the gutters and low-lying seabed between reef patches. Extensive sandy beaches with intertidal
rocky reef habitats occur along the shoreline adjacent to the outfall.
1.4 Scope of Works / Study Objectives
The Burwood Beach Reef Ecology Study aimed to address some of the knowledge gaps by
assessing both the spatial and temporal impact of the effluent and biosolids discharges on sessile
reef assemblages. The key objective of the Burwood Beach Reef Ecology Study was to report
changes in the distribution of benthic marine flora and fauna along the effluent and biosolids
dispersion pathways, as a function of distance from the outfalls, to establish and document the area in
which benthic reef organisms may be affected by the Burwood Beach discharges.
The study also aimed to detect and characterise the following:
Impacts on community structure of reef communities;
The extent or zone of impact;
The gradient of any impact on biological indicators (species or groups) depending on
distance from the outfall;
The broader ecological implications of any impact; and
Extrapolate findings to make a judgment on the likely impact of future discharges.
1.4.1 Null Hypothesis
The null hypothesis was:
There is no significant difference between community structure, diversity, abundance and
richness of reef flora and fauna on reefs located in close proximity to the Burwood Beach
biosolids outfall compared to reefs with increasing distance from the outfalls.
1.5 Review of Previous Reef Ecology Studies at Burwood Beach
There have been eight previous studies undertaken to assess the potential impacts of the WWTW on
benthic reef communities near the Burwood Beach outfalls. Each of these studies has used a
photoquadrat method, in which a standardised area of the seabed was photographed and projected
onto a gridded screen, to assess the percentage cover of various benthic organisms. This was
previously done to establish whether or not there were significant differences between benthic reef
assemblages at the outfall (i.e. impact location) and nearby control / reference locations (i.e.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 15 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Merewether and Stockton Reefs). A summary of the findings of these previous studies is provided
below.
HUNTER ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 1992-1996 (NSW EPA 1996)
The first benthic reef surveys at Burwood Beach were undertaken by the NSW EPA in November
1993, two months prior to commissioning of the biosolids diffuser. These were followed by surveys in
March / April 1994, three months following commissioning (NSW EPA 1996). Early studies at the
outfall indicated that “there was no suggestion that there had been any longer-term changes to the
assemblages and populations of biota at the diffuser location compared to control locations that could
be attributable to the discharge of the diffuser”.
IMPACT OF DIFFUSER OUTFALL AT BURWOOD BEACH (THE ECOLOGY LAB 1996,
1997, 1998)
Following the initial studies undertaken by the NSW EPA (1996), The Ecology Lab (Sydney) was
engaged to undertake further benthic surveys and employed the same methodology as used
previously (i.e. by the NSW EPA 1996). The Ecology Lab undertook benthic surveys at the Burwood
Beach outfall in May 1996, December 1996 and April 1998 (The Ecology Lab 1996, 1998). Surveys
were undertaken in the vicinity of the biosolids diffuser (diffuser number 10) and at three control
locations, South Merewether, Merewether and Stockton.
The Ecology Lab surveys reported high spatial variability (between locations and sites within
locations) and temporal variability between benthic reef assemblages at the outfall and control
locations. A possible short term impact after commissioning of the biosolids diffuser was initially
detected, however this was not sustained through time. Overall, there was no indication of a longer
term impact of the diffuser on benthic communities at Burwood Beach. No measurable change in the
variability of assemblages at the outfall compared to the control locations was found. It was
concluded that the spatial and temporal variability observed over the first five survey periods (i.e.
1993 to 1998) was within the range of natural variation and that there was no evidence to suggest
that there were any impacts on marine biota which could be attributed to the discharges. However,
as anthropogenic changes in marine communities may only manifest with time, ongoing monitoring
was recommended.
BENTHOS SURVEY AT BOULDER BAY AND BURWOOD BEACH WASTEWATER
TREATMENT WORKS OCEAN OUTFALLS (AWT 2000)
Australian Water Technologies (AWT) was engaged to undertake the next round of surveys at the
Burwood Beach outfall (AWT 2000). The 1999/2000 monitoring reported that the area of silt at the
Burwood Beach outfall location sites was greater than at the control location sites. There was also a
reduction in the total number of flora and fauna taxa (i.e. benthic diversity) and algal cover
(corresponding to higher silt load) at the outfall locations compared to control locations. While there
was also a reduction in taxa and sponge cover over time, these patterns were consistent between the
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 16 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
outfall and control locations, and as such, were attributed to impact sources other than the Burwood
Beach outfall.
BENTHOS SURVEY AT BURWOOD BEACH WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS OCEAN
OUTFALL 2002-2003 (AWT 2003)
Further studies undertaken by AWT in 2002 to 2003 found that overall spatial differences between the
outfall and control sites were small in scale (AWT 2003). AWT reported a substantial increase in the
total number of taxa and a decrease in the percentage cover of silt matrix since previous surveys (i.e.
Ecology Lab 1998 and AWT 2000). An increase in the percentage cover of sponges and decrease in
percentage cover of ascidians was thought to indicate a long-term recovery of benthic communities at
the outfall site after initial commissioning of the outfall. Feather stars (crinoids) were abundant during
this survey despite being absent from previous surveys. Similarities between the outfall site and the
Merewether control site lead AWT (2003) to suggest that the stormwater outlet at Merewether may be
affecting benthic assemblages in addition to the outfall.
PATTERNS IN ASSEMBLAGES OF MACROBENTHOS ASSOCIATED WITH THE OCEAN
OUTFALLS AT BOULDER BAY , BURWOOD BEACH AND BELMONT BEACH
(B IOANALYSIS 2006)
The most recent surveys of benthic assemblages at Burwood Beach were undertaken by BioAnalysis
in 2006 (BioAnalysis 2006). These studies found that sponges were the most diverse and abundant
assemblages at the Burwood Beach outfall and that the species richness of algae was lower at the
outfall than the control locations. There was a higher percentage of silt cover at the outfall location
and differences in the structure of benthic assemblages at the outfall compared to control locations.
Burwood Beach outfall had a lower diversity and abundance of ascidians and higher diversity and
abundance of bryozoans that the control locations. However, overall, the outfall location had a higher
diversity of taxa than the control locations. Due to the spatial and temporal variability within and
between locations, differences in assemblages could not be attributed to the operation of the outfall.
Two main constraints to these earlier studies have been identified by CEE (2010):
1. None of these studies have specified the exact distance of the „outfall‟ sites from the actual
outfall (providing instead a general distance of within 50 m to 200 m from the outfall). This
has prevented the identification of any gradation in impact from being identified.
2. These studies provide no ecological description of cause and effect, which can only be
demonstrated by either a consistent change from „before the impact (i.e. the outfall)‟ to „after
the impact‟ (i.e. Before After Control Impact (BACI) designs; Green et al. 1979; Underwood
1991) or, where a „before‟ situation is not documented, by a consistent gradient in effect with
distance from the outfall.
The current Burwood Beach Reef Ecology Study aims to address both of these issues.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 17 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
2 METHODS
2.1 Reef Survey Sites
The area around the Burwood Beach outfall is comprised predominantly of low profile rocky reef
surrounded by soft sediment / sandy substrate. Very little deep subtidal reef habitat exists in between
these areas. Intertidal and shallow subtidal fringing reefs occur around the headlands of nearby
beaches. Small patches of subtidal reef occur around the outfall and some distance away at
Redhead and Merewether.
Surveys for the Burwood Beach outfall were undertaken using a gradient sampling design. Sites
were at positioned at increasing distances (locations) from the outfall (i.e. biosolids diffuser #10) at
10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m (reference) (Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2). Southern reference sites
were located off Redhead while northern reference sites were located off Merewether / Bar Beach.
Four replicate sites were nested within each location, with two replicates located to the approximate
NE and two to the SW of the outfall (N = four locations and 16 sites). GPS co-ordinates and depths of
each of the survey sites are provided in Table 2.1. All sites were located on similar low profile rocky
reef (Figure 2.3) and surveyed along the same depth contour (approximately 22 m), or as close to
this depth as possible taking into account the availability of reef sites (sites ranged from 21 - 24 m).
Figure 2.1 Location of all reef survey sites.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 18 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 2.2 Location of reef survey sites near to the outfall diffuser.
Figure 2.3 Images of the low profile rocky reef surveyed.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 19 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 2.1 GPS co-ordinates and depths of each survey site.
Zone Distance Site Latitude (S) / Longitude (E)
Depth (m)
Site Description
Outfall Impact Zone
10 m 10 m SW 32°58.239' / 151°45.129' 23 Low profile rocky reef
10 m SE 32°58.239' / 151°45.138' 23 Low profile rocky reef
10 m NW 32°58.231' / 151°45.128' 23 Low profile rocky reef
10 m NE 32°58.231' / 151°45.138' 24 Low profile rocky reef
Nearfield Mixing Zone
50 m
50 m SW 32°58.261' / 151°45.109' 21 Low profile rocky reef
50 m SE 32°58.270' / 151°45.141' 23 Low profile rocky reef
50 m NW 32°58.202' / 151°45.135' 23 Low profile rocky reef
50 m NE 32°58.208' / 151°45.154' 24 Low profile rocky reef
Midfield Mixing Zone
100 m 100 m SW 32°58.278' / 151°45.071' 22 Low profile rocky reef
100 m SE 32°58.288' / 151°45.095' 23 Low profile rocky reef
100 m NW 32°58.157' / 151°45.144' 23 Low profile rocky reef
100 m NE 32°58.159' / 151°45.162' 24 Low profile rocky reef
Reference Areas
> 2,000 m >2,000 m NW 32°56.849' / 151°46.290' 22 Low profile rocky reef
>2,000 m NW 32°56.724' / 151°47.384' 22 Low profile rocky reef
>2,000 m SW 33°01.219' / 151°43.666' 22 Low profile rocky reef
>2,000 m SE 33°01.605' / 151°42.980' 22 Low profile rocky reef
During the first surveys (December 2011 / January 2012) many of the pre-determined reef sites
(some of which were based on previously surveyed reference sites, echo sounding and prior mapping
data) were completely covered in sand so could not be surveyed. These included both of the 50 m
north and south sites, both of the 100 m north sites and both of the northern reference sites, as had
been surveyed previously by BioAnalysis (2006).
The sites at the outfall diffuser (i.e. 10 m north and south) and a newly identified northern reference
site were also unable to be surveyed effectively due to very poor visibility during this event. It is
considered that these poor conditions resulted from a combination of the biosolids diffuser not being
turned off prior to surveys and from natural subsurface ocean conditions. Some images captured at
these sites are provided in Figure 2.4 on the following page.
Consequently, the final design for the December 2011 / January 2012 survey only included two
locations (100 m south of the diffuser and southern reference sites) and two sites at each location.
During all remaining survey events all sites were able to be surveyed, although underwater conditions
were quite variable.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 20 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Outfall sites: Visibility at the outfall diffuser (i.e. the 10 m sites) was too poor for any effective reef
surveys to be undertaken. This was due to a combination of extremely poor subsurface oceanic
conditions and instances where the biosolids diffusers were not switched off prior to diving. The
image to the left shows the conditions at the diffuser when the visibility was poor due to subsurface
ocean conditions. The image to the right shows conditions when the biosolids diffuser was not turned
off.
Northern reference sites: During the December 2011 / January 2012 survey the northern reference
sites surveyed previously by BioAnalysis (2006) were found to be completely covered in sand (shown
on left). Radial circular searches (of 50 m) were undertaken at the seabed using divers however no
alternative reef could be located. New northern reference sites were then located using sonar and an
investigative dive was undertaken. A suitable site rocky reef was located; however, the visibility
below 10 m depth was too poor for any surveys to be undertaken in December 2011 as shown in the
image to the right.
Figure 2.4 Imagery captured at a selection of reef sites which were unsuitable for survey in
December 2011 / January 2012.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 21 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
2.2 Temporal Assessment
Four Reef Ecology surveys were undertaken over a two year period as follows:
1. December 2011 / January 2012 (surveys retried due to poor conditions)
2. April 2012
3. October 2012
4. April 2013
2.3 Field Survey Methods
Prior to each reef survey at Burwood Beach it was requested that the biosolids diffuser be turned off
for a period of at least 8 hours to ensure that underwater visibility was maximised. At each site, ten
replicate photoquadrats were taken by SCUBA divers using a Canon G11 camera and suitable strobe
lighting to ensure that colouring of sponges was obtained. The dimensions of the photoquadrat were
0.25 m2, consistent with previous assessments of reef ecology at Burwood Beach (BioAnalysis 2006,
Roberts et al. 2006).
2.4 Data Analysis
2.4.1 Image Analysis
Digital photographs were analysed using the program Coral Point Count (CPCe) (Kohler and Gill
2006). The CPCe program is used by coral reef and benthic researchers as a rapid and effective
means of photographic assessment. Twenty five randomly located points were projected over each
quadrat image, with the data analyst selecting a relevant classification for each point, corresponding
to the underlying benthic biota or substrate (Figure 2.5).
The level of taxonomic resolution was equivalent to that used previously (i.e. BioAnalysis 2006) to
allow for comparison (i.e. crustose coralline algae and foliose macroalgae were grouped into morpho-
taxa and termed foliose macroalgae and crustose coralline algae, other taxa were identified to the
lowest possible taxonomic level).
The classification „unknown‟ was used for taxa that could not be distinguished to any particular
phylum and is consistent with what Roberts et al. (2006) described as “a matrix of silt, consisting of a
mixture of micro-flora and fauna, silt and micro-organisms…..the dominant primary cover on exposed
reefs and, at some times, the dominant cover on sheltered reefs.”
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 22 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 2.5 Example of CPCe analysis of a photoquadrat from Burwood Beach indicating
randomly located points assigned by the computer program, for species identification.
2.4.2 Species Abundance, Richness and Diversity
Mean species abundance, richness and diversity were calculated for the reef data.
Species abundance: Relates to how common or rare a species is relative to other species
in a defined location or community. Abundance was calculated as the mean proportion of
total algae, total fauna and for individual phyla that were dominant in the dataset.
Species richness: Species richness is the total number of different species present within a
site / location. Species richness was calculated for total algae, total fauna and for individual
phyla that were dominant in the dataset.
Species diversity: Species diversity accounts for the number of species and the evenness
of species giving a measure of the biodiversity and complexity of a population. Species
diversity consists of two components, species richness and species evenness. Species
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 23 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
diversity was calculated for total algae, total fauna and for individual phyla that were dominant
in the dataset.
Species diversity was calculated using the Shannon Weiner diversity index as follows:
S
H = Σ - (Pi * ln Pi)
i = 1
Where:
H = the Shannon diversity index
Pi = fraction of the entire population made up of species i
S = numbers of species encountered
Σ = sum from species 1 to species S
2.4.3 Statistical Analysis
Univariate statistical analyses were performed using Statistica Version 7. Diversity, abundance and
richness measures were examined for normality using a normality plot. Homogeneity of variance was
assessed using Levene‟s test and when p < 0.05 continuous data was transformed via log
transformation ln(x+1) and proportion data was transformed using ArcSin. Significant differences
(p < 0.05) in diversity, abundance or richness between distance from the outfall, site and time were
examined using nested ANOVAs in the GLM module.
Multivariate analysis was undertaken using PRIMER 6. Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) and cluster
plots were generated to identify similarities of fauna / algae assemblages among locations. A
multivariate PERMANOVA was undertaken on reef assemblages using the PERMANOVA add-on in
PRIMER 6. A PERMANOVA is the equivalent of an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), except using a
multivariate dataset. The same model was assessed as the univariate analyses, except at a
multivariate level, to determine if there were significant differences or interactions (p < 0.05) in the
reef assemblages between distance from the outfall, site or time.
Ordination of parameters was performed using MDS scaling in PRIMER 6, based on ranked matrices
of dissimilarities between samples, employing the square root transformation and the similarity
measure of Bray Curtis. Goodness of fit (stress) was assessed using Kruskal‟s stress formula and
compared to maximum values recommended by Sturrock and Rocha (2000). To identify which
species had the highest contribution to the average similarity within each location, SIMPER analysis
was performed in PRIMER 6.
Power analysis was undertaken on the first round of survey data in order to help design and modify,
where applicable, future reef ecology studies. A Type I error rate of 5% (0.05) was adopted here, and
a Type II error rate of 20% (0.2, power 80%) was considered acceptable. A 50% effect size was
used.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 24 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
3 RESULTS
3.1 Univariate Analyses of Reef Ecology
During the first survey round (December 2011 / January 2012) a number of factors influenced the
amount of reef data that could be collected. These included extremely poor subsurface visibility
caused by natural oceanic conditions restricting surveys, visibility issues at the outfall and nearfield
mixing zone sites associated with the biosolids diffuser not being switched off prior to surveys and a
number of reefs being covered in sand. A number of these issues have previously been identified by
consultants surveying the reefs at Burwood Beach. As a result, during this survey period, only data
which was collected from two sites located at 100 m south of the diffuser (100 SE and 100 SW) and
the two southern reference sites (> 2,000 SE and > 2,000 SW) was suitable for analysis.
Reef sites that were covered in sand during December 2011 included all the 50 m sites to the north
and south of the outfall diffuser, all sites 100 m north of the diffuser (100 NE and 100 NW) and the
two northern reference sites (> 2,000 NE and > 2,000 NW). The fact that many reef sites were
covered in sand during the December 2011 survey is considered further in the discussion.
Intermittent sand movement over the low profile reefs at Burwood Beach will likely have an impact on
the abundance, richness and diversity of flora and fauna that inhabit these reefs.
Average abundance, richness and diversity of all (total) algae and all (total) fauna species are
presented in Figure 3.1 to Figure 3.6. The abundance of dominant fauna phyla (i.e. phyla that were
present at each site) were also graphed separately. The abundance of porifera (sponges), ascidians
(sea squirts), cnidarians (hydroids, sea anemones, corals and sea pens) and echinoderms (sea stars
and feather stars) are presented in Figure 3.7 to Figure 3.10 respectively. For marine algae, the
dominant phyla (i.e. green, brown or red algae) were not presented separately, as nearly all of the
algae surveyed was red algae.
A summary of the raw dataset of the mean proportions of taxa at each site is provided in Appendix 1.
In general, there was a low abundance of algae and fauna species for all sampling periods. Of the
four surveys, the October 2012 and April 2013 surveys had the highest abundance of both algae and
fauna.
The classification “unknown” was used for the silt matrix, where taxa could not be distinguished to any
particular phylum and accounted for between 4% and 100% of identification points on the individual
photoquadrats, with an average (over the four surveys) of 57%. There was only slight variation in the
average percentage of identification points on photoquadrats with this classification over the four
surveys (December 2011 = 49%, April 2012 = 57%, October 2012 = 62%, April 2013 = 54%). This
classification was especially prevalent at the reef sites located closer to the outfall.
Factorial nested ANOVAs were used to analyse the reef ecology measures of abundance, richness
and diversity and included the main factors of time, distance and site (which was nested within
distance) and interactions for time by distance and time by site (nested within distance). The findings
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 25 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
of these analyses are presented in Table 3.1. While December 2011 was included, the analysis
calculated effects based on the available sites only.
3.1.1 Total Algae
Mean algal abundance, richness and diversity are presented in Figure 3.1 - Figure 3.3 respectively.
The measure of total algae at Burwood Beach was comprised of nearly all red algae species, which
were predominantly encrusting coralline (Order Corallinales). Brown and green algae species were
both relatively rare, with the only observations being of the large brown macroalgae Ecklonia radiata
(kelp) and a green algae species (Caulerpa filiformis), which were both recorded at the southern
reference sites and at 50 NW during the December 2011 and October 2012 surveys.
As most distances could not be surveyed in December 2011, trends in algal abundance with distance
from the outfall could not be assessed (Figure 3.1).
In April 2012, total algae abundance was highest at the northern reference sites and very low at the
outfall sites (i.e. from all the 10 m sites). A number of sites within 100 m of the outfall (e.g. 10 SE,
10 SW, 10 NE and 100 NW) had no macroalgae recorded at all. Often this was due to a layer of fine
silt restricting any classification / identification (i.e. classification of “unknown”). In general, algae
were more prevalent at the southern sites than the northern sites (with the exception of high values at
the northern reference sites) (Figure 3.1). In April 2012 mean richness and diversity of total algae
also tended to increase with distance from the Burwood Beach biosolids outfall, with lowest values
recorded at all the 10 m and 100 m north sites and highest values being found at the reference sites
(Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3).
Results of the October 2012 survey were similar to April 2012 in that algae abundance was highest at
the northern reference sites (Figure 3.1). However, in contrast to April 2012, algae abundance,
richness and diversity tended to be higher at the outfall sites (i.e. the 10 m and 50 m sites) in
comparison to the 100 m sites and the southern reference sites during this survey period.
Abundance, richness and diversity of total algae were higher at most sites within 100 of the outfall
during October 2012 compared to April 2012 (Figure 3.1 to Figure 3.3).
During the April 2013 survey, there was similar overall algae abundance to that surveyed during
October 2012. In general, algae abundance was lowest at the reference sites and at 10 SE during
this survey. Total algae abundance was highest at the 10 NW and 10 SW sites (Figure 3.1). Algae
richness was quite similar among sites, with the exception of 10 SE and > 2,000 NE which had lower
values in comparison to all other sites (Figure 3.2). Algae diversity was highest at the 100 NW site
and lowest at the 10 NW, 10 SE and 50 SE sites (Figure 3.3).
Overall, no consistent temporal trends were apparent over the four surveys at Burwood Beach for
mean abundance, richness or diversity of total algae. Variation within sites (i.e. at the quadrat level)
was also quite high (refer to standard error (SE) bars on Figure 3.1 - Figure 3.3) showing that small
scale spatial variability was apparent. However, low values for all parameters were often detected at,
at least, one outfall site (i.e. at 10 m) and to some extent at sites located 50 - 100 m from the outfall.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 26 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Nested ANOVA found that there were significant interactions between time and distance for all algae
measures including abundance, richness and diversity (Table 3.1). This indicates that the trends
seen over distance were inconsistent between the surveys. During April 2013, algae abundance and
richness were significantly lower at 10 m sites in comparison to the 50 m and > 2,000 m sites. There
was also significantly lower algae abundance at 100 m sites in comparison to > 2,000 m. During
October 2012, there was significantly lower abundance at 10 m in comparison to 100 m. For algae
diversity, there was significantly lower diversity at 10 m in comparison to > 2,000 m. These analyses
demonstrate that while there are some occurrences of significantly different algae values (in terms of
abundance, richness and diversity) between distances, these patterns are not consistent through
time.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 27 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.1 Abundance (percentage cover) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids outfall with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 28 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.2 Richness (number of taxa) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood
Beach biosolids outfall with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 29 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.3 Diversity (Shannon Weiner Index) of all algae species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 30 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
3.1.2 Total Fauna
Fauna species recorded at Burwood Beach were mainly comprised of porifera (sponges) followed by
cnidarians (hydroids, sea anemones, corals and sea pens), echinoderms (sea stars and brittle stars)
and ascidians (sea squirts). Bryozoans (moss animals) and molluscs were low in abundance and
absent from the majority of sites. The mean abundance, richness and diversity of total fauna are
presented in Figure 3.4 to Figure 3.6 respectively.
As most sites could not be surveyed in December 2011, measures for total fauna could only be
determined for the 100 m and > 2,000 m sites south of the outfall. Total fauna abundance, richness
and diversity were generally higher at the > 2,000 m sites than the 100 m sites, especially for the
measures of richness and diversity (Figure 3.4 to Figure 3.6).
During the April 2012 surveys the abundance, richness and diversity of total fauna were very low at
the 10 m outfall sites. Values for all measures were highest at the southern reference sites
(> 2,000 SE and SW) followed by the 50 m sites. Whereas, low values for abundance, richness and
diversity were recorded at the 100 m sites and northern reference sites (> 2,000 NE and NW)
(Figure 3.4 to Figure 3.6).
During October 2012, total fauna abundance was again highest at the southern reference sites and
lowest at the 10 m sites, 100 SW and > 2,000 NW (Figure 3.4). This trend was quite similar to that
seen in April 2012. Fauna richness and diversity were generally similar across sites. Although
> 2,000 NW had lower richness in comparison to most sites and 50 SW had lower diversity compared
to most sites (Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6). Overall values for total fauna abundance, richness and
diversity at all sites were considerably higher than in the previous surveys.
In the final April 2013 survey, total fauna abundance was highest at 100 NW, no clear trend with
distance from the outfall was evident (Figure 3.4). Fauna richness and diversity were generally
lowest at the 10 m outfall sites (Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6).
Overall, no consistent temporal trends were apparent over the four surveys at Burwood Beach for
mean abundance, richness or diversity of total fauna. Variation within sites (i.e. at the quadrat level)
was relatively high (refer to standard error (SE) bars on Figure 3.4 to Figure 3.6) indicating there was
significant small scale spatial variability. However, low values for all parameters were often detected
at, at least, one outfall site (i.e. at 10 m).
Nested ANOVA found that there were significant interactions between time and distance for all total
fauna measures including abundance, richness and diversity. This indicates that the trends over
distance were inconsistent between surveys. Specifically, for all measures there was a significant
interaction due to significantly lower values at 10 m in comparison to 50 m and > 2,000 m sites during
April 2012, but not during the other survey events. For fauna richness and diversity, it was also due
to significantly lower values at 10 m in comparison to 100 m during April 2013 only. The statistical
analyses demonstrated a pattern of lower fauna abundance, richness and/or diversity at the outfall
(10 m) in comparison to one or more distances further from the outfall, however, this pattern was only
apparent during the April warm water surveys.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 31 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.4 Abundance (percentage cover) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 32 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Fi
gure 3.5 Richness (number of species) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the Burwood
Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 33 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.6 Diversity (Shannon Weiner Index) of all fauna species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
December 2011
April 2012
October 2012
April 2013
Could not be surveyed
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 34 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
3.1.3 Individual Fauna Taxa
A number of individual fauna taxa were examined including porifera (sponges), ascidians (sea
squirts), cnidarians (sea anemones, corals and sea pens) and echinoderms (sea stars, urchins and
feather stars). Graphs of mean abundance for each taxa are provided in Figure 3.7 to Figure 3.10.
Overall there was high variation between sites and survey periods for marina fauna, and abundances
of individual fauna were generally low. No strong trends with distance from the outfall could be seen
for individual fauna taxa.
Porifera generally occupied less than 10% of reef space, with the highest abundance values being
recorded in the October 2012 and April 2013 surveys (Figure 3.7). In December 2011 the
abundance of porifera at the two 100 m south sites (100 SE and 100 SW) was considerably lower
than at the southern reference sites (> 2,000 SE and SW). No other sites could be surveyed during
this survey. In April 2012, porifera abundance was highest at 50 NW, 50 SE and the southern
reference sites. Abundance at 100 SE and 100 SE were very similar to the December 2011 survey,
with about 5% coverage. Abundance at all other sites was low. During October 2012, porifera
abundance was low at the northern reference sites (> 2,000 NE and NW) and at 100 NE in
comparison to all other sites. During April 2013, there was very low abundance at the 10 m southern
sites. No consistent trends in porifera abundance with distance from the outfall could be seen across
all survey events. However, a slight trend with increased porifera abundance to the south of the
outfall may be apparent (Figure 3.7).
In general, there were few ascidians recorded across all surveys (Figure 3.8). Even during surveys
where all sites could be surveyed, ascidians were often absent from a number of sites and / or
locations. When they were present, abundances were low. In December 2011 ascidians were more
abundant at the 100 m south sites than the southern reference sites, and most abundant at 100 SW,
although within site variability (i.e. between quadrats) was high. In April 2012, only five of the 16 sites
surveyed had ascidians present. These included 50 SW, 100 SE, both northern reference sites
(> 2,000 NE and NW) and site > 2,000 SW. Abundance at all these sites was very low. During
October 2012, ascidians were detected at most sites (12 out of 16) albeit with high variability within
sites and low abundance values. Comparing the surveys over time, October 2012 had the highest
occurrence of ascidians. During the April 2013 survey, there were some occurrences of ascidians but
abundance was similar among these sites. No consistent trends in ascidian abundance were seen
with distance from the outfall (Figure 3.8).
Cnidarians were present at most sites during the April 2012 and October 2012 surveys, however were
usually low in abundance and variable within sites. In December 2011, just one of the four sites
surveyed had cnidarians present (Figure 3.9). Cnidarians were very low in abundance at most sites
during the April 2012 survey. At 50 SE and 50 SW, abundance was considerably higher than all other
sites due to the relatively high coverage of little coral Culicia tenella. In October 2012 there was low
cnidarian abundance for all sites. During the April 2013 survey, C. tenella was again common at
some sites, causing overall cnidarian abundance at 10 SE, 10 SW and 50 SE to be considerably
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 35 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
higher than all other sites. No persistent overall trends in cnidarian abundance with distance from the
outfall were apparent (Figure 3.9).
Echinoderms were present at around half the sites during each survey, however, the specific sites of
occurrence and abundances were highly variable. When present, the abundance of echinoderms
was greater than for other fauna species, there were no strong consistent patterns across surveys
(Figure 3.10). High echinoderm abundances were usually due to the presence of large aggregations
of Ptilometra australis (the passion flower feather star), which is a modern crinoid. In December 2011
echinoderm abundance was low at the sites that could be surveyed, the 100 m and > 2000 m sites to
the south. During April 2012, echinoderms were common at sites 10 m and 50 m south of the outfall,
and present in lower abundances at the northern 100 m and reference sites. The patterns were quite
different during October 2012, when echinoderms were relatively abundant at the northern 50 m and
100 m sites, the 100 m SE site and highest at the southern reference sites. A similar pattern of
echinoderm abundance as observed during April 2013 (Figure 3.10).
Separate nested ANOVA analyses were undertaken on the abundances of porifera and cnidarians
(Table 3.1). Similar to the other analyses, there were significant interactions detected between time
and distance. It was found that porifera abundance was significantly lower at 10 m in comparison to
> 2,000 m, during April 2012 only. For cnidarians, there was significantly higher abundance at the
50 m distance in comparison to other distances, during April 2012. There was also significantly
higher abundance at 10 m and 50 m sites in comparison to 100 m and > 2,000 m sites during April
2013.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 36 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.7 Abundance (percentage cover) of porifera (sponges) species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from
the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location diffuser (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 37 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.8 Abundance (percentage cover) of ascidian species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 38 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.9 Abundance (percentage cover) of cnidarian species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
December 2011
April 2012
October 2012
April 2013
Could not be surveyed
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 39 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.10 Abundance (percentage cover) of echinoderm species surveyed at Burwood Beach. Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 40 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 3.1 Nested factorial ANOVAs on all surveys. Locations were increasing distances from
the Burwood Beach WWTW biosolids diffuser with four site replicates surveyed within each
location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). Note: during December 2011 only the sites 100
SE, 100 SW, > 2,000 SE and > 2,000 SW were available for survey.
Algae Abundance Algae Richness
Source Effect DF MS F p MS F p
Time Fixed 3 0.48 9.92 0.00** 2.06 20.25 0.00**
Distance Fixed 3 0.34 10.40 0.00** 0.62 7.29 0.00**
Time*Distance Fixed 7 0.37 7.71 0.00** 0.58 5.75 0.00**
Site (Distance) Random 36 0.03 0.68 0.91 0.09 0.84 0.71
Time*Site (Distance) Random 90 0.05 0.90 0.71 0.10 0.85 0.82
Error 377 0.05
0.12
Transformation
arcsine
ln (x+1)
Algae Diversity Fauna Abundance
Source Effect DF MS F p MS F p
Time Fixed 3 0.07 18.23 0.00** 0.68 14.42 0.00**
Distance Fixed 3 0.02 6.30 0.00** 0.83 21.63 0.00**
Time*Distance Fixed 7 0.02 5.67 0.00** 0.19 4.19 0.00**
Site (Distance) Random 36 0.00 0.72 0.87 0.04 0.85 0.70
Time*Site (Distance) Random 90 0.00 0.68 0.99 0.05 0.65 0.99
Error 377 0.01
0.07
Transformation
ln (x+1)
arcsine
Fauna Richness Fauna Diversity
Source Effect DF MS F p MS F p
Time Fixed 3 2.97 13.89 0.00** 0.21 13.41 0.00**
Distance Fixed 3 2.32 11.53 0.00** 0.13 11.35 0.00**
Time*Distance Fixed 7 1.24 5.91 0.00** 0.09 5.79 0.00**
Site (Distance) Random 36 0.20 0.95 0.55 0.01 0.78 0.80
Time*Site (Distance) Random 90 0.21 0.85 0.82 0.02 0.91 0.71
Error 377 0.25
0.02
Transformation
ln (x+1)
ln (x+1)
Significant values: ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 41 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 3.1 continued. Nested factorial ANOVAs on all surveys. Locations were increasing
distances from the Burwood Beach WWTW biosolids diffuser with four site replicates
surveyed within each location (mean ± SE, N = 10 photoquadrats). Note: during December
2011 only the sites 100 SE, 100 SW, > 2,000 SE and > 2,000 SW were available for survey.
Red Algae Richness Red Algae Abundance
Source Effect DF MS F p MS F p
Time Fixed 3 1.91 19.24 0.00** 0.43 9.20 0.00**
Distance Fixed 3 0.46 5.48 0.00** 0.27 8.04 0.00**
Time*Distance Fixed 7 0.68 6.90 0.00** 0.40 8.69 0.00**
Site (Distance) Random 36 0.08 0.86 0.69 0.03 0.73 0.86
Time*Site (Distance) Random 90 0.10 0.85 0.83 0.05 0.88 0.77
Error
377 0.12
0.05
Transformation
ln (x+1)
arcsine
Porifera Abundance Cnidarian Abundance
Source Effect DF MS F p MS F p
Time Fixed 3 7.84 5.43 0.00** 0.14 12.50 0.00**
Distance Fixed 3 8.40 6.21 0.00** 0.27 20.10 0.00**
Time*Distance Fixed 7 4.91 3.36 0.00** 0.13 12.87 0.00**
Site (Distance) Random 36 1.34 0.92 0.59 0.01 1.31 0.15
Time*Site (Distance) Random 90 1.46 1.14 0.20 0.01 0.54 1.00
Error
377 1.27
0.02
Transformation
arcsine
arcsine
Significant values: ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 42 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
3.2 Multivariate Analyses of Reef Ecology
Multivariate analysis of reef ecology at Burwood Beach took into account all reef data (including both
flora and fauna assemblage parameters). Analyses were undertaken on each survey event and on
the total data set (i.e. all survey events combined).
3.2.1 December 2011
A MDS plot was generated in PRIMER 6 to compare similarities of reef assemblages between
distances for the December 2011 survey (Figure 3.11). The 100 m south sites and > 2,000 m south
sites were the only distances available for analysis for this survey. Visually, the MDS plot shows
some clustering of the individual photo replicates for the 100 m distance whereas photo replicates
from the > 2,000 m distance are more scattered, indicating that there was more dissimilarity between
them (Figure 3.11).
One-way ANOSIM indicated there was a significant difference in reef assemblages between the
100 m and > 2,000 m distances (R = 0.135, p < 0.05) (Appendix 2).
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Location> 2000 metres
100 metres
2D Stress: 0.2
Figure 3.11 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for December 2011.
Distances were dependent on reef availability.
Note: Photo replicates are displayed in the MDS plot rather than sites as replicates for December 2011, as 100
m and > 2,000 m were the only distances with two site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 43 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
3.2.2 April 2012
A MDS plot was generated in PRIMER 6 to compare similarities of reef assemblages among
distances for the April 2012 survey (Figure 3.12). A clear gradient effect can be seen in the plot
where the 10 m sites are most similar to each other and found to the left of the plot, and most
dissimilar to the > 2,000 m reference sites which are found on the right hand side of the plot. The
50 m and 100 m reef sites are clustered in the middle of the plot, between the outfall and reference
sites. In addition to the clear separation of distances, some separation of sites by direction is also
apparent (e.g. within the 10 m, 50 m and > 2,000 m sites). The southern reference sites and 50 m
sites are also separated from the rest of the sites along the y-axis, indicating some dissimilarity
between these and the other sites.
While a gradient effect can be seen, the site replicates within each distance group are quite widely
scattered, indicating that there is also some variation between sites within locations (i.e. distances).
One-way ANOSIM indicated that there was a significant difference between distances (R = 0.224,
p < 0.05) (Appendix 2). The 10 m distance was found to be significantly different from 50 m, 100 m
and > 2,000 m. The 100 m distance was also found to be different from > 2,000 m.
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Distance10 m
50 m
100 m
> 2000 m
10NE
10NW
10SE
10SW
50NE
50NW
50SE
50SW
100NE
100NW
100SE
100SW
> 2000m NE
> 2000m NW
> 2000m SE
> 2000m SW
2D Stress: 0.1
Figure 3.12 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for April 2012.
Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m, with four site replicates (N = 10
photoquadrats / site) per distance.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 44 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER, PRIMER 6) was used to determine the top ranked taxa that
contributed the most to the average similarity within locations in April 2012 (Table 3.2). At the 10 m
location, taxa from porifera and thallose red algae made the highest contributions to the average
similarity. At the 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m locations, the echinoderm, P. australis (feather star),
made the highest or second highest contribution to the average similarities between the locations.
The SIMPER analysis demonstrated that while the assemblages were different for each distance from
the outfall there were no strong patterns with distance from the outfall.
Table 3.2 SIMPER analysis results for April 2012. Taxa ranked in order of highest contribution
(using a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance (percentage cover) in
brackets within each location (distance). Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates.
Taxon Species / Description Location (distance from outfall)
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
Porifera encO 1 (0.62%)
Red Algae other thallose red algae 2 (0.72%) 2 (1.6%) 3 (1.78%)
Echinoderm Ptilometra australis 1 (9.83%) 1 (4.62%) 2 (9.12%)
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 2 (4.4%) 1 (18.22%)
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 3 (5.53%)
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 4 (1.1%) 3 (0.7%)
3.2.3 October 2012
A MDS plot was generated in PRIMER 6 to compare similarities of reef assemblages among
distances for the October 2012 survey (Figure 3.13). Again, a gradient of impact can be detected in
this plot. The > 2,000 m distance group is separated quite well from the rest of the sites while the
10 m, 50 m and 100 m sites seem to be more clustered together, indicating greater similarity.
Visually there is some weak clustering of the 10 m, 50 m and 100 m distances.
One-way ANOSIM indicated that there was a significant difference in reef assemblages between the
distances (R = 0.19, p < 0.05) (Appendix 2). However, the pairwise comparisons between distances
indicated there were no significant differences among all combinations, i.e. all distances were similar
to one another.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 45 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Distance10 m
50 m
100 m
> 2000 m
10NE10NW
10SE
10SW
50NE 50NW
50SE
50SW
100NE
100NW
100SE100SW
> 2000m NE
> 2000m NW
> 2000m SE
> 2000m SW
2D Stress: 0.12
Figure 3.13 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for October 2012.
Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
SIMPER (PRIMER 6) was used to determine the top 5 ranked taxa that contributed the most to the
average similarity within locations in October 2012 (
Table 3.3). The SIMPER analysis demonstrated that the patterns of assemblages were similar
among distances, with red algae taxa (encrusting coralline and thallose algae) ranked as the most or
second most important species for all distances. The echinoderm, P. australis, was also ranked at
the first or second most important species for the 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m distances. The
SIMPER analysis demonstrated that the assemblages were relatively similar between distances and
there was no strong pattern with distance from the outfall. Comparing the April 2012 and October
2012 SIMPER analyses, there were similar important species between the surveys with the exception
of two taxa from porifera.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 46 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 3.3 SIMPER analysis results for October 2012. Taxa ranked in order of highest
contribution (using a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance
(percentage cover) in brackets within each location (distance). Locations were increasing
distances from the Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates.
Taxon Species / Description
Location (distance from outfall)
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 1 (12.32%) 3 (4.88%) 2
(11.14%)
Red Algae other thallose red algae 2 (6.06%) 1 (5.85%) 2 (3.82%) 3 (2.1%)
Porifera encO 3 (1.54%)
Porifera encCR 4 (1.33%) 4 (1.52%) 3 (1.11%)
Echinoderm Ptilometra australis 2 (8.46%) 1 (8.85%) 1
(14.58%)
Porifera MArufY 4 (1.2%)
3.2.4 April 2013
A MDS plot was generated in PRIMER 6 to compare similarities of reef assemblages among
distances for the April 2013 survey (Figure 3.14). Similar to past survey events, a gradient of
distance can be seen in the plot. The 10 m distance is grouped separately from all the distances.
There is also clustering of the 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m distances.
One-way ANOSIM indicated that there was a significant difference in reef assemblages between the
distances (R = 0.27, p < 0.05) (Appendix 2). The pairwise comparisons between distances showed
that there were significant differences for all combinations, i.e. all distances were different from one
another.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 47 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Distance10 m
50 m
100 m
> 2000 m
10NE
10NW
10SE
10SW
50NE50NW
50SE
50SW
100NE
100NW
100SE
100SW
> 2000m NE
> 2000m NW
> 2000m SE
> 2000m SW
2D Stress: 0.11
Figure 3.14 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna) assemblages for April 2013.
Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10
photoquadrats / site) per distance.
SIMPER analysis shows the top ranked species that contributed the most to the average similarity
within distances during April 2013 (Table 3.4). The patterns of assemblages were quite different
among the distances, particularly for the 10 m distance. With the exception of encrusting coralline,
the ranked species at 10 m were unique to this distance. At 10 m, the cnidarian (Culicia tenella) was
the top ranked taxa. At 50 m, the top ranked taxa was the group of other thallose red algae, which
was also ranked second at 100 m and > 2,000 m. At 100m, the top ranked taxa was the echinoderm
P. australis and at > 2,000 m the top ranked taxa was encrusting coralline red algae.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 48 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Table 3.4 SIMPER analysis results for April 2013. Taxa ranked in order of highest contribution
(using a cut off of 90%) to the average similarity with average abundance (percentage cover) in
brackets within each location (distance). Locations were increasing distances from the
Burwood Beach biosolids diffuser with four site replicates.
Taxon Species / Description
Location (distance from outfall)
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 1 (9.2%)
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 2 (7.43%) 3 (5.15%) 1 (11.38%)
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 3 (0.3%)
Red Algae Red turf 4 (2.8%)
Red Algae Other thallose red algae 1 (6.14%) 2 (8.81%) 2 (4.6%)
Echinoderm Ptilometra australis 2 (7.03%) 1 (17.91%) 3 (9.41%)
Porifera encO 4 (0.9%) 5 (1.21%)
Ascidian Pyura spinifera 5 (1%)
Porifera MArufY 3 (1.4%)
Porifera encCR 4 (1.9%)
3.2.5 Overall Multivariate Analysis of Reef Data
Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) plots were used to compare overall patterns in Burwood Beach reef
assemblages by distance, survey event, season and direction across all survey events (Figure 3.15 -
Figure 3.18 respectively). The overall analysis by distance (Figure 3.15) indicates that there is some
degree of grouping of sites by distances. Each of the 10 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m distance sites tend
to be grouped together while the 50 m distance sites overlap over all the distances. There is also
moderate variability between site replicates within each distance. In Figure 3.16 analysis of reef
assemblages by survey event is shown. While some loose grouping is apparent within survey events,
a fair amount of overlapping between site replicates does occur. In general, no strong trends
between survey events could be detected. When data were presented by season (i.e. cool water:
December / October surveys, versus warm water: April surveys) some degree of separation between
seasons was apparent (Figure 3.17). Finally, when data were presented by direction from the
diffuser no overall trends were apparent (Figure 3.18).
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 49 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
A two-way ANOSIM, with distance and time as the main factors, indicated that there was a significant
difference in reef assemblages between the distances (R = 0.43, p < 0.05) and between sampling
events (R = 0.31, p < 0.05) (Appendix 2). The pairwise comparisons between distances showed that
10 m was significantly different in comparison to 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m. The 100 m distance
was also significantly different to > 2,000 m. Pairwise comparisons between the sampling events
showed that April 2013 was significantly different to all other sampling events, in addition April 2012
was different to October 2012.
A nested Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Variance (PERMANOVA), with time and distance as
the main factors, was undertaken and significant differences were found at all levels of the analysis
(Table 3.5). Pairwise comparisons between sampling events found that April 2013 was significantly
different to October 2012 and April 2012 and that April 2012 was significantly different to October
2012. However, a significant interaction with distance indicates that this pattern was not consistent
across all distances. A significant interaction between time and distance was due to a significant
difference between sampling events for distances of 10 m and 100 m. Pairwise comparisons found
that reef assemblages were significantly different for 10 m for all sampling events and that 100 m in
April 2012 in comparison to April 2013.
Table 3.5 Overall PERMANOVA analysis of reef assemblages across all survey events.
Factor Source DF MS Pseudo F Ratio
p-value Permutations
Time Fixed 3 3789.9 2.57 0.001** 998
Distance Fixed 3 6730.6 4.58 0.001** 995
Time*Distance Fixed 7 2577 1.75 0.002** 998
Error 38 1469.9
The main taxa seen to be driving the separation between the sites and sampling events were
predominantly encrusting coralline red algae, the cnidarian species C. tenella, other thallose red
algae and the echinoderm species P. australis. Encrusting coralline and C. tenella are the main taxa
which correlate with the 10 m site replicates clustered separately (i.e. that are separated from other
distances/sites) during April 2013. Other thallose red algae and P. australis are the main taxa
responsible for the separation of the other distances (i.e. 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m), but especially
for > 2,000 m during December 2011 and October 2012.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 50 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Distance10 m
50 m
100 m
> 2000 m
Encrusting Coraline
other thallose red algae
Culicia tenella
Ptilometra australis
2D Stress: 0.18
Figure 3.15 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages at
distances across all survey event. Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with
four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
Sampling EventDecember 2011
April 2012
October 2012
April 2013
Encrusting Coraline
other thallose red algae
Culicia tenella
Ptilometra australis
2D Stress: 0.18
Figure 3.16 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by survey
event. Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 51 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
photoquadrats / site) per
distance.
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
SeasonCool water
Warm water
Encrusting Coraline
other thallose red algae
Culicia tenella
Ptilometra australis
2D Stress: 0.18
Figure 3.17 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by season
(cool water: Dec 2011 / Oct 2012, warm water: April 2012 / 2013). Distances included 10 m,
50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10 photoquadrats / site) per distance.
Transform: Square root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity (+d)
DirectionSW
SE
NE
NW
Encrusting Coraline
other thallose red algae
Culicia tenella
Ptilometra australis
2D Stress: 0.18
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 52 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Figure 3.18 MDS analysis of reef (algae and fauna percentage cover) assemblages by
direction. Distances included 10 m, 50 m, 100 m and > 2,000 m with four site replicates (N = 10
photoquadrats / site) per distance.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 53 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
4 DISCUSSION
The aim of the Burwood Beach Reef Ecology Study was to determine the area of impact of the
Boulder Bay WWTW outfalls on macrobenthic reef communities by assessing the characteristics of
these communities along the effluent and biosolids dispersion pathway. Objectives of the study were
to assess:
Impacts on community structure of reef communities;
The extent or zone of impact;
The gradient of any impact on biological indicators (species or groups) depending on
distance from the outfall;
The broader ecological implications of any impact; and
Extrapolate findings to make a judgment on the likely impact of future discharges.
4.1 Restrictions to Surveys
During the December 2011 reef survey at Burwood Beach poor visibility and sand inundation limited
data collection to the 100 m and reference sites south of the outfall. The biosolids diffuser was not
switched off prior to the survey, making visibility extremely poor (i.e. zero visibility) at the 10 m sites
and poor at the 50 m sites. At other sites, very poor subsurface visibility was caused by natural
oceanic conditions.
In addition, a number of the reef sites which were intended to be surveyed in December 2011 were
found to be covered in sand when divers reached the bottom. This included all sites 50 m from the
outfall, the northern 100 m sites and the northern reference sites. The Burwood Beach effluent and
biosolids outfalls are located in a high energy coastal environment. In these receiving waters there
are high levels of natural sand movement which intermittently covers the patchy low profile subtidal
reefs which lie offshore. This phenomenon can also be observed frequently on the fringing shallow
subtidal reefs at nearby Merewether and Bar Beaches. The difficulty in locating stable subtidal reef
sites (i.e. issues with reef sites becoming intermittently covered in sand) has been noted by previous
consultants working on the Burwood Beach outfall (Pers. Comm. Hunter Water).
Poor underwater visibility (i.e. < 5 m) was again problematic during the October 2012 survey,
although all sites were able to be surveyed. In contrast, during the April 2012 and April 2013 surveys,
subsurface conditions were optimal (visibility ~ 5 - 10 m) and all sites were able to be surveyed.
4.2 General Trends
The abundance, richness and diversity of benthic flora and fauna were generally low during all
surveys at Burwood Beach. The multivariate analysis of community composition provided some
suggestion of changes with distance from the biosolids outfall. The MDS analysis showed some
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 54 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
grouping with distance and the assemblages at sites 10 m from the outfall were significantly different
to those at all other distances on some occasions (April 2012 and 2013). However, these
relationships were not consistent over time, with significant variability and interaction between sites
and between surveys. There was no consistent gradient in effect with distance that would indicate
differences in assemblages were attributable to the operation of the Burwood Beach outfalls.
4.3 Algae
The most dominant algae recorded at Burwood Beach were red algae. The red algae species
surveyed at Burwood Beach and reference reefs were predominantly encrusting coralline and thallose
red species. Very few brown or green algae species were recorded during this study. The only
occurrences were of the large brown macroalgae E. radiata (kelp) at southern and northern reference
sites in April 2012 and October 2012, and the green macroalgae C. filiformis, which was recorded at
the southern reference sites in April 2012 and 50 NW in October 2012.
The relative abundance of red algae at the survey sites is most likely related to depth and low light
climate. Red algae contain a pigment, phycoerythrin, which reflects red light and absorbs blue light.
Because blue light penetrates water to a greater depth than light of longer wavelengths, this pigment
allows red algae to photosynthesize and live at somewhat greater depths than either green or brown
algae (UCMP 2009).
There was considerable variation between surveys (both increases and decreases) in the coverage of
encrusting coralline red algae, particularly at sites at the outfall (10 m). Corallines, especially
encrusting forms, are slow growers and expand by just 0.1 to 80 mm a year (Aguirre et al. 2000). It is
therefore unlikely there would be significant increases, or recovery from significant decreases, in
coverage between biannual surveys. As such increases were observed, it suggests coralline algae at
the outfall sites may be being covered in fine sediments intermittently rather than disappearing
altogether. While it has been reported that the abundance of crustose coralline algae is
comparatively higher on reefs with low sediment deposition (Fabricius and De‟ath 2001; Connell
2005), they can tolerate a wide range of turbidities and nutrient concentrations (Aguirre et al. 2000).
The green macroalga C. filiformis, which was detected at a small number of study sites, is thought to
be an invasive species which has recently been observed to rapidly dominate algal assemblages in
shallow subtidal regions along the NSW coast (Cummins and Williamson 2008). Caulerpa filiformis
was first observed in the Hunter Central Rivers Catchment Management Area (HCRCMA) in 2008
during helicopter mapping trials and is thought to be a possible indicator of increased pollution
(Creese and Glasby 2008). This species usually forms extensive meadows on sand-covered rocks in
the lower intertidal and sublittoral fringes. The National Introduced Marine Pest Information System
(NIMPIS) reports that this species occurs to a maximum depth of 6 m on exposed reef and rock
platforms in the shallow subtidal (to 6 m depth) in Sydney, Australia (NIMPIS 2012). However, this
species has been recorded from sites much deeper than this (>20 m) in the local area (personal
observation). The species can form extensive dense patches up to several square metres in area,
which are usually free of other algae (NIMPIS 2012). The presence of this species on the deeper
reefs at Burwood Beach is not surprising considering its rapid colonisation of shallower subtidal
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 55 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
habitat in the area and potential relationship to pollution. Ongoing monitoring of the spread of this
species on deeper reefs around the Burwood Beach outfall would be useful.
There is no clear footprint or gradient of impact from the outfall on marine algae in the area. Weak
trends in abundance, richness and/or diversity were apparent for individual sampling events; however
these were not consistent across surveys.
4.4 Fauna
The marine fauna recorded at the Burwood Beach outfall and surrounding reefs was mainly
comprised of porifera (sponges), followed by cnidarians (hydroids, sea anemones, corals and sea
pens), echinoderms (sea stars, urchins and feather stars) and ascidians (sea squirts). Bryozoans
(moss animals) and molluscs were low in abundance and absent from the majority of sites.
BioAnalysis (2006) also reported that sponges were the most diverse and abundant assemblages at
Burwood Beach.
AWT (2003) noted that feather stars P. australis were abundant during that survey despite being
absent from all previous surveys. Ptilometra australis were again abundant during all surveys in the
current study. They were generally the most abundant macro-faunal species present at sites 50 m
and 100 m north of the outfall and at the southern reference sites.
Faunal abundances were generally low and there was high variation between sites, between
sampling periods and significant interactions between sites and surveys. No strong trends with
distance from the outfall could be seen for the overall faunal assemblage or for individual fauna taxa.
This is consistent with the results of previous studies, which also have found no evidence to suggest
that there were any impacts on marine biota which could be attributed to the discharges from the
Burwood Beach outfalls and recorded high spatial and temporal variability in fauna assemblages at
the Burwood Beach outfall (e.g. NSW EPA 1996; The Ecology Lab 1996, 1997, 1998, AWT 2003;
BioAnalysis 2006). They have often concluded that the spatial and temporal variability observed was
within the range of natural variation and alternative impact sources, such as the Merewether storm
water outlet, have been suggested.
4.5 Sand Movement
Although they did not necessarily attribute them to impacts from the outfall, these previous studies did
identify intermittent differences in the structure of benthic assemblages at the outfall compared to
control locations (NSW EPA 1996, The Ecology Lab 1996, 1997, 1998; AWT 2000, 2003; BioAnalysis
2006).
The first benthic reef study at Burwood Beach (NSW EPA 1996) compared reef communities at the
outfall before and after commissioning of the biosolids diffuser. This study did not detect any
significant changes in community structure that could be attributable to the discharge of the diffuser.
Subsequent surveys in May 1996, December 1996 and April 1998 (The Ecology Lab 1996, 1998)
identified possible short term impacts after commissioning of the biosolids diffuser; however, overall
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 56 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
there was no indication of a longer term impact of the diffuser on benthic communities at Burwood
Beach.
Monitoring by Australian Water Technologies in 1999/2000 (AWT 2000) identified an increase in silt
coverage and corresponding reduction in algae abundance and algae and fauna richness at the
outfall locations. These „impacts‟ were not evident in the following survey (AWT 2003).
The most recent surveys of benthic assemblages at Burwood Beach (BioAnalysis 2006) found there
was a higher percentage of silt cover and differences in the structure of benthic assemblages at the
outfall compared to control locations. These differences included lower algal richness and overall
higher diversity of taxa than the control locations. Due to the level of spatial and temporal variability
within and between locations, differences in assemblages could not be clearly attributed to the
operation of the Burwood Beach outfall. The intermittent reductions in population parameters at the
outfall identified by previous studies have usually coincided with periods of higher silt coverage at the
outfalls (AWT 2000; BioAnalysis 2006). Occasional widespread sediment inundation was also
observed during the present study, particularly in December 2011.
The Burwood Beach outfalls are located relatively nearshore on a high energy coast. In this type of
receiving environment, natural coastal processes, such as wave/current-induced longshore sand
transport and onshore / offshore sand erosion associated storm events, result in frequently changing
patterns of sand deposition and erosion, which intermittently cover the patchy low profile subtidal
reefs.
Intermittent sand movement over the low profile subtidal reefs at Burwood Beach acts as a
disturbance mechanism and most likely influences the structure of the benthic communities present
(Airoldi 2003). The impact of sand movement may be as, or more, important than the impact of the
outfall on the reef assemblages. Indeed, the prevalence of the silt matrix across most sites suggests
sedimentation is a principal driver of reef community structure in the region. Filamentous algae are a
significant component of the matrix and are indicative of heavy sediment accumulation, to which
many encrusting and erect algae are less tolerant (e.g. Connell 2005).
These temporary reef environments are unlikely to maintain stable flora and fauna communities.
Instead, reef communities are likely to be in a permanent state of heterogeneous flux, with decline in
areas of deposition and colonization/recovery on newly exposed reef in areas of erosion. This would,
to some extent, explain the high spatial and temporal variability observed in both current and previous
studies; however it also hinders the detection of any impact of the Burwood Beach outfall on reef
communities.
It is expected that any increases in future effluent and biosolids discharges from the Burwood Beach
WWTW outfalls will result in similar but more significant patterns in algae and faunal assemblage
parameters with distance from the outfall than have been recorded during this study. This is
discussed further in the Data Integration Report.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 57 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
5 CONCLUSIONS
During the December 2011 reef survey at Burwood Beach poor visibility and sand inundation
limited data collection to the 100 m and reference sites south of the outfall. All sites were
surveyed during April 2012, October 2012 and April 2013 surveys.
The abundance, richness and diversity of benthic flora and fauna were generally low during all
surveys at Burwood Beach.
The most dominant algae recorded at Burwood Beach were red algae. The occurrence of brown
macroalgae was limited to kelp (E. radiata) at the reference sites. The only green macroalgae
observed (C. filiformis) is thought to be an invasive species which has recently been observed to
rapidly dominate algal assemblages in shallow subtidal regions along the NSW coast.
The marine fauna recorded at the Burwood Beach outfall and surrounding reefs was mainly
comprised of porifera (sponges), followed by cnidarians (hydroids, sea anemones, corals and sea
pens), echinoderms (sea stars, urchins and feather stars) and ascidians (sea squirts).
The multivariate analysis of community composition provided some suggestion of changes with
distance from the outfalls on some occasions; however, these relationships were not consistent
over time.
Overall, there was no consistent gradient in effect with distance from the outfall that would
indicate the observed differences in assemblages were attributable to the operation of the
Burwood Beach outfall.
The current results are consistent with the results of previous studies.
It is likely that intermittent sand movement over the low profile subtidal reefs at Burwood Beach
influences the structure of the benthic communities present. This may contribute to the high
spatial and temporal variability observed in both current and previous studies and also obscure
any impact of the Burwood Beach outfall on reef communities.
It is expected that any increases in future effluent and biosolids discharges from the Burwood
Beach WWTW outfalls will result in similar but more significant patterns in algae and faunal
assemblage parameters with distance from the outfall than have been recorded during this study.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 58 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank those that assisted with the design and implementation of this study.
Consulting Environmental Engineers (CEE), Hunter Water, NSW EPA, NSW Marine Parks and NSW
DPI Fisheries assisted with the design of the sampling program and methodology. Sandy Bottom
Boat Charters provided a boat and skipper for field sampling. Divers from WorleyParsons undertook
all the sampling under the supervision of Judith Phillips, Commercial Diving Supervisor. All surveys
were undertaken under NSW Fisheries Permit # P110051-1.2 and NSW Marine Parks Permit
#2011/046.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 59 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
7 REFERENCES
Aguirre, J., Riding, R. and Braga, J.C. (2000). "Diversity of coralline red algae: origination and
extinction patterns from the Early Cretaceous to the Pleistocene". Paleobiology 26 (4), 651–667.
Airoldi, L. (2003). The effects of sedimentation on rocky coast assemblages. Oceanogr. Mar.
Biol. Annu. Rev. 41, 161-236
Andrew-Priestley, M. (2011). Molluscan biomonitor for quantification and impact assessment of
estrogenic and metallic contaminants in Australian marine ecosystems. PhD Thesis, Discipline of
Biological Sciences, University of Newcastle.
Andrew-Priestley, M., O‟Connor, W., Dunstan, R.H., Van Zwieten, L., Tyler, T., Kumar, A. and
MacFarlane, G. (2012). Estrogen mediated effects in the Sydney rock oyster, Saccostrea glomerata,
following exposure to sewage effluent containing estrogenic compounds and activity. Aquatic
Toxicology 120-121, 99-108.
AWT (2000). Benthos Survey at Boulder Bay and Burwood Beach Wastewater Treatment Works
Ocean Outfalls. Report October 2000.
AWT (2003). Benthos Survey at Burwood Beach Wastewater Treatment Works Ocean Outfall –
2002/03. Report June 2003.
AWT Ensight (1996). Toxicity tests for Burwood Beach WWTW. A report prepared for Hunter Water
Corporation by Australian Water Technologies for the 29th April to 2
nd May 1996, 31 pp.
AWT Ensight (1998). Bioassay testing of the Burwood Beach WWTW Biosolids Effluent, Report No.
98/29. January 1998.
BioAnalysis (2006). Patterns in assemblages of macrobenthos associated with the ocean outfalls at
Boulder Bay, Burwood Beach and Belmont Beach – ocean outfall benthos study. Editors: Roberts,
D.E. and Murray, S.R. BioAnalysis Pty Ltd. August 2006.
CEE (2007). Environmental Monitoring and Performance Review of Burwood Beach WWTW Biosolids
to Ocean Discharge, Report to Hunter Water Corporation.
CEE (2010). Design of the environmental assessment program for the ocean outfalls at Burwood
Beach. September 2010. Report to Hunter Water Corporation.
Connell, S.D. (2005). Assembly and maintenance of subtidal habitat heterogeneity: synergistic effects
of light penetration and sedimentation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 289, 53–61.
Creese, B. and Glasby, T. (2008). Mapping and Monitoring Rocky Reef Biota. NSW Coastal
Conference Presentation, 2008.
Cummins, D.O. and Williamson, J.E. (2008). The role of herbivory and fouling on the invasive green
alga Caulerpa filiformis in temperate Australian waters. Marine and Freshwater Research 59(4), 279–
290.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 60 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
ESA (2001). Ecotoxicity of Burwood Beach Biosolids Effluent, 2001. A report prepared by Ecotox
Services Australia for Hunter Water Corporation.
ESA (2005). Ecotoxicity of Burwood Beach Biosolids Effluent, 2005. A report prepared by Ecotox
Services Australia for Hunter Water Corporation.
Fabricius, K. and De'ath G. (2001). Environmental factors associated with the spatial distribution of
crustose coralline algae on the Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 19 (4), 303-309.
Green, R. H. (1979). 'Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists.' (Wiley:
Chichester.)
Kohler, K.E. and Gill, S.M. (2006). Coral Point Count with Excel extensions (CPCe): A Visual Basic
program for the determination of coral and substrate coverage using random point count
methodology. Computers and Geosciences, Vol. 32, No. 9, pp. 1259–1269.
NIMPIS (2012). Caulerpa filiformis reproduction and habitat, National Introduced Marine Pest
Information System, viewed 12 December 2012 <http://www.marinepests.gov.au/nimpis>.
NSW EPA (1994). Contaminants in Fish and Oysters from Newcastle Waters. Technical Report No.
94167 prepared by the New South Wales Environmental Protection Authority.
NSW EPA (1996). Hunter Environmental Monitoring Program 1992-1996. NSW Environment
Protection Authority Report, August 1996, 124 pp
Quinn, G. and Keough, M. (2002). Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists. Cambridge
Press, United Kingdom.
Roberts, D., Cummins, S., Davis, A. and Chapman, M. (2006). Structure and dynamics of sponge-
dominated assemblages on exposed and sheltered reefs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 321, 19-
30.
Roff, J. and Zacharias, M. (2011). Marine Conservation Ecology. MPG Books, UK.
Sinclair Knight Merz (1999). Toxicity Testing of Burwood Beach WWTW Biosolids. Report June 1999.
Sinclair Knight Merz (2000). Toxicity Testing of Burwood Beach WWTW Biosolids. Report 2000.
Sturrock, K. and Rocha, J (2000). A multidimensional scaling stress evaluation table. Field Methods
12, 49-60.
The Ecology Lab (1996). Impact of diffuser outfall at Burwood Beach. August 1996. Report prepared
for Hunter Water Corporation.
The Ecology Lab (1997). Impact of diffuser outfall at Burwood Beach. May 1997. Report prepared
for Hunter Water Corporation.
The Ecology Lab (1998). Impact of diffuser outfall at Burwood Beach. Ongoing monitoring – April
1998. July 1998. Report prepared for Hunter Water Corporation.
Thomas, D. (2002). Seaweeds. Life Series. Natural History Museum, London.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 61 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
UCMP (2009). "Introduction to the Rhodophyta" (Online) UCMP. Accessed December 12, 2012.
Underwood, A. (1991). Beyond BACI: Experimental Designs for Detecting Human Environmental
Impacts on Temporal Variations in Natural Populations. Australian Journal of Freshwater Research
42, 569-587.
Woelkerling, W.J. (1988). The coralline red algae: an analysis of the genera and subfamilies of
nongeniculate Corallinaceae. London: British Museum (Natural History).
Woelkerling, W.J. (1990). "An introduction". In K. M. Cole & R. G. Sheath. Biology of the Red Algae.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 1–6.
Water Research Laboratory (1999). Burwood Beach Ocean Outfall Monitoring and Modelling WRL
Report 98/54 March.
Water Research Laboratory (2007). Burwood Beach Monitoring and Modelling. Technical Report
2007/11. Editors: Glamore, W. C., Hawker, K. M., Miller, B. M. Water Research Laboratory, The
University of New South Wales, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 62 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Appendix 1 – Reef Fauna and Flora
Proportion Data
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 63 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Red Algae Amphiroa anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 1.20 0.00 0.40 4.43
Red Algae Corallina officinalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Peyssonnelia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Red turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Arthrocardia wardii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Other thallose red algae 2.50 2.83 12.40 2.80
Red Algae Other erect coralline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Lobophora variegata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Stypopodium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Zonaria diesingiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Ecklonia radiata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Brown Algae Zonaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Other thallose brown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Brown turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Halopteris sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Padina sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 64 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Green Algae Caulerpa filiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seagrass Posidonia australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge other ENCrufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscO 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00
Sponge PAPsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Halopsamma laminaefavosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25
Sponge ENCsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLoscY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFspiW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 65 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge Cliona sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - flat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - Strepsichoraia? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufY 0.00 1.60 0.40 11.93
Sponge maBR barrel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGspi 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encY on coralline algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encG2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Psammocinia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 1.20 0.00 1.74 0.00
Sponge encPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGret 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flfW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 66 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge encO 0.83 0.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge encY 0.00 0.00 0.40 1.20
Sponge ENCrufG/PPL 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Ircinia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGruf 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encBLK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge enc small white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maWosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encPPL2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MaCRruf 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glBL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARrufPUR2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Tethya sp. 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MarufP 1.65 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 67 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00
Sponge FLFoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.63
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUPspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW2 (with brown edges) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge White folded sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Sycon sp 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENretBR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Callyspongia sp1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 68 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW3 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Grey ridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encCR 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Anthothoe albocincta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Solanderia fusca 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian White soft coral 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00
Cnidarian Hydroid on sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 69 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Cnidarian Capnella sp.? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Acabaria spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Halopteris campanula 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Pale hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Dark hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Coscinarea mcneilli 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Plesiastrea versipora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Erythropodium hicksoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Zoanthus sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Riterella sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polycitor giganteus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Ascidian Cnemidocarpa pedata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82
Ascidian Botrylloides anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Ascidia sydneiensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Clavelina meridionalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Pyura spinifera 0.00 2.40 2.40 1.20
Ascidian Herdmania grandis 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 70 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Ascidian Fuzzy white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyclinum sp. (sandy ascidian) 1.20 0.00 6.75 0.00
Ascidian Didemnid ascidians 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyandrocarpa lapidosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Botrylloides leachii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Amathia wilsoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Brown hard bryozoan 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.83
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Celleporaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Hornera sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Triphllozoon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Fromia polypora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Plecaster decanus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Ptilometra australis 8.18 0.00 3.20 2.40
Echinodermata Comanthus trichoptera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Asterodiscides truncatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Centrostephanus rodgersii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 71 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Mollusca Aphelodoris varia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mollusca Australium tentoriiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annelida Hard white branched serpulid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
* All 10 m sites, 50 m sites, northern 100 m sites and reference sites were unable to be surveyed during December 2011 due to sand / underwater visibility issues.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 72 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Red Algae Amphiroa anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.20 14.00 18.10 0.00 0.00 1.25 2.08 1.60 38.55 2.40 2.00
Red Algae Corallina officinalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Peyssonnelia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Red turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Arthrocardia wardii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Other thallose red algae 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 1.20 0.00 0.80 1.20 0.00 4.40 0.80 4.40 0.00 1.60 2.40
Red Algae Other erect coralline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Lobophora variegata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Stypopodium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Zonaria diesingiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Ecklonia radiata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.60 0.00 0.00 0.80
Brown Algae Zonaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Other thallose brown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Brown turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Halopteris sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Padina sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 73 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Green Algae Caulerpa filiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seagrass Posidonia australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 1.60
Sponge Other ENCrufG 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPsmoY 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00
Sponge Halopsamma laminaefavosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLoscY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFspiW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 74 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge Cliona sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - flat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - Strepsichoraia? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maBR barrel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGspi 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encY on coralline algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encG2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
Sponge Psammocinia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00
Sponge encPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGret 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flfW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 75 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge encO 0.80 0.40 0.40 0.93 0.40 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.40 2.48 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.80
Sponge encY 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.80 4.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ENCrufG/PPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 2.42 0.40
Sponge Ircinia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encBLK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge enc small white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maWosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encPPL2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MaCRruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glBL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARrufPUR2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Tethya sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge MarufP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 76 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00
Sponge CUPspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW2 (with brown edges) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge White folded sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Sycon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENretBR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80
Sponge ENCoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Callyspongia sp1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 77 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ENCoscW3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Sponge Grey ridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.80 2.00 2.40
Sponge MAoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Anthothoe albocincta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Solanderia fusca 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian White soft coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Hydroid on sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.80 1.60 1.60 0.40 1.20 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 78 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Cnidarian Capnella sp.? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Acabaria spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Halopteris campanula 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Pale hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.20 8.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Dark hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Coscinarea mcneilli 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Plesiastrea versipora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Erythropodium hicksoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Zoanthus sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Riterella sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.80
Ascidian Polycitor giganteus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Cnemidocarpa pedata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Ascidian Botrylloides anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40
Ascidian Ascidia sydneiensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Clavelina meridionalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Pyura spinifera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Herdmania grandis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 79 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Ascidian Fuzzy white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyclinum sp. (sandy ascidian) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Didemnid ascidians 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyandrocarpa lapidosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Botrylloides leachii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Amathia wilsoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Brown hard bryozoan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.80
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Celleporaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Hornera sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Triphllozoon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Fromia polypora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Plecaster decanus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Ptilometra australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.40 9.20 0.00 0.00 7.67 3.20 6.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 27.53 30.80
Echinodermata Comanthus trichoptera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Asterodiscides truncatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00
Echinodermata Centrostephanus rodgersii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 80 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Mollusca Aphelodoris varia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mollusca Australium tentoriiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annelida Hard white branched serpulid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 81 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Red Algae Amphiroa anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 2.83 21.35 23.47 0.44 1.25 0.00 12.93 5.35 0.00 1.60 0.00 7.20 1.60 38.55 2.40 2.00
Red Algae Corallina officinalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Peyssonnelia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Red turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Arthrocardia wardii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Other thallose red algae 2.02 2.40 3.20 17.78 4.43 6.53 3.23 9.20 1.60 8.47 3.60 1.60 4.40 0.00 1.60 2.40
Red Algae Other erect coralline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Lobophora variegata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Stypopodium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Zonaria diesingiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Ecklonia radiata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.60 0.00 0.00 0.80
Brown Algae Zonaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Other thallose brown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Brown turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Halopteris sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Padina sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 82 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Green Algae Caulerpa filiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seagrass Posidonia australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 1.60
Sponge Other ENCrufG 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPsmoY 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00
Sponge Halopsamma laminaefavosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLoscY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFspiW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 83 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge Cliona sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - flat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - Strepsichoraia? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufY 0.40 3.20 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 2.40 0.80 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maBR barrel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGspi 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encY on coralline algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encG2 0.00 1.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
Sponge Psammocinia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00
Sponge encPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGret 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flfW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 84 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge encO 2.42 0.40 2.00 1.33 0.40 0.00 1.60 0.40 0.00 2.42 1.60 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.80
Sponge encY 0.80 5.65 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ENCrufG/PPL 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 2.42 0.40
Sponge Ircinia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encBLK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge enc small white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maWosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encPPL2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MaCRruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glBL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARrufPUR2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Tethya sp. 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge MarufP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 85 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiO 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00
Sponge CUPspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW2 (with brown edges) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge White folded sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Sycon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENretBR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80
Sponge ENCoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Callyspongia sp1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 86 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge ENCoscW3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Sponge Grey ridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encCR 0.40 0.80 1.20 3.11 1.23 0.40 2.05 2.40 0.43 0.82 2.00 1.20 0.40 0.80 2.00 2.40
Sponge MAoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Anthothoe albocincta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Solanderia fusca 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian White soft coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Hydroid on sponge 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 0.82 2.42 1.60 0.00 0.83 1.62 0.82 0.82 1.20 0.40 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 87 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Cnidarian Capnella sp.? 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Acabaria spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Halopteris campanula 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Pale hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 0.00 1.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Dark hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Coscinarea mcneilli 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Plesiastrea versipora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Erythropodium hicksoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Zoanthus sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Riterella sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.80
Ascidian Polycitor giganteus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Cnemidocarpa pedata 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Ascidian Botrylloides anceps 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40
Ascidian Ascidia sydneiensis 0.00 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Clavelina meridionalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Pyura spinifera 0.40 2.00 0.00 0.44 2.14 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Herdmania grandis 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 88 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Ascidian Fuzzy white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyclinum sp. (sandy ascidian) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Didemnid ascidians 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyandrocarpa lapidosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Botrylloides leachii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Amathia wilsoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Brown hard bryozoan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.80
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Celleporaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Hornera sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Triphllozoon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Fromia polypora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Plecaster decanus 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Ptilometra australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.89 11.54 22.32 0.00 0.00 4.80 12.98 16.40 1.20 0.00 0.00 27.53 30.80
Echinodermata Comanthus trichoptera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Asterodiscides truncatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00
Echinodermata Centrostephanus rodgersii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 89 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Mollusca Aphelodoris varia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mollusca Australium tentoriiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annelida Hard white branched serpulid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 90 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Red Algae Amphiroa anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Encrusting coralline 3.23 2.00 3.20 21.30 1.20 0.40 16.57 2.45 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 20.40 23.45 1.67 0.00
Red Algae Corallina officinalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Peyssonnelia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Red turf 1.20 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Arthrocardia wardii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Red Algae Other thallose red algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 10.10 2.40 8.07 4.80 12.00 10.45 8.00 6.40 2.40 4.82 4.80
Red Algae Other erect coralline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Lobophora variegata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Stypopodium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Zonaria diesingiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Ecklonia radiata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Zonaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Other thallose brown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Brown turf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Halopteris sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brown Algae Padina sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 91 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Green Algae Caulerpa filiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Green Algae Codium sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seagrass Posidonia australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 2.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge other ENCrufG 0.40 1.20 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.90 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.40 0.80 0.40
Sponge Cup - thick grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge MAoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Halopsamma laminaefavosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCsmoY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge GLoscY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Sponge flPK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFspiW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 92 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge Cliona sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - flat 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUrufPPL - Strepsichoraia? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 1.20 1.62 0.40 2.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge maBR barrel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maGspi 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encY on coralline algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encG2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.40 0.00
Sponge Psammocinia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 1.60 0.00 0.40
Sponge encGret 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge flfW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 93 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge encO 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 1.20 1.62 0.40 0.40 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.40 0.83 2.00
Sponge encY 0.42 1.20 0.00 0.40 1.20 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCrufG/PPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Ircinia spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00
Sponge maGruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge encBLK 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encGosc2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge enc small white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge maWosc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encPPL2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MaCRruf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glBL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARrufPUR2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge tethya sp 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MarufP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 94 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 1.20 0.00 2.40
Sponge MAspiO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge CUPspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge FLFoscW2 (with brown edges) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge PAPrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MArufG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCrufY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge White folded sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAspiG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Sycon sp 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENretBR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAsmoPPL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENoscO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.40
Sponge Callyspongia sp1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 95 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Sponge MAspiCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00
Sponge MAoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscG 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ENCoscW3 2.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge ARBrufCR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge glG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Grey ridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge Cup - thick red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge encCR 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.40 2.40 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 2.40 0.40 2.82 2.00
Sponge MAoscW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Sponge ARBrufO3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Anthothoe albocincta 1.20 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Solanderia fusca 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian White soft coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Hydroid on sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Tubastrea sp. 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.80 1.62 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.80 2.80
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 96 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Cnidarian Capnella sp.? 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Acabaria spp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60
Cnidarian Halopteris campanula 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Cnidarian Pale hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Cnidarian Culicia tenella 3.25 1.60 11.00 20.95 0.00 0.40 16.13 1.22 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Dark hydroid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Coscinarea mcneilli 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Plesiastrea versipora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Erythropodium hicksoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cnidarian Zoanthus sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Riterella sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polycitor giganteus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Cnemidocarpa pedata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00
Ascidian Botrylloides anceps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Ascidia sydneiensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Clavelina meridionalis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Pyura spinifera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 2.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Herdmania grandis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 97 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
ascidian Fuzzy white 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyclinum sp. (sandy ascidian) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Didemnid ascidians 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Polyandrocarpa lapidosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ascidian Botrylloides leachii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Amathia wilsoni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Brown hard bryozoan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Celleporaria sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Hornera sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Triphllozoon sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bryozoa Family Catenicellidae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Fromia polypora 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Plecaster decanus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Ptilometra australis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.53 15.60 0.00 0.00 15.60 36.80 2.00 17.23 0.00 0.00 17.63 20.00
Echinodermata Comanthus trichoptera 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Asterodiscides truncatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Echinodermata Centrostephanus rodgersii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 98 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Group Taxa
10 m 50 m 100 m > 2,000 m
NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW NE NW SE SW
Mollusca Aphelodoris varia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Mollusca Australium tentoriiformis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annelida Hard white branched serpulid 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 99 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Appendix 2 – Statistical Output: ANOSIM
Analyses
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 100 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
December 2011
Multivariate analysis of similarities among locations in the abundance of reef assemblages during
December 2011.
Global ANOSIM Test
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.135
Significance level of sample statistic: 0.8%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from a large number)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 7
April 2012
Multivariate analysis of the similarities among locations in the abundance of reef assemblages during
April 2012.
Global ANOSIM Test
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.523
Significance level of sample statistic: 0.3%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from a large number)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 2
Distance pairwise comparisons
R Statistic
Significance Level %
Possible Permutations
Actual Permutations
Number > Observed
10 m, 50 m 0.698 2.9 Very large 999 1
10 m, 100 m 0.792 2.9 Very large 999 1
10 m, > 2,000 m 0.948 2.9 Very large 999 1
50 m, 100 m 0.156 20 Very large 999 7
50 m, > 2,000 m 0.063 40 Very large 999 14
100 m, > 2,000 m 0.542 2.9 Very large 999 1
* Significant pairwise comparisons are highlighted in bold.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 101 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
October 2012
Multivariate analysis of the similarities among locations in the abundance of reef assemblages during
October 2012.
Global ANOSIM Test
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.19
Significance level of sample statistic: 4%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from a large number)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 39
Distance pairwise comparisons
R Statistic
Significance Level %
Possible Permutations
Actual Permutations
Number > Observed
10 m, 50 m -0.031 48.6 35 35 17
10 m, 100 m 0.292 8.6 35 35 3
10 m, > 2,000 m 0.135 25.7 35 35 9
50 m, 100 m 0.083 22.9 35 35 8
50 m, > 2,000 m 0.135 20 35 35 7
100 m, > 2,000 m 0.313 8.6 35 35 3
* Significant pairwise comparisons are highlighted in bold.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 102 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
April 2013
Multivariate analysis of the similarities among locations in the abundance of reef assemblages during
April 2013.
Global ANOSIM Test
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.572
Significance level of sample statistic: 0.1%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from 2627625)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 0
Distance pairwise comparisons
R Statistic
Significance Level %
Possible Permutations
Actual Permutations
Number > Observed
10 m, 50 m 0.49 5.7 35 35 2
10 m, 100 m 1 2.9 35 35 1
10 m, > 2,000 m 0.875 2.9 35 35 1
50 m, 100 m 0.323 2.9 35 35 1
50 m, > 2,000 m 0.021 40 35 35 14
100 m, > 2,000 m 0.49 2.9 35 35 1
* Significant pairwise comparisons are highlighted in bold.
HUNTER WATER
REEF ECOLOGY STUDY
BURWOOD BEACH WWTW
Page 103 301020-03413 : 103 FINAL DRAFT: September 2013
Overall (all survey events combined)
Multivariate analysis of the similarities among locations in the abundance of reef assemblages at
during all survey events.
Global two-way ANOSIM Test
Between sampling events:
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.422
Significance level of sample statistic: 0.1%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from a large number)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 0
Distance pairwise comparisons
R Statistic
Significance Level %
Possible Permutations
Actual Permutations
Number > Observed
> 2,000 m, 100 m 0.428 0.1 128625 999 0
> 2,000 m, 10 m 0.618 0.1 42875 999 0
> 2,000 m, 50 m 0.128 12.9 42875 999 128
100 m, 10 m 0.705 0.1 42875 999 0
100 m, 50 m 0.188 6.2 42875 999 61
10 m, 50 m 0.389 0.9 42875 999 8
* Significant pairwise comparisons are highlighted in bold.
Between distances:
Sample statistic (Global R): 0.422
Significance level of sample statistic: 0.1%
Number of permutations: 999 (Random sample from a large number)
Number of permuted statistics greater than or equal to Global R: 0
Distance pairwise comparisons
R Statistic
Significance Level %
Possible Permutations
Actual Permutations
Number > Observed
December 2011, April 2012 0.196 21.8 225 225 49
December 2011, October 2012 0.393 6.2 225 225 14
December 2011, April 2013 0.625 1.3 225 225 3
April 2012, October 2012 0.234 3.6 1500625 999 35
April 2012, April 2013 0.417 0.7 1500625 999 6
October 2012, April 2013 0.206 3.9 1500625 999 38
* Significant pairwise comparisons are highlighted in bold.