Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the ...dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Eberhard etal...

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches

in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area:

Establishment Report

Rolan Eberhard, Chris Sharples, Nick Bowden & Michael Comfort

August 2015

Department of Primary

Industries, Parks, Water

& Environment

Natural & Cultural

Heritage Division,

Geoconservation Section

Nature Conservation

Report Series 15/3

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area:

Establishment Report

Rolan Eberhard, Chris Sharples, Nick Bowden & Michael Comfort August 2015

Natural and Cultural Heritage Division Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment

Hobart

i

Recommended citation: Eberhard, R. Sharples, C. Bowden, N. & Comfort, M. (2015).

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmania Wilderness World

Heritage Area: Establishment Report. Nature Conservation Report Series 15/3. Natural &

Cultural Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment,

Hobart.

ISSN: 1441-0680 (book)

ISSN: 1838-7403 (web)

Copyright 2015 Crown in the right of State of Tasmania

Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as

permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any means without

permission from the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.

Published by the Natural & Cultural Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries,

Parks, Water & Environment.

GPO Box 44 Hobart, 7001.

Mapping datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 (GDA94) and Australian Height

Datum (Tasmania). Map grids and coordinates cited in the text refer to the Universal

Transverse Mercator Grid, Zone 55, Map Grid of Australia, 1994 (MGA94).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge and thank the following agencies and individuals for their

support: Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service, Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania, Rob Walch

(Walch Optics Pty Ltd), University of Tasmania (Spatial Science, Antarctic Climate &

Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre), Bronwyn Tilyard (Natural & Cultural Heritage

Division, DPIPWE), Malcolm Crawford (Land Information Services Division, DPIPWE),

Ralph Bottrill (Mineral Resources Tasmania), Dave Paton and Dave Pullinger (both

Helicopter Resources Pty Ltd). Furthermore, we would like to record our appreciation of

Emma Lee, who collaborated with us in the field as an Aboriginal Tasmanian and member of

the National Parks & Wildlife Advisory Committee.

All photos by Rolan Eberhard except where noted otherwise in the captions.

Cover photo: Aerial view of a large sandblow at Towterer Beach, Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. This beach faces northwest and is exposed to prevailing onshore winds. An active sandblow has breached the dune backing the beach and extends over 0.5 km beyond it into vegetated transgressive dunes.

ii

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 3

ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 4

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5

1.1. Background ................................................................................................................................................ 5 1.2. Project objectives and scope ................................................................................................................... 7 1.3. Respecting indigenous culture ................................................................................................................ 8

2. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 9

2.1. Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.2. Shoreline profiles.....................................................................................................................................10 2.3. Shoreline stability status .........................................................................................................................16 2.4. Vertical aerial imagery.............................................................................................................................19 2.5. Oblique aerial imagery ............................................................................................................................19 2.6. Ground-based imagery ...........................................................................................................................20 2.7. Sand mineralogy and granulometry ......................................................................................................23 2.8. Archiving of data .....................................................................................................................................23

3. STUDY SITES ........................................................................................................................ 24

3.1. Mulcahy Bay .............................................................................................................................................24 3.2. Wreck Bay ................................................................................................................................................28 3.3. Stephens Bay ............................................................................................................................................31 3.4. Window Pane Bay ...................................................................................................................................35 3.5. Cox Bight ..................................................................................................................................................40 3.6. Prion Beach ..............................................................................................................................................43

4. DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 46

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 47

APPENDIX 1: State permanent marks ........................................................................................... 50

APPENDIX 2: Shoreline profiles .................................................................................................... 57

Mulcahy Bay ........................................................................................................................................................57 Wreck Bay ...........................................................................................................................................................61 Stephens Bay .......................................................................................................................................................65 Window Pane Bay ..............................................................................................................................................70 Cox Bight ............................................................................................................................................................73 Prion Beach .........................................................................................................................................................77

APPENDIX 3: Sand mineralogy and particle size analysis ............................................................ 84

APPENDIX 4: Metadata ................................................................................................................. 97

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area __________________________________________________________________________________________

3

SUMMARY

This report documents an approach to monitoring the erosion status of selected beaches within

the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (TWWHA). A key element of the approach

is the establishment of shoreline profile transects at a sample of major oceanic beaches. The

methodology follows that of the Tasmanian Shoreline Monitoring and Archiving Project

(TASMARC), which monitors other Tasmanian beaches but hitherto without representation

of sites between Ocean Beach on the mid-west coast and Recherche Bay on the lower south-

east coast. This coastal reach is largely within the TWWHA and is one of the most exposed

and least disturbed by recent human activity in the Australian region.

Shoreline profiles have been surveyed across a total of 24 transects at six beaches, namely

Mulcahy Bay, Wreck Bay, Stephens Bay, Window Pane Bay, Cox Bight and Prion Beach.

Transects extend to sea level from marked points 50-100 m inland. The surveys are referenced

to geodetic marks (State Permanent Marks) established for this project. Additionally, a

qualitative classification of the erosion status of the seaward faces of the backing dunes was

developed and applied at each site. The resultant shoreline stability status maps complement

the shoreline profiles in characterising the geomorphic condition of the beach systems.

The initial survey results initiate a potential time series of data which can be used to quantify

rates and scales of change in sandy coastal landforms. This will assist in assessing and

responding to the effects of climate change and sea level rise on the coastal systems within the

TWWHA. Aerial and ground based digital images have been collected, augmenting the

shoreline profile and stability status datasets as a record of shoreline condition.

Annual sampling of shoreline profiles and stability status is suggested as a reasonable

minimum for an initial period. The survey marks used are potentially long lasting and create

opportunities for longer-term monitoring, potentially in conjunction with high resolution

aerial imagery and other techniques.


4

ABBREVIATIONS

AHD Australian Height Datum

AUSPOS Geoscience Australia Online GPS Processing Service

BP Before Present (1/1/1950 by convention)

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation

DPIPWE Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment

GDA94 Geodetic Datum of Australia 1994

GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS Global Positioning System

GSD Ground Sample Distance

IMU Inertia Measurement Unit

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging

LOI Loss on Ignition

MGA94 Map Grid of Australia 1994

MRT Mineral Resources Tasmania

RBB Rhythmic Bar and Beach

RTK Real Time Kinematic

SfM Structure from Motion

SPM State Permanent Mark

TASI Tasmanian Aboriginal Sites Index

TASMARC Tasmanian Shoreline Monitoring and Archiving Project

TBR Transverse Bar and Rip

TWWHA Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area

XRD X-ray Diffraction


5

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

It has been established that relative sea level on the Tasmanian coast has risen at a rate of

about 0.8-1.5 mm/year since the 19th

century (Hunter et al. 2003, Hunter 2008). This is

commensurate with rate estimates from elsewhere in the Australian region and globally

(Church et al. 2006, Church et al. 2013). The rate of rise has increased during the latter part of

the 20th

century and is projected to increase further during the 21st century. Projections

reported in the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC) imply that that global mean sea level may be 0.4-0.8 m higher by 2100 (Church et al.

2013).

Sea level rise implies a spatial shift in the location of the shoreline on the majority of coastal

reaches. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, low lying coastal areas will be flooded as the

sea moves to a higher level. Secondly, wave action will cause erosion, compounding the

direct effect of sea level rise by causing shoreline retreat. The scale of shoreline recession

under these conditions is potentially up to an order of a magnitude greater than the rise in sea

level (Bruun 1962, Zhang et al. 2004). The actual geomorphic response on a given coastal

reach will be influenced by many local factors – these will determine whether the net

trajectory is one of recession, accretion or statis.

The Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (TWWHA) coastline is a contiguous

oceanic reach totalling 755 km, from Elliot Bay on the west coast to Recherche Bay on the

lower south-east (Figure 1). The coastline is both visually spectacular and host to some of the

key natural and cultural values of the property. It has been described as the ‘the most

extensive temperate-zone coast of its type [globally] displaying ongoing rocky and sandy

coastal geomorphic forms and processes unmodified by [post industrial] human activities…’

(Sharples 2003). Moreover, the south-western coast of Tasmania is exposed to the most

energetic and stormy swell wave climate of any Australian coast because it is Australia’s

southernmost open coast and most directly exposed to large swells generated by extra-tropical

storms in the Southern Ocean (Hemer et al. 2008).

Coastal erosion linked to sea level rise has been identified as a significant threat to the

geodiversity, flora, fauna and cultural values of the TWWHA (Prince 1992, Rudman et al.

2008, Brown 2010, Sharples 2011, Mallick 2013). Approximately 16% of the TWWHA coast

is formed in unconsolidated sandy sediments which are vulnerable to the effects of sea level

rise (and potentially other processes associated with climate change). Most sandy beaches on

the south-west coast currently exhibit actively-eroding dune fronts and have done so for at

least the last few decades (Baynes 1990, Cullen 1998). The very high wave energy to which

this coast is exposed raises the possibility that the persistent erosion already evident may be

an early response to recent sea-level rise, which to date is less clearly expressed on many

lower-energy swell-exposed coasts. Moreover, the fact that other anthropogenic disturbances

are largely absent from the TWWHA coast means that its response to sea level rise and

climatic changes may be easier to identify and study, due to the lack of anthropogenic ’noise’

in the coastal response signal. Hence, gaining a better understanding of the causes and

ongoing trends of erosion of Tasmania’s south-west beaches may prove an important

contribution to understanding the response of shorelines to sea level rise globally.

The work described in this report establishes a system for collecting quantitative data on the

erosion status of selected beaches within the TWWHA. It is envisaged that this will create a


6

context for establishing their trajectories of erosion and/or sedimentation, over timescales of

years to decades. The information obtained will support a variety of objectives, especially

those related to tracking and responding to the effects of sea level rise and climate change on

the environment.

The project supports priorities identified in the TWWHA Research and Monitoring Priorities

2013-2018 document (DPIPWE, 2013; see Table 1). It complements biodiversity monitoring

projects under the same strategy and gives partial effect to the recommendations of earlier

reports emphasising the need for better data on coastal sand dynamics within the TWWHA

(Baynes 1990, Cullen 1998, Sharples 2003, Horton et al. 2008, Sharples 2011).

TWWHA RESEARCH & MONITORING PRIORITIES 2013-2018

Theme 1: IDENTIFICATION Objective 1: Undertake systematic identification and assessment of biodiversity and geodiversity conservation values in the TWWHA

Actions Duration Priority

1.1 Systematically identify, assess and document geodiversity and geoconservation values in the TWWHA, prioritising outstanding universal values and those values most at risk of impacts from current and potential threats).

Long term High

Theme 2: MONITORING and REPORTING Objective 2: Review existing monitoring programs and establish integrated baseline environmental monitoring programs to report on the status and trends of natural values and threats

Actions Duration Priority

2.1 Develop and implement a system of monitoring and reporting that integrates data from flora, fauna and earth sciences to inform management of the state and trends of TWWHA natural values and ecosystems.

Long term High

2.2 World Heritage Ecosystem Baseline Studies (WHEBS): establish integrated long term monitoring of TWWHA natural values and processes focusing on research that informs management and improves understanding of ecosystem processes

Long term High

2.3 Continue to identify and review knowledge gaps to ensure adequate monitoring of priority TWWHA natural values and threats.

Long term Medium

2.4 Characterise the current condition and monitor geodiversity values on a thematic basis (e.g. karst, coastal, fluvial, glacial).

Long term Medium

Theme 3: CONSERVATION, PROTECTION and REHABILITATION – identify and investigate impacts on TWWHA natural values and processes, and where possible develop methods to mitigate impacts Objective 5: Investigate and where possible implement options to build resilience of natural values to climate change.

5.1 Increase understanding of geodiversity elements, taxa, taxonomic groups and ecosystems that are under immediate threat from climate change.

Long term Medium

5.2 Develop quantitative methods to assess the response of geodiversity to climate change and apply these to values at risk. Conduct targeted research to document geodiversity values likely to be destroyed or modified through climate change.

Long term High

Table 1: TWWHA Research and Monitoring Priorities 2013-2018 relevant to this project (DPIPWE 2013).


7

Figure 1: South-west Tasmania, indicating the principal beaches and selected other features mentioned in the text.

1.2. Project objectives and scope

The objective for this project in 2014-2015 was to establish a baseline for monitoring

changes in the morphology of a representative selection of oceanic beaches and associated

dunes in the TWWHA. The data collected will contribute to a dataset covering a broader

sample of Tasmanian beaches being compiled by the Tasmanian Shoreline Mapping and

Archiving project (TASMARC). Analysis will be undertaken in collaboration with research

currently underway at the University of Tasmania.

Six TWWHA beaches were selected for detailed monitoring, representing two beaches each

from the following coastal reaches: Elliot Bay to Port Davey, Port Davey to Southwest Cape,

Southwest Cape to Southeast Cape. The beaches are listed at Table 2; their locations are

shown at Figure 1.

The selection samples some of the principal beaches of the TWWHA, which contains 149

beaches according to the survey of the beaches of Tasmania by Short (2006). It provides a

geographic spread of sites with representation of outstanding features such as the Prion Beach

sandspit. Vulnerability to erosional recession is considered high in all cases, based on

mapping of indicative coastal vulnerability to climate change and sea level rise by Sharples

(2006). Sharples classifies these shorelines in his category of ‘potentially susceptible to

erosion and significant recession due to sea level rise’.


8

Location Reference no. (Short 2006) Length (km)

Mulcahy Bay T691 1.8

Wreck Bay T686-687 1.7

Stephens Bay T626 2.4

Window Pane Bay T616 1.5

Cox Bight T602-603 3.6

Prion Beach T578 5.0 Table 2: Beaches selected for shoreline monitoring. Length is the combined length of component beach segments, as listed by Short (2006).

1.3. Respecting indigenous culture

The TWWHA coastline is rich in the physical evidence of traditional indigenous culture. This

is especially clear where dune deflation has exposed former campsites and associated

middens. The middens typically comprise dense accumulations of shell, bone and worked

stone, in some cases occupying many hundreds of square metres. Thus, the physical content

of cultural presence is integral to the fabric of the coastal landforms being monitored. The

coastline also contains rock art sites, occupation shelters, hut depressions, burial sites, ochre

sources and stone quarries. It is anticipated that the monitoring results will assist in assessing

the effects of coastal erosion on the cultural values.

The following practical measures were applied to minimize the risk of disturbing the physical

evidence of indigenous culture encountered during field work. Firstly, prior to

commencement, candidate beaches were referred to Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania, which

reviewed them with reference to the Tasmanian Aboriginal Sites Index (TASI). TASI sites

were avoided in selecting the position of monitoring transects. Secondly, prior to placing

survey marks, surface duff was scraped off and the ground surface inspected for evidence of

midden materials. Midden material was observed at several sites not listed on the TASI;

however, no such sites were found on the survey transects.

In addition to the above, advice on cultural issues in the field was provided by Emma Lee, a

member of the Tasmanian Aboriginal community and past member of the National Parks and

Wildlife Advisory Committee.


9

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1. Overview

A variety of approaches have been applied in quantifying changes in shoreline morphology

over time. These include ‘traditional’ approaches, such as erosion pins, surveying slope

profiles and photogrammetry (Gouldie 1990). More recently, advances in digital technology

have increased the quality and range of remote sensing techniques, with higher resolution

aerial imagery and more reliable rectification of this via the satellite-based Global Positioning

System (GPS). Additionally, three dimensional terrain modelling using structure from motion

(SfM) and laser ranging (i.e. LIDAR) has been applied to characterizing landforms at a

variety of scales and assessing temporal change in form (Lucieer et al. 2014, Schubert et al.

2015). The feasibility of applying these methods is being investigated.

This study adopted a combination of methods for monitoring shorelines (Table 3). Firstly,

shoreline profiles were surveyed in accordance with the approach developed by TASMARC.

The TASMARC program is Statewide in scope and provides empirical verification of actual

changes in shoreline position and form. It has hitherto been confined mainly to sites on the

east, north and, to a lesser extent, west coast (one site). The inclusion of beaches on the south-

west coast through this project will increase the comprehensiveness of the TASMARC dataset

in capturing the diversity of Tasmanian beach systems and tracking changes in their

condition.

Secondly, the erosion status of beach-backing dunes was mapped using a qualitative

classification of morphological attributes relevant to erosion (shoreline stability status). This

approach samples entire shorelines in a format suitable for interpretation of broader changes

in shoreline condition over time. This data is augmented by a considerable number of digital

images collected at ground-based photo points and as low elevation oblique aerial images

during helicopter overflights.

In addition to the above datasets, high resolution vertical aerial images have been requested

through DPIPWE Land Information Services Division. This work was scheduled for summer

2014/2015 but was delayed by weather and the images are not available at the time of writing.

The requested imagery will extend the valuable time series of (analog) aerial imagery which

already covers south-west Tasmania. A combination of aerial imagery and shoreline profile

data has been applied in the most detailed studies to date of shoreline recession in Tasmania

(Sharples 2010, Sharples et al. 2012).

The field component of the project was completed over a seven day period from 30/11/2014

to 6/12/2014. A helicopter was used to transport personnel to the study sites from a base at

Melaleuca Inlet.

Map grids and coordinates cited in the text refer to the Universal Transverse Mercator Grid,

Zone 55, Map Grid of Australia, 1994 (MGA94), based on the Geocentric Datum of Australia

1994 (GDA94) and Australian Height Datum (Tasmania).


10

Method Procedure Comments

Shoreline profile surveys

Differential GPS survey along transects from marked points inland to sea level

Established method with contextual data available from other Tasmanian sites (i.e. TASMARC); selectively samples shoreline form in spatially discrete units

Shoreline stability status mapping

Field mapping of morphological evidence of erosion/accretion of beach-backing dunes

Broadly characterizes the stability status of entire beaches through direct observation in the field; qualitative dataset

Vertical aerial imagery

Aerial imagery capture and post-processing contracted externally

Comprehensively samples entire shoreline reaches; global satellite positioning reduces reliance on manual geo-referencing and ortho-rectification of imagery

Oblique aerial imagery

Overlapping sequence of digital images of shoreline from low-flying helicopter

Qualitative visual record of entire shoreline reaches; quality of imagery variable; not geo-referenced

Ground-based imagery

Digital images with scale at selected points on shoreline (georeferenced by GPS)

Qualitative visual record of condition at selected points on shoreline; quality of imagery variable; potential for subjectivity in selection of photo points and interpretation of time series results; not a comprehensive record of shoreline condition

Table 3: Summary of methods adopted in this project for characterizing shoreline condition and monitoring erosion.

2.2. Shoreline profiles

The shoreline profile survey method broadly follows that devised by the TASMARC program

(Hunter et al. 2004, TASMARC 2012). This method characterizes shoreline morphology by

measuring changes in elevation at points along a defined transect, commencing at a mark

inland of the shoreline and extending from the mark to sea level via the most direct alignment

(i.e. perpendicular to the long axis of the beach). The transect survey is repeated over time,

capturing a time series of data which can be used to quantify rates and scales of change across

the sampled portion of shoreline.

The TASMARC program is concerned with shoreline position (nominally defined as the high

water mark) and form; the approach can also be used to assess changes to other elements of

coastal morphology (e.g. sandblows, erosion scarps, incipient foredunes) and beach surface

height and shape changes. Accordingly, transects established during this project were

commenced at points on the landward sides of the principal foredunes, capturing entire dune-

shoreline profiles. This objective was constrained in some cases by the density of vegetation

or lack of time. Transects varied in length from 48 to 217 m (mean = 120 m). Their vertical

extents varied between 4 to 52 m (mean = 20 m).

Survey transects were marked at their inland ends using two galvanized steel fencing posts

(1.6-1.8 m star pickets/droppers). The first post was driven to within a few centimetres of

ground level, or as deep as otherwise practicable. The head of this post marks the inland end

of the survey traverse. The second post was driven to approximately half height at a point 1.0

m north (magnetic) of the aforementioned mark and is intended to assist in locating that mark.


11

Standard signs (100 x 120 mm) attached to the second post specify the transect reference

number and contact information (Plate 1)1.

At least three transects were established at each beach being monitored, one positioned

towards the centre of the beach with two further transects roughly halfway between this and

the respective ends of the beach. This general approach was modified as required to avoid

Aboriginal heritage and site-specific terrain features, such as watercourses (these may cause

beach and dune erosion independent of wave attack) and rock outcrops. Additional transects

were established at longer beaches, namely Stephens Bay (4 transects), Cox Bight (4

transects) and Prion Beach (7 transects)2. Survey transects are listed at Table 4.

Transect Location Date Easting Northing Height (m)

730/300 Wreck Bay 1/12/2014 401392.61 5217744.40 9.42

730/301 Wreck Bay 30/11/2014 401661.48 5217517.69 9.12

730/302 Wreck Bay 30/11/2014 402057.36 5216942.15 19.37

730/303 Mulcahy Bay 1/12/2014 396954.00 5225553.63 41.92

730/304 Mulcahy Bay 1/12/2014 396681.23 5225969.40 23.34

730/305 Mulcahy Bay 1/12/2014 396405.97 5226124.09 25.00

730/306 Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 417253.32 5194858.19 52.14

730/307 Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 416961.92 5195444.02 4.98

730/308 Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 416691.81 5195765.29 5.15

730/309 Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 416288.75 5196114.18 8.41

730/310 Window Pane Bay 3/12/2014 420758.11 5187775.27 38.36

730/311 Window Pane Bay 3/12/2014 421430.71 5187303.59 20.54

730/312 Window Pane Bay 3/12/2014 421523.68 5187150.96 18.76

730/313 Cox Bight 4/12/2014 438096.90 5184462.93 4.06

730/319 Cox Bight 4/12/2014 439254.35 5184582.11 3.97

730/320 Cox Bight 4/12/2014 439962.53 5184423.94 19.12

730/321 Cox Bight 4/12/2014 441076.26 5183768.26 5.18

730/314 Prion Beach 5/12/2014 463498.17 5180799.49 6.98

730/315 Prion Beach 5/12/2014 463969.41 5180608.43 12.79

730/316 Prion Beach 5/12/2014 464609.87 5180329.95 13.55

730/317 Prion Beach 6/12/2014 465142.94 5180082.36 21.58

730/318 Prion Beach 6/12/2014 465667.37 5179804.94 18.05

730/322 Prion Beach 6/12/2014 466239.62 5179493.69 19.75

730/323 Prion Beach 6/12/2014 466497.16 5179358.30 16.13 Table 4: Shoreline profile transects established during this project. Coordinates and heights refer to marks at the inland ends of transects (MGA94 Zone 55 map grid; GDA94 and AHD (Tas) datum).

1 One transect was not identified with a sign (transect 730/320 Prion Beach). 2 Six of the seven transects at Prion Beach are aligned with an earlier series of transects established by Cullen & Dell (2013). Some of their marks (numbered galvanized pegs) were re-located and surveyed.


12

Plate 1: This image illustrates the form of mark at the inland end of the survey transects (in this example, transect 318, Prion Beach). The head of the steel post in the foreground marks the first point on the transect. The second post behind the first is intended to assist in locating the start of the transect and is not itself a survey point. In all cases the survey mark is located 1.0 m south (magnetic) of the second post.

In addition to survey transect marks, seven State Permanent Marks (SPM) were established

for geodetic control. The marks comprise numbered brass discs positioned on rocky outcrops

adjacent to the study beaches (Plate 2). The marks are listed at Table 5 and their locations

described and illustrated at Appendix 1. They are also listed in DPIPWE’s Survey Control

Marks Database (SurCom) (http://surcom.dpiw.tas.gov.au./surcom/jsp/index.jsp).

All survey marks and profile transects were measured using a pair of Leica System 1200 GPS

receivers in real time kinematic (RTK) mode. The position of the RTK base station was

determined using the Geoscience Australia AUSPOS GPS processing service

(http://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/positioning-navigation/geodesy/auspos). AUSPOS

calculates Australian Height Datum heights using an Australia wide gravimetric geoid model

AUSGEOID09. All surveying was undertaken by Nick Bowden (Antarctic Climate &

Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, University of Tasmania), a qualified surveyor.

To obtain the maximum amount of data for AUSPOS the normal practice was to establish a

temporary base station on arrival at the study beaches (Plate 3). Geoscience Australia

recommends at least two hours of data for a reliable solution. Temporary base stations used

during this project were occupied for intervals ranging from 3-8 hours. Quality indicators in

the AUSPOS solution are an estimated positional uncertainty and the percentage of

http://surcom.dpiw.tas.gov.au./surcom/jsp/index.jsp

http://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/positioning-navigation/geodesy/auspos


13

ambiguities resolved per baseline. An average ambiguity resolution of 50% or better

indicates a reliable solution and was achieved in all cases (Table 6).

The State Permanent Marks, survey transect marks and profile points on transects were fixed

by radio-based RTK connection from the temporary base station to a rover unit. The RTK

rover antenna was mounted on a pole that could be extended to a height of 3.59 m. Reception

of satellite transmission was still problematic on a few occasions3. The antenna pole was

generally carried in a fully collapsed position and then extended to 2 m for normal

measurements or full height in areas of taller vegetation. Incorrect recording of the pole height

is therefore a possible source of error4.

It is anticipated the State Permanent Marks will be used as localisation points for future RTK

surveys, preventing the need for the long occupation times required for an AUSPOS position

fix. It is possible the survey transect marks could be used as localisation points to re-measure

the profiles using a theodolite; however, this would generally be difficult due to the density of

the vegetation preventing clear lines of sight.

The survey transect results are provided at Appendix 2.

Plate 2: Example of a State Permanent Mark installed during this project (SPM 11452, Mulcahy Bay).

3 See notes for transects 730/311 (Window Pane Bay) and 730/303 (Mulcahy Bay) at Appendix 3. 4 One apparently anomalous result was amended to correct for this possibility. See notes for transect 730/321 (Cox Bight) at Appendix 3.


14

Mark Location Date Easting (m) Northing (m) Height (m)

SPM 11450 Wreck Bay 30/11/2014 401545.565 5217406.485 5.249

SPM 11451 Window Pane Bay

3/12/2014 420472.957 5187693.270 3.450

SPM 11452 Mulcahy Bay 1/12/2014 396727.031 5225068.539 2.767

SPM 11453 Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 416922.156 5194189.035 7.029

SPM 11454 Window Pane Bay

3/12/2014 421617.046 5186857.807 3.371

SPM 11455 Cox Bight 4/12/2014 438641.280 5184112.863 8.406

SPM 11456 Prion Beach 5/12/2014 462868.942 5180826.453 3.697 Table 5: State Permanent Marks established during this project (MGA94 Zone 55 map grid; GDA94 and AHD (Tas) datum).

Site AUSPOS

ID Occupation

time (hr:min)

Positional uncertainty (m) Ambiguity resolution Easting Northing Height

Mulcahy Bay

MULC 7:41 0.009 0.010 0.025 80.3%

Wreck Bay SPM1 5:15 0.009 0.010 0.027 73.8%

Stephens Bay

STEP 7:51 0.009 0.009 0.022 85.0%

Window Pane Bay

WIND 8:18 0.008 0.009 0.022 87.5%

Cox Bight COX1 2:57 0.010 0.013 0.023 89.1%

Cox Bight COX2 4:56 0.009 0.009 0.024 83.5%

Prion Beach PRI0 6:15 0.009 0.010 0.026 77.7%

Prion Beach 30PR 7:05 0.008 0.009 0.021 84.2% Table 6: Temporary base stations established during this project. The stations are unmarked, except at Wreck Bay where the temporary base station coincided with SPM 11450.


15

Plate 3: GPS receiver in use as temporary base station (Window Pane Bay).


16

2.3. Shoreline stability status

The condition of dune fronts is rarely uniform along the length of a beach. That is, sections of

the seawards face of the dunes may be eroding while other portions are stable or accumulating

sand. The net effect over time of these local tendencies will determine whether a sand barrier

is accreting, receding or in dynamic equilibrium (stable). Shoreline stability status mapping is

a tool for characterizing these local variations at the time of observation, providing context for

interpreting other datasets, such as aerial imagery and shoreline profiles.

The approach adopted is based on a scheme initially developed for sandy saltmarsh shores in

north-west Tasmania by Mount et al. (2010), and here simplified and extended to encompass

sandy shores and soft-rock (e.g. cohesive clay) shores. A qualitative classification of shoreline

stability status was developed following initial observations of the beaches in question.

Mapping involved traversing the beaches from end to end while noting changes in dune

morphology related to erosion and/or accretion on the seaward face. A handheld GPS and

printed air photos provided spatial control during the mapping exercise, the order of accuracy

of which is probably 10 m or better in most cases.

The shoreline stability status classification is set out at Table 7 (only sandy shores and

beaches are relevant to the present study). The field data is archived in shapefile format (see

Metadata Appendix 4).The format is suitable for inclusion in future versions of the Smartline

coastal geomorphic line map for Tasmania (Sharples et al. 2009).

The results of this work are mapped and summarized in the following section.

Shoreline stability status mapping was completed at Cox Bight and New Harbour during an

earlier reconnaissance study (Horton et al. 2008). The earlier study utilized a different

classification to that adopted in this study and the results are not directly comparable.


17

Sandy saltmarsh shores (swell-sheltered)

Sandy shores and beaches (swell-exposed or swell-sheltered, non-saltmarsh)

‘Soft-rock’ incl. cohesive clay shores (swell-exposed or swell-sheltered)

Attribute Stability status Attribute Stability status Attribute Stability status

110 Actively eroding sandy saltmarsh shore

Actively eroding shores, continuous.

210 Actively eroding sandy shore

Fresh erosion scarp in foredune or backshore sands, minor or recent slumping of scarp, no incipient foredune.

310 Actively eroding soft-rock shore

Fresh erosion scarp with little or no slumping or rock-fall in front.

120 Dominantly eroding sandy saltmarsh shore

Dominantly actively eroding shores, with sub-ordinate intermittent stability or accretion.

220 Eroded sandy shore with little recovery

Prominent foredune or backshore sand erosion scarp, with significant slumping and/or deflation but only minor or no incipient foredune development.

320 Eroded soft-rock shore

Prominent erosion scarp with notable slumped or fallen material in front (may be some signs of recent erosion).

130 Intermittently eroding sandy saltmarsh shore

Intermittently eroding shores (some spatially or temporally intermittent accretion or stability, but accretion or stability not dominant).

230 Eroded sandy shore with significant recovery

Slumped and/or deflated foredune or backshore sand erosion scarp with notable incipient foredune development.

330 Inactive eroded soft-rock shore

Old rounded and/or slumped erosion scarp with slumped or fallen material in front (no signs of recent erosion).

140 Stable sandy saltmarsh shore

Stable shores (no clear indication of either accretion or erosion).

240 Stable sandy shore

Well-vegetated foredune or backshore sands with neither significant erosion scarp nor incipient foredune evident.

340 Stable soft-rock shore

Well-rounded or sloping shore profile with no clear indications of old erosion scarps visible.

150 Dominantly accreting sandy saltmarsh shore

Dominantly accreting shores with some intermittent or prior erosion evident.

250 Recovered eroded sandy shore

Significant incipient foredune development with older erosion scarp still partly visible.

N/A

160 Actively accreting sandy saltmarsh shore

Accreting shores, no visible evidence of prior erosion.

260 Actively accreting sandy shore

Well-developed incipient foredune fronting sandy backshore or established foredune with little or no visible sign of prior erosion.

N/A

Table 7: Classification of shoreline stability status. The classification is based on that applied by Mount et al. (2010) and here simplified and extended to encompass additional shoreline types in unconsolidated sediments. Only sandy shores and beaches are relevant to this study.


19

2.4. Vertical aerial imagery

DPIPWE Land Information Services will coordinate capture of vertical aerial imagery of

TWWHA beaches as part of its annual aerial photo program. This work is contracted to an

external provider and was originally scheduled for completion in early 2015. However, the

beaches component was delayed and is now expected to be completed no earlier than late

2015. The request includes all the major oceanic beaches of the TWWHA, in addition to those

where TASMARC transects have been established. Rectified and geo-referenced 10 cm GSD

digital colour orthomosaics will be prepared.

Due to the remoteness of the area, aerial imagery of this type would normally not be subject

to ground control in favour of geo-referencing and ortho-rectification via air station

positioning (i.e. IMU and GNSS). The achievable accuracy by the latter method is in the order

of 3 m. The feasibility of establishing ground control points during future surveys will be

investigated. This has potential to improve the accuracy of the imagery to less than 0.5 m.

It is anticipated that the aerial imagery will provide an important visual record of shoreline

condition and a potentially powerful tool for interpreting shoreline behavior over time.

2.5. Oblique aerial imagery

Closely spaced sequences of overlapping oblique aerial images were obtained during

helicopter overflights of nine beaches (Table 9). This was done by flying length-wise along

the beaches about 50 m above the zone of the breakers. The camera was oriented towards the

shoreline and inclined at an angle appropriate to capturing the beach and dune front within the

image. An example is provided at Plate 4.

The images were collected with a digital SLR digital camera (Canon EOS 7D). Image

resolution was set to maximum in JPEG and raw image formats (file size approximately 17.9

megapixels)5. The camera drive mode was set to high speed continuous, capturing 2-3 images

per second. A full record of camera settings is embedded in the individual image files and can

be interrogated using readily available software (e.g. Google Picasa, Nikon NX2).

This dataset augments other imagery obtained during the project as a qualitative visual record

of shoreline condition. The oblique images are not georeferenced.

5 Some images in the Prion Beach and Cox Bight sequences are in JPEG format only.


20

Plate 4: Example of a low level oblique aerial image (Window Pane Bay). Note the unstable condition of the seaward face of the dune, which comprises a 50 m high slope of loose sand littered with soil-vegetation rafts moving downslope. This south facing beach is somewhat protected from the dominant westerly winds by Flying Cloud Point and is probably responding to wave and/or sea level effects rather than wind effects; however, a small sandblow can be seen towards the left side of the image.

Site Date Number of images

Mulcahy Bay 1/12/2014 288

Wreck Bay 30/11/2014 305

Towterer Beach 30/11/2014 125

Stephens Bay 2/12/2014 236

Noyhener Beach 2/12/2014 76

Window Pane Bay 3/12/2014 74

Cox Bight 4/12/2014 476

Louisa Bay 5/12/2014 71

Turua Beach 5/12/2014 34

Prion Beach 5/12/2014 261 Table 9: Beaches sampled for low elevation oblique aerial image sequences.

2.6. Ground-based imagery

A considerable number of digital images were collected while surveying transects and at

various points nearby. These provide a visual record of beaches and dunes where the work

was undertaken. They may also assist in re-locating shoreline profile transects.


21

The majority of the images were taken with a compact digital camera (Nikon model ‘Coolpix’

AW100) with integral GPS. The order of accuracy of the geoferencing is probably in the

order of 10 m or better. The images are 1.9 megapixel files in JPEG format. A record of

camera settings is embedded in the individual image files, which can be interrogated using

readily available software (e.g. Google Picasa, Nikon NX2).

This dataset includes standard images of the shore profile transects, in accordance with

TASMARC methodology. The images comprise at least three views at each transect:

1. view from beach to backing dune along transect;

2. view along beach/dune to left of transect; and

3. view along beach/dune to right of transect.

A 1 m scale pole was positioned towards the seaward base of the dune in the first image. A

representative set of images is illustrated at Plates 5-7.

Additional images of dunes were collected at points along the beaches selected for

monitoring. The majority of these are perpendicular views towards the dune from the beach

(with 1 m staff for scale).

Plate 5: Example of standard image for transect 730/318, Prion Beach (view from beach to dune at transect).


22

Plate 6: Example of standard image for transect 730/318, Prion Beach (view along beach/dune to left of transect).

Plate 7: Example of standard image for transect 730/318, Prion Beach (view along beach/dune to right of transect).


23

2.7. Sand mineralogy and granulometry

Grab samples of surficial sand were collected under permit from each surveyed beach. Nine

samples were analysed for mineralogy by X-ray diffraction and particle size by wet sieving.

The samples comprise beach sand (six samples) and dune sand (three samples). Beach sand

was collected at the top of the swash zone; dune sand was taken from loose material at the

crest of the first dune at the back of the beach (excluding incipient foredunes). The analysis

was undertaken by Mineral Resources Tasmania.

Analysis of the sand characterizes some of the primary features of sediment mobilized by

waves and wind across the monitoring sites, within an area where little data of this type have

hitherto been reported. The particle size and other granulometry parameters may be valuable

for characterizing wave energy and beach type, while mineralogy assists in understanding

sediment source. Analytical methods and results are presented at Appendix 3.

2.8. Archiving of data

Data collected during this project has been archived on a server (‘Barrow’) dedicated as a

repository for certain datasets managed by DPIPWE Natural Values Conservation Branch.

Metadata is provided at Appendix 4 and published on the NRM data library

(http://nrmdatalibrary.dpiw.tas.gov.au).

Additionally, the shoreline profile results are published on the TASMARC website

(http://www.tasmarc.info/).

http://nrmdatalibrary.dpiw.tas.gov.au/

http://www.tasmarc.info/


24

3. STUDY SITES

3.1. Mulcahy Bay

Mulcahy Bay beach is a high energy sandy beach directly exposed to the south-westerly

swells 26 km north of the entrance to Port Davey. Geomorphic aspects of the beach have

previously been described by Pemberton & Cullen (1999), Cullen (1998) and Short (2006).

Mulcahy Bay beach mostly faces southwest (aspect 220º True) and although strongly exposed

to the south-westerly swells is located within a deep rocky embayment 1.5 km wide bounded

by prominent rocky headlands. The beach is a Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) to Rhythmic

Bar and Beach (RBB) morphodynamic type (Short 2006, p. 184) fronted by a 100 m wide surf

zone with several strong rips. The beach is immediately backed by 20 m to 25 m high dune

faces which are the eroded seawards edge of an extensive and now mostly vegetated

Holocene transgressive dune complex described by Cullen (1998, p. 72-73). See Figure 2.

Since Mulcahy Bay is relatively sheltered from the dominating north-westerly winds, the

vegetated transgressive dunes do not show the strong NW-SE dune ridge orientation found at

more exposed sites such as Stephens Bay, and for the same reason present day blowout

(deflation) erosion is relatively minor (albeit notable) compared to sites like Stephens Beach

(Cullen 1998, p. 72). The vegetated transgressive dune complex is itself partly backed by

deep bleached white sands that Cullen (1998, p. 72) interprets as possibly Pleistocene aeolian

sand sheets.

Although it is likely that currently active wind erosion (deflation) of the mostly bare seawards

dune faces behind much of the beach was initiated by wave erosion exposing bare dune faces,

there were no recently active wave-eroded scarps along the dune front at the time of

inspection (December 2014), apart from a large beach scarp close to the toe of the dune face

behind the central-northern part of the beach (Figure 2). The seawards dune face was however

mostly bare and small to moderate-size actively accumulating lobes of windblown sand

immediately in the lee of the dune crest indicate the faces are losing sand to landwards by

deflation (wind erosion), albeit at a limited rate compared to more wind-exposed sites such as

Stephens Beach. As at December 2014 the beach and dune face exhibited varying degrees of

recovery (Figure 2) with significant beach berm recovery, incipient dune accumulation and

revegetation of the dune face in some areas (Plate 8), and lesser berm recovery with no

incipient dune accumulation or vegetation recovery in other areas (Plate 9). Nonetheless

several palaeosols are exposed in the dune face, which suggest the dune face is in a state of

net progressive recession which may be more due to wave erosion than wind erosion given

the relatively minor erosional role currently being played by deflation at this beach.

Cullen (1998, p. 72) notes the palaeosols have A-C profiles typical of coastal dunes in the

region. Although no absolute dates are available for the palaeosols at Mulcahy Bay, Cullen

infers them to be similar to palaeosols at nearby Nye Bay, for which radiocarbon dating of

contained charcoal have indicated ages ranging from 700 years BP to less than 200 years BP,

with inferred dune ages of less than 1000 years being attributed to probable destruction of

earlier dunes prior to 1000 years BP (Pemberton & Cullen 1999).

Whereas the northern and southern ends of the beach are backed by dunes perched on partly

exposed bedrock surfaces above present sea-level (Plate 10) which consequently have little

potential for significant shoreline recession, the major central part of the beach is backed by

soft sandy sediments that probably extend below present sea-level for several hundred metres


25

Figure 2: Coastal landforms at Mulcahy Bay, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated (note that shoreline stability here refers primarily to shoreline response to wave erosion and recovery; some ongoing landwards wind deflation of the dune faces is present at this beach but is not implied by the Shoreline Stability Status mapping) . Coastal landform mapping is based on Cullen (1998), with additional geomorphic and erosion status mapping by C. Sharples. Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA1994 datum).


26

landwards, and hence have considerable potential for shoreline recession. Despite the current

lack of recently active wave erosion scarps at Mulcahy Bay, it is likely that wave erosion has

played a major role in the shoreline recession that has occurred to date (as indicated by

palaeosols exposures) although deflation by wind undoubtedly has played some role as well.

Ongoing beach-dune profile monitoring will provide important evidence as to the nature of

shoreline changes and rates of recession that are occurring at Mulcahy Bay.

Plate 8: Mulcahy Bay, partly recovered dune face near TASMARC profile 730/303, showing good beach berm recovery and notable incipient dune accumulation at the toe of the face, and advanced dune face revegetation reducing deflation of the face by wind. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


27

Plate 9: Mulcahy Bay, view of bare dune face just north of TASMARC profile 730/304, showing at least one prominent palaeosol horizon exposed in the poorly recovering seawards dune face. Although beach berm recovery is substantial, there is little incipient dune accumulation at the foot of the eroded face, which remains largely unvegetated and deflating. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).

Plate 10: View northwards from near the southern end of Mulcahy Bay beach, showing the dominantly unvegetated and deflating seawards faces of the transgressive dune complex backing the beach. Exposed quartzite bedrock in the foreground underlies the southern end of the dunes above present sea-level. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


28

3.2. Wreck Bay

Wreck Bay beach is a high energy swell-exposed sandy beach located on the far south-west

coast of Tasmania about 16 km northwest of Port Davey. Geomorphic aspects of the beach

have previously been investigated and described by Cullen (1998) and Short (2006).

Wreck Bay beach is a deeply-embayed beach about 1.5 km long facing southwest (aspect

200º True) between protruding rocky headlands in a dominantly rocky coast. The beach is

backed by dune sands over a bedrock base which probably mostly rises above present sea-

level from very close behind the present back of the beach. The beach has a 250 m wide

double bar surf zone characterised as a Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) inner bar with a high

energy Rhythmic Bar and Beach (RBB) outer bar by Short (2006, p. 183). The intertidal

beach face is composed of fine to medium-grained sand with hard quartzite bedrock outcrops

sporadically protruding along the full length of the beach and at the base of the backing dune.

The north-western third of the beach is dominated by a near-continuous rocky shore platform

in the lower intertidal area, and a large rocky point near the middle of the beach divides it into

two main sub-compartments.

The beach is backed by vegetated dunes 5 – 20 m high which appear to mostly overlie

bedrock above present sea-level (inferred from the sporadic bedrock outcrops on the beach

face and at the base of the dune-front). The central rocky point is also capped by vegetated

windblown sand above storm wave swash levels, as is the rocky shore southwards of the

southern end of the beach. Apart from minor development of small incipient foredunes

(mainly in the more sheltered south-eastern parts of the bay: see Figure 3) and other poorly-

defined patchy remnants of beach-derived sands blown onto the front of older dunes, the

dunes are mostly not foredunes in the sense of Hesp (2002). Rather, they are mainly formerly

mobile transgressive and longitudinal dunes inferred to be of Late Holocene age by Cullen

1998 (p. 70). These are currently eroding and receding at their seawards (beach-facing)

margins, but are largely stable and vegetated in the back-dune areas. The dune ridges trend in

south-easterly directions but are much less extensive than at nearby Towterer Beach because

the south-westerly aspect of Wreck Bay reduces exposure to dominant north-westerly to

westerly winds. Cullen (1998, p. 70) noted the most extensive dunes occur behind the

southern end of the embayment where exposure to north-westerly winds is greatest, and

include cliff top dunes above rocky shores beyond the end of the beach (see Figure 3). Cullen

reported an auger hole 600 m inland of the southern end of the beach encountering the

shallow distal end of the windblown sands over river gravels.

During Nov-Dec 2014 the dune front was mostly an actively eroding or eroded scarp with

slumping but little recovery, and was in parts mostly bare of vegetation (see Plate 11). Small

fresh lobes of unvegetated windblown sand present immediately behind the crest some of the

dune-front scarps demonstrate those bare scarps are being actively deflated by onshore winds,

although the amounts of sand being blown landwards are currently too small to sustain bare

actively mobile sand lobes extending more than a few metres landwards of the dune crests.

Cullen (1998, p. 70) noted that active sand blows at Wreck Bay are small compared to other

embayments in the region and attributed this to the relatively sheltering from north-westerly

to westerly winds afforded by the southwest aspect of the embayment.

Stream discharges from Trepanner Creek in the south-east corner of the bay and from several

other creeks along the beach appear to have contributed significantly to beach and dune

erosion immediately adjacent to their mouths, however on field evidence it appears that the

greatest amount of shoreline recession to date has occurred at the northwest end of the south-


29

Figure 3: Coastal landforms at Wreck Bay, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated. Coastal landform polygon mapping is based on Cullen (1998), other shoreline landform and erosion status mapping by C. Sharples. Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA94 datum).


30

eastern sub-compartment of the bay, and in the north-western sub-compartment, which are

most exposed to the south-westerly swells. In these areas up to three palaeosols are exposed

in the dune scarps, implying the current degree of landwards dune face recession is greater

than any since the formation of the oldest exposed palaeosols (this means that much of Wreck

Bay beach and dune front is currently in a state of progressive recession that has extended

further landwards than any seen since the now-exposed palaeosols formed).

Cullen (1998, p. 70-71) illustrates dune soil profiles from Wreck Bay, and notes the

palaeosols have A-C profiles typical of foredunes in the region. Although no absolute dates

are available for the palaeosols at Wreck Bay, Cullen infers them to be of equivalent ages to

palaeosols at nearby Nye Bay, for which radiocarbon dating of contained charcoal have

indicated ages ranging from 700 years BP to less than 200 years BP, with inferred dune ages

of less than 1000 years being attributed to probable destruction of earlier dunes prior to 1000

years BP (Pemberton & Cullen 1999).

Plate 11: Aerial view south-eastwards along Wreck Bay beach, showing the prevalence of rocky outcrops on the beach and bare eroded (and slumped) seawards dune faces. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


31

3.3. Stephens Bay

Stephens Bay beach is a high energy sandy beach directly exposed to the south-westerly

swells a few km south of the entrance to Port Davey. Geomorphic aspects of the beach have

previously been described by Baynes (1990), Cullen (1998) and Short (2006).

Stephens Bay beach mostly faces southwest (aspect 240º True) and although strongly exposed

to the south-westerly swells is located within a rocky embayment 2.3 km wide bounded by

prominent rocky headlands. The beach is Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) to Rhythmic Bar and

Beach (RBB) morphodynamic type (Short 2006, p. 175) fronted by a 200 m wide surf zone

with several strong rips. The beach is backed by dunes ranging from about 6 m high behind

the north-western end of the beach up to about 50 m high behind its southern end. The dunes

are mostly an old (Late Pleistocene or Holocene) transgressive dune complex (not foredunes

in the sense of Hesp 2002) with dominantly WNW to ESE oriented ridges (Cullen 1998).

At the time of inspection (Dec. 2014) the seawards faces of the dunes were mostly bare of

living vegetation except behind the north-western end of the beach. However, fresh wave

erosion scarps were not apparent in the dune toes, and the bare dune faces were evidently

partly slumped. There was little evidence of the accumulation of new incipient dunes at the

toe of the bare dune faces, although considerable recovery of a sand berm at the back of the

beach abutting the dunes was apparent in parts of the beach. It is evident that the bare dune

faces are deflating behind most of the beach, with fresh lobes of windblown sand

accumulating in the lee of the seawards dune crest. Although the backshore parts of the dune

complex are mainly stable and vegetated behind the northern half of the beach, the degree of

dune face deflation and the extent of currently actively mobile transgressive dunes blowing

inland from the seawards dune faces in a south-easterly direction increases southwards along

the beach. Very extensive unvegetated and currently active transgressive dunes behind the

southern half of the beach extend well over a kilometre south-eastwards and extend through to

nearby Noyhener Beach (Figure 4) in part. At least one palaeosol is exposed in both the

deflating seawards faces of the dunes and in deflation hollows within the active backshore

transgressive dune complex (Plate 12). Behind the southern part of the beach the wind

erosion (deflation) has exposed extensive middens, as well as exposures of iron pans and peat

deposits at the base of the dunes which may represent earlier swamp deposits that were buried

beneath the transgressive dunes as they initially formed.

A low established (vegetated) foredune a few metres high and about 400 m long is present on

the seawards side of the high deflating transgressive dunes behind the southern part of the

beach (Figure 4, Plate 13). This feature exhibits a recently active wave erosion scarp on its

seawards side, which exposes anthropogenic debris (plastics, wooden planks) in the foredune,

indicating that the foredune is likely to be of recent (late Twentieth Century) origin. Further

north in the middle (most wave exposed?) part of the beach recent wave erosion has formed a

high beach scarp in the recovered beach berm, although this scarping has not extended to the

toe of the backing dune itself (Plate 14).

Although the presence of exposed palaeosols in the seawards dune faces behind most of

Stephens Bay beach implies that the dune faces are receding landwards, at the present time

this seems to be primarily the result of wind erosion (deflation) of the dune faces removing

sand landwards, rather than wave erosion removing sand offshore. Although it is likely that

wave erosion has at some time triggered onset of dune deflation by exposing the seawards


32

Figure 4: Coastal landforms at Stephens Bay, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated (note that shoreline stability here refers primarily to shoreline response to wave erosion and recovery; major ongoing landwards wind deflation of the dune faces is present at this beach but is not implied by the Shoreline Stability Status mapping). Coastal landform mapping is based on Cullen (1998), with additional geomorphic and erosion status mapping by C. Sharples. Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA1994 datum).


33

faces of the dunes, there is currently a substantial beach berm in front of the dunes along

much of the beach and no evidence of wave erosion reaching the toe of the deflating dune

faces. The exception to this is the small eroding foredune in front of the deflating dunes in the

southern part of the beach, whose presence is itself indicative of a lack of wave erosion

having reached the deflating dunes behind it for some decades at least. Whether – or when –

wave erosion will cause significant shoreline recession at this beach is unclear, and ongoing

monitoring of beach-dune profiles at Stephens Bay will be important in understanding how

this beach is behaving and whether it is beginning to respond to sea-level rise.

Plate 12: A part of the high actively mobile transgressive dunes behind the southern end of Stephens Bay Beach, showing a palaeosol exposed in a deflation hollow on the dune crest. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


34

Plate 13: Northwards view along the recently wave-eroded foredune behind the southern part of Stephens Bay beach, showing strongly deflating high transgressive dunes behind. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).

Plate 14: View south from the middle part of Stephens Beach, showing a recent beach scarp cutting into the notably recovered beach berm. High deflating transgressive dunes fronted by the small vegetated foredune are visible in the distance towards the southern end of the beach. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


35

3.4. Window Pane Bay

Window Pane Bay beach is a high energy swell-exposed sandy beach directly facing the

south-westerly swells about 12 km north of South West Cape (Plate 15). Geomorphic aspects

of the beach have previously been described by Cullen (1998) and Short (2006).

Window Pane Bay beach mostly faces southwest (aspect 210º True) and although strongly

exposed to the south-westerly swells is located within a rocky embayment 1.7 km wide on a

long mostly rocky and cliffed coastal section. The north-western end of the beach is

somewhat sheltered behind the long rocky point of Flying Cloud Point which bounds the

western side of the embayment. The 1.5 km long fine to medium grained sand beach is a

Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) to Rhythmic Bar and Beach (RBB) morphodynamic type

(Short 2006, p. 173) fronted by a 100 m wide surf zone with several rips. At its south-eastern

end the beach grades to a 600 m long boulder beach, whilst the more sheltered western end in

the lee of Flying Cloud Point is a 100 m long Reflective (R) morphodynamic beach type

which sometimes includes an ephemeral tombolo connecting it to an offshore rock (Short

2006, p. 173). Window Pane Creek discharges across the broad middle of the beach in a

meandering channel with a cobble bed load.

The north-western 700 m of the beach (west of the creek outlet) is backed by a very high

steep eroding and slumped dune face up to 50 m high (Plates 16-17). This does not appear to

be a foredune in the sense of Hesp (2002) but rather appears to be the wave-eroded distal

(downwind) end of a now-vegetated transgressive dune complex which Cullen (1998, p. 55)

has interpreted (on the basis of NW-SE aligned dune ridges) to have accumulated in Late

Pleistocene to Holocene times from sand blown south-eastwards from Island Bay into the

Window Pane Bay embayment (Figure 5). It is likely that most of this dune complex mantles

a bedrock surface above present sea-level. When inspected during December 2014 most of the

seawards (southerly-facing) dune face was bare slumping sand with rafts of organic soil and

vegetation sliding down from the crest of the dune, however the dune crest and back dune

area is well-vegetated and stable. No significant incipient dune accumulation was noted at the

dune scarp toe. No palaeosols were noted in the slumped dune face, however at one or two

locations a peat deposit with plant fragments is exposed at the base of the dune face. This

appears different to the slumped peaty dune soil rafts and may represent an older swamp

deposit underlying the dune sands. Some minor wind-driven deflation of the bare dune face is

occurring with small active lobes of wind-blown sand transgressing into vegetation for a few

metres on the lee (north) side of the dune crest, however there is also a large deflating gully at

the western end of this high dune where wind is transporting sand northwards up and behind

the dune-face for over 100 m.

Window Pane Creek emerges through a 200 m wide gap in the dunes onto the central part of

the beach, which is backed by a broad low valley interpreted by Cullen (1998, p. 54) as a

sediment infill basin (likely Holocene marine sediment infill) with some vegetated

transgressive dunes. In this area the soft sediment infill is likely to extend in depth to below

sea-level for some hundreds of metres inland of the beach. Relatively fresh scarps at the dune

toes on either side of the creek outlet are probably a result of fluvial (creek) erosion rather

than wave erosion, and are not indicated on the shoreline stability mapping provided on

Figure 5.

The south-eastern part of the beach is backed by a vegetated sandy (true) foredune rising 15 –

20 m above the back of the beach, which also backs most of the boulder-beach further south-

east of the sandy beach section (Plate 15). A wave erosion scarp with some slumping but little


36

incipient dune recovery was present along the foredune toe behind this part of the beach at the

time of inspection, and was mostly only 2 – 3 m high but reached over 15 m high to the crest

of the dune around the TASMARC profile 730/311 location (see Figure 5). No evidence of

currently active dune front deflation in the form of windblown sand accumulations in the lee

of the dune crest was seen, nor were palaeosols exposed in the dune erosion scarp. The dune

erosion scarp continued south-eastwards behind the boulder beach to a little north of

TASMARC profile 730/312, beyond which the foredune front is mostly stable and fully

vegetated with no significant erosion scarp (see Figure 5). This foredune is in turn backed by

stable vegetated transgressive dunes extending inland for 1.5 km to the east and north-east,

and up to 250 m above sea-level. North-easterly trending dune ridges in this complex imply

sand transport and deposition by winds blowing from the south-west into Window Pane Bay,

in contrast to the north-westerly derivation inferred for the transgressive dunes backing the

northwest part of Window Pane Bay beach. The depth to bedrock beneath the foredune is

difficult to infer, however rising slopes close behind the dune and rocky reefs immediately

offshore from the boulder beach section suggest the underlying bedrock surface rises above

present sea-level beneath or close behind most of the foredune.

Whereas the slumping dune scarps at Window Pane Bay provide evidence of relatively recent

wave erosion, none exhibit freshly active basal wave scarps, but rather the scarp toes have

slumped since the most recent wave erosion events. On the other hand neither is any incipient

dune recovery evident at the toe of the slumped dune scarps (suggesting relatively recent toe

erosion). The lack of any exposed palaeosols means it is unclear whether the high dune

behind the north-west part of the beach is in a state of progressive recession although the size

and relatively recent activity of the scarp (indicated by the lack of incipient dune

accumulation) might be thought to imply this. On the other hand the mostly limited foredune

erosion behind the south-eastern part of the beach provide little evidence of any progressive

dune recession to date, although the higher slumping dune scarp at TASMARC profile

730/311 is suggestive of increased dune erosion activity. Ongoing dune profile monitoring

over some years will be necessary to understand how this beach and dune system is behaving.


37

Figure 5: Coastal landforms at Window Pane Bay, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated. Coastal landform mapping is based on Cullen (1998), with additional geomorphic and erosion status mapping by C. Sharples. Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA1994 datum).


38

Plate 15: Window Pane Bay from the southeast, showing the sandy beach backed by high scarped dunes in the distance, and the boulder beach section backed by a sandy foredune and vegetated transgressive dunes in the foreground. Photo by C. Sharples Dec. 2014.

Plate 16: View looking northwards at the high slumping dune face backing the north-western end of Window Pane Bay beach. Much of the vegetation visible on the dune face is on rafts of peaty soil gradually sliding down the dune face. The well-vegetated area immediately behind the dune face is a transgressive dune complex of which the eroding face is probably the scarped distal end. Photo by C. Sharples Dec. 2014.


39

Plate 17: View of scarped and slumped 50 m high dune face at the north-western end of Window Pane Bay close to TASMARC profile 730/310, showing rafts of soil and vegetation. The lack of either a recent wave scarp or of significant incipient dune growth at the toe of the slope is notable. Photo by C. Sharples Dec. 2014.


40

3.5. Cox Bight

Cox Bight on the south-southwest coast of Tasmania contains three high-energy swell-

exposed sandy beach barriers separated by small rocky points. Geomorphic aspects of the

beaches have previously been described by Cullen (1998), Short (2006) and Horton et al.

(2008), with the latter also documenting an initial shoreline condition monitoring survey for

Cox Bight.

Cox Bight as a whole is a deep south-facing embayment between prominent rocky headlands

which ensure little or no longshore drift of sand into or out of the embayment. The sandy

beaches are located at the northern head of the embayment and are separated by Point Eric

and a smaller rocky point to its east (Figure 6). The 2.2 km long western beach faces south-

southeast (aspect 170º True) and is a Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) to Rhythmic Bar and

Beach (RBB) morphodynamic type (Short 2006, p. 171) fronted by a 150-200 m wide surf

zone with several rips. The beach is dominantly fine-medium grained sand with a cobble berm

that is largest at the western end (Plate 18). The beach is backed by 2 prograded Holocene

cobble beach ridges mantled by aeolian foredune sands (Cullen 1998, p.41) and typically up

to 2-5 m high. The beach barrier is backed by an extensive plain of soft alluvial sediments

extending in depth to below present sea-level, and impounds two large backshore lagoons.

The middle beach extends 1.7 km eastwards from Point Eric and faces south-southwest

(aspect 195º T). This is a dominantly fine-medium grained sand beach which is a Transverse

Bar and Rip (TBR) morphodynamic type (Short 2006, p. 171) fronted by a 100 m wide surf

zone with several rips. The beach is backed by a foredune ranging from only 2-3 m high in the

west to 20-25 m high in the most exposed central part of the beach (Plate 19), which in turn is

backed by a soft sediment plain that probably extends in depth to below present sea-level for

several hundred metres inland. The easternmost beach is about 1.4 km long and faces

southwest (aspect 220º True). This is also a dominantly fine-medium grained sandy beach

which is a Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) morphodynamic type (Short 2006a, p. 171) fronted

by a 100 m wide surf zone with several rips. The beach is backed by a foredune ranging 5 –

10 m high in its northern to middle parts, and up to 20 – 30 m high in its southern section

where the dune caps a bedrock slope rising above sea-level behind the beach. The northern to

middle part of the foredune is in turn backed by a soft sediment plain that probably extends in

depth to below present sea-level for several hundred metres inland, although the southern half

of the beach is immediately backed by a rising bedrock slope. No evidence of dune blowouts

or significant landwards transport of sand in wind-driven transgressive sand lobes or dunes

was seen at any of the three beaches.

At the time of inspection, most of the foredunes behind each of the three beaches showed

evidence of prior erosion scarps (except at the apparently more stable western end of the

western beach), however these exhibited greater or lesser degrees of recent recovery through

slumping and incipient dune accretion. The freshest erosion scarps seen during December

2014 were associated with creek outlets along the beaches, and were probably a response to

fluvial (creek discharge) erosion rather than to wave erosion. Considerable recovery following

erosion was evident in the middle of the middle beach (Plate 19). However it is noteworthy

that Cullen (1998, p. 41) reported extensive foredune scarping with exposure of one or two

dune palaeosols behind the two beaches east of Point Eric at the time of his inspection. These

palaeosols were mostly covered by slumping or incipient dune recovery during December

2014, however their exposure during 1998 (and perhaps at other subsequent times) do suggest

that despite a recent recovery phase the two eastern beaches may be in a state of progressive

albeit episodic recession. In contrast the western beach appears to have been more stable

although it is possible it has begun to recede at its eastern end. Ongoing beach profile


41

Figure 6: Coastal landforms at Cox Bight, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated. Coastal landform mapping is based on Cullen (1998), with additional geomorphic and erosion status mapping by C. Sharples. Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA1994 datum).


42

monitoring over a period of some years will be necessary to determine whether the eastern

beaches (and possibly the eastern part of the western beach) have indeed commenced to

progressively recede or are still oscillating around an equilibrium position.

Plate 18: View typical of the western Cox Bight beach, showing a sandy beach with a substantial cobble berm backed by foredune sands over cobble beach ridges. Whereas erosion scarps are notable along much of west Cox Bight (see Figure 6), the cobble berms appear to quickly reform and partly protect the scarps after major storms. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).

Plate 19: A high foredune backing a section of the middle beach of Cox Bight, showing virtually full recovery of the seawards dune face by windblown sand accumulation following erosion. Only traces of the prior scarp are discernible in this recovered section, although vegetation is yet to re-establish on the dune face. Other parts of the two easternmost Cox Bight beaches still exhibit exposed foredune wave erosion scarps with minor or moderate recovery through slumping and incipient foredune accumulation. Photo by C. Sharples (2014).


43

3.6. Prion Beach

Prion Beach is a high energy swell-exposed sandy beach located about half-way along the

south coast of Tasmania. Geomorphic aspects of the beach have previously been investigated

and described by Cullen (1998), Short (2006) and Cullen & Dell 2013).

Prion Beach lies within a broad embayment in a dominantly rocky and cliffed coast, and faces

south-southwest (aspect 205º True). The embayment is about 6 km wide and bounded by

large steep rocky headlands at Point Cecil and Menzies Bluff (Figure 7). The beach is backed

by a broad coastal barrier comprising dune and marine sands probably extending in depth to

below present sea-level, which bars the mouth of New River Lagoon. The beach itself is a

Transverse Bar and Rip (TBR) to Rhythmic Bar and Beach (RBB) morphodynamic type

(Short 2006, p. 167) fronted by a 300 m wide rip-dominated surf zone. The western four

kilometres of the beach is immediately backed by a large vegetated foredune ridge varying

from about 4 m to 25 m high (Plate 20), which in turn is backed by several shore-parallel

dunes then older (probably Holocene) prograded dunes with some dune lakes in swales

(Cullen & Dell 2013). However, the eastern two kilometres of the beach is a 200-300 m wide

beach spit without established dunes (Plate 21), which is episodically reworked as the outlet

channel of New River Lagoon migrates eastwards along the spit after occasional large storms

open an outlet channel at the east end of the barrier dunes. A Holocene foredune backs this

very mobile beach spit on the landwards side of the episodic outlet channel, and is in turn in

backed by older dunes which Cullen & Dell (2013) obtained Pleistocene dates for.

When Prion Beach and its backing dunes were inspected during December 2014, the seawards

face of the foredune along the western two-thirds of the beach exhibited a high erosion scarp,

reaching in parts to the crest of the dune, which exhibited some slumping and was also

fronted by a significant incipient dune indicating considerable beach and foredune recovery

since the erosion event responsible for the most recent scarping (see Plate 20). It is possible

that the erosion event responsible for the dune scarping was a July 2011 storm swell event

which caused major coastal erosion around much of the western, southern and south-eastern

Tasmanian coast. A more recent erosion event has produced a beach scarp at the seawards toe

of parts of the incipient foredune, but has neither destroyed the incipient foredune nor further

affected the main dune-face scarp. Although small amounts of sand exposed in the seawards-

facing erosion scarp are being deflated and blowing up the dune face to accrete as small

transgressive sand lobes amongst vegetation immediately behind the dune crest in some

places, no significant blowouts (deflation hollows) or major active transgressive dunes are

apparent along the foredune or behind it, and the morphology of the parallel dune ridges

behind the beach indicates that landwards movement of windblown sand from the foredune

face (i.e., transgressive dune development) is not a significant process at this beach (except at

its far eastern end: see Figure 7).

No palaeosols are exposed in the current dune scarp, however in several places the scarp

exposes fragments of anthropogenic (plastic) marine debris which were evidently buried

within the seawards dune face during earlier phases of dune recovery following earlier erosion

events. These observations both imply that the Prion Beach foredune has been eroded further

to landwards during earlier Twentieth Century erosion events than it was during the most

recent major erosion event (2011?), and has recovered from those earlier events. Together

with the currently well-advanced recovery of the foredune face from the most recent major

erosion event, this implies that the Prion Beach and its established foredune are not exhibiting

any signs of progressive shoreline recession as yet, but rather are continuing to oscillate

around an equilibrium profile with episodic erosion and accretion phases.


44

Figure 7: Coastal landforms at Prion Beach, with stability (erosion) status of the seawards dune face as at December 2014 indicated. Coastal landform polygon mapping is based on Cullen (1998) and Cullen & Dell (2013); other shoreline landform and erosion status mapping is by C. Sharples and Hannah Walford (polygon mapping). Permanent survey benchmark (SPM) and TASMARC survey profile locations and numbers are indicated. Co-ordinate system is Map Grid of Australia zone 55 (GDA94 datum).


45

Plate 20: Eroded foredune scarp at Prion Beach on 5th December 2014, showing large erosion scarp with considerable beach face recovery and incipient dune accretion (to seawards of the scarp) since the last previous major erosion event (possibly the July 2011 storm event). Photo by C. Sharples (2014).

Plate 21: View west along Prion Beach from the extensive unvegetated spit at its eastern end towards the beach and parallel-dune barrier backed by New River Lagoon (out of sight to the distant right). In this view, the New River outlet channel (foreground) is located against the rocky headland at the east end of the beach, however the channel outlet episodically migrates along the full length of the unvegetated spit in response to flood and storm events and subsequent eastwards migration of the outlet channel. Photo by C. Sharples (1978).


46

4. DISCUSSION

This project has initiated steps towards quantifying changes over time in the morphology and

condition of sandy coastal landforms within the TWWHA. The value of the time series of

data which has been initiated will depend on an appropriate sampling regime over coming

years. Regular sampling is critical for understanding shoreline dynamics, given that seasonal

or episodic effects entail potential to skew the data. This aspect of the study is subject to

significant practical constraints, given the remoteness and cost of accessing the monitoring

sites. Helicopter transport to the monitoring sites is a significant cost – air time was

approximately six hours during the establishment phase of the project.

The TASMARC approach recommends that shoreline profiles should be surveyed at two to

three month intervals. In practice, whereas many TASMARC sites are surveyed quarterly

others are surveyed less frequently, in some cases annually. It is suggested here that annual

sampling is a reasonable minimum for this project to aim for over an initial period. However,

more frequent sampling should be considered if opportunities arise.

It is further recommended that the status of the project should be reviewed after initial

analysis of data in the context of the doctoral study currently underway at the University of

Tasmania (the study is investigating the relationship between sea level rise and coastal erosion

across the Australian region). The review should inform a decision regarding the future of the

project, taking account of the results obtained and developments in technology that may offer

cost-effective alternatives to the present approach.


47

REFERENCES

Baynes, F. (1990). A Preliminary Survey of the Coastal Geomorphology of the World

Heritage Area, South West Tasmania. Unpublished report, Department of Lands, Parks &

Wildlife, Tasmania.

Brown, M. J. (2010). Monitoring the Impact of Climate Change on the Flora and Vegetation

Values of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area: A Review

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-

permits/publications/monitoring-impact-of-climate-change-on-the-twwha).

Bruun, P. (1962). "Sea-level rise as a cause of shore erosion." Journal of the Waterways and

Harbors Division, American Society of Civil Engineers 88: 117-130.

Church, J. A., P. U. Clark, A. Cazenave, J. M. Gregory, S. Jevrejeva, A. Levermann, M. A.

Merrifield, G. A. Milne, Nerem,, N. R.S., P. P.D., P. A.J., W.T., D. Stammer and A. S.

Unnikrishnan (2013). Sea Level Change. In: Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor,

M., Allen, S.K., Boschung, J., A. Nauels, Xia, Y., Bex, V. & Midgley, P.M. (eds.). Climate

Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

Church, J. A., J. R. Hunter, K. L. McInnes and N. J. White (2006). "Sea-level rise around the

Australia coastline and the changing frequency of extreme sea-level events." Australian

Meteorological Magazine 55: 253-260.

Cullen, P. (1998). Coastal Dune Systems of South-Western Tasmania: Their Morphology,

Genesis, and Conservation. Nature Conservation Report 98/1, Parks & Wildlife Service,

Tasmania.

Cullen, P. and M. Dell (2013). Geomorphological Evolution of the Prion Beach and New

River Lagoon Beach Barrier System. Nature Conservation Report 2013/03. Geoconservation

Section, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment, Tasmania

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/nature-

conservation-report-2013-03).

DPIPWE (2013). Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Research and Monitoring

Priorities 2013-2018, Resource Management and Conservation Division, Department of

Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Hobart

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/twwha-

research-monitoring-priorities-2013-2018).

Gouldie, A. (1990). Geomorphological Techniques. London, Unwin Hyman.

Hemer, M. A., I. Simmonds and K. Keay (2008). "A classification of wave generation

characteristics during large wave events on the Southern Australian margin." Continental

Shelf Research 28: 634-652.

Horton, B. M., T. Rudman, J. Balmer and I. Houshold (2008). Monitoring Dry Coastal

Vegetation in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Part 2: Appraisal of Method.

Nature Conservation Report 2008/4, Department of Primary Industries & Water, Tasmania

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-

permits/publications/monitoring-dry-coastal-vegetation-in-the-tasmanian-wwha-part-2).

Hunter, J., R. Coleman and D. Pugh (2003). "The sea level at Port Arthur, Tasmania, from

1841 to the present." Geophysical Research Letters 30(7): 54.51-54.54.

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/monitoring-impact-of-climate-change-on-the-twwha)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/monitoring-impact-of-climate-change-on-the-twwha)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/nature-conservation-report-2013-03)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/nature-conservation-report-2013-03)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/twwha-research-monitoring-priorities-2013-2018)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/twwha-research-monitoring-priorities-2013-2018)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/monitoring-dry-coastal-vegetation-in-the-tasmanian-wwha-part-2)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/monitoring-dry-coastal-vegetation-in-the-tasmanian-wwha-part-2)


48

Hunter, J., W. Hennecke, R. Coleman and C. Sharples (2004). TAsmanian Shoreline

Monitoring and ARChiving project (TASMARC). http://www.tasmarc.info/ (downloaded

13/1/2015).

Hunter, J. R. (2008). Historical and Projected Sea-level Extremes for Hobart and Burnie,

Tasmania, Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tasmania.

Lucieer, A., S. M. de Jong and D. Turner (2014). "Mapping landslide displacements using

Structure from Motion (SfM) and image correlation of multi-temporal UAV photography."

Progress in Physical Geography 38(1): 97-116.

Mallick, S. (2013). Potential Impacts of Climate Change on the Fauna Values of the

Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Nature Conservation Report 13/2. Hobart,

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.

Mount, R., V. Prahalad, C. Sharples, J. Tilden, B. Morrison, M. Lacey, J. Ellison, M. Helman

and J. Newton (2010). Circular Head Region Coastal Foreshore Habitats: Sea Level Rise

Vulnerability Assessment. Report to Cradle Coast NRM Region and the Cradle Coast

Authority, by the Blue Wren Group, School of Geography and Environmental Studies,

University of Tasmania: 221 p.

Prince, B. (1992). Aboriginal Archaeological Sites on the West Coast of Tasmania: Port

Davey to Cape Sorell. A report to the Tasmanian Department of Parks, Wildlife & Heritage,

July 1992.

Rudman, T., B. M. Horton and J. Balmer (2008). Monitoring Dry Coastal Vegetation in the

Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area, Part 1 Monitoring Priorities. Nature

Conservation Report 2008 / 1, Department of Primary Industries and Water, Hobart,

Tasmania (http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-

permits/publications/monitoring-dry-coastal-vegetation-in-the-twwha-part-1-monitoring-

priorities).

Schubert, J. E., T. W. Gallien, M. S. Majd and B. F. Sanders (2015). "Terrestrial Laser

Scanning of Anthropogenic Beach Berm Erosion and Overtopping." Journal of Coastal

Research 299: 47-60.

Sharples, C. (2003). A Review of the Geoconservation Values of the Tasmanian Wilderness

World Heritage Area. Nature Conservation Report 03/06. Hobart, Nature Conservation

Branch, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/a-review-

of-the-geoconservation-values-of-the-twwha).

Sharples, C. (2006). Indicative Mapping of Tasmanian Coastal Vulnerability to Climate

Change and Sea Level Rise: Explanatory Report, 2nd edition. Hobart, Department of Primary

Industries, Water & Environment (http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/climate-

change/climate-change-and-coastal-vulnerability/indicative-mapping-of-tasmanian-coastal-

vulnerability).

Sharples, C. (2011). Potential Climate Change Impacts on the Geodiversity of the Tasmanian

Wilderness World Heritage Area: A Management Response Position Paper. Report to the

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania

(http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/potential-

climate-change-impacts-in-the-twwha).


http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/monitoring-dry-coastal-vegetation-in-the-twwha-part-1-monitoring-priorities)



http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/a-review-of-the-geoconservation-values-of-the-twwha)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/a-review-of-the-geoconservation-values-of-the-twwha)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/potential-climate-change-impacts-in-the-twwha)

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-permits/publications/potential-climate-change-impacts-in-the-twwha)


49

Sharples, C., R. Mount and T. Pederson (2009). The Australian Coastal Smartline

Geomorphic and Stability Map Version 1: Manual and Data Dictionary, School of Geography

& Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, 8th October 2009: 179 pp.

Short, A. D. (2006). Beaches of Tasmanian Coasts and Islands. Sydney, Sydney University

Press.

TASMARC (2012). TASMARC survey instructions - levelling (Version - 20120821)

(http://www.tasmarc.info).

Zhang, K., B. C. Douglas and S. P. Leatherman (2004). "Global warming and coastal

erosion." Climatic Change 64: 41-58.

http://www.tasmarc.info)/


50

APPENDIX 1: State permanent marks

Coordinate system: Universal Transverse Mercator Grid, Zone 55, Map Grid of Australia,

1994 (MGA94). Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 (GDA94) and Australian Height

Datum (Tasmania).

Mark no. 11450

Location Wreck Bay

Easting 401545.565

Northing 5217406.485

Height 5.249

Description The general location is a rocky promontory dividing Wreck Bay beach

into northern and southern portions. The mark is situated at the point of

the promontory, on a rock slab very near the boundary between bare

rock and shrubby vegetation.

Plate 29: Location of SPM 11450, Wreck Bay.


51

Mark no. 11451

Location Window Pane Bay

Easting 420472.957


Height 3.450

Description The general location is the western end of Window Pane Bay, opposite a

steep rocky islet just off offshore. The mark is situated on a spur of

schistose rock at the back of the beach.

Plate 30: Location of SPM 11451, Window Pane Bay.


52

Mark no. 11452

Location Mulcahy Bay

Easting 396727.031


Height 2.767

Description The general location is a rocky shoreline west of the outlet of Alec

Rivulet. The mark is situated on a tabular, sparsely vegetated rock

pedestal partly surrounded by sand.

Plate 31: Location of SPM 11452, Mulcahy Bay.


53

Mark no. 11453

Location Stephens Bay

Easting 416922.156


Height 7.029

Description The general location is a minor rocky headland between the southern

end of Stephens Bay Beach and Chatfield Point. The mark is situated on

a rock slab backed by shrubby vegetation, near the edge of a cliff at the

back of the shoreline.

Plate 32: Location of SPM 11453, Stephens Bay.


54

Mark no. 11454

Location Window Pane Bay

Easting 421617.046


Height 3.371

Description The general location is the bouldery eastern portion of the beach. The

mark is situated on an inclined rock slab protruding above boulders near

the top of the swash zone.

Plate 33: Location of SPM 11454, Window Pane Bay.


55

Mark no. 11455

Location Cox Bight

Easting 438641.280


Height 8.406

Description The general location is the western side of Point Eric. The mark is

situated on a rock slab above a steep drop onto the adjacent shore

platform.

Plate 34: Location of SPM 11455, Cox Bight.


56

Mark no. 11456

Location Prion Beach

Easting 462868.942


Height 3.697

Description The general location is a shore platform several hundred metres south of

the outlet of Grotto Creek at the western end of Prion Beach. The mark

is situated on an inclined rock slab close to upper margin of bare rock.

Plate 35: Location of SPM 11456, Prion Beach.


57

APPENDIX 2: Shoreline profiles

Coordinate system: Universal Transverse Mercator Grid, Zone 55, Map Grid of Australia,

1994 (MGA94). Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 (GDA94) and Australian Height

Datum (Tasmania). Measurement units: metres.

Mulcahy Bay

Station Date/time Easting Northing Height

730/303 1/12/2014 16:40 396954.00 5225553.63 41.92

730/30301 1/12/2014 16:43 396947.72 5225550.14 39.93

730/30302 1/12/2014 16:45 396944.05 5225550.30 38.70

730/30303 1/12/2014 16:50 396935.73 5225548.37 34.69

730/30304 1/12/2014 16:53 396930.91 5225547.66 32.40

730/30305 1/12/2014 16:59 396900.30 5225542.39 26.52

730/30306 1/12/2014 17:00 396892.72 5225540.45 29.02

730/30307 1/12/2014 17:01 396888.57 5225538.37 31.53

730/30308 1/12/2014 17:02 396885.33 5225537.12 30.00

730/30309 1/12/2014 17:03 396880.88 5225536.19 29.42

730/30310 1/12/2014 17:04 396876.34 5225535.33 28.02

730/30311 1/12/2014 17:04 396873.10 5225534.34 27.28

730/30312 1/12/2014 17:04 396871.38 5225533.93 28.30

730/30313 1/12/2014 17:05 396867.78 5225532.80 25.90

730/30314 1/12/2014 17:05 396863.13 5225532.63 22.38


58

730/30315 1/12/2014 17:06 396856.08 5225530.68 17.13

730/30316 1/12/2014 17:06 396848.34 5225527.51 11.56

730/30317 1/12/2014 17:06 396842.27 5225526.38 7.82

730/30318 1/12/2014 17:06 396829.94 5225523.08 4.24

730/30319 1/12/2014 17:07 396817.37 5225519.47 2.71

730/30320 1/12/2014 17:07 396806.74 5225517.10 2.10

730/30321 1/12/2014 17:07 396804.92 5225517.02 1.74

730/30322 1/12/2014 17:08 396787.72 5225513.35 0.68


730/304 1/12/2014 15:50 396681.23 5225969.40 23.34

730/30401 1/12/2014 15:51 396678.91 5225967.29 22.69

730/30402 1/12/2014 15:53 396675.23 5225963.47 20.61

730/30403 1/12/2014 15:54 396673.47 5225960.70 18.91

730/30404 1/12/2014 15:55 396669.31 5225955.96 17.10

730/30405 1/12/2014 15:56 396664.65 5225952.04 18.27

730/30406 1/12/2014 15:57 396660.11 5225945.81 20.02

730/30407 1/12/2014 15:58 396655.07 5225940.77 19.43

730/30408 1/12/2014 15:59 396649.01 5225934.30 18.59

730/30409 1/12/2014 16:02 396646.98 5225931.75 19.40

730/30410 1/12/2014 16:04 396645.01 5225928.67 21.52

730/30411 1/12/2014 16:06 396640.02 5225922.90 26.46

730/30412 1/12/2014 16:06 396636.56 5225920.35 26.29


59

730/30413 1/12/2014 16:06 396631.28 5225917.02 24.75

730/30414 1/12/2014 16:07 396627.05 5225913.37 22.91

730/30415 1/12/2014 16:07 396624.12 5225910.49 21.03

730/30416 1/12/2014 16:07 396618.95 5225905.44 17.16

730/30417 1/12/2014 16:08 396616.70 5225899.95 13.67

730/30418 1/12/2014 16:08 396614.08 5225894.34 9.59

730/30419 1/12/2014 16:08 396609.41 5225889.64 6.97

730/30420 1/12/2014 16:09 396601.19 5225881.00 3.74

730/30421 1/12/2014 16:09 396592.93 5225873.53 2.31

730/30422 1/12/2014 16:09 396579.65 5225860.99 1.40

730/30423 1/12/2014 16:10 396565.39 5225849.10 0.67


730/305 1/12/2014 15:04 396405.97 5226124.09 25.00

730/30501 1/12/2014 15:06 396404.89 5226119.22 23.84

730/30502 1/12/2014 15:06 396403.22 5226113.69 20.84

730/30503 1/12/2014 15:07 396401.22 5226108.72 17.59

730/30504 1/12/2014 15:07 396399.51 5226104.35 15.07

730/30505 1/12/2014 15:08 396398.58 5226098.54 12.43

730/30506 1/12/2014 15:08 396396.73 5226092.22 9.80

730/30507 1/12/2014 15:09 396395.28 5226087.86 9.58

730/30508 1/12/2014 15:09 396393.16 5226081.52 10.07

730/30509 1/12/2014 15:10 396392.18 5226079.67 10.89


60

730/30510 1/12/2014 15:12 396392.51 5226076.87 11.96

730/30511 1/12/2014 15:18 396391.49 5226067.50 15.29

730/30512 1/12/2014 15:21 396388.87 5226059.93 21.22

730/30513 1/12/2014 15:22 396388.46 5226057.29 17.37

730/30514 1/12/2014 15:23 396386.03 5226050.81 12.78

730/30515 1/12/2014 15:24 396382.98 5226043.54 7.64

730/30516 1/12/2014 15:25 396381.55 5226040.64 5.91

730/30517 1/12/2014 15:26 396379.34 5226035.11 2.26

730/30518 1/12/2014 15:26 396374.14 5226023.76 1.44

730/30519 1/12/2014 15:26 396365.37 5226008.77 0.32


61

Wreck Bay


730/300 30/11/2014 16:49 401392.61 5217744.40 9.42

730/301 30/11/2014 16:51 401390.83 5217736.52 9.49

B303 30/11/2014 17:27 401386.93 5217723.09 10.87

B303A

401386.34 5217721.08 11.08

B304 30/11/2014 17:33 401384.77 5217709.15 18.41

B305 30/11/2014 17:34 401383.54 5217703.41 22.01

B306 30/11/2014 17:34 401382.66 5217700.83 22.86

B307 30/11/2014 17:35 401380.53 5217695.69 22.84

B308 30/11/2014 17:35 401377.18 5217686.21 21.73

B309 30/11/2014 17:35 401373.44 5217671.76 19.44

B310 30/11/2014 17:36 401370.85 5217661.82 18.54

B311 30/11/2014 17:36 401370.20 5217659.42 19.34

B312 30/11/2014 17:37 401369.42 5217657.59 19.45

B313 30/11/2014 17:38 401368.47 5217655.58 20.12

B314 30/11/2014 17:39 401367.38 5217653.89 17.70

B315 30/11/2014 17:39 401367.16 5217652.38 17.30

B316 30/11/2014 17:40 401365.68 5217643.00 15.64

B317 30/11/2014 17:40 401364.88 5217637.20 15.98

B318 30/11/2014 17:41 401364.04 5217629.39 18.29

B319 30/11/2014 17:41 401362.25 5217623.63 20.25

B320 30/11/2014 17:42 401361.00 5217619.23 21.79


62

B321 30/11/2014 17:43 401361.47 5217613.80 23.87

B322 30/11/2014 17:43 401361.60 5217611.74 23.20

B323 30/11/2014 17:44 401360.91 5217605.29 18.92

B324 30/11/2014 17:44 401359.37 5217598.09 14.02

B325 30/11/2014 17:45 401354.86 5217588.11 6.93

B326 30/11/2014 17:45 401350.66 5217578.75 4.06

B327 30/11/2014 17:45 401345.80 5217568.47 2.36

B328 30/11/2014 17:46 401338.87 5217554.40 1.41

B329 30/11/2014 17:46 401331.36 5217540.06 0.68


730/301 1/12/2014 18:28 401661.48 5217517.69 9.12

730/3011 1/12/2014 18:30 401659.94 5217510.84 8.51

730/3012 1/12/2014 18:31 401658.52 5217504.55 9.54

730/3013 1/12/2014 18:32 401657.67 5217500.13 9.90

730/3014 1/12/2014 18:34 401656.82 5217494.55 12.12

730/3015 1/12/2014 18:37 401655.01 5217490.64 13.00

730/3016 1/12/2014 18:37 401654.55 5217488.58 12.65

730/3017 1/12/2014 18:37 401654.37 5217488.21 11.59

730/3018 1/12/2014 18:38 401653.72 5217485.88 9.69

730/3019 1/12/2014 18:38 401652.24 5217482.18 6.95

730/3020 1/12/2014 18:39 401650.80 5217477.40 3.68

730/3021 1/12/2014 18:39 401650.37 5217473.37 3.07


63

730/3022 1/12/2014 18:40 401646.31 5217459.50 2.22

730/3023 1/12/2014 18:40 401642.27 5217445.25 1.56

730/3024 1/12/2014 18:40 401638.63 5217435.65 1.13

730/3025 1/12/2014 18:41 401634.69 5217428.93 0.71


730/302 30/11/2014 14:55 402057.36 5216942.15 19.37

730/303 30/11/2014 14:58 402055.05 5216943.24 19.04

730/304 30/11/2014 14:58 402052.34 5216945.07 18.33

730/305 30/11/2014 14:59 402049.99 5216946.13 17.75

730/307 30/11/2014 15:01 402044.27 5216949.71 15.03

730/308 30/11/2014 15:03 402040.32 5216952.19 13.40

730/309 30/11/2014 15:06 402037.41 5216953.14 12.45

730/310 30/11/2014 15:09 402033.86 5216954.88 11.37

730/311 30/11/2014 15:11 402028.88 5216957.48 10.58

730/312 30/11/2014 15:14 402026.32 5216958.85 10.82

730/313 30/11/2014 15:17 402018.72 5216962.57 11.25

730/314 30/11/2014 15:21 402014.32 5216967.93 13.04

730/315 30/11/2014 15:23 402011.15 5216967.79 13.27

730/316 30/11/2014 15:24 402007.67 5216970.32 13.01

730/317 30/11/2014 15:25 402003.18 5216972.26 11.91

730/318 30/11/2014 15:29 401998.05 5216975.22 12.53

730/319 30/11/2014 15:31 401994.28 5216977.47 12.73


64

730/320 30/11/2014 15:31 401992.88 5216978.21 12.03

730/321 30/11/2014 15:32 401992.63 5216978.63 10.94

730/322 30/11/2014 15:35 401991.54 5216979.29 10.41

730/323 30/11/2014 15:36 401991.19 5216980.14 9.29

730/324 30/11/2014 15:36 401989.93 5216980.48 8.80

730/325 30/11/2014 15:37 401987.56 5216981.54 6.82

730/326 30/11/2014 15:37 401986.07 5216982.31 6.02

730/327 30/11/2014 15:38 401984.67 5216983.48 4.98

730/328 30/11/2014 15:39 401982.16 5216984.08 2.85

730/329 30/11/2014 15:39 401980.12 5216985.77 2.56

730/330 30/11/2014 15:40 401967.88 5216992.80 1.75

730/331 30/11/2014 15:40 401956.13 5216999.68 1.41

730/332 30/11/2014 15:40 401946.43 5217004.96 1.43

730/333 30/11/2014 15:41 401941.60 5217007.00 1.04


65

Stephens Bay


730/306 2/12/2014 11:00 417253.32 5194858.19 52.14

730/30601 2/12/2014 11:02 417249.67 5194857.87 51.38

730/30602 2/12/2014 11:03 417246.20 5194857.89 50.35

730/30603 2/12/2014 11:03 417242.34 5194857.79 49.14

730/30604 2/12/2014 11:04 417237.69 5194858.32 50.06

730/30605 2/12/2014 11:04 417236.11 5194858.20 49.93

730/30606 2/12/2014 11:05 417231.88 5194858.76 47.70

730/30607 2/12/2014 11:05 417229.97 5194857.83 46.95

730/30608 2/12/2014 11:06 417226.79 5194856.93 45.27

730/30609 2/12/2014 11:07 417223.41 5194856.62 43.98

730/30610 2/12/2014 11:07 417221.75 5194856.33 43.51

730/30611 2/12/2014 11:08 417219.55 5194856.38 42.43

730/30612 2/12/2014 11:09 417216.35 5194856.03 39.36

730/30613 2/12/2014 11:10 417212.33 5194855.93 36.13

730/30614 2/12/2014 11:10 417208.85 5194856.03 35.50

730/30615 2/12/2014 11:10 417205.72 5194856.67 37.14

730/30616 2/12/2014 11:11 417202.67 5194856.84 35.08

730/30617 2/12/2014 11:11 417194.46 5194855.60 32.79

730/30618 2/12/2014 11:11 417191.57 5194855.26 31.68

730/30619 2/12/2014 11:12 417186.65 5194855.69 29.47


66

730/30620 2/12/2014 11:12 417181.79 5194855.69 26.64

730/30621 2/12/2014 11:13 417177.16 5194854.90 23.00

730/30622 2/12/2014 11:13 417172.26 5194854.03 20.81

730/30623 2/12/2014 11:13 417165.62 5194853.62 16.95

730/30624 2/12/2014 11:14 417154.09 5194852.53 13.16

730/30625 2/12/2014 11:14 417146.01 5194851.45 9.38

730/30626 2/12/2014 11:14 417136.74 5194850.56 6.37

730/30627 2/12/2014 11:15 417130.68 5194849.90 4.82

730/30628 2/12/2014 11:15 417117.14 5194848.32 4.19

730/30629 2/12/2014 11:15 417104.64 5194846.25 4.49

730/30630 2/12/2014 11:16 417102.19 5194845.86 3.74

730/30631 2/12/2014 11:19 417098.83 5194846.19 4.21

730/30632 2/12/2014 11:20 417096.07 5194844.49 4.90

730/30633 2/12/2014 11:21 417091.46 5194842.82 2.83

730/30634 2/12/2014 11:21 417087.48 5194841.73 2.39

730/30635 2/12/2014 11:22 417064.58 5194836.31 1.16

730/30636 2/12/2014 11:22 417039.93 5194831.25 0.18


730/307 2/12/2014 13:54 416961.92 5195444.02 4.98

730/30701 2/12/2014 14:02 416951.04 5195437.98 5.96

730/30702 2/12/2014 14:10 416934.21 5195429.51 9.41

730/30702A

416931.08 5195427.94 10.05


67

730/30703 2/12/2014 14:15 416926.15 5195423.39 14.63

730/30704 2/12/2014 14:21 416906.24 5195413.22 29.57

730/30705 2/12/2014 14:22 416904.43 5195411.53 30.70

730/30706 2/12/2014 14:22 416901.26 5195410.28 29.87

730/30707 2/12/2014 14:23 416893.81 5195406.81 26.20

730/30708 2/12/2014 14:23 416886.36 5195402.94 21.05

730/30709 2/12/2014 14:24 416876.19 5195398.92 14.56

730/30710 2/12/2014 14:25 416871.98 5195397.08 11.36

730/30711 2/12/2014 14:25 416865.06 5195392.63 7.05

730/30712 2/12/2014 14:26 416857.82 5195387.45 3.43

730/30713 2/12/2014 14:27 416857.23 5195387.21 2.07

730/30714 2/12/2014 14:28 416844.01 5195377.42 1.10

730/30715 2/12/2014 14:28 416829.27 5195368.88 0.36


730/308 2/12/2014 15:28 416691.81 5195765.29 5.15

730/30801 2/12/2014 15:30 416681.03 5195761.89 5.61

730/30801A

416679.66 5195761.42 4.21

730/30802 2/12/2014 15:36 416677.16 5195759.99 6.06

730/30803 2/12/2014 15:53 416659.43 5195749.84 17.49

730/30804 2/12/2014 15:57 416655.79 5195747.16 21.15

730/30805 2/12/2014 15:57 416652.50 5195744.73 22.28


68

730/30806 2/12/2014 15:57 416646.54 5195741.51 21.49

730/30807 2/12/2014 15:58 416642.47 5195738.79 21.30

730/30808 2/12/2014 15:58 416638.85 5195734.68 17.89

730/30809 2/12/2014 15:58 416636.98 5195733.37 17.16

730/30810 2/12/2014 15:59 416633.26 5195728.58 12.74

730/30811 2/12/2014 15:59 416627.38 5195725.67 8.66

730/30812 2/12/2014 16:00 416622.50 5195721.65 5.02

730/30813 2/12/2014 16:00 416614.56 5195714.72 2.30

730/30814 2/12/2014 16:01 416606.60 5195709.13 1.64

730/30815 2/12/2014 16:01 416582.36 5195692.15 0.14


730/309 2/12/2014 16:46 416288.75 5196114.18 8.41

730/30901 2/12/2014 16:47 416288.64 5196113.99 7.86

730/30902 2/12/2014 16:48 416283.78 5196107.49 7.42

730/30903 2/12/2014 16:49 416276.90 5196099.89 7.28

730/30904 2/12/2014 16:50 416273.27 5196094.99 6.86

730/30905 2/12/2014 16:53 416269.60 5196090.17 7.17

730/30906 2/12/2014 16:54 416265.55 5196087.92 7.52

730/30907 2/12/2014 16:54 416264.47 5196086.04 8.60

730/30908 2/12/2014 16:55 416263.29 5196085.49 7.51

730/30909 2/12/2014 16:56 416262.97 5196085.41 6.60

730/30910 2/12/2014 16:56 416261.55 5196082.39 4.56


69

730/30911 2/12/2014 16:57 416260.51 5196080.14 2.58

730/30912 2/12/2014 16:57 416252.11 5196069.03 1.45

730/30914 2/12/2014 16:59 416242.99 5196054.64 0.45


70

Window Pane Bay


730/310 3/12/2014 11:57 420758.11 5187775.27 38.36

730/3101 3/12/2014 12:06 420755.42 5187766.65 40.23

730/3102 3/12/2014 12:08 420752.26 5187757.95 43.11

730/3103 3/12/2014 12:13 420748.58 5187748.75 43.94

730/3104 3/12/2014 12:16 420743.86 5187740.11 49.04

730/3105 3/12/2014 12:16 420743.51 5187738.55 48.60

730/3106 3/12/2014 12:17 420743.04 5187736.16 46.80

730/3107 3/12/2014 12:17 420742.78 5187735.56 45.86

730/3108 3/12/2014 12:18 420742.69 5187734.32 45.13

730/3109 3/12/2014 12:18 420742.39 5187733.82 44.07

730/3110 3/12/2014 12:19 420740.80 5187726.47 39.08

730/3111 3/12/2014 12:19 420740.53 5187725.66 37.94

730/3112 3/12/2014 12:20 420738.62 5187717.64 32.01

730/3113 3/12/2014 12:21 420736.58 5187708.90 25.42

730/3114 3/12/2014 12:22 420734.24 5187700.84 19.46

730/3115 3/12/2014 12:23 420731.85 5187691.71 13.40

730/3116 3/12/2014 12:24 420729.23 5187680.68 6.43

730/3117 3/12/2014 12:24 420728.21 5187676.22 3.85

730/3118 3/12/2014 12:24 420726.73 5187671.70 2.89

730/3119 3/12/2014 12:25 420723.15 5187657.67 1.46

730/3120 3/12/2014 12:25 420720.43 5187646.76 0.10


71


730/311

421430.71 5187303.59 20.54

730/31101 3/12/2014 17:13 421423.50 5187298.55 24.34

730/31101A 3/12/2014 17:28 421423.48 5187298.55 24.41

730/31102 3/12/2014 17:31 421421.20 5187297.20 23.93

730/31103 3/12/2014 17:32 421419.46 5187295.55 22.47

730/31104 3/12/2014 17:33 421419.21 5187295.45 21.00

730/31105 3/12/2014 17:35 421416.70 5187293.98 18.74

730/31106 3/12/2014 17:35 421414.58 5187291.78 16.84

730/31107 3/12/2014 17:36 421411.90 5187289.07 14.41

730/31108 3/12/2014 17:36 421410.44 5187287.06 12.60

730/31109 3/12/2014 17:37 421408.23 5187284.83 10.74

730/31110 3/12/2014 17:37 421404.85 5187281.77 7.28

730/31111 3/12/2014 17:38 421402.85 5187279.59 5.07

730/31112 3/12/2014 17:38 421402.12 5187278.52 4.44

730/31113 3/12/2014 17:39 421401.56 5187277.88 3.37

730/31114 3/12/2014 17:39 421395.26 5187272.16 1.77

730/31115 3/12/2014 17:39 421389.34 5187264.79 0.81

NOTE: the position of 730/311 was determined by tape, compass and clinometer survey from 730/31101; the accuracy of the result is estimated to be ± 0.2 m


72


730/312 3/12/2014 14:36 421523.68 5187150.96 18.76

730/31201 3/12/2014 14:36 421522.09 5187150.26 18.25

730/31202 3/12/2014 14:37 421518.99 5187149.31 16.73

730/31203 3/12/2014 14:38 421515.24 5187148.32 14.71

730/31204 3/12/2014 14:38 421512.25 5187147.42 12.89

730/31205 3/12/2014 14:39 421508.79 5187146.00 10.51

730/31206 3/12/2014 14:40 421506.71 5187145.63 9.31

730/31207 3/12/2014 14:41 421504.47 5187145.23 7.98

730/31208 3/12/2014 14:42 421502.91 5187144.11 6.57

730/31209 3/12/2014 14:42 421501.96 5187143.49 5.77

730/31210 3/12/2014 14:43 421500.78 5187142.59 4.70

730/31211 3/12/2014 14:43 421496.13 5187139.87 3.31

730/31212 3/12/2014 14:44 421490.80 5187137.20 2.23

730/31213 3/12/2014 14:45 421483.49 5187132.58 0.61

730/31214 3/12/2014 14:46 421481.41 5187130.25 0.22


73

Cox Bight


730/313 4/12/2014 9:25 438096.90 5184462.93 4.06

730/31301 4/12/2014 9:26 438096.70 5184456.09 4.10

730/31303 4/12/2014 9:33 438097.13 5184451.07 4.73

730/31304 4/12/2014 9:40 438097.68 5184445.94 7.01

730/31305 4/12/2014 9:47 438098.47 5184443.24 7.50

730/31306 4/12/2014 9:48 438099.26 5184437.57 6.34

730/31307 4/12/2014 9:52 438100.11 5184437.04 5.22

730/31308 4/12/2014 9:52 438100.08 5184435.52 4.36

730/31309 4/12/2014 9:53 438100.27 5184434.06 3.05

730/31310 4/12/2014 9:54 438101.30 5184425.37 1.47

730/31311 4/12/2014 9:54 438100.99 5184411.46 0.88

730/31312 4/12/2014 9:54 438101.03 5184397.48 0.27


74


730/319 4/12/2014 13:50 439254.35 5184582.11 3.97

730/31900 4/12/2014 13:51 439254.35 5184582.10 3.97

730/31901 4/12/2014 13:52 439254.41 5184568.90 3.55

730/31903 4/12/2014 14:04 439249.62 5184532.50 3.31

730/31904 4/12/2014 14:04 439250.53 5184525.99 3.41

730/31905 4/12/2014 14:05 439250.68 5184522.22 3.58

730/31906 4/12/2014 14:05 439250.84 5184520.71 2.95

730/31907 4/12/2014 14:06 439252.66 5184509.07 1.78

730/31908 4/12/2014 14:06 439256.40 5184487.32 0.83

730/31909 4/12/2014 14:07 439259.68 5184466.85 0.07


75


730/320 4/12/2014 14:36 439962.53 5184423.94 19.12

730/3201 4/12/2014 14:38 439960.52 5184417.65 18.96

730/3202 4/12/2014 14:40 439958.95 5184408.31 20.58

730/3203 4/12/2014 14:42 439958.85 5184404.82 20.47

730/3204 4/12/2014 14:46 439955.48 5184392.76 16.90

730/3205 4/12/2014 14:47 439953.95 5184388.45 16.77

730/3206 4/12/2014 14:48 439952.07 5184386.01 15.98

730/3207 4/12/2014 14:49 439951.20 5184384.78 15.36

730/3208 4/12/2014 14:49 439950.13 5184382.62 13.54

730/3209 4/12/2014 14:50 439948.42 5184378.00 9.66

730/3210 4/12/2014 14:51 439946.22 5184368.72 6.23

730/3211 4/12/2014 14:51 439942.90 5184355.42 2.83

730/3212 4/12/2014 14:51 439937.57 5184336.31 1.60

730/3213 4/12/2014 14:52 439930.84 5184313.33 0.86

730/3214 4/12/2014 14:52 439922.45 5184284.73 -0.01


76


730/321 4/12/2014 16:03 441076.26 5183768.26 5.18

730/32101 4/12/2014 16:04 441072.20 5183763.14 4.71

730/32102 4/12/2014 16:10 441069.52 5183762.13 4.69

730/32103 4/12/2014 16:17 441056.88 5183747.64 5.03

730/32104 4/12/2014 16:19 441052.16 5183740.76 5.40

730/32105 4/12/2014 16:20 441049.11 5183735.84 6.34

730/32106 4/12/2014 16:21 441045.61 5183731.30 5.40

730/32107 4/12/2014 16:22 441044.61 5183729.65 5.10

730/32108 4/12/2014 16:22 441043.02 5183727.86 4.43

730/32109 4/12/2014 16:23 441042.48 5183728.01 3.34

730/32110 4/12/2014 16:23 441041.20 5183725.65 2.71

730/32111 4/12/2014 16:23 441038.33 5183719.68 1.98

730/32112 4/12/2014 16:24 441031.58 5183704.54 1.23

730/32113 4/12/2014 16:24 441022.88 5183687.63 0.63

730/32114 4/12/2014 16:24 441015.63 5183672.30 0.01

NOTE: height at 730/32105 was amended from 4.75 to 6.34 in response to an apparent anomaly in the profile plot. It appears the pole height was recorded as 3.57 when it was actually 2.00.


77

Prion Beach


730/314 5/12/2014 14:26 463498.17 5180799.49 6.98

730/31401 5/12/2014 14:28 463498.78 5180796.66 7.73

730/31402 5/12/2014 14:31 463498.63 5180793.96 7.60

730/31403 5/12/2014 14:32 463497.32 5180786.46 6.52

730/31404 5/12/2014 14:34 463496.10 5180783.57 5.63

730/31405 5/12/2014 14:36 463495.86 5180780.82 5.21

730/31406 5/12/2014 14:37 463495.71 5180778.96 4.51

730/31407 5/12/2014 14:38 463493.85 5180773.95 6.99

730/31408 5/12/2014 14:38 463492.77 5180772.40 6.74

730/31409 5/12/2014 14:39 463492.63 5180772.04 5.64

730/31410 5/12/2014 14:40 463490.81 5180769.27 3.95

730/31411 5/12/2014 14:40 463488.10 5180761.29 2.44

730/31412 5/12/2014 14:40 463481.48 5180743.77 1.68

730/31413 5/12/2014 14:41 463471.60 5180721.88 1.01

730/31414 5/12/2014 14:42 463460.57 5180695.59 -0.03


78


730/315 5/12/2014 15:50 463969.41 5180608.43 12.79

PBT6/4 5/12/2014 15:52 463968.75 5180607.60 12.54

730/31501 5/12/2014 15:55 463966.14 5180604.43 11.91

PBT6/3 5/12/2014 15:57 463963.59 5180601.45 10.88

730/31502 5/12/2014 15:58 463960.38 5180597.96 8.50

PBT6/1 5/12/2014 16:06 463947.03 5180579.91 8.37

730/31503 5/12/2014 16:10 463942.91 5180575.11 8.40

730/31504 5/12/2014 16:11 463942.07 5180571.66 9.47

730/31505 5/12/2014 16:13 463941.85 5180570.85 8.11

730/31508 5/12/2014 16:25 463938.67 5180570.76 7.06

730/31509 5/12/2014 16:26 463934.95 5180568.54 4.91

730/31510 5/12/2014 16:26 463933.28 5180568.04 4.68

730/31511 5/12/2014 16:27 463932.75 5180567.93 3.83

730/31512 5/12/2014 16:27 463931.13 5180565.73 3.26

730/31513 5/12/2014 16:27 463929.73 5180562.04 2.40

730/31514 5/12/2014 16:28 463918.10 5180553.09 1.66

730/31515 5/12/2014 16:28 463902.90 5180540.30 0.97

730/31516 5/12/2014 16:29 463884.50 5180527.77 0.07

NOTE: PBT6/4, PBT6/3 and PBT6/1 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their transect is not plotted as the data require further interpretation.


79


730/316 5/12/2014 17:37 464609.87 5180329.95 13.55

PBT5/4 5/12/2014 17:39 464609.39 5180329.22 13.15

730/31601 5/12/2014 17:41 464608.17 5180324.97 13.07

PBT5/3 5/12/2014 17:45 464602.67 5180317.89 10.44

PBT5/2 5/12/2014 17:49 464598.12 5180311.30 10.15

730/31603 5/12/2014 17:53 464594.75 5180307.47 13.07

PBT5/1 5/12/2014 17:54 464593.82 5180305.55 13.27

730/31604 5/12/2014 17:55 464593.22 5180304.62 12.88

730/31605 5/12/2014 17:58 464590.78 5180301.86 10.13

730/31606 5/12/2014 17:59 464589.54 5180298.04 6.94

730/31607 5/12/2014 18:00 464588.96 5180296.87 6.64

730/31608 5/12/2014 18:00 464587.70 5180295.61 5.15

730/31609 5/12/2014 18:00 464587.23 5180295.00 4.75

730/31610 5/12/2014 18:01 464586.88 5180294.37 3.78

730/31611 5/12/2014 18:01 464586.02 5180293.27 4.17

730/31612 5/12/2014 18:01 464580.45 5180286.87 2.64

730/31613 5/12/2014 18:02 464568.27 5180274.43 1.46

730/31614 5/12/2014 18:02 464557.48 5180262.60 0.77

730/31615 5/12/2014 18:03 464543.38 5180246.39 -0.06

NOTE: PBT5/4, PBT5/3 and PBT5/2 and PBT5/1 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their transect is shown in red on the profile plot above.


80


730/317 6/12/2014 14:29 465142.94 5180082.36 21.58

PBT4/3 6/12/2014 14:31 465142.41 5180081.42 21.20

730/31701 6/12/2014 14:33 465141.01 5180079.72 20.76

730/31702 6/12/2014 14:35 465136.59 5180074.74 17.92

730/31703 6/12/2014 14:37 465134.02 5180070.52 15.32

PBT4/2 6/12/2014 14:39 465132.46 5180068.08 15.14

730/31704 6/12/2014 14:42 465127.36 5180063.98 13.84

730/31705 6/12/2014 14:44 465124.35 5180058.33 12.96

PBT4/1 6/12/2014 14:45 465123.18 5180056.68 12.34

730/31706 6/12/2014 14:48 465120.14 5180053.83 9.54

730/31707 6/12/2014 14:49 465119.71 5180053.33 8.44

730/31708 6/12/2014 14:51 465117.53 5180050.25 5.31

730/31709 6/12/2014 14:51 465116.88 5180049.00 4.77

730/31710 6/12/2014 14:52 465116.75 5180048.57 3.93

730/31711 6/12/2014 14:52 465116.48 5180047.89 4.18

730/31712 6/12/2014 14:53 465113.84 5180042.39 2.83

730/31713 6/12/2014 14:53 465105.15 5180031.33 1.47

730/31714 6/12/2014 14:53 465095.28 5180018.90 0.96

730/31715 6/12/2014 14:54 465082.61 5180003.26 0.05

NOTE: PBT4/3, PBT4/2 and PBT4/1 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their transect is shown in red on the profile plot above.


81


730/318 6/12/2014 15:44 465667.37 5179804.94 18.05

PBT3/1 6/12/2014 15:50 465665.89 5179802.82 17.55

730/31801 6/12/2014 15:52 465664.52 5179800.83 17.43

PBT3/2 6/12/2014 15:58 465661.17 5179794.79 15.76

730/31802 6/12/2014 15:59 465659.74 5179792.50 15.35

730/31803 6/12/2014 16:00 465658.38 5179790.65 15.85

PBT3/3 6/12/2014 16:01 465657.41 5179788.91 15.91

730/31804 6/12/2014 16:04 465655.26 5179785.17 12.48

PBT3/4 6/12/2014 16:06 465654.07 5179782.79 10.26

PBT3/6 6/12/2014 16:19 465651.40 5179777.18 5.41

730/31806 6/12/2014 16:23 465651.11 5179776.45 3.65

730/31807 6/12/2014 16:24 465650.74 5179775.42 3.64

730/31808 6/12/2014 16:24 465648.35 5179770.55 2.65

730/31809 6/12/2014 16:27 465647.91 5179770.16 1.70

730/31810 6/12/2014 16:28 465644.08 5179755.17 0.92

730/31811 6/12/2014 16:28 465638.52 5179736.19 0.06

NOTE: PBT3/1, PBT3/2, PBT3/3, PBT3/4 and PT3/6 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their transect is not plotted as the data requires further interpretation.


82


730/322 6/12/2014 12:03 466239.62 5179493.69 19.75

730/32201 6/12/2014 12:05 466237.97 5179490.85 19.27

730/32202 6/12/2014 12:06 466236.09 5179488.59 18.33

PBT1/5 6/12/2014 12:09 466233.32 5179483.75 16.56

730/32203 6/12/2014 12:13 466229.03 5179475.58 12.42

730/32204 6/12/2014 12:15 466226.03 5179469.51 16.11

730/32205 6/12/2014 12:16 466224.54 5179467.13 13.69

PBT1/4 6/12/2014 12:18 466220.64 5179460.43 8.42

730/32206 6/12/2014 12:19 466219.95 5179459.11 6.41

730/32207 6/12/2014 12:19 466218.54 5179456.67 4.50

730/32208 6/12/2014 12:20 466213.99 5179449.71 3.16

730/32209 6/12/2014 12:20 466205.95 5179437.31 2.09

730/32210 6/12/2014 12:21 466199.37 5179429.04 1.48

730/32211 6/12/2014 12:21 466191.21 5179419.56 0.34

NOTE: PBT1/5 and PBT1/4 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their transect is not plotted as the data requires further interpretation.


83


730/323 6/12/2014 10:34 466497.16 5179358.30 16.13

730/3231 6/12/2014 10:38 466493.22 5179343.66 10.70

730/3232 6/12/2014 10:40 466490.49 5179337.02 14.81

730/3233 6/12/2014 10:44 466487.87 5179326.90 21.36

PBT2/5 6/12/2014 10:46 466487.18 5179325.02 21.68

PBT2/4 6/12/2014 10:48 466485.48 5179319.41 21.55

PB2T/3 6/12/2014 10:50 466479.60 5179309.62 15.23

730/3234 6/12/2014 10:52 466477.24 5179305.30 12.11

730/3235 6/12/2014 10:53 466476.67 5179304.79 11.01

730/3236 6/12/2014 10:54 466474.84 5179302.87 9.61

730/3237 6/12/2014 10:55 466474.52 5179300.39 8.65

730/3238 6/12/2014 10:55 466474.34 5179300.07 7.86

730/3239 6/12/2014 10:56 466473.67 5179297.85 5.80

730/3240 6/12/2014 10:56 466473.03 5179295.98 5.22

730/3241 6/12/2014 10:56 466472.68 5179295.03 4.02

730/3242 6/12/2014 10:56 466472.32 5179294.02 4.04

730/3243 6/12/2014 10:57 466465.32 5179282.59 2.43

730/3244 6/12/2014 10:57 466458.79 5179271.60 1.78

730/3245 6/12/2014 10:57 466453.85 5179264.71 1.39

730/3246 6/12/2014 10:57 466444.83 5179253.37 0.33

NOTE: PBT2/5, PBT2/4 and PBT2/3 are marked points surveyed by Cullen & Dell (2013). Their data is not plotted as the data require further interpretation.

Mineral Resources Tasmania

Mineral Resources Tasmania Depa r tm en t o f S t a te Gr owt h

APPENDIX 3: Sand mineralogy and particle size analysis

Laboratory Report

MPR2015/037

Sand testing:

SW Tasmania

An unpublished Mineral Resources Tasmania report for

DPIPWE

by R S Bottrill & R N Woolley

24 April 2015

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area

MPR2012/047 Page 85 of 105

Summary

The samples studied comprised nine samples of sand from various beach areas in SW

Tasmania, all found to be well sorted sands dominated by quartz and mostly with small

amounts of shell grit, trace feldspars and other minerals and lithic materials.

Introduction

The objective of this study is to determine the mineralogy and size distribution of nine

samples of sand from various beach areas in SW Tasmania. The sample details are given in

Table 1.

The samples were also registered with Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT) (with precise

locations recorded) with the results added to the MRT database of Tasmanian soils, but are

flagged as restricted.

The samples were all prepared and analysed in the MRT Laboratories, Rosny Park, Tasmania.

Table 1: Sample details: Samples submitted

Registration

Number Field No. Location

Sample

Description

G406301 PB6D Prion Beach (transect 730/319) Dune sand

G406302 PB6B Prion Beach (transect 730/319) Beach sand

G406303 CE2B Cox Bight (transect 730/320) Beach sand

G406304 WP1B

Window Pane Bay (transect

730/310) Beach sand

G406305 WP1D

Window Pane Bay (transect

730/310) Dune sand

G406306 SB3B Stephens Bay (transect 730/308) Beach sand

G406307 WB2B Wreck Bay (transect 730/301) Beach sand

G406308 MB2B Mulcahy Bay (transect 730/304) Beach sand

G406309 MB2D Mulcahy Bay (transect 730/304) Dune sand

Analytical techniques

The samples were all prepared, examined and analysed by XRD, chemical techniques and low

power microscopy in the MRT laboratories, Rosny Park, Tasmania.

Sizings

The samples were sized by wet sieving in accordance with Australian standard soil test

method AS 1289.3.6.1, in the Mineral Resources Tasmania Laboratories, Rosny Park,

Tasmania. The results are shown in Appendix 1 and summarized in Table 2.

XRD

The samples were prepared, examined and analysed in the MRT laboratories, Rosny Park,

Tasmania. They were run on an automated Philips X-Ray diffractometer system: PW 1729

generator, PW 1050 goniometer and PW 1710 microprocessor with nickel-filtered copper

radiation at 35kV/25mA, a graphite monochromator (PW1752), sample spinner and a

proportional detector (sealed gas filled PW1711). Our typical step-size is 0.02 degrees, and

the standard scanning speed is 0.02 degrees/second. The PW1710 system is presently driven


MPR2012/047 Page 86 of 105

by the CSIRO XRD software: "VisualXRD", "PW1710 for Windows" and "XPLOT for

Windows". Interpretation and quantification is largely manual, using a series of prepared

standards of the more common minerals to enable some semi-quantitative analysis. Quartz, if

present, is used as an internal standard; and if not present, it is often added to the sample for a

supplementary scan. Our semi-quantitative results are calculated using single-peak

calibration factors derived from scans of known mixtures of minerals.

LOI

The samples were analysed for loss on ignition (LOI) by firing a weighed part of the sample

at 1050oC in muffle furnace, determining weight loss gravimetrically. The results are shown

in Appendix 1.

Results

The XRD results are attached in Appendix 1 and indicate that all the sands are all quartz rich,

many with minor calcite and aragonite, representing shell grit, trace salt (halite) and trace

micas, feldspars and other minerals probably representing lithic grains. Loss on Ignition (LOI)

was determined and used to refine the carbonate contents.

Most samples are well sized and show very small amounts of silt or clay (maximum of 0.3

wt.% in the <63 micron fraction), and no detectable gravel (>2mm).

R S Bottrill R N Woolley

MINERALOGIST/PETROLOGIST TECHNICAL OFFICER

Disclaimers

While every care has been taken in the preparation of this report, no warranty is given as to

the correctness of the information and no liability is accepted for any statement or opinion or

for any error or omission. No reader should act or fail to act on the basis of any material

contained herein. Readers should consult professional advisers. As a result the Crown in

Right of the State of Tasmania and its employees, contractors and agents expressly disclaim

all and any liability (including all liability from or attributable to any negligent or wrongful

act or omission) to any persons whatsoever in respect of anything done or omitted to be done

by any such person in reliance whether in whole or in part upon any of the material in this

report.

These analyses collected in the MRT laboratories, along with some other data on the samples

submitted, may enter the MRT databases but every attempt will be made to ensure the data

remains closed file and not be available externally, except at your request.


MPR2012/047 Page 87 of 105

Appendix 1: Mineral Resources Tasmania Laboratory Report Client: R. Eberhard, DPIPWE

Sample Source: Various

MRT Job Number: LJN2015/037

Analyses: Approximate Mineralogy and Loss on Ignition Analyst: R.N. Woolley

Methods: X-Ray Diffraction and Heating to 1050°C Date: 14 April 2015

Results:

Field No. PB6B PB6D CE2B WP1B WP1D

MRT Reg. No. G406301 G406302 G406303 G406304 G406305

Mineral Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Wt. %

Quartz 87 ± 4 90 ± 4 91 ± 4 97 ± 3 99 ± 1

Calcite 7 ± 1 5 ± 1 3 ± 0.5

Aragonite 2 ± 1 1.5 ± 0.5 *

Mica 2 ± 1 1.5 ± 0.5 1.5 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5 *

Plagioclase 1 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5 1.5 ± 0.5 *

K-Feldspar ? ? 1 ± 0.5 ?

Chlorite *

Halite * 1.5 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5

Rutile ?

Loss on Ignition 4.38% 3.48% 1.91% 0.41% 0.10%

Field No. SB2B WB2B MB2B MB2D

MRT Reg. No. G406306 G406307 G406308 G406309

Mineral Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Wt. %

Quartz 79 ± 4 40 ± 4 93 ± 3 94 ± 3

Calcite 12 ± 1 41 ± 4 3 ± 1 2 ± 1

Aragonite 4 ± 1 12 ± 2 1 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5

Mica 2 ± 1 3 ± 1 1 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5

Plagioclase 1.5 ± 0.5 1 ± 0.5 * *

K-Feldspar * ? * ? 1

Chlorite * 1 ± 0.5 *

Halite 1 ± 0.5 3 ± 1 *

Rutile ? ? 1

Loss on Ignition 8.12% 24.36% 2.12% 1.46%

* = trace; ? = possible trace 1 = approximately 1% ± 0.5% of Rutile or K-Feldspar (or a mixture of both) present

Peak overlap (e.g. Rutile and K-Feldspar) may interfere with identifications and quantitative

calculations.

Amorphous minerals (e.g. organic matter, some hydrous iron oxides) and minerals present in trace

amounts may not be detected.


MPR2012/047 Page 88 of 105

Appendix 2: Mineral Resources Tasmania Laboratory Report

Client: R. Eberhard, DPIPWE MRT Job Number: LJN2015/037 Sample Location: Various Analysis: Soil Grain-Sizing Method: Sieve Analysis Analyst: R.N. Woolley

Date: 10 April 2015

Prion Beach PB6B (G406301)

Weight of Sample Used: 25.37g

Size (µm) Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Mass (g) % Passing

8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.02 0.02 99.9

500 1.56 1.58 93.8

250 11.43 13.01 48.7

180 8.20 21.21 16.4

125 4.03 25.25 0.5

90 0.10 25.34 0.1

63 0.01 25.35 0.1

Pan 0.02 25.37

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000%

Passin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - PB6B


MPR2012/047 Page 89 of 105

Prion Beach PB6D (G406302)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.00 0.00 100.0

250 1.26 1.26 94.0

180 6.07 7.33 65.1

125 12.98 20.31 3.3

90 0.57 20.88 0.6

63 0.06 20.94 0.3

Pan 0.06 21.00

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - PB6D


MPR2012/047 Page 90 of 105

Cox Bight CE2B (G406303)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.02 0.02 99.9

250 0.31 0.33 98.9

180 3.32 3.65 87.4

125 23.90 27.55 5.2

90 1.49 29.04 0.1

63 0.02 29.06 0.1

Pan 0.01 29.07

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - CE2B


MPR2012/047 Page 91 of 105

Window Pane Bay WP1B (G406304)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.17 0.17 99.2

250 20.48 20.65 7.0

180 1.53 22.18 0.1

125 0.02 22.20 0.0

90 0.00 22.00 0.0

63 0.00 22.20 0.0

Pan 0.00 22.20

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - WP1B


MPR2012/047 Page 92 of 105

Window Pane Bay WP1D (G406305)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.09 0.09 99.6

250 14.57 14.66 36.4

180 7.88 22.54 2.2

125 0.47 23.01 0.2

90 0.02 23.03 0.1

63 0.01 23.04 0.1

Pan 0.01 23.05

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - WP1D


MPR2012/047 Page 93 of 105

Stephens Bay SB2B (G406306)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.02 0.02 99.9

250 2.85 2.87 88.2

180 9.91 12.78 47.3

125 11.12 23.90 1.4

90 0.26 24.16 0.3

63 0.02 24.18 0.2

Pan 0.06 24.24

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - SB2B


MPR2012/047 Page 94 of 105

Wreck Bay WB2B (G406307)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.38 0.38 98.4

250 10.57 10.95 54.7

180 10.89 21.84 9.6

125 2.17 24.01 0.6

90 0.08 24.09 0.3

63 0.02 24.11 0.2

Pan 0.05 24.16

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - WB2B


MPR2012/047 Page 95 of 105

Mulcahy Bay MB2B (G406308)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.00 0.00 100.0

250 4.39 4.39 80.3

180 14.28 18.67 16.1

125 3.56 22.23 0.1

90 0.03 22.26 0.0

63 0.00 22.26 0.0

Pan 0.00 22.26

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - MB2B


MPR2012/047 Page 96 of 105

Mulcahy Bay MB2D (G406309)



8000 0.00 0.00 100.0

4000 0.00 0.00 100.0

2000 0.00 0.00 100.0

1000 0.00 0.00 100.0

500 0.00 0.00 100.0

250 4.03 4.03 83.1

180 15.49 19.52 18.3

125 4.21 23.73 0.7

90 0.09 23.82 0.3

63 0.02 23.84 0.2

Pan 0.05 23.89

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

10100100010000

% P

assin

g

Size (µm)

Grain-Size Analysis - MB2D


MPR2012/047 Page 97 of 105

APPENDIX 4: Metadata

Metadata format follows the NRM data library (http://nrmdatalibrary.dpiw.tas.gov.au).

::Identification info

Title: DIGITAL IMAGERY OF SELECTED BEACHES, TASMANIAN

WILDERNESS WORLD HERITAGE AREA, DECEMBER 2014

Date: 2015-02-19

Date type: Images

Abstract: Digital images were collected during field work to establish coastal

erosion monitoring transects at selected beaches within the Tasmanian

Wilderness World Heritage Area. The following beaches were

photographed: Mulcahy Bay, Wreck Bay, Towterer Beach, Stephens

Bay, Noyhener Beach, Window Pane Bay, Cox Bight, Louisa Bay,

Turua Beach and Prion Beach. The images comprise low level oblique

aerial sequences and ground-based images on and adjacent to erosion

monitoring transects. Further information is available in the report:

Eberhard, R., Sharples, C., Bowden, N. & Comfort, M. (2015).

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmania

Wilderness World Heritage Area: Establishment Report. Nature

Conservation Report Series 15/3. Natural Values Conservation

Branch, Natural & Cultural Heritage Division, Department of Primary

Industries and Water, Hobart.

Status: completed

::Data Point of contact

Organisation

name:

Natural Values Conservation Branch, Natural and Cultural

Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water

and Environment, Tasmania

Position

name:

Karst Officer, Geoconservation Section

Voice: +61 3 6165 4410

Facsimile: +61 3 6223 8603

Postal

Address:

GPO Box 44

City: Hobart

State: Tasmania

Postcode: 7001

Country: Australia

E-mail: [email protected]

OnLine

resource:

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/geoconservation

Role: Project co-ordinator

Maintenance

and update

frequency:

notPlanned

http://nrmdatalibrary.dpiw.tas.gov.au/

mailto:[email protected]


MPR2012/047 Page 98 of 105

Name: Digital imagery of selected beaches, Tasmanian Wilderness World

Heritage Area, December 2014

Descriptive

keywords:

Coastal landforms, sea-level rise, Tasmanian Wilderness World

Heritage Area

Language: English

Topic

category:

environment

::Data quality info

Hierarchy

level:

nonGeographicDataset

::Distribution info

::OnLine

resource

OnLine

resource:

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/publications-forms-and-

permits/publications/nature-conservation-report-series

::Metadata

constraints

Use limitation: N/A

Use

constraints:

Copyright

::Metadata

Author

Organisation

name:

Natural Values Conservation Branch, Natural and Cultural Heritage

Division, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and

Environment, Tasmania

Position name: Karst Officer, Geoconservation Section

Role: PointOfContact


MPR2012/047 Page 99 of 105


Title: SHORELINE PROFILES, TASMANIAN WILDERNESS WORLD

HERITAGE AREA, DECEMBER 2014

Date: 2015-02-19

Date type: Geodetic survey (easting, northing, height)

Abstract: Shoreline profiles were surveyed during field work to establish coastal

erosion monitoring transects on selected beaches within the

Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (Mulcahy Bay, Wreck

Bay, Stephens Bay, Window Pane Bay, Cox Bight and Prion Beach).

The approach follows the methodology of the Tasmanian Shoreline

Monitoring and Archiving (TASMARC) project. The data is

referenced to the Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 (GDA94) and

Australian Height Datum (Tasmania). Further information is available

in the report: Eberhard, R., Sharples, C., Bowden, N. & Comfort, M.

(2015). Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the

Tasmania Wilderness World Heritage Area: Establishment Report.

Nature Conservation Report Series 15/3. Natural Values Conservation

Branch, Natural & Cultural Heritage Division, Department of Primary

Industries and Water, Hobart.

Status: completed


Organisation

name:

Natural Values Conservation Branch, Natural and Cultural

Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water

and Environment, Tasmania

Position

name:


Voice: +61 3 6165 4410

Facsimile: +61 3 6223 8603

Postal

Address:

GPO Box 44

City: Hobart

State: Tasmania

Postcode: 7001

Country: Australia


OnLine

resource:



Maintenance

and update

frequency:

The survey transects may be repeated approximately annually.

Name: Shoreline profiles, Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area,

December 2014

Descriptive Coastal landforms, sea-level rise, Tasmanian Wilderness World



MPR2012/047 Page 100 of 105

keywords: Heritage Area

Language: English

Topic

category:

environment

::Data quality info

Hierarchy

level:


::Distribution info

::OnLine

resource

OnLine

resource:




::Metadata

constraints

Use limitation: N/A

Use

constraints:

nil

::Metadata

Author

Organisation

name:








MPR2012/047 Page 101 of 105


Title: SHORELINE STABILITY STATUS, TASMANIAN WILDERNESS

WORLD HERITAGE AREA, DECEMBER 2014

Date: 2015-02-19

Date type: Digital spatial (shapefile)

Abstract: The stability status of coastal dunes was assessed qualitatively along

transects extending lengthwise from end to end of selected beaches

within the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (Mulcahy Bay,

Wreck Bay, Stephens Bay, Window Pane Bay, Cox Bight and Prion

Beach). The results are presented in shapefile format, referenced to the

Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 (GDA94). Further information

including a lookup table is available in the report: Eberhard, R.,

Sharples, C., Bowden, N. & Comfort, M. (2015). Monitoring the

Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmania Wilderness World

Heritage Area: Establishment Report. Nature Conservation Report

Series 15/3. Natural Values Conservation Branch, Natural & Cultural

Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries and Water,

Hobart.

Status: completed


Organisation

name:

School of Land and Food (Discipline of Geography & Spatial

Science), University of Tasmania

Position

name:

University Associate

Voice: +61 3 6226 2898

Facsimile:

Postal

Address:

Private Bag 76

City: Hobart

State: Tasmania

Postcode: 7001

Country: Australia


OnLine

resource:

N/a

Role: Co-author of report

Maintenance

and update

frequency:

notPlanned

Name: Coastal dune-front stability status, Tasmanian Wilderness World

Heritage Area, December 2014

Descriptive

keywords:

Coastal landforms, sea-level rise, Tasmanian Wilderness World

Heritage Area





MPR2012/047 Page 102 of 105

Language: English

Topic

category:

environment

::Data quality info

Hierarchy

level:

GeographicDataset

::Distribution info

::OnLine

resource

OnLine

resource:



::Metadata

constraints

Use limitation: Copyright

Use

constraints:

The data may be supplied and used for a specified purpose, provided

written permission has first been obtained from the author, Chris

Sharples. The author may specify conditions.

::Metadata

Author

Organisation

name:







MPR2012/047 Page 103 of 105

Title: COASTAL SAND MINERALOGY AND PARTICLE SIZE,

TASMANIAN WILDERNESS WORLD HERITAGE AREA,

DECEMBER 2014

Date: 2015-02-19

Date type: Report (pdf)

Abstract: Sand mineralogy (by XRD) and particle size distribution (by wet

sieving) was investigated at selected beaches within the Tasmanian

Wilderness World Heritage Area (Mulcahy Bay, Wreck Bay, Stephens

Bay, Window Pane Bay, Cox Bight and Prion Beach). Nine samples

total were analysed. The data is presented as an unpublished report to

the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment by

R.S. Bottrill and R.N. Woolley (Sand Testing: SW Tasmania, Mineral

Resources Tasmania, 24 April 2015). The report is included as appendix

in: Eberhard, R., Sharples, C., Bowden, N. & Comfort, M. (2015).

Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the Tasmania

Wilderness World Heritage Area: Establishment Report. Nature

Conservation Report Series 15/3. Natural Values Conservation Branch,

Natural & Cultural Heritage Division, Department of Primary Industries

and Water, Hobart.

Status: completed


Organisation

name:




Position

name:


Voice: +61 3 6165 4410

Facsimile: +61 3 6223 8603

Postal

Address:

GPO Box 44

City: Hobart

State: Tasmania

Postcode: 7001

Country: Australia


OnLine

resource:



Maintenance

and update

frequency:

n/a

Name: Coastal Sand Mineralogy and Particle Size Analysis, Tasmanian

Wilderness World Heritage Area, December 2014

Descriptive Quaternary geology, coastal sand, Tasmanian Wilderness World



MPR2012/047 Page 104 of 105

keywords: Heritage Area

Language: English

Topic

category:

environment

::Data quality info

Hierarchy

level:


::Distribution info

::OnLine

resource

OnLine

resource:



::Metadata

constraints

Use limitation: N/A

Use

constraints:

nil

::Metadata

Author

Organisation

name:


Division, Department of Primary Industry, Parks, Water and




Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the ...dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Eberhard etal...

Documents

Transcript of Monitoring the Erosion Status of Oceanic Beaches in the ...dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Eberhard etal...