Table of Contents · Geomorphological and hydrological mapping using current and historical aerial...

Mr Richard Sattler

Anderson Bay Sand Pit

Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan

APPENDIX C

Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd Reports; Hydrogeology and Geomorphology

GEOMORPHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Lost Farm Sand Extraction

Geo-Environmental Solutions P/L 86 Queen Street Sandy Bay 7005. Ph 6223 1839 Fax 6223 4539

February 2014

© Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd Page 1

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3 2 Work Undertaken .................................................................................................................. 4 3 Acts, Policies and DPEMP ................................................................................................... 5 4 Site Characterisation ............................................................................................................. 6

4.1 Project Area Certificate of Title .................................................................................... 6 4.2 Project Area Setting ...................................................................................................... 6 4.3 Climatic Conditions ...................................................................................................... 9 4.4 Regional Topography and Hydrology ........................................................................ 10 5 Geoconservation ................................................................................................................. 11

5.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Geoconservation Definitions ...................................................................................... 12

5.3 Regional Geoconservation .......................................................................................... 12

5.3.1 The Waterhouse Dunefield ...................................................................................... 13

5.3.2 Pleistocene Aeolian System..................................................................................... 14 5.4 Scope of Works for Assessing Site Geoconservation Status ...................................... 15 6 Geology ............................................................................................................................... 16

6.1 Basement Geology ...................................................................................................... 16 6.2 Last Interglacial (Pleistocene) ..................................................................................... 16 6.3 Last Glacial (Pleistocene) ........................................................................................... 16

6.4 Holocene ..................................................................................................................... 18 6.5 Modern Holocene........................................................................................................ 19 7 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................... 41

8 Ecosystems .......................................................................................................................... 44 9 Geoconservation Assessment.............................................................................................. 45

9.1 Mobile Transgressive Dunefields ............................................................................... 45

9.1.1 Intrinsic Value ......................................................................................................... 46

9.1.2 Ecological or Natural Process Values .................................................................... 46 9.1.3 Anthropocentric Values .......................................................................................... 46 9.2 Parabolic Dunefields ................................................................................................... 47 10 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 49 11 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 50 12 References ........................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix 1 Regional Features Listed in the Tasmanian Geoconservation Database ................ 52 Appendix 2 Wind Rose Diagrams (Bridport Sea View Villas 30/10/94 to 30/9/10).................. 56 Appendix 3 Panoramic Photographs ........................................................................................... 61 Appendix 4 Soil Bore & Monitoring Well Logs ........................................................................ 65

Appendix 5 Soil Particle Analysis .............................................................................................. 76 Appendix 6 Inventory of Parabolic Dunefields in the Area ....................................................... 77

Figures

Figure 1 Site Location, Tasmanian (The LIST) ........................................................................... 6 Figure 2 Site Location, North East Tasmania (The LIST) ............................................................ 7 Figure 3 Site Location, Anderson Bay (The LIST) ..................................................................... 7 Figure 4 Average Monthly Climate Data..................................................................................... 9 Figure 5 Regional Topography .................................................................................................. 10 Figure 6 Site Location adjacent to the Waterhouse Conservation Area .................................... 11


Figure 7 Geoconservation Areas ................................................................................................ 13 Figure 8 2011 Aerial Illustrating the Location of the Geoconservation Areas Listed in the

Tasmanian Geoconservation Database ....................................................................................... 14 Figure 9 Geology Mapping Extracted from Bowden (1983). .................................................... 17

Figure 10 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 20 Figure 11 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1956 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 21 Figure 12 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1964 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 22 Figure 13 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1978 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 23 Figure 14 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1991 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 24

Figure 15 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 2011 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates ...... 25 Figure 16 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949 Illustrating Summary of Dune

Migration Rates ........................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 17 Backdating Analysis of Dunefield Transgression Based on Average Receding

Margin Position ........................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 18 Backdating Analysis of Dunefield Transgression Based on Individual Blowouts.... 28

Figure 19 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949 ............................................................. 29 Figure 20 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1956 ............................................................. 30

Figure 21 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1964 ............................................................. 31 Figure 22 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1978 ............................................................. 32 Figure 23 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1991 ............................................................. 33 Figure 24 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 2011 ............................................................. 34

Figure 25 Summary of Site Boreholes ....................................................................................... 40 Figure 26 1979 Aerial Orthophoto Illustrating The LIST Drainage Lines, Contours, and

Inferred Localised Surface & Groundwater Drainage Pattern .................................................... 43

Plates

Plate 1 Drainage Channel near the Eastern Side of The Mining Lease Showing 50 mm

Diameter Pebbles of Alluvial/Marine Origin. ............................................................................. 16

Plate 2 Historical Parabolic Ridgeline Unearthed by Deflation and Becoming Revegetated at

the Waterhouse Conservation Area ............................................................................................ 35 Plate 3 Chevron Parabolic Dune Unearthing Historical Trailing Ridgeline Presented in Plate 2

..................................................................................................................................................... 36

Plate 4 Historical Parabolic Ridgeline Unearthed by Deflation at the Site ............................... 36 Plate 5 East/West Directed Ridgeline with Remnant Quaternary Calcified Forest at the Site .. 37 Plate 6 East/West Directed Ridgeline with Remnant Quaternary Calcified Forest at the Site .. 37 Plate 7 Aerial Photograph of East/West Directed Calcified Wood Ridgelines at the Site as

Presented in Plates 5 & 6 ............................................................................................................ 38

Plate 8 Parabolic Ridgeline Forming Through Sheet Sand Deposits in Waterhouse

Conservation Area ...................................................................................................................... 38

Plate 9 Satellite Snapshot of Parabolic Dune (Plate 8) Forming Through Sheet Sand Deposits

at Waterhouse Conservation Area .............................................................................................. 39 Plate 10 Windblown Sheet Sand and Lobate Deposits Encroaching on Wetlands along

Southern Margins ........................................................................................................................ 41 Plate 11 Wetland Slacks forming along Regressing Margins Showing Early Stages of

Succession ................................................................................................................................... 42 Plate 12 Inter-Dune Slacks forming along Regressing Dune Margins Showing More Advanced

Succession ................................................................................................................................... 42 Plate 13 Inter-Dune Slacks forming along Regressing Dune Margins Showing Advanced

Succession (WCA) ...................................................................................................................... 43


1 Introduction

Part of an extensive mobile sand dune deposit is planned to be mined on private land (‘Lost

Farm’ or ‘the Site’), located 7 km east of Bridport on the northeast of Tasmania. The private

land owner, Richard Sattler plans to extract sand through a joint venture agreement with North

East Tasmania Sands Pty Ltd. As the sand has a highly uniform composition and consistency,

it is of an acceptable standard to supply local and Sydney market demands to be used as a

premix concreting product. A mining lease application MLA 1957/P/M has been lodged for the

proposed development.

Geo-Environmental Solutions have been contracted by John Miedecke and Partners Pty Ltd to

identify the geoconservation (geoheritage) values of the mobile dunefield at the site. This

investigation will provide information to inform a Development Proposal and Environmental

Management Plan (DPEMP) in accordance with the following Environmental Protection

Authority general and site specific guidelines:

‘General Guidelines for the Preparation of a Development Proposal and Environmental

Management Plan for Level 2 (Schedule 2) activities and ‘called in’ Activities’.

Andersons Bay Sand Mining, Bridport Tasmania. Development Proposal and

Environmental Management Plan Project Specific Guidelines for Richard Sattler.

Board of the Environment Protection Authority, August 2013.

Specific aims of this assessment include:

To document the geomorphic and sedimentary characteristics of the mobile sand dune

deposit at the site and to assess the geoconservation values of the feature;

To determine if the site is registered as having geoconservation value and if not, what

aspects of the surrounding landscape are considered of geoconservation value and how

this may relate to the site features;

To assess the likelihood of other equivalent features of a similar geomorphic system

being present in an undisturbed state elsewhere in the area, and assess their likely

conservation significance in relation to the Lost Farm site.


2 Work Undertaken

Desktop works undertaken include the following:

A regional assessment of the following:

Climate

A review of all relevant geomorphological documentation specific to aeolian

systems in the region, with particular focus on geoconservation values

Aerial photo and satellite interpretation of mobile dune systems

Geological interpretation

Local site assessments which included:

Geomorphological and hydrological mapping using current and historical

aerial orthophoto time series

An assessments of areas of bio conservation significance

Other available soil mapping

Field reconnaissance investigations included:

A regional geomorphological assessment of mobile sand dune systems

A detailed assessment of site geomorphology

The southern parts of the site mining lease (the projected 6 year programme) was investigated

with a 4wd mounded direct push drilling rig to depths of up to 12 m. The following were

investigated:

A total of eleven (11) boreholes were positioned around the perimeter of the dunefield

and through the central parts of the dune to understand the landform characteristics.

Sediment samples were collected for lithological interpretation and grain size

characterisation

A total of six (6) groundwater monitoring wells were installed for the hydrogeological

assessment (assessed in detail in a separate report)


3 Acts, Policies and DPEMP

This geoconservation assessment will be considered in relation to the DPEMP General

Guidelines and the DPEMP site specific guidelines. As the dunes are within 1000 m of the

high water mark of the coast, the proposed site operations will need to be considered in the

context of the State Coastal Policy (SCP) 1996. Under section 1.1.2, of the SCP, the coastline

will be managed to protect ecological, geomorphological and geological features and aquatic

environments of conservation value.

Section 4.7.2 e of the DPEMP guidelines state that the effects of geoconservation significance

or natural processes (such as fluvial or coastal features), including sites of geoconservation

significance listed on the Tasmanian Geoconservation Database. Aspects highlighted in the

section 4.7 site specific DPEMP guidelines include:

Preservation of the coastal strip to the north of the site which is indicated in the coastal

values dataset as having the highest indicative conservation value and is highly

sensitive and needs to remain intact

The effect of the proposal on the coastal geomorphology and conservation significance

of the parabolic dune systems. Includes and analysis of existing and modified sediment

budgets; sand transportation potential; pre during and post mining; stability of the

interim and final landforms including dunes and swales.

Actions to be taken to avoid and/or mitigate potential impacts from sand mining.


4 Site Characterisation

4.1 Project Area Certificate of Title

The mining lease MLA 1957/P/M is located on parcels of land which have the following

certificate of title references:

242847/1

199540/1

Both titles are collectively referred to as “the site’ or the ‘project area” in this report.

4.2 Project Area Setting

The site is positioned on one of a series of northwest directed beaches which span the north

coast of Tasmania between the central coast area of Devonport and Cape Portland located on

the north east of the state (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Site Location, Tasmanian (The LIST)

The beaches have aligned perpendicular to the prevailing north westerly swell fronts (Figure 2)

and are backed by extensive modern day mobile and partially stabilised transgressive and

parabolic dune forms (Figure 3). These dunes overprint a larger, older and more extensive

longitudinal and crescent dunefield complex which formed during the late Pleistocene period,

at a time when sea levels were much lower and dunefields covered large tracts of Bass Strait

(Bowden 1983).

SITE


Figure 2 Site Location, North East Tasmania (The LIST)

The transgressive and parabolic dunes are pronounced within 1 km of the coastline in the back

dune areas of Noland Bay, Andersons Bay and Ringarooma Bay which form a combined area

of over 100 km2. The 2.43 km

2 mining lease at the site coverers a 3.3 km long portion of the

19 km stretch of the Andersons Bay dune system.

Figure 3 Site Location, Anderson Bay (The LIST)

SITE

SITE


An aspect of the site which is clearly visible from aerial and satellite imagery is that the dune

system is not stabilised by vegetation and as a result has been actively migrating inland. The

majority of these dune systems were originally stable before human settlement. Land use

practices between 1839 and 1955 (WCAMP 2003) had resulted in denudation of the vegetation

and soils which covered the dune system.


4.3 Climatic Conditions

The area experiences a mild strongly seasonal coastal maritime climate, and is windy with

prevailing winds varying from northwest to southwest. North easterlies are also quite common

during the summer months. The annual rainfall is generally less than 800 mm, with rainfall

occurring frequently throughout the year, with a slight winter maximum.

(Figure 4). Maximum temperatures range between 14 and 21 degree Celsius. Solar exposure

is greatest during November to January.

Figure 4 Average Monthly Climate Data

Site wind data was based on the Bureau of Meteorology weather observations from the

Bridport (Sea View Villas) gauging station from the dates 30th

of October 1994 to the 30th

September 2010. Wind rose diagrams for 9 am and 3 pm are presented in Appendix 1. The

wind direction responsible for mobilisation of the sand is wind from the west to north west

with wind speed in excess of 10 km per hour typically used to determine grain mobility.

Wind velocities are considerably calmer during the morning with June being the calmest

month. There is less prevalence in a particular wind direction in the morning compared with

the afternoon. May through to September is dominated by westerly to north westerly winds.

Easterly winds become increasingly pronounced from August through to December. From

January to April, easterly and south easterly winds are most dominant.

During the afternoon periods (3 pm), the westerly and north westerly winds remain persistent

(~20% to 30% of all observations) throughout the year, with the exception for January and

February when the northerly sea breeze is more dominant than the north westerly and westerly

winds. Throughout the year, winds exceeding 40 km/hr come from the west followed by the

North West with the exception for February when the high velocity winds are directed from the

northwest followed by the north and west. Southerly, south westerly and south easterly wind

directions account for less than 5% of all observations, with it being very rare that winds

exceed 40 km/hr. Easterly winds account for less than 10% of all observations. South

westerly, southerly and south easterly winds account for less than 5% of observations for all

months.


4.4 Regional Topography and Hydrology

The transgressive dunefields and parabolic dune systems within the region (Figure 11) have an

elevation range of approximately 2 m AHD to over 20 m AHD. The dune systems provide a

contrasting relief to the relatively flat coastal plain topography in the region. Around the

margins of the dune system and in other low lying parts of the coastal plain, the water table

extends above the ground surface forming freshwater wetlands. Water levels in the wetlands

tend to fluctuate by not more than 0.5 m seasonally, with the shallow water bodies partially

drying out during the summer months.

Mobile windblown sand deposits at the site and throughout the region dynamically reshape the

surface of the land and influence wetland distribution and surface drainage networks. There is

a dynamic interplay between sand dune formation and water body occurrence at the site.

Figure 5 Regional Topography

SITE


5 Geoconservation

5.1 Overview

Much of the landform development visible at the site is the product of aeolian processes that

have occurred in the last 200 years. Although natural processes are active in shaping the

transgressive mobile dunes at the site, the dunes exist as a result of poor land management

practices in the past. The majority of the sand at the site sources from a frontal dunefield

which once lined the coastline. Land use practices between 1839 and 1955 had resulted in

denudation of the coastal dune vegetation and soils along the Anderson Bay coastline

(WCAMP 2003). Under the management of successive graziers, the pressure of burning,

heavy grazing and introduction of rabbits resulted in severe degradation of the coastal dunes

(Steane 1996).

Attempts were made to reduce the mobility of the sand dunes through various revegetation

programmes with some success; however the dunes at the site remain denuded. The Sand

Dune Reclamation Unit (SDRU) was established by the lands department between 1955 and

2000 which implemented a reliable dune stabilisation programme for the northeast of Tasmania

which included a Marram grass revegetation program (WCAMP 2003). A large part of the

focus area is what now comprises the Waterhouse Conservation Area (WCA) and surrounding

lands including the site (Figure 4).

Figure 6 Site Location adjacent to the Waterhouse Conservation Area


The SDRU successfully stabilised vast tracts of land both within and beyond the WCA. The

Marram grass was able to take hold over the majority of the modern dunefield but isolated

parts (including the site) could not be successfully stabilised. Over the last 60 years,

transgressive dunefields at the site have been actively migrating at a rate of approximately 7 m

per year and are encroaching on viable farming land to the west and local wetlands which are

listed as threatened under the Tasmanian Conservation Act 2002 (North Barker, 2013). Based

on current dune mobility rates, back in the 1930’s, the dunefield would have been located at the

coastline, approximately 500 to 600 m from the site. Dune mobility rates have not been

consistent, but it is known that the rates have accelerated as a result of:

Initial and possibly graduated breakout of the frontal dune due to disturbance to the

native coastal vegetation

Some stabilisation success by the SDRU but eventual abandonment when the unit

ceased operation in 2000

One of the aims of the WCAMP is to eradicate weeds or control and manage where eradication

is not practical. Although Marram grass is regarded as a weed, it has aided in demobilisation

of the transgressive dunefields and preservation of the aquatic ecosystems at the WCA and

surrounding areas. According to the WCAMP, careful management of the WCA has resulted

in restoration of native spinifex grass into some areas which is gradually replacing the

introduced Marron grass. Due to success of the SDRU, the WCA may closely resemble the

original biological condition despite the geomorphology being highly modified. Sand dunes at

the site on the other hand resemble a separate entity in which biodiversity is lost to a system

which is almost entirely controlled by active wind dynamics.

Given that the modern dunefield at the site exists as a result of human disturbance, questions

must be raised as to whether or not the transgressive dunefields are a natural landform, and be

considered in terms of geoconservation value. Is there basis behind the need to preserve the

geomorphic values of this modern system, considering that the conservation value of the

system has declined over time as it moves further and further from its original natural state?

Essentially, as a result of poor land management practices, the original dunefield has been

excavated by the forces of wind and transported inland where it is engulfing the landforms and

ecosystems similar to that of the WCA that we seek to preserve. In additional to addressing the

geoconservation status of the modern dune system, there is the potential that older dune

systems exist at the site which will need assessing.

5.2 Geoconservation Definitions

‘Geoconservation aims to maintain the diversity of geological, geomorphological, soil

features, systems and process, and to maintain natural rates and magnitudes of change in those

features and processes’. In addition, the basis behind the geoconservation movement is to

protect natural landforms that are vulnerable to disturbance (Sharples 1995). Based on the

Concepts and Principles of Geoconservation (Sharples 2002), the term ‘natural’ is used to

define the concept of geodiversity and used as a basis from which to define landforms as being

worthy of geoconservation status. The Cambridge Dictionary defines natural ‘as found in

nature and not involving anything made or done by people’.

5.3 Regional Geoconservation

The original basis behind the SDRU was to protect farming land and towns that were at risk of

being engulfed by the mobile dune systems. Over time, the focus of the SDRU may have

shifted towards protecting vulnerable habitats from erosion as bioconservation became a focus

point for the area leading up to development of the WCA. When the WCAMP was approved


in May 2003, principle of geoconservation had already been well founded for more than a

decade.

The geoconservation significance of the WCA has been addressed in the WCAMP and includes

the following landform features (also listed in the Tasmanian Geoconservation Database: TCD;

Figure 5):

The Waterhouse Pleistocene dunes - part of the TCD Geosite: Northeast Tasmania

Pleistocene Aeolian System (ID 2873).

The Holocene dune features - part of the TCD Geosite: Waterhouse Dunefield (ID

2163).

Figure 7 Geoconservation Areas

5.3.1 The Waterhouse Dunefield

The Waterhouse Dunefield follows the coastline and more or less covers the entire of the WCA

and passes within 100 m of the site to the northeast (Figure 6). The Waterhouse Dunefield

comprises of active and inactive dunes present in a variety of forms. In the WCAMP, the

Holocene dune features are described as having conservation significance in that they provide

‘excellent examples of transgressive dunefields. As will be assessed in this report, the


transgressive dunefields are a modern feature of the landscape and are a product of human

disturbance. The same Holocene dunefield is described in the Natural Values Atlas

(Tasmanian Geoconservation Database) as comprising of the large, long lived Holocene sand

dune area (Appendix 1). There is no mention of the modern transgressive dunefields, with

main attention being drawn to the Ainslie Longitudinal Dune which extends continuously for

some 20 km across far northeast Tasmania, near Waterhouse (Bowden 1983). The presence of

Marron grass infestation has seriously impacted upon site processes in the WCA; and prevents

the site meeting integrity requirements for National Estate assessment.

5.3.2 Pleistocene Aeolian System

The Pleistocene Aeolian System extends along the southern boundary of the Waterhouse

Dunefield comprising aeolian sand sheets and longitudinal dune systems. As indicated in

Figure 6, the Pleistocene Aeolian System extends through the site and wraps around the

southern boundary of the modern transgressive dunefields. The boundary of the Pleistocene

Aeolian System had a considerable buffer from the mobile dune front (in the order of 200 m)

but since the boundary was delineated the sand dune front has encroach into the Pleistocene

Aeolian System geoconservation area (Figure 6).

Figure 8 2011 Aerial Illustrating the Location of the Geoconservation Areas Listed in the Tasmanian

Geoconservation Database


5.4 Scope of Works for Assessing Site Geoconservation Status

Based on a preliminary assessment of the site, it is apparent that the mobile dunefield s have

been historically activated as a result of poor land management practices. Regardless of

whether the mobile dunes have been recently activated by recent European land use practices

or not, a number of questions about the site need to be addressed in a scope of works.

Key aspects which require investigation:

Given that scientific significance of a landform alone is generally not a basis in which

to define site conservation status, it needs to be assessed if the dunes at the site:

Provide a basis in which to understand and study the physical nature of

ongoing and active processes.

Provide insight into other landform features in the area which can give us

clues about past geomorphic processes.

Are standalone features which are integral to the overall landscape

geodiversity.

It needs to be determined if the sand dune systems at the site are in any way influencing

the integrity of other systems in the area in terms of general sediment dynamics and

sediments budgets. In turn, these dynamics will need to be assessed in terms of how

they may be influencing other systems including:

The coastal geomorphic system

The hydrological system has been addressed in a separate report (GES 2014)

with the findings summarised herein.

Biotic systems in the area

Aside from the modern transgressive dunefield, the extent of older dune systems at the

site will need to be assessed. An assessment will need to be made about the

conservation value of these systems, and whether they may be impacted by the

proposed mining activity.


6 Geology

6.1 Basement Geology

The geology of the local area comprises of a medium to coarse grained Devonian to

Carboniferous graniodiorite bedrock which underlies all Quaternary aged sediments exposed in

the area (Figure 8). The graniodiorite is exposed 2.5 km to the south-east of the site and forms

part of a larger granitic pluton that extends from the east coast of Tasmania to Wilsons

Promontory. The granite has been intruded by 165 Million year old Jurassic Dolerite, such as

found underlying Hardwick’s hill.

6.2 Last Interglacial (Pleistocene)

Includes the Stumpies Bay Sand deposits which comprise of marine plains and beach ridges

spreading broadly across the coastal sand embayment’s to depths in excess of 32 m. The older

Pleistocene marine terrace deposits comprise shells, clay, silt and organic matter deposits. The

terrace deposits rise up to over 10 m AHD inland of the site and dip down at an angle towards

the coast where it is locally buried beneath the Holocene dune sands. The sand sheets feature

strongly in the landscape of coastal northeasters Tasmania. The plains were formed from

marine transgression and regression essentially across granite hinterland (Bowden 1983). There

are no sheet deposit landforms of noticeable relief at the site.

6.3 Last Glacial (Pleistocene)

Ainslie Sand deposits are well documented by Bowen (1983). These deposits comprise of

longitudinal dunes and sand sheets that feature in the landscape more than 5 km to the east of

the site. Forester Gravel deposits from the last glacial event are mapped to the south of the

mining lease and are exposed along a drainage cut near the south east corner of the site where it

comprises of a beach shingle type pebble deposit.

Plate 1 Drainage Channel near the Eastern Side of The Mining Lease Showing 50 mm Diameter Pebbles of

Alluvial/Marine Origin.


Figure 9 Geology Mapping Extracted from Bowden (1983).


6.4 Holocene

Holocene dune deposits at the site comprise of:

modern calcareous transgressive dunefield (Bowlers Lagoon Sand);

marine sand deposits along the coastline (Barnbougle Sand); and

parabolic dunes which back the marine sand deposits (Waterhouse Sand).

Coastal marine transgression (inward movement of the coastline) occurred across the Bass

Strait land bridge following the last glacial event as sea levels began to rise (Bird 2000). Large

linear dunefields which stretched Bass Strait (Bowden 1983) and local river systems provided

ample supply of sediment to the coast with marine transgression. Marine and lagoon deposits

from the last interglacial (Stumpies Bay Sand) formed a base for Holocene deposits across the

coastal plane. Beaches realigned to the prevailing swell directions and sand began to

accumulate coastally over the recent half of the Holocene period as the coastline stabilised.

Dissipative waves have led to a net accumulation of sand across the coastline, and a lack of any

extensive recession or progradation combined with strong persistent unidirectional winds has

resulted in the development of large frontal dunes (Masselink, Hughes & Knight 2011; Psuty

2004) lining the north westerly directed coastlines.

Climatic data indicates that there is a strong wind bias which has influenced the resultant drift

potential of the dune front (Ritter, Kochel & Miller 1995) in an ESE direction. Persistent

influence of the wind and the lack of coastline recession have ensured that the dune sand has

largely become independent of the beach exchange system. The oblique angles of the average

swell direction relative to the resultant sand drift potential has meant that there is a greater

capacity for sand to be transported inland (Bird 2000). Coastline vegetation becomes the

predominant force in retaining the dune front from migrating inland. Landward migration of

frontal dune systems is initiated by blowout dune form structures. These are generally trough

or saucer shaped hollows caused by deflation (Nordstrom 1991). The sudden development of

large scale blowouts as seen at the site can be initiated by either or a combination of the

following (Bird 2000):

Anthropogenic influence - burning of coastal vegetation, excessive grazing by rabbits,

sheep, cattle or goats.

A receding coastline will not have sand replaced and blowouts will continue to develop

as vegetation struggles to take hold.

A period of aridity where vegetation would have been otherwise held by vegetation

Initiation by stronger and more frequent winds

During the Holocene period, formation of large blowouts along the primary dune front at

Andersons Bay has resulted in dissection of the frontal dune system and inland migration of

parabolic dune forms. As evident in figure 8, the parabolic dunes at the site form a tight V

shape structure which is typical of environments where wind is strong, persistent and with a

consistent wind direction. The training arms (ridges) of the parabolic dune to the south east of

the site (presented in Figure 8) are over 100 m wide and 800 m apart at maximum width. The

total length of the parabolic dune is 2.5 km with the front extending 3.7 km from the coast and

the training ridges extending part way into the site. The parabolic dune has evolved from a

blowout structure as a result of the dune width exceeding the dune length by a factor of 3.

There is no information on the age of the parabolic dunes, although they are likely to have


occurred well before European settlement as a result of and of the former three causes listed

above.

Given that the dune has separated from the original primary dune front, it is referred to as a

secondary dune as sand is transferred inland and lost from the dune-beach sand-sharing-system.

In other words, the dune acts independently of the beach exchange processes (Livingston &

Warren 1996). There are three distinct types of secondary dunes which include blowouts,

parabolic dunes & transgressive dunefields. All three types can be found together, with

blowouts occurring close to the coastline through to parabolic and transgressive dunefields with

increasing distance from the beach. There are two distinctive secondary dune forms:

Frontal dune dissection - Modification of the primary dune where the dune is dissected

and isolated parabolic forms migrate inland

Frontal dune transgression - Complete separation from the frontal dune and inland

migration of a secondary transgressive dunefield.

Both of these forms are apparent at the site with older parabolic forms being overprinted by

younger transgressive dunefields. Older parabolic dunes occur on the coastal plane up to 4 km

from the coast and include chevron and long walled hairpin types. The largest parabolic form

in the area occurs to the west of the site (apparent in Figure 8). Both chevron and hairpin types

have long trailing ridges and extensive deflation basins. The hairpin type occurs when there is

a high wind velocity and a single predominant wind direction. Chevron parabolic dunes are

formed by strong winds of consistent direction where wind is in conflict with vegetation

(Maxwell & Haynes 1989). The chevron form is maintained as long as the trailing arms are

held back by vegetation. If the vegetation is reduced, the parabolic form will evolve into a

transgressive sand sheet (Bird 2000).

In summary, it is clear that there has been a dynamic shift in dune form at the site from one of

isolated parabolic dune ‘break outs’ from the primary frontal dune to more recent inland

transgression of an overwhelming proportion of the frontal dune system along the length of the

coastline. A closer look at the rates of mobile dune migration at the site will assist in providing

a likely time period in which the dunes may have begun transgressing.

6.5 Modern Holocene

Aerial orthophoto’s of the site provide a comparative outline of the transgressive dunefield for

each successive photographic event, and provide waypoints from which rates of transgression

can be determined (Figures 10 to 15).

The site orthophoto series illustrate how the leading front of the transgressive dune system is

gradually migrating inland at a similar rate at which the windward side of the dunes is being

deflated along the receding margins. As the leading margin tends to be more sporadic, the

receding margins are used as a more accurate guide from which to determine dunefield

transgression rates. A number of interdune deflation slacks are used as reference points for the

transects.

The table in Figure 16 provides a summary of the dunefield migration distances and rates for

each transect along the receding margin. It can be concluded that the average rate of dunefield

migration ranged from 7.8 metres per year (1964 to 1978; and 1991 to 2011) to 12.5 metres per

year (1964 to 1978).


Figure 10 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949 Illustrating Dune Migration Rates


Figure 16 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949 Illustrating Summary of Dune Migration Rates


The 1949 orthophoto is used as a baseline from which to assess the average distance of the

transgressive dunefield receding margin from the coastline (represented by a dashed line in

Figure 16). Accounting for a margin of error associated with sea level rise recession, this

distance is determined to be approximately 280 m. Linear transgression trends have been

determined based on a computer generated line of best fit for each transect. The trend line is

extrapolated to former coastline position to determine the approximate date when the dunefield

began to mobilise (Figure 17) which is calculated to be between 1910 and 1930. These dates

are coincident with European settlement in the region where records indicate that by the early

1950’s there was considerable concern about the huge blowouts along the coastline (WCAMP

2003).

Figure 17 Backdating Analysis of Dunefield Transgression Based on Average Receding Margin Position

The backdating presented in Figure 17 assumes that the individual transect blowouts were

present on the side of the frontal dune prior to initiation of the dunefield transgression. A

separate analysis has be conducted on the 1949 orthophoto by calculating the distance of the

individual blowout structures from the coast, and back dating to the likely time of blowout

occurrence (Figure 18). It is possible that individual blowouts had initiated between 1860

(transect 2 – Figure 16) and 1915, although the 1897 to 1915 dates tend to show more

weighting (transects 1, 3, 4 & 5).

By 1949, the leading and trailing margins of transect 5 dune form (Figure 16) had migrated

considerably further inland compared with majority of the dunefield. It is likely that the

elongated transect 5 parabolic had been set in motion prior to the formation of other large scale

blowouts (transects 1 to 4).


Figure 18 Backdating Analysis of Dunefield Transgression Based on Individual Blowouts

It is noted that the blowout along transect 5 has an elongated form and is directly aligned with

an historical hairpin parabolic dune. Back dating indicates that this dune began migrating at a

similar time to the other transect dune forms but migrated at a much faster rate. It is possible

that some aspect of the landscape such as the historic trailing ridge lines have influenced the

transgression, allowing it to travel ahead of the main dunefield.

Another orthophoto series is presented in Figures 19 to 24, illustrating the pre-existing hairpin

parabolic forms that once lined the landscape to the south of the mining lease. The series also

demonstrates the successive nature of the modern transgressive dunefield. The series illustrates

that the historical hairpins occur along distinct sections of the coastline, whereas the

transgressive dunefield is continuous and has ‘chaotic breakouts’ from the leading margin. The

historical trailing ridge lines are presumed to have historically played an important role in

aligning the sand migration from the individual blowouts. The sheer relief of the modern

transgressive dunefield however has meant that the sand wave has completely inundated the

existing dune forms. The trailing ridges are only recently starting to shape the dune form along

the receding margins, however the advancing margins still have considerable relief over the

surrounding landscape, apparently unhindered by the underlying topography.


Figure 19 Orthorectified Aerial Photograph from 1949


The site orthophoto series illustrates how the leading front of the transgressive dunefield is

gradually prograding inland at a similar rate at which the parabolic dune forms are being

deflated along the receding margins. The pattern of migration is dynamically influenced by the

dune form, wind speed duration and direction, sand particle characteristics, surface

obstructions, the water table and soil moisture characteristics. Vegetation is the primary

surface obstruction across the dunefield and in most cases occupies the trailing ridges of the

historical parabolic dunes. The trailing ridge vegetation is present in the following forms:

in the living form typically as isolated coppice dunes or regrowth along the edges of the

parabolic ridgelines (Appendix 3A; Plate 2 & 3). Includes marron grass spinifex &

coastal Wattyl;

has become unearthed along the trailing ridge as dead partially buried plant limbs

(Plates 2 & 4), and;

as calcified wood (rhizo-concretions) along the trailing ridges (Plates 5 to 7).

Examples are provided from the Waterhouse Conservation Area as the ridges are less clearly

defined at the site due to deep burial. At the Waterhouse Conservation Area, parabolic dunes

are incised through sand sheets and are unhindered by historical ridgeline obstructions (Plates 8

& 9).

Plate 2 Historical Parabolic Ridgeline Unearthed by Deflation and Becoming Revegetated at the

Waterhouse Conservation Area


Plate 3 Chevron Parabolic Dune Unearthing Historical Trailing Ridgeline Presented in Plate 2

Plate 4 Historical Parabolic Ridgeline Unearthed by Deflation at the Site


Plate 5 East/West Directed Ridgeline with Remnant Quaternary Calcified Forest at the Site

Plate 6 East/West Directed Ridgeline with Remnant Quaternary Calcified Forest at the Site


Plate 7 Aerial Photograph of East/West Directed Calcified Wood Ridgelines (depicted as black outline) at

the Site as Presented in Plates 5 & 6

Plate 8 Parabolic Ridgeline Forming Through Sheet Sand Deposits in Waterhouse Conservation Area


Plate 9 Satellite Snapshot of Parabolic Dune (Plate 8) Forming Through Sheet Sand Deposits at


Plates 2 to 9 demonstrate surface roughness and wind obstruction from vegetation resulting in

the exposure of elevated ridge lines between the deflation hollows. The resulting parabolic

dune structures are not entirely free formed, and in most cases are predetermined by the

existing landform characteristics. The exact ages of the calcified structures (rhizo-concretion)

is not clearly known but are likely to have formed between the late Pleistocene to early

Holocene periods. The calcarenite fossils form when plant roots draw up carbonate bearing

groundwater resulting in precipitation and induration of enclosing calcrete pipes (Bird 2000).

Figure 25 presents a summary of boreholes that were drilled into the transgressive dunefield.

Bore logs and particle size classes are presented in Appendix 4 & 5.

Silty marsh deposits (inferred to be the Waterhouse Sand deposits) were intercepted in the base

of boreholes BH04, BH05 and BH09 at 2.4, 3.2, and 4.0 m AHD respectively in the lower

lying north western parts of the site.

The dune sand is consistent, mostly fine to medium grained, and comprises of various portions

of calcareous shell fragments and quartz and feldspar. On the whole, the silica component

dominates over the calcareous, although there are bands where the calcareous component

dominates. The calcareous component largely diminishes beneath the water table which may

be attributed to calcium carbonate dissolution. Table 1 below presents a summary of soil

sample density for BH06. Soil density decreases with depth around BH06, depicting

decreasing quartz to calcareous shell fragment ratio. In other parts of the deposit, the

calcareous composition is expected to be more dominant towards the surface.

Trace ash layers were noted throughout the deposit. Calcified wood and more recently buried

forests noticeably protrude from east-west directed ridgelines along the length of the sand dune

system. Similar calcified wood deposits are expected to be located in dunefields to the north

east of the site in the Waterhouse Conservation Areas, although formalised ground truthing has

not been conducted.


Figure 25 Summary of Site Boreholes


7 Hydrology

Water bodies at the site along the advancing (south eastern) margin of the transgressive

dunefields have been and continue to be engulfed by lobate dunes and windblown sand sheet

deposits (Plate 10; Appendix 3B to 3G).

Plate 10 Windblown Sheet Sand and Lobate Deposits Encroaching on Wetlands along Southern Margins

The wetlands along the south eastern margin of the dunefield have historically existed as small

isolated water bodies and at present have retracted to two or three isolated wetlands as the dune

continues to migrate. The wetlands illustrated in Plate 10 were visibly noted to have prograded

by more than 3 m over the one month period between site investigation dates. Given the

current migration rates they are expected to infill within 3 years. To the north of the site the

dunefield is also rapidly infilling and threatening highly valued wetlands (Appendix 3G).

The dune sand is partially blocking drainage towards the coastline which has sustained the

wetlands on the south eastern side of the dune. The wetlands will remain in this environment

as long as the sand deposits provide an obstacle to groundwater flow. As organic matter builds

within the wetlands, chemical reactions in the soil between the calcareous sand and organic

acids from plant degradation have the potential to cause localised subsidence (Masselink,

Hughes & Knight, 2011). Subsidence rates may be offset by organic matter and silt build up in

the wetland environment. Moreover, siltation will begin to choke groundwater flow towards

the coast which will further elevate groundwater levels inland. As the rate of sand migration is

much more rapid than the rate of siltation, the inland wetlands are not able to reach this more

advanced stage of succession as it has done in the Pleistocene, where thick marsh deposits have

lined the landscape.

Also along the southern margins, the dunefield terminates along a precipitation ridgeline where

it meets the vegetation (Appendix 3F to 3H).

Along the north western margins of the regressing dune system, the land surface was observed

to have been deflated to below the water table which has resulted in the formation of dune

slacks (Plate 4, 7 & 11; Appendix 3A to 3I). These slacks are also evident throughout the

WCA (Plates 2, 3, 8 & 9). Lowering of the land surface in these areas may not be caused solely

by wind deflation as subsidence can occur in dune slacks as a result of the carbonate

dissolution process discussed above (Masselink, Hughes & Knight, 2011).

The historical orthophoto series shows vegetation bands within the dune slacks which parallel

the receding dune outline. It has been established that these bands are forming at a rate of

between 7.8 to 12.5 m per year. The process is pronounced in transgressive dunefields across


the entire lengths of Noland, Anderson and Ringarooma Bay and has resulted in the formation

of well established ‘lag’ wetlands which are at various stages of succession (Plates 11, 12 &

13).

Plate 11 Wetland Slacks forming along Regressing Margins Showing Early Stages of Succession

Plate 12 Inter-Dune Slacks forming along Regressing Dune Margins Showing More Advanced Succession


Plate 13 Inter-Dune Slacks forming along Regressing Dune Margins Showing Advanced Succession (WCA)

LIST contours and drainage networks at the site have been matched to and overlayed over the

1979 orthophoto. Figure 25 illustrates that the historical drainage pattern during this period is

restricted in areas on the south eastern side of the dune system. The LIST layer does not infer

any surficial drainage extending away from the back dune areas. The predominant drainage

trend in the area is subsurface groundwater flow towards the coast through the dune sands

rather than southward directed flow towards the Great Forrester River (GES 2014). The

drainage channel cut to the south of the dunefield has minimal groundwater discharge and is

not expected to influence local drainage patterns.

Figure 26 1979 Aerial Orthophoto Illustrating The LIST Drainage Lines, Contours, and Inferred Localised

Surface & Groundwater Drainage Pattern


8 Ecosystems

Northbarker Ecosystem Services have prepared a comprehensive assessment of the ecosystem

at the proposed mining site area. It has been demonstrated that the site is in a continual state of

geomorphic flux, and ecosystems described by Northbarker may have been modified since the

investigation. Although wetland infilling by sand dune systems will result in a loss of habitat,

the wetland habitats are reappearing further inland as water tables are raised in the area and the

free movement of groundwater is blocked by the transgressing dune front. The inland wetlands

along the advancing front are unable to reach any advanced state of succession due to constant

dune sand reclamation.

Conversely, on the receding side of the dune transgressive dunefield where the blowouts are

forming, the process of deflation and subsidence from carbonate dissolution has resulting in an

overall lowering of the land surface below the water table level. Combined with this, gradual

increases in sea levels due to global warming (presently rate of 25 mm per decade and

accelerating), wetlands are developing in the interdune slacks of the receding margins.

Threatened frog species are reliant on wetlands in the area to survive. Continual infilling of the

southern wetlands and means there may be more stress placed threatened species in these areas

compared with along the receding margins.

Ecosystems along the receding margins are in a constant state of succession as the dunefield

migrates inland. Marron grass is common around the margins of the dunefield, particularly

where the trailing ridgelines are being uncovered by the blowouts.


9 Geoconservation Assessment

9.1 Mobile Transgressive Dunefields

It has been established that the formation of the mobile transgressive dunefields has had an

undesirable effect on the overall landscape backing the coastline of Anderson Bay. The

occurrence of the mass dune mobilisation is attributed to European land use practices possible

dating back to the late 19th

century. Other bays including Noland Bay and Ringarooma Bay may

have also been subject to similar pressure, although available literature has focussed in on

Anderson Bay, with the Waterhouse Conservation Area being the main focus.

It is clear that mobilisation of the dunefield was initially not desirable due to the impact on

farming land. Over time this focus may have shifted to more of conservation view point as the

natural values of the systems being inundated by the sand were considered. It still remains that

the agricultural values of the land are a large focus; however conservation has played an

important role which had led to the development of the Waterhouse Conservation Area.

Marram grass stabilisation was considered a viable approach to reducing the rate of sand sheet

movement, however attitudes have changed as the marram grass is viewed as being an

undesirable aspect of the landscape due to:

The formation of unnatural landform features through differences in plant habit

compared with the spinifex systems.

Developments of a different type of ecosystem which may exclude natural species

promote the introduced of exotic species and change the overall natural ecosystem

balance.

It has been established that historical landform processes have involved similar processes that

are evident with the transgressive dunefield processes, although the scale at which the processes

are occurring has been magnified. Bird (2000) has recognised the important role vegetation

plays in maintaining a natural landform processes in parabolic dune landscapes. At the site, the

vegetation has had the following roles:

To stabilise the frontal dune and limited the extent to which blowout dunes from.

Historically, blowouts were noted to intermittently occur across discrete zones in the

landscape.

Assist in the formation of distinct trailing arm ridgelines across the landscape which act

an ‘guides’ from which assist in channelling the inland migration of a parabolic dunes

In areas where theses ridges are not present, vegetation helps to maintain hairpin and

chevron type parabolic forms evident in the area.

Bird noted that the loss of vegetation in parabolic dune environment can result in the formation

of large transgressive dunefields. A review of satellite and aerial photograph imagery has

revealed that there is no geomorphic evidence of extensive broad slip face parabolic landforms

in the area which would form as a result of extensive transgressive dunefields seen in the area.

The majority of the historic landforms tend to be of the contrasting hairpin type parabolic dune

form. The following lines of evidence suggest that the migration of the dunefield is not typical

of the natural dune geomorphic processes:


Historical parabolic dune form markings are only present along isolated sections of the

coastal plain; however modern transgressive dunefield is continuous along the coastline

(see Figures 19 to 24).

The natural dune formation in the area is that of a thin long parabolic hairpin form,

whereas the transgressing dunefield has a broad advancing margin with chaotic breakouts

that do not follow any clear landform pattern

Historical trailing ridge lines are presumed to play a considerable role in assisting the

formation of new hairpin dune forms. As will be discussed in a later section, given that

the elevation of the transgressive dunefield well exceeds the elevation of the ridge lines,

there is little chance for the parabolic forms to take shape.

The majority of the individual blowouts date back from between 1897 and 1915; mass

dunefield migration is determined to have been underway from between 1910 and 1927.

9.1.1 Intrinsic Value

‘The idea of intrinsic value is fundamental to the approach to geoconservation’ (Sharples 2002).

Recognition of intrinsic values makes us consider the diversity of natural landforms and

systems. Although the transgressive dunefield has active processes occurring, there is little

intrinsic value in the transgressive dunefield given that it is not representative of natural

landforms in the area. Maintaining intrinsic values of the site would have involved protecting

the historical frontal dune system from the extensive inland transgression. Historic damage to

the fragile natural geomorphic system combined with introduction of marram grass into the area

has had irreparable repercussions. In summary, the geoconservation does not seek to maximise

geodiversity by artificially creating landforms (Bradbury 1995).

9.1.2 Ecological or Natural Process Values

It is discerned that there are some important natural values in the mining lease area. Important

ecological niches are likely to have been buried as a result of migration of the dunefield. This is

likely to have resulted in forceful displacement of frog species. The distance between interdune

slacks (wetland habitats) along the advancing boundary is notably broader across the

transgressive dunefield front compared with the natural parabolic system. This may have had

implication for frog migration in the area. Although the transgressive dunefield may have had

adverse effects on existing habitats and wetlands, there is strong value in protecting the

interdune slacks along the receding margins. In this case, natural processes of deflation should

be encouraged rather than inhibited along the receding margins such that wetland expansion can

proceed naturally to a point where there is adequate habitat area to sustain the endangered and

vulnerable frog populations in the area.

9.1.3 Anthropocentric Values

The “Lost Farm’ transgressive dunefield features abruptly on the landscape and may be vividly

seen by onlookers travelling along Waterhouse Road. As the dune system is on private land, it is

out of bounds for recreation use other than by the land owners. Regardless, it may provide

familiarity to some for providing a feeling of sense of place. Many observers may be unaware of

the short history of the dune system and reasons for its presence. Spiritual or religious values

attached to the dune are 3 to 4 generations old and of the European heritage.

The dunes have a relatively short history which may remind some of the tiring efforts to stop the

relentless migration of sand. For some it may represent a sense of achievement in knowing that

the Waterhouse Conservation Area could be stabilised. For historical and current land owners,


the mobile dunes are viewed as a potential economic threat to farming livelihood. The wetlands

to the north of the site (Appendix 3G) are highly valued among neighbouring land owners. At

the same time, the sand has economic value to the landowner, local area and state. Sand

resource is an important aspect of the construction industry, and geoconservation of existing

sand mining areas needs to be considered in balance with responsible sand depletion from other

areas considered of lesser geoconservation value.

9.2 Parabolic Dunefields

It has been established that historical parabolic dune forms underlie the transgressive dunefields

at the site. Natural parabolic dune forming processes have been discussed in this report, and

reference is given to the importance of vegetation in retaining the structure of these landforms.

The trailing arm ridgelines are also an important feature of the landscape and are believed to

play an important role in directing inland migration of the parabolic dunes.

An important element of natural parabolic dune form processes at the site is the steady supply of

sand from the coastline which has been achieved by a hydrodynamic system balance where

neither progradation nor recession act to reduce sand supply but rather retain sand supply within

the frontal dunes. With the combined anthropogenic effects of sea level rise as well as mass

transfer of sand from the primary dune front to an inland secondary dunefield, the net result is an

overall depletion of sand supply along the coastal fringe. As sea level rise induced recession

continues, sand supplies along the frontal dunes will be depleted further. A preliminary

assessment of aerial photographs have revealed that it is likely that there will be sufficient sand

supply in the frontal dune to buffer against sea level rise induced recession and storm erosion

demand.

The large scale erosion of sand from the frontal dune system has meant that this key component

of the natural parabolic dune forming process (being the supply of sand) has been lost which will

result in a reduction in the following:

frequency at which breakouts will occur

parabolic dune length

spacing between breakouts

This degradation effect is most apparent at the site where sand stabilisation has been less

successful and less apparent in areas where the Sand Dune Reclamation Unit had reasonable

success in stabilising the dunefield (such as across the WCA).

An alternative way of looking at it is that the sand reserves that had built over the last few

thousand years of more or less static sea levels have been very rapidly lost to the extent that the

ongoing natural processes that once occurred in that area have been greatly modified. The

natural dune processes are more apparent in areas where sand supply had been retained such as

across the Waterhouse Conservation Area.

Appendix 6 presents an illustrated account of parabolic dunes across the eastern north coast of

Tasmania. Dunes illustrated in the series have been selected based on representativeness of the

type of parabolic dunes that are expected to underlie the transgressive dunefield at the site.

The inventories of parabolic dunes are selected from the following areas:


Single Tree Plain Conservation Area

Double Sandy Point Conservation Area


Boobyalla Conservation Area

As a preliminary assessment, based on blowout distance inland from the coast, many of the

parabolic dunes are expected to have initiated transgression at a similar time (later 18th

to early

19th

century) as the dunefield at the site. Regardless, dune systems in conservation areas

presented in the inventory are discerned to be more representative of the natural parabolic

systems across the landscape compared with the site for the following reasons:

Sand resource has been clearly been depleted across frontal dunes to the north of the site

where elevations are below 10 m AHD, compared with 10 to 30 m AHD elevations

across the conservation areas.

Frontal dune sand resource is abundant and vegetation is proving to be effective in

retaining large scale transgression.

Parabolic dune forms are typically elongated and of the hairpin type and representative of

historic landforms.

Many parabolic dunes are still connected to the coastline

Some of the parabolic dunes are short in length indicating that the dunes are either young

or otherwise the vegetation is effective in resisting erosional forces.

GES believe that there is less intrinsic value in the parabolic dune systems at the site given:

There are active dune building processes occurring in conservation areas which are more

representative of the historical parabolic dune systems

The large loss of sand from the frontal dune means that the system has been largely

modified and is no longer representative of historical site conditions.

There is less value in preserving relict dunefields at the site given that relict dunes in

conservation areas across the north east coast are playing an important role in shaping

ongoing dune forming processes.

An important aspect of the dune system at the site is the presence of the calcified plant remains.

There are two important factors which need to be considered to determine the geoconservation

value of these calcified deposits:

How predominant are the landform features in the overall landscape?

What is the age of these calcrete deposits? ie. Pleistocene age and possibly linked to the

linear dunefields which once dominated Bass Strait, or recent Holocene and linked to the

more modern parabolic dune systems?

It is most likely that the calcified wood ridgelines are repeated throughout the Waterhouse

Conservation Area. If this is the case, it needs to be determined if the calcified forests at the site

are distinctly representative of similar landforms in the area to warrant geoconservation. Given

that the site is largely degraded, the landforms are unlikely to be representative, but this may

need to be assessed.


10 Conclusion

A geoconservation assessment of the landforms at the site has been conducted. The following

can be concluded:

Land use practices in the region are the likely cause of the disruption to the vegetation

across the frontal dune system at the site and in the area between the late 18th

and early 19th

century.

Planting of marron grass in the mid-19th

century by the sand dune reclamation unit had

largely stabilised dunes across the Parks and Wildlife Service and Crown Land titles across

the north east coast (including the Waterhouse Conservation Area)

Sand at the site has remained largely unstable and has led to the development of a large

transgressive dunefield.

Farming land, wetlands and historical parabolic dunes have been buried as the mobile

dunefield has transgressed inland.

There is little intrinsic value in the transgressive dunefield given that it is not representative

of natural landforms in the area.

The large volume of sand lost from the frontal dune system as a result of this unnatural

transgression has altered the natural parabolic dune building processes at the site, to the

extent that the system is not representative of natural dune building processes in the area.

Moreover, there is less value in preserving relict dunefields at the site given that relict dunes

in conservation areas across the north east coast are playing an important role in shaping

ongoing natural dune forming processes.

There is strong value in protecting the interdune slacks along the receding margins of the

dunefield to ensure that wetlands in the area are retained.

It is more than likely that the calcified forests are repeated across the landscape, particularly

to the north in the Waterhouse Conservation Area. Comment cannot be made on the

geoconservation significance of the calcified forests without knowing the regularity of the

associated landforms throughout the region.


11 Recommendations

The following can be recommended for the site:

It is recommended that transgressive dunefields at the site an unnatural anthropogenic

derived landform feature in the landscape and are not representative of surrounding

parabolic dunefields in the area and therefore does have geoconservation significance.

Due to alteration to the parabolic dunefield system at the site, ongoing natural processes

cannot be maintained. Relict parabolic dunes in the area have an important influence of

parabolic landform processes, however at the site, the relict dunes are unlikely to play

any significant role in ongoing processes. The relict dunes at the site are no more of a

notable landform feature compared with the relict dune forms which are broadly spread

across the conservation areas across the eastern north coast.

Natural processes of deflation should be encouraged rather than inhibited along the

receding margins of the transgressive dunefield such that wetland expansion can proceed

naturally to a point where there is adequate habitat area to sustain the endangered and

vulnerable frog populations in the area.

It is recommended that Parks and Wildlife Service are liaised with to determine the likely

distribution of the calcified forests. In particular, the group managing the Waterhouse

Conservation Area will need to be consulted.

A reconnaissance of the Waterhouse Conservation Area should be conducted to

determine the repeatability of the landforms.

It is recommended that carbon dating is conducted on the calcified remains to determine

the likely age of the forests.

Kris Taylor B.Sc (hons)

Environmental Geologist


12 References

Bird, E., 2000. Coastal Geomorphology. An Introduction. John Wiley & Sons.

Bowden, A.R. 1983. Relict terrestrial dunes: legacies of a former climate in coastal northeastern

Tasmania. Z. Geomorph. N. F. 45: 153-174.

DPEMP. Developemtn Proposal and Environemtnal Management Plan Project Specific

Guidelines. For Richard Sattler – Andersons Bay Sand Mining Bridport, Tasmania.

Board of the Environmental Protection Authority. August 2013.

GES Geoenvironmental Solutions 2014. Hydrogeology assessment of Lost Farm Dunefield

Masselink, G., Hughes, G., & Knight, J., 2003. Introduction to Coastal Processes and

Geomorphology. Hodder Education.

Maxwell, T.A. and Haynes, C.V., Jr., 1989. Large-scale, low-amplitude bed forms (chevrons) in

the Selima Sand Sheet, Egypt: Science v. 243, p. 1179-1182.

North Barker Ecosystem Services. 2013. Barnbougle Sand Quarry. Vegetation Survey and

Fauna Habitat Assessment. For Earth Exchange Pty Ltd.

Psuty, N.P., Martinez, M.L., Coasal Dunes Ecology and Conservation. Springer.

Ritter, D.F., Kochel, R.C., & Miller, J.M., 1995. Process Geomorphology. Wm C. Brown

Publishers

SCP Tasmanian State Coastal Policy, 1996. Revised 16 April 2003 in accordance with the

Satae Coastal Policy Validation Act.

Sharples, C., 1995, A reconnaissance of landforms and Geological Sites of Geoconservation

Significance in the State Forests of Eastern Tasmania, Report of Forestry Tasmania,

Hobart.

Sharples, C., 2002, Concepts and Principles of Geoconservation. Published Electronically on

the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service website.

Steane, D., 1996. Dunelands of North eastern Tasmania – Firestick Farming to Landcare and

sustainable Management – A management Plan for the Gladstone/Waterhouse Landcare

Group, David Steane and Associates, Hobart.

WCAMP. Waterhouse Conservation Area Management Plan 2003. Parks and Wildlife Service

Tasmania. Department of Tourism Parks Heritage and the Arts.


Appendix 1 Regional Features Listed in the Tasmanian Geoconservation Database


Appendix 2 Wind Rose Diagrams (Bridport Sea View Villas 30/10/94 to 30/9/10)


Appendix 3 Panoramic Photographs

A

B

C


D

E

F

G


H

I


J


Appendix 4 Soil Bore & Monitoring Well Logs


Appendix 5 Soil Particle Analysis

ID

Bore From To Tin #

Tin

tare

Tin

+wet

soil

Tin+

oven dry

soil

Mass

of soil

(gm)

Mass of

water

(gm)

Water

Content

(%) <90um >90um >250um >710um >2 mm <90um >90um >250um >710um >2 mm Sum <90um >90um >250um >710um >2 mm <90um >90um >250um >710um >2 mm

BH01 0 1.2 3 18.3 41.39 41.06 22.76 0.33 1.45 376.83 289.43 334.32 328.77 394.27 0.42 28.34 53.14 0.27 0.06 82.23 0.51 34.46 64.62 0.33 0.07 Q>S>F

BH01 1.2 2.4 52 26.1 64.2 64.16 38.06 0.04 0.11 376.74 298.38 344.74 329.33 395.27 0.33 37.29 63.56 0.83 1.06 103.07 0.32 36.18 61.67 0.81 1.03

BH01 2.4 3 604 18.85 71.86 69.95 51.1 1.91 3.74 377.65 391.44 593.99 336.19 394.27 1.24 130.35 312.81 7.69 0.06 452.15 0.27 28.83 69.18 1.70 0.01

BH01 3 3.6 801 18.74 75.23 73.34 54.6 1.89 3.46 376.85 405.02 615.54 330.06 394.27 0.44 143.93 334.36 1.56 0.06 480.35 0.09 29.96 69.61 0.32 0.01

BH01 3.6 4.8 83 16.03 79.05 76.65 60.62 2.4 3.96 379.13 340.05 622.6 334.36 394.44 2.72 78.96 341.42 5.86 0.23 429.19 0.63 18.40 79.55 1.37 0.05 R R

BH01 4.8 5.4 606 26.05 80.35 77.61 51.56 2.74 5.31 377.67 388.05 667.9 333.27 394.28 1.26 126.96 386.72 4.77 0.07 519.78 0.24 24.43 74.40 0.92 0.01 C C

BH01 5.4 6 10 25.61 65.89 64.37 38.76 1.52 3.92 377.2 343.47 593.98 331.29 394.27 0.79 82.38 312.8 2.79 0.06 398.82 0.20 20.66 78.43 0.70 0.02

BH01 6 6.6 86 18.9 72.44 70.69 51.79 1.75 3.38 377.11 345.47 592.13 331.24 394.27 0.7 84.38 310.95 2.74 0.06 398.83 0.18 21.16 77.97 0.69 0.02

BH01 6.6 7.2 813 32.43 61.71 60.67 28.24 1.04 3.68 377.31 342.8 657.86 341.79 394.29 0.9 81.71 376.68 13.29 0.08 472.66 0.19 17.29 79.69 2.81 0.02

BH01 7.2 7.8 13 17.97 61.03 59.45 41.48 1.58 3.81 378.37 302.33 595.21 340.1 394.27 1.96 41.24 314.03 11.6 0.06 368.89 0.53 11.18 85.13 3.14 0.02

BH01 7.8 8.4 811 32.48 89.84 87.26 54.78 2.58 4.71 377.46 328.55 585.38 335.02 394.27 1.05 67.46 304.2 6.52 0.06 379.29 0.28 17.79 80.20 1.72 0.02

BH01 8.4 9 125 17.54 52.46 50.82 33.28 1.64 4.93 378.03 320.85 481.21 331.53 394.27 1.62 59.76 200.03 3.03 0.06 264.5 0.61 22.59 75.63 1.15 0.02

BH01 9 9.6 820 20.36 54.69 53.25 32.89 1.44 4.38 377.4 331.21 533.97 330.44 394.27 0.99 70.12 252.79 1.94 0.06 325.9 0.30 21.52 77.57 0.60 0.02

BH01 9.6 10.2 433 25.62 65.25 63.7 38.08 1.55 4.07 378.31 352.46 641.72 329.64 394.27 1.9 91.37 360.54 1.14 0.06 455.01 0.42 20.08 79.24 0.25 0.01

BH01 10.2 10.8 36 20.26 62.27 60.62 40.36 1.65 4.09 377.41 355.08 593.2 329.21 394.27 1 93.99 312.02 0.71 0.06 407.78 0.25 23.05 76.52 0.17 0.01

BH01 10.8 11.4 68 25.48 71.41 69.27 43.79 2.14 4.89 377.84 314.38 669.42 331.9 394.27 1.43 53.29 388.24 3.4 0.06 446.42 0.32 11.94 86.97 0.76 0.01

BH01 11.4 12 76 25.72 67.74 66.07 40.35 1.67 4.14 377.63 328.73 664.83 332.94 394.27 1.22 67.64 383.65 4.44 0.06 457.01 0.27 14.80 83.95 0.97 0.01

BH02 0.6 1.2 87 18.13 58.01 57.02 38.89 0.99 2.55 376.89 306.72 485.41 392.91 394.21 0.48 45.63 204.23 64.41 0 314.75 0.15 14.50 64.89 20.46 0.00 P Q>F>C>S Q>F>C>S Q>S>F

BH02 1.8 2.4 2222 32.7 71.95 70.66 37.96 1.29 3.40 376.86 331.13 732.85 330.66 394.21 0.45 70.04 451.67 2.16 0 524.32 0.09 13.36 86.14 0.41 0.00 P Q>F>C>S Q>F>C>S

BH02 3 3.6 h 25.99 68.91 68.2 42.21 0.71 1.68 376.81 311.21 577.9 330.72 394.21 0.4 50.12 296.72 2.22 0 349.46 0.11 14.34 84.91 0.64 0.00 P Q>F>C>S Q>F>C>S

BH02 4.2 4.8 607 25.71 62.54 60.83 35.12 1.71 4.87 376.79 319.25 541.52 329.33 394.29 0.38 58.16 260.34 0.83 0.08 319.79 0.12 18.19 81.41 0.26 0.03 P Q>F>C>S Q>F>C>S C

BH02 5.2 5.6 55 25.64 68.36 66.35 40.71 2.01 4.94 376.72 312.23 606.59 330.57 394.21 0.31 51.14 325.41 2.07 0 378.93 0.08 13.50 85.88 0.55 0.00 P R>Q>S R

BH02 6 6.4 tt 25.98 68.96 67.58 41.6 1.38 3.32 377.46 294.65 535.34 330.26 394.6 1.05 33.56 254.16 1.76 0.39 290.92 0.36 11.54 87.36 0.60 0.13 R>Q>S

BH02 6.8 7.2 888 25.61 76.65 74.88 49.27 1.77 3.59 377.06 313.62 638.54 331.23 394.29 0.65 52.53 357.36 2.73 0.08 413.35 0.16 12.71 86.45 0.66 0.02

BH02 7.6 8 z 19.73 58.89 56.97 37.24 1.92 5.16 376.83 311.01 483.28 329.29 394.21 0.42 49.92 202.1 0.79 0 253.23 0.17 19.71 79.81 0.31 0.00

BH02 8.4 8.8 5 19.36 53.96 52.7 33.34 1.26 3.78 378.32 302.53 462.94 330.15 394.21 1.91 41.44 181.76 1.65 0 226.76 0.84 18.27 80.16 0.73 0.00 R>Q>S

BH02 9.2 9.6 600 25.58 61.51 60.33 34.75 1.18 3.40 376.95 297.13 440.63 330.12 394.21 0.54 36.04 159.45 1.62 0 197.65 0.27 18.23 80.67 0.82 0.00

BH02 10 10.4 808 18.58 60.6 58.86 40.28 1.74 4.32 377.01 290.03 479.75 337.08 394.21 0.6 28.94 198.57 8.58 0 236.69 0.25 12.23 83.89 3.62 0.00 S>Q>

BH02 10.8 11.2 61 18.89 61.75 60.1 41.21 1.65 4.00 378.08 306.55 480.64 332.03 394.21 1.67 45.46 199.46 3.53 0 250.12 0.67 18.18 79.75 1.41 0.00 S>Q>

BH02 11.6 12 305 18.29 62.34 60.27 41.98 2.07 4.93 377.05 295.06 586.92 331.29 394.21 0.64 33.97 305.74 2.79 0 343.14 0.19 9.90 89.10 0.81 0.00

BH03 0.4 0.8 433 25.45 64.4 63.35 37.9 1.05 2.77 377.19 295.2 422.93 329.49 394.21 0.78 34.11 141.75 0.99 0 177.63 0.44 19.20 79.80 0.56 0.00

BH03 1.2 1.6 13 17.87 72.3 70.44 52.57 1.86 3.54 377.36 312.78 493.82 330.01 394.21 0.95 51.69 212.64 1.51 0 266.79 0.36 19.37 79.70 0.57 0.00

BH03 2 2.4 68 25.3 66.66 65.05 39.75 1.61 4.05 377.15 303.35 645.24 331.25 394.21 0.74 42.26 364.06 2.75 0 409.81 0.18 10.31 88.84 0.67 0.00

BH03 2.8 3.2 125 17.4 72.59 70.75 53.35 1.84 3.45 377.08 296.95 583.74 330.48 394.21 0.67 35.86 302.56 1.98 0 341.07 0.20 10.51 88.71 0.58 0.00

BH03 3.6 4 813 32.36 86.33 84.48 52.12 1.85 3.55 376.91 311.05 532.5 533.73 394.21 0.5 49.96 251.32 205.23 0 507.01 0.10 9.85 49.57 40.48 0.00

BH03 4.4 4.8 76 25.53 79.14 76.95 51.42 2.19 4.26 377.05 295.73 517.21 339.62 394.21 0.64 34.64 236.03 11.12 0 282.43 0.23 12.26 83.57 3.94 0.00

BH03 5.2 5.6 801 18.73 58.88 57.23 38.5 1.65 4.29 376.87 293.25 423.25 329.26 394.21 0.46 32.16 142.07 0.76 0 175.45 0.26 18.33 80.97 0.43 0.00

BH03 6 6.4 10 25.56 74.62 72.84 47.28 1.78 3.76 376.91 313.67 486.95 329.34 394.21 0.5 52.58 205.77 0.84 0 259.69 0.19 20.25 79.24 0.32 0.00

BH03 6.8 7.2 811 32.35 75.67 73.58 41.23 2.09 5.07 377.04 301.96 479.97 329.36 394.21 0.63 40.87 198.79 0.86 0 241.15 0.26 16.95 82.43 0.36 0.00 C

BH03 7.6 8 86 18.83 64.37 62.68 43.85 1.69 3.85 376.92 291.64 433.04 330.48 394.21 0.51 30.55 151.86 1.98 0 184.9 0.28 16.52 82.13 1.07 0.00

BH03 8.4 8.8 820 20.22 70.6 69.07 48.85 1.53 3.13 377.57 306.42 550.51 331.02 394.21 1.16 45.33 269.33 2.52 0 318.34 0.36 14.24 84.60 0.79 0.00 A A R

BH03 9.2 9.6 606 26.03 75.58 73.45 47.42 2.13 4.49 377.08 308.95 593.8 329.53 394.21 0.67 47.86 312.62 1.03 0 362.18 0.18 13.21 86.32 0.28 0.00 A A

BH03 10 10.4 83 15.99 59.96 58.6 42.61 1.36 3.19 376.82 289.43 505.48 328.97 394.21 0.41 28.34 224.3 0.47 0 253.52 0.16 11.18 88.47 0.19 0.00

BH03 10.8 11.2 36 20.09 62.52 61.23 41.14 1.29 3.14 376.79 271.58 519.08 331.16 394.21 0.38 10.49 237.9 2.66 0 251.43 0.15 4.17 94.62 1.06 0.00

BH03 11.6 12 52 26.1 73.38 71.7 45.6 1.68 3.68 377.43 309.77 585.14 331.56 394.21 1.02 48.68 303.96 3.06 0 356.72 0.29 13.65 85.21 0.86 0.00

BH04 0.4 0.8 813 32.36 67.19 66.04 33.68 1.15 3.41 376.92 293.84 484.1 321.5 394.21 0.51 32.75 202.92 -7 0 229.18 0.22 14.29 88.54 -3.05 0.00

BH04 1.2 1.6 86 18.83 66.53 65.48 46.65 1.05 2.25 376.82 293.77 495.28 329.73 394.21 0.41 32.68 214.1 1.23 0 248.42 0.17 13.16 86.18 0.50 0.00

BH04 2 2.4 34 25.98 72.82 67.7 41.72 5.12 12.27 376.88 296.56 600.8 329.36 394.21 0.47 35.47 319.62 0.86 0 356.42 0.13 9.95 89.68 0.24 0.00

BH04 2.7 3 13 17.84 59.15 51.64 33.8 7.51 22.22 377.65 292.2 595.07 330.18 394.21 1.24 31.11 313.89 1.68 0 347.92 0.36 8.94 90.22 0.48 0.00 C & O C

BH04 3 3.3 433 25.46 73.55 64.89 39.43 8.66 21.96 379.59 296.43 516.84 330.16 394.36 3.18 35.34 235.66 1.66 0.15 275.99 1.15 12.80 85.39 0.60 0.05 C & O C & O

BH04 3.3 3.6 10 25.55 56.96 48.05 22.5 8.91 39.60 380.74 280.6 435.32 340.22 402.51 4.33 19.51 154.14 11.72 8.3 198 2.19 9.85 77.85 5.92 4.19 C & O O O O O

BH05 0 0.4 h 26.04 79.06 77.06 51.02 2 3.92 377.08 287.88 487.6 329.42 394.21 0.67 26.79 206.42 0.92 0 234.8 0.29 11.41 87.91 0.39 0.00

BH05 0.8 1.2 z 19.77 65.14 63.62 43.85 1.52 3.47 376.96 285.79 540.1 329.33 394.21 0.55 24.7 258.92 0.83 0 285 0.19 8.67 90.85 0.29 0.00

BH05 1.6 2 tt 26.04 64.96 63.51 37.47 1.45 3.87 376.92 290.31 492.24 329.27 394.21 0.51 29.22 211.06 0.77 0 241.56 0.21 12.10 87.37 0.32 0.00

BH05 2.4 2.8 5 19.51 62.76 57.49 37.98 5.27 13.88 376.68 275.77 571.75 329.38 394.21 0.27 14.68 290.57 0.88 0 306.4 0.09 4.79 94.83 0.29 0.00

BH05 3.2 3.6 55 25.68 69.41 61.68 36 7.73 21.47 376.94 285.29 564.26 329.19 394.21 0.53 24.2 283.08 0.69 0 308.5 0.17 7.84 91.76 0.22 0.00

BH05 4 4.4 888 25.65 72.92 64.96 39.31 7.96 20.25 376.55 278.08 495.96 437.31 405.19 0.14 16.99 214.78 108.81 10.98 351.7 0.04 4.83 61.07 30.94 3.12 O P/O

BH05 4.4 4.8 7 19.63 60.74 40.65 21.02 20.09 95.58 382.27 284.79 675.97 336.19 403.98 5.86 23.7 394.79 7.69 9.77 441.81 1.33 5.36 89.36 1.74 2.21 O O>S P/O

BH06 0.4 0.8 817 18.53 64.9 63.91 45.38 0.99 2.18 376.83 305.34 442.85 330.6 394.21 0.42 44.25 161.67 2.1 0 208.44 0.20 21.23 77.56 1.01 0.00

BH06 1.2 1.6 7 26.05 54.94 53.88 27.83 1.06 3.81 376.65 287.82 398.03 330.08 394.21 0.24 26.73 116.85 1.58 0 145.4 0.17 18.38 80.36 1.09 0.00

BH06 2 2.4 20 22.46 69.02 66.95 44.49 2.07 4.65 376.88 308.07 505.21 330.89 394.21 0.47 46.98 224.03 2.39 0 273.87 0.17 17.15 81.80 0.87 0.00

BH06 2.8 3.2 99 32.99 68.29 66.92 33.93 1.37 4.04 376.75 299.04 433.03 330.08 394.21 0.34 37.95 151.85 1.58 0 191.72 0.18 19.79 79.20 0.82 0.00

BH06 3.6 4 302 25.87 72.39 71.09 45.22 1.3 2.87 377.23 319.49 534.64 329.93 394.21 0.82 58.4 253.46 1.43 0 314.11 0.26 18.59 80.69 0.46 0.00

BH06 4.4 4.8 602 25.65 74.8 73.24 47.59 1.56 3.28 376.9 332.93 519.34 329.93 394.21 0.49 71.84 238.16 1.43 0 311.92 0.16 23.03 76.35 0.46 0.00

BH06 5.2 5.6 818 18.52 58.92 57.04 38.52 1.88 4.88 376.84 309.54 530.9 330.2 394.21 0.43 48.45 249.72 1.7 0 300.3 0.14 16.13 83.16 0.57 0.00

BH06 6 6.4 13 18.2 55.94 54.22 36.02 1.72 4.78 376.66 291.4 501.41 330.22 394.21 0.25 30.31 220.23 1.72 0 252.51 0.10 12.00 87.22 0.68 0.00

BH06 6.8 7.2 3 25.87 77.18 74.62 48.75 2.56 5.25 376.75 288.82 484.75 330.11 394.21 0.34 27.73 203.57 1.61 0 233.25 0.15 11.89 87.28 0.69 0.00

BH06 7.6 8 34 26.03 65.87 64.43 38.4 1.44 3.75 376.57 280.69 496.34 330.34 394.21 0.16 19.6 215.16 1.84 0 236.76 0.07 8.28 90.88 0.78 0.00

BH06 8.4 8.8 922 25.64 85.09 76.22 50.58 8.87 17.54 377.23 273.86 662.89 336.85 394.21 0.82 12.77 381.71 8.35 0 403.65 0.20 3.16 94.56 2.07 0.00 C

BH06 8.8 9.2 83 20.39 76.68 66.48 46.09 10.2 22.13 381.93 335.05 634.91 330.68 394.53 5.52 73.96 353.73 2.18 0.32 435.71 1.27 16.97 81.18 0.50 0.07 O O O

BH06 9.2 9.6 33 25.69 84.76 74.7 49.01 10.06 20.53 380.45 296.44 677.56 335.25 394.37 4.04 35.35 396.38 6.75 0.16 442.68 0.91 7.99 89.54 1.52 0.04 O O>S O

BH07 0 0.4 68 25.31 65.66 64.84 39.53 0.82 2.07 376.55 294.44 552.74 334.08 395.05 0.14 33.35 271.56 5.58 0.84 311.47 0.04 10.71 87.19 1.79 0.27 O>S>F>Q Q>F>S>O Q>F>S Q>F>S S

BH07 0.8 1.2 125 17.39 50.18 49.27 31.88 0.91 2.85 376.64 325.9 560.21 331.83 394.21 0.23 64.81 279.03 3.33 0 347.4 0.07 18.66 80.32 0.96 0.00 Q>F>S

BH07 1.6 2 83 18.42 43.95 43.16 24.74 0.79 3.19 377.77 331.84 511.35 332.45 394.21 1.36 70.75 230.17 3.95 0 306.23 0.44 23.10 75.16 1.29 0.00

BH07 2.4 2.8 818 18.51 49.02 47.87 29.36 1.15 3.92 377.69 387.72 606.29 329.63 394.21 1.28 126.63 325.11 1.13 0 454.15 0.28 27.88 71.59 0.25 0.00

BH07 3.2 3.6 124 18.24 63.53 58.41 40.17 5.12 12.75 378.5 428.31 521.87 329.62 394.21 2.09 167.22 240.69 1.12 0 411.12 0.51 40.67 58.54 0.27 0.00

BH07 4 4.4 606 26.01 64.86 57.88 31.87 6.98 21.90 377.39 374.53 534.17 329.72 394.21 0.98 113.44 252.99 1.22 0 368.63 0.27 30.77 68.63 0.33 0.00

BH08 0 0.4 604 18.85 42.56 42.49 23.64 0.07 0.30 376.78 294.94 505.86 335.53 394.21 0.37 33.85 224.68 7.03 0 265.93 0.14 12.73 84.49 2.64 0.00

BH08 0.8 1.2 820 20.21 58.32 58.07 37.86 0.25 0.66 376.71 330.74 427.48 330.3 394.29 0.3 69.65 146.3 1.8 0.08 218.13 0.14 31.93 67.07 0.83 0.04

BH08 1.6 2 52 26.1 68.09 66.75 40.65 1.34 3.30 376.71 390.12 448.16 330.22 394.21 0.3 129.03 166.98 1.72 0 298.03 0.10 43.29 56.03 0.58 0.00

BH08 2.4 2.8 811 32.35 78.05 76.31 43.96 1.74 3.96 376.93 369.11 499.23 329.84 394.21 0.52 108.02 218.05 1.34 0 327.93 0.16 32.94 66.49 0.41 0.00

BH08 3.2 3.6 76 25.53 78.95 77.29 51.76 1.66 3.21 376.67 373.32 500.42 330.04 394.21 0.26 112.23 219.24 1.54 0 333.27 0.08 33.68 65.78 0.46 0.00

BH08 4 4.4 83 15.99 73.17 70.65 54.66 2.52 4.61 376.73 368.5 506.19 330.71 394.21 0.32 107.41 225.01 2.21 0 334.95 0.10 32.07 67.18 0.66 0.00

BH08 4.8 5.2 818 18.51 66.06 63.93 45.42 2.13 4.69 377 355.31 535.12 331.05 394.21 0.59 94.22 253.94 2.55 0 351.3 0.17 26.82 72.29 0.73 0.00

BH08 5.6 6 801 18.71 60.81 58.3 39.59 2.51 6.34 377.08 348.64 458.84 330.87 394.21 0.67 87.55 177.66 2.37 0 268.25 0.25 32.64 66.23 0.88 0.00

BH08 6.4 6.8 36 20.1 59.17 57.35 37.25 1.82 4.89 376.62 333.75 454.02 328.87 394.21 0.21 72.66 172.84 0.37 0 246.08 0.09 29.53 70.24 0.15 0.00

BH08 7.2 7.6 606 26.04 69.58 67.52 41.48 2.06 4.97 377.55 331.88 481.92 330.76 394.21 1.14 70.79 200.74 2.26 0 274.93 0.41 25.75 73.01 0.82 0.00 A

BH08 8 8.4 68 25.31 67.83 65.93 40.62 1.9 4.68 376.98 337.16 500.83 331.67 394.21 0.57 76.07 219.65 3.17 0 299.46 0.19 25.40 73.35 1.06 0.00

BH08 8.8 9.2 125 17.4 65.03 63.21 45.81 1.82 3.97 377.06 302.85 683.17 330.31 394.21 0.65 41.76 401.99 1.81 0 446.21 0.15 9.36 90.09 0.41 0.00

BH09 0 0.4 34 25.99 56.64 55.93 29.94 0.71 2.37 376.82 335.67 393.17 333.87 394.21 0.41 74.58 111.99 5.37 0 192.35 0.21 38.77 58.22 2.79 0.00

BH09 0.8 1.2 13 17.87 59.38 58.17 40.3 1.21 3.00 376.87 347.57 485.15 330.78 394.21 0.46 86.48 203.97 2.28 0 293.19 0.16 29.50 69.57 0.78 0.00

BH09 1.6 2 10 25.57 56.08 55.11 29.54 0.97 3.28 376.79 317.94 495.82 347.44 394.38 0.38 56.85 214.64 18.94 0.17 290.98 0.13 19.54 73.76 6.51 0.06 C

BH09 2.4 2.8 813 32.36 70.23 68.99 36.63 1.24 3.39 376.69 365.71 531.99 330.58 394.21 0.28 104.62 250.81 2.08 0 357.79 0.08 29.24 70.10 0.58 0.00

BH09 3.2 3.6 811 32.35 71.76 70.22 37.87 1.54 4.07 377.24 347.08 538.73 331.21 394.21 0.83 85.99 257.55 2.71 0 347.08 0.24 24.78 74.20 0.78 0.00

BH09 4 4.4 86 18.82 57.32 51.38 32.56 5.94 18.24 376.76 409.92 297.59 330.45 394.21 0.35 148.83 16.41 1.95 0 167.54 0.21 88.83 9.79 1.16 0.00

BH09 4.8 5.2 52 26.11 67.01 59.81 33.7 7.2 21.36 377.63 346.94 444.36 330.63 394.21 1.22 85.85 163.18 2.13 0 252.38 0.48 34.02 64.66 0.84 0.00 C

BH09 5.2 5.6 433 25.46 84.43 73.16 47.7 11.27 23.63 377.26 323.52 481.45 331.49 394.21 0.85 62.43 200.27 2.99 0 266.54 0.32 23.42 75.14 1.12 0.00 O C>S

BH09 5.6 6 76 25.51 72.81 52.44 26.93 20.37 75.64 379.76 277.34 316.96 335.15 401.44 3.35 16.25 35.78 6.65 7.23 69.26 4.84 23.46 51.66 9.60 10.44 O O O O O

BH10 0.4 0.8 600 25.59 73.98 72.5 46.91 1.48 3.15 376.69 303.8 429.5 330.45 394.21 0.28 42.71 148.32 1.95 0 193.26 0.14 22.10 76.75 1.01 0.00

BH10 1.2 1.6 607 25.72 85.49 75.66 49.94 9.83 19.68 376.76 344.63 432.92 331.64 394.21 0.35 83.54 151.74 3.14 0 238.77 0.15 34.99 63.55 1.32 0.00

BH10 2 2.4 2222 32.49 98.49 86.07 53.58 12.42 23.18 377.01 332.86 525.03 332.12 394.21 0.6 71.77 243.85 3.62 0 319.84 0.19 22.44 76.24 1.13 0.00 C

BH10 2.8 3.2 87 18.16 62.8 54.51 36.35 8.29 22.81 378.03 358.58 484.14 331.73 394.87 1.62 97.49 202.96 3.23 0.66 305.96 0.53 31.86 66.34 1.06 0.22 O O O

BH11 0 0.4 817 18.58 59.51 58.39 39.81 1.12 2.81 376.54 351.96 459.12 329.93 394.21 0.13 90.87 177.94 1.43 0 270.37 0.05 33.61 65.81 0.53 0.00 C

BH11 0.8 1.2 302 25.93 70.93 69.59 43.66 1.34 3.07 376.73 314.18 547.96 335.56 394.21 0.32 53.09 266.78 7.06 0 327.25 0.10 16.22 81.52 2.16 0.00

BH11 1.6 2 83 20.36 60.64 59.19 38.83 1.45 3.73 376.65 372.16 458.32 330.59 394.21 0.24 111.07 177.14 2.09 0 290.54 0.08 38.23 60.97 0.72 0.00

BH11 2.4 2.8 33 25.64 73.31 71.95 46.31 1.36 2.94 376.79 413.67 411.41 334.46 394.21 0.38 152.58 130.23 5.96 0 289.15 0.13 52.77 45.04 2.06 0.00

BH11 3.2 3.6 13 18.22 72.77 70.55 52.33 2.22 4.24 376.82 342.71 527.93 334.17 394.21 0.41 81.62 246.75 5.67 0 334.45 0.12 24.40 73.78 1.70 0.00

BH11 4 4.4 7 26.1 71.02 69.62 43.52 1.4 3.22 376.78 304.07 439.97 330.37 394.21 0.37 42.98 158.79 1.87 0 204.01 0.18 21.07 77.83 0.92 0.00

BH11 4.8 5.2 922 25.78 51.28 50.45 24.67 0.83 3.36 376.83 340.6 464.34 330.35 394.21 0.42 79.51 183.16 1.85 0 264.94 0.16 30.01 69.13 0.70 0.00

BH11 5.6 6 602 25.69 58.57 57.31 31.62 1.26 3.98 376.86 380.95 493.55 330.83 394.21 0.45 119.86 212.37 2.33 0 335.01 0.13 35.78 63.39 0.70 0.00

BH11 6.4 6.8 604 18.89 51.37 49.8 30.91 1.57 5.08 376.75 315.77 391.72 330.27 394.21 0.34 54.68 110.54 1.77 0 167.33 0.20 32.68 66.06 1.06 0.00

BH11 7.2 7.6 34 26.03 70.51 68.7 42.67 1.81 4.24 376.9 360.96 473.27 331.08 394.21 0.49 99.87 192.09 2.58 0 295.03 0.17 33.85 65.11 0.87 0.00

BH11 8 8.4 818 18.56 53.85 52.22 33.66 1.63 4.84 377.07 374.28 571.76 336.31 394.21 0.66 113.19 290.58 7.81 0 412.24 0.16 27.46 70.49 1.89 0.00 C

BH11 8.8 9.2 20 22.52 70.35 67.94 45.42 2.41 5.31 376.88 341.98 459.6 330.6 394.21 0.47 80.89 178.42 2.1 0 261.88 0.18 30.89 68.13 0.80 0.00

BH11 9.6 10 3 25.89 65.06 63.27 37.38 1.79 4.79 376.66 261.56 348.26 517.74 394.21 0.25 0.47 67.08 189.24 0 257.04 0.10 0.18 26.10 73.62 0.00

BH11 10.4 10.8 99 33.06 80.92 78.88 45.82 2.04 4.45 376.94 302.47 496.77 331.52 394.21 0.53 41.38 215.59 3.02 0 260.52 0.20 15.88 82.75 1.16 0.00

BH11 11.2 11.6 160 18.38 50.17 49.08 30.7 1.09 3.55 376.93 299.6 428.23 329.86 394.21 0.52 38.51 147.05 1.36 0 187.44 0.28 20.55 78.45 0.73 0.00

Notes : Q - quartz, S - Shell, F - Feldspar, O - organic matter, R - Rubber, P - Peat, C - Charcoal, A - Ash

ObservationsDepth Moisture Content Sand +seive weight( gm) Sand weight(gm) Sand %


Appendix 6 Inventory of Parabolic Dunefields in the Area

BIG WATERHOUSE LAKE

LAKE CREEK


Easting 550800

Northing 5472800

GDA94 ZONE 55

Parks & Wildlife Service

BIG WATERHOUSE LAKE



Easting 550700

Northing 5474400

GDA94 ZONE 55

LITTLEWATERHOUSE LAKE

Parks & Wildlife Service & Crown Land



Easting 547100

Northing 5470000

GDA94 ZONE 55




Easting 547000

Northing 5467750

GDA94 ZONE 55

Parks & Wildlife Service / Crown Land

Private Holdings



Easting 544000

Northing 5464900

GDA94 ZONE 55


Private Holdings



Easting 543200

Northing 5463100

GDA94 ZONE 55


Private Holdings



Private Holdings

Boobyalla Conservation Area

Easting 577000

Northing 5476000

GDA94 ZONE 55

Ringarooma River

Bowlers Lagoon



Private Holdings


Easting 577000

Northing 5476000

GDA94 ZONE 55



Private Holdings


Easting 522000

Northing 5464500

GDA94 ZONE 55



Private Holdings

Single Tree Plain Conservation Area &


Easting 522000

Northing 5464500

GDA94 ZONE 55


Parks & Wildlife Service & Crown Land

Private Holdings

Private Holdings


Easting 522000

Northing 5464500

GDA94 ZONE 55

Table of Contents · Geomorphological and hydrological mapping using current and historical aerial...

Documents

Transcript of Table of Contents · Geomorphological and hydrological mapping using current and historical aerial...