As this draft aquaculture plan does not have a statutory basis, applications for aquaculture authorisations will continue to be considered on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the plan and other relevant guidelines/information.
In the absence of adequate baseline information, proponents need to provide adequate information, to the satisfaction of the Minister for Environment. Given the World Heritage status of Shark Bay, adequate monitoring to ensure that environmental impacts can be quantified is essential.
It should be noted that for applications for species such as finfish that need formulated diets, the proponent would be required to provide more detailed information on water circulation and water quality impacts. Proponents should refer to the document prepared by the Marine Conservation Branch of the Department of Conservation and Land Management for guidance (CALM, 1998a).
Prior to submitting an application to the Department of Fisheries for an Aquaculture Lease or Licence, proponents should examine the plan and discuss their proposal with an officer from the Department of Fisheries Aquaculture Program.
Assessment of applications for aquaculture authorisations submitted to the Department of Fisheries is undertaken by one of three processes, depending on the location of the proposed site and the nature of the proposed activities.
7.1 Freehold land sites
Proposals that are located wholly on private (freehold) land may require approval from several authorities, including the relevant Local Government Authority. The relevant approvals are generally submitted with the application to the Department of Fisheries.
Once competency checks have been completed and the relevant approvals have been obtained, the application can be determined.
7.2 Non-freehold land sites
Proposals located on non-freehold or unallocated Crown Land require a broader consultation process than ones for freehold land.
An application is submitted to the Department of Fisheries to determine competency and to assess whether all reasonable information to enable determination has been provided. It is then referred to relevant decision-making authorities for comment within a specified period. Industry and community groups may also be consulted, if appropriate.
Relevant agencies provide approval/clearance to the Department of Fisheries or alternatively advise of the processes required to assess an application. Once all the agencies have completed their processes, and the relevant clearances have been obtained, the Department of Fisheries is in a position to determine the success (or otherwise) of the application.
7.3 Marine sites
All aquaculture proposals for marine sites are assessed taking into account Ministerial Policy Guideline No. 8 “Assessment of applications for authorisations for Aquaculture and Pearling in coastal waters of Western Australia” (MPG8). The assessment and consultation process set down in the Guideline includes consultation with relevant decision-making authorities and other involved agencies, community and interest groups, and provides an opportunity for public comment through public advertisement.
Where the proposal is in accordance with a plan which has been duly adopted within the last five years by a competent authority or authorities after public consultation, public comment may not be specifically sought, although the public will be notified of the proposal (see MPG8 4d(i)).
Consultation will be undertaken with relevant decision-making authorities, other involved agencies and representative community and industry groups.
Applications for aquaculture licences in the Shark Bay will not be automatically approved simply because they are in accordance with the recommendations outlined above. This plan provides only a guide to proponents to aid the decision-making process. Prior to lodging an application, proponents should examine the plan and discuss their proposal with the Department of Fisheries’
Officers.
Recommendation 9
Ensure proponents provide the following information in their applications:
• A map of the major benthic habitats (e.g. seagrass meadows, coral or limestone reef, bare sand, mud) in and around the lease sites.
• A qualitative description of water movement or map of general water circulation in and around the lease, especially where sensitive marine communities are located within or close to lease sites.
• A map of the important biological resources (e.g. bird rookeries, seal or turtle nesting/haul-out beaches) in the proposed lease and surrounding area.
• A description of the potential environmental impacts from the proposal and details of how those impacts are to be minimised.
• A detailed description of site works (including water-based construction) and other processes which are likely to impact on the environment.
• Details of monitoring that will be carried out, including baseline monitoring, prior to project commencement so that environmental impacts can be adequately quantified.
• Details of contingency plans, if the World Heritage values of Shark Bay are compromised.
(proponents/DOF/DOE/EPA)
Recommendation 10
Ensure that lease and/or license conditions for aquaculture include:
• A commitment to monitoring for the life of the project to enable environmental impacts to be adequately quantified;
• Conditions relating to the removal of infrastructure and reinstatement of the area disturbed by any environmental impact; and
• Performance criteria to measure whether the lease and/or license is being used in the manner
for which it was intended. (DOF/DEP/EPA)