Rockingham Council is proposing to dredge a 300m long 30m wide channel with markers through the sand bar at Bent St. They are meeting Marine Parks and Reserves on Thursday. All pond users need to state their opposition to this proposal.
Article from Saturday's West
Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/pages/No-dredging-at-Safety-Bay/106760259451420
I would urge anyone who is opposed to the dredging of this channel to either read or get a copy of this document to the people making the decisions.
This is a copy of a guy's thesis on the dynamics of Warnbro Sound and what causes the movement of sand etc around that area.
Hey it's pretty long winded but that's what they need - some research - not just someone saying, "uh, der, sounds like a good idea, let's just put the channel there".
Why don't they simply just dredge the channel that is already there????
www2.sese.uwa.edu.au/~pattiara/theses/Hollings_2004.pdf
It will just fill back up again... Long shore drift...
If they want to make a difference, they should re-build the road
going to Garden Island...
from bens abstract, if you bothered for a quick read
"it was found that the large scale sediment dynamics are the result of a combination of transport processes and can not simply be considered in terms of wind wave driven longshore transport"
further to this, i have seen the offshore sand feeds through the reefs out there via water pentrating bathymetry, pretty sure it is a large bay too which means you get a gyre system which probably alternates direction - hence the long term feed from offshore that has made tern island is also affected by the scalloping on the eastern side due to currents, and makes the great kite and windsurf spot happen
"Hey it's pretty long winded but that's what they need - some research - not just someone saying, "uh, der, sounds like a good idea, let's just put the channel there".
Why don't they simply just dredge the channel that is already there????"
mate, coastal engineers have been assisting the city with this proposal for over 6 years - they look at all the relevant data, report on it and then design options for the city to consider as a solution to their problems at the site, they also take on board the community concerns and needs as well as get stakeholders input - and advise on ways forward, with the pros and cons laid out
the idea that anything you are now suggesting as a logical alternative has not been considered is, uh, laughable if not insulting - for whatever political, economic or geographical reason they may wish to explain to you that it has been discounted
why is everyone so scared of dredging too? it is moving of wet sand...and if this goes ahead, it will probably never even affect you in the long run, and the beaches eroding down the way at waikiki could probably use the sand nourishment feed
i mean - how do the other water users (kites/windsurfers) handle boats going through the area to access the ramp already?
Hey Mazdon, thanks for the reply.
Certainly have bothered to read that document - many times over in fact. Given that Warnbro Sound is my front yard I do pay a bit of attention to what goes on there.
Certainly not looking to insult anyone - I was simply providing what I thought might be some useful information to kite surfers and wind surfers who from what I could ascertain don't want that area to be dredged as it's a great spot to a be able to stand and get going again.
Dredge away mate - I'm a boater so it's only going to benefit me.
It might be just wet sand but it has now become covered in weed and is now a breeding ground for lots of species.
I'm sure there are plenty of examples of so called 'engineers' that have made decisions that don't take into account all available information - I wonder if they are the same engineers who designed the foreshore down at Rockingham Beach that got washed away in that storm a few years back? Or the Garden Island causeway? And mate I never assume that anyone covers every 'logical alternative'.
As for taking on 'community concerns', they don't seem to be paying much attention to concerns about the development of the Mangles Bay marina.
My point was that according to the thesis they are fighting a losing battle - the two sand banks are destined to join back up again just the way it was back in 1837.
Anyway,makes for interesting reading...
hi sky, firstly sorry, that first comment re: reading it, was aimed at the ant man
my second comment towards your good self should have my own disclosure, that i know a range of people that have worked on this over the years, so i have a fair idea of the rigorous approach, thought and political pressures that have gone into it - in saying that, coasts are dynamic and one freak event could make even the most sensible design look silly. logical approaches often get thrown out the door for illogical and political reasons too, but that is the world we live in.
unfortunately most coastal engineering on our already established coastal locations means facing a "losing a battle" to some degree - mother nature always wins, but local coastal managers and populations seek to maintain, often delaying the inevitable, the coastal lifestyle they have become accustomed to...money down a black hole in some instances, justifiable expense in others. and the timeframe is the other factor - is it worth doing if they get 20 uyears out of it, during which another boating facility in a better location gets built that then allows them to transfer the pressure on infrastructure? Port Kennedy has been floated before i believe?
anyhow, nothing wrong with a nice debate on these things.
i am a north of the river guy, so not much clue on other infrastructure in the region like the causeway or magles marina... (disclosure #2: only saw the causeway up close for the first time at the ripe old age of 28 - didn't know it was there before then haha)
heard the crabs are good to dive fromt eh beach for there too!
