Send Message
Weather | Buy&Sell | Forums |  |
Weather | Buy & Sell | Gallery | Forums | |
From the back page of today's West in the motoring section.
Could not find it online so excuse the scanning.
"Coastal engineering consultants employed by the City of Rockingham have presented three channel options — the preferred centre channel being 300m long, 30m wide and 1.6m deep heading in a south-east direction through an existing and stable weed bank to the east of the ramp.
I think this would provide the best balance between providing long-term access between the ramp and Warnbro Sound, and limiting the adverse impact on the environment and the public who use a nearby beach for swimming and exercising dogs.
The spoil material would be used for beach restoration in the immediate area. Regular dredging would be required and the deep waters of Warnbro Sound could also help flush any silt into open water.
"Without a formal navigation channel and demarcated channel markers the potential risk to safety and conflict between recreational vessels and the windsurfing/kitesurfing communities will continue.
Mr Sammels said that Rockingham Council's aim was to provide boaters with a safe passage for vessels up to 8m in length and its Engineering and Parks Department would put yet another presentation to the Marine Parks and Reserves Authority on Thursday.
I think windsurfers should have input in to this discussion. Post your thoughts here and we can collate and approach Rockingham Council.
Or contact them direct
Telephone: (08) 9528 0333
Fax: (08) 9592 1705
Email: council@rockingham.wa.gov.au
The destruction of one of WAs best flat water Windsurfing and Kitesurfing Locations would be a tragedy. People travel from all over Australia and the world to sail at Safety Bay every summer. In the Perth metro area there is no other area like it.
I remember laughing when they rebuilt this ramp several years ago wondering how long it would last before it got silted up. Rockingham Council should immediately close this boat ramp and save themselves the money they would spend dredging it then the ongoing cost of having to redredge it several times a year as silting will always be a problem.
The boaties allready have two beach ramps adjacent to the Bent St ramp plus concrete ramps at Point Peron, Long Point and several along the Rockingham Foreshore and on Kwinana beach each ramp has attached parking facilities that are better than bent street how much more access do the boaties need when windsurfers and kite surfers only have one good spot with insufficient parking and no facilities.
The grass parking facility at the bent st ramp also has to be re turfed every winter as the boaties in thier trucks and 4WDs tear it up manouvering thier multi axle trailers into the insufficient amount of parking space this ramp has.
Wouldn't it be good to build a new jetty at Carlisle street? It seems to have deeper water access there, and wouldn't get in anyone's way. Although any access still has to pass over the shallow waters around there.
Better yet, build a new jetty at June street, as this is definitely deeper, and does not appear to have any problems with sand build up. There is currently parking nearby, and surely more could be added.
It appears that Safety Bay is shallow on any of the potential channel options, and all of them would silt up again, especially as its clear that sand builds up there, based on what has happened with Tern island. Having said that, of the approaches suggested, which one would have the least impact on windsurfing? The central or the western one?
That would be absolute travesty if it proceeds 
None of the channels are a good idea, but especially the 'Central Channel' which would destroy the speed strip in the lee of the weedbank.
We need to mobilise all the local GPSTC crew that sail there against this appalling proposal!!
Not only would it destroy the speed strip, it would take out a huge 30 metre wide section of the sandbar that learners use as a nice shallow safe end point at that end of the run and which we more experienced types are grateful for if we flub a gybe or need a breather.
It would also mess up the lovely little ramps on the other side of the sandbar which can be great fun to wave jump off at the end of a nice speed run.
Man, first they go and put in that dirty great big jetty and stuff up that lovely nice safe long beach for learners to sail back and forth along and now this.
They obviously have no concern for all of us windsurfers and kitesurfers who are actually the ones who use the bay there the most. Most other users are transients who are just passing thru.
The huge tourist attraction that that area represents surely must hold some weight?
I guess we can count our blessings that Oakagee up north hasn't gone thru and destroyed Corros as well yet.
The rest of the world must look at WA and think what small-minded parochial people there are in our local and state governments that are willing to destroy such rare natural water sport treasures for yet another example of man distorting and destroying a natural wonder.
Our voice is just too small it seems. Anyone up for a bit of chaining one selves to a dredging barge to get on the 6 o'clock news? :-(
as a kid the sand bar did not join the mainland.
and its constantly changing- see photos here
kiteboarder.net.au/forums/Windsurfing/General/Safety-Bay-Sand-Bar-Washed-away/
read the 2004 University of WA, Thesis project of B Hollings titled "Sediment Dynamics of Warnbro Sound, Western Australia"
www.uwa.edu.au/ems/schools/school-of-engineering/department-of-civil-environmental-and-mining-engineering
and the sand bar will change again regardless of these proposed actions.
I believe that the money and machinery over nature approach is doomed for failure.
Relocation is a better option.
I agree that relocating the boat ramp further east seems a better option. Keeping the boat ramp accessible in it's current location will be an increasing battle against the sands of Warnboro Sound.
From a windsurfing perspective, the existing or western channel would be the least intrusive. It is hard enough to avoid kiters on the speed strip without having to avoid boats and boat wash as well, and the eastern channel would destroy the safe turning spot for beginners and those of us who don't gybe so well.
I'm not to tech savvy, but there was an email petition devolped on another website regarding the Coal Mining in Margaret River. Could this be something to look at instead of individual emails being sent?
Would a new boat ramp development east or west be better or dredging of the western (existing) channel. If the Western Channel is used there should be limited damage the the speed strip and reduction of flat water in the pond.
I'm all for an idea that keeps the area clean and safe for all users but doesn't compromise the reason why we all sail there.
Okay here's my bit.
Hope it helps stop this travestry.
1)It must be regonised by the City of Rockingham that 2 international sailing coaches use this area for their coaching, which attracts sailors from all over Australia to this area.
2) If Mayor Barry Samuels is going to use the "Saftey" argument for boat uses etc. Shouldn't all boat users that need rescuing be towed to Pt. Perron where there is facilities to accomadate stricken vessels safely and access for other emergency services ie Ambulance. It is also where the Rockingham Voulunteer Sea Rescue group has its base. Commander of Rescue Group Peter Edwards has stated this in article.
3) Should n't all boaties "Log In" at Volunteer Base before heading out for a days boating. Yes, you can use UHF/VHF to log in but they do prefer manual. As stated when I did my RST.
4) They should look at the Esperance forshore for proof that fighting against the strongest force in nature, Tidal movement, is futile, not to mention the wasted cost.
5) What effect of dredging and distubing the sandspit have on the natural fauna and flora. To use as an example, The Department of Enviroment and Conservation stopped tuna farming in Esperance due to the fact that the high concentrate of tuna excretement in one area would destroy a 50m radius of seagrass.
How much natural seagrass, crabs, micro organisiums, etc would be destroyed by the savage effects of dredging.
6) Barry Wiseman wrote in the first paragragh that it is the one of the busiest boat ramps south of the river. Bent street is by far THE busiest sailing and kiting area south of the river.
7) Barry also wrote that Bent Street has been use "for decades" as a boat ramp.
How long has there been sailing carried out there?
8) I know of one, (there maybe more) local businesses who's majority of income is directly related to sailing/kiting taking place at Bent Street. I do not know if the cafe across the road would be effected much by if there was a boat ramp there or not.
9) As stated by Commander Peter Edwards, there are " other sand ramps in the area".
I hope this helps in the prevention of any more man made disasters from effecting our awesum sport. I hope the WWA and the Kiters can work together on this one.
A few centimetres to 0.5m through the existing channel? when has it ever got that shallow? what are they doing, aiming at the end of the sandbar or weed bank? (actually I have seen the boaties try and cross the weedbank, but its not the channel is it?
)
why dont they dredge the existing one and mark it with a couple of port/starboard bouys? It could all disappear eventually anyway.
Oh this will be a huge dent in windsurfing WA, if this goes ahead. I was really into the beaver fever when i was there...Great spot. If all those kiters can get on board too surly that will be enough.
To quote Ben Hollings in his thesis on "Sediment Dymamics of Warnbro Sound", he states:
"The Bent Street boat ramp may become cut of from the Sound by the developing sand spit, once
this reaches the Berry Street sand bar depths will be too small for boats to get out into the Sound.
Of all the existing ramps in the area it is apparent that the June Road boat ramp has the most
favourable future outlook. It is located on the northern most region of Warnbro Beach adjacent
to the central basin. The coastline of this area has remained static and is not expected to change
considerably in the foreseeable future."
His conclusion clearly indicates that the council/rate payers would stretch their dollar further by investing in infrastructure further to the east where there is much less likely to be the ongoing costs of dredging.
The construction of the new ramp at Long point has taken much of the traffic away from Bent Street. It should also be taken into consideration that bent street is South facing. This creates all sorts of problems when launching and retrieving in any more than 5 knots of wind. Prior to the opening of the new ramp at Pt Kennedy there was no other option and I think people just put up with it. This will be made even worse by a deeper channel, creating more choppy wave action . The 8-10 minute drive to the new ramp (at Long Point), that is sheltered, and also closer to the reefs and open water, seems like the logical option.
I think the council should take into consideration the number of people who live and holiday close to safety bay for its wind sport qualities. It is the only spot (south of Perth) which offers protection from swell and chop, while still delivering solid wind.
Being a boat owner myself I avoid launching at bent st now, as I think the ramps at Pt Kennedy and Point Peron are safer and easier to use and offer protection from the most wind directions.
I hope the council can realize they will be taking away a world class windsurfing and kitesurfing location, which people travel to from all over Perth and the world, for the sake of a boat ramp.
Hi guys,
I'm a reporter with the Sound Telegraph, I'm trying to contact someone within Windsurfing WA with regards getting their views on these proposed plans, anyone able to furnish me with contact details? The website only gives an email address and the deadline isn't far off. You can send me an email to cahair.okane@soundtelegraph.com.au or a PM on this.
Thanks,
Cahair O'Kane
Senior Reporter
Sound Telegraph
The Relocation of the boat ramp would be the most efficient use of local government revenue. The long term costs in channel maintance really cannt be justified either !
I feel that if this project was to go ahead it would be to the detriment of our sport that relies on this location as a nursery for new sailors.
I would support any unified action to stop this proposal.
Keep the comments coming. Good arguments being put forward and very helpful.
Spoke to
Cahair O'Kane, Senior Reporter, Sound Telegraph and thank him for his interest.
Contacted the Marine Parks and Reserves authority but the person I needed to speak to was out and hoping to get a return call tomorrow.
Spoke to Rockingham Council reception who put me on hold and then said they could not find anyone that knew anything about it so currently composing an e-mail to the Mayor.
^^^Good work guys. We all have to make a stand whether we are affiliated with WWA or not.
It's this or the loss of a world renound windsurfing spot.
If there is anything i can do let me know. 
Got a call back from a council worker today about the email I sent them, he claimed he understood our point of view but the meeting tomorrow is still going ahead.
He told me that since the article appeared last saturday a whole can of worms has been opened of people objecting to it so be hopefull.
I highlighted to him that whilst boaties have the multiple ramps and can launch in almost any wind direction and sea state safely within Rocko shire windsurfers only have a onshore flatwater spot.
He also told me a windsurfer by the name of Jim has been a part of the planning process for this within the council for years, does anyone know who this Jim is?
Whilst it is good they called me back about my concerns I have spoken to brick walls with better listening skills.
Finally got to talk to someone at the council (Media rep). Weekend courier has been given a copy of the proposal being presented to Marine Parks Authority today.
Despite frequent attempts I have not been able to speak to the person involved at MPA but was told in a message that today's meeting is private and therefore WWA could not attend.
Person to talk to at council is the Director of engineering and park services. I have sent an e-mail but yet to speak.
Go above the council....Lodge a written complaint to the department of environmental protection (with environment fears it will destroy the fragile eco system and cause errosion as excessive swell will penetrate the banks )further along with a petition rejecting the dredging. They should use the money to install and upgrade boat ramps on the protected side of the Rockingham (point perron) They have a proposed marina .There is already sufficient that the boat ramps near via the beach paralell (next carpark to the pond These boatramps are rarely used and if they are its used by vessels that are under 20 foot. . Id like to get involved but im not a bogan and have enough issues dealing with the Shire of Serpentine Jarrahadale._explore our beauty someday!!!!
If you need a petition i can get the misses (saftey bay )to show some clevage and do the rounds!!!
sygested it to the better half she told me to go and **** myself. This is not unusual. So the boobies for signatures is out!
