20 October 2005
EUROBODALLA PWC RESTRICTION ZONE REVIEW
Background
The response to the PWC restriction trial zones conducted in selected Eurobodalla locations over the past 12 months was very positive and people in those locations hope they will become permanent.
However, as predicted there was a noticeable increase in PWC use in other locations and as a consequence those waterway users were exposed to a greater safety risk and nearby residential areas to a higher level of noise pollution.
The motion proposing the addition of further locations to the trial exclusion zones at the September meeting of the Eurobodalla Shire Council Works and Facilities Committee was unsuccessful but Coastwatchers believes there are still other options to be explored and these are outlined below.
The need for better PWC regulation
PWC use is clearly not compatible with other passive waterway activities and for his reason their use should not be permitted where they present a danger and nuisance to others. Neither should their use be permitted in environmentally sensitive locations.
Noise pollution is one of the main issues of concern and generates the most complaints about PWC use, but the problem could be avoided if some common sense and consideration of others rights were applied to better regulate PWC use in contentious areas.
The constant noise of one or more PWC has the ability to aggravate many people and over time is known to be injurious to health. Noise does not only affect the people close by, but on still days noise can carry long distances across water or be driven by winds to other residential areas. It is also known that marine animals and bird life are disturbed by the constant irritation of PWC noise.
By virtue of their design PWC are a thrill-seeking craft often ridden by people who would be bored stiff by just driving in a straight line on flat water. The combination of manoeuvrability, speed and the urge by some riders to show off, have the potential to create enormous problems for the safety and wellbeing of other waterway users, especially when they are permitted to operate near popular beaches and in enclosed waterways, used primarily for passive recreational activities.
Although PWC are not permitted to come within 60metres of a person or small craft in the water when travelling at 10 knots or more, there have been incidents of irregular driving reported in some locations that have jeopardised the safety of other users. This highlights the need for better education of PWC riders and increased penalties in respect of such breaches, if only to serve as a greater deterrent to noncompliant riders.
Coastwatchers advocates the introduction of safe havens at family beaches where exclusion zones were not introduced last summer and recommends that the 200m-restriction from the shoreline be increased to 300m, to exclude all irregular driving within this limit. This would mean that, PWC would be required to operate generally in a straight line within 300m of the shoreline and therefore provide greater protection for swimmers and other passive users. This restriction would also apply where one or more dwellings are visible within 300m of that shore and help to reduce noise levels to residential areas.
PWC use is certainly not desirable in environmentally sensitive areas, such as enclosed waterways and estuaries. Coastwatchers believes that to ensure maximum protection for the biodiversity of environmentally sensitive locations and their value as fish and bird breeding habitats, PWC use should be totally excluded from all estuaries and ICOLLs in the shire.
Summary of recommendations:
Conclusion
The measures outlined above, to restrict PWC use in locations where their presence impinges on the wellbeing of the community and the environment, could be introduced on a trial basis over the summer months and reviewed when the PWC trial period for existing exclusion zones ends.
In the event that further regulation cannot be policed, for whatever reason, then a preferred option would be to designate specific locations for PWC operation where they would have the least impact on the environment and the safety and wellbeing of the community. This was previously recommended at the Works and Facilities PWC Workshop last year, but to date no locations have been nominated, but the idea could be revisited.
For
Jenny Edwards
Secretary