Fish kill could end Traveston Dam

Photos of the effects of the Fish Ladder on Burnett River Turtles

ABC Stateline Video on the Mary River Turtle

Traveston set for the High Court

ABC 7.30 Report-Dam Construction Threatens Lungfish (Video 5 Oct 2009)

Can The Queensland Lungfish Use Fish Ladders?

By Darren Edward

Preface

This article is the result of an attempt to research currently available data on the performance of fishways and fish ladders on the Burnett River with respect to the Queensland Lungfish, and the implications for the proposed Traveston Crossing Dam on the Mary River. “Attempt”, because various departments of the Queensland Government have gone to remarkable lengths to restrict public access to any such information. It is thus a story as much about the suppression of data as it is a story about the transport of fish accross man-made barriers.

Available (and Unavailable) Data

Since the announcement of the Traveston Crossing Dam in April 2006, the Qld State Government has consistently used the operation of the Paradise dam fish lift (see photo below) to dismiss scientific concerns over the future of one of the world’s oldest fish, a “living fossil”, in the Mary River. The ALP claim that a similar device on the Traveston Crossing dam would successfully protect the remaining population of the migratory fish and allow them to reach spawning sites upstream from the dam.

For example, on Monday, 29 May 2006, the Premier told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that claims the Lungfish was being driven to extinction were “…alarmist and untrue. We’ve been able to put in place the transportation of lungfish and protect them in the Bundaberg region and we will do exactly the same in the [Mary River] region. We will not be environmental vandals; we will ensure we protect the lungfish. We’ve succeeded in doing it at the Paradise Dam and we’ll do it here.” [1]

Back in November 2005, the Premier noted in his own press release that, “a state-of-the-art fish-way on the Burnett River Dam will soon be completed to allow for upstream and downstream passage of fish.” The Premier insists that the fish-lift is working and he has the proof. On the ABC 7-30 Report on 22 June 2006 Peter Beattie stated that “it seems to be effectively working as far as I’m concerned”.[2]

However, at the opening of the Paradise Dam on 1 September 2006 it was stated that the fish-lift was unable to operate as the water level in the dam was too low. Photographs show it languishing and rusting in its cradle unable to be even demonstrated at the opening, let alone give passage to lungfish. One of the scientists responsible for monitoring the performance of the fish-lift confirmed that no replicated studies have been conducted to evaluate its success due to its operation being too irregular. All they can say is that it has been observed passing some fish. To date, no relevant reports or documents have been made available for independent scrutiny. [2] and [3]

A Freedom of Information (FOI) request was lodged with the Premier’s Office by local conservationists, requesting documents relating to the advice given to the Queensland Premier on the functioning of the fish-ladder on Paradise Dam on the Burnett River, including any breifing notes, cabinet reports, agency reports, scientific data, or supportive documentation concerning the premiers statements that the lungfish ladder is working effectively.

The Premier’s Office responded that “A search was conducted of the records management system and physical searches were undertaken of pertinent areas of the Office of the Premier, however, no documents relevant to your application were located”. [4]

However, there have been many rumours of suppressed scientific reports prepared by the Queensland Government showing that, in fact, fish lifts are not successful in protecting the Queensland Lungfish living in the Burnett River near Walla Weir. Prominent Lungfish biologist Dr Jean Joss of Macquarie University claimed in August that a whistleblower had revealed to her that the Department of Primary Industries had ordered these reports shredded. [1]

From an interview with the ABC on 24 August 2006, “Dr Jean Joss says she has been told by Department of Primary Industries staff that they have been ordered to shred the reports. Dr Joss says if the order is carried out then vital evidence supporting a challenge under federal law to the proposed Mary River dam would be lost.”

“I was rung specifically and told by an employee of the Department of Primary Industries - not in the local Brisbane district at all, in fact quite a different area of Queensland - he rang me to say that they have been asked to shred any information that the department was holding on endangered species in the Mary River,” she said. [5]

In relation to a request by a Mary Valley resident to obtain copies of three DPI&F studies regarding performance of fishlocks on the Burnett River and their passage of Queensland Lungfish, a DPI&F representative responded “As for the previously mentioned reports, the Coordinator Generals Department has refused my request to release them publicly, sorry”. [3]

Another Mary Valley resident reports: “While looking for documents concerning recent fishkills in the Burnett River, including a major event at Mingo Crossing in the Paradise Dam, I was surprised to find that the official fishkill incident reports that used to be available via the EPA website were no longer available on line. They had been removed from their website sometime after the 7 September 2006. I contacted EPA regarding this and was informed that the information was under review and could be given no answer as whether the information was going to be made available again in the future. I then was put in contact with the officer responsible for naintaining the fishkill incident report database, who kindly offered to fax me copies of the relevant reports. He rang back 30 mins later and told me that he could not locate those reports and would therefore be unable to assist me with my enquiries. These fish kills were well reported in the local media and and I believe that they were subject to investigations by officers of EPA and Sunwater.” [6]

The Traveston Swamp News is pleased to make two of the DPI lungfish documents available for public scrutiny for the first time. The links to the documents are:

DPI Walla Weir Downstream.pdf

DPI Walla Weir Upstream.pdf

It is hoped that the Qld Government will begin to honour it’s commitment to “transparency in decision making; and ensuring sound information is available to all sectors at key decision points” under the Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative, that it signed on 25 June 2004. [7] 

Performance of Fishways on the Burnett River

As previously mentioned, no studies have been conducted to evaluate the performance of the fish ladder at Paradise Dam, due to its operation being too irregular. The following information is based on two 2004 DPI&F reports: “Downstream passage of fish at Ned Churchward Weir fishlock” [8] and “Upstream passage of Queensland lungfish at Ned Churchward Weir fishlock” [9].

The Ned Churchward Weir (formerly Walla Weir) is a 15.0 m high concrete gravity structure, located approximately 75km from the mouth of the Burnett River (see photograph). It was completed in 1998.

Downstream Passage of Fish through the fishlock

Excerpts from the DPI&F report [8]

The behaviour of downstream migrating fish at the fishlock was assessed using automatic readers that detected the presence of PIT tagged fish within the fishlock. A total of 551 fish [345 of which were lungfish] were tagged at sites upstream of the weir. Over autumn 2003 a small number of PIT tagged fish were detected approaching the upstream fishlock channel. Only four fish were detected successfully using the fishlock to migrate downstream with the remainder either migrating over the weir wall or remaining upstream of the weir. Most of the fish detected made numerous approaches but failed to migrate downstream through the fishlock. Comparison of the operation of the fishlock with the detection of fish suggests that attraction flows and entrance conditions are inadequate.

Whilst flood flows are important migratory cues, some fish species also migrate on a seasonal basis and independently of flow. A result that highlights the importance of effective downstream fishways, particularly on structures that overtop infrequently. Preliminary results indicate that the provision of safe passage of fish over the spillway requires substantial further investigation. Observations made in this study suggest that during low flows at Ned Churchward Weir conditions are detrimental for the safe passage of fish with conditions improving during higher flows possibly due to the resultant higher tailwater levels.

Two Queensland lungfish were detected at the downstream fishlock channel in April and May 2003. One lungfish was originally tagged upstream at Booyal Crossing and the other at Wallaville gauging weir in November 2002. Neither fishmoved back upstream through the fishlock. Another lungfish that was tagged directly upstream of the weir in October 2002 was detected at the upstream fishlock channel on a single occasion on 12th of July 2003. The majority of the fish detected failed to move through the fishlock despite being recorded multiple times over several days. Although it was not possible to ascertain the exact direction fish were travelling when they were detected. Some of the detections were of fish exiting the upstream channel after attraction flows had ceased or after entering the fishlock chamber and finding no way downstream.

Very little research has been conducted in Australia on the effect of spillways on fish that are washed over during overtopping flows. Studies overseas however have found that the size of fish and the height of the dam wall influenced fish mortality particularly when combined with other factors such as abrasion from contact with the spillway, rapid pressure changes and shearing effects (Clay 1995). Large fish such as adult lungfish and striped mullet are likely to come in contact with the spillway face and suffer high mortalities. Following the February 2003 floods a substantial number of dead fish were found below Ned Churchward Weir (authors pers. obs.), it is possible that these fish were injured as they went over the weir wall.

Species such as blue catfish and long-finned eel have previously been observed using the structure provided by vertical-slot fishways as shelter to ambush prey (Stuart and Berghuis 2002). Although it is difficult to verify, some of the behaviour recorded in this study is also likely to be predatory behaviour. One of the blue catfish that was detected moving up and downstream through the fishlock remained within the fishlock for over 10 full cycles before exiting and one of longfinned eels was detected over 26,000 times between April and June 2003.

Upstream Passage of Lungfish through the fishlock

Excerpts from the DPI&F report [9]

In 1998 a lock-type fishway was incorporated into the construction of the Ned Churchward Weir on the Burnett River to facilitate passage of migratory fish. An assessment of the effectiveness of the fishlock was undertaken over an 18-month period from January 1999 to June 2000 (Berghuis, Broadfoot et al. 2000). A total of 31,154 fish representing 27 species were identified attempting to migrate upstream through the fishlock. The assessment established that the fishlock provided adequate access over the weir for the majority of upstream migrating fish species and size classes. Twelve Queensland lungfish were recorded using the fishlock in the 1999-2000 study and were abundant below the weir and in all methods of fish community sampling (Berghuis, Broadfoot et al. 2000). Given the observed abundance and the low number of lungfish recorded using the fishlock further investigation was required before the structure could be considered to provide suitable passage for this important species.

As a result of ongoing water infrastructure development in the Burnett catchment, the Department of State Development under the “Burnett Program of Actions” funded the current study. The objective of the study was to provide more detailed knowledge of lungfish passage through the Ned Churchward Weir fishlock. In order to achieve continuous and non-intrusive monitoring of lungfish as they approached and utilised the fishlock, a reader system to detect the presence of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tagged fish was installed at Ned Churchward Weir. A total of 1285 lungfish were captured and PIT tagged at sites upstream and downstream of the weir from October 2002 to November 2003. Data on the behaviour of PIT tagged lungfish at Ned Churchward Weir were collected from January to December 2003.

A total of 41 individual lungfish were recorded at the downstream entrance of the fishlock of which only 7 continued through the fishlock. As a result of the continuous nature of the data collection, response to factors such as river flow and fishlock cycling provided further insight into lungfish behaviour at fishways. Data collected in this study indicates that passage past Ned Churchward Weir is important and that the fishlock does not appear to be providing optimal passage for lungfish.

A total of 41 lungfish were detected at the downstream fishlock channel, of these seven (17.1%) successfully migrated upstream through the fishlock (Table 2). The maximum number of days that an individual lungfish was detected in the downstream fishlock channel was six, however most fish were detected on only one day. Most of the lungfish swam in and out of the downstream fishlock channel several times over a number of hours before moving through the fishlock or moving away entirely.

Behavioural aspects should also be considered when attempting to speculate why lungfish fail to pass through a fishlock. In general upstream migrating fish are attracted to flowing water, at a natural barrier the flow is continuous and fish are able to scan the open water below the barrier to find the best place to pass. At Ned Churchward Weir, migrating fish are being encouraged to enter the fishlock under unnatural conditions and this may be affecting behaviour. A study of pike-perch (Stizostedion lucioperca) in Austria found that despite being highly migratory and physically able to ascend, these large fish actively avoided the small channel provided at fishway entrances (Schmutz, Giefing et al. 1998). At Ned Churchward Weir the fishlock entrance is separated from the spillway by a wing wall and flow patterns below the weir differ from those in front of the fishlock entrance. Furthermore, fish are expected to enter into a concrete chamber and wait up to 40 minutes until the lock chamber gate closes before being lifted up to the level of the headwater. Attraction flows through the fishlock are discontinuous within phases of the same cycle so fish are unlikely to remain in the vicinity for any length of time. A major criticism of fishlocks elsewhere has been that fish may fail to exit in the time provided and remain in the fishlock chamber (Clay 1995) and this may also be the case for lungfish at Ned Churchward Weir. It is possible that lungfish may become disoriented as the fishlock chamber fills and fail to find the exit and are remaining in the chamber until it fills again or exit through the downstream fishlock chamber gate.

Commentary and Conclusions

There is apparently no scientific data available to support Premier Beattie’s claims that the fish ladder at Paradise Dam is working effectively, and the Premier’s Office has admitted this to be the case. In fact, available evidence indicates the contrary, although several government departments including the Premier’s Office, EPA, DPI&F, State Development and the Coordinator General’s Deparment have all played roles in suppression of such evidence.

From studies conducted by the DPI&F, out of 551 tagged fish (345 lungfish) upstream of the weir, only 4 managed to successfully navigate downstream through the fishlock in a 3 month period. Out of 1,285 lungfish tagged downstream of the weir, only 41 were able to locate the fishlock and only 7 successfully navigated upstream in a 12 month period. It would appear to be extremely optimistic to describe the fishway as an effective mode of transport past the weir in either direction. Predatory fish and eels were observed in the DPI&F studies using the fishway as an ambush site for prey, and others have noted similar behaviour by predatory birds. Large fish such as adult lungfish are expected to suffer high mortality rates during over-topping flows due to impacts with the spillway. Such an event was observed in February 2003 during the DPI&F study.

These factors should raise very serious concerns for the future of the Queensland Lungfish, not only in the Burnett River but also in the Mary River, should the proposed Traveston Crossing Dam go ahead. It is extremely troubling to consider that the environmental performance of fishways on the Burnett (including the yet-to-be-studied and barely operational Paradise fish lift) are being presented as a model for the Traveston Crossing Dam.

References

1. Qld Greens press pelease, Juanita Wheeler, 4 Sept 2006

2. Save The Mary River press release, 5 Sept 2006

3. Email correspondence from DPI&F to local resident (name with-held), June 2006

4. Written account, Roger Currie, WBBCC, 1 Sept 2006

5. ABC Interview, Dr Jean Joss, 24 August 2006

6. Written account, (name with-held), 29 September 2006

7. Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative. Between the Commonwealth of Australia and the Governments of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. 25 June 2004.

8. Berghuis, A. P. and C. D. Broadfoot (2004). Downstream passage of fish at Ned Churchward Weir fishlock, Queensland Fisheries Service, Bundaberg, Report to the Dept. of State Development.: 18

9. Berghuis, A. P. and C. D. Broadfoot (2004). Upstream passage of Queensland lungfish at Ned Churchward Weir fishlock., Queensland Fisheries Service, Report to Dept. of State Development: 20

Disclaimer

The materials presented in this document are provided voluntarily as a contribution to public debate. The information and conclusions provided are made available in good faith and are derived from sources believed to be reliable and accurate at the time of publication. However, the information is provided solely on the basis that readers will be responsible for making their own assessment of the matters discussed herein and are advised to verify all relevant representations, statements and information.

The author gives no warranty in relation to the information and conclusions (including accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability) and accept no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the document.

Two of the documents referenced in this article were produced by the Qld Dept of Primary Industries & Fisheries (DPI&F) and reported to the Qld Dept of State Development. These two documents carry the following disclaimer:

“This study was undertaken for the Department Of State Development. The resultant report is an internal document for the exclusive use of the Department Of State Development. Optimisation of fish passage is an ongoing process in Queensland. The results of this monitoring do not necessarily reflect the final outcome for this site. Use of the data from this study should acknowledge this context and data should not be reproduced without appropriate acknowledgement.”

Other articles on Freedom of Information

Radio Podcast: 4ZzZ 102.1 ECO Radio: Paradise Dam no Paradise for the lungfish

Featured Speakers/Commentators: Graeme Armstrong, turtle researcher; Lydny Marshall, local activist; Drew Hutton, head of the QLD Greens

Credit where credit is due-Photo Gallery on the Paradise Dam

California agency finds removing dams would be feasible Trouble in Paradise—Latest Arkin Mackay’s photo’s of Paradise Dam

The Great South East Queensland Dam Tour (July 06) Senator Ian Campbell on Fish Ladders