ecReational ccess Rinking ateR atchments toRages in ustRalia · RecReational access to DRinking...

CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

Private Mail Bag 3Salisbury SOUTH AUSTRALIA 5108

Tel: (08) 8259 0211Fax: (08) 8259 0228

E-mail: [email protected]: www.waterquality.crc.org.au

The Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Water Quality and Treatment is Australia’s national drinking water research centre. An unincorporated joint venture between 29 different organisations from the Australian water industry, major universities, CSIRO, and local and state governments, the CRC combines expertise in water quality and public health.

The CRC for Water Quality and Treatment is established and supported under the Federal Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program.

• ACTEW Corporation

• Australian Water Quality Centre

• Australian Water Services Pty Ltd

• Brisbane City Council

• Centre for Appropriate

Technology Inc

• City West Water Limited

• CSIRO

• Curtin University of Technology

• Department of Human Services

Victoria

• Griffith University

• Melbourne Water Corporation

• Monash University

• Orica Australia Pty Ltd

• Power and Water Corporation

• Queensland Health Pathology &

Scientific Services

• RMIT University

• South Australian Water

Corporation

• South East Water Ltd

• Sydney Catchment Authority

• Sydney Water Corporation

• The University of Adelaide

• The University of New South

Wales

• The University of Queensland

• United Water International Pty Ltd

• University of South Australia

• University of Technology, Sydney

• Water Corporation

• Water Services Association of

Australia

• Yarra Valley Water Ltd

The Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment is an unincorporated joint venture between:

Research Report 24: Recreational Access to D

rinking Water C

atchments

Research Report 24

Recreational Access to Drinking Water Catchments and Storages in Australia

5021 CRC RESEARCH REPORT 24 COVE1 1 11/5/06 1:59:15 PM

RecReational access to DRinking WateR catchments anD stoRages in austRalia

�


Rachael Miller1, Belinda Bennett2, Judy Birrell2 and Dan Deere1

� CRC for Water Quality and Treatment2 Sydney Catchment Authority

Research Report No24


2

Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment

Private Mail Bag 3

Salisbury SA 5�08

AUSTRALIA

Telephone: +6� 8 8259 0240

Fax: +6� 8 8259 0228

E-mail: [email protected]

Web site: www.waterquality.crc.org.au

Research Report: Recreational access to drinking water catchments and storages in Australia

Photos on the front cover were supplied courtesy of Dr Mike Burch of the Australian Water Quality Centre and Fiona Wellby of the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment.

ISBN �8766�6482Published by the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

© CRC for Water Quality and Treatment 2006

DISCLAIMERThe Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment and individual contributors are not responsible for the outcomes of any actions taken on the basis of information in this research report, nor for any errors and omissions.

The Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment and individual contributors disclaim all and any liability to any person in respect of anything, and the consequences of anything, done or omitted to be done by a person in reliance upon the whole or any part of this research report.

The research report does not purport to be a comprehensive statement and analysis of its subject matter, and if further expert advice is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.


3

FOReWORD

The provision of safe drinking water supplies and the development of sanitation systems throughout the twentieth century in developed countries have delivered outstanding public health benefits to the community. It is these systems that have allowed cities to grow to the size they are today without the constant threat of water-borne public health concerns over bacterial diseases like cholera, dysentery and typhoid.

The urban water industry has as its central tenet the protection of public health. One can never be complacent about this responsibility given that new threats will often emerge.

In recent years the urban water industry has adopted a ‘catchment to tap’ approach to managing the risks associated with drinking water quality. This approach recognises that ‘prevention is superior to cure’ and it is not possible to ‘engineer out’ all the risks by the provision of a single barrier such as a water treatment plant. The systems approach adopted by the industry ensures that at every point in the system where there is the potential for entry of a pathogen, a barrier is erected.

It is in the context of this multi-barrier approach that the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Water Quality and Treatment project – Understanding the impacts of recreational access on drinking water storages and catchments in Australia – is so important. As our environment has become increasingly urbanised, the desire for recreational opportunities in natural environments has increased. Urban water utilities, which either have no access or limited access to their water supply catchments, are under increasing pressure to open up water supply catchments for a range of recreational experiences. Such decisions are often in direct conflict with the utility’s objective of protecting the quality of source water.

Currently, different approaches to allowing recreational access are adopted across Australia. This can lead to confusion amongst stakeholders who cannot understand the logic or rationale that leads to this inconsistency. This project is important because it will help develop a decision making framework as part of a guideline which can be implemented nationally to determine whether access to drinking water catchments is appropriate given the risks involved.

The stakes are always high when public health is involved. Decisions to open catchments and storages to recreational activities once made, have proven difficult to overturn once made even though, with the benefit of hindsight, access has exposed drinking water supplies to unacceptable risks. It is for this reason we must evaluate all proposals to introduce recreational access to water supply catchments and storages in a prudent manner, as we cannot afford mistakes. The framework will provide the community with a logical, systematic and transparent means of understanding the basis of decisions. It will also be valuable in educating the community about the protection of the source of our most important resource – safe drinking water.

Ross YoungExecutive DirectorWater Services Association of Australia


4

As the Australian population increases and forests and wilderness areas become depleted, the demand for recreational access to drinking water catchments is increasing. Recreational activities that are popular in these areas include walking, climbing, skiing, mountain biking, horse riding, trail biking, four wheel driving, swimming, rafting, fishing and boating. Recreation can have benefits to those partaking including physical, cultural and financial. However a combination of direct and indirect impacts of recreational activity in catchments can reduce the quality, safety and supply security of yielded drinking water.

In Australia, the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) emphasise the need to avoid waterborne disease outbreaks through the ‘protection of catchments from human and animal wastes as a priority’. Therefore, catchment management and public health practitioners need to consider the impacts of recreational access when discharging their obligations in complying with these guidelines to protect drinking water sources.

This CRC for Water Quality and Treatment project collated data and information for catchment managers and public health practitioners in relation to the following:• Current levels of access within Australian water supply

catchments.• Potential impacts on water quality associated with

such access.• Framework for decision making and managing access.• Key information gaps and suggested areas for further

study.

Currently, there is considerable variation with respect to the levels of access permitted in water supply catchments. At one end of the continuum, entire water supply catchments are fully closed to all forms of recreational access. At the other, a wide variety of forms of recreational access are permitted on both the water supply reservoirs and within the catchment lands. In most cases, recreational access is not permitted on permanent water supply storages although some form of limited recreational activity is permitted in parts of the catchment lands. The range of access provisions appears to be related to historical and political factors, variations in the level of development within catchments as well as the level of water treatment provided.

Recreational access has been conclusively shown to have negative impacts on drinking water quality. The report provides a summary of the evidence relating to the potential impacts of recreational access on drinking water quality, and highlights the complexity associated with understanding the impacts of recreational activities on drinking water quality. The complex interrelationships that characterise catchment processes make it difficult to provide a quantitative estimate of the extent of impact given an anticipated or measured quantity of recreational access. Even where predictions or measurements of the effect of recreational access on water quality have been made, the estimates are subject to significant uncertainties. The result of this irreducible uncertainty is that decisions must be made based on principles and probabilities.

A risk based decision making framework is proposed that can assist those faced with the challenge of deciding whether or not to permit recreational access, and the nature and extent of any recreational activities permitted within water supply catchments. This report is limited to consideration of drinking water supply issues although it is noted that there are range of other factors, eg. ecological impacts, security concerns and legal aspects of recreational access, that can be major concerns for decision-makers. The approach proposed in the report provides a systematic and rigorous basis for decision making and planning in relation to recreational access in drinking water catchments and storages.

The information gaps that exist are very difficult to fill. The qualitative cause and effect and conceptual relationships between recreational access and impacts on water quality are now well established. However, there is only limited quantitative data on the impact of any particular type or level of recreational activity on drinking water quality. It is unlikely that the costs involved in quantifying these relationships will be justifiable by any agency or organisation. Therefore, a precautionary approach is proposed whereby the ecological integrity of Australia’s remaining conservation and wilderness areas are protected and the quality of the yielded water is secured.

exeCutive SuMMARy


5

tABle OF CONteNtS

Foreword.......... ....................................................................................................................................................3

executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................4

table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................5

1 introduction..................................................................................................................................................7

�.� Background ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7

�.2 What is recreation? ................................................................................................................................................................... 7

�.3 The importance of source protection .................................................................................................................................. 7

�.4 The current situation ................................................................................................................................................................ 7

2 CRC for Water Quality and treatment Project ........................................................................................9

2.� Scope..... ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Project participants ................................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Workshop 23-25 February 2004, Sydney ............................................................................................................................. 9

3 Drinking water supply catchments in Australia ......................................................................................11

3.� Drinking water catchments ................................................................................................................................................... ��

3.2 Operation and management of drinking water quality ................................................................................................... ��

3.3 Recreational impacts and the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines .......................................................................... �2

4 Recreation in drinking water catchments ...............................................................................................14

4.� Types of recreational activity ................................................................................................................................................ �4

4.2 Current levels of recreational access in drinking water catchments across Australia ............................................. �4

5 Frequently asked questions.......................................................................................................................15

6 impacts of recreational activities .............................................................................................................18

6.� Introduction of chemicals ...................................................................................................................................................... �8

6.2 Introduction of pathogens ..................................................................................................................................................... �8

6.3 Impacts of erosion (sediment) .............................................................................................................................................. �8

6.4 Changes in nutrient levels ...................................................................................................................................................... �9

6.5 Changes in system condition and ecology ......................................................................................................................... �9

6.6 Increased risk of fire ............................................................................................................................................................... �9

6.7 Security of drinking water supply assets ............................................................................................................................ �9

6.8 Legal liability .............................................................................................................................................................................. �9

6.9 Cumulative impacts ................................................................................................................................................................. 20

7 Management of recreational access .........................................................................................................24

7.� Risk assessment as a tool in recreation management ..................................................................................................... 24


6

7.2 Key steps in the risk management process ........................................................................................................................ 26

Step � Establish the risk assessment context .................................................................................................................... 26

Step 2 Establish risk criteria .................................................................................................................................................. 27

Step 3 Identify hazards, hazardous events and sources................................................................................................... 28

Step 4 Analyse risks ................................................................................................................................................................. 28

Step 5 Risk evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 30

Step 6 Risk Treatment ............................................................................................................................................................. 30

7.3 Benefit cost analysis ................................................................................................................................................................ 33

8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................34

9 Acknowledegments ...................................................................................................................................35

10 References ..................................................................................................................................................36

Appendix 1

Workshop participants: 23-25 February 2004........................................................................................................................ 39

Appendix 2

Types of recreational activity in drinking water catchments and the access and infrastructure requirements to

support the activity....................................................................................................................................................................... 40

Appendix 3

Table A:

Water-based recreational access in Metropolitan sources operated by some Australian water utilities. ................ 4�

Table B:

Water-based recreational access in Country (non-metropolitan) sources operated by some Australian

water utilities. ................................................................................................................................................................................. 42

Table C:

Land-based recreational access in Metropolitan sources operated by some Australian water utilities. ................... 42

Table D:

Background to why land-based access is permitted in Metropolitan catchments ......................................................... 42

Appendix 4

Information Checklist................................................................................................................................................................... 43

Appendix 5

Criteria and Categorisation Of Risk ......................................................................................................................................... 44

Appendix 6

Key Knowledge Gaps ................................................................................................................................................................... 45


7

1.1 BACkgROuND

Over the past century, Australia’s water, sanitation and public health professionals have shown great foresight by protecting large tracts of Australia’s natural landscape to become managed wilderness water catchment. Apart from immeasurable ecological benefits, this action has provided very tangible benefits in terms of ensuring reliable and high quality drinking water. The same foresight saw large investments in creating weir pools and reservoirs to provide additional water purification and to capture and store good quality water.

In recent years, with so much of Australia’s natural land and water resources being degraded, water catchment managers find themselves responsible for protecting and managing these ever more valuable areas. At the same time, pressure to allow recreational use of these areas has been rising due to increasing populations, a greater desire for recreational opportunities in natural areas and decreasing area of natural landscapes in which to recreate (Hassall and Associates, �998). Commentators have noted that:

‘This issue of recreational access to areas sourcing drinking water supply has been a source of debate between the water industry and recreationalists for some time’ (Advisory Committee for the Purity of Water, NSW Health, �977).

‘It is a complex technical and social problem. Indeed few resource conflicts better express the connection between social power and environmental transformation than controversies surrounding the construction and maintenance of water supply infrastructure’ (Steinberg and Clarke, �999).

1.2 WhAt iS ReCReAtiON?

Recreation, according to Peterson et al (�990), is a means by which people achieve desired objectives for their leisure life. Recreation includes a wide range of activities, some of which have a lower risk to drinking water quality than others. Nature-based recreation involves a range of activities such as swimming, bushwalking, hiking, camping, picnicking, sightseeing, horse riding, mountain biking, four wheel driving, fishing, skiing (and associated activities), rafting and boating. The level of access, seasonality and the types of activity vary, depending on the needs of the recreationalists and the options available. Nature-based recreation, which is the most popular in water catchments and storages, has increased due to the continual increases in population size, leisure time and private vehicle ownership (Liddle, �988). This, in turn, has greatly increased the demand for commercial and private recreational use of national parks, conservation reserves and fragile environments (Buckley, �994).

1.3 the iMPORtANCe OF SOuRCe PROteCtiON

One of the most recent changes with respect to recreational access to water storages and catchments has been the wider appreciation of the fact that water treatment barriers are not absolute. It is now recognised that water treatment does not ‘remove’ contaminants even when working properly. Rather, the treatment barriers ‘reduce’ contaminant concentrations. Furthermore, treatment barriers can ‘fail’ due to a range of natural or human causes, resulting in little or no protective effect. The most striking evidence for the fallibility of treatment barriers comes from the repeated outbreaks that have occurred in treated water supplies in the late �980s and early �990s in the USA (particularly Milwaukee), the mid to late �990s in the UK, the �998 contamination incident in Sydney, Australia and the Walkerton and Battleford incidents in Canada in the early 2000’s. Each of these incidents was followed by major changes to national drinking water regulations and guidelines and, in all cases, the multiple barrier approach and enhanced source water protection was promoted.

1.4 the CuRReNt SituAtiON

Following the August 200� CRC for Water Quality and Treatment Catchments Program Workshop it was clear that there was an increasing body of opinion within Australian water utilities that opening up water supply reservoirs to public use can pose serious health risks to drinking water consumers in terms of contamination by pathogens. The CRC for Water Quality and Treatment was asked by its participants to consider the issues for drinking water supply that are associated with recreational access. Following this workshop the project “Understanding the impacts of recreational access on drinking water catchments and storages in Australia” commenced. Similar concerns exist in the US (US EPA, �999). The lack of a quantitative relationship between measurable changes in water quality and particular levels of access in water catchments makes it very difficult to be precise in explaining to communities the reasons that recreational access is not permitted. Most of the studies that do draw the link between in-catchment recreation and water quality are probabilistic or risk-based studies, and are founded on a modelled or qualitative assessment of potential impacts. The few studies that have been undertaken that measure actual water quality impacts of recreation through empirical scientific observation have been unable to conclusively prove a quantitative link between the level and type of recreational activities and the degree of water quality impacts, mainly due to confounding influences.

Public policy in relation to water supply now formally endorses catchment protection as the most important

1 iNtRODuCtiON


8

barrier in drinking water quality protection (ADWG 2004). Minimising contamination before it reaches the treatment plant is considered a vital step, and part of a multiple barrier approach, to minimise drinking water-related health risks (Sydney Catchment Authority and National Parks and Wildlife Service, 200�).

Since �� September 200�, security has emerged as another key issue. Security concerns mean that vital assets such as water and power installations must be protected from malicious damage. Recreational access provides increased opportunity for surveillance and damage to water supply assets.

At the same time as water suppliers and public health professionals are facing strong pressure to prevent and reduce human access to water catchments and storages, the community’s desire for access to natural bushland and reservoirs for recreation is increasing. Catchment areas generating and protecting water quality tend to have areas of high quality bushland, are relatively quiet, clean and uncrowded and are often located close to towns and major city centres.

Across Australia the regulatory frameworks and the precise nature of the issues vary greatly with differing legal and policy requirements, different access conditions, and different water supply systems. However, the key issue of increasing demands for access and associated water quality implications are consistent nationally. This report aims to provide a national and coordinated approach to understanding and addressing these issues.

Public health practitioners and water catchment managers have differing views about what level of recreational access is appropriate in water catchments. However, one area of almost universal common ground is that a precautionary approach is warranted, with current levels of access not being increased until further analysis indicates that such changes will not have a negative impact on water quality. Additionally, in some areas with extensive approved recreation, there is a strong desire to reduce current levels of access. However, there is consensus that justification and evidence is required before access regimes are changed.


9

2 CRC FOR WAteR QuAlity AND tReAtMeNt PROJeCt

2.1 SCOPe

The aim of the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment project “Understanding the impacts of recreational access on drinking water catchments and storages in Australia” was to better understand the impacts of recreational access on drinking water sources and to recommend an appropriate mechanism for decision making on this issue. The focus of the study was on impacts in the catchments, in the storages and at the offtakes for water supply.

The objectives of the project included:• To identify pressures on water supply organisations

for access to catchments and storages.• To collate national and international data and

information on the relationship between recreational uses and water quality and catchment health.

• To coordinate the efforts of Australian water supply organisations to develop a national understanding of impacts of recreational access on drinking water supplies.

• To consider appropriate decision making frameworks for water supply organisations to apply to the management of recreational access in their catchments and storages to ensure their sustainable management.

This project was also intended to provide the basis for further work in relation to:• Developing a better understanding of the relationship

between recreational activities and water quality in drinking water supply catchments and storages in Australia for the purpose of best management.

• Developing means of quantifying and assessing the relationship between recreational activities and water quality in drinking water supply catchments and storages in Australia, for example through research, monitoring, risk assessment, trials and consultation.

The benefits of the project were to include:• The synthesis of a rigorous body of knowledge on

the relationship between recreational activities, water quality and catchment health, to ensure good decision making by water managers in the management of their storages and catchments.

• Development of a sound basis for a nationally agreed position on recreational access to drinking water supply catchments and storages.

• An increase in collaboration between Australian water supply organisations and their stakeholders.

• Cost savings to water supply organisations by eliminating duplication of effort in access management.

It should be noted that this project did not look to find reasons or justification for either a closed or an open

catchment policy in drinking water source areas. Instead the aim was to present what was known about the impacts of recreational access at different levels, in different environs and in different water supply operating systems in order to determine appropriate access provisions in appropriate areas and under locality specific conditions. It is expected that not all types of recreational access will be compatible with drinking water protection, but for those that may be, consideration was given to conditions whereby the risks to water quality could be minimised.

This project concentrated on the possible impact of recreation on water quality. However, other aspects of recreational impact need to be considered by decision making bodies, including ecological health, security, legal liability, safety and visual qualities. In many cases, decision makers also have to manage multiple stakeholders often with conflicting uses and objectives.

2.2 PROJeCt PARtiCiPANtS

The organisations and participants involved in the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment project are as follows:• Sydney Catchment Authority – Ms Belinda Bennett /

Ms Judy Birrell (Project Leader)• CRC for Water Quality and Treatment – Dr Daniel

Deere and Ms Rachael Miller (Project Officer) • Melbourne Water – Dr Melita Stevens• South Australia Water – Mr Glyn Ashman• South East Queensland Water – Dr Mark

O’Donohue• Water Corporation (WA) – Ms Clairly Lance• Power and Water Corporation (NT) – Dr Declan

Page• University of New South Wales – Prof Nick Ashbolt• Department of Human Services – Ms Jan Bowman

The core project team is made up of the Project Leader and two research staff from the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment Catchments Program – Rachael Miller (Research Officer/Knowledge Broker) and Dan Deere (Program Leader).

2.3 WORkShOP 23-25 FeBRuARy 2004, SyDNey

In order to gain information on the key issues for the Australian Water Industry, a national workshop was held in Sydney from 23-25 February 2004. The national workshop aimed to enable the project participants and their invited expert guests to achieve the following:

• Identify the key issues for the participant organisations related to recreational access.

• Identify the extent of published information on water quality, ecological and social issues related to access.


�0

• Identify existing information held by the participants and related organisations that can contribute to the project.

• Identify the key decision criteria for decisions on access.

• Identify the project’s short term and long term outcomes.

• Identify further work required to understand the impacts of access.

• Identify the key stakeholders in the project.

The key outcomes of the workshop provided the basis for developing this paper. A list of workshop participants is provided in Appendix �.


��

3.1 DRiNkiNg WAteR CAtChMeNtS

Drinking water catchments include areas that capture water from surface water runoff or groundwater aquifers that are used for drinking water supply. Across Australia, there are several hundred drinking water supply catchments, supplying large metropolitan cities, regional centres and small country towns with reticulated drinking water. Drinking water catchments vary in size, water quality and land tenure.

In terms of scope, catchments cover the area of the water supply system before the water is treated ie. the catchment area of raw water. Catchments are comprised of the upstream areas of hydrological runoff (the catchment), the collection point (dam wall or weir) and the downstream hydrological mechanisms before the water enters the water treatment plant. These downstream features can be storage reservoirs, run of river operations or pumpback systems. The type and extent of water sources impacts on the management requirements for the water supply system and catchment. As such it is essential to understand the hydrology and hydrodynamics of the water source, as well as the system design and operation so the impacts of recreational activities within catchments can be better understood.

3.2 OPeRAtiON AND MANAgeMeNt OF DRiNkiNg WAteR QuAlity

Water managementWater is supplied to customers in their homes, and it also is used by industry, for irrigation and other purposes. The required quality of water varies depending on its intended end use. Generally, drinking water needs to be of a higher quality than for irrigation or industrial purposes. Currently, due to drought conditions in many parts of Australia, reservoir levels in drinking water supply catchments are low, forcing more careful management of water quality and quantity. Water utilities are continually planning for additional water resources and better management of existing reserves to ensure that drinking water needs – both quality and quantity – are met in a sustainable way.

The types of barriers required and the range of preventive measures employed to ensure good quality drinking water are different for each water supply, and usually are determined by the characteristics of the source water and surrounding catchment. Sound barriers in the catchment are considered the most effective means of minimising the risk of contaminants reaching the water distribution system. Barriers need to be applied at the various steps in the source to tap water supply process (Figure �).

This report primarily focuses on the ‘upstream’ barriers in the water supply system ie. catchment lands and storages (reservoirs and weirs). However, when looking at the impacts on water quality of recreational activities, it is important to consider the water supply system in its entirety including ‘downstream’ treatment, storage and distribution management.

The first step in safe drinking water supply is to use high quality, protected source waters as a means of reducing the potential load of drinking water contaminants, thus reducing treatment costs and subsequent health risks to consumers. A study by Edzwald and Kelley (�998) of the mean concentration of Cryptosporidium oocysts in protected reservoirs (0.52 oocysts �00 L-�) and pristine lakes (0.3-9.3 oocysts �00 L-�) compared with polluted rivers (43-60 oocysts�00 L-�) and polluted lakes (58 oocysts �00 L-�) highlights the merit of this strategy.

Catchment management and source water protection provides the first barrier for the protection of water quality. Where catchment management is beyond the jurisdiction of drinking water suppliers, the planning and implementation of preventive measures will require a coordinated approach with relevant agencies such as planning authorities, catchment boards, environmental and water resource regulators, road authorities and emergency services. To improve the effectiveness of the catchment barrier, sources of contamination need to be managed to minimise risks to water quality. Sources of contamination arise from all types of land uses and activities.

Reservoirs can help reduce contamination by diluting pollutants and providing increased detention time for

3 DRiNkiNg WAteR SuPPly CAtChMeNtS iN AuStRAliA

Figure 1. Process steps at which barriers need to be applied in water quality management

Catchment/ infiltration

DistributionStoragetreatmentReservoir/Weir/ Aquifer


�2

contamination degradation. Exposure to sunlight and temperature at the surface of the waterbody also helps to reduce pathogens. These processes are generally most effective in larger reservoirs with longer residence times. Reservoir operations to increase the effectiveness of these processes include aeration to reduce stratification and alum dosing to settle sediment and nutrients. However, recent CRC for Water Quality and Treatment/AwwaRF research has shown that the reservoir barrier can break down in storm events when inflows move through the water body quickly and reach the dam wall within hours to days (CRC for Water Quality and Treatment 2004a). Further, water storages that are limited in dilution and detention capacity, such as smaller reservoirs and run-of-river operations, have only limited capacity to be effective barriers under any conditions.

Water treatment plants have the specific purpose of reducing contamination from raw water including chemicals and microorganisms that could be harmful to human heath. The choice of which treatment to use depends on the characteristics of the water, the types of water quality problems likely to be present and the costs of different treatments.

The more complex the level of treatment, the higher the cost. Commenting on the potential to use treatment barriers to offset the risks arising from recreational access, Gilmour and Scandol (�997) noted that ‘although water treatment processes have been recently improved, higher levels of treatment of bulk water can only be achieved at increased cost to the consumers’.

3.3 ReCReAtiONAl iMPACtS AND the AuStRAliAN DRiNkiNg WAteR guiDeliNeS

RegulationIn Australia, drinking water supply and management is guided by the prevailing edition of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC & NRMMC, 2004). The guidelines include a comprehensive quality-based framework, which outlines the key aspects of drinking water quality management across all responsible stakeholders and processes including strategy, planning, operations and research and development. Water utilities delivering treated water to customers report to their relevant department of health on their performance against the guideline values.

The ADWG are intended to provide a framework for good management of drinking water supplies that, if implemented, will assure safety at point of use. The guidelines were developed after consideration of the best available scientific evidence. The ADWG are designed to provide authoritative reference on what defines safe, good quality water, how it can be achieved and how it can be assured. The ADWG are intended for use by the Australian community and all agencies with responsibilities associated with the supply

of drinking water, including catchment and water resource managers, drinking water suppliers, water regulators and health authorities. The guidelines clearly enunciate the requirement for multiple barriers to be applied to protect drinking water quality from catchment to tap. Reliance on treatment alone is considered inappropriate.

Some relevant guiding principles of the ADWG are as follows:

• ‘The multiple barrier approach is universally recognised as the foundation for ensuring safe drinking water.

• No single barrier is effective against all conceivable sources of contamination, is effective 100 per cent of the time or constantly functions at maximum efficiency.

• Prevention of contamination provides greater surety than removal of contaminants by treatment.

• The most effective barrier is protection of source waters to the maximum degree practical.

• Water suppliers should adopt a preventive risk management approach, as stipulated in the ADWG, to maintain the supply of water at the highest practicable quality.

• The guideline values should never be seen as a licence to degrade the quality of a drinking water supply to that level.

• The greatest risk to consumers of drinking water is pathogenic micro-organisms. Protection of water sources and treatment are of paramount importance and must never be compromised.

• The drinking water system must have, and continuously maintain, robust multiple barriers appropriate to the level of contamination facing the raw water supply.

• Any sudden or extreme change in water quality, flow or environmental conditions (eg. extreme rainfall or flooding) should arouse suspicion that drinking water might become contaminated.

• Ensuring drinking water safety and quality requires the application of a considered risk management approach’.

Framework for the Management of Drinking Water Quality The elements of a water quality management system for the protection of drinking water quality through all components of the water supply system are outlined in Figure 2.


�3

Commitment to drinking water quality management

System analysis and management

Assessment of the drinking water qualitysystem

Operational procedures and process control

Verification of drinking water quality

Management of incidents and emergencies

Supportingrequirements

Employee awareness andtraining

Community involvement andawareness

Research and development

Documentation and reporting

Review

Evaluation andaudit

Review andcontinualimprovement

Figure 2. The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines Framework for the Management of Drinking Water Quality

table 1 ADWg 2004 guideline values for some key water quality hazards introduced by recreational activities

Recreational activities introducing water quality contamination

Water quality impact parameter

2004 ADWg guideline*

Basis guideline interpretation for drinking water quality management

Activity causing erosion (eg. walking, camping, mountain biking, horseriding, vehicles)

Turbidity � NTU Turbidity (sediment) impedes chlorination and filtration treatment processes and has aesthetic impacts

Minimise turbidity via erosion mechanisms using riparian buffers and activity control.

Leaking fuel tanks and oil spills from vehicles and boats (eg. vehicle access, boating, skiing, non-power and associated vehicle access)

Hydrocarbons None detected Some are non-threshold carcinogens

Minimise fuel storage and use in catchment. Appropriate on-site management and incident response for fuel spills in catchments from roads or land activities.

Human activity, contact with water (eg. primary and secondary), human waste, animal waste (eg. camping, picnicking, mountain biking, horse riding, animal access)

Cryptosporidium None detected Causes diarrhoea, can be life threatening in immuno compromised

Prevention of source water contamination by human and livestock waste.

Giardia None detected Causes diarrhoea and abdominal cramps

E. coli None detected Gastroenteritis

Viruses (humans are only significant source of waterborne enteric viruses)

None detected Numerous health impacts - respiratory infections, gastroenteritis, conjunctivitis etc.

* Guideline for water after treatment.

Table � outlines the types of water quality contaminants that have been associated with recreational activity in catchments along with the ADWG guideline values.

Preventive measures for drinking waterquality management


�4

4.1 tyPeS OF ReCReAtiONAl ACtivity

Recreation in drinking water catchments can be broken into two main categories, water-based recreation and land-based recreation. Within these categories, recreation can occur in two ways:• in an approved manner meeting the requirements of

state guidelines or access agreements; and • on an illegal basis where access is not in compliance

with state guidelines or access agreements.

Specific types of recreational activities and the infrastructure and support facilities required to service and manage these activities are detailed in Appendix 2.

4.2 CuRReNt levelS OF ReCReAtiONAl ACCeSS iN DRiNkiNg WAteR CAtChMeNtS ACROSS AuStRAliA

In order to understand existing levels of recreational access in catchments across Australia, a survey was undertaken of water utilities on the current levels of approved access in catchments operated by that utility and the reasons for that access regime (summarised in Appendix 3). The information includes access arrangements for utilities managing urban and rural catchments in metropolitan and regional environments. ‘Approved access’ is usually based on state-wide approval from a regulator or conditional approval (on a case-by-case basis) from the water utility.

From the information presented in Appendix 3 it is possible to draw several conclusions. A major point is that there is broad variation with respect to what is permitted across Australia. Some areas are predominantly closed to access, whilst others have minimal passive access and other catchments have broad-scale open access arrangements.

The major factors that influence policy or access approval are as follows:• Whether the water utility has direct control over the

land where access is occurring.• The type of source ie. strategic vs. emergency and

direct supply vs. pumpback.

• Historical precedents due to demand for recreational use and perceived risk to water supply operation.

• Public health and safety (of recreators and the down-stream water consumers).

• The level and effectiveness of water treatment.• The proximity of the access to the storage and/or

offtake point.• The public’s perception of their ‘right’ to access

catchment lands and storages. In areas where the public values the protection a closed catchment provides, demand for access is lower and less illegal access occurs.

• The availability of alternative areas nearby for recreation.

Another key learning is that the introduction of recreation on a trial basis establishes a user group and community-based expectation for the activity to continue beyond the specified period. Therefore, trials should only be permitted if there is a very high a priori agreement that the activity should probably go ahead. From the survey it was established that the key reasons to limit or restrict access were as follows:• Public health and safety (of recreators and the

downstream water consumers).• Inappropriate treatment or barriers to mitigate

impacts.• Security issues associated with water supply.• Costs of managing access.• Incompatibility of access users (such as bushwalking vs.

rally driving). • Ecological and environmental protection.• Minimal demand for access. • The utility’s ownership of the land enables controls to

be implemented at key access points.

4 ReCReAtiON iN DRiNkiNg WAteR CAtChMeNtS


�5

Past research in the Sydney drinking water catchment, conducted by Longworth and Mackenzie (�986) and involving an extensive community survey on community attitudes to existing and potential recreational uses, found that:• The general public was in favour of utilising Sydney’s

drinking water catchments for recreational activities.• Those activities that did not involve water contact

were supported the most.• Pollution was identified as the major perceived

problem.• Ranger-escorted walks were seen as the most

acceptable activity, followed by bushwalking.• The community was willing to pay for water quality

maintenance costs if changes to the access regime were made. This would be through entry fees as opposed to increases in water rates.

Overall, despite a keen interest in increased access to Sydney’s catchments, the surveyed group did indicate some concern for the impacts on water quality. It was concluded that further information would be required before any significant changes could be made to the existing access regime (Longworth and Mackenzie, �986). More recent research by Manning et al (2004) aimed to understand to what extent recreators perceive the environmental impacts of ecotourism. The study found that many visitors associated with outdoor recreation were not highly aware of recreation-related environmental impacts.

Those requesting recreational access to drinking water catchments and storages repeatedly raise a number of key questions. These questions are discussed below.

Is water treatment always effective?

There is faith in the ability of water treatment processes and plants to remove all types of contamination in the raw water within the reservoir. However, treatment plants are not �00 per cent reliable and even when working they serve to reduce, not remove, pathogens and other contaminants. The more contamination that treatment plants are required to manage, the higher the costs of treatment and, potentially, the higher the amount of contamination that remains in the treated water that reaches the consumers.

Can water quality sampling programs detect and identify contamination in a timely manner for risk response?

Water quality sampling programs in raw water (before it is treated) are used by water utilities to support risk management programs over the long-term. However, sampling is not useful to drive short-term risk management. The time required to collect, transport, test and analyse samples is often from days to weeks. In most cases, this means that the water tested will be beyond the treatment

plant and possibly at the customer’s tap by the time results are received. This delay prevents any immediate change in water treatment to be activated by changes in raw water quality. The time delay may be exacerbated by transport of water samples from regional or remote areas to laboratories and by complicated testing procedures required for some water quality parameters such as pathogens (eg. Cryptosporidium) and some chemicals. In addition, it is difficult to determine with a high level of confidence the suite of water quality parameters to be tested. There are hundreds of water quality parameters, each of which requires a separate testing procedure and with associated costs. As such, it is not realistic to test for all. For some land use activities, the water quality risks of that activity are well understood, so the corresponding water quality contamination sampling suite can be more certain. For instance, E.coli is considered to be a good indicator of bacterial contamination, which may arise from human activity around a reservoir. However, in other areas, scientific understanding of water quality risks and the capability of tests are still only developing. This is true of pharmaceutically active compounds and viruses that may arise from human waste.

Is it possible to link water quality impacts to recreational activities?

Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) noted that it is not practical in most cases to relate a particular type and level of recreational activity to a quantified level of water quality impact. As a result, expert judgement, modelling and scientific inference are required, leading to at least some uncertainty in assessing levels of risk.

Are reservoirs effective contamination removal barriers?

Reservoirs can be effective barriers to drinking water quality contamination in certain circumstances. Processes within the reservoir can attenuate and allow contamination to settle, pathogens to die-off or the concentration of some contaminants to dilute to an acceptable level. These processes are particularly enhanced by larger storages and the period of time the water stays in the storage ie. high detention time. Temperature impacts on the surface of the reservoir can also enhance pathogen die off. Most storages in Australia are not large, with the exception of a few reservoirs in the eastern states such as Thompson, Warragamba and Wivenhoe. Even the capacity of these reservoirs is limited in dry years and storm events can have a major impact on dilution and detention processes. In Myponga, during high inflow (storm events) the reservoir can short-circuit and the inflow can reach the off-take point of the reservoir within 30 hours over a distance of 5km (Brookes et al, 2004).

5 FReQueNtly ASkeD QueStiONS


�6

Is there a problem with only a small number of passive recreators?

Different recreational activity generates different use patterns. Some activities are more ‘passive’ than others. Yet even passive activities, such as bushwalking, can involve large groups of people. Freshwater angling tends to involve small groups of one to three people but it can also involve large groups with overnight camping at key times in the season. Appropriate ‘catchment friendly’ behaviour can include waste-in/waste-out actions, limited noise, respect to native flora and fauna, keeping to roads and tracks and generally following the requirements of access approval. Inappropriate behaviour can include the use of firearms, anti-social behaviour, harming native wildlife, dumping carcasses in reservoirs, dumping household rubbish and growing drug crops. However, in practice, controlling behaviour and numbers can prove impractical such that allowing a small number of well-behaved recreators into a catchment might have undesired consequences as numbers expand and less caring recreators start to enter.

How secure are our water sources?

Recent terrorism attacks across the world have had a dramatic effect on how organisations now manage their security. There now is a heightened concern about intentional contamination or harm to water supply and infrastructure with consequent impacts on public health and safety. Access into drinking water catchments does increase security risks to both water quality and supply.

Do septic tanks disinfect wastewater?

Most septic systems are not coupled to disinfection processes. Instead they act first as a storage tank for solid waste, which is pumped out at a later date. The liquid waste from the tank is transported away to an absorption trench to encourage leaching of waste into the soil profile. Generally, it is found that several tens of meters of sand can provide an effective natural barrier to the transport of protozoan and faecal bacteria (CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, 2004a). However if the site is poorly designed or maintained ie. the tank is not regularly pumped or the absorption trench is located in poorly draining soils, then the septic tank can fail and untreated human waste can be washed into waterways and reservoirs.

What impact do storm events have on water quality?

Recent research in Australia has confirmed that high rainfall and runoff events are the most critical hydrological conditions for water quality (CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, 2004a). This study showed that as much as 300 years worth of dry weather pathogen contamination loads could be exported during one day in a single small rainfall event. This research has direct implications for the impacts

of contamination from recreational activities in drinking water catchments. It means that pathogenic material, such as human or animal faeces, can be easily transported to streams and rivers and then into reservoirs.

Is it possible to manage access so as to control the impacts of recreational activities on drinking water quality?

National parks across Australia aim to manage access to the parks instead of limiting access. The objective is to encourage people to a particular area of the park that is suitable for access, whilst protecting the more ecologically vulnerable areas. Many land managers spend a large amount of money on developing and maintaining facilities at these sites. In drinking water catchments the priority concern is public health, which can require higher levels of protection than ecological health. In many instances, damage to ecological values can be mitigated or remediated. However, it is impossible to remediate an illness suffered by a consumer from drinking contaminated water.

Can a user pays system help generate revenue for water quality protection?

User pays systems work on the concept that the service or product, in this case the ability to access catchments, is a commodity or service on a free market and thus available to consumers at a price. Application of this principle would require recreators to pay a regular access fee or annual payment that would cover the costs relating to facility management (development and maintenance), activity management (surveillance) as well as remediation of impacts such as trail repairs and water treatment. However, user pays systems are usually not equitable in situations where access is spread over large areas, enforcement is difficult and it is difficult to attribute the costs associated with access to a particular group. While recreationalists benefit directly from having access to water catchments and storages, the costs associated with increased access are usually borne by the wider community. In particular, treatment costs are often borne by the community as a whole since such costs are generally high and cannot be recovered readily from usage fees. This requires the community at large to determine the appropriate values it places on often competing uses in a drinking water catchment.

Are there potential economic and social benefits from recreational activities in drinking water catchments?

There can be a range of social and economic benefits associated with recreational activities in drinking water catchments. These include: direct and indirect use benefits, health and wellbeing of recreationalists, educational and scientific benefits and economic benefits from commercial operations including tourism. The benefits from recreational


�7

activities need to be weighed up against the potential public health risks from allowing extensive recreational activities in drinking water catchments.

Aren’t drinking water contamination incidents rare?

Several major water supply contamination events resulting from the introduction of human wastes to supplies have been reported. The US Center for Disease Control estimates that 940,000 Americans become ill and 900 die each year from microbiologically contaminated water (Hurlbert, �996 quoted in Sinclair Knight Merz, 200�). In �993 in Milwaukee, USA, a waterborne outbreak of cryptosporidiosis affected a large urban water supply causing around 400,000 illnesses and dozens of deaths (MacKenzie et al, �994). Reliance on filtration, chlorination and coliform monitoring were found to be fallible due to the properties of this pathogen and a combination of climatic conditions and operational problems. In May 2000 in Walkerton, Ontario, Canada, 2,300 people became ill and seven people died after consuming drinking water contaminated with bacteria including a deadly strain of Escherichia coli. In this incident reliance on the usually effective barrier of chlorination was shown to be fallible under certain climatic conditions combined with an operational environment of complacency.

Shouldn’t recreational access be allowed in water catchment areas as they take up a large portion of the protected natural environment and there are few other alternative areas for recreation?

In many areas in Australia, recreation locations are limited. This is particularly true for areas close to major urban centres. Most people desire a location within practical travel distance from their home location and with a range of facilities. In some regions, water catchment covers a large portion of such areas, and if access is limited, locations outside can instead become heavily used. Again, it is a matter of balancing public health risks against the desire

for access to relatively uncrowded recreational areas.Aren’t water storages and catchments public assets and public goods?

Water, like sunlight and clean air, is a natural resource that most of the community feel that they own. However, unlike sunlight and air, and more like gas and minerals, water is a natural resource that is more obviously finite, is harvested and is provided by a utility. Water catchments and associated infrastructure (dam wall, reservoir, tower etc.) are often viewed by the community as a public good, which should be readily available to all. However conflicts can arise between private and public landholders within water supply catchments, between recreationalists with conflicting uses eg. passive and active activities, and between the values of good quality drinking water and recreational access. Water utilities have a duty of care to the whole community, and primarily to the water consumer community, and need to protect their interests first and foremost. The needs of the large number of water consumers may outweigh the desires of a relatively smaller number of recreators.

Many water storages were built and provided as multiple purpose facilities for recreation and water supply. Why should this change?

In the past, some water supply reservoirs and catchments were promoted as places for recreation, often because risks to public health were considered low and systems were in place to reduce contamination. However, with improved research into drinking water quality there is a growing recognition of the risks posed to water quality from pathogens and other contaminants. This has required a review of previously accepted management practices in drinking water catchments.


�8

A literature review was undertaken to identify and summarise published material on the impacts of recreation on reservoir water quality, and also the unpublished material (grey literature), which includes internal water utility research reports and planning documents. Material was provided by project and workshop participants, as well as information located through internet searches and discussions with stakeholders.

Information on the public health and environmental impacts of recreation and tourism is limited, especially in water catchment areas (Sun and Walsh, �998; Australian Water Technologies, 2002). Most of the literature covers the conditions of North American wilderness or European environs (Australian Water Technologies, 2002). Recreation and tourism activities can negatively affect the forest and other recreational sites physically and biologically, as described by Davies (�978), Thyer (�98�), Calais and Kilpatrick (�986), Sun and Liddle (�99�, �993), Hawes (�992), Hardie (�993) and Whinam and Comfort (�996). Sun and Walsh (�998) indicate that the results of available studies and observations indicate that the common recreational and tourist activities can, if not well managed, adversely affect the natural values of the environment.

Table 2 provides a comprehensive summary of the generic contamination risks from different types of recreational activity in drinking water source areas (based on reports by Australian Water Technologies (2002), Gilmour and Scandol (�997) and CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (2004b). The major contaminants associated with recreational access are discussed below.

6.1 iNtRODuCtiON OF CheMiCAlS

Many contaminants can be introduced into surface waters due to motorised activities such as boating. These contaminants can be introduced as a result of maintenance activities, and include new paint, old paint scrapings, anti-foulants, solvents, oil and grease, fuels, and cleaning agents. Ships and boats contribute considerable sources of contaminants such as trace elements, tributylin (Mee and Fowler, �99�), polychlorinated biphyls (Machiwa, �992), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (Kennicutt et al, �992), as well as bacteria (Pettibone et al, �996). Elevated contaminant levels have been reported in marinas with high densities of moored boats, for example through engine exhausts and antifouling paints, and associated boating-related activities such as washing-down, sanding and painting, draining bilge water and refuelling. Many of these substances, particularly chlorinated biphenyls, tend to accumulate in freshwater, estuarine and marine sediments (Brown and Wagner, �990). In regards to boat fuel discharge, outboard motors discharge exhausts directly to water whilst inboard motors discharge exhausts at or below water line. Two stroke engines exhaust

approximately one-quarter of consumed fuel, and 529g of unburnt hydrocarbons are released from a 70 horsepower outboard motor per hour (Mosisch and Arthington, �998). These unburnt fuel contaminants can be found in the water column and can also accumulate in sediments as short and long-chained hydrocarbons, tetraethyl lead, ethylene dibromide, ethylene dichloride, zinc, sulphur and phosphorus. Exhaust contaminants include carbon, nitrogen oxide, sulphur dioxide, hydrocarbons and a number of oxidation products (Murphy et al, �995 quoted in Mosisch and Arthington, �998). Boat traffic in freshwater rivers also can impact water quality by resuspending contaminated bottom sediment (Pettibone et al, �996).

6.2 iNtRODuCtiON OF PAthOgeNS

Bacterial, viral and protozoan contaminants can enter waterways and reservoirs as a result of the release of faecal material (Sinclair Knight Merz, 200�). It is well recognised that exposure of reservoirs and catchment areas to public access can contribute to pathogens in reservoirs (Anderson et al, �998; US EPA, �999; WHO, 2004). Most waterborne pathogens are introduced into drinking water supplies in human or animal faeces (WHO, 2004) and the most serious risk to human health is from human faecal releases (Sinclair Knight Merz, 200�; Cilimburg et al, 2000). The outcomes of such contamination can result in exposure to viral, bacterial and protozoan organisms including Hepatitis A virus, and species of Salmonella, Shigella, Giardia, Cryptosporidium and many others (Anderson et al, �998, Barwick et al, 2000). Recently emerging protozoan pathogens, including Cryptosporidium, have been associated with outbreaks in recreational waters, are highly resistant to disinfection and, in some cases, are difficult to remove by water filtration. In addition, a study carried out by Warnken and Buckley (2004) looking at human recreational impacts on water quality in a flowing stream found that E. coli concentrations increased during periods of recreational activity. Whether the increase was caused by physical input of bacteria from swimmers bodies, or from resuspension of bacteria in streambed sediments was not concluded.

6.3 iMPACtS OF eROSiON (SeDiMeNt)

Particles of suspended soil caused by erosional processes entering a drinking water reservoir give rise to increased turbidity, reducing aesthetic water quality, increasing water treatment costs and potentially shielding pathogens from disinfection treatment (Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures, 2004). Boat activity along a shoreline causes bank erosion, however the movement of boats through water can also cause disturbance to the bed of the water body, either through direct contact or through the effect of turbulence created by the vessel’s passage. This disturbance is most evident in the form of the stirring up of fine sediments from the bottom of the water body that

6 iMPACtS OF ReCReAtiONAl ACtivitieS


�9

decreases water clarity in the water column. Sediments in urban catchments are often highly contaminated with various pollutants (eg. polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and trace metals) that are toxic to humans and the aquatic environment (Ogura et al, �990; Hewitt and Rashed, �992; Rogge et al, �993; Moon et al, �994; Marr et al, �999; Rhoads and Cahill, �999). Anchor drag caused by inappropriate anchoring can disturb the upper layers of the sediment and cause localised particle suspension. Personal watercraft, for example jet skis are likely to cause similar disturbance to stream beds. Many site specific variables will play an important role in determining the overall contribution of boating to turbidity, and in particular the sensitivity of the water to increased turbidity. Recreation in the surrounding catchment can also contribute pollution to the water storage with erosion from vehicles or animals causing turbidity. Fayer (�997) found that horse riding caused increased turbidity in nearby waterways.

6.4 ChANgeS iN NutRieNt levelS

King and Mace (�974) found that camping and the associated food preparation activities caused higher phosphate levels from detergents to enter waterways. Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) detailed a number of activities associated with shoreline fishing that could lead to a higher risk of algal problems including: line dragging, wading and swimming that promote increased sediment resuspension and possible nutrient flux to the water column; organic bait adding a significant nutrient load to the reservoir; release of carp as live bait which could destroy macrophyte beds and allow increased wave-induced sediment resuspension and nutrient flux; litter and rubbish on foreshore and in the water; walking on the shoreline increasing sediment transport with associated nutrients to the reservoir; and increased fire frequency with subsequent runoff.

Elevated levels of nutrients in waterways can trigger algal blooms and toxic cyanobacteria, which cause odour problems, increase treatment times and costs and can affect water consumers’ health.

6.5 ChANgeS iN SySteM CONDitiON AND eCOlOgy

Recreation, like any modification of a natural environment, can have numerous impacts on system ecology. Swimming and bathing can cause trampling of foreshore vegetation (Martinick and Associates, �995). Pearce and Eaton (�983, quoted in Mosisch and Arthington �998) found that power boating activity caused alterations to sediment quality, disruptions to ecological processes and modification of habitat, while Mosisch and Arthington (�998) found that powerboats caused damage to banks and shoreline erosion. Fishing activity was found to alter habitat and contribute to trampling of vegetation in riparian zones and increase turbidity from shoreline disturbance (Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures, 2004). Horse riding can

cause trail proliferation, weeds (Landsberg et al, 200�), soil compaction and vegetation damage (Whinam et al, �994). Camping has been found to cause soil compaction, damage to trees, exotic plant invasion and vegetation loss (Cole �992). Kuss and Hall (�99�) found bushwalking causes soil compaction. Mountain biking can cause soil erosion, gullying of tracks, ground compaction, clearing of vegetation, increased runoff, turbidity and saltation, dust, increased fire risk and weeds.

6.6 iNCReASeD RiSk OF FiRe

One critical issue for many utilities is the increased risk of wildfire caused by recreational access. Picnicking and camping increase the risk of accidental wildfire, while recreational access in general poses a risk from malicious and deliberate fire lighting. Wildfire can destroy large tracks of land in catchments, resulting in an increased risk of turbid runoff in storm events which, in turn, can affect water treatment processes. In a catastrophic case of wildfire, the impact on turbidity can cause the catchment to become a net contributor of contamination, instead of a barrier, and affect yield negatively.

6.7 SeCuRity OF DRiNkiNg WAteR SuPPly ASSetS

In more recent times, water authorities have been required to respond to threats posed by those seeking to deliberately damage or interfere with water supply infrastructure. Decisions on recreational access to water storages and catchment lands therefore need to be cognisant of the wider risk context relating to access and the need to protect critical assets, such as dam walls, treatment plants and raw water storages, from security risks.

6.8 legAl liABility

Water supply authorities need to act with due diligence in relation to both statutory and common law with respect to permitting or preventing recreational access to catchments and storages.

Water utilities have a common law duty of care to persons using the water or service they supply, with the standard of that duty determined from precedent and guidelines. The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) and accepted industry standards are seen as best practice and may, therefore, have common law status. Statements in substantive documents such as the ADWG, therefore, need to be carefully considered and decisions made in the context of prevailing guidelines and standards. Where such statements call for caution, protection and multiple barrier management these may point against an open catchments and reservoir policy. In addition, a water utility that permits recreational activities in an area of responsibility would have some responsibility to ensure that the area was safe. Statutory laws, which may be State or Commonwealth-based legislation, also bind water authorities and require


20

them to meet public health, water management, planning and environmental responsibilities.

6.9 CuMulAtive iMPACtS

The impacts described above do not occur in isolation but are related to other impacts in the catchment. The quantitative estimation of the cumulative impact of recreational activities on water quality is challenging. Due to the complexity of catchment processes and the long timeframes involved in many of the processes, it is unlikely that there will ever be a great degree of certainty associated with the long-term and cumulative impacts of various recreational activities. In the absence of a criterion to separate acceptability from unacceptability, a precautionary approach would seek to limit the level of activity to as low a magnitude as possible or to preclude it completely.


2�

tabl

e 2:

the

tab

le b

elow

out

lines

the

gen

eric

co

ntam

inat

ion

risk

s fr

om

diff

eren

t ty

pes

of r

ecre

atio

nal a

ctiv

ity

in d

rink

ing

wat

er s

our

ce a

reas

(b

ased

on

repo

rts

by A

ustr

alia

n W

ater

tec

hno

logi

es (

2001

), g

ilmo

ur a

nd S

cand

ol (

1997

), e

cos

env

iro

nmen

tal C

ons

ulti

ng a

nd W

ater

Fut

ures

(2

004)

, CR

C fo

r W

ater

Qua

lity

and

tre

atm

ent

(200

4b))

.

Act

ivit

yA

ctiv

ity-

base

d is

sues

th

at a

ffec

t le

vel o

f im

pact

Phy

sica

l im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Che

mic

al im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Mic

robi

olo

gica

lim

pact

impl

icat

ions

hum

an b

ody

en

teri

ng w

ater

-

(inc

ludi

ng

bath

ing,

sw

imm

ing

for

was

hing

o

r ce

rem

oni

al

purp

ose

s)

•Le

vel o

f site

use

•N

umbe

r of

use

rs•

Beha

viou

r of

use

rs•

Peri

od o

f tim

e in

ca

tchm

ent

(toi

letin

g ac

tiviti

es)

•H

ealth

of u

sers

•W

aste

dis

posa

l•

Ass

ocia

ted

activ

ity

picn

icki

ng, c

ampi

ng.

Tram

plin

g of

fore

shor

e ve

geta

tion

with

tu

rbid

ity a

nd s

uspe

nsio

n of

sed

imen

t (M

artin

ick

and

Ass

ocia

tes,

�995

).

Tram

plin

g of

fore

shor

e ve

geta

tion

– re

duce

ef

fect

iven

ess

of r

ipar

ian

buffe

r to

tra

p ru

noff

and

cont

amin

ants

.

Hig

her

phos

phat

e le

vels

from

de

terg

ents

/soa

ps u

sed

in

bath

ing

or w

ashi

ng a

ctiv

ity.

Alg

al b

loom

s an

d as

soci

ated

cy

anot

oxin

s w

ith

publ

ic h

ealth

im

plic

atio

ns.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa (

And

erso

n et

al,

�998

; Car

swel

l et

al,

(�96

9) in

Fo

rsyt

h (�

985)

Ba

ther

s ha

ve b

een

show

n to

she

d hi

gh d

ensi

ties

of

E. c

oli,

ente

roco

cci

and

Pseu

dom

onas

au

rugi

nosa

(EPA

, �9

99; W

HO

, 200

4).

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

Fis

hing

(w

adin

g,

sho

relin

e, b

ait

and

non-

bait

act

ivit

ies)

•Le

vel o

f site

use

•Be

havi

our

of u

sers

•U

se o

f bai

t•

Peri

od o

f tim

e in

ca

tchm

ent

(toi

letin

g ac

tiviti

es)

•W

aste

dis

posa

l•

Body

con

tact

with

w

ater

•A

ssoc

iate

d ac

tivity

-

cam

p fir

es•

Loca

tion

of a

ctiv

ity t

o ou

tlet.

Alte

ring

hab

itat

tram

plin

g of

veg

etat

ion

in r

ipar

ian

zone

, Tu

rbid

ity fr

om s

hore

line

dist

urba

nce.

Tram

plin

g of

fore

shor

e ve

geta

tion

– re

duce

ef

fect

iven

ess

of r

ipar

ian

buffe

r to

tra

p ru

noff

and

cont

amin

ants

.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa (

And

erso

n et

al,

�998

) fr

om

acci

dent

al b

ody

cont

act

with

wat

er

and

fishi

ng b

ait

or

was

te.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

No

n-po

wer

bo

atin

g•

Leve

l of s

ite u

se•

Beha

viou

r of

use

rs•

Ass

ocia

ted

activ

ities

–

fishi

ng, s

wim

min

g, ca

mpi

ng•

Peri

od o

f tim

e in

ca

tchm

ent

(toi

letin

g ac

tiviti

es•

Was

te d

ispo

sal -

bilg

e,

sew

erag

e an

d ru

bbis

h•

Boat

laun

chin

g an

d pe

rmitt

ed a

reas

in

rela

tion

to o

utle

t.

Tram

plin

g of

fo

resh

ores

are

as d

urin

g la

unch

ing

(Mar

tinic

k an

d A

ssoc

iate

s, �9

95),

dam

age

to

bank

s an

d sh

orel

ine

eros

ion

(Mos

isch

and

A

rthi

ngto

n, �

998)

.

Tram

plin

g of

fo

resh

ore

vege

tatio

n –

redu

ce e

ffect

iven

ess

of r

ipar

ian

buffe

r to

tra

p ru

noff

and

cont

amin

ants

Sh

orel

ine

eros

ion

– tu

rbid

ity a

ffect

ing

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

ch

lori

natio

n an

d fil

trat

ion.

Roa

d gr

ime

and

asso

ciat

ed

cont

amin

ants

rel

atin

g to

bo

atin

g-re

late

d in

fras

truc

ture

(L

iddl

e, �

988)

.

Hyd

roca

rbon

s –

not

trea

tabl

e by

gen

eric

dr

inki

ng w

ater

tr

eatm

ent

proc

esse

s, an

y de

tect

ion

exce

eds A

DW

G.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa (

And

erso

n et

al,

�998

) fr

om

sew

erag

e sy

stem

di

scha

rge

and

acci

dent

al b

ody

cont

act

with

wat

er.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.


22

Act

ivit

yA

ctiv

ity-

base

d is

sues

th

at a

ffec

t le

vel o

f im

pact

Phy

sica

l im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Che

mic

al im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Mic

robi

olo

gica

lim

pact

impl

icat

ions

Pow

er b

oat

ing

•Le

vel o

f site

use

•Be

havi

our

of u

sers

•A

ssoc

iate

d ac

tiviti

es

– fis

hing

, sw

imm

ing,

cam

ping

•Pe

riod

of t

ime

in

catc

hmen

t (t

oile

ting

activ

ities

)•

Was

te d

ispo

sal –

bilg

e,

sew

erag

e an

d ru

bbis

h•

Boat

laun

chin

g an

d pe

rmitt

ed a

reas

in

rela

tion

to o

utle

t.

Alte

ratio

ns t

o se

dim

ent

qual

ity, d

isru

ptio

ns t

o ec

olog

ical

pro

cess

es,

mod

ifica

tion

of h

abita

t (P

earc

e an

d Ea

ton,

�9

83).

Dam

age

to b

anks

and

sh

orel

ine

eros

ion

caus

ing

turb

idity

(M

osis

ch a

nd

Art

hing

ton,

�99

8).

Tram

plin

g of

fore

shor

e ve

geta

tion

– re

duce

ef

fect

iven

ess

of r

ipar

ian

buffe

r to

tra

p ru

noff

and

cont

amin

ants

. Tu

rbid

ity a

ffect

ing

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

ch

lori

natio

n an

d fil

trat

ion.

Unb

urnt

fuel

con

tam

inan

ts

can

be fo

und

in w

ater

col

umn

and

can

also

acc

umul

ate

in

sedi

men

ts.

Out

boar

d m

otor

s di

scha

rge

exha

usts

dir

ectly

to

wat

er;

Inbo

ard

mot

ors

disc

harg

e ex

haus

ts a

t or

bel

ow w

ater

lin

e.

Two

stro

ke e

ngin

es e

xhau

st

appr

ox. ¼

of c

onsu

med

fuel

, 52

9g o

f unb

urnt

hyd

roca

rbon

s ar

e re

leas

ed fr

om a

70

hors

e po

wer

out

boar

d m

otor

per

ho

ur.

Shor

t an

d lo

ng-c

hain

ed

hydr

ocar

bons

, tet

raet

hyl l

ead,

et

hyle

ne d

ibro

mid

e, e

thyl

ene

dich

lori

de, z

inc,

sulp

hur

and

phos

phor

us. E

xhau

st

cont

amin

ants

incl

ude

carb

on,

nitr

ogen

oxi

de, s

ulph

ur d

ioxi

de,

hydr

ocar

bons

and

a n

umbe

r of

oxi

datio

n pr

oduc

ts (

Mur

phy

et a

l, �9

95 in

Mos

isch

and

A

rthi

ngto

n, �

998)

.U

nbur

nt fu

el p

ollu

tant

s ph

enol

s, le

ad a

nd v

olat

ile a

nd

non-

vola

tile

oils

(Bu

rton

�97

5 in

Mos

isch

and

Art

hing

ton,

�9

98).

Hyd

roca

rbon

s –

not

trea

tabl

e by

gen

eric

dr

inki

ng w

ater

tr

eatm

ent

proc

esse

s, an

y de

tect

ion

exce

eds

heal

th

guid

elin

es.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

sew

age

disc

harg

e an

d bi

lge

wat

er.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

Cam

ping

•Le

vel o

f site

use

•Be

havi

our

of u

sers

•C

onne

ctiv

ity o

f site

to

wat

erbo

dy•

Peri

od o

f tim

e in

ca

tchm

ent

(toi

letin

g ac

tiviti

es)

•W

aste

dis

posa

l•

Res

ista

nce

of

vege

tatio

n,

•So

il dr

aina

ge.

Soil

com

pact

ion,

da

mag

e to

tre

es,

exot

ic p

lant

inva

sion

, ve

geta

tion

loss

(C

ole

�992

).

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

se r

unof

f, ve

geta

tion

dam

age,

w

eed

infe

stat

ion.

Hig

her

phos

phat

e le

vels

from

de

terg

ents

(K

ing

and

Mac

e,

�974

).

Alg

al b

loom

s w

ith

poss

ible

pub

lic h

ealth

im

plic

atio

ns.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa

from

hum

an w

aste

(C

ilim

burg

et

al,

2000

).

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.


23

Act

ivit

yA

ctiv

ity-

base

d is

sues

th

at a

ffec

t le

vel o

f im

pact

Phy

sica

l im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Che

mic

al im

pact

impl

icat

ions

Mic

robi

olo

gica

lim

pact

impl

icat

ions

Pic

nick

ing

•Le

vel o

f site

use

Be

havi

our

of u

sers

•C

onne

ctiv

ity o

f site

to

wat

erbo

dy,

•Pe

riod

of t

ime

in

catc

hmen

t (t

oile

ting

activ

ities

)•

Was

te d

ispo

sal.

Soil

com

pact

ion,

da

mag

e to

tre

es,

exot

ic p

lant

inva

sion

, ve

geta

tion

loss

.

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

sed

runo

ff,

vege

tatio

n da

mag

e,

wee

d in

fest

atio

n.

Hig

her

phos

phat

e le

vels

from

de

terg

ents

(K

ing

and

Mac

e,

�974

).

Alg

al b

loom

s w

ith

poss

ible

pub

lic h

ealth

im

plic

atio

ns.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

hum

an w

aste

.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

Bus

hwal

king

•Le

vel o

f site

use

•Tr

ail p

rolif

erat

ion

•Lo

catio

n of

tra

il to

gr

adie

nt•

Soil

type

•Pe

riod

of t

ime

in

catc

hmen

t (t

oile

ting

activ

ities

)•

Was

te d

ispo

sal.

Soil

com

pact

ion

and

exot

ic p

lant

inva

sion

(K

uss

and

Hal

l, �9

9�).

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

se r

unof

f, ve

geta

tion

dam

age,

w

eed

infe

stat

ion.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

hum

an w

aste

.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

Mo

unta

in b

ikin

g•

Leve

l of s

ite u

se,

•Be

havi

our

of u

sers

•Pe

riod

of t

ime

in

catc

hmen

t (t

oile

ting

activ

ities

)•

Was

te d

ispo

sal

•A

ssoc

iate

d ac

tiviti

es

Swim

min

g or

bat

hing

ac

tivity

•

Cam

ping

act

ivity

- c

amp

fires

.

Soil

eros

ion,

gul

lyin

g of

tra

cks,

grou

nd

com

pact

ion,

cle

arin

g of

ve

geta

tion,

incr

ease

d ru

noff,

tur

bidi

ty a

nd

salta

tion,

dus

t, in

crea

sed

fire

risk

, wee

ds.

Ecol

ogic

al im

pact

s -

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

se r

unof

f, ve

geta

tion

dam

age,

w

eed

infe

stat

ion.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

hum

an w

aste

.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

ho

rser

idin

g•

Res

ista

nce

of v

eget

atio

n•

Leve

l of s

ite u

se,

•Tr

ail p

rolif

erat

ion

•Lo

catio

n of

tra

il to

gr

adie

nt•

Soil

type

.

Trai

l pro

lifer

atio

n,

wee

ds (

Land

sber

g et

al,

200�

), so

il co

mpa

ctio

n an

d ve

geta

tion

dam

age

(Whi

nam

et

al, �

994)

. In

crea

sed

turb

idity

(F

ayer

, �99

7).

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

se r

unof

f, ve

geta

tion

dam

age,

w

eed

infe

stat

ion.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

hum

an w

aste

. Cr

ypto

spor

idiu

m

parv

um (

Faye

r, �9

97).

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.

veh

icul

ar a

cces

s•

Use

leve

l of t

rack

s•

Prol

ifera

tion

and

exte

nsio

n of

tra

cks

•U

se o

f cam

psite

s an

d fir

epla

ces

•Ill

egal

act

iviti

es s

uch

as

shoo

ting

•D

og a

cces

s•

Inco

mpa

tibili

ty w

ith

othe

r re

crea

tiona

l ac

tiviti

es.

Soil

eros

ion,

gul

lyin

g of

tra

cks,

grou

nd

com

pact

ion,

cle

arin

g of

ve

geta

tion,

incr

ease

d ru

noff,

tur

bidi

ty a

nd

salta

tion,

dus

t, ro

ad

kill,

incr

ease

d fir

e ri

sk,

wee

ds (

SPC

C, �

979)

.

Soil

com

pact

ion

- le

ads

to in

crea

se r

unof

f, ve

geta

tion

dam

age,

w

eed

infe

stat

ion.

Rub

bish

at

cam

psite

s, hi

gher

ph

osph

ate

leve

ls fr

om

dete

rgen

ts (

Kin

g an

d M

ace,

�9

74).

Alg

al b

loom

s w

ith

poss

ible

pub

lic h

ealth

im

plic

atio

ns.

Bact

eria

, vir

uses

an

d pr

otoz

oa fr

om

hum

an w

aste

.

Bact

eria

vir

uses

and

pr

otoz

oa w

ith p

ublic

he

alth

impl

icat

ions

.


24

7 MANAgeMeNt OF ReCReAtiONAl ACCeSS

PRiNCiPleS FOR ReCReAtiONAl ACCeSS MANAgeMeNt iN DRiNkiNg WAteR CAtChMeNtS AND StORAgeS

1. A risk assessment should be undertaken that considers the likelihood, consequence and certainty of any application and/or grouped activity and this should recognise the contribution of that activity to the cumulative impacts and the indirect impacts.

2. the precautionary principle should be applied in decision making.3. A preventive approach should be adopted.4. the multiple barrier approach should be supported.5. it should be possible to make decisions on a case-by case basis but within a consistent policy

framework.6. Public health should be the primary consideration in water supply catchments.7. environmental, community, social and economic considerations are also important.8. lack of protection in one area should not be used as a reason for decreasing protection in other

areas.9. Water quality should not be degraded to the point where it just complies with the guidelines; the

best possible quality of water should be supplied.10. Direct and indirect costs of access should be borne by users, not the water consumers as a whole.11. Social acceptance of decisions is necessary, this may require community education on risk and

their participation in identifying what is acceptable.

One of the key aims of this project is to provide a decision support framework for those making decisions on recreational access, and to enable rigorous policies to be developed which protect public health, water quality and

other values of drinking water catchments and storages. To achieve an agreed position for the Australian water industry, a set of principles has been agreed by the project participants.

7.1 RiSk ASSeSSMeNt AS A tOOl iN ReCReAtiON MANAgeMeNt

Risk assessment and management planning is now considered by the Australian water industry to be an appropriate approach for determining appropriate management controls over land uses and activities in and around drinking water sources (NHMRC & NRMMC, 2004; Deere and Davison, 2005).

In general, catchment-based risks facing the water industry have a low probability of occurrence but can have significant consequences. Unlike treatment plants and water distribution systems, which are man-made and operated, sources of drinking water are more difficult to understand due to complex interactions between geological, hydrological and biological processes. It is this complexity that drives the need for a tailored approach to risk assessment in drinking water source areas. It is also essential that such a process is compatible with other risk management programs used for treatment, assets and distribution systems, so that outputs and information can be integrated across the water supply system. This will provide a logical, consistent and effective plan for managing recreational access and the drinking water system generally. However, with the broad level of variation of sources across Australia, the approach requires flexibility. Sources can vary in size (quantity), water quality, type, level of risk, barriers present, remoteness, level of stakeholder involvement, treatment options and historical precedents.

Currently, risk assessment outcomes are indicating that a more restrictive approach to recreational use of drinking water sources is required. Indeed, attempts to quantify risk from recreation on and around water sources have indicated that there is a significant increase in risk if recreation is introduced (Stewart et al, 2002; Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures, 2004).

Figure 3 details a recommended approach for the assessment of risks from recreational access on drinking water quality in catchments and storages. This method has been adapted from a model developed as part of the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (in preparation) publication, Risk Management Manual for Drinking Water Catchments and Sources. This approach incorporates catchment risk assessment concepts adapted from HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points), AS/NZS 4360 Risk Management (2004) and the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC & NRMMC, 2004). The model has been simplified and adapted for use to assist in decision making in relation to the management of recreational access in drinking water catchments and storages. However, as it is consistent with other risk management frameworks, the approach can utilise existing information and knowledge about catchments and water sources, and the results can be readily integrated into broader risk based strategies for catchment and drinking water management.


25

�. Establish the risk management context

Assemble project team and involve stakeholders

Scope project and collate information

• Identify key staff and gain involvement.

• Gain commitment of stakeholders.

• Define goals, objectives & scope.• Identify strategic context.• Define standards, information

needs and level of complexity.

2. Establish risk criteria Determine appropriate criteria • Criteria may include: operational,

legal, social, environmental and economic.

3. Identify hazards, hazardous events and sources of risk

Identify potential hazards

Identify hazardous events

Identify sources of risk

• Microbial pathogens, algae, metals, pesticides, hydrocarbons/oils, NOM, nutrients and sediment.

• Hazardous events may include swimming, fishing, littering, defecation.

• Site, area or other entity where water quality hazard comes from or event can occur eg. lake, shoreline, catchment lands.

4. Risk analysis Qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative analysis

• Estimate level of risk by considering sources of risk, consequences and the likelihood those consequences will occur.

• Identify factors affecting consequences and likelihood.

• Consider existing controls.• Consider precautionary principle.

5. Risk evaluation Compare risk against previously established criteria

• Set risk priorities. • Low or acceptable – periodic

review.• Higher level risks – consider

treatment options.

6. Risk treatment

Identify and evaluate options

Prepare management plan

• Identify options to avoid or reduce risks. Assess options using cost benefit analysis.

• Prepare and implement risk treatment plan, including management controls, monitoring and verification.

Figure 3 Recommended approach for the assessment of risks from recreational access on drinking water quality in catchments and storages


26

7.2 key StePS iN the RiSk MANAgeMeNt PROCeSS

The following section provides a description of the key steps to be followed in undertaking a risk management process in relation to recreational access to drinking water catchments and storages. The approach can be used to assist decision making on access in relation to particular recreational activities, particular locations in the catchment or storages, for a specific event, or a permanent change in access policy.

Due to the variability in catchments and storages and the type and extent of recreational activities around Australia, this provides a general guide only. It is not intended as a detailed ‘how to’, but rather a summary of key issues that should be considered when undertaking a risk assessment of recreational access.

The key steps in the risk management process comprise:

1. Risk Management Context Establishes the goals, objectives, strategies scope

and parameters of the activity that is the subject of the risk management process.

2. Risk Criteria Determine appropriate criteria, for example,

operational, legal, social, environmental and economic.

3. Risk identification Identifying hazardous events and sources of risks –what can happen and how. 4. Risk Analysis Consideration of the sources of risks, their

consequences and the likelihood those consequences will occur, within the context of existing controls.

5. Risk evaluation Comparing the level of risk found during the

analysis against previously established criteria. The output of a risk evaluation is a prioritised list of risks for further action.

6. Risk treatment Identification of the range of options for treating

risks, assessment of those options and preparation and implementation of risk treatment plans.

7. Monitor and Review – Communicate and Consult

Step 1: establish the Risk Assessment ContextThe first step in undertaking a risk management process is to establish the strategic, organisational and risk management context within which the assessment is to take place. Key elements are:

• establish project management structure and responsibilities

Depending on the level of complexity of the risk assessment, this may involve the appointment of a single project manager, a project team with appropriate knowledge and expertise and/or the appointment of a specialist risk analyst. It is important that personnel with subject matter expertise and knowledge of the system or activity under review are involved in the risk management process.

• Stakeholder involvement

The Framework for Management of Drinking Water Quality contained in the ADWG (NHMRC & NRMMC, 2004) notes that stakeholder involvement is vital in drinking water quality management. This is particularly important when making decisions about recreational access, where there can be multiple interest groups, often with conflicting attitudes and values about recreational access. Decisions about recreational access in drinking water catchments and storages raise broader questions about the relative value placed by the community on the social, environmental and economic benefits and costs associated with recreational activities in these areas.

A key aspect of the risk assessment process is communication with internal and external stakeholders (AS/NZS 4360, 2004). It is important to involve key stakeholders throughout the risk assessment process so that those responsible for making decisions about recreational access, and those affected by the decisions, understand the basis on which decisions are made, and why particular management actions or controls are required.

• Scope project

Key elements to be considered are:o Defining project and determining its goals and

objectives.o Defining extent of project – spatially and in time.o Identifying the strategic context – organisational,

operational, social, economic, legal and cultural context of the project.

o Defining water quality and other standards that must be met eg ADWG, industry supply agreements.

o Identifying information and resource requirements required to properly undertake the process.

o Defining the type and complexity of the risk management process (see box below).

The degree of complexity of the project (see below) will depend on the specific risk-based conditions of the catchment and the management objectives of the risk assessment. Generally, the higher the level of quantification and level of complexity, the more resource intensive and the narrower the range of risks and causes considered.


27

• information requirements

To effectively conduct a risk management process, information needs to be collated on the nature of the recreational activities and the characteristics and operation of the catchment and water supply system. It is essential to understand what hazards may arise, how these hazards create risks and the processes that affect drinking water quality. Gaps in information that are critical to the risk assessment process also can be identified at this point and, if practical, processes put in place to fill these gaps.

A checklist is provided in Appendix 4 to assist in the collation of relevant information to undertake a risk assessment of recreational access. The nature and extent of the information collected will relate to the required level of complexity of the risk assessment process.

Step 2: establish Risk Criteria

The next step is to define the decision making criteria against which risk is to be evaluated. The criteria should reflect the risk context defined in Step � and will be based on the operational, legal, social, environmental and economic context of the risk assessment. Risk criteria can be refined further as particular risks are identified and risk analysis techniques are selected. Risk criteria should correspond to the type of risks and the way in which risks levels are expressed (AS/NZS 4360, 2004). As an example, the Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) study of shoreline fishing at Tarago Reservoir was assessed against sustainability or ‘triple bottom line’ criteria (Table 3).

Simple or Complex?

Very early in the process, consideration needs to be given to the complexity of the risk management process that is to be undertaken. Risk assessments can range from simple desktop approaches with checklists and a base set of resources and information to very complex analyses undertaken with multiple stakeholders, using toolboxes and extensive information and resources. The appropriate level of risk assessment can be determined according to several criteria :

• The characteristics of the source (eg population served, sole or back-up supply, treatment barriers). • The resources available (eg time, people, data, tools).• Stakeholder involvement (eg numbers, historic demand, future expectations).

Miller et al (2004) and Deere and Davison (2005) detail a number of different approaches to assessing risks to water quality and prioritising risk mitigation actions (control measures). These approaches include:• Relatively simple risk analyses using flow diagrams that show where water comes from, how it is captured,

treated and disinfected and where risks may arise. This provides a visual map of risk pathways using a simple box or diagram model or more detailed process maps showing cause-effect relationships (eg Ecos Environmental Consulting & Water Futures 2004).

• Qualitative and semi-quantitative assessments involving the use of expert ‘peer jury’ groups assessing likelihood and consequences in order to rank relative levels of risk. Methodologies used include the generic AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management Standard, the HACCP system, Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) and CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (in preparation).

• Quantitative risk assessments (QRA) usually involve the use of models to predict infection or disease burdens associated with specified exposure routes and hazards (Deere and Davison, 2005). QRAs can be used to assess chemical risks, microbial risks or health risks (chemical and microbial).

table 3: example of criteria for evaluating risks

economic environmental Social

Full cost-reflective pricing in user charges Promotes efficient resource use Protects public health

No net environmental costs Maintains resource integrity Complies with relevant legislation and regulation

Generates increased economic return Protects ecological health Follows policies and guidelines

Transparency in costing Provides social benefits

Equity in distribution of costs Builds community capacity and ownership


28

Step 3: identify hazards, hazardous events and Sources

The key objective of this step is to identify the water quality hazards that can arise from recreational activities, potentially hazardous events and their sources (WHO, 2004): • A hazard is a biological, chemical, physical or radiological

agent that has the potential to cause harm.• A hazardous event is an incident or situation that can

lead to the presence of a hazard. • A hazard source is a site, area or other entity where a

water quality hazard comes from or where a hazardous event can occur.

Drinking water hazards can be grouped into the following categories:

• Microbial pathogens – including bacteria, protozoa and viruses

• Algae – including algal impacts, cyanobacteria and associated toxicology

• Metals – including but not limited to aluminum, calcium, iron, manganese, and heavy metals

• Pesticides• Hydrocarbons/oils.

Causal water quality hazards include:• Natural organic matter – which can cause

eutrophication, effect disinfection processes, and impede natural breakdown by sunlight of microbiological contamination

• Nutrients – causing algal and eutrophication issues

• Sediment – which can trigger turbidity issues as well as being a transport mechanism for other contaminants.

Comprehensive identification using a well-structured systematic process is critical, as risks not identified at this stage will not be considered. The risks to be considered should include those within and outside the control of the

organisation. There are various techniques that can be used to identify hazards, hazardous events and sources including checklists, judgements based on experience and records, conceptual models and process maps, systems analysis and scenario analysis (AS/NZS 2004). Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) used a process map describing cause-effect relationships through which recreational fishing could pose risks to water quality.

The list of generic contamination risks from different types of recreational activities in drinking water sources (see Table 2 in this report) can be used as the basis for determining key hazards, hazardous events and sources.

Step 4: Analyse Risks

Risk analysis involves consideration of the sources of risk, consequences and likelihood. The magnitude of the consequences of an event, and the likelihood of the event and its associated consequences are assessed taking into account the effectiveness of existing controls (AS/NZS 4360, 2004). The information collected in Step � will provide the basis for determining appropriate criteria and weightings for undertaking a risk analysis of recreational access for a particular activity, location or area of risk.

The complexity of the risk analysis will depend on the nature of the risk, the purpose of the analysis and the information, data and resources available. Analysis may be qualitative, semi-qualitative or quantitative, or a combination of these approaches. Qualitative analysis can be used initially to gain a general indication of risk and to identify major risks. It may be necessary later to undertake more detailed, quantitative assessments to analyse major risks (AS/NZS 4360, 2004). Table 4 provides a description of the levels of complexity applied in analysing risks (Deere and Davison, 2005).

Examples of generic risk analysis methodologies can be found in NHMRC & NRMMC (2004), AS/NZS 4360 (2004) CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (in preparation) and Deere and Davison (2005). Predictive modelling of water

table 4: levels of complexity in risk analysis (adapted from Deere and Davison, 2005)

Basic intermediate Complex

Likelihood of occurrence

Merged with consequence, not separately rated

Rating scale, usually � to 5, with descriptors such as rare, unlikely, possible, likely or almost certain.

Frequency of occurrence estimated in terms of return event frequency.

Severity of consequence

Merged with likelihood, not separately rated

Rating scale, usually � to 5, with descriptors such as negligible, minor, moderate, major, extreme.

Several criteria, including approximate population exposed, whether impact is inconvenient, harmful or fatal and costs of impact.

Number of possible outputs

Significant or insignificant The product of total number of categories on each rating scale: scores from � to 25 or risk matrix combining ratings from likelihood and consequences (see Appendix 5).

Extensive range of possible outputs, depending on how many criteria and categories are used, often with a number of continuous scales being used (frequency, population dollar values).


29

quality impacts can provide a quantitative assessment of the impacts of recreational activities on drinking water reservoirs. A quantitative microbial risk assessment was undertaken by Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) to analyse the public health risks associated with shoreline fishing. The endpoint for the risk assessment used was disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), which provides a metric of a disease’s impact on human health based on years of life lost due to death and years lived with a disease-related disability. The analysis found that, under a steady state scenario, the risk model predicted that shoreline fishing would not breach current WHO guideline values in relation to acceptable risk levels from infection by enteric diseases. However under a peak event scenario (ie. high rainfall event) the study found that the WHO guideline value would be exceeded. Anderson et al, (�998) and Stewart et al, (�997) modelled the impacts

of recreational activities on drinking water reservoirs. The models predicted marked increases in the levels of pathogenic loads (Stewart et al, �997; and Anderson et al, �998); and increases to the risk of downstream consumers contracting disease (Stewart et al, �997).

Qualitative risk analyses require judgements to be made about the likelihood of a hazardous event happening and the magnitude of the consequences should the event happen. The likelihood of a hazardous event happening can be scored within a range eg. � to 5 from rare, unlikely, possible, likely or almost certain, while the magnitude of consequences can be scored similarly eg. negligible, minor, moderate, major and extreme (CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, in preparation). Appendix 5 provides suggested criteria against which to analyse and rank risk levels. The criteria are not exhaustive and should be used as a guide

limits to certainty and the precautionary principle in recreational access

In the risk assessment process it is important that the levels of confidence in the risk analysis are made clear, and levels of uncertainty are tested where possible eg. through sensitivity analyses. However, relationships between activities and impacts on catchments values are complex (Gilmour and Scandol, �997). Uncertainty exists about the relationships between recreational impacts and stored water quality, water treatment and public health. This uncertainty can be interpreted in different ways according to value judgments regarding risk. This is particularly true for diffuse pollution-based activities in catchment environments such as recreation. It is difficult to investigate actual impacts or effects for this kind of activity as it is difficult to track pollution, especially if it is delayed, or if there are other contributing factors in the catchment.

It should be noted that limitations also exist with respect to scientific water quality sampling. As sampling only provides a snapshot of a specific parcel of water at a specific time, it may not be representative of the impacts at other points in space or time. Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) noted that the assessment of risks to water quality endpoints that might arise from recreational activities are complicated by the difficulty in proving cause and effect, and even more so, in quantitatively linking the extent of any particular aspect of an activity with the magnitude of that effect. Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) suggest the following factors complicate the attribution of effect to an activity:• The impacts of recreation may be delayed and so are not immediately observable or measurable;• Attribution of the effects of recreation may not be practical. This is particularly relevant where there are

multiple possible sources within the catchment;• Effects may be non-linear and levels of activity may not correlate in simple ways with levels of impact;• Uncertainty with respect to user behaviour (during survey and without being surveyed);• Variability between water catchments and reservoirs, making it difficult to extrapolate; and• Cumulative impacts where it is difficult to relate impacts to one from many individuals or activities.

When assessing the level of risk to drinking water quality posed by recreational activities, it is important to understand the limits to scientific certainty. Just as important, however, is the need to consider the precautionary principle when assessing risks to drinking water quality from recreational activities. The Precautionary Principle was developed as part of the Rio Declaration from the �992 UN Conference on the Environment and Development (the Earth Summit). Principle �5 stated:‘In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation’.

In the context of assessing risks to drinking water quality from recreational access then, the precautionary principle would direct that measures be taken to ensure that any risks posed by recreational activities do not pose a threat of serious or irreversible damage to drinking water quality.


30

only. The categorisation of risk, and the weightings to be assigned to each criterion, will need to be determined based on management objectives, subjective estimates, available data, statistical analysis or modelled predictions.

Step 5: Risk evaluation

The next step involves comparing the level of risk against previously established criteria (see Step 2). The purpose of risk evaluation is to produce a prioritised list of risks for further action. If the risk falls into a low or acceptable category, they may be accepted without further treatment, other than periodic review. Higher-level risks need to be further considered in light of the treatment options available.

Step 6: Risk treatment

The purpose of the risk assessment will direct the total exclusion of some activities and the adoption of appropriate management measures for others. For some activities, a recreation site with well-managed facilities at an appropriate distance from watercourses will effectively lower the likelihood and consequence of the risk occurring. For others the risk will be extreme and the only effective treatment is to avoid the risk altogether.

Table 5 provides some suggested management controls for specific types of recreational activities. In addition, as with any land use or activity that is located within a surface water catchment, it is imperative to have a clear understanding the effectiveness of the control measures. Monitoring and verification of control measures is a critical aspect of the management of access. Suggested monitoring mechanisms are also provided in Table 5.

One of the key problems with prohibiting or managing recreational access is the limitation associated with enforcement. Catchment areas that are sources for drinking water can cover large tracts of land, are often remote from towns and other facilities, can cover numerous types of land tenure (from private land to Crown owned with either open or limited access) and different types of environment and terrain. This means that the ability to properly monitor all activities is almost impossible, even with an army of rangers. The catchment areas supplying Sydney cover �6,000 square kilometres (Sydney Catchment Authority, 2003) with some areas so remote and inaccessible that helicopters are used to gain access.

In addition, with multiple land uses and tenures also come multiple stakeholders and subsequent conflicts in land management objectives. For example, private landowners in surface water catchments tend to not like recreational users, as the landowners can be victims of anti-social behaviour, property damage or theft. Conflicts also can occur between government agencies pursuing different management objectives. It is for this reason that policy and planning mechanisms are vital to coordinated and effective recreation management. Opportunities then arise for resource pooling such as honorary enforcement officers and jointly developed alternative areas.

Generally, management controls can only be enforced where there is an effective regulatory base, a multiple stakeholder approach to policy and planning and sufficient resources to implement the required management strategies.


3�

tabl

e 5:

Man

agem

ent

cont

rols

for

recr

eati

ona

l acc

ess

in d

rink

ing

wat

er c

atch

men

ts (

sour

ced

fro

m C

RC

for

Wat

er Q

ualit

y an

d t

reat

men

t, 20

04b)

Act

ivit

y -

So

urce

of

haza

rd/e

vent

typi

cal p

reve

ntiv

e m

easu

res1

Sug

gest

ions

for

cons

ider

atio

n 1

Mo

nito

ring

and

ver

ifica

tio

n

hum

an b

ody

ent

erin

g w

ater

- B

athi

ng,

swim

min

g, w

ashi

ng o

r ce

rem

oni

al p

urpo

ses

•R

estr

ictio

n of

site

s av

aila

ble

to s

wim

min

g/ba

thin

g•

Lim

itatio

n of

act

iviti

es a

way

from

off-

take

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

•Pr

ohib

it sw

imm

ing/

bath

ing

in a

ll w

ater

bodi

es in

ca

tchm

ent

•Pu

blic

edu

catio

n ca

mpa

ign

•R

ange

r pa

trol

s at

key

tim

es o

f ille

gal a

cces

s •

Wat

er q

ualit

y sa

mpl

ing

prog

ram

for

impa

cts

at

perm

itted

site

s an

d do

wns

trea

m; a

nd a

fter

acc

ess

proh

ibiti

on•

Rev

iew

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

edu

catio

n pr

ogra

ms

Fis

hing

(w

adin

g,

sho

relin

e, b

ait

and

non-

bait

act

ivit

ies)

•Pr

ovis

ion

of t

oile

t fa

cilit

ies

and

fish

clea

ning

are

as•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

•Is

suin

g of

per

mits

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

fish

ing

and

rela

ted

activ

ities

•Pr

ohib

it fis

hing

in s

ome

or a

ll ar

eas

of t

he c

atch

men

t or

res

ervo

ir•

Impl

emen

t a

perm

it sy

stem

for

fishi

ng in

the

ca

tchm

ent

or r

eser

voir

•Im

prov

e an

d en

cour

age

alte

rnat

ive

fishi

ng a

reas

ou

tsid

e th

e ca

tchm

ent

or r

eser

voir

•Fi

ne s

cree

ns o

n w

ater

sup

ply

dive

rsio

ns s

truc

ture

s

•A

udit

of p

erm

it co

nditi

ons

com

plia

nce

by u

sers

–

freq

uenc

y de

pend

ing

on s

easo

n •

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut fi

shin

g se

ason

•

Wat

er q

ualit

y sa

mpl

ing

prog

ram

for

impa

cts

at

perm

itted

site

s an

d do

wns

trea

m; a

nd a

fter

acc

ess

proh

ibiti

on•

Clo

sure

of p

erm

it sy

stem

if n

on c

ompl

ianc

e of

be

havi

our

and

prov

en w

ater

qua

lity

impa

cts

•M

onito

r us

e pa

tter

ns o

f alte

rnat

ive

area

s

No

n-po

wer

bo

atin

g•

Lim

itatio

n of

act

iviti

es t

o ar

eas

away

from

offt

akes

•N

o bo

at la

unch

ing

poin

ts w

ithin

cat

chm

ents

•La

unch

ing

poin

ts d

ista

nt t

o of

ftak

es a

nd s

eale

d•

Man

agem

ent

of s

ewag

e re

quir

ed

•R

estr

ictio

n on

typ

es o

f boa

ts u

sed

•R

ange

r pa

trol

s

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

boa

ting

incl

udin

g oc

curr

ence

of

spill

s an

d m

anag

emen

t of

sew

age

•R

estr

ict

boat

ing

in s

ome

area

s (ie

. aw

ay fr

om s

pillw

ay

and

offt

akes

)•

Boat

ing

club

or

perm

it sy

stem

•C

onst

ruct

clu

bhou

se o

utsi

de o

f cat

chm

ent

•Se

aled

acc

ess

road

and

laun

chin

g po

int

•D

ay a

cces

s on

ly•

Subs

idis

e de

velo

pmen

t of

alte

rnat

ive

area

s

•A

udit

of p

erm

it co

nditi

ons

com

plia

nce

by u

sers

–

freq

uenc

y de

pend

ing

on s

easo

n.

•R

ange

r pa

trol

s th

roug

hout

yea

r at

spe

cific

use

site

s •

Wat

er q

ualit

y sa

mpl

ing

prog

ram

for

impa

cts

at

perm

itted

site

s an

d do

wns

trea

m; a

nd a

fter

acc

ess

proh

ibiti

on•

Clo

sure

if b

ehav

iour

non

com

plia

nt w

ith p

erm

it co

nditi

ons

and

prov

en w

ater

qua

lity

impa

cts

•M

onito

r us

e pa

tter

ns o

f alte

rnat

ive

area

s

Pow

er b

oat

ing

•Li

mita

tion

of a

ctiv

ities

to

area

s aw

ay fr

om o

fftak

es•

No

boat

laun

chin

g po

ints

with

in c

atch

men

ts•

Laun

chin

g po

ints

dis

tant

to

offt

akes

and

sea

led

•M

anag

emen

t of

sew

age

requ

ired

•R

estr

ictio

n on

typ

es o

f boa

ts u

sed

•R

ange

r pa

trol

s

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

boa

ting

incl

udin

g oc

curr

ence

of

spill

s an

d m

anag

emen

t of

sew

age

•Pr

ohib

it m

otor

ised

boa

ts t

o re

duce

ris

k of

pet

role

um

spill

•R

estr

ict

boat

ing

in s

ome

area

s (ie

. aw

ay fr

om s

pillw

ay

and

offt

akes

)•

Boat

ing

club

or

perm

it sy

stem

•C

onst

ruct

clu

bhou

se o

utsi

de o

f cat

chm

ent

•Se

aled

acc

ess

road

and

laun

chin

g po

int

•D

ay a

cces

s on

ly•

Subs

idis

e de

velo

pmen

t of

alte

rnat

ive

area

s

•A

udit

of p

erm

it co

nditi

ons

com

plia

nce

by u

sers

–

freq

uenc

y de

pend

ing

on s

easo

n•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut y

ear

at s

peci

fic u

se s

ites

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

; and

aft

er a

cces

s pr

ohib

ition

•C

losu

re if

beh

avio

ur n

on c

ompl

iant

with

per

mit

cond

ition

s an

d pr

oven

wat

er q

ualit

y im

pact

s•

Mon

itor

use

patt

erns

of a

ltern

ativ

e ar

eas

Cam

ping

•D

esig

nate

d ca

mpi

ng a

reas

loca

ted

dow

nstr

eam

of

wat

er s

uppl

y di

vers

ion

poin

t an

d aw

ay fr

om

wat

erco

urse

s•

Prov

isio

n of

pit,

com

post

or

seal

ed t

oile

ts a

nd lo

cate

d do

wns

trea

m o

r fa

r aw

ay fr

om r

eser

voir

offt

akes

or

wat

erco

urse

s•

Was

te in

/was

te o

ut o

r bi

ns p

rovi

ded

•Is

suin

g of

per

mits

•Pr

ohib

ition

of w

ood

fires

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

cam

ping

act

iviti

es in

cat

chm

ent

•K

eep

cam

psite

s at

leas

t 30

0m a

way

from

wat

erco

urse

s an

d re

serv

oir,

or d

owns

trea

m o

f wat

er s

uppl

y di

vers

ion

poin

t•

Educ

atio

n ca

mpa

ign

on c

atch

men

t pr

otec

tion

(sig

nage

, br

iefin

gs, r

ange

r ad

vice

and

pam

phle

ts)

•Pe

rmit

syst

em fo

r ca

mpe

rs-

no fi

res

•C

ampi

ng a

vaila

ble

only

at

dry

times

of y

ear

•R

evie

w e

ffect

iven

ess

of e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut c

atch

men

t an

d ye

ar•

Aud

it of

per

mit

cond

ition

s co

mpl

ianc

e by

use

rs

– fr

eque

ncy

depe

ndin

g on

sea

son

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

(Foo

tnot

es)�

W

here

a r

estr

icte

d ar

ea e

xist

s to

pro

tect

wat

er q

ualit

y (e

g. R

eser

voir

Pro

tect

ion

Zon

e), t

hen

this

is c

onsi

dere

d th

e m

inim

um d

ista

nce

to b

e ad

here

d to

.


32

Act

ivit

y -

So

urce

of

haza

rd/e

vent

typi

cal p

reve

ntiv

e m

easu

res1

Sug

gest

ions

for

cons

ider

atio

n 1

Mo

nito

ring

and

ver

ifica

tio

n

Pic

nick

ing

•Pr

ovis

ion

of a

dequ

ate

was

te fa

cilit

ies

•Li

mita

tion

of a

ctiv

ities

aw

ay fr

om w

ater

cour

ses

•Sh

ootin

g an

d ba

iting

of f

eral

ani

mal

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

•D

ay a

cces

s on

ly•

Kee

p pi

cnic

site

s aw

ay fr

om w

ater

cour

ses

and

rese

rvoi

rs, a

nd d

owns

trea

m o

f offt

akes

•Se

lect

site

s w

here

cat

ch d

rain

s an

d fe

nces

pre

vent

ac

cess

to

rese

rvoi

r

•R

ange

r pa

trol

s th

roug

hout

cat

chm

ent

and

year

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

Bus

hwal

king

Ori

ente

erin

gR

ogai

ning

•D

esig

nate

d tr

acks

or

cons

truc

ted

trai

ls•

Prov

isio

n of

pit,

com

post

or

seal

ed t

oile

ts a

nd lo

cate

d do

wns

trea

m o

r fa

r aw

ay fr

om r

eser

voir

offt

akes

or

wat

erco

urse

s•

Was

te in

/was

te o

ut o

r bi

ns p

rovi

ded

•Is

suin

g of

per

mits

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

bus

hwal

king

act

iviti

es in

ca

tchm

ent

•K

eep

trai

ls a

t le

ast

300m

aw

ay fr

om w

ater

cour

ses

and

rese

rvoi

rs•

Mem

oran

dum

of U

nder

stan

ding

with

clu

bs•

Trai

ls s

houl

d cr

oss

stre

ams

only

at

brid

ges

or c

ulve

rts

•Ed

ucat

ion

cam

paig

n on

cat

chm

ent

prot

ectio

n (s

igna

ge,

brie

fings

, ran

ger

advi

ce a

nd p

amph

lets

)•

Day

wal

ks o

nly

polic

y

•R

evie

w e

ffect

iven

ess

of e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut c

atch

men

t an

d ye

ar•

Aud

it of

per

mit

cond

ition

s co

mpl

ianc

e by

use

rs

– fr

eque

ncy

depe

ndin

g on

sea

son

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

Mo

unta

in b

ikin

g•

Des

igna

ted

trac

ks o

r co

nstr

ucte

d tr

ails

•Pr

ovis

ion

of p

it, c

ompo

st o

r se

aled

toi

lets

and

loca

ted

dow

nstr

eam

or

far

away

from

res

ervo

ir o

fftak

es o

r w

ater

cour

ses

•W

aste

in/w

aste

out

or

bins

pro

vide

d•

Issu

ing

of p

erm

its

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

mou

ntai

n bi

king

act

iviti

es in

ca

tchm

ent

•K

eep

trai

ls a

t le

ast

300m

aw

ay fr

om w

ater

cour

ses

and

rese

rvoi

rs•

Mem

oran

dum

of U

nder

stan

ding

with

clu

bs –

Dev

elop

, im

plem

ent

and

revi

ew a

n en

viro

nmen

tal m

anag

emen

t pl

an a

ddre

ssin

g w

ater

qua

lity

prot

ectio

n is

sues

•Tr

ails

sho

uld

cros

s st

ream

s on

ly a

t br

idge

s or

cul

vert

s•

Educ

atio

n ca

mpa

ign

on c

atch

men

t pr

otec

tion

(sig

nage

, br

iefin

gs, r

ange

r ad

vice

and

pam

phle

ts)

•D

ay a

cces

s on

ly p

olic

y

•R

evie

w e

ffect

iven

ess

of e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut c

atch

men

t an

d ye

ar•

Aud

it of

per

mit

cond

ition

s co

mpl

ianc

e by

use

rs

– fr

eque

ncy

depe

ndin

g on

sea

son

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

ho

rser

idin

g•

Des

igna

ted

trac

ks o

r co

nstr

ucte

d tr

ails

•Pr

ovis

ion

of p

it, c

ompo

st o

r se

aled

toi

lets

and

loca

ted

dow

nstr

eam

or

far

away

from

res

ervo

ir o

fftak

es o

r w

ater

cour

ses

•W

aste

in w

aste

out

or

bins

pro

vide

d•

Issu

ing

of p

erm

its

•R

evie

w in

form

atio

n on

hor

seri

ding

act

iviti

es in

ca

tchm

ent

•K

eep

trai

ls a

t le

ast

300m

aw

ay fr

om w

ater

cour

ses

and

rese

rvoi

rs•

Mem

oran

dum

of U

nder

stan

ding

with

clu

bs -

Dev

elop

an

d re

view

an

envi

ronm

enta

l man

agem

ent

plan

ad

dres

sing

wat

er q

ualit

y pr

otec

tion

issu

es•

Trai

ls s

houl

d cr

oss

stre

ams

only

at

brid

ges

or c

ulve

rts

•Ed

ucat

ion

cam

paig

n on

cat

chm

ent

prot

ectio

n (s

igna

ge,

brie

fings

, ran

ger

advi

ce a

nd p

amph

lets

)•

Day

acc

ess

only

pol

icy

•R

evie

w e

ffect

iven

ess

of e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut c

atch

men

t an

d ye

ar•

Aud

it of

per

mit

cond

ition

s co

mpl

ianc

e by

use

rs

– fr

eque

ncy

depe

ndin

g on

sea

son

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

veh

icul

ar a

cces

s –

Off

ro

ad, t

rail

bike

s, r

ally

ev

ents

•A

ltern

ativ

e su

pply

dur

ing

maj

or r

ally

/4W

D e

vent

s•

Prov

isio

n of

spe

cific

ally

des

igne

d tr

acks

(aw

ay fr

om

wat

erco

urse

s) w

ith g

rave

l cov

er t

o pr

even

t er

osio

n•

Prev

entiv

e m

easu

res

over

ref

uelli

ng a

reas

(de

sign

ated

ar

eas

with

spi

ll co

ntai

nmen

t, aw

ay fr

om w

ater

)•

Res

tric

t ac

cess

to

com

petin

g ve

hicl

es a

nd s

uppo

rt

team

s

•R

evie

w o

ccur

renc

e of

rec

reat

iona

l veh

icle

s in

ca

tchm

ent

•R

estr

ict

or p

rohi

bit

recr

eatio

nal v

ehic

ular

acc

ess

•D

evel

op a

nd r

evie

w a

n en

viro

nmen

tal m

anag

emen

t pl

an fo

r ea

ch e

vent

•N

o pr

actic

e ev

ents

to

be h

eld

in c

atch

men

t•

No

vehi

cle

mai

nten

ance

in c

atch

men

t•

Roa

d m

aint

enan

ce a

nd r

efue

lling

to

be c

arri

ed o

ut

imm

edia

tely

aft

er a

n ev

ent

•Pe

rmit

even

ts in

dri

er t

imes

of t

he y

ear

•M

emor

andu

m o

f Und

erst

andi

ng w

ith o

rgan

iser

s an

d cl

ubs

•W

ater

qua

lity

sam

plin

g pr

ogra

m fo

r im

pact

s at

pe

rmitt

ed s

ites

and

dow

nstr

eam

•R

evie

w e

ffect

iven

ess

of e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s•

Ran

ger

patr

ols

thro

ugho

ut c

atch

men

t an

d ye

ar,

espe

cial

ly d

urin

g ev

ents

•A

udit

of p

erm

it co

nditi

ons

com

plia

nce

by u

sers

–

freq

uenc

y de

pend

ing

on s

easo

n


33

7.3 BeNeFit COSt ANAlySiS

Selecting the most appropriate risk treatment option involves balancing the costs of implementing each option against the benefits derived from it. It is important that all direct and indirect costs and benefits, tangible or intangible, are considered in the assessment (AS/NZS 4360, 2004). There are a limited number of benefit cost analyses (BCAs) that relate to recreational access to catchments and water storages. Some of these include: Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004), Hassall and Associates (�998), Dwyer (�99�) and Longworth and Mackenzie Pty Ltd (�986). However, more general studies of the costs and benefits of access to recreational areas eg. national parks can also be of use (see Australian Water Technologies, 2002).

Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) note that the key questions that need to be answered when undertaking a BCA of recreational access include:

�. What are the total benefits of recreational access in drinking water catchments and how can they be quantified?

2. Who benefits from increasing access?3. Who benefits from decreasing access? 4. What are the total environmental, social and

financial costs likely to be imposed and how can they be quantified?

5. Who will bear the costs?

As an example, the Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) study identified the following benefits and costs in a BCA of shoreline fishing at Tarago Reservoir:

Benefits: • Social benefits to fishers from using the reservoir

instead of alternative sites.• Reduction in environmental costs associated with less

travelling time ie. less greenhouse gas emissions.

Costs: • Social and financial costs associated with raw water

contamination eg. impact on householders and businesses of boil water notices; operational costs of flushing contaminated water from supply system; health costs and lost productivity due to incapacity or potentially death.

• Environmental degradation eg. loss of ecosystem integrity, algal blooms, bushfire risks.

• Financial costs associated with managing recreational activity eg additional infrastructure and facilities and visitor management costs.

Hassall and Associates (�998) evaluated the economic and financial costs of the regulations used to control access to Sydney’s drinking water catchments and storages. The study considered the impacts of access on water quality, ecological integrity and educational, scientific and cultural values. It was concluded that it would not be possible to guarantee the protection of stored water quality and the maintenance of ecological integrity and other values in the catchments and storages in the absence of the regulation. In addition, the stated objectives of the regulation could not be met under the several other options that involved partial relaxation of access provisions.

Some of the key issues raised in the various BCAs undertaken to date include:

• Difficulties in assigning a value to many of the costs and benefits, particularly the costs of environmental degradation and intangible benefits related to social and cultural values.

• Difficulties in predicting and quantifying the current and future consequences of a reduction in water quality.

• A lack of accurate and location specific data on which to base analyses.

• Problems of obtaining and sustaining a balance between multiple and often conflicting uses of catchments and storages.

Many of the difficulties faced in undertaking a BCA of recreational access arise from broader issues associated with the complexity of catchment processes and difficulties in establishing direct cause-effect relationships between particular activities or actions on drinking water quality and public health, both now and for future generations.


34

This paper has aimed to outline the key outcomes of the national workshop held in February 2004, which initiated the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment project titled ‘Understanding the impacts of recreational access to drinking water catchments and storages’. The genesis of the project was increased concern by Australian water utilities about the water quality risks associated with current and future recreational access demands.

The workshop aimed to gather a comprehensive understanding of the current situation for the Australian water industry, as well as determine an appropriate way ahead for this project. In line with the current best-practice approach to managing risks in drinking water catchments, it is recommended that a risk management process be used as a decision making tool for current and future access management. This approach provides a transparent, rigorous and systematic means of assessing potential risks to water quality from recreational access, taking into account the limitations of scientific certainty.

It is recognised that further work is needed to enhance the existing knowledge base on this issue. While the risk management process is an appropriate decision making framework for recreational access in drinking water catchments and storages, it could be greatly enhanced by further work to fill existing gaps in knowledge. A thorough risk management process requires conceptual models, quantitative data on impacts, knowledge about the effectiveness of preventive measures, and in-depth knowledge of system and catchment/storage condition. As most of the existing literature is based on overseas experience, establishing Australian-based case studies would be beneficial in better understanding the direct and indirect impacts of access on water quality, including the social, economic and environmental costs and benefits of providing recreational access. The project has identified existing information as well as where key knowledge gaps exist. Key knowledge gaps are summarised and presented in Appendix 6. The options for addressing these knowledge gaps include:

• Paired catchment study – impacted versus unimpacted catchments for land based recreation.

• Benefit cost analyses of recreational activities, including measures and quantification of benefits and costs, costs of implementing ADWG and assessment of positive impacts to the community from recreational activities.

• Transport studies from source to catchment to stream to storage to treatment plant, integrating impacts data into transport studies to predict water quality at treatment plants.

• Assessment of how control measures work and their effectiveness – distance, detention, treatment options and critical limits.

• Legal issues associated with recreation in catchments and storages.

• Best practice for stakeholder involvement, management of recreational activities and recreationalists’ behaviour.

This paper is a significant step towards the implementation of the Framework for Management of Drinking Water Quality (ADWG 2004) in the drinking water catchments. It is hoped that as new issues arise and more data becomes available, it can be integrated in the current knowledge base, thus enabling water supply authorities across Australia to make more informed decisions about recreational access in drinking water catchments and storages.

8 CONCluSiON


35

The authors of this report would like to thank the following contributors:

Bruce Whitehill, Sydney Catchment AuthorityMelita Stevens, Melbourne WaterClairly Lance, Water CorporationMark O’Donohue, South East Queensland WaterDeclan Page, Power and Water Corporation, Northern TerritoryGlyn Ashman, South Australia WaterPat Feehan, Goulburn Murray WaterTony Veal, University of Technology, SydneyThorsten Mosisch, Healthy Waters ProgramKatrina Charles, University of NSW

As well as all those who attended the workshop outlined in Appendix �.

9 ACkNOWleDgeMeNtS


36

Advisory Committee for the Purity of Water (�977) A Study of Catchments and Recreation in Western Australia. Compiled for the Advisory Committee for the Purity of Water.

American Water Works Association (�97�) Statements of Policy on Public Water Supply Matters – Recreational Use of Domestic Water Supply Reservoirs. Extract from website www.awwa.org.

Anderson M, Stewart MH, Yates MV and Gerba CP (�998) Modeling the Impact of Body-Contact Recreation on Pathogen Concentrations in a Source Drinking Water Reservoir. Water Research 32(��) 3293-3306.

AS/NZS 4360 (2004) Risk Management Standard. Standards Australia, Sydney & Standards New Zealand, Wellington.

Australian Water Technologies (2002) Review of Current Knowledge of the Impacts of Access to Water Supply Catchments and Storages. Prepared for Sydney Catchment Authority, March 2002.

Barry SJ, Atwill ER, Tate KW, Koopman TS, Cullor J and Huff T (�998) Developing and Implementing a HACCP-Based Programme to Control Cryptosporidium and Other Waterborne Pathogens in the Alameda Creek Watershed: Case Study. American Water Works Association Annual Conference, 21-25 June 1998, Dallas, Texas Water Resources Vol. B: 57-69.

Barwick RS, Levy DA, Craun GF, Beach MJ and Calderon RL (2000) Surveillance for Water Bourne Disease Outbreaks – United States �997-�998. Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 49(SS04) �:37.

Brown JF and Wagner RE (�990) PCB movement, dechlorination, and detoxication in the Acushnet Estuary. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 9:�2�5-�233.

Buckley RC (�994) A framework for ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research 2�:66�-665.

Calais SS and Kilpatrick JB (�986) Impact of trampling on natural ecosystems in the Cradle-Mountain-Lake St. Clair National Park. In Sun D and Walsh D (�998) Review of Studies on Environmental Impacts of Recreation and Tourism in Australia. Journal of Environmental Management 53:323-38.

Cilimburg A, Monz C and Kehoe S (2000) Wildlife Recreation and Human Waste: A Review of Problems, Practices and Concerns. Environmental Management 25(6):587-598.

Cole DN (�992) Modelling Wilderness Campsites: Factors That Influence Amount of Impact. Environmental Management �6(2):255-264.

CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (2004a) Pathogen movement and survival in catchments, groundwaters and raw water storages, CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, South Australia.

CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (2004b) A Guide to Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment for Drinking Water Supplies, Research Report ��, CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, South Australia.

CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (in preparation) Risk Management Manual for Drinking Water Catchments and Sources, CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, South Australia.

Davies JB (�978) Motorised Recreation Vehicle (Off-road Vehicles) Impact on the Tasmanian Environment. Tasmanian Department of the Environment, Hobart.

Davies CM, Ferguson CM, Kaucner C, Krogh M, Deere DA and Ashbolt NJ (2004) Dispersion and Transport of Cryptosporidium Oocysts from Faecal Pats under Simulated Rainfall Events. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 70(2):��5�-��59.

Deere D (2004) Implementation of a HACCP approach to Catchment Management. in HACCP in Water Utilities Conference, National Sanitation Foundation and World Health Organization, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 4-5 May 2004.

Deere D and Davison A (2005) The Ps and Qs of Risk Assessment. Water March 2005:38-42.

Department of Resources and Energy and Australian Water Resources Council (�987) Desirable Guidelines for the Recreational Use of Urban Water Storages and Their Catchments. Water Management Series No. 8. Prepared for the workshop on recreational use of urban water storages and their environs, Griffith University, Brisbane 3-5 December �984.

Dwyer L (�99�) Cost Benefit Analysis of Drinking Water Quality. Report prepared for Sydney Water Board.

Ecos Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd and Water Futures (2004) Assessment of Potential Recreational Use (Shoreline Fishing) of Tarago Reservoir. Report prepared for Victorian Department of Human Services, March 2004.

Edzwald JK and Kelley MB (�998) Control of Cryptosporidium - from reservoirs to clarifiers to filter. Water Science Technology 37(2):�-8.

Fayer R (�997) Cryptosporidium and Cryptosporidiosis, CRC Press, Boca Raton �997.

Forsyth JRL (�985) Report on Inquiry into Recreation at Sugarloaf Reservoir. Prepared for the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, December �985.

Gilmour AJ and Scandol JP (�997) Review of Access to the Special Areas with an Emphasis on the Warragamba Special Areas – Workshop Report and Recommendations. Prepared by Macquarie Research Ltd for Sydney Water Corporation and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, August �997.

10 ReFeReNCeS


37

Hardie, M (�993) Measuring bushwalking and camping impacts – Mt Bogong, Victoria. Occasional Paper Series NPPL No. 9, National Parks and Public Land Division Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

Hassall and Associates (�998) Economic and Financial Evaluation – Final Working Paper Sydney Water Corporation Limited (Catchment Management) Regulation �995 Prepared for Sydney Water Corporation, February �998.

Hawes M (�992) Draft Walking Track Management Strategy for the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. In Sun D and Walsh D (�998) Review of Studies on Environmental Impacts of Recreation and Tourism in Australia. Journal of Environmental Management53:323-38.

Hewitt CN and Rashed MB (�992) Removal rates of selected pollutants in the runoff waters from a major rural highway. Water Research 26(3):3��-3�9.

Keirle I (2002) Should Access to the Coastal Lands of Wales be Developed Through a Voluntary or Statutory Approach? A Discussion. Land Use Policy �9:�77-�85.

Kennicutt MC, Wade TL and Presley BJ (�992) Assessment of Sediment Contamination in Casco Bay. Casco Bay Estuary Project, Texas A&M University.

King JG and Mace AC (�974) Effects of Recreation on Water Quality. Journal of Wat. Poll. Contr. Fed.46:2453-9.

Kuss FR and Hall CN (�99�) Ground Flora Trampling Studies: Five Years after Closure. Environmental Management �5:7�5-727.

Landsberg J, Logan B and Shorthouse D (200�) Horse Riding in Urban Conservation Areas: Reviewing Scientific Evidence to Guide Management. Ecological Management and Restoration 2(�):36-36.

Liddle MJ (�988) Recreation and the Environment: the Ecology of Recreation Impacts. Griffith University, Brisbane.

Longworth and Mackenzie Pty. Ltd. (�986) Survey of Existing and Potential Recreational Uses of the Water Board’s Catchments and Storages. Prepared for Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board. Kuring-Gai Centre for Leisure and Tourism Studies.

Machiwa JF (�992) Anthropogenic pollution in the Dar-es-Salaam Harbour area, Tanzania. Marine Pollution Bulletin 20: 469-472.

MacKenzie WR, Hoxie NJ, Procter ME, Gradus MS, Blair KA, Peterson DE, Kazmierczak JJ, Addiss DG, Fox KR, Rose JBand Davis JP (�994). A massive outbreak in Milwaukee of Cryptosporidium infection transmitted through the public water supply. New England Journal of Medicine 33�:�6�-�67.

Manning RE, Lawson S, Newman P, Budruk M, Valliere W, Laven D and Bacon, J (2004) Visitor perceptions of recreation-related resources impacts in Buckley, R (2004) Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism, Cabi Publishing.

Marr LC, Kirchstetter TW, Harley, RA, Miguel AH, Hering SV and Hammond KS (�999) Characterization of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Motor Vehicle Fuels and Exhaust Emissions. Environmental Science and Technology 33:309� –3099.

Martinick and Associates (�995) A Review of Water-based Recreation in Western Australia: Summary report and rindings of a study undertaken by consultants for the Western Australian Water Resources Council and Ministry of Sport and Recreation Working Group.

McClellan, P (�998) The Sydney Water Inquiry Final report Volume � – Executive Summary Introduction, Recommendations and Actions. New South Wales Premiers Department, December �998.

Mee LD and Fowler SW (�99�) Organotins biocides in the marine environment: a managed transient? Editorial Mar. Environ. Res. 32:89-��.

Metropolitan District Committee Division of Watershed Management (2003) Public Access Plan – Recreational Activities and Water Supply Compatibility. Extract from website www.mass.gov/dcr/.

Miller R, Whitehill B and Deere D (2004) A national approach to risk assessment in drinking water catchments in Australia. In Conference proceedings IWA Marrakech.

Moon C, Lee Y and Yoon T (�994) Variation of trace Cu, Pb and Zn in sediment and water of an urban stream resulting from domestic effluents. Water Research 28(4):985-99�.

Mosisch T and Arthington AH (�998) The impacts of power boating and water skiing on lakes and reservoirs. Lakes and Reservoirs: Research and Management 3:�-�7.

Muench R (200�) Southern Darling Range – Regional Recreation Study. Prepared for Department of Conservation and Land Management, Water Corporation and Water and Rivers Commission.

National Health and Medical Research Council and Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council (2004) Australian Drinking Water Guidelines National Water Quality Management Strategy, Australia.

Nelson E (�994) Polluting for Pleasure. In Motorised Watercraft Environmental Assessment, �997, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency.

O’Connor D (2002) Report of the Walkerton Inquiry – The events of May 2002 and Related Issues. Queens Printer for Ontario.


38

Ogura K, Machihara T and Takada H (�990) Diagenesis of biomarkers in Biwa Lake sediments over � million years. Organic Geochemistry �6:805-8�3.

Pearce HG and Eaton JW (�983) Effects of Recreational Boating on Freshwater Ecosystems – an Annotated Bibliography. In Mosisch T and Arthington AH (�998) The Impacts of Power Boating and Water Skiing on lakes and Reservoirs. Lakes and Reservoirs: Research and Management 3:�-�7.

Pettibone GW, Irvine KN and Monahan KM (�996) Impact of a ship passage on bacteria levels and suspended sediment characteristics in the Buffalo River, New York. Water Research 30(�0):25�7-252�.

Purity of Water Committee (�977) A study of catchments and recreation in Western Australia. Prepared for the Advisory Committee on Purity of Water.

Rhoads B and Cahill R (�999) Geomorphological assessment of sediment contamination in an urban stream system. Applied Geochemistry �4:459-483.

Rogge WF, Hildemann LM, Mazurek MA, Cass GR and Simoneit BR (�993) Sources of fine organic aerosol 3. Road dust, tire debris and organometallic brake lining dust: Roads as sources and sinks. Environmental Science and Technology 27:�892–�904.

Sydney Catchment Authority and NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (200�) Special Areas Strategic Plan of Management Sydney Catchment Authority, Penrith.

Sydney Catchment Authority (2003) Annual Report 2002-03, Sydney Catchment Authority, Penrith.

Sinclair, Knight and Merz Pty. Ltd. (200�) Literature review of Public Access to Water Supply Reservoirs for Recreation. Report for SA Water.

Soller J, Olivieri A, Eisenberg J, Spear R and Tchobanoglous G (2003) Discussion: Predicted Public Health Consequences of Body-Contact Recreation on a Potable Water Reservoir. Journal AWWA 95:1 January 2003.

State Pollution Control Commission NSW (�979) Off-road Vehicles Inquiry: Report and Recommendations of the Inquiry into Off-road Use of Vehicles for Recreational Purposes. 23 November �979.

Stewart M, Yates M, Anderson M, Gerba C, DeLeon R and Wolfe R (�997) Modelling the impact of body-contact recreation on Cryptosporidium levels in a drinking water reservoir. In Fricker CR, Clancy JL and Rochelle PA (eds) 1997 International Symposium on Water-borne Cryptosporidium Proceedings. American Water Works Association, Denver, pp �37-�46.

Stewart M, Yates M, Anderson M, Gerba C, Rose J, DeLeon R and Wolfe R (2002) Predicted Public Health Consequences of Body-Contact Recreation on a Potable Water Reservoir. Journal AWAA 94:5, May 2002.

Sun D and Liddle MJ (�99�) Field occurrence, recovery, and simulated trampling resistance and recovery of two grasses. Biological Conservation 57(2):�87-203.

Sun D and Liddle MJ (�993) A Survey of Trampling Effects on Vegetation and Soil in Eight Tropical and Subtropical Sites. Environmental Management �7(4):497-5�0.

Sun D and Walsh D (�998) Review of Studies on Environmental Impacts of Recreation and Tourism in Australia. Journal of Environmental Management 53:323-338.

Thyer NC (�98�) Trampling Effects and Management Strategy in a Dry Sclerophyll Forest of South-East Queensland. M.Sc. Thesis, Griffith University, Brisbane.

UK Group of Experts (�990) Report of the Group of Experts in Cryptosporidium in Water Supplies, (Series Ed.: Badenoch, J.), London.

UK Group of Experts (�995) Second Report of the Group of Experts in Cryptosporidium in Water Supplies (Series Ed.: Badenoch, J.), London.

US EPA (�999) EPA Guidance Manual: Uncovered Finished Water Reservoirs, Sources of Contamination and Associated Control Measures. April �999.

Warnken W and Buckley R (2004) Instream bacteria as a low-threshold management indicator of tourist impacts in conservation reserves. In Buckley, R (2004) Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism, Cabi Publishing.

Water and Rivers Commission (2003) Policy and Guidelines for Recreation within Public Drinking Water Source Areas on Crown Land, Water and Rivers Commission, Statewide Policy No.�3.

Water Futures (2004) Guide to preparing risk management plans consistent with the Safe Drinking Water Act 2003 (Vic) for Water Storage Managers. �st Edition. Prepared for Goulburn Murray Water, Southern Rural Water and Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water.

Whinam J, Cannell EJ, Kilpatrick JB and Comfort M (�994) Studies on the potential impact of recreational horse riding on some alpine environments of the Central Plateau, Tasmania. Journal of Environmental Management, 40:�03-��7.

Whinam J and Comfort M (�996) The Impact of Commercial Horse Riding on Sub-Alpine Environments at Cradle Mountain, Tasmania, Australia. Journal of Environmental Management, 47:6�-70.

World Health Organisation (2004) Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, Third Edition.


39

Workshop participants: 23-25 February 2004State Participant Organisation

QlD Mark O’Donohue SEQ Water Corporation

Graham Webb Queensland EPA

Thorsten Mosisch Healthy Waterways Program

NSW Daniel Deere CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

Rachael Miller CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

Belinda Bennett Sydney Catchment Authority

Tony Paull Sydney Catchment Authority

Bob Banens Sydney Catchment Authority

Greg Cawston Sydney Water Corporation

Katrina Charles University of New South Wales

Tony Veal University of Technology Sydney

David Roser University of New South Wales

Annette Davison Water Futures

Paul Byleveld NSW Health

Leslie Brodlo NSW Health

Nt Declan Page Power and Water Corporation

SA Dennis Steffensen CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

Glyn Ashman SA Water

Monique Blason SA Water

David Cunliffe SA Department of Human Services

WA Graeme Hughes Water Corporation

Clairly Lance Water Corporation

Stephen Watson Department of Environment

Tony Laws Department of Environment

viC Melita Stevens Melbourne Water

Pat Feehan Goulburn-Murray Water

David Shier Goulburn Murray Water

Jan Bowman Victoria Department of Human Services

APPeNDix 1


40

APPeNDix 2

types of recreational activity in drinking water catchments and the access and infrastructure requirements to support the activity

types of access Access infrastructure legend of facilities

Land –based recreation and access

Walking �. 2. 3. 4. �. Pathways/non vehicle access routes in catchment2. Toilets3. Rubbish bins4. Signage5. Road access, car parking6. Covered areas7. BBQ’s8. Cleared areas9. Spectator areas�0. Beached areas��. Ladders�2. Changing rooms�3. Running water�4. Fish cleaning�5. Boat ramps�6. Access points to waterbody and/or waterways

Orienteering/Rogaining �. 2. 3. 4.

Camping �. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. �3.

Picnicking �. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Mountain biking 2. 3. 4. 5.

Snow skiing �. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Horse riding �. 2. 3. 4.

Animal walking (dogs, domestic animals) �. 2. 3. 4.

Motor-bike riding �. 2. 3. 4.

4wheel driving 2. 3. 4. 5. 8.

Rally driving 2. 3. 4. 5. 8. 9.

Bird watching �. 2. 3. 4.

Wood collection �. 4.

Sun bathing �. 2. 3. 4. 8.

Water-based recreation and access

Swimming �. 2. 4. 6. �0. ��. �2. �3. �6.

Bathing and washing �. 2. 4. 6. �0. ��. �2. �3. �6.

Fishing (bait and non-bait) from banks, wading and from boats

�. 2. 3. 4. 5. �4. �5. �6.

Boating – powered (all types) �. 2. 3. 4. 5. �5. �6.

Boating – non-powered (sailing, canoeing, rafting) �. 2. 3. 4. 5. �5. �6.

Para sailing �. 2. 3. 4. 5. �5. �6.

Water skiing �. 2. 3. 4. 5. �5. �6.

Diving (scuba-aqua) �. 2. 3. 4. 5. �5. �6


4�

APPeNDix 3

tabl

e A

: W

ater

-bas

ed r

ecre

atio

nal a

cces

s in

Met

ropo

litan

so

urce

s o

pera

ted

by s

om

e A

ustr

alia

n w

ater

uti

litie

s.

City

So

urce

s w

ith

appr

oved

wat

er-b

ased

rec

reat

ion

Bac

kgro

und

to w

hy a

cces

s is

per

mit

ted

Fish

ing

Pass

ive

boat

ing

Pow

er b

oatin

gSw

imm

ing

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

Pert

h3

33

3O

ne s

ourc

e an

d it

is a

pum

pbac

k.

Dar

win

33

33

One

sou

rce

and

it is

for

emer

genc

y ba

ckup

pur

pose

s.

Ade

laid

e3

33

3Tr

ial a

cces

s fo

r lim

ited

fishi

ng a

cces

s at

one

loca

tion

Wat

er t

reat

men

t is

chl

orin

atio

n, fi

ltrat

ion,

ultr

a vi

olet

, cop

per

sulp

hate

dos

ing

in

som

e m

etro

polit

an r

eser

voir

s an

d de

stra

tifica

tion

usin

g ae

rato

rs.

Mel

bour

ne

33

33

Onl

y on

e M

elbo

urne

Wat

er r

eser

voir

is o

pen

to a

ny fo

rm o

f rec

reat

ion,

Sug

arlo

af

Res

ervo

ir, w

hich

is

an o

ff-st

ream

sto

rage

for

wat

er p

umpe

d fr

om t

he Y

arra

R

iver

. The

cat

chm

ent

for

the

Yarr

a R

iver

is

open

and

sup

port

s m

any

diffe

rent

ag

ricu

ltura

l ind

ustr

ies.

Rec

reat

ion

that

is a

llow

ed o

n Su

garl

oaf R

eser

voir

is in

the

form

of s

hore

-bas

ed fi

shin

g (in

res

tric

ted

area

s) a

nd s

ailin

g th

roug

h m

embe

rshi

p at

the

Suga

rloa

f Sai

ling

Clu

b. S

ailin

g is

in r

estr

icte

d ar

eas.

Som

e w

alki

ng tr

acks

are

w

ithin

the

cat

chm

ent

of t

he r

eser

voir

whi

ch is

pro

tect

ed b

y a

catc

h dr

ain.

Wat

er

trea

tmen

t is

filtr

atio

n, c

hlor

inat

ion

and

fluor

idat

ion.

Sydn

ey

33

33

Fish

ing

and

pass

ive

boat

ing

perm

itted

on

rese

rve

sour

ces.

All

sour

ces

have

wat

er

trea

tmen

t inv

olvi

ng c

onta

ct fi

ltrat

ion

(che

mic

al c

oagu

latio

n an

d gr

anul

ar m

ediu

m

filtr

atio

n) a

nd c

hlor

inat

ion.

Bris

bane

33

33

Sour

ces

are

larg

e (�

,�00

,000

ML)

and

hav

e w

ater

tre

atm

ent

invo

lvin

g fil

trat

ion

and

chlo

rina

tion.

The

re is

als

o a

60km

str

etch

of r

iver

bef

ore

raw

wat

er e

nter

s th

e tr

eatm

ent

plan

t. M

ost

acce

ss o

ccur

s fr

om la

nd n

ot o

wne

d by

the

util

ity.


42

tabl

e B

: Wat

er-b

ased

rec

reat

iona

l acc

ess

in C

oun

try

(no

n-m

etro

polit

an)

sour

ces

ope

rate

d by

so

me

Aus

tral

ian

wat

er u

tilit

ies.

Stat

eS

our

ces

wit

h ap

prov

ed w

ater

-bas

ed r

ecre

atio

nB

ackg

roun

d to

why

acc

ess

is p

erm

itte

d

Fish

ing

Pass

ive

boat

ing

Pow

er b

oatin

gSw

imm

ing

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

WA

33

33

Wat

er t

reat

men

t is

san

d fil

trat

ion.

NT

33

33

VIC

ü 3

33

3Sy

stem

is

set

up t

o su

pply

irr

igat

ion

wat

er a

nd o

ther

wat

er u

ses

are

seco

ndar

y, or

in

cide

ntal

. How

ever

, som

e 25

,000

cus

tom

ers

from

�70

tow

ns a

re s

uppl

ied

with

dri

nkin

g w

ater

. Wat

er t

reat

men

t is

filtr

atio

n an

d ch

lori

natio

n.

tabl

e C

: lan

d-ba

sed

recr

eati

ona

l acc

ess

in M

etro

polit

an s

our

ces

ope

rate

d by

so

me

Aus

tral

ian

wat

er u

tilit

ies.

Cit

yS

our

ces

wit

h ap

prov

ed la

nd b

ased

rec

reat

ion

Hun

ting

Vehi

cle

acce

ssM

ount

ain

bike

sR

ogai

ning

or

orie

ntee

ring

Cam

ping

Picn

icki

ngBu

shw

alki

ngH

orse

ridi

ng

All

Som

e N

one

All

Som

e N

one

All

Som

e N

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

All

Som

eN

one

Pert

h3

33

33

33

3

Dar

win

33

33

33

33

Ade

laid

e3

33

33

33

3

Mel

bour

ne

33

33

33

33

Sydn

ey

33

33

33

33

Bris

bane

nana

nana

33

3na

tabl

e D

: Bac

kgro

und

to w

hy la

nd-b

ased

acc

ess

is p

erm

itte

d in

Met

ropo

litan

cat

chm

ents

Cit

yB

ackg

roun

d to

why

land

-bas

ed a

cces

s is

per

mit

ted

in M

etro

polit

an c

atch

men

ts

Pert

hH

isto

rica

l use

of t

he B

ibul

umn

Trac

k.Br

idle

tra

ils in

tw

o pu

mpb

ack

sour

ces.

Dar

win

One

sou

rce

only

tha

t is

for

emer

genc

y ba

ckup

sup

ply

Ade

laid

eSo

urce

s ar

e pa

rt o

f lin

ked

pum

pbac

k sy

stem

and

hav

e fil

trat

ion.

Mel

bour

ne

His

tori

cal u

se, s

ourc

e ha

s fil

trat

ion.

Sydn

ey

Picn

icki

ng a

t da

m s

ites

only

(ou

tsid

e of

cat

chm

ent)

.Ve

hicl

es, h

orse

rid

ing

and

mou

ntai

n bi

kes

only

on

publ

ic r

oads

.A

cces

s fo

r ro

gain

ing/

orie

ntee

ring

, cam

ping

and

bus

hwal

king

allo

wed

out

side

of i

mm

edia

te r

eser

voir

cat

chm

ent

area

(Sc

hedu

le 2

Are

as).

Bris

bane

Mos

t la

nd b

ased

act

ivity

occ

urs

on la

nd n

ot o

wne

d or

man

aged

by

the

wat

er u

tility

.


43

iNFORMAtiON CheCkliStCategory type of information and whether required

Nature of recreational activity Recreation type and characteristics eg land or water based, location of recreational activities, particularly in relation to waterways, storages and offtakes.

Relevant literature on impacts of recreational activity.

Historical, current and predicted levels of site usage by recreationalists: numbers, population characteristics (infants, immuno compromised), timing and frequency of use

Behaviours of recreators – legal and illegal; human contact with water ie. bathing, wading, washing; waste/rubbish used or left behind; human toileting activity.

Infrastructure and facilities required to support recreational activities (See Appendix 2).

Associated activities eg vehicular use, waste production, fire risk, domestic animal access.

Availability of alternative recreational opportunities

Management options for the activities and their effectiveness

Socio-economic information Perceptions and attitudes of key stakeholders

History of stakeholder involvement

Social and cultural issues associated with recreational activity

Economic values associated with recreational activity

Catchment characteristics Major land uses

Rainfall eg. high rainfall events close to high usage times pose a greater risk than dry weather.

Temperature (affects rate of pathogen die-off)

Soil types - drainage, erosion potential, decomposition and suitability for plant growth

Riparian buffers – width, composition and site specific vegetation (some plants trap and retain contamination and sediment more effectively than others)

Water system characteristics Type of storage eg on-stream or off-stream reservoir, groundwater source, run of river supply

Current and future use of water sources

Criticality of storage eg sole source of supply; main source, reserve supply

Size of storage and detention times

Type of water treatment and treatment options

Reliability and performance of barriers

Drinking water quality Water quality standards (ADWG, industry agreements) and policy requirements

Existing water quality problems and causes

Trends in key parameters

Key local conditions for water quality incidents

Management issues associated with recreational activities

Legal liability –statutory and common law

Safety and security issues

Other relevant organisational, industry and environmental policies and guidelines

Fire risks

Potential for illegal activities and access

APPeNDix 4


44

CRiteRiA AND CAtegORiSAtiON OF RiSkLikelihood criteria Definition

Level of contact with water source Higher risk of contaminants entering the system from primary contact with water sources.

Location of activity in catchment or storages

Higher likelihood of contaminants entering supply system the closer the activity to inflows to reservoirs , groundwater sources or offtake points.

Frequency of use and number of recreators

Higher risks associated with more frequent use and larger number of recreators.

Time in catchments or storages Likelihood of contaminants eg. human wastes, being deposited in catchment or waterways increases with length of time in catchment eg overnight visits.

Infectivity of recreators Infants and immuno-compromised people have a higher risk of carrying infectious pathogens.

Behaviour of recreators Likelihood of hazardous event occurring is higher if recreational activity is associated with activities that are high impact or illegal eg. lighting of fires, walking off tracks, domestic pets.

Contaminant release time Higher risks associated with greater frequency of high rainfall events.

Availability and use of facilities Higher risks if facilities to mitigate impact eg toilets, bins, boat handling, are not available or used inappropriately.

Management controls and their effectiveness

Likelihood of an event occurring will be higher if there are little or no management controls or those that exist are not effective.

Characteristics of water sources Higher likelihood of event occurring in direct supplies, smaller and shallower reservoirs, with evidence of short-circuiting in rain events.

Catchment land condition Higher risks associated with low soil permeability and poor vegetation conditions.

Long term water quality degradation Higher risks where water quality is trending downward.

Long term catchment condition Higher risks where catchment condition is trending downward.

Consequences criteria Definition

Direct human health impacts Greater magnitude of consequences are associated with hazardous events that introduce contaminants that directly impact human health eg. microbial pathogens in human wastes

Indirect human health impacts Higher risks associated with events that introduce contaminants that indirectly impact human health eg. sediment is often a transport mechanism for pathogens.

Level of recreational use Higher risks associated with higher levels of use (number of activities, numbers of people). Most studies show that the degree of impact increases with the level of recreational use (Sun and Walsh, �998) although the relationship is not linear.

Water quality standards Higher risks associated with events that introduce contaminants likely to breach water quality parameters contained in ADWG or industry agreements. The risk categorisation will be related to current and trending water quality levels in catchment or water source.

Water supply operations Higher risks associated with events that result in lengthy and serious interruption to water supply operations.

Criticality of water source Higher risks associated with events that affect direct sources of supply.

Management options and their effectiveness

Consequences of an event will be higher if there are little or no management controls or those that exist are not effective.

likelihood Consequences

Negligible Minor Moderate Major Extreme

Almost certain High High Extreme Extreme Extreme

Likely Moderate High High Extreme Extreme

Possible Low Moderate High Extreme Extreme

Unlikely Low Low Moderate High Extreme

Rare Low Low Moderate High High

APPeNDix 5

Risk levels are determined by creating a matrix of likelihood and consequences and assigning a level of risk based on a risk score or rating. Risk matrices can be found in AS/NZS 4360 (2004), Ecos Environmental Consulting and Water Futures (2004) and CRC for Water Quality and Treatment (in prep.). The example below ranks risk as low, moderate, high or extreme (from AS/NZS 4360, 2004 and CRC for Water Quality and Treatment, in prep.).


45

APPeNDix 6

key kNOWleDge gAPSissue Confidence in existing

knowledgeResearch required limitations on getting that

knowledge eg. cost, time, uncertainty

The quantitative impacts or each recreation type

Low - Limitations in determining cause and effect from specific activity types.

Detailed and well-designed case studies analysing the higher risk activities

There will always be high uncertainty due to confounding and the non-linearity of relationships

Numbers of would-be recreators

Low Community surveys Costs of surveysRaising expectationsEstimates only

Likelihood of human waste being deposited

Low – Not many surveys Surveys where recreation is permitted on land and within waterbody

Costs of surveysDifficulties with extrapolation

Pathogen loads from recreators

High –based on public health surveillance

Behaviour of recreators Difficulty in surveying and assessing behaviour in field

Importance of the location of activity in storage or catchment

Low – limited understanding of contaminant transport

Local knowledge of storage and transport processes for pathogens, nutrients, and chemicals across land and/or through reservoir to offtakes.

Complexity of processes and confounding influences likely to make cause/effect relationship impossible to confirm

Effect of behaviour of recreators

Low - limited by applicability to areas outside those studied

Identify activities commonly undertaken by recreators when engaged in a given activity and frequency of behaviour

Broad scale information on recreational behaviour difficult and costly to collect

Associated activities that take place

Low – observation only Survey of associated activities resulting from nominated recreational activity types


Management options that are effective

Moderate – some limitations in applicability to areas outside those studied

Quantify how effectively control measures mitigate contamination

There will always be high uncertainty due to confounding and non-linearity of relationships

Ability to control behaviour

High – numerous case studies

The effectiveness of the range of control mechanisms for range of activities


Effect of reservoir characteristics- type, size, criticality,

High – calibrated models are now reasonably reliable

Each organisation needs to know its own system but models can be used to help understand fate and transport of contaminants

Costs of reservoir modelling and calibration of those models is often high and studies lengthy

Reliability and performance of barriers

Low - data available on downstream treatment processes, little for upstream

Quantification of the effectiveness of barriers and the requirements for barriers to function well


Treatment capability High - data is available for downstream treatment processes

Further validation of effect treatment Local validation of processes can be costly

Water quality impacts of land-based activity

Low – limitations in determining cause and effect in natural systems for both immediate and longer term accumulation

Quantification of the relationship between land activities and water quality impacts


Cumulative impacts of activity

Low – catchments are complex and contributions of one activity are hard to separate from others

Research to measure cumulative impacts that are not simply additive effects of the individual activities – therefore need to understand more about catchment processes

Empirical studies and catchment comparisons are often long-term high costs studies

Impacts to soils and vegetation

High – although majority of research done outside of Australia and not in water catchments

Confirm effects in Australian water catchments Empirical studies and catchment comparisons are often long-term high costs studies

Safety and liability High – some organisations gather such data

Compile data held by water supply and land management organisations on safety and liability

Cost of survey

Costs of managing recreational access

High – some organisations gather such data

Compile data held by water supply and land management organisations on safety and liability

Cost of survey

CRC for Water Quality and Treatment

Private Mail Bag 3Salisbury SOUTH AUSTRALIA 5108

Tel: (08) 8259 0211Fax: (08) 8259 0228

E-mail: [email protected]: www.waterquality.crc.org.au

The Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Water Quality and Treatment is Australia’s national drinking water research centre. An unincorporated joint venture between 29 different organisations from the Australian water industry, major universities, CSIRO, and local and state governments, the CRC combines expertise in water quality and public health.

The CRC for Water Quality and Treatment is established and supported under the Federal Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program.

• ACTEW Corporation

• Australian Water Quality Centre

• Australian Water Services Pty Ltd

• Brisbane City Council

• Centre for Appropriate

Technology Inc

• City West Water Limited

• CSIRO

• Curtin University of Technology

• Department of Human Services

Victoria

• Griffith University

• Melbourne Water Corporation

• Monash University

• Orica Australia Pty Ltd

• Power and Water Corporation

• Queensland Health Pathology &

Scientific Services

• RMIT University

• South Australian Water

Corporation

• South East Water Ltd

• Sydney Catchment Authority

• Sydney Water Corporation

• The University of Adelaide

• The University of New South

Wales

• The University of Queensland

• United Water International Pty Ltd

• University of South Australia

• University of Technology, Sydney

• Water Corporation

• Water Services Association of

Australia

• Yarra Valley Water Ltd

The Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment is an unincorporated joint venture between:

Research Report 24: Recreational Access to D

rinking Water C

atchments

Research Report 24


5021 CRC RESEARCH REPORT 24 COVE1 1 11/5/06 1:59:15 PM

ecReational ccess Rinking ateR atchments toRages in ustRalia · RecReational access to DRinking...

Documents

Transcript of ecReational ccess Rinking ateR atchments toRages in ustRalia · RecReational access to DRinking...