Manly Local Government Area · 2017-03-24 · Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water...

Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water Safety

Black Spots Fund watersafety.nsw.gov.auA NSW Government water safety initiative

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment Manly Local Government Area

April 2014

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment: Manly Local Government Area

Page ii of 86

© Surf Life Saving New South Wales, Belrose 2014 All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer This work is copyright. However, material form this publication may be copied or published by State Government agencies without the permission of SLSNSW on the condition that the meaning of the material is not altered and SLSNSW is acknowledged as the source of the material. Any other persons or bodies wishing to use the material must seek permission. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSW Government.


Page iii of 86

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. VII

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................... VIII

1 INTRODUCTION, SCOPE & CONTEXT ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 CONTEXT AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 DEFINITION OF TERMS .................................................................................................................................. 5 1.5 PROJECT TEAM / AUTHORS ............................................................................................................................ 7

2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 8

2.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 SITE IDENTIFICATION .................................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 SITE INSPECTION ........................................................................................................................................ 10 2.4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................. 11 2.5 BEACH HAZARD RATINGS AND OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 12 2.6 ABSAMP TYPES AND RATINGS .................................................................................................................... 13 2.7 ABSAMP BEACH TYPE CHARACTERISTIC OVERVIEW AND HAZARDS .................................................................... 14

2.7.1 Transverse Bar and Rip ................................................................................................................. 14 2.7.2 Reflective....................................................................................................................................... 14 2.7.3 Rock Platforms and Rocky Coasts ................................................................................................. 15

2.8 FACILITY VISITATION RATES (FVR) ................................................................................................................ 16 2.8.1 Facility Visitation Rating (FVR) Reference Tables ......................................................................... 16

2.9 FACILITIES AUDIT ....................................................................................................................................... 19 2.10 POPULATION, DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM................................................................................................... 20

2.10.1 Population Statistics ..................................................................................................................... 20 2.10.2 Development Plans in Manly ........................................................................................................ 20 2.10.3 Tourism Information ..................................................................................................................... 21 2.10.4 Beach Usage Statistics .................................................................................................................. 23 2.10.5 Drowning Incidents ....................................................................................................................... 26 2.10.6 Emergency Callouts ....................................................................................................................... 28

2.11 COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTATION ......................................................................................................... 32

3 RISK ASSESSMENT FINDINGS .................................................................................................................. 34

3.1 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY (INHERENT GROSS RISK) ...................................................................................... 34 3.1.1 Action Planning Priority Index ....................................................................................................... 34 3.1.2 Australian Beach Safety and Management Program ................................................................... 34 3.1.3 Local Population Rating ................................................................................................................ 35 3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction Rating ............................................................................................... 36 3.1.5 Access Rating ................................................................................................................................ 37 3.1.6 Action Planning Priority Score ....................................................................................................... 38

3.2 OVERVIEW OF PRINCIPAL RISK TREATMENTS ................................................................................................... 40 3.2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 40 3.2.2 Hierarchy of Risk Treatments (Controls) ....................................................................................... 40 3.2.3 Education and Awareness Programs ............................................................................................ 41 3.2.4 Safety Signage .............................................................................................................................. 49 3.2.5 Emergency Marker System ........................................................................................................... 54 3.2.6 Access Infrastructure and Ongoing Capital Works/Maintenance Programs ................................ 55 3.2.7 Public Rescue Equipment .............................................................................................................. 57 3.2.8 System of Supervision ................................................................................................................... 60

4 EMERGENCY RESPONSE ......................................................................................................................... 65

4.1 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTING - TRIPLE ZERO (000) ..................................................................... 65


Page iv of 86

4.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE ALARM .................................................................................................................... 66 4.3 EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACONS ................................................................................................................. 67 4.4 EMERGENCY SERVICE RESPONSE ................................................................................................................... 68 4.5 RADIO COVERAGE ...................................................................................................................................... 69 4.6 JOINT RESPONSE (LIFESAVERS AND LIFEGUARDS) ............................................................................................. 70

5 MONITOR AND REVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 72

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................... 73

APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Access and Signage Schedule APPENDIX B - Risk Register and Treatment Plan APPENDIX C - Public Rescue Equipment APPENDIX D - Facilities Audit APPENDIX E - Coverage Maps APPENDIX F - Stakeholder Engagement APPENDIX G - Life Saving Service Level Calculator APPENDIX H - Data Collection


Page v of 86

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1.1: THE DROWNING CHAIN (INTERNATIONAL LIFE SAVING FEDERATION, 2008) ...................................................... 2 FIGURE 2.2.1 OVERVIEW OF MANLY LGA COASTAL LOCATIONS ASSESSED BY AUSTRALIAN COASTSAFE ....................................... 9 FIGURE 2.4.1 RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS .................................................................................................................. 11 FIGURE 2.7.1 ILLUSTRATION OF A TRANSVERSE BAR AND RIP BEACH ................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 2.7.2 ILLUSTRATION OF A REFLECTIVE BEACH ....................................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 2.10.1 SLS ATTENDANCE STATISTICS FOR 2008 TO 2013 (SURFGUARD, 2013) ........................................................ 23 FIGURE 2.10.2 SLS RESCUE STATISTICS FOR 2008 TO 2013 (SURFGUARD, 2013) ................................................................ 24 FIGURE 2.10.3 SLS FIRST AID AND PREVENTION STATISTICS FOR 2008 TO 2013 (SURFGUARD, 2013) ..................................... 25 FIGURE 2.10.4 MANLY LGA – DROWNING LOCATION AND VICTIM POSTCODE OF RESIDENCE ................................................. 27 FIGURE 2.10.5 SURF RESCUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE BY LOCATION (SLSNSW, 2013).......................................................... 28 FIGURE 2.10.6 SURF RESCUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE BY SEASON AND DAY (SLSNSW, 2013) ............................................... 29 FIGURE 2.10.7 SURF RESCUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE BY PATROL SEASON/HOURS (SLSNSW, 2013) ...................................... 31 FIGURE 2.11.1 PROJECT BLUEPRINT FLYER ..................................................................................................................... 32 FIGURE 3.2.1 MANLYAUSTRALIA.COM ‘SWIM IN SAFETY’ ................................................................................................... 41 FIGURE 3.2.2 SURF SAFETY PRESENTATION ON THE NORTHERN BEACHES .............................................................................. 42 FIGURE 3.2.3 HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION IN MANLY ...................................................................................................... 43 FIGURE 3.2.4: INFORMATION BOX AT BONDI THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED AT MANLY ......................................................... 43 FIGURE 3.2.5 DRINKING FOUNTAIN AT NORTH STEYNE ..................................................................................................... 43 FIGURE 3.2.6: EXAMPLE OF A SURF SAFETY POSTER IN THE BEGA VALLEY LGA ...................................................................... 43 FIGURE 3.2.7 EXAMPLE OF A VISUAL NOTICE BOARD COULD BE POSITIONED AT MANLY WHARF ................................................ 44 FIGURE 3.2.8 EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE AT ROCK FISHING LOCATIONS .................................................................................... 45 FIGURE 3.2.9 RECREATIONAL FISHING ALLIANCE ROCK FISHING SCHOOL ............................................................................... 45 FIGURE 3.2.10 KOREAN WEBSITE PROMOTING ROCK FISHING (WAVE ROCK, 2006) ............................................................... 46 FIGURE 3.2.11 DON’T PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE™ ........................................................................................................ 47 FIGURE 3.2.12 SURVIVE A RIP ...................................................................................................................................... 47 FIGURE 3.2.13 BEACH SAFETY FOR TOURISTS / MIGRANTS ................................................................................................. 47 FIGURE 3.2.14 SWIM BETWEEN THE FLAGS .................................................................................................................... 47 FIGURE 3.2.15: CERTAIN RISK AND HAZARDS .................................................................................................................. 49 FIGURE 3.2.16: CLIFF EDGE WARNING........................................................................................................................... 49 FIGURE 3.2.17: DANGER STRONG CURRENT .................................................................................................................. 49 FIGURE 3.2.18: WARNING SUBMERGED OBJECT .............................................................................................................. 49 FIGURE 3.2.19 POOL SAFETY WARNING ......................................................................................................................... 50 FIGURE 3.2.20 CLIFF EDGE WARNING ............................................................................................................................ 50 FIGURE 3.2.21: ENVIRONMENTAL WARNING .................................................................................................................. 50 FIGURE 3.2.22: BEWARE OF SUBMERGED PIPES .............................................................................................................. 50 FIGURE 3.2.23 EXAMPLE LEVEL TWO CAR PARK/LEVEL THREE OPEN ACCESS SIGN IN WOLLONGONG .......................................... 50 FIGURE 3.2.24 EXAMPLE SIGNAGE AT A BEACH ACCESS POINT IN BYRON BAY ........................................................................ 50 FIGURE 3.2.25: EXAMPLE OF PROHIBITION SIGN.............................................................................................................. 51 FIGURE 3.2.26: LOCATIONS OF COLLATED PROHIBITION SIGNS ........................................................................................... 51 FIGURE 3.2.27 ALCOHOL PROHIBITED SIGN THAT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING CONSOLIDATED INTO A LARGE PROHIBITED

ACTIVITIES SIGN ................................................................................................................................................. 51 FIGURE 3.2.28 TEMPORARY DIRECTIONAL SIGN ............................................................................................................... 53 FIGURE 3.2.29 EXAMPLE EMERGENCY MARKER SIGN ........................................................................................................ 54 FIGURE 3.2.30 EXISTING EMERGENCY MARKERS IN THE TWEED LGA ................................................................................... 54 FIGURE 3.2.31 INFORMAL ACCESS AT BLUE FISH POINT .................................................................................................... 55 FIGURE 3.2.32 FORMAL ACCESS AT MANLY .................................................................................................................... 55 FIGURE 3.2.33 PUBLIC RESCUE TUBE AT FAIRY BOWER ..................................................................................................... 58 FIGURE 3.2.34: RESCUE BOARDS ARE STRATEGICALLY PLACED ALONG THE QUEENSCLIFF TO MANLY STRETCH .............................. 62 FIGURE 3.2.35: DIAGRAM OVERVIEW WHEN TWO SETS OF FLAGS ARE ERECTED ..................................................................... 63 FIGURE 3.2.36: BOLD AND BEAUTIFUL ATTENDANCE JUNE 2010 - AUGUST 2013 ................................................................ 63 FIGURE 4.1.1 SIGN ENCOURAGING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO RING 000 IN AN EMERGENCY ................................................. 65 FIGURE 4.2.1: EMERGENCY RESPONSE ALARM AT FRESHWATER ......................................................................................... 66 FIGURE 4.3.1 EXAMPLE OF A MOBILE EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACON ................................................................................. 67 FIGURE 4.4.1: COASTAL EMERGENCY SERVICE LOCATIONS FOR MANLY LGA ........................................................................ 68 FIGURE 4.5.1 UHF RADIO SIGNAL STRENGTH ON THE MANLY ............................................................................................ 69


Page vi of 86

List of Tables

TABLE 2.3.1 ASSESSED LOCATIONS AND ASSESSMENT DATES .............................................................................................. 10 TABLE 2.6.1 ABSAMP BEACH HAZARD RATINGS............................................................................................................ 12 TABLE 2.6.2 BEACH HAZARD RATING CALCULATION MATRICES FOR WAVE DOMINATE BEACHES ................................................. 12 TABLE 2.7.1 ABSAMP BEACH HAZARD RATINGS – MANLY LGA ....................................................................................... 13 TABLE 2.9.1 TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT AND NATURAL HAZARDS RATING FOR RESERVES – NON BEACH ENVIRONMENTS .................. 16 TABLE 2.9.2 TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT RATINGS FOR BEACHES .............................................................................................. 16 TABLE 2.9.3 TYPICAL POPULATION USE RATING FOR A FACILITY ........................................................................................... 17 TABLE 2.9.4 SUGGESTED FREQUENCY USE RATING FOR A FACILITY ...................................................................................... 17 TABLE 2.9.5 FACILITY VISITATION RATES – FOR ASSESSED LOCATIONS .................................................................................. 17 TABLE 2.11.1 MANLY POPULATION DATA (ABS, 2013) ................................................................................................... 20 TABLE 2.11.2 ACCOMMODATION PROVIDERS IN THE MANLY LGA ..................................................................................... 22 TABLE 2.12.1 DROWNING INCIDENTS WITHIN MANLY LGA (SLSA, 2013) .......................................................................... 26 TABLE 3.1.1 ABSAMP AND INDICATIVE RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS ............................................................... 34 TABLE 3.1.2 LOCAL POPULATION RATING DESCRIPTORS ..................................................................................................... 35 TABLE 3.1.3 LOCAL POPULATION RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS ......................................................................... 35 TABLE 3.1.4 HUMAN/ACTIVITY INTERACTION DESCRIPTORS .............................................................................................. 36 TABLE 3.1.5 HUMAN/ACTIVITY INTERACTION RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS ........................................................ 36 TABLE 3.1.6 ACCESS RATING DESCRIPTORS ..................................................................................................................... 37 TABLE 3.1.7 ACCESS RATINGS APPLIED TO ASSESSED LOCATIONS ......................................................................................... 37 TABLE 3.1.8 SUMMARY OF ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY CALCULATIONS FOR EACH ASSESSED LOCATION ...................................... 38 TABLE 3.1.9 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY SCORES FOR ASSESSED LOCATIONS ........................................................................ 39 TABLE 3.2.1 EXAMPLES OF EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAMS .................................................................................. 46 TABLE 3.2.2 SUMMARY TABLE OF AQUATIC AND RECREATIONAL SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MANLY LGA .................. 52 TABLE 3.2.3 ACCESS PROVISION WITHIN ASSESSED LOCATIONS IN MANLY............................................................................. 56 TABLE 3.2.4 AN OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC RESCUE EQUIPMENT (PRE) (BRADSTREET, ET AL., 2012) ............................................. 57 TABLE 3.2.5 PROPOSED LIFE RING LOCATIONS ................................................................................................................. 58 TABLE 3.2.6 VOLUNTEER LIFESAVING SERVICES IN THE MANLY LGA ................................................................................... 61 TABLE 3.2.7 PAID LIFEGUARD SERVICES IN THE MANLY LGA ............................................................................................. 62 TABLE 4.4.1 COASTAL EMERGENCY SERVICE LOCATIONS FOR MANLY LGA. ......................................................................... 68


Page vii of 86

Executive Summary This report contains findings and treatment options which align with current International and Australian standards, guidelines and best practice risk management processes. The report contains information specific to locations under the authority of Manly Council and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. These locations include (north to south):

1. Queenscliff 6. Shelly Beach 2. North Steyne 7. Fairy Bower Point 3. Manly 8. Blue Fish Point 4. Manly Point 9. North Head 5. Fairy Bower 10. Old Man’s Hat

Activities/Facilities The Manly Local Government Area (LGA) is a popular destination which sees year round public usage and recreational activity, including swimming, surfing (Inc. all surfcraft), fishing, snorkelling/diving, boating, and walking. A number of facilities support coastal usage and activities including well maintained car parks and beach access, lifeguard and lifesaving supervision, coastal walks, a number of public toilets/changing rooms, BBQ’s, playgrounds and picnic tables. Hazards/Risks The Manly LGA has a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the area. These are outlined in detail in the report body and Appendix B. Based on the risk assessment in Appendix B, the following hazards that have been rated with the greatest inherent risk for the Manly LGA:

Strong currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type Waves/waves overwashing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type Slippery rocks: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement Cliffs/dangerous access: As a result of coastal geography Boating traffic: As a result of human interaction It has been identified that the above listed hazards pose risk to the following types of recreational users:

Strong currents/rip currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Waves/waves overwashing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen Slippery rocks: Fishermen, rock platform users Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen Cliffs/dangerous access: Surf craft users, fishermen, walkers, sight seers Boating traffic: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters Existing Risk Treatments Land Managers in partnership with a number of other organisations have implemented the following risk treatment initiatives within the Manly LGA: o Education and awareness programs (p.41) o Safety signage (p. 49) o Public rescue equipment (p.57) o System of supervision (p. 60)


Page viii of 86

Summary of Recommendations Please note:

o The below recommendations are provided as options for guidance only and will not be binding to the Land Manager

o The below recommendations are in no particular order in regards to prioritisation

o Further explanation to the recommendations should also be referenced and can be found on the corresponding pages

Recommendation 1 Manly Council should consider implementing the following risk treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 1.1 Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Manly Local Government Area, should

consider the impact of increased coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue equipment and supervision. (p.21)

1.2 Coastal usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics) should be used to inform decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal safety. (p.31)

1.3 Manly Council should continue to meet regularly with the Presidents of Queenscliff, North Steyne and

Manly Surf Life Saving Clubs as an effective forum which considers coastal safety issues and develops coastal safety strategies in the Manly Local Government Area. It is recommended that the treatment options found in this report be addressed as part of these meetings. (p.33)

1.4 As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using a

staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence. (p.39)

Education: 1.5 Education and awareness programs within the Manly Local Government Area should continue to be

implemented, reviewed and supported. (p.47) 1.6 Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are

recognised by the aquatic industry (e.g. NSW Water Safety website http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/ ). (p.47)

1.7 Continue to develop relationships with tourism agencies with the aim of distributing standardised surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers), to all coastal accommodation providers (including the Manly Visitor Information Centre) in the Manly Local Government Area. (p.47)

1.8 Surf safety information (for example rip current education), should be strategically placed in visual form at various locations along the Queenscliff to Manly promenade. Specific examples can be referenced in the report. (p.47)

1.9 A targeted education campaign about surf safety should be developed for the Manly Ferry Service. Options for consideration could include a visual notice board at Manly Wharf and free surf safety collateral (including multilingual). (p.47)

1.10 Businesses within the Manly LGA that hire out the use of surfboards should be aware of the daily beach conditions, educating customers about where the best place is to surf (dependent on ability) and should not hire boards when the beach has been closed by the lifeguards on duty. (p.48)

1.11 Continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets (may

include educational signage). (p.48)

http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/


Page ix of 86

1.12 An opportunity exists to support the children at Royal Far West Health Service to participate in surf awareness programs organised by peak water safety organisations. (p.48)

Safety Signage: 1.13 Standardised water safety signage that complies with Australian Standards and aligns to best-practice

‘style’ should be implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage. (p.53)

1.14 Temporary signage should continue to be used at access locations near patrolled areas to direct patrons to a supervised swimming area and where there is a higher risk of injury due to temporary hazards such as strong currents, creek openings and pollution. (p.53)

Access: 1.15 Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed. (p.56)

1.16 To minimise the level of risk when alcohol and night swimming takes place on Shelly Beach, a trial could take place in which the automatic BBQs stop working during certain time periods e.g. 9:00pm to 7:00am. (p.56)

Supervision and Surveillance:

1.17 During the summer months on weekends and public holidays, when volunteer lifesavers are on patrol in

conjunction with paid lifeguards, there is the opportunity to continue to have two sets of flags permanently erected during this period (dependent upon suitable resources being available and favourable weather and surf conditions). (p.64)

1.18 Although the ‘Bold and the Beautiful’ promote themselves as being an informal group, due to the growth and popularity of this group as well as the risks involved, further risk mitigation may need to be investigated by Manly Council. This may include formal education courses or a system of supervision (e.g. water safety). (p.64)

1.19 When Queenscliff and North Steyne are not patrolled by lifeguards it has been identified that a surveillance camera (closed circuit) to be located at Queenscliff or North Steyne SLSC could be used by the lifeguards who are stationed at the lifeguard base in Manly LSC to monitor the usage on this section of the beach and provide an opportunity to proactively engage swimmers prior to a possible incident occurring by providing warnings and direction via the public address system. (p.64)

Emergency Response: 1.20 Any signage on public rescue equipment that encourages members of the public to ring emergency

services should be clearly identified with the following text – “In case of emergency – Dial Triple Zero (000)”. (p.65)

1.21 An emergency response alarm should be investigated at Shelly Beach. When activated the alarm should be linked to the Manly lifeguard base. (p.66)

1.22 Further discussions around joint communications (radio) mid-week and weekends should be conducted with Surf Life Saving NSW to improve joint operations between lifeguards and lifesavers and other nearby lifeguard services. (p.69)

1.23 A debrief session should continue to be held after any critical incidents that occur through the Surf

Rescue Emergency Response System where there is a joint response from lifesavers and lifeguards within


Page x of 86

the Manly Local Government Area. These sessions should investigate where opportunities may exist at a local level to improve emergency response (e.g. information sharing, communication and the formalisation of emergency response procedures). (p.70)

1.24 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Northern Beaches Branch Duty Officers/Support Operations, Manly Lifeguard Supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.70)

1.25 Club Captains and Patrol Captains from Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly should meet with the Manly lifeguard supervisors at the start of the surf life saving season to discuss guidelines and expectations that will improve the communication and coordination to work effectively together while on patrol. (p.71)

Monitor and Review: 1.26 In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure the

effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented. (p.72)

1.27 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.72)

Recommendation 2 The National Parks and Wildlife Service – Office of Environment and Heritage should consider implementing the following risk treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 2.1 Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Manly Local Government Area, should

consider the impact of increased coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue equipment and supervision. (p.21)

2.2 Coastal usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics) should be used to inform decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal safety. (p.31)

2.3 As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using a

staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence. (p.39) Education: 2.4 Education and awareness programs within the Manly Local Government Area should continue to be

implemented, reviewed and supported. (p.47) 2.5 Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are

recognised by the aquatic industry (e.g. NSW Water Safety website - http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au ). (p.47)

2.6 Continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets (may

include educational signage). (p.48)

2.7 An education day should be organised for rock fishers at Old Man’s Hat within the Sydney Harbour National Park. This day will target high risk user groups providing educational learning and fishing techniques that will equip rock fishers with information to make an informed decision about where they decide to fish as well as communicating key safety messages. (p.48)


Page xi of 86

Safety Signage: 2.8 Standardised water safety signage that complies with Australian Standards and aligns to best-practice

‘style’ should be implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage. (p.53)

Access: 2.9 Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed. (p.56)

2.10 Informal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should be considered for redirection or consolidation, in

order to promote/facilitate the use of formal access. (p.56) Emergency Response: 2.11 Any signage or public rescue equipment that encourages members of the public to ring emergency

services should be clearly identified with the following text – “In case of emergency – Dial Triple Zero (000)”. (p.65)

Monitor and Review: 2.12 In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure the

effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented. (p.72)

2.13 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.72)

Recommendation 3 The Water Safety Advisory Council should consider implementing the following risk treatment options: Education: 3.1 Continue to develop relationships with tourism agencies with the aim of distributing standardised surf

safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers), to all coastal accommodation providers (including the Manly Visitor Information Centre) in the Manly Local Government Area. (p.47)

3.2 An education day should be organised for rock fishers at Old Man’s Hat within the Sydney Harbour

National Park. This day will target high risk user groups providing educational learning and fishing techniques that will equip rock fishers with information to make an informed decision about where they decide to fish as well as communicating key safety messages. (p.48)

3.3 Identify the relevant user groups and related resources/websites (including CALD) that promote rock fishing in the Manly Local Government, and target safety messaging to those groups/resources. This research may also provide the opportunity for targeted education campaigns. (p.48)

3.4 A targeted education campaign about surf safety should be developed for the Manly Ferry Service. Options for consideration could include a visual notice board at Manly Wharf and free surf safety collateral (including multilingual). (p.47)

3.5 An opportunity exists to support the children at Royal Far West Health Service to participate in surf awareness programs organised by peak water safety organisations. (p.48)


Page xii of 86

Emergency Marker Signage: 3.6 With guidance from the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services and Land and Property Information, a

state aligned emergency marker system at all identified access locations should be considered. (p.54) Public Rescue Equipment: 3.7 Explore the means to fund the expansion and continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in

consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in ‘Appendix C’. Final positioning should be determined by these fishing associations. (p.59)

Recommendation 4 Australian CoastSafe should consider implementing the following risk treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 4.1 Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and Surf

Life Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky coast should be commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related to rocky coasts in this report should be reviewed. (p.13)

Recommendation 5 Surf Life Saving (State, Branch & Club) should consider implementing the following risk treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 5.1 Manly Council should continue to meet regularly with the Presidents of Queenscliff, North Steyne and

Manly Surf Life Saving Clubs as an effective forum which considers coastal safety issues and develops coastal safety strategies in the Manly Local Government Area. It is recommended that the treatment options found in this report be addressed as part of these meetings. (p.33)

Supervision and Surveillance: 5.2 During the summer months on weekends and public holidays, when volunteer lifesavers are on patrol in

conjunction with paid lifeguards, there is the opportunity to have two sets of flags permanently erected during this period (dependent upon suitable resources being available and favourable weather and surf conditions). (p.64)

5.3 Branch and club procedures should continue to ensure that roving patrols are performed on a regular

basis to cover a nearby beach/section of a beach that is not patrolled. (p.64) Emergency Response: 5.4 A debrief session should continue to be held after any critical incidents that occur through the Surf Rescue

Emergency Response System where there is a joint response from lifesavers and lifeguards within the Manly Local Government Area. These sessions should investigate where opportunities may exist at a local level to improve emergency response (e.g. information sharing, communication and the formalisation of emergency response procedures). (p.70)

5.5 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Northern Beaches Branch Duty Officers/Support Operations, Manly Lifeguard Supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.70)

5.6 Club Captains and Patrol Captains from Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly should meet with the Manly lifeguard supervisors at the start of the surf life saving season to discuss guidelines and expectations that will improve the communication and coordination to work effectively together while on patrol. (p.71)


Page 1 of 86

1 Introduction, Scope & Context

1.1 Introduction Project Background Surf Life Saving New South Wales is undertaking a significant state-wide drowning prevention project, known as Project Blueprint. As a core component of the project, every accessible coastal beach and rock platform in New South Wales are being assessed using industry leading systems and processes. The outcomes will include evidence based drowning prevention treatment options to stakeholders and government, both at a local, regional and state level. Project Blueprint is being delivered by Australian CoastSafe, as the leading coastal public safety risk management authority in Australia. Australian CoastSafe is the strategic and intelligence beach safety unit of Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA) – visit www.coastsafe.org.au for more information. This document is a coastal public safety risk assessment and treatment plan specific to water safety related issues identified at every beach/rock platform located on the coast of the Manly LGA. The Land Managers of this area include Manly Council and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) - Office of Environment and Heritage. The Drowning Issue Tragically, NSW accounts for 50% of the national coastal drowning toll annually. As of 30 June 2013, there have been 338 coastal drowning deaths in NSW since 1 July 2004

1. The vast majority of these can be attributed to

swimming/rip-currents and rock-fishing, with almost all occurring at unpatrolled locations/times, where no expert assistance is immediately available. Accidental drowning deaths in the coastal aquatic environment can be accounted for through a number of factors known as the ‘drowning chain’ (Error! Reference source not found.). These are: o Lack of knowledge, disregard or misunderstanding of the hazard o Uninformed or unrestricted access to the hazard o Lack of supervision or surveillance o An inability to cope once in difficulty The strategies that have been identified to address the drowning chain are: o Education and information o Denial of access, improvement of infrastructure and/or provision of warnings o Provision of supervision o Acquisition of survival skills

1 Surf Life Saving Incident Reporting Database

http://www.coastsafe.org.au/


Page 2 of 86

Figure 1.1.1: The Drowning Chain (International Life Saving Federation, 2008)

Treatment Options This report will be fundamental in addressing the coastal drowning issue in NSW both in the short, mid and long term. The report will do this by providing a sustainable and effective drowning prevention strategy with clear supporting evidence/data, engagement of relevant stakeholders, and the application of effective risk mitigation and drowning prevention initiatives where and when they are required. It is acknowledged that land managers have many competing priorities and limited resources. Land managers should balance water safety land management activities within the context of their broader role to provide services and facilities to meet the current future needs of their local communities as a whole, all within a limited budget. This report recognises that there are many inherent risks associated with the NSW coastline and that in most instances these risks associated with the NSW coastline cannot be eliminated and can only be managed within the operations contexts of the land manager, taking into account all of their responsibilities and available resources. This report also recognises that visitors to these areas also have a personal responsibility for their own safety and those they are responsible for. The treatment options found in the report are representative of Australian CoastSafe’s opinion in relation to risk management at the locations assessed. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSW Government


Page 3 of 86

1.2 Context and Scope Context Surf Life Saving New South Wales recently received funding as part of a NSW Government water safety initiative through the Water Safety Black Spot Fund to commence coastal public safety risk assessments on the NSW coastline (beaches and rock platforms). The program will be staged over several years with phase two to include the Pittwater, Warringah, Manly, Shoalhaven and Bega LGAs. The report provides risk treatment options about how to improve risk and safety management in line with current industry standards: o AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management – Principles and Guidelines o AS/NZS2416:2010 Water Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags o AS 2899(.1&.2) – 1986 Public Information Symbols Part 1 and 2 o ISO 7001:2007 Graphical symbols - Public information symbols o AS2342 – 1992 Development, Testing and Implementing of Information and Safety Symbols and Symbolic

Signs o ISO9001:2008 Quality Management Systems Scope This coastal risk assessment and treatment plan has been prepared following an on-site risk assessment undertaken by Australian CoastSafe of the Manly LGA which commenced on Monday 11th November and concluded on Thursday 14th November, 2013. The assessment covered all coastal locations within the area. The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment, including but not limited to; signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user groups, conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people to visit the location. The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of the Manly LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this report. Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the coastal aquatic environment. While recreational and commercial boating may occur in these waters the detailed assessment of hazards and their treatments specific to boating activities falls outside the scope of this report. Information on boating safety can be found at www.maritime.nsw.gov.au The engagement of Land Managers and other key local stakeholders was also a vital part of this risk assessment. Australian CoastSafe assessed the following in detail: o Access locations, classifying these as formal or informal access tracks and recommending treatment

options. Signage that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current signage Appendix A. o Hazards, their potential risks, risk groups, risk scores and treatment options Appendix B. o Public rescue equipment that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current public rescue

equipment Appendix C. o Facilities and points of interest that may attract members of the public to coastal locations Appendix D. Other appendices include: o Coverage maps of assessed locations Appendix E o Stakeholder Engagement Appendix F o Life Saving Service Level Calculator Appendix G o Data Collection Appendix H


Page 4 of 86

At no time during the inspection was the water entered. The assessments were performed from the land, along the edges of the water, along rocky outcrops, headlands, access tracks and car park access points.

1.3 Limitations The following are acknowledged as limitations of this coastal public safety risk assessment. o The absence of an agreed and recognised methodology for rating the hazardousness of rock platforms. o Difficulty in gaining feedback from all identified stakeholders. o Limited timeframes allowed for stakeholders to provide feedback on consultative draft versions of the

report as a result of the project timeframes.


Page 5 of 86

1.4 Definition of Terms Definitions of the key terms used within this report are provided below.

ABSAMP Australian Beach Safety and Management Program

Attendance A snapshot of the on-beach and in-water attendance taken every two hours on a daily basis

ATV All-terrain vehicle

CALD Culturally And Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities

Coastal The foreshore, seabed, coastal water, and airspace above a large body of water (marine), including areas up to 2NM offshore and of which the landward boundary is the line of mean high water. Coastal beaches are all marine beaches listed in ABSAMP, which exclude harbours, inlets and bays

Coastal Waterway A coastal body of water e.g. river/creek opening

Consequence Outcome or impact of an event

Control An existing process, policy, device, practice or other action that acts to minimise negative risk or enhance positive opportunities

Emergency Action Plan A plan that outlines the procedures to be used in the event of an emergency

First Aid A lifesaver/lifeguard treating either a minor or major first aid incident, which may require further assistance from NSW Ambulance e.g. broken bones or stings/bites

Formal Access Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating the use of a generally safer ‘track’, effectively exposing people to the relevant safety signage/information, reducing the quality of signage required and enhancing emergency reporting/location identification.

Frequency A measure of the number of occurrences per unit of time

Geomorphology Is the scientific study of landforms and the processes that shape them

Hazard A source of potential harm

Hazard Symbols A graphical symbol used together with a safety colour and safety shape to form a safety sign

Informal Access Informal access ways may create higher risk through use (uneven ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/sink-holes), may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make emergency location reporting difficult (location awareness).

Inherent Risk The risk that an activity would pose if no controls or other mitigating factors were in place

IRB Inflatable Rescue Boat


Page 6 of 86

LGA Local Government Area – for the purposes of this report this area is used to determine the scope of the assessment (i.e. the coastal boundary of the Local Government Area). This may include lands managed by Councils, Crown and National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Lifesaving Service An organised and structured service comprised of paid lifeguards and/or volunteer lifesavers and appropriate rescue and first aid equipment supported by a coordinated backup team

Likelihood Used as a general description of probability or frequency

Modal The conditions that occur most frequently, or more often than other conditions.

Monitor To check, supervise, observe critically or measure the progress of an activity, action or system on a regular basis in order to identify change from the performance level required or expected

Peak Water Safety Agencies

A peak body is defined as a state, territory or national non-profit organisation established to cater for the needs, interests and aspirations of its members. Members may include individuals or organisations, but they will all have a common interest. Peak bodies in the water safety sector may include agencies such as Surf Life Saving, Royal Life Saving, Surf Educators Australia, AustSwim, Australian Professional Ocean Lifeguard Association, Surfing NSW and the Office of Boating Safety who represent the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council as a committee member.

Prevailing The conditions existing in a particular place or at a particular time

Preventative Action / Prevention

A lifesaver/lifeguard simply providing proactive direction or advice to beachgoers in a ‘preventative action’ for the beachgoer to avoid finding themselves in a position beyond their capability

Probability A measure of the chance of occurrence expressed as a number

Rescue A lifesaver/lifeguard rendering direct assistance to a beachgoer in difficulty in the water

Residual Risk Risk remaining after implementation of risk treatments

Rip Current Channelled currents of water flowing away from shore, typically extending from the shoreline, through the surf zone, and past the line of breaking waves

Risk Standards Australia defines risk as the effect of uncertainty on objects (AS/NZS 31000:2009)

Risk Analysis Systematic process to understand the nature of and to the level of risk

Risk Assessment Standards Australia defines a risk assessment as the overall process of risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation (AS/NZS 31000:2009)

Risk Evaluation Process of comparing the level of risk against criteria

Risk Identification The process of determining what, where, when, why and how something should happen


Page 7 of 86

Risk Management Standards Australia defines risk management as coordinated activities to direct and control an organisation with regard to risk (AS/NZS 31000:2009).

Risk Register A table summarising the identified risks, the location, why it has been identified as a risk, and what current treatments are in place to lessen the risk and an overall hazard rating.

Risk Treatment Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify risk

Risk Treatment Plan A table summarising how to deal with the identified risks, including a list of potential risk treatments, the risk treatments currently and any residual risk.

RWC Rescue water craft (jet ski)

SLS Branch Surf Life Saving Branch, a regional body of Surf Life Saving formed to further the objects of surf lifesaving in a particular geographic area.

Stakeholders Those people and organisations who may affect, be affected, or perceive themselves to be affected by a decision, activity or risk

1.5 Project Team / Authors Project Team: Adam Weir, Coastal Risk Manager, [email protected] Camilla Green, Coastal Risk Officer, [email protected] Luke Stigter, Coastal Risk Officer, [email protected] Chris Twine, Coastal Administration Officer, [email protected] Australian CoastSafe Surf Life Saving New South Wales Ph: 02-9471 8000| F: 02-9471 8001 W: www.coastsafe.org.au/blueprint


Page 8 of 86

2 Assessment Methodology

2.1 Introduction The methodology included site identification, site inspection, hazard identification, data analysis, beach hazard ratings, beach identification, facility visitation ratings, facilities, beach usage, incident data, communication and consultation.

2.2 Site Identification The map in Figure 2.2.1 provides an overview of the locations of beaches and rock platforms within the Manly LGA subject to the coastal risk assessment. The specific locations can be referenced in Appendix E. All together the Australian CoastSafe team assessed approximately 8km of coastline in the Manly LGA. The area includes locations and/or facilities under the administration of: o Manly Council o Sydney Harbour National Park o Crown Lands The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment and is not limited to signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user groups, conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people to visit the location. The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of the Manly LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this report. Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the coastal aquatic environment.


Page 9 of 86

Figure 2.2.1 Overview of Manly LGA coastal Locations assessed by Australian CoastSafe


Page 10 of 86

2.3 Site Inspection Table 2.3.1 Assessed locations and assessment dates

Location

Land Management Authority

Date

Queenscliff

Manly Council

Monday 11th

& Tuesday 12th

November, 2013

North Steyne

Manly Council

Monday 11th

& Tuesday 12th

November, 2013

Manly

Manly Council

Monday 11th

& Wednesday 13th

November, 2013

Manly Point

Manly Council

Thursday 14th

November, 2013

Fairy Bower

Manly Council

Thursday 14th

November, 2013

Shelly Beach

Manly Council

Thursday 14th

November, 2013

Fairy Bower Point

Manly Council

Thursday 14th

November, 2013

Blue Fish Point

Sydney Harbour National Park

Wednesday 13th

November, 2013

North Head


Wednesday 13th

& Thursday 14th

November, 2013

Old Man’s Hat


Wednesday 13th

November, 2013


Page 11 of 86

2.4 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment During the site inspection hazards were identified within the area inspected and assessed in terms of their individual risk to public safety (extreme, high, medium, low) using a risk assessment matrix Appendix B. The risk assessment matrix considers both the type of harm that could be sustained as a result of an individual hazard and the likelihood of this harm actually occurring. Hazards/Risks The Manly LGA has a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the beaches in the area. Based on the risk assessment in Appendix B, the following hazards that have been rated with the greatest inherent risk for the Manly LGA: Strong ocean currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type Waves/waves over washing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type Slippery rocks: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement Cliffs/dangerous access: As a result of coastal geography Boating traffic: As a result of human interaction It has been identified that the above listed hazards pose risk to the following types of recreational users: Strong ocean currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Waves/waves over washing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Inshore holes/drop-off/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen Slippery rocks: Fishermen, rock platform users Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen Cliffs/dangerous access: Surf craft users, fishermen, walkers, sight seers Boating traffic: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters This coastal public safety risk assessment aligns with the international standard of risk management ‘AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines’ (Standards Australia, 2009). Figure 2.4.1 on the following page illustrates the risk management process.

Figure 2.4.1 Risk Management Process


Page 12 of 86

2.5 Beach Hazard Ratings and Overview The ABSAMP (Australian Beach Safety and Management Program) was developed by Professor Andrew Short from the University of Sydney Coastal Studies Unit in conjunction with Surf Life Saving Australia. The program has identified coastal hazards that affect bathers and rates the safety of the beach on a scale of one to ten, where one (1) is the least hazardous and ten (10) is the most hazardous. The beach hazard ratings and definitions are provided in Table 2.5.1. Table 2.5.1 ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings

The beach hazard rating is calculated by determining the beach type and wave height. This can be done under either modal (average) or prevailing (current) conditions. The beach hazard rating is then calculated by using the following table. Table 2.5.2 Beach hazard rating calculation matrices for wave dominate beaches

Wave Height

Beach Type

< 0.5 (m)

0.5 (m) 1.0 (m) 1.5 (m) 2.0 (m) 2.5 (m) 3.0 (m) > 3.0 (m)

Dissipative 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10

Long Shore Bar Trough

4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10

Rhythmic Bar Beach

4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10

Transverse Bar Rip

4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Low Tide Terrace 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

Reflective 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

The beach hazard ratings presented in this report relate to modal beach conditions and as such the hazard rating of a beach may increase when conditions alter e.g. with increasing wave height, winds, strong tides and high tide. Furthermore, a hazard rating is also applied to an average person and therefore the hazard may in fact be greater or less, depending upon an individual's own skill, and understanding and competence in relation to a certain area. The ABSAMP hazard ratings for the inspected areas of the Manly LGA are detailed within the next section of the report.

Hazard Rating Details

1 - 3

Least Hazardous: Low danger posed by water depth and/or weak currents; however, supervision still required, in particular for children and poor swimmers.

4 - 6

Moderately Hazardous: The level of hazard depends on wave and weather conditions, with the possibility of strong rips and currents posing a moderate risk.

7 - 8

Highly Hazardous: Experience in strong surf, rips and currents required, with beaches in this category considered dangerous.

9 - 10

Extremely Hazardous: Identifies beaches that are considered extremely dangerous due to strong rips and currents, and large breakers.


Page 13 of 86

2.6 ABSAMP Types and Ratings The ABSAMP Hazard Rating for the assessed locations listed in Table 2.6.1 below. The table provides both a modal and a prevailing ABSAMP rating. The modal ABSAMP rating represents the average conditions for each location, which has been extracted from the Australian Beach Safety and Management Program. The prevailing ABSAMP rating represents the conditions observed by Australian CoastSafe on the day each audit took place. Table 2.6.1 ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings – Manly LGA

Location Name ABSAMP No.

ABSAMP Rating

(Modal)

ABSAMP Type (Modal)

ABSAMP Rating

(Prevailing)

ABSAMP Type (Prevailing)

Queenscliff nsw317a 6 Transverse Bar

and Rip 10 Transverse Bar and

Rip

North Steyne nsw317b 6 Transverse Bar


Rip

Manly nsw317c 6 Transverse Bar


Rip

Manly Point nsw317cRPa 5* Rocky Coast 6* Rocky Coast

Fairy Bower nsw318 3 Reflective + Rocks 3 Reflective + Rocks

Shelly Beach nsw319 2 Reflective 2 Reflective

Fairy Bower Point nsw319RPa 3* Rocky Coast 3* Rocky Coast

Blue Fish Point nsw319RPb 3* Rock Platform 3* Rocky Coast

North Head nsw319RPc 3* Rock Platform 3* Rocky Coast

Old Man’s Hat nsw319RPd 3* Rock Platform 3* Rocky Coast

* Manly LGA Rock Platform Ratings Currently there is no method of rating the hazardousness of the rocky coast, in an equivalent manner to the ABSAMP beach hazard rating system for sandy beaches. Research is currently underway; Dr. David Kennedy has utilised a grant from Melbourne University to pilot the methods for the development of a risk classification study on rocky coasts (Kennedy, et al., 2013). This research has now received funding under an Australian Research Council linkage grant. Prof. Colin Woodroffe (University of Wollongong) presented the methodology for this project at the NSW Coastal Conference in Kiama (November, 2012). As an interim method of providing an indication of the hazardousness of rock platforms the ABSAMP beach hazard ratings for the beaches on either side of the each rock platform have been averaged. Since the beaches on either side of a rock platform would be exposed to similar prevailing and modal wind, wave and weather conditions and these sandy beaches have a recognised and accepted method of rating the associated hazardousness taking the average of the beaches bordering a rock platform will provide an indication as to the potential hazard associated with the modal conditions affecting the rock platform. It is a limitation of the report that there is no available method of calculating the specific hazard rating of a rock platform. In order to allow the risk calculations used in this report to be processed the interim solution, which takes into account the local conditions and geomorphology detailed above, has been applied. Once the research being conducted by Dr. David Kennedy and Prof. Colin Woodroffe is completed then these calculations should be revisited.

Treatment Option 4.1 Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and Surf Life Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky coast should be commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related to rocky coasts in this report should be reviewed.


Page 14 of 86

2.7 ABSAMP Beach Type Characteristic Overview and Hazards The modal beach characteristics and associated hazards for each location are as follows:

2.7.1 Transverse Bar and Rip

Transverse bar and rip (TBR) type is the most common and extensive of Australia’s wave-dominated beach types. They occur primarily on beaches composed of fine to medium sand (0.3 mm) and exposed to waves averaging 1.5 m. This beach type received its name from the fact that the bars are transverse or perpendicular to and attached to the beach, separated by deeper rip channels. The bars and rips are usually regularly spaced and range from 150 m on the lower energy sea-dominated northern Australian beaches to 250 m along the higher energy southeast coast and 350 m along the exposed southern coast. Waves break heavily on the shallower bars and less in the deeper rip channels resulting in lower energy swash in lee of the bars and higher energy swash/shore break in lee of the rips. The shoreline is rhythmic building a few metres seaward behind the attached bars as deposition occurs forming the mega cusp horns and being scoured out and often scarped in lee of the rips forming the embayments. The surf zone has a cellular circulation pattern. Waves tend to break more on the bars and move shoreward as wave bores. This water flows both directly into the adjacent rip channel and, closer to the beach, into the rip feeder channels located at the base of the beach. The water in the rip feeders converge and return seaward as a strong rip current. The following beaches within the Manly LGA are classified as Transverse Bar and Rip: o Queenscliff o North Steyne o Manly

2.7.2 Reflective

Reflective sandy beaches lie at the lower energy end of the wave-dominated beach spectrum. They are characterised by relatively steep, narrow beaches usually composed of coarser sand (0.4 mm). On the open Australian coast, sandy beaches require waves to be less than 0.5 m to be reflective. For this reason they are also found inside the entrance to bays, at the lower energy end of some ocean beaches and in lee of the reefs and islets that front many beaches. Reflective beaches are Australia's most common beach type occurring in every state though they are more common around the southern half of the continent. Reflective beach morphology consists of the steeper, narrow beach and swash zone, with beach cusps commonly present in the upper high tide swash zone. They have no bar or surf zone as waves move unbroken to the shore, where they collapse or surge up the beach face.

Figure 2.7.1 Illustration of a Transverse Bar and Rip beach

Figure 2.7.2 Illustration of a Reflective beach


Page 15 of 86

The following beach within the Manly LGA is classified as Reflective: o Fairy Bower o Shelly Beach

2.7.3 Rock Platforms and Rocky Coasts

Rock platforms and rocky coasts are wave eroded regions that exist at the base of rocky cliffs and headlands. They are typically influenced by tides and waves. For coastal hazards, rocky coasts can therefore be considered static features unable to adjust their morphology during storms unlike sandy beaches (Kennedy, et al., 2013). The following regions within the Manly LGA are classified as Rock Platforms or Rocky Coast: o Manly Point o Fairy Bower Point o Blue Fish Point o North Head o Old Man’s Hat o Quarantine Head


Page 16 of 86

2.8 Facility Visitation Rates (FVR) The Facility Visitation Rate (FVR) is a quantitative assessment system developed by Statewide Mutual as ‘Best Practice’ for Signage As Remote Supervision (2007). The FVR can be used by NSW Local Government to determine the most appropriate signage schedule for a facility (venue or location). The FVR is calculated using data collected during the assessment process and includes site population use and frequency of use. Since the FVR calculation is used to determine aquatic recreational warning signage requirements, the figures used are those of the peak period of beach usage. The following information is used to calculate the FVR: 1. Observational data collected during the site assessment; 2. Stakeholder observation, consultation and feedback; and, 3. Historical statistical data The Facility Visitation Rate is calculated using the following formula: FVR = (Development x Population) + Frequency Where: Development* = The level of facilities and infrastructure that exist within or about the facility Population = The average number of people that use the facility at any point in time Frequency = The number of times that the facility is used by patrons

* Note: Only beach environments were assessed so the ABSAMP hazard rating for each location was used to determine the

Development rating

2.8.1 Facility Visitation Rating (FVR) Reference Tables

Table 2.8.1 provides the Development ratings that apply to a reserve or other non-beach environment provided by council. Table 2.8.2 provides the equivalent AMSAMP hazard rating for each Development rating. The Population and Frequency rating classifications are provided in Table 2.8.3 and Table 2.8.4, respectively.

Table 2.8.1 Typical Development and Natural Hazards Rating for Reserves – non beach environments

Rating Development Natural Hazards

1 Virginal bush, cleared land, no infrastructure No hazardous features

2 Cleared land, static infrastructure e.g. grass area with tables and chairs, toilet block, lookout

Sloping ground; no natural water; walking track around reserve

3 Cleared land with mobile infrastructure e.g. grassed area with play equipment, cycle way, market, leash free dog

areas

Reserve contains natural waterway that runs during wet weather, drops less

than 1 metre

4 Land manager owned infrastructure with no artificial lighting e.g. golf course, football field, recreational

ground, caravan park

Creeks, ponds and ledges between 1 metre and 3 metres

5 Extensively developed infrastructure with artificial lighting e.g. sporting complex, artificially lit courts

Contains rivers, dams and cliffs greater than 3 metres

Table 2.8.2 Typical development ratings for beaches

Rating ABSAMP Beach Rating

1 Beach hazard rating 1 and 2






Page 17 of 86

Table 2.8.3 Typical population use rating for a facility

Rating Population Use

1 Less than 5 people at a time

2 5 to 50 people at a time



5 Greater than 500 people at a time

Table 2.8.4 Suggested Frequency use rating for a Facility

Rating Frequency of Use

1 An annual activity or event is held at the facility

2 An activity event takes place in the facility on a monthly basis

3 An activity event takes place in the facility on a weekly basis

4 An activity event takes place in the facility on a daily basis

5 The facility is in continuous use for the majority of the day

The FVR values for assessed locations in the Manly LGA are provided in Table 2.8.5. Since only beach environments were assessed, the ABSAMP hazard rating for each location was converted to a Development rating using Table 2.8.2. Table 2.8.5 Facility Visitation Rates – for assessed locations

LOCATION NAME DEVELOPMENT RATING

* POPULATION + FREQUENCY = FVR

Queenscliff 3 x 5 + 4 = 19

North Steyne 3 x 5 + 4 = 19

Manly 3 x 5 + 5 = 20

Manly Point 3 x 2 + 4 = 10

Fairy Bower 2 x 3 + 4 = 10

Shelly Beach 1 x 5 + 4 = 9

Fairy Bower Point 2 x 3 + 3 = 9

Blue Fish Point 2 x 2 + 3 = 7

North Head 2 x 4 + 3 = 11

Old Man’s Hat 2 x 2 + 3 = 7

Given the FVR scores listed in Table 2.8.5, the most appropriate signage characteristics for each location are listed below.

FVR Score between 7 and 10

o Manly Point o Fairy Bower o Shelly Beach o Fairy Bower Point o Blue Fish Point o Old Man’s Hat This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by Land Managers have signage and are spaced no greater than 500 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the facility o A general warning message o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top hazard should appear


Page 18 of 86

o Any information symbols relevant to the facility

FVR Score between 11 and 15 o North Head This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by Land Managers have signage and are spaced no greater than 500 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the facility o A general warning message o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top two hazards should appear o Any information symbols relevant to the facility FVR Score between 16 and 20 o Queenscliff o North Steyne o Manly This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by Land Managers have signage and are spaced no greater than 250 metres apart around the beach perimeter. o The name of the facility o A general warning message o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top three hazards should appear o Any information symbols relevant to the facility FVR Score between 21 and 26 o No locations This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by Land Managers have signage and are spaced no greater than 100 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the facility o A general warning message o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top four hazards should appear o Any information symbols relevant to the facility


Page 19 of 86

2.9 Facilities Audit Facilities in the coastal risk management process are any item of infrastructure which is situated close to the beach/access. These include but are not limited to: o Picnic areas o BBQ’s o Playgrounds o Benches o Showers/water taps o Amenities o Car parks o Caravan parks o Art infrastructure o Rubbish bins o Boat Ramps Why do we record facilities? It is important for the Land Manager to recognise that by providing facilities to the public, it is likely that there will be increase in people visiting these areas. This increase in human visitation can correlate to the likelihood of a risk occurring in a coastal environment. Implementation of the treatment plans identified in this report may reduce the risk of a particular event occurring. Refer to Appendix D for a breakdown of facilities at the assessed locations within the Manly LGA.


Page 20 of 86

2.10 Population, Development and Tourism Population growth is an important consideration when evaluating and predicting beach usage trends. Increasing beach usage due to population growth relates to an increase in the probability of an event occurring. Tourism operations and development proposals are also associated with population growth, and these should also be considered when determining suitable risk treatment options.

2.10.1 Population Statistics

The 2011 census recorded that a population count of 39,747 in the Manly LGA. Population over the last 10 years has increased steadily by approximately 3,203 people (8.7% growth). Table 2.10.1 lists the male, female and total population in the Manly LGA for the last three Census counts. Table 2.10.1 Manly population data (ABS, 2013)

2.10.2 Development Plans in Manly

Manly 2015 (Manly Council , 2013) This exciting project provides a vision for the revitalisation of the public domain and key infrastructure facilities within the Manly CBD. The project aims to improve, renew and capitalise on Manly as a local town centre and international destination as well as creating spaces and facilities for use by our local community. Some of the major developments include: o Removing the Whistler Street car park to make way for new public spaces and community uses o Constructing a new parking station beneath Manly Oval o Pedestrian access of Sydney Road from Belgrave Street through to the Corso to form a 'Gateway Plaza' and

'High Street' for shopping as an alternative destination to the Corso o Broadening the appeal of Manly for locals by introducing new community programs as well as new shops

and services o Revitalising Manly's laneways and streets, many of which have large components which remain un-

activated o Increasing opportunities for walking and cycling Sydney Harbour National Park, Plan of Management 2012 In regards to the North Head precinct, the Sydney Harbour National Park outlines the following outcomes: 1. Conserve the natural values of the park 2. Celebrate and nurture contemporary and traditional aboriginal culture 3. Celebrate the historical values of the park 4. Provide enriching and memorable experiences in the park 5. Improved access to the park for all 6. Strengthen and create partnerships 7. Robust management of the park is sustained 8. Contribute to the goal of easy and safe transport to and within the park The strategies of the outcome referring to improved access include: o Provide high quality, well designed landscape elements at the entrance to North Head at Park Hill Arch to

demonstrate pride and excitement at what lies beyond on North Head o Prepare and implement an integrated signage package for the precinct including entry, information,

directional, regulatory and interpretive signage o Construct a visitor viewing platform at the lookout adjacent to the North Fort entrance. Consideration is to

be given to a design competition for this structure.

Manly Local Government Area – Population

Year Males Females Total

2011 19,408 20,339 39,747

2006 18,066 19,044 37,110

2001 17,861 18,683 36,544


Page 21 of 86

o Improve access by developing new opportunities for the mobility impaired. These may include bird hides, accessible walking tracks, lookout platforms, and potentially new improved access opportunities in aquatic reserves

The completion of these two projects will attract a higher number of visitors to these areas which may increase the likelihood of a particular risk occurring and therefore existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Manly LGA, should consider the impact of increased coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue equipment and supervision.

Treatment Options 1.1 & 2.1 Existing and future coastal development plans scheduled for the Manly Local Government Area, should consider the impact of increased coastal usage, discussing possible treatment options such as education, signage, access, public rescue equipment and supervision.

2.10.3 Tourism Information

The following information on international visitors, domestic overnight visitors and domestic day trippers has been directly quoted from Destination NSW (2012). Overview The average number of visitors to Manly per annum over the past three years was over 2.1 million. This figure is a very conservative estimate as it is based on data from two national tourism surveys and relies on visitors satisfying a very specific definition. The day trips figure particularly may be an underestimate as the definition of a day trip is “a round trip distance of at least 50 kilometres and away from home for at least four hours”. Therefore, people traveling to Manly from most inner parts of Sydney would not be counted. International Visitors Of all the international visitors that travelled to Sydney, 32% visited Manly. The average number of international visitors to Manly over the past three years was 837,300. The top three international markets visiting Manly were the UK (20%), USA (12%) and New Zealand (8%). The most popular activity for international visitors to Australia who visited Manly was going to restaurants and cafes with 91% of all international visitors participating in this activity. Other popular activities included going to the beach (85%), sightseeing (84%), going shopping (80%), going to pubs and clubs (61%) and visiting national parks (60%). International visitors to Manly were most likely to be travelling unaccompanied (59%) or in an adult couple (22%). One quarter (25%) of international visitors to Manly were backpackers. The youth market (15-29 years) accounts for 43% of the total international visitors to Manly. The second largest age group is the 30-39 years olds (19%). International visitors to Manly were most likely to be first time visitors to Australia (55%). Domestic Overnight Visitors Only 11% of the total domestic overnight visitors to Sydney travelled to Manly. The average number of domestic overnight visitors to Manly over the last three years was 135,000. Domestic overnight visitors who stayed in Manly were mainly travelling for the purpose of visiting friends and relatives, followed by holiday. The most popular activities for domestic overnight visitors travelling to Manly were eating out at restaurants (78%), visiting friends and relatives (56%), sightseeing (46%), going shopping (45%), and going to the beach (39%). Overnight visitors to Manly were more likely to come from interstate (67%) than intrastate (33%). Interstate visitors were more likely to come from Victoria (27%) and Queensland (19%) while intrastate visitors were most likely going to be travelling from The Hunter or North Coast. Domestic Day Trip Manly received 3% of the total Sydney domestic day trip market, Bondi received 2% and Sutherland received 4%. The average number of day-trip visitors to Manly over the past three years was 468,000 per annum. Of all visitors to Manly, nearly two thirds (64%) come to Manly for leisure purposes and 29% to visit their friends and relatives. The most popular activities for day trippers to Manly were eating out and going to the beach.


Page 22 of 86

Local Accommodation Providers Local accommodation providers also attract beach users to the coast especially during school holiday periods. The beachside suburbs of the Manly LGA are largely occupied with residential housing, however a small number of holiday lodging options are available. The major accommodation providers are listed in Table 2.10.2. Table 2.10.2 Accommodation Providers in the Manly LGA

Venue Location No. Rooms/Sites Max Capacity

Manly Oceanside Accommodation Queenscliff 26 56

Manly Surfside Apartments North Steyne 70 280

Novotel Manly Pacific Manly 213 630

The Sebel Manly 83 180

Q. Station Manly 82 180

Manly Paradise Motel & Apartments Manly 44 176

Manly Shores Holiday Apartments Manly 26 56

Manly Backpackers Manly 32 110

Boardrider Backpacker & Budget Motel Manly 27 108

There are also numerous self-contained apartments and bed and breakfast locations within the Manly LGA. Through the methods of consultation it was learnt that alcohol and night swimming was also an issue around the Manly Corso area. Although lights around the promenade make it safer for night life, lights may also encourage people to go swimming. This should continually be monitored by Police and Council rangers.


Page 23 of 86

2.10.4 Beach Usage Statistics

The following statistics have been recorded by the lifesaving (volunteers) and lifeguard services (paid) operating within the Manly LGA over the last five patrolling seasons (2008/09, 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13). Statistics for lifesavers have been sourced from the Surf Life Saving internal management database known as ‘SurfGuard’. Lifeguard statistics have been sourced from Manly Council. Manly Council lifeguards patrol at Manly 365 days a year. Queenscliff and North Steyne are patrolled from the beginning of the September school holidays to Anzac Day or the end of the April School Holidays (whichever is later). Requests were made by Australian CoastSafe to Manly Council in order to obtain lifeguard statistics for inclusion in this report however these statistics were not supplied. When asked Manly Council Lifeguard Service informed assessors that lifeguards did not record beach usage statistics, however they did record statistics in relation to rescues and preventative actions. Manly Council Lifeguard Service should implement a system of recording daily service statistics which include an estimation of beach visitation numbers recorded at start, middle and end of each service day. Attendances: The below graph provides the average daily attendance for lifesavers (weekends and public holidays).

Figure 2.10.1 SLS attendance statistics for 2008 to 2013 (SurfGuard, 2013)

Notes to graph: o Manly has the highest recorded average daily attendance o North Steyne recorded the second highest average daily attendance followed closely by Queenscliff Through the methods of consultation it was also learnt that alcohol and night swimming is also an issue around the Manly Corso and Shelly Beach area. Although lights around the promenade make it safer for night life, lights may also encourage people to go swimming. This should continually be monitored by Police and Council Rangers.


Page 24 of 86

Rescues: The rescue statistics for lifesavers (weekends and public holidays) along Manly beach are illustrated in below.

Figure 2.10.2 SLS rescue statistics for 2008 to 2013 (SurfGuard, 2013)

Notes to graph: o Manly recorded the highest number of rescues followed by Queenscliff o Rescues between the three clubs were relatively consistent o Season 2010/11 for Manly recorded the highest number of rescues in a single year


Page 25 of 86

Preventions/First Aid: The preventions and first aid statistics for lifesavers (weekends and public holidays) along Manly beach are provided below.

Preventions may include: o Swimmers advised/warned o Craft users advised/warned o Beach users advised/warned o Warning signs erected o Shark alarm o Searches/lost children

First Aid cases may include: o Minor injuries/first aid o Major injures/hospitalisation o Marine stings o Spinal injuries o Shock

Figure 2.10.3 SLS first aid and prevention statistics for 2008 to 2013 (SurfGuard, 2013)

Notes to graph: o Manly recorded the highest number of first aid cases and preventions o North Steyne and Queenscliff recorded a similar number of first aid cases o North Steyne received the second highest number of first aid cases Rescues/Preventions: The below table shows the cumulative statistics for both preventions and rescues which are then used to determine the preventions: rescues ratio. In theory, the more preventative actions a club/service makes, the number of rescues that are required to be conducted will decrease e.g. Queenscliff makes 27 preventions before having to conduct a single rescue. These statistics may highlight which clubs/services have the opportunity to be more proactive in making preventions with the aim of reducing the amount of rescues that need to be performed. Surf Life Saving

Queenscliff North Steyne Manly

Total Preventions 12765 20988 46121

Total Rescues 471 452 592

Ratio Preventions: Rescues 27:1 46:1 78:1

Notes to table: o Manly recorded the highest ratio of preventions / rescues o Queenscliff recorded the lowest ratio of preventions / rescues


Page 26 of 86

2.10.5 Drowning Incidents

The drowning incidents that have occurred in the Manly LGA between the 1st of July 2004 and the 30th of June 2013 are provided in Table 2.10.3. Table 2.10.3 Drowning incidents within Manly LGA (SLSA, 2013)

Coastal Drowning Incidents – Manly Local Government Area

Date Location Time Month Age / Gender

Ethnicity Residential Status

Activity Victim Postcode

9/02/2005 Manly Cove 1:00 Feb 71 / M Tongan Aus Resident Boating 2095

16/02/2006 Blue Fish Point 8:00 Mar 49 /M Korean Aus Resident Rock Fishing 2150

17/10/2010 Blue Fish Point 16:30 Oct 33 /M Japanese Aus Resident Rock Fishing 2090

16/08/2011 Blue Fish Point n/a Aug 23 /M n/a Aus Resident Rock Fishing 7120

30/04/2012 Blue Fish Point 20:30 Apr 40 /M Asian Aus Resident Rock Fishing 2067

31/12/2012 Delwood Beach 13:00 Dec 29 /M Korean Int. Tourist Swimming N/A

Notes to table: o All 6 people who have drowned in Manly between the 1st of July 2004 and the 30th of June 2013 were

male; o One of these men was a Korean tourist, while the rest were all Australian residents; o Four people (67%) were of Asian descent; o More than 67% of the incidents were rock fishing related and occurred at Blue Fish Point; o Only one of the persons who drowned resided in the Manly LGA (see the following page for illustration) While data surrounding incident location/time has been referenced, specific environmental conditions at the time of incidents have not been adequately assessed to identify causal factors and specific trends. This information exists and is held in raw format by the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), including wave height/direction, tides, wind speed/direction, temperature, and visibility. The Bureau of Meteorology and Surf Life Saving Australia are currently undertaking a retrospective analysis of meteorological and oceanographic conditions prevalent at the time of drowning cases between 2003 and 2013 to identify trends and inform the refinement of the hazardous surf warning system. Review and assessment of this data may identify environmental trends which may encourage/discourage recreational activities, impact hazard/risk perception and risk taking behaviour, identify higher-risk conditions for types of localities, and specific ‘black spot’ locations. Dangerous surf warnings and education/awareness programs may be improved as a result.


Page 27 of 86

Figure 2.10.4 Manly LGA – Drowning Location and Victim Postcode of Residence


Page 28 of 86

2.10.6 Emergency Callouts

There have been 37 emergency callouts through the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (SRERS) from 1st January 2008 to 30th October 2013 in the Manly LGA. The SRERS involves callout teams (lifesavers/lifeguards), including ‘after hours’ responding to emergencies that have been tasked by the Police. As a result of the 37 callouts, 20 persons have been rescued (including found persons). 18 callouts resulted in ‘no further action’, meaning resources responded to the incident however the patient managed to self rescue or was rescued by a member of the public. Through the SRES, emergency services were called to one drowning incident in the Manly LGA. Note: The data below does not incorporate incidents from other emergency services where the SRERS may not have been

tasked e.g. Water Police, Ambulance and Marine Rescue data.

Notes to graph: o Manly has the highest number of emergency callouts o Harbour beaches also receive a high number of emergency callouts o 24% of emergency callouts occur at rocky coasts/rock platforms o Freshwater Point, North Narrabeen and Collaroy Point all recorded the least number of callouts

Figure 2.10.5 Surf Rescue Emergency Response by Location (SLSNSW, 2013)


Page 29 of 86

Surf Rescue Emergency Response by Season and Day

Figure 2.10.6 Surf Rescue Emergency Response by Season and Day (SLSNSW, 2013)

Notes to graph: o The majority of emergency response callouts have occurred during summer followed by autumn o Mondays recorded the greatest percentage of callouts at 25% followed by Saturday at 17%, while the least

amount of callouts occurred on Tuesdays at 5% o Over 60% of callouts occurred during Monday to Friday.


Page 30 of 86

Notes to graph: o Surf craft related activities have instigated the greatest number of emergency responses having been

recorded in Manly o The second highest activity resulting in an emergency response callout was swimming the vessel incidents


Page 31 of 86

Notes to graph: o 41% of emergency callouts occurred between 3pm and midnight highlighting that this is a high risk period o 73% of emergency callouts occurred in the afternoon after 12:00hrs

Treatment Options 1.2 & 2.2 Coastal usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics) should be used to inform decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal safety. (p.31)

Figure 2.10.7 Surf Rescue Emergency Response by Patrol Season/Hours (SLSNSW, 2013)


Page 32 of 86

2.11 Communication and Consultation Communicating with stakeholders about risk perception and tolerance is a core component of the risk assessment and management process. Stakeholder Consultation Consultation with a number of stakeholders was formally undertaken to ensure Land Managers and other key stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide local input and knowledge i.e. validation of strategies in place, risk management issues and opportunities that may exist. Local stakeholder meetings were conducted with: o Beth Lawson, Manly Deputy General Manager, People Place & Infrastructure, Manly Council o Helen Lever, Acting Divisional Manager, Human Services and Facilities, Manly Council o Adele Heasman, Deputy Mayor, Manly Council o Mark McDougall, Senior Lifeguard Supervisor, Manly Council o David Boardman, Lifeguard Supervisor, Manly Council o Cameron Grey, Lifeguard Supervisor, Manly Council o Lee de Gail, Harbour North Area – North Head, National Parks and Wildlife Service o Craig Riddington, Founder SEA Australia, President Surf Educators International o Members and Directors of Surf Life Saving Northern Beaches o Stan Konstantaras, President, Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) o Alex Bellissimo, Bellissimo Rock and Beach Charters o Department of Primary Industries – NSW Fisheries

The consultation process has been aided in the following ways: o Open community forums and workshops o Print, Radio and Television media announcements of workshops and consultation o Written and verbal follow ups post workshops o Use of social media - Twitter o Web based surveys o Web based information submissions o On-site communication and distribution of flyers o On-site one-to-one surveying o Draft reports circulated to the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council Figure 2.11.1 Project Blueprint Flyer


Page 33 of 86

Consultation Workshop A public forum was held on Thursday 14th November 2013 at the Queenscliff Surf Life Saving Club to discuss Project Blueprint and drowning prevention. This public forum was advertised in local print media and pre-identified stakeholders were notified via email. Public forums were open to any member of the public including surf lifesavers, lifeguards, fishing groups, surfing associations, emergency services personnel, residents, etc. The Manly public forum was attended by: o Tracey Hare-Boyd o Joseph Mastrangelo o Rob Daniel o Anthony Bradstreet o Steve Faddy

President – North Steyne SLSC Vice Club Captain – North Steyne SLSC Club Captain – Queenscliff SLSC Deputy President Lifesaving – Manly LSC Previous Director – SLS Sydney Northern Beaches

Consultation Survey The consultation process has also involved the introduction of two online surveys which has been useful to capture input from a wide range of key stakeholders, at local/regional level. The first survey was sent to both internal and external stakeholders. Questions focused on drowning identification and prevention. The second survey was sent to internal stakeholders only e.g. lifesavers and lifeguards. Questions focused on visitation numbers and incidents. Specific questions and answers can be referenced in Appendix F and will be included within the final report. Stakeholder communication The process of communicating risk estimates from the assessment process to decision-makers and ultimately to the public, sometimes referred to as risk education, is only one part of the communication process. In getting those affected by risk to accept risk mitigation measures, and in providing decision-makers and communities with the information they need to tolerate and deal with risks, there needs to be two-way communications that includes those affected by risk, the public, into the decision-making process. It is acknowledged that Manly Council meets with the Club Presidents of Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly on a regular basis throughout the season. It is recommended that the treatment options found in this report are addressed as part of these meetings. The Local Emergency Management Committee is an effective group on the Northern Beaches to discuss emergency management processes, opportunities and issues (including coastal). The group is made up of representatives from NSW Police, NSW Marine Area Command, NSW Fire and Rescue, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW Ambulance Service, State Emergency Service, Marine Rescue, Pittwater/Warringah/Manly Councils, National Parks and Wildlife, Surf Life Saving Northern Beaches, Australian Lifeguard Service, Transport Groups, Local Government Departments (Education, Communication Services), Roads and Maritime Services, Sydney Water, Telstra, Jemina (Gas) and the Animal Emergency Committee. Australian CoastSafe presented Project Blueprint at the last Local Emergency Management Committee meeting on 7 November 2013.

Treatment Option 1.3 & 5.1 Manly Council should continue to meet regularly with the Presidents of Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly Surf Life Saving Clubs as an effective forum which considers coastal safety issues and develops coastal safety strategies in the Manly Local Government Area. It is recommended that the treatment options found in this report be addressed as part of these meetings.


Page 34 of 86

3 Risk Assessment Findings

3.1 Action Planning Priority (Inherent Gross Risk)

3.1.1 Action Planning Priority Index

The Action Planning Priority Index can be viewed as the gross risk score for a beach. The index seeks to identify the risks associated with the broader coastal environment under assessment, rather than specific hazards and risks present at a particular location or site. The majority of information detailed in this section of the report will be identified through pre exiting data (where available), with new data sourced where gaps are present or the data is not reliable. The total score for the Action Planning Priority Index, displayed on page 39 is intended to be used for the purpose of prioritising risk mitigation strategies provided for consideration in this report. The individual components of the Action Planning Priority Index should not be considered in isolation from the total scores outlined in Table 3.1.8 Summary of action planning priority calculations for each assessed location. The information is based on modal data for peak visitation during the busiest season(s). The Action Planning Priority Index uses the following risk identification information: 1. Australian Beach Safety & Management Program (ABSAMP) Rating (Table 3.1.1) 2. Local Population Rating (LPR) (Table 3.1.3) 3. Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR) (Table 3.1.5) 4. Access Rating (AR) (Table 3.1.7)

3.1.2 Australian Beach Safety and Management Program

Table 3.1.1 ABSAMP and Indicative ratings applied to assessed locations

Location Name ABSAMP No. ABSAMP Rating ABSAMP Type

Queenscliff nsw317a 6 Transverse Bar and Rip

North Steyne nsw317b 6 Transverse Bar and Rip

Manly nsw317c 6 Transverse Bar and Rip

Manly Point nsw317cRPa 5* Rocky Coast

Fairy Bower nsw318 3 Reflective + Rocks

Shelly Beach nsw319 2 Reflective

Fairy Bower Point nsw319RPa 3* Rocky Coast

Blue Fish Point nsw319RPb 3* Rock Platform

North Head nsw319RPc 3* Rock Platform

Old Man’s Hat nsw319RPd 3* Rock Platform


Page 35 of 86

3.1.3 Local Population Rating

The Local Population Rating (LPR) expands on the information obtained from the Facility Visitation Rating. This additional population rating identifies the population of residents and/or non-residents located within 2km’s of a coastal location under assessment. The highest figure (resident or non-resident) will be recorded. Table 3.1.2 Local population rating descriptors

Population Rating Qualifying Description (all staying/living within 2km of beach)

1 < 50 residents and/or < 20 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

2 50 – 250 residents and/or 21 – 100 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)



5 2500 + residents and/or 1000 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

Table 3.1.3 Local population ratings applied to assessed locations

Location LPR Total

Queenscliff 5

North Steyne 5

Manly 5

Manly Point 5

Fairy Bower 5

Shelly Beach 5

Fairy Bower Point 5

Blue Fish Point 4

North Head 3

Old Man’s Hat 3


Page 36 of 86

3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction Rating

The Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR) identifies any conflicts present at the coastal environment between the number of people and activities taking place. Activities include both those in the water and those on the beach. Table 3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction descriptors

Population (in-water)

Conflicting activities Population (on beach)

Conflicting activities

100+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5 1000+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5

75-100 4 Persistent 4 750-1000 4 Persistent 4

50-75 3 Regular 3 500-750 3 Regular 3

25-50 2 Isolated conflicts 2 250-500 2 Isolated conflicts 2

1-25 1 No conflicts reported 1 1-250 1 No conflicts reported 1 Table 3.1.5 Human/Activity Interaction ratings applied to assessed locations

Location Population (in water)

Conflict Population (on beach)

Conflict HAI Total

Queenscliff 5 3 3 2 13

North Steyne 5 3 3 2 13

Manly 5 3 5 3 16

Manly Point 1 2 1 2 6

Fairy Bower 2 2 1 2 7

Shelly Beach 5 3 3 3 14

Fairy Bower Point 4 2 1 2 9

Blue Fish Point 1 1 1 2 5

North Head 1 1 2 3 7

Old Man’s Hat 1 1 1 2 5


Page 37 of 86

3.1.5 Access Rating

Beaches or coastal environments that have increased accessibility (i.e. near major roads, cities, public transport, car parks, boat ramps, maintained access paths etc.) increase the likelihood of users at that beach. This directly increases the level of risk of drowning and or injury. Table 3.1.6 Access rating descriptors

Table 3.1.7 Access ratings applied to assessed locations

Location Access Rating

Queenscliff 5

North Steyne 5

Manly 5

Manly Point 3

Fairy Bower 5

Shelly Beach 5

Fairy Bower Point 4

Blue Fish Point 2

North Head 3

Old Man’s Hat 2

Access Rating Qualifying Description

1 No identifiable access via road or track, no facilities, car parking or obvious access points

2 Access via un-maintained track with no facilities and/or via water access

3 Access via any form of track or walkway (either maintained or un-maintained) AND any provision of facilities or services including (but not limited to) public transport, shower,

public toilet, payphone, kiosk, significant roadway, parking

4 Access via maintained tracks with clearly identified parking area AND/OR provision of basic facilities (i.e. public toilets, public shower/ wash down area) AND/OR within 10km

of moderate sized town or city (population greater than 5,000)

5 Clearly evident, marked or signposted and maintained access points AND/OR within 10km of major town or city (population greater than 25,000) AND / OR car parking for

50 or more vehicles/boat trailers. Public transport provided within 250m of a beach access point


Page 38 of 86

3.1.6 Action Planning Priority Score

The action planning priority score provides an indicator for the overall level of risk of the location. The scores range from 0 to 60. These scores can be used to prioritise the order in which risk treatments described in the next section of this report are implemented. Table 3.1.8 Summary of action planning priority calculations for each assessed location

Location

AMSAMP X 2

(Out of 20)

Population Support

X 2 (Out of 10)

Human Activity/

Interaction (Out of 20)

Access X 2

(Out of 10)

Total Score

(Out of 60)

Queenscliff 12 10 13 10 45

North Steyne 12 10 13 10 45

Manly 12 10 16 10 48

Manly Point 10 10 6 6 32

Fairy Bower 6 10 7 10 33

Shelly Beach 4 10 14 10 38

Fairy Bower Point 6 10 9 8 33

Blue Fish Point 6 8 5 4 23

North Head 6 6 7 6 25

Old Man’s Hat 6 6 5 4 21

Where limited resources prohibit the implementation of all risk treatments recommended in this report, those beaches that have received a high action planning priority score should be treated first, then beaches with a medium and low score.


Page 39 of 86

Table 3.1.9 Action Planning Priority scores for assessed locations

Priority

Priority location

Priority Action & Total Score

Comments

1

Manly

48

High – this location should be considered as

a priority for implementation of identified

risk treatment options

2

North Steyne

45




2

Queenscliff

45




4

Shelly Beach

38

Medium – this location should be

considered for implementation of identified

risk treatment options after locations rated

as high or as funding becomes available

5

Fairy Bower

33





5

Fairy Bower Point

33





7

Manly Point

32





8

North Head

25

Low – this location should be considered for

implementation of identified risk treatment

options after locations rated as medium or

as funding becomes available

9

Blue Fish Point

23





10

Old Man’s Hat

21





Key to Action

Planning Priority High 41+ Medium 31-40 Low 21-30 Very Low 0-20

Treatment Options 1.4 & 2.3 As funding becomes available, treatment options outlined in this report should be implemented using a staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence.


Page 40 of 86

3.2 Overview of Principal Risk Treatments

3.2.1 Introduction

There are a range of risk treatment options that can be considered in the context of coastal risk management. The selection of the most appropriate option involves balancing the financial, social and environmental impacts of implementing each against the benefits derived from each. These may include any combination of the following: o Spread (share) risk – insurance o Engineer (structural and technological) risk treatment – include modified practices o Regulatory and institutional – change through revised regulations and planning o Avoid – isolate the risk, move people away o Research to better understand o Educate and inform stakeholders

3.2.2 Hierarchy of Risk Treatments (Controls)

In determining the most appropriate and cost effective option, it is important to consider the hierarchy of risk treatments (controls). The hierarchy is a sequence of options which offer a number of ways to approach the hazard control process. o Hard controls deal with the tangible such as:

Eliminate the hazard which in a coastal context is often difficult to achieve Isolate the hazard which in a coastal context can be difficult due to the dynamic nature of

environmental and weather conditions Use engineering controls such as design of access paths, installation of appropriate signage, and

revegetation Use administrative controls such as supervision, emergency action plans, other documented policies,

practices and procedures o Soft controls deal with human behaviour such as:

Use of effective leadership, management, trust, ethics, integrity, and building relationships Education

Outlined below are principal risk treatment solutions that expand upon those listed within the Risk Register and Treatment Plan in Appendix B. The solutions outlined endeavour to provide specific and detailed information relative to the beach locations; however due to the diverse nature of location characteristics, recommendations are at times mainly generic in nature. Land Managers should plan to adopt the most appropriate treatments specific to their organisations capabilities and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders. The principal risk treatments are outlined on the following pages.


Page 41 of 86

3.2.3 Education and Awareness Programs

Public education and awareness programs are a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy, and target both the pre-arrival and early arrival periods (prior to hazard exposure). Key factors pertaining to effective education and awareness programs include: o Consistency in safety messaging (elimination of confusing/unclear or dissipative information) o Consistency in the method of provision (ongoing information provided at regular locations/times) o Longevity in the provision of information (ongoing, not a one-off)

Existing Controls:

During the course of the assessment and throughout the consultation process, Australian CoastSafe were made aware of various beach safety information sources and education programs that are currently in place to educate and inform the public at a local level. These programs as well as any other initiatives within the Manly LGA should continue to be implemented, reviewed and supported by Manly Council and key stakeholder groups. Existing controls include: Online Education: Manly Council Website: The Manly Council website provides information on safety at the beach by providing a multilingual brochure available for download. Patrol times and dates are also promoted. Manly Australia Website: The Manly Australia website was developed tourists and visitors. Key safety messages are outlined within the beaches/water related activities section. Figure 3.2.1 manlyaustralia.com ‘swim in safety’

Community Education: Surf Educate Australia (SEA): SEA is a provider of surf education and surfing programs for schools and the general community. All programs include important surf education and water safety messages that help save lives and provide a healthy and active learning experience. (Surf Education Australia, 2013). Manly Surf School: Manly Surf School offers a range of surf safety, surf education, surfboard riding, body surfing and body board programs for tourists, school groups, corporate groups and any member of the public (Manly Surf School, 2013). Surf Life Saving Northern Beaches: The Sydney Northern Beaches branch of Surf Life Saving (SLSSNB) conducts a Surf Life Saving School aimed at educating school aged children about surf safety and survival through a series of water based and classroom


Page 42 of 86

programs (SLSSNB, 2013). Within the Northern Beaches 15,159 students participated in beach programs and presentations last financial year (2012/13). Figure 3.2.2 surf safety presentation on the Northern Beaches (Photo courtesy from Surf Life Saving Northern Beaches)

Media: Throughout the surf life saving season, the Manly Daily play a key role in delivering key safety messages as well as informing the public when dangerous surf warnings are in place. There are also various television (news) and radio stations that inform the public of dangerous surf when large swell events occur. Educational Facilities: Manly plays host to a number of educational institutions such as the International College of Management and the Australian Pacific College. Overseas students make up a large proportion of overall students at these colleges. As overseas students are a higher risk group in regards to staying safe along the coastline, recognition should be given to these educational institutions as surf safety awareness courses are organised during orientation. School Programs – Western Sydney One of the key target groups for surf safety education includes people residing in western Sydney. Through the Water Safety Black Spots Fund Wollongong Council and Surf Life Saving NSW are currently delivering surf education to schools in south west Sydney. To date this program has received positive feedback and will aim to educate key target groups so they are informed about the hazards and risks when using the coastline. This program will be expanded next year to include schools in the areas of north west Sydney.

Recommended Controls:

Educational Messages: Land Managers should continue to provide public education/awareness programs which include standardised key safety messages and align/reference to peak coastal water safety agency websites such as: NSW Water Safety Advisory Council: http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/beach-safety/ Together with the following referenced websites of the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council for beach safety: o BeachSafe: www.beachsafe.org.au o Safe Fishing: http://www.safefishing.com.au o Boating: www.lifejacketwearit.com.au The Water Safety Advisory Council has recently established the Consistent Messaging Sub Group with the aim of standardising key safety messages for water safety. Education Collateral: The Manly LGA is a popular destination for day trippers and overnight visitors, especially through the school holiday periods. The distribution of surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers) to all coastal accommodation providers in the Manly LGA should continue to be implemented. Brochures and flyers about surf safety should also be made available at the Manly Visitor Information Centre.

http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/beach-safety/

http://www.beachsafe.org.au/

http://www.safefishing.com.au/

http://www.lifejacketwearit.com.au/


Page 43 of 86

Figure 3.2.3 Holiday accommodation in Manly

Surf safety information, for example, rip education should be strategically placed in visual form at locations along the Queenscliff to Manly promenade. Options may include the following: o Information Boxes o Drinking Fountains o Posters At Bondi, in front of the Pavilion, there is an information box that includes information about services, location maps and surf safety. Manly Council has the opportunity to implement an information box similar to the one below at the main access at Manly, in front of the Corso.

Along the promenade of Manly there are 10 drinking fountains (see picture below). There could be the opportunity for the images and content of these drinking fountains to refer to surf education e.g. rip safety, key safety messages. Figure 3.2.5 Drinking fountain at North Steyne

Finally, displaying posters which promote water safety at public amenity blocks, Surf Life Saving Clubs and visitor information displays could be implemented. Figure 3.2.6: Example of a surf safety poster in the Bega Valley LGA

Figure 3.2.4: Information box at Bondi that could be implemented at Manly


Page 44 of 86

Educational posters, signage and information boards should not be placed in positions where they would compete with formal aquatic and recreational safety signage which is usually placed around formal access points and high traffic areas (see Section 3.2.4, Safety Signage). Tourists and Visitors: Tourism Operators: Tour operators that bring visitors to Manly LGA (through bus or private tours) have the opportunity to distribute standardised key safety messages to their customers upon entry of a coastal area (beach + rocky coasts). Education prior to arrival at their destination will be beneficial and assist in public safety. Sydney Ferries: A large proportion of day trippers to Manly arrive by the Manly Ferry Service from Circular Quay in the City. According to Transport NSW, 5.8 million passengers caught the Manly Ferry during the 2012 – 2013 financial year. There is an opportunity to target this key group through the use of educational initiatives. One such initiative includes a visual notice board in regards to surf safety to be positioned where people get off the ferry. An option could include “Remember the F-L-A-G-S and stay safe”. Other initiatives may include surf safety collateral (multilingual) on board the Manly Ferry.

Figure 3.2.7 Example of a visual notice board could be positioned at Manly Wharf

Royal Far West: Royal Far West is a non-government organisation that has been providing health services to children living in rural and remote New South Wales for over 85 years. Every year, thousands of country children who have non-acute developmental, behavioural, learning, emotional and mental health disorders, and limited access to local services, benefit from Royal Far Wests integrated clinical and educational model of care. The children who visit Royal Far West regularly use the beach for recreation. Apart from being supervised in the flagged area the children do not have strong surf awareness. As this is a high target group, Manly Council should approach the Royal Far West to participate in surf awareness programs with peak water safety organisations. Surfboard Hire: There are a number of businesses in the Manly LGA that hire surfboards for public use. A high customer base for this market is domestic and international tourists. Lifeguards have reported that these user groups may often be unaware of local conditions and their ability to surf and swim can be very basic, which has resulted in rescues being conducted. Businesses within the Manly LGA that hire out the use of surfboards should be aware of the daily beach conditions, educating customers about where the best place is to surf (dependent on ability) and should not hire boards when the beach has been closed by the lifeguards on duty. Personal Protective Equipment: Water safety agencies actively promote the use of lifejackets for fisherman and recreational boaters. Educational and awareness programs in the Manly LGA should also promote and encourage these user groups to wear lifejackets. These messages could be included in community based education programs or the use of educational signage such as the below at well-known rock fishing locations.


Page 45 of 86

Figure 3.2.8 Educational signage at rock fishing locations

The NSW Ministry for Police and Emergency Services have released a discussion paper titled Wearing of Lifejackets by Rock Fishers (2013). This paper has proposed six options for the wearing of lifejackets in NSW:

Option One Major coordinated education campaigns Option Two Maintain voluntary wearing of lifejackets Option Three Mandatory wearing of lifejackets in high risk locations or high risk conditions Option Four Wearing of lifejackets in certain situations Option Five Trial mandatory wearing of lifejackets for a certain time period in a certain location Option Six Mandatory wearing of lifejackets

Recreational Fishing Alliance: The Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW has produced the Safe Fishing website, which also provides multilingual information and resources to promote safer recreational rock fishing (Recreational Fishing Alliance, 2011). Part of this initiative has been the provision of multilingual flyers and DVDs to promote rock fishing safety. Education days are also organised for rock fishers to provide educational learning and fishing techniques that will provide rock fishers with more information to make an informed decision about where they decide to fish as well as communicating key safety messages. One of these education days has also been filmed and is available through the YouTube channel ‘ACFishing’. In regards to the Manly LGA there is the opportunity to conduct and education day at Old Man’s Hat within the Sydney Harbour National Park.

Figure 3.2.9 Recreational Fishing Alliance rock fishing school (photo courtesy of NSW Recreational Fishing Alliance)


Page 46 of 86

Rock fishing Multilingual Websites During the course of the assessment, Australian CoastSafe were made aware that non English speaking websites (e.g. Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese etc.) exist amongst ethnic groups which promote rock fishing specifically in the Manly LGA. Further investigation of these websites could provide an opportunity to engage a targeted educational campaign to specific user groups. Examples include: o http://waverockfishing.com/about.htm

o http://ameblo.jp/japanese-fishing-sydney/

Figure 3.2.10 Korean website promoting rock fishing (Wave Rock, 2006)

Education Summary: The following table outlines a range of education and awareness programs that are available to Land Managers within the Manly LGA. Table 3.2.1 is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all education and awareness programs available to land managers, it is intended to provide examples of a range of programs that are available and delivered within the context of coastal aquatic safety. Land managers are not limited to the organisations listed in the table below, however they should ensure that any provider engaged to act on their behalf is adequately licensed, qualified and insured. Table 3.2.1 Examples of education and awareness programs

Program Target audience Location Delivery (Who)

School based water safety programs

Local primary and high school students All locations Peak water safety agencies

Coastal Accommodation Network

Tourists, visitors and migrants (TVM) All locations Peak water safety agencies

Local Media Residents and TVM All locations Local media outlets

Learn to Swim / Swim and Survive

Young Children All locations Royal Life Saving Society Australia

Learn to Swim All ages All Locations

AustSwim accredited swim schools

Nippers Local children All locations Surf Life Saving NSW

Surf Ed. All ages All locations Surf Life Saving NSW

Surf Groms Local children All locations Surfing NSW

Surfers Rescue 24/7 Local surfing associations All locations Surfing NSW

Kids Academy of Surf (KAOS)

Local children All locations Surf Educate Australia

School surfing and surf education

Local children All locations Surf Educate Australia

Corp Surf 18 years + All locations Surf Educate Australia

Get hooked – it’s fun to fish

Schools All locations NSW DPI (Fisheries)

Rock fishing safety information

Rock fishers

Rock platforms

Peak water safety agencies

http://waverockfishing.com/about.htm

http://ameblo.jp/japanese-fishing-sydney/


Page 47 of 86

Program Target audience Location Delivery (Who)

Boating safety information

Boaters Manly Roads and Maritime Service

QR codes

The use of QR codes on signage and other infrastructure to link to location based beach safety information.

All locations

Manly Council

The figures below are not intended as a comprehensive display of all education and awareness collateral available to land managers, rather to provide examples of a range of collateral that are available and can be provided to land managers upon request. Land managers are not limited to the education collateral shown in the figures below, however they should ensure that any education collateral distributed or displayed is aligned to the key water safety messages promoted by the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council.

Treatment Options 1.5 & 2.4 Education and awareness programs within the Manly Local Government Area should continue to be implemented, reviewed and supported.

Treatment Options 1.6 & 2.5 Education and awareness programs should include standardised key safety messages which are recognised by the aquatic industry (e.g. NSW Water Safety website http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/ ). (p.47)

Treatment Options 1.7 & 3.1 Continue to develop relationships with tourism agencies with the aim of distributing standardised surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures and flyers), to all coastal accommodation providers (including the Manly Visitor Information Centre) in the Manly Local Government Area.

Treatment Option 1.8 Surf safety information (for example rip current education), should be strategically placed in visual form at various locations along the Queenscliff to Manly promenade. Specific examples can be referenced in the report. (p.47)

Treatment Options 1.9 & 3.4 A targeted education campaign about surf safety should be developed for the Manly Ferry Service. Options for consideration could include a visual notice board at Manly Wharf and free surf safety collateral (including multilingual).

Figure 3.2.11 Don’t put your life on the line™

Figure 3.2.12 Survive a rip current

Figure 3.2.13 Beach safety for tourists / migrants

Figure 3.2.14 Swim between the flags


Page 48 of 86

Treatment Option 1.10 Businesses within the Manly LGA that hire out the use of surfboards should be aware of the daily beach conditions, educating customers about where the best place is to surf (dependent on ability) and should not hire boards when the beach has been closed by the lifeguards on duty.

Treatment Options 1.11 & 2.6 Continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets (may include educational signage).

Treatment Option 1.12 & 3.5 An opportunity exists to support the children at Royal Far West Health Service to participate in surf awareness programs organised by peak water safety organisations. (p.48)

Treatment Options 2.7 & 3.2 An education day should be organised for rock fishers at Old Man’s Hat within the Sydney Harbour National Park. This day will target high risk user groups providing educational learning and fishing techniques that will equip rock fishers with information to make an informed decision about where they decide to fish as well as communicating key safety messages.

Treatment Option 3.3 Identify the relevant user groups and related resources/websites (including CALD) that promote rock fishing in the Manly Local Government, and target safety messaging to those groups/resources. This research may also provide the opportunity for targeted education campaigns.


Page 49 of 86

3.2.4 Safety Signage

Safety signage is a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy and targets the in-transit and on-arrival periods pertaining to a person/s arriving at a hazardous location. Key factors relating to effective safety signage include: o a risk assessment process used in the identification of priority information to display o alignment to Australian Standards for signage content (AS/NZS2416:2010) o consistency in signage layout/display (Australian Water Safety Council, 2013) o consistency in the appropriate positioning of signage, to maximise exposure to the public prior to arriving

in a hazardous location, with the minimum number of signs o a consistent process of signage maintenance as part of the land managers annual planning

It is important to note that at most locations, an improved safety signage system usually results in an overall reduction in the quantity of signage due to the elimination of duplicate or ineffectual signs and the consolidation of key information into other signs. For Land Managers this may see a reduction in the implementation and maintenance costs related to signage and a reduction in the visual pollution of a site.

Existing Controls:

Existing safety signage within the Manly LGA includes: o warning signage at popular rock shelf fishing / cliff edge locations o warning signage at some access locations at Manly o warning signage due to pollution o warning signage at pipe locations along the Queenscliff to Manly stretch o warning signage at pool locations o temporary signage in place when lifesavers and lifeguards are on duty. These signs are placed along the

Queenscliff to Manly stretch.

Figure 3.2.15: Certain risk and hazards

Figure 3.2.16: Cliff edge warning

Figure 3.2.17: Danger Strong Current

Figure 3.2.18: Warning submerged object


Page 50 of 86

Recommended Controls:

While existing signage within Manly LGA exists, as an option for improvement, Land Managers could implement a strategy of consistent aquatic and recreational safety signage at formalised access locations outlined in Appendix A. Level 2 Car Park Signs (Primary access sign) Land Managers have the option to place this type of signage at the main entrance/car park to an aquatic environment. The recommended content includes location name, emergency contact information, safety hazards/prohibitions and lifesaving/lifeguard service information. As an example within the Manly LGA, this type of signage would be appropriate at the main access to Manly Beach in front of the Corso. Level 3 Access Signs (Secondary access sign) Land managers can place this type of sign at access points or pathways that lead to the aquatic environment (beach, rock pool or rock platform). Level 3 access signs follow the same principles as those of Level 2 car park signs and typically display the location name, emergency contact information, safety hazards/prohibitions and lifesaving/lifeguard service information.

Figure 3.2.21: Environmental warning

Figure 3.2.22: Beware of submerged pipes

Figure 3.2.23 Example level two car park/level three open access sign in Wollongong

Figure 3.2.24 Example signage at a beach access point in Byron Bay

Figure 3.2.20 Cliff edge warning

Figure 3.2.19 Pool safety warning


Page 51 of 86

Prohibition Signage In Appendix A, it was identified that an overview of prohibited activities are sometimes collated into a single sign. This occurs 7 times along the Queenscliff to Manly stretch (see below map) and an example of this type of sign is also below. These signs can be effective as they are larger, more modern and reduce the visual impact of having too many signs. There is the opportunity to implement an increase in these signs where gaps appear in the above map. If these signs are implemented there is the opportunity that other existing prohibition signs (see below) can be consolidated. In the long term, this reduces the amount of signs that need to be continually maintained by Council.

Figure 3.2.26: Locations of collated prohibition signs

Figure 3.2.25: Example of prohibition sign

Figure 3.2.27 Alcohol prohibited sign that has the opportunity of being consolidated into a large prohibited activities sign


Page 52 of 86

Summary Table Table 3.2.2 Summary table of aquatic and recreational signage recommendations for the Manly LGA

Combined Beach Locations

Existing Signs

Possible Consolidation/

Remove

Proposed Level 3 (Open)

Proposed Level 3

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Queenscliff 24 2 0 6 6 4

North Steyne 48 5 0 6 6 1

Manly 65 4 4 2 6 2

Manly Point 7 0 0 0 0 0

Fairy Bower 16 1 0 1 1 0

Shelly Beach 28 6 1 4 5 -1

Fairy Bower Point 12 0 0 2 2 2

Blue Fish Point 19 0 0 1 1 1

North Head 46 0 0 1 1 1

Old Man’s Hat 2 0 0 1 1 1

Totals 267 18 5 24 29 11

Note: Net signage = proposed signage minus consolidated signage. For example 29 signs have been proposed in the Manly LGA however 18 existing signs have the opportunity to be consolidated and/or removed, leaving a net reduction in overall signage of positive 11 signs. When implementing future signage, the following points are recommended: 1. Safety signs as recommended in this report should meet Australian Standard ‘AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 Water

Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags’, and align signage style/layout with the ‘National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual, 3rd Edition, July 2006’ or the State-wide Mutual guide. It is the recommendation of this report that style is aligned to the former.

2. Signage layout (top-down order) consists of the following:

a) Location name and emergency marker (if/when applicable) or street address b) Hazards and warnings within the designated area c) Safety information or general location/area details d) Regulations e) Facility / Land Manager

3. Safety signs should meet the size/height/placement specifications outlined in ‘AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 Water

safety signs and beach safety flags’.

4. ‘Diamond’ hazard symbols should be utilised (not triangle). Context: AS/NZS 2416.3:2010 provides for the use of either ‘diamond’ or ‘triangle’ hazard symbols. For consistency with existing signage and across local government areas the more effective diamond symbols should be utilised.

5. Effective placement of aquatic and recreational safety signage in a public reserve cannot be underestimated. Location, height and existing visual distractions are major factors which contribute to the effectiveness of a sign when installed.

6. Signs positioned in car parks should be placed central to the parking area and where parked vehicles will not obscure the sign.

7. Signs that are positioned in relation to open access areas should be spaced at regular intervals, with the distance between individual signs dependent upon the calculated Facility Visitation Rate (FVR).

8. Signs that are positioned in relation to defined access points should be sited as close as practical to the access point, or other appropriate location, and need to be consistently applied where possible e.g. on the left of the track entrance.


Page 53 of 86

9. To effectively capture the attention of visitors, improve overall visual amenity and avoid confusion as a result of too many signs. Repetitive and/or unnecessary information and signs should be removed. Further, any non-essential signage (not related to location, safety, hazard, prohibition information) that is present at a location should be considered for removal or re-located as appropriate so as not to impact on the recognition of the safety orientated priority signage.

QR Codes QR codes involve the use of smart phone technology to provide location based safety messaging. The system works by scanning a smart phone over the QR Code. These codes could be included on signage (e.g. a sticker) and linked to specific water related safety information, with the potential for multilingual messages.

There are numerous online providers that allow for the creation of a QR code. This stage of the process is cost effective and the only expense is printing. Certain online providers also allow customers to be able to track the number of people who have scanned the QR code. Temporary Signage Temporary individual hazard signs may be used where a hazard is localised, has been identified at a level of risk that warrants a sign posting and is not permanent in nature. Temporary hazards signs can be utilised in the following ways: 1. Where there is a higher risk of injury from temporary hazards

2. Where a hazard may exist at a patrolled beach either side of the flags / along the beach

3. When the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) release a dangerous surf warning once the swell reaches a certain

height and wave period. Dangerous surf warnings will appear on the official BOM weather forecast. When the two sets of flags are not in operation, there is the opportunity for a similar sign to the example shown in Figure 3.2.28 to be positioned on the sand in front of the Manly Corso to direct members of the public to swim between the red and yellow flags. These could also be used in conjunction with the strong current signs as determined by the Lifeguard Supervisor. Figure 3.2.28 Temporary directional sign

Treatment Options 1.13 & 2.8 Standardised water safety signage that complies with Australian Standards and aligns to best-practice ‘style’ should be implemented at the locations listed in ‘Appendix A’. This may include the maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage.

Treatment Option 1.14 Temporary signage should continue to be used at access locations near patrolled areas to direct patrons to a supervised swimming area and where there is a higher risk of injury due to temporary hazards such as strong currents, creek openings and pollution.


Page 54 of 86

3.2.5 Emergency Marker System

When an incident occurs at a specific street address, it is relatively simple for emergency services to identify the location of the caller/incident. However, when an incident occurs at locations such as open-space parkland, walking trails, beaches or rock platforms (where no cross-street or other reference point is available) it can delay the identification of a location and the subsequent emergency service response. Emergency location markers enable triple zero call takers to immediately and accurately verify the location of an emergency triple zero call. Figure 3.2.29 provides an example of how an emergency marker sign might look.

Emergency markers display a unique number to a specific location, most commonly on existing access/safety signage. These emergency marker displays could be a sticker placed over already existing signage. For an emergency marker system to be effective, a standardised state-wide program is required, that engages Police and other emergency service CAD systems and land management authority signage plans. No current program exists in NSW. Some locations in NSW have local emergency marker systems in place, where current signage displays a numbering code at some locations (see Figure 3.2.30). This system is outlined in local emergency procedures however does not include a formal numbering system that links back to NSW emergency services (Police, Ambulance and Fire). Following on from recent meetings, Australian CoastSafe will be supplying the Emergency Information Coordination Unit (EICU) (NSW LPI) with the locations and numbers of these signs so there is a greater chance that a ‘000’ operator will recognise these numbers.

Australian CoastSafe is currently working with key government departments and emergency services to develop a best practice emergency marker system which can be rolled out on a state-wide basis in the near future.

Treatment Option 3.6 With guidance from the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services and Land and Property Information, a state aligned emergency marker system at all identified access locations should be considered.

Figure 3.2.29 example emergency marker sign

Figure 3.2.30 existing emergency markers in the Tweed LGA


Page 55 of 86

3.2.6 Access Infrastructure and Ongoing Capital Works/Maintenance Programs

The way the coast is accessed is a significant factor in the management of coastal risk. While preventing public access/use to the coastal environment is not desired, a number of options exist to minimise the risks associated with the access way itself and the hazards that may be encountered on the coast (via that access way). In reference to the assessment process, access points have been broken down into formal (defined), and informal (undefined) access. Access issues are interrelated to other risk management initiatives/options such as water safety signage, emergency access numbering/reporting, supervision (lifeguard) information and public rescue equipment. An effective access plan for an area may optimise the effectiveness and efficiency of other initiatives. Formal Access The majority of formal access tracks in the Manly LGA are well maintained. Periodic inspections take place due to vegetation overgrowth, degraded footings and unattached fence posts. Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating the use of a generally safer ‘track’, exposing people to the relevant safety signage/information, reducing the quantity of signage required and enhancing emergency access, reporting and location identification. Informal Access A number of informal access tracks also exist. Informal access ways may create higher risk through use (uneven ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/unstable and uneven surfaces), may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make emergency location reporting difficult (location awareness).

Options for formalising, redirecting or consolidating informal access use may include man-made barriers, vegetation growth and fencing. It is noted that for some locations and situations it may be difficult to formalise access and/or restrict the use of informal access. Restricting Access Through the methods of consultation it was also noted that on warm summer nights, Shelly Beach can still have high amounts of visitors until late at night. As well as noise pollution, this can cause issues around alcohol and swimming at night. One way to try and reduce the number of people is the option of setting the BBQ timers to stop during certain time periods e.g. 9:00pm to 7:00am. Alcohol and night swimming is also an issue around the Manly Corso area. Although lights around the promenade make it safer for night life, lights may also encourage people to go swimming. This should continually be monitored by Police and Council rangers.

Figure 3.2.32 Formal access at Manly

Figure 3.2.31 Informal access at Blue Fish Point


Page 56 of 86

Table 3.2.3 Access provision within assessed locations in Manly

Location Open

Access

Formal

Pedestrian

Vehicle

Access

Informal /

Old Access

Private

Access

Total

Access

Possible

Redirection

Net

Access

Queenscliff 1 6 1 0 0 8 0 8

North Steyne 0 7 0 0 0 7 0 7

Manly 2 3 1 0 0 6 0 6

Manly Point 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Fairy Bower 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 4

Shelly Beach 0 5 2 0 1 8 0 8

Fairy Bower Point

0 3 0 5 0 8 0 8

Blue Fish Point 0 4 1 7 0 12 2 10

North Head 0 5 1 9 0 15 2 13

Old Man’s Hat 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 2

Totals 3 38 6 23 1 71 4 67

Note: Net Access = the total of all access types minus consolidated/redirected access. For example, 71 access points have been located in the Manly LGA, however 4 of these access points have the opportunity to be redirected or consolidated, leaving a net access of 67.

Treatment Options 1.15 & 2.9 Formal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should continue to be regularly maintained through ongoing infrastructure and capital works programs. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed.

Treatment Option 1.16 To minimise the level of risk when alcohol and night swimming takes place on Shelly Beach, a trial could take place in which the automatic BBQs stop working during certain time periods e.g. 9:00pm to 7:00am.

Treatment Option 2.10 Informal access paths identified in ‘Appendix A’ should be considered for redirection or consolidation, in order to promote/facilitate the use of formal access.


Page 57 of 86

3.2.7 Public Rescue Equipment

The table below provides an overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) currently in or available for use in Australia. Table 3.2.4 An overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) (Bradstreet, et al., 2012)

PRE Type Morphology of current

installations

Advantages Disadvantages Extensive Training Required

Recommended uses in NSW

Rescue Tube Sandy beaches and

rock pools

Can be thrown short distances

Requires the rescuer to enter the water

themselves

Yes None

Throw Bag Not in use Distance of deployment

Risk of theft, risk of using the line to

return the patient towards the rocks, not strong/tough

enough to be resilient from

environmental conditions

No May be used on a case by case basis.

Further

effectiveness investigation

required.

Throw Sticks (Stormy

grenades)

Personal device

(mobile)

Mobility – easily deployed to

incident locations

Effective mid-range (thrown)

Requires 2 to off-set ‘miss-throw’ of the

first

No Yes. Relevant personnel /staff

(emergency services/SLS

/rangers)

Life Ring (Angel ring)

Steep rampart rock

platforms

Ease of use. Rugged design.

Awareness campaign

established.

Single use device. Distance of

deployment. Requires rescuer to

approach the platform edge.

Weight.

No Steep (>1:1) rampart rock

platforms

Silent Sentry Sloping platforms

EPIRB unit immediately alerts

emergency services. Multiple balls can be rolled down slopes to the patient keeping the

rescuer at a safer distance

EPIRB units were vulnerable to

vandalism and disabled

No Sloping (<1:1) rampart rock

platforms.

Recommended redesign to

remove EPIRB housing.

Life Rings (Angel Rings™

2)

Life rings are an instantly recognised lifesaving mechanism and their functionality is easily understood by both a rescuer and the casualty. The national ‘Angel Ring ™ Project’ has seen the installation of 116 rings in NSW with 47 confirmed rescues involving their use (ANSA, 2013). The Australian National Sportsfishing Association NSW (ANSA NSW) recently received additional funding for the expansion and maintenance of the Angel Ring Project through the NSW Recreational Fishing Trust. There are currently no life rings situated in the Manly LGA. Proposed life ring locations are provided in Table 3.2.5 and further information can be found in Appendix C.

2Angel Ring is a registered trade mark of the Australian National Sportfishing Association.


Page 58 of 86

Table 3.2.5 Proposed life ring locations

Priority Location

1 Blue Fish Point (eastern tip)

2 Old Man’s Hat

3 Blue Fish Point (north)

4 Fairy Bower Point (Little Bluey)

Feedback from Sydney Harbour National Park is that they are willing to enter into negotiations with relevant fishing groups to determine the possibility of installing such devices, however they are unwilling to accept responsibility for maintenance or replacement devices unless funding is allocated for this purpose. There are also liability issues that may require addressing as well. In regards to any maintenance issues that may arise, ANSA NSW has stated the following:

“ANSA NSW will maintain contact with the local clubs, NSW Government agencies and individuals who have installed or agreed to manage the angel rings and continue communication to ensure that management targets are met. As a minimum ANSA NSW or its nominated management team must complete a visual check at least every 2 months to determine the rings status.” (ANSA, 2013)

Global Positioning Satellite (GPS): GPS technology is available to be used within public rescue equipment such as life rings. Recreational fishing bodies have already trialled certain tracking devices in some areas and should be consulted with in relation to this matter. This technology may be beneficial by the way of a daily audit that can record when a life ring has been washed away or stolen as part of an asset management system. Rescue Tubes One public rescue tube exists along the coastline of the Manly LGA located at the pool at Fairy Bower. The rescue tube is continually checked and maintained by the Manly Lifeguard Service.

In 2012, the NSW Department of Primary Industries commissioned a report titled a Research Review of Rock Fishing Safety in New South Wales (Bradstreet et al., 2012). The extract below is taken from pages 48 – 49 of this report and relates to the use of rescue tubes as items of public rescue equipment.

Rescue tubes are presently used in a small number of coastal council areas in NSW, generally around sandy beaches and rock pools. Their use is currently limited to sandy beaches and rock pools. The use of a rescue tube as public rescue equipment is considered inappropriate for four reasons:

Figure 3.2.33 Public rescue tube at Fairy Bower


Page 59 of 86

1. The use of the equipment could not be adequately taught to the rescuer in under 10 seconds preferably in pictures;

2. There is significant aquatic ability and skill required to use a rescue tube effectively; and 3. The effective use of the equipment requires the rescuer to enter the water, assuming a degree of aquatic

skill and exposing the rescuer to further risk 4. The use of swimming fins is highly recommended with a rescue tube. An argument for the use of rescue tubes is related to human nature, and that loved ones will enter the water to conduct a rescue, and any flotation that can be provided is beneficial. This topic, for the case of the child drowning victim, is discussed in a paper by Pearn and Franklin, who term the process of the rescuer drowning following a rescue as aquatic victim-instead-of-rescuer (AVIR) syndrome. The results of this study advocate both an increase in basic rescue skills (aquatic skill development) and use of non-contact rescues. The Royal National Lifeboat Association (RNLI) also uses rescue tubes for trained lifeguards, but the equipment is not recommended for use on beaches, rocky coasts, tidal inlets, estuaries, or man-made coasts. The descriptions of the geomorphology included in the RNLI guide are consistent with the descriptions included in the SLSA Public Safety and Aquatic Rescue Manual learners guide, therefore the guideline has been considered transferrable to the Australian environment. Training provided to lifesavers and lifeguards in the use of rescue tubes strongly recommends the use of swim fins (flippers) to aid the effectiveness and speed with of aided and unaided rescues. This has also been displayed through scientific research. It has been noted by stakeholders that storage of swim fins in situ as a piece of public rescue equipment would be impossible due to theft, and inability to provide a variety of sizes to suit different rescuer sizes. The RNLI guide also states that “PRE is not generally suitable for shallow shelving beaches (...) PRE has proven to be ineffective in areas where an adult is able to stand at any point within 25m of the shoreline and the gradient of the seabed or the beach is low and gentle”. In the case where PRE is going to be installed, RNLI recommend small-medium life rings are used. Action Item 1.17: Based on the available evidence, rescue tubes are not recommended for use as PRE.

Treatment Option 3.7 Explore the means to fund the expansion and continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in ‘Appendix C’. Final positioning should be determined by these fishing associations.


Page 60 of 86

3.2.8 System of Supervision

The supervision of aquatic coastal locations is often required to manage the risk of the location, whether due to prevailing weather and beach conditions, the proximity to large population bases, or the attendance of the beach/coastal area due to its location or attractiveness. The primary decision to be made by land managers before establishing a lifesaving/lifeguard service is to determine which areas will be patrolled or unpatrolled. A patrolled beach is one at which a trained lifesaver and/or lifeguard is stationed during prescribed times and designated by the flying of red and yellow flags. A mobile lifesaver/lifeguard or lifeguard vehicle that periodically visits or checks a location may be effective as a proactive education initiative but should not be considered as providing a patrolled swimming location. Uncertainties may exist when deciding whether supervision at a given location is appropriate, since: o The provision of a service may encourage attendance at a non-suitable location, such as when the beach

topography and morphology create a highly hazardous location. This factor would be reflected in the ABSAMP beach hazard rating;

o Such services may be deemed too expensive and therefore not provided by the responsible land manager; o The patronage of the location is low and the assessed risk level is minimal. There are a range of aquatic supervisory services that should be considered, as it is not “one size fits all”. They include: o Full time comprehensive lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, fixed and

portable facilities, equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services. o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, portable facilities,

equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services. o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard service with trained personnel, portable facilities, some equipment and craft,

and links to a command centre. o A flexible demand based service with trained personnel provision which allocates resources to where they

are most needed. o Surveillance cameras. o No service, but the provision of safety signs and controlled access. Lifesaving Service Level Calculator The lifesaving service level calculator takes into consideration the ABSAMP beach hazard ratings, visitation levels, frequency of use, residency of visitors, incident history and remoteness of location to determine best practice lifesaving service levels. The first decision that needs to be made by a Land Manager is whether or not a location should be patrolled. The Action Planning Priority Index should be used to guide decision making on which locations are of greater risk and therefore a higher priority for a lifesaving service. The lifesaving service level calculations should not be used in isolation to determine whether or not a lifesaving service should be provided, however once a decision has been made to provide a service the calculations should be referred to for guidance on the minimum service level required. Calculations for all beaches can be found in Appendix G. International Best Practice The International Life Saving Federation (ILSF) is the peak body for lifeguard and water safety organisations internationally. Lifeguard/lifesaving uniforms The ILSF recommends the colours for uniforms be red & yellow

3. Lifeguards/lifesavers throughout the world

are called upon to provide safety services at a range of water environments that include swimming pools, beaches, lakes, river front and other waterfronts. In providing these aquatic safety services, it is important that the people using these environments for aquatic activity can readily identify the lifeguards/lifesavers for: o Guidance on safety issues, and o Assistance in times of need

3 Lifesaving Position Statement - LPS 05 - Lifesaver And Lifeguard Uniforms


Page 61 of 86

As such the lifeguards should be readily distinguishable against the many people and colours they may be wearing while in, on or around these aquatic environments. The red and yellow colours have been used by a number of International Lifesaving Member Federations for many years to such an extent and with much success that red and yellow has become synonymous with lifesavers and lifeguards in these countries. Red and yellow flags The use of red & yellow feathered flags is undertaken to provide the maximum visual effect to identify a designated swimming area. Manly Council currently does not use the feathered patrol flag. The use of the feather flag is provided as an option within AS2416:2010.2. The decision to use the feather flag should be based on an appropriate risk assessment. The feather flag is currently used at many locations within New South Wales and Queensland and is used at all patrolled locations in Victoria, South Australia, Northern Territory and Western Australia. To date, there are no recorded incidents towards a member of the public as a result of using the feather flag. Volunteer Lifesaving Service Below are the patrol dates and hours that will be covered during the 2013/2014 season over weekends and public holidays. Table 3.2.6 Volunteer Lifesaving Services in the Manly LGA

Club Patrol Dates Saturdays Sundays /

Public Holidays

Queenscliff

21/09/2013 to 17/11/2013 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

23/11/2013 to 30/03/2014 9am - 6pm 9am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

North Steyne

21/09/2013 to 17/11/2013 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

23/11/2013 to 30/03/2014 9am - 6pm 9am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

Manly

21/09/2013 to 17/11/2013 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

23/11/2013 to 30/03/2014 9am - 6pm 9am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 9am - 5pm 9am - 5pm

Regular roving patrols are also encouraged as part of SLSNSW Standard Operating Procedures and are incorporated into a Clubs Patrol Operation Manual. Roving patrols can be conducted by ATV, IRB/RWC or walking and should continue to be conducted at the following locations throughout a patrol. o Queenscliff SLSC: Queenscliff Head to storm pipe (Pine Street) o North Steyne SLSC: Pine Street to Raglan Street o Manly SLSC: Denison Street to Raglan Street It is acknowledged that during busy days, when beach attendance demands, Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly lifesavers and lifeguards will often stay on the beach until 7pm during the summer school holidays. It is also acknowledged that the Surf Life Saving Northern Beaches Branch through its support services already conducts roving patrols at unpatrolled locations (weekends and public holidays). The Branch has 1 RWC that operates in the Manly LGA that is stationed at Freshwater. The Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter is also a vital service that operates along the coastline of the Manly LGA. For emergency response, this service is activated through the surf rescue emergency response system, mostly outside of patrol hours. The service also conducts regular roving patrols on weekends, looking out for swimmers, surfcraft users, rockfishermen and boaters who may be in need of assistance as well as scanning for dangerous marine life that may be around patrolled locations.


Page 62 of 86

Paid Lifeguard Service - Existing The Manly lifeguard patrol dates and hours for the 2013/2014 season are provided in Table 3.2.7. Table 3.2.7 Paid Lifeguard Services in the Manly LGA

Beach Patrol Dates Days of Service Patrol Times

Queenscliff

21/09/2013 to 04/10/2013 7 days 9am - 5pm

05/10/2013 to 04/04/2014 7 days 9am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 7 days 9am - 5pm

North Steyne

21/09/2013 to 04/10/2013 7 days 9am - 5pm

05/10/2013 to 04/04/2014 7 days 9am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 7 days 9am - 5pm

Manly

01/07/2013 to 20/09/2013 7 days 8am - 4pm

21/09/2013 to 04/10/2013 7 days 7am - 5pm

05/10/2013 to 20/12/2013 7 days 7am - 6pm

21/12/2013 to 27/01/2014 7 days 7am - 7pm

28/01/2014 to 04/04/2014 7 days 7am - 6pm

05/04/2014 to 27/04/2014 7 days 7am - 5pm

28/04/2014 to 30/06/2014 7 days 8am - 4pm Note: o North Steyne only has a patrolled flagged area on weekends, public holidays and during school holiday periods. Regular

roving patrols by lifeguards occur at all other times. o The number of lifeguards on duty varies throughout the year. During the surf life saving season on weekdays there are 4

lifeguards at Manly, 2 at North Steyne and 2 at Queenscliff. Over weekends there are 3 lifeguards at Manly, 2 at North Steyne and 2 at Queenscliff. During winter there are 4 lifeguards stationed at Manly.

It is acknowledged that during busy days, when beach attendance demands, lifeguards at Queenscliff and North Steyne will often stay on the beach until 7pm. Another great initiative by Manly Council is the installation of loud speakers. Along the entire beach promenade there are 15 loud speakers. This ensures that if Lifeguards have key safety messages and warnings, everyone using the beach in and outside the water can hear these messages. Rescue boards are also positioned at regular intervals along the entire stretch of beach. This will ensure a quick response from lifeguards and ensures the principal of patrolling outside the safest swimming area where rescues and preventions are more likely to occur. Figure 3.2.34: Rescue boards are strategically placed along the Queenscliff to Manly stretch


Page 63 of 86

System of Supervision - Proposed Second set of flags: The access in front of the Corso is the main/primary access for Manly Beach for the majority of beach user groups such as tourists and visitors. Lifeguards do a great job in erecting temporary safety signage encouraging people to swim between the flags located at the southern end of the beach. It is also acknowledged that when beach attendance at Manly is extreme and if the number of lifeguard personnel is sufficient lifeguard’s erect two sets of flags which are used to control swimming behaviour. The second sets of flags are erected in front of the Corso (see diagram below). Figure 3.2.35: Diagram overview when two sets of flags are erected

During the summer months on weekends and public holidays, when volunteer lifesavers and paid lifeguards patrol in conjunction, there is the opportunity to have two sets of flags permanently erected during this period (weather and surf conditions permitted). The Bold and the Beautiful Swim Group: The 'Bold & Beautiful' is an informal group who meet at Manly LSC at 7am, 7 days a week to swim from Manly to Shelly Beach and back. The group has grown significantly in average daily attendance over the last three years and maximum numbers can reach up to 500 people. Figure 3.2.36: Bold and Beautiful Attendance June 2010 - August 2013 Source: Bold and Beautiful Swim Squad Manly (2013)

There are also long distance swims for more experienced members that area held on an annual basis. These swim routes include Queenscliff Beach to Shelly Beach and also includes a super swim around North Head. A disclaimer on the website states “The 'Bold & Beautiful' is an informal activity between a group of friends. All activities are undertaken at your own risk. You are responsible for your own safety at all times. Anyone is


Page 64 of 86

welcome, but everyone is participating at their own risk; this is not an official event and there is no water safety”. It is acknowledged that surf safety messages are provided on the Bold and the Beautiful website, however lifeguards and lifesavers have had to conduct rescues for this group (often which are out of hours). Although rescue data is not available for this swim group, lifesavers and lifeguards have both confirmed that there have been numerous rescues over the last four years. The below is a statement from one of the consultation surveys. “The local community swimming group called the 'Bold & Beautiful' uses and area of the beach that has a strong rip. The group does not have water safety and there has been over 20 swimmers rescued over the last two seasons. It needs to be relocated to a safer area”. The risks associated with this swimming group include: o Inability to cope in a rip current o Overestimated swimming ability o Physical exhaustion o Delayed emergency response time as a result of minimal supervision Although the Bold and the Beautiful promote themselves as being an informal group, due to the growth and popularity of this group as well as the risks involved Manly Council should meet with this group to further discuss prevention strategies such as formal education courses or a system of supervision e.g. water safety. Surveillance Cameras: Cameras can aid supervision through remote monitoring by appropriate authorised personnel in regional/central locations e.g. lifeguard headquarters. The effectiveness of camera surveillance relates to the consistency in monitoring, the training held by those persons monitoring and the response procedures in place to act on any identified issues (both proactive and reactive). When Queenscliff and North Steyne is not patrolled by lifeguards it has been identified that a surveillance camera (closed circuit) could be used by the lifeguards who are stationed at the lifeguard base in Manly LSC to monitor the usage on this section of the beach and provide an opportunity to proactively engage swimmers prior to a possible incident occurring. This could occur by communicating via the loud speaker. Legality/privacy issues are important and may have to be resolved prior to installation. Installation could be located somewhere on Queenscliff, North Steyne SLSC or on already existing loud speakers.

Treatment Option 1.17 & 5.2 During the summer months on weekends and public holidays, when volunteer lifesavers are on patrol in conjunction with paid lifeguards, there is the opportunity to continue to have two sets of flags permanently erected during this period (dependent upon suitable resources being available and favourable weather and surf conditions).

Treatment Option 1.18 Although the ‘Bold and the Beautiful’ promote themselves as being an informal group, due to the growth and popularity of this group as well as the risks involved, further risk mitigation may need to be investigated by Manly Council. This may include formal education courses or a system of supervision (e.g. water safety).

Treatment Option 1.19 When Queenscliff and North Steyne are not patrolled by lifeguards it has been identified that a surveillance camera (closed circuit) to be located at Queenscliff or North Steyne SLSC could be used by the lifeguards who are stationed at the lifeguard base in Manly LSC to monitor the usage on this section of the beach and provide an opportunity to proactively engage swimmers prior to a possible incident occurring by providing warnings and direction via the public address system.

Treatment Option 5.3 Branch and club procedures should continue to ensure that roving patrols are performed on a regular basis to cover a nearby beach/section of a beach that is not patrolled.


Page 65 of 86

4 Emergency Response The relatively high rate of emergency incidents in the Manly LGA in previous years makes consideration of issues in relation to emergency response extremely relevant to a drowning prevention strategy for the area. Emergency response considerations include but are not limited to: o Emergency communications/reporting Triple Zero (000) o Emergency phones/alarms o Emergency response beacons o Emergency service response o Radio coverage o Emergency service communications (internal and joint service)

4.1 Emergency Communications/Reporting - Triple Zero (000) The ability of members of the public to request assistance in an emergency is an important component of a drowning prevention strategy. The Australian Government, through the Attorney-General’s Department are currently running a national Triple Zero (000) campaign which aims to build awareness of the Triple Zero (000) number and educate the community about when to use the number. The campaign serves to reinforce to members of the public their responsibilities when calling the Triple Zero (000) emergency number both in nominating the required emergency service and identifying the location they are calling from. The campaign uses the internet, newspapers, radio and television to promote messages of Triple Zero (000). In addition, elements of the campaign have been translated to reach culturally and linguistically diverse communities throughout Australia. “Triple Zero (000) should not be referred to as 'Triple Oh', as this can cause confusion and could result in people incorrectly dialling 666 on some alpha-numeric keypads. If dialled within Australia, emergency calls to 666 will not be re-routed to Triple Zero (000)” (Australian Government, Attorney's-General Department, 2012). Below is a sign that has the opportunity of being updated in relation to the Triple Zero (000) campaign.

Treatment Options 1.20 & 2.11 Any signage on public rescue equipment that encourages members of the public to ring emergency services should be clearly identified with the following text – “In case of emergency – Dial Triple Zero (000)”.

Figure 4.1.1 Sign encouraging members of the public to ring 000 in an emergency


Page 66 of 86

4.2 Emergency Response Alarm Emergency alarms are an effective way of informing lifesavers and lifeguards of an emergency and reducing first-response time, before emergency services arrive. Appropriate locations for these emergency alarms are around coastal rock pools or unpatrolled beaches where a lifesaving or lifeguard patrol is nearby. Once activated, these alarms send a text message to lifeguards/lifeguard base, informing them that the alarm has been pressed. Warringah council have implemented these alarms at high visitation rock pool locations, which have assisted in efficient emergency response on numerous occasions. Below is an example of an emergency alarm stationed at Freshwater Pool in the Warringah LGA. Figure 4.2.1: Emergency response alarm at Freshwater

Through the methods of consultation and incident data it was learnt that on occasion there are emergency incidents that occur at Shelly Beach. Emergency response in this area could be improved through the installation of an emergency alarm. This alarm could be located at the end of the walkway, near the boat ramp at Shelly Beach. Some concerns that require further discussions with key stakeholders include prank calls, resources being taken away from the primary patrolling area and an increase in calls that may not be an emergency.

Treatment Option 1.21 An emergency response alarm should be investigated at Shelly Beach. When activated the alarm should be linked to the Manly lifeguard base.


Page 67 of 86

4.3 Emergency Response Beacons Emergency Response Beacons can be positioned in high use/risk areas. They are highly visible and once activated, link via radio to lifesaving/lifeguard services. The two main types of ERB are: Mobile: A movable unit which can be placed at a designated location for a limited period (usually daylight hours) before being removed for security/monitoring reasons. They usually complement an existing on-beach lifesaving service (nearby) or on-duty staff hours (non lifesaving). Fixed/permanent: A unit which is permanently or semi-permanently positioned (secured) at a location, and provides 24/7 capacity. Such an ERB should fit within a coordinated emergency communications system, whereby the unit is monitored 24/7 and complemented with specific procedures for emergencies by those monitoring the ERB. Fixed ERBs are generally only considered for use in high risk locations, where:

Limited or no mobile phone coverage exists,

A service can consistently monitor the beacon, and

A daily process of equipment checking/testing is in place. More information about ERB can be provided by Surf Life Saving New South Wales.

Figure 4.3.1 example of a mobile emergency response beacon


Page 68 of 86

4.4 Emergency Service Response Emergency services and support organisations play a vital role in responding to coastal emergencies within the Manly LGA. Resources that may respond include: o Police (including Water Police) o Ambulance (including the Westpac Helicopter) o NSW Fire and Rescue o Manly Council Lifeguards o Surf Life Saving Sydney (Branch and Club Callout Teams) o State Emergency Service (SES) o Rural Fire Service o Marine Rescue NSW

Figure 4.4.1: Coastal Emergency Service locations for Manly LGA

Table 4.4.1 Coastal Emergency Service locations for Manly LGA.

Emergency Services – Manly Local Government Area

Emergency Service Street Address Suburb

NSW Police 4-10 Sydney Road Manly

NSW Ambulance Corner Condamine Street and Balgowlah Road Balgowlah

NSW Fire & Rescue 128 Sydney Road Fairlight

State Emergency Service 1C Quirk Road Balgowlah

Note: There are also Community Fire Units in Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth Emergency Response around the Sydney Harbour National Park can be difficult at the rock platform locations such as Blue Fish Point, North Head and Old Man’s Hat. Rescue helicopters are often the most effective resource when responding to these locations.


Page 69 of 86

4.5 Radio Coverage The Surfcom base at Fisherman’s Beach (Warringah LGA) and the State Operations Centre in Belrose (SLSNSW) assist lifeguards and lifesavers during normal operations and emergency incidents via UHF radio communication. Figure 4.5.1 shows the UHF radio signal strength on the Manly coastline. Radio strength varies, however the majority of the area receives strong to average signals.

Key:

Surf Life Saving NSW is currently in the process of planning to improve signal strength along the Manly to Queenscliff stretch. This involves investigating the options of the installation of a back-to-back repeater site at North Head that will improve radio signal strength in this area. Through the methods of consultation, volunteer lifesavers have provided feedback that on occasions there have been troubles communicating with the Manly Lifeguards on weekends in the past. Radio communication between services is important for joint services in regards to operational and emergency communication. It is understood that Manly lifeguards have the Surf Life Saving frequencies in their radios and discussions should be conducted with Surf Life Saving NSW to raise any current issues and opportunities. Lifeguards at Manly are also able to communicate with Warringah Council lifeguards via radio communication during cross border emergencies / joint operations.

Treatment Option 1.22 Further discussions around joint communications (radio) mid-week and weekends should be conducted with Surf Life Saving NSW to improve joint operations between lifeguards and lifesavers and other nearby lifeguard services.

No coverage

(black spot)

Signal strength

(limited)

Signal strength

(average)

Signal strength

(strong)

Figure 4.5.1 UHF radio signal strength on the Manly Coastline (Warringah Repeater)

Figure 4.5.2 UHF radio signal strength on the Manly Coastline (Bondi Repeater)


Page 70 of 86

4.6 Joint Response (Lifesavers and Lifeguards) Surf Rescue Emergency Response System The Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (NSW) was established in January 2008 and provides a single point of contact for emergency services when there is a need to utilise surf rescue assets in coastal incidents. The emergency number can be contacted 24/7 and operators (State Duty Officers) can task/notify any surf rescue asset in NSW.

Through the growth of this system the Sydney Northern Beaches Branch have an effective Branch Duty Officer

system and dedicated Club Callout Teams (capable of night operations) that can respond to incidents outside

of patrolled locations/after hours.

The following points list the notification priority order for the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System for

emergency activations within the Manly LGA. These include:

o Manly lifeguards are notified first on weekdays and weekends during operational hours

o Surfcom Sydney Northern Beaches is notified second on weekends and public holidays during operational

hours

o Sydney Northern Beaches Branch Duty Officers are notified first outside of operational hours

o Manly lifeguards are notified second outside of operational hours

Lifeguards and lifesavers do an outstanding job responding to emergency incidents (many of which occur at unpatrolled locations and/or after hours). The Surf Rescue Emergency Response System should be a topic of discussion to review recent major incidents and to investigate where opportunities may exist at a local level to improve emergency response (e.g. information sharing, communication and the formalisation of emergency response procedures). Emergency Scenario Training Communications and emergency response could be enhanced by conducting an annual emergency response scenario training day for lifesaving and lifeguarding services. Such exercises help to establish and cement the chain of command, cooperation and adherence operational procedures in the event of a joint emergency response. Lifesaver/lifeguard relations A great way for lifesavers and lifeguards to maintain and improve relations is for the club captains and patrol captains of Manly, North Steyne and Queenscliff Surf Life Saving Clubs to meet with the Manly Lifeguard Supervisors once a year at the start of every surf life saving season to discuss the guidelines and expectations that will improve the communication and coordination to work effectively together while on patrol. These meetings have been successfully held in other Local Government Areas.

Treatment Options 1.23 & 5.4 A debrief session should continue to be held after any critical incidents that occur through the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System where there is a joint response from lifesavers and lifeguards within the Manly Local Government Area. These sessions should investigate where opportunities may exist at a local level to improve emergency response (e.g. information sharing, communication and the formalisation of emergency response procedures).

Treatment Options 1.24 & 5.5 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Northern Beaches Branch Duty Officers/Support Operations, Manly Lifeguard Supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season.


Page 71 of 86

Treatment Options 1.25 & 5.6 Club Captains and Patrol Captains from Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly should meet with the Manly lifeguard supervisors at the start of the surf life saving season to discuss guidelines and expectations that will improve the communication and coordination to work effectively together while on patrol.


Page 72 of 86

5 Monitor and Review The process of monitor and review ensures that risk treatment options are meeting their objectives, new hazards and risks are identified in a timely manner and evolving strategies are in line with community expectations. Land managers should ensure that a there is a process of regular review of the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies that have been implemented. This should include a process for the collection of data regarding any incidents affecting public safety at the locations assessed as well as the use of public rescue equipment and emergency response phones. Land managers may determine to further engage peak water safety organisations to assist with this task. The process should include the review of all incident data, access points, signage, public rescue equipment and supervision. With regard to Sydney Harbour National Park, it is acknowledged that the NPWS already have a system of monitor and review built into the ‘NPWS Visitor Safety Regional Risk Register User Guide’. As previously mentioned the Sydney Harbour National Park also have a ‘Plan of Management’.

Treatment Options 1.26 & 2.12 In consultation with relevant stakeholders, this document should be reviewed annually to measure the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented.

Treatment Options 1.27 & 2.13 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance.


Page 73 of 86

References Angel Ring Project, 2012, ‘NSW Angel Ring Update – 17

th June 2012’, Australian National Sports fishing

Association (NSW Branch)’, Sydney, Accessed on 7th January, 2013 Angel Ring Project, 2013, Angel Ring Management http://angelrings.com.au/angel-ring-management/, Accessed on 25th October, 2013 ABS, 2013. Census. http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/map, Accessed September 2013 Australian Water Safety Council, 2013. National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual , Melbourne: State Government of Victoria. Barns, R 2012, ‘NSW Councils Beach Safety Information Signage’, Statewide Mutual, Sydney Bold and Beautiful Swim Squad Manly, 2013. Bold and Beautiful Swim Squad Manly, http://www.boldandbeautifulmanly.com.au/, Accessed 13 December 2013. Bradstreet A, Sherker S, Brighton B, Weir A, Thompson, M 2012, ‘Research Review of Rock Fishing in New South Wales’, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney. Destination NSW, 2013, Manly Visitor Profile http://www.destinationnsw.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/169232/Manly-visitor-profile-2012.pdf, Accessed 5

th November 2013

International Life Saving Federation, 2008. A framework to reduce drowning deaths in the aquatic environment for nations/regions engaged in lifesaving, Belgium: The International Life Saving Federation. Kennedy, D. M. et al., 2013. Rocky coast hazards and public safety: Moving beyond the beach in coastal risk management. Ocean and Coastal Management, Volume 82, pp. 85-94. Life Saving Victoria, 2006, ‘National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual’, 3rd edition, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne Manly Council, 2013, Manly 2015 Master Plan http://www.manly2015.com.au/manly2015/current-site/,Accessed 18th November 2013 Manly Surf School , 2013. Manly Surf School. http://manlysurfschool.com.au, accessed 21 October 2013 National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2012, Plan of Management - Sydney Harbour National Park, Office of Environment and Heritage NSW Division of Local Government, 2012, ‘Practice Note No. 15 – Water Safety’, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Nowra Recreational Fishing Alliance, 2011. Safe Fishing. http://www.safefishing.com.au/index.html, Accessed 24 September 2013.

Short, A 2006, ‘Australian Beach Safety Management Program’, Coastal Studies Unit, University of Sydney, Sydney SLSNSW, 2013. Incident Reporting Database, Sydney: Surf Life Saving New South Wales. SLSSNB, 2013. Surf Life Saving School. http://www.surflifesavingschool.com.au, Accessed 24 September 2013.


Page 74 of 86

Statewide Mutual, 2007, ‘Best Practice Manual, Signs As Remote Supervision’, V.3, Statewide Mutual, Sydney Standards Australia, 2009. AS/NZS ISO31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines. Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 1: Specifications for water safety signs used in workplaces and public areas’, Standards Australia, Sydney Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 2: Specifications for beach safety flags – “colour, shape, meaning and performance’, Standards Australia, Sydney Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 3: Guidance for use’, Standards Australia, Sydney Statewide Mutual, 2007. Signage As Remote Supervision, Sydney: Statewide Mutual. Surf Education Australia, 2013. Surf Education and Surfing Programs. http://www.seaaustralia.com.au/, Accessed 26 September 2013. SurfGuard, 2013. SurfGuard. https://www.surfguard.slsa.asn.au/, Accessed October 2013. Surf Life Saving Australia, 2010, ‘The Australian Coastal Public Safety Guidelines’, 2nd edition, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney Surf Life Saving Australia, 2011, ‘Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessor Learner Guide’, V.3, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney Wave Rock, 2006, http://waverockfishing.com/about.htm, Accessed 12 December 2013

Date post:	25-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Manly Local Government Area · 2017-03-24 · Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water...

Documents