Jervis Bay Aquaculture Facility

Having recently traveled through parts of Europe and seen first hand what irresponsible development can do I come home to be confronted by this proposal. It is beyond my comprehension that such a ridiculous project can even be considered. We have one of the last pristine bays left on the East coast of Australia worth a fortune in tourism if money is the real reason. I am led to believe that the return from the current proposed leases is minimal and it would be necessary at a later date to develop the balance to try to make the proposal viable.. What a wonderful sight for tourists 1000 acres of yellow buoys and the hideous infrastructure needed to service the enterprise! They will flock here.Local development is kept to a minimum and done in keeping with our magnificent environment as should be yet this proposal is put forward. It is sheer stupidity and should be treated as such.

If this proposal goes ahead it will have a detrimental effect on Jervis Bay forever.

As a full-time resident of Callala Bay on Jervis Bay, I strongly object to this proposal. If this proposal goes ahead it will have a detrimental effect on Jervis Bay forever. The following are just some of the reasons so many of us are alarmed.

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

I regularly spend time on Jervis Bay sailing and enjoying the marine life that lives in Jervis Bay and I object to the proposal of having aquaculture leases on the bay. I believe the ropes, lines and chains required for these leases poses a safety risk to the marine life that lives in the bay and to the people that spend time on and in the water of Jervis Bay.

The bay is home to pods of dolphins, migrating whales, and various other wildlife and the droplines have the potential for these animals to become entagled. In recent months there has been occasions where whales have drowned off sydney beaches when becoming entangled in shark nets and it would be devestating to have this occur in Jervis Bay.

There is also the risk to the boating community. I participate in sailing on the bay and in other body's of water around the country. When competing away from Jervis Bay, the presence of structures in the water create a great risk to boats and sailors. The nature of sailing is that boats can only travel in directions that the wind allows and to introduce structures in the water could result in boats becoming entangle in the ropes, lines and chains. For small sailing craft, this could cause signifcant damage to the boat potentialling causing it to sink and leaving sailors in the water. This then creates a further risk of sailors becoming entangled in the lines and the potential for drowing.

I am entered as a competitor to the Hobie 16 worlds in Jervis Bay in 2014 and future events like this would be threated by the safety risk created by structures in the water. There is also the issue that events like this need open water for boats to sail on, if the bay is full of bouys, sail boats will ru out of room. It would be devestating that the finanical benefits of having a global spotlight on the region can generate.

Please consider these safety risks when evaluating this proposal.

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

7: Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

Having read the application and EIS I believe the development proposal is inconsistent with the now preserved and pristine nature of Jervis Bay.

As a part time resident of Vincentia, and having spent extended periods at Jervis bay for nearly 30 years, I have been fortunate to observe the preservation of the natural wonders of the Bay and surrounding bushland through the extension of the system of National Parks and the preservation of the marine environment. This foresight by the NSW and Federal governments has provided the many vistors from Sydney, Canberra and much further afield with a rare experience of an unspoilt and unique part of the South East Australian coast.

With the "whitest sand in the world" and as a mecca for snorkeling and scuba diving Jervis Bay is a "one of a kind" tourist destination which injects significant tourist dollars into local economy of the Shoalhaven Region.

Since the appalling industrial development plans for the Bay in the 1960's consistent support by the community and governments of all persuasions has kept the Bay environs free from major industry.

I am firmly of the view the development of major shellfish aquaculture leases would be a retrograde step and inconsistent with the on-going preservation of Jervis Bay's natural beauty

The simple equation of economic benefit Vs potential environmental concern and tourism negativity is clear......the economic benefit would be so small to our local community and the potential negative effects so BIG that this proposal should NOT go ahead.
Can we please leave this pristine Bay as it is, so it can continue to offer it's wonderful attractions as they are now. I am not against smart development, I'm just VERY unsure about putting further pressure on a fragile environment for the benefit of such a small minority of people who MAY benefit.

As owners of 'Minke, The Whalers Cottage, 57 Cyrus Street, Hyams Beach, we are extremely alarmed at this proposal for its despoliation of a beautiful natural habitat and its impact on a place where people go to enjoy and relax. It will significantly endanger the areas attractions and tourism.

In particular:

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

7: Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

The unique, essentially unspoiled ecosystem that Jervis Bay represents and which so attracts ratbag, self-interested enterprises, exists today only because all such developments have ultimately been overturned in the past. It must be maintained exactly as is with no compromises, precisely because it is unique.
There will be sufficient pressures and challenges ahead simply because an asset of this sublime nature, so attractive to tourism, risks being loved to death.
The marine mammals attracted to the Bay are only now beginning to re-establish their numbers, notably seals and whales. These, along with dolphins are the basis of a growing eco-tourism industry, which is arguably the lowest impact, high turn-over enterprise that can exist on the Bay, because it accepts and uses the assets of this environment, as is. A major compromise between natural values and high impact human enterprise already exists because of the Naval presence in the Bay. This is not without its impacts, but to the extent that this presence is deemed necessary, it can seemingly be accommodated.
The risks of compounding impacts through additional developments are not acceptable.
The scientific and cultural arguments against this proposal are well understood by all. The issue for decision makers is only what relative value is placed upon these, as opposed to the clamourings of importuning developers. The default position of pandering to such self-interest as if it has by right, equal moral weight with higher ideals, is a major flaw in public policy.
Jervis Bay is not an "opportunity". It is complete in itself. It is our right and privilege to accept and enjoy it as such.

As a local resident who chooses to live and work in Jervis Bay I am in opposition to the aquaculture in Jervis Bay for a number of reasons outlined below;
Water pollution
Visual pollution
A change in the marine environment
Changes in fish population as mussels filter fish eggs
Increase in shark activity
Decrease in Dolphin and whale activity in the bay.
Injury to all marine life from underwater shellfish racks
Impact on local wild mussels
Impact on tourism due to a loss of all things above


I do not believe that the introduction of such farms will be of any benefit for the area and I also don't believe in the school of thought that sustainable means to create something synthetic so we all get to eat as much of it as we can. To me that is creating a major problem because we are interfering in the due course of nature. My preference is for wild seafood and taking less rather than creating more.


I am very concerned that this initiative will fundamentally negatively impact upon my daily life and work in tourism in Callala Beach/ Myola. This idea upsets me greatly.

I am a concerned resident in Myola village, with a tourism business that relies on the pristine waters of Jervis Bay for an income.
If these proposed leases go ahead I believe the water quality in the Bay will dramatically deteriorate with the waste from the mussels.
I also feel that the location of the leases is far too close to Callala Beach.
I am also of the opinion that the native mussels will suffer from the presence of the spawning of the farmed mussels.
The introduction of a non native mussel could change the marine structure in the Bay. I walk along this beach every day and see evidence of native mussels at every tide.
This idea will surely disturb the bay's dolphin population with the man made structures obstructing their environment. Dolphins are a big part of why we choose to live and work in Jervis Bay. We wouldn't want anything to negatively impact upon them.
Aquaculture could increase shark numbers in the Bay as mussels will attract more fish feeding and attract more sharks.This would be devastating for tourism in the area.
I also believe that this is a much bigger issue in terms of environmental impact for only creating jobs for 20 locals, when our dolphin and beach based tourism industry employs hundreds of people including me.


Please accept this submission and do not allow this project to go ahead.

I Object to this development!

I am writing to voice my opposition to development of commercial aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay. I am concerned that marine mammals and recreational boaters could become entangled in the infrastructure.
There is no provision to stop the developer applying to maximise the lease in order to make more profit in the future which would exacerbate the above problem and increase visual pollution.
Jervis Bay is a beautiful place attracting a large number of tourists both from Australia and Overseas. This number is steadily growing. They come for the pristine environment and provide sustainable employment opportunities for this area which are needed.

I strongly object to the DPI's proposal for a minimum (and probably greater over time) 50 ha of aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay. The pristine Jervis Bay environment, and the tourist-based economy relying on the beautiful environment, will suffer unnecessarily.

The benefit/cost analysis is either not yet done, or is not released because it looks embarassing. Initial community discussions by the DPI a year ago stated an NPV of about $1M over 20 years, without taking into account any lost tourism dollars. Common sense will show the costs to tourism, the environment, boating safety and finally the costs of development and operations, will far outway any benefits to the state or the local community.

So the NSW Government plans to degrade its best natural coastal asset - recognized both nationally and internationally as a unique, pristine natural transition zone between the different ecosystems north and south of it - for no real financial gain and the addition of just 500 tonnes of shellfish food in a market of many thousands of tonnes.

It is claimed 15 direct jobs will be created for 50 ha of leases, but how many jobs will be lost in tourism and hospitality, when the environment of Jervis Bay is degraded?

50 ha of submerged cable structures will be a danger to sailing boats, charter boats, fishing boats, ski boats, jet skis, kayaks, windsurfers, kite boarders, paddle boards, divers, and other recreational users of Jervis Bay.

The famous dolphins and whales of Jervis Bay are also at risk of entanglement.

Visual pollution will be pronounced, especially from the higher shore along Vincentia. Hundreds of black buoys floating in a huge mat formation on top of the aqua waters of Jervis Bay will not be pretty.


When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha for commercial aquaculture leases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production area. If we allow this 50 ha development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.



Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for decades. Sailing and other recreational activities such as scuba diving and kayaking contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. In 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy - this is the estimated NPV of the commercial aquaculture proposal over 20 years!

Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles. 



Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.



Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality, natural beauty and diverse ecology.

The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from industries that will degrade it. In the past Jervis Bay has been proposed as the site for a nuclear power station, a major trading port for Canberra, a chemical plant, a steel works. All have, thankfully, not come to fruition. The beauty of Jervis Bay has been preserved for this and future generations. Let's keep it that way, for local residents, Sydney visitors, intrastate visitors, national visitors, international visitors and local flora and fauna.

This proposal must be rejected - it does not make financial sense, political sense or environmental sense.

I submit the following facts in objection to the proposal of an aquaculture lease in Jervis Bay:

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

7: Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

I wish to object to the aquaculture proposal SSI 5657 because I believe that the proposal will have many detrimental effects including:
1. Danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay from 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure.
2. Danger to marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) and other animals from aquaculture infrastructure
3. Visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.
4. Likely expansion in the scale of aquaculture in the near future. The proposal is not economically viable, according to NSW Fisheries. Therefore if the proposal succeeds, further attempts to expand commercial aquaculture to the full 440 ha (1087 acres) allocated in Jervis Bay Marine Park are more than likely. This scale of development, equivalent to approximately 4 times the size of the Bayswood Vincentia, would carry exponentially greater risks and is highly objectionable.
5. Damage to the tourism industry and local and regional economy. Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. By comparison, the estimated gross turnover of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000. Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.
6. Foreshore and beach litter and pollution. Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.
7. Threat to water quality. Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry. It should remain that way.

I am writing to you to object against the proposal SSI 5657, Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases Jervis Bay, NSW.

I strongly believe that if this proposal came to pass it will prove to be detrimental to Jervis Bay as we know it.
Jervis Bay is a gem from its clean waters, its diverse marine life, tourism and natural beauty.
Also:
50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.
There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.
NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.
Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.
ervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.
Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

I hope you heed my concerns

I strongly believe that we should object to this proposal. The reasons are listed below:

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

7: Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

Please take the time to submit an objection to the proposal viathe link below.

1. Jervis Bay's renowned white and unpolluted beaches would be littered as a result of aquaculture activities with debris and shells such as those seen readily in other commercial aquaculture areas.
2. The floating buoys and other infrastructure would create visual pollution and the area proposed at the initiation of commercial activity alone would damage for some time the qualities for which this Bay is appreciated.
3. There is a real danger of the proposed submerged infrastructure inhibiting and interfering with the lives of the dolphins, rays and other marine creatures of the Bay.
4.Water-based activities contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. Imposition by any form of commercial
farming whether on the shoreline or within the marine park or surrounding waters would deter and threaten such activities for little benefit to the area or region.

I am writing to bring to your attention the proposal by NSW Fisheries for the development of commercial aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay (for blue mussels, scallops, Akoya pearl oysters, Sydney rock oysters, flat oysters & abalone). The proposal is for an initial 10 ha (approx. 24 acre) lease, 660m north of Orion Beach near Holden Street boat ramp, Vincentia, and 2 x 20 ha (approx. 98 acre) leases 1.5 km & 1.9 km southeast of Callala Beach (north of Currambene Creek entrance at Huskisson).

If this proposal goes ahead it will have a detrimental effect on Jervis Bay forever.

I strongly believe that we should object to this proposal. The reasons are listed below:

1: 50 ha (122 acres) of submerged cable structure presents a real danger to recreational users of Jervis Bay. Entanglements of marine mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins) in aquaculture infrastructure are also known to occur.

2: There will be visual pollution presented by 50 ha (122 acres) of floating buoys.

3: NSW Fisheries indicated that commercial aquaculture on this scale was not financially viable. Therefore the developer, which will eventually hold these leases, will seek to maximise the leases to the full 440 ha (1087 acres). This is about 4 times the size of the whole Bayswood Vincentia development.

4: When Jervis Bay became a Marine Park, there was an allocation of 440 ha (1087 acres) for commercial aquacultureleases. It is obvious that any lease holder will seek to maximise their production. If we allow this 50 ha (122 acre) development, there is a real risk that we will end up with 440 ha (1087 acres) of aquaculture in the Bay within this decade.

5: Jervis Bay is a well known international sailing venue and has been for approx. 30 years. Sailing and other recreational water-based activities such as scuba diving and kayaking, contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. For instance in February 2014 it is estimated that sailing events alone, such as the Hobie World Titles, will contribute more than $1,000,000 to the local economy. The estimated gross turn over of the commercial aquaculture proposal of 50 ha, is a mere $173,000!!! Not only will the proposal contribute little to the local and regional economy, it may compromise attracting future national and international events such as the Hobie World Titles.

6: Jervis Bay has the "whitest sand in the world" and a number of the beaches have been recognised with "clean beach" awards. The Bay's beaches are one of our major tourism drawcards and the pride of all that have the opportunity to enjoy them. Foreshore and beach litter is known to occur as a result of aquaculture activities. Our clean and white beaches should be preserved.

7: Jervis Bay is the last body of water in proximity to Sydney that has no commercial aquaculture leases in place. The Bay is well known for its high water quality. The community, and governments, have fought for generations to protect Jervis Bay and keep it free from primary industry.

Dear Sir - Madam.
I have been visiting Jervis bay for the past 30 years and eventually bought a house here because this place is one of the very few untouched and pristine places in the world.
We have and documented the whitest sand in the world among other things. Why anyone in the right mind would want to destroy something like this.
The Proposed Development in Jervis Bay so close to the shore, where families enjoy the beauty of the land and sea will kill it for ever.

One has to visit the place every weekend to see the life and enjoyment the children of the visitors and locals alike having here.
According to our information the fisheries indicated that such development will not be able to sustain the expense that will be required to build such monstrosity.
There for what will be there to stop them from expending further.
Can anyone tell us where all these people that use Jervis Bay as is today will then go, and from where the millions of dollars that are coming in to the area from tourists will come from?
Why you want to send away the Sailing and Kayaking venues away-elsewhere. Why You want to destroy Jervis Bay, can anyone tell us the benefits that will derive from such Development
Of 122 acres and possible 1087 acres eventually.
With these few words very strongly oppose the proposed development.
This is not the right place for it as will be very detrimental to the Area - its people living here and Visitors alike.
Living in HOPE that
sanity will find its way to STOP this proposed development from going ahead.
James Tzavaras.