GORA manages the foreshore from Torquay to Marengo. Some areas are relatively pristine (if something can be relatively pristine), but areas within towns are highly modified. The 2022 Coastal Vegetation Strategy just released by GORA is based on its predecessor’s (the Great Ocean Road Coast Committee)) ‘Native Vegetation and Weed Action Plan’. In essence, natural vegetation is set as the benchmark to work towards. This means maintaining areas that are in a good state and restoring those that aren’t.

To what extent is the plan consistent with community values? There are lots of ‘communities’ to consider in addressing this question.

There is the ‘community’ of government, university and independent ecologists whose work has directly or indirectly been used to define the ‘natural’ state. For much of Lorne, the benchmark vegetation is deemed to be small and medium shrubs, plus herbs and grasses and occasional trees. GORA’s aim is to protect, or rehabilitate areas to, this state. There are exceptions, including areas that are very heavily used and ones in which the plantings form part of the history of Lorne.

Another community is the totality of people who use the Victorian coast. Surveys of these people always turn up the same findings. The natural beauty, beaches and wildlife are the things we value most. The legislated objective that GORA should ‘protect, conserve, rehabilitate and manage Crown lands and coastal assets’ therefore seems consistent with public opinion. It is also consistent with the statement of purpose of the Friends of Lorne. And, indeed, with the increasing and Australia-wide effort to protect biodiversity.

Among the community of people involved with Lorne, there are some who approve of the overall objectives of GORA, but have bones to pick on details. These bones are often to do with what is, or is not, a weed. A recent example is coastal tea tree (Leptospermum laevigatum) which GORA classes as a weed and is progressively removing from most areas. An argument made against removal is that these plants serve an ecological purpose and that their loss may fragment the remaining vegetation to the point of putting other living things at risk. Another argument is that foreshore vegetation, including coastal tea tree, provides privacy to beach users by screening them from the traffic of the Great Ocean Road. That screening function will be weakened as coastal tea tree is thinned in some parts of our foreshore but, provided that plants with a similar form take its place, the change will be a transient one.

And there is also the human attachment factor. As pointed out by Greg Moore in our October webinar, humans sometimes become very fond of particular plants. In recognition of this sort of human factor, GORA will retain some of Lorne’s most notable tea trees.

Moving on from weeds, other members of the community reject other elements of GORA’s plan for a vegetated foreshore. Their reasons include that plants are a fire hazard, that house users and people travelling the Great Ocean Road should have an open view of the sea, and that GORA has misidentified the natural state of the foreshore which should in fact be grassland. Some of these views are promoted by the recently formed Lorne Foreshore Conservation Group.

 It seems unwise to be dogmatic about what vegetation is ‘right’ at any particular point or time along the coast, because the ‘natural’ state is variation. Variation from one metre to the next. Variation from one day to the next. Variation in the stage of ecological succession reached on the range of land forms present.

Most of Lorne’s foreshore is made up of a narrow strip of flat sand and seaward slopes that are not sand. Even were we to suppose that it is made up of a single land form, and that that land form is a system of sand dunes, ecological succession means we would not have one ‘right’ type of vegetation.

According to textbooks, succession on sand dunes goes more or less like this: by some circumstance a patch of sand stays still for long enough to be colonised by plants that can take root quickly, such as some grasses and herbs. The tops of these plants (and to a lesser extent the roots), stabilise that patch of sand. Sometimes their tops will trap more sand, more plants will take root, organic matter will enrich the sand resulting, with the passing of time, in a more stable, deeper and richer soil. Shrubs and even small trees will invade as soon as the rooting medium suits them. 

But succession is not a one-way process. There will be many reversals, not just because of the action of the sea itself, but also because of erosion caused by water flowing to the sea. Some reversals will be locally severe enough to take us back to bare sand or rock – ‘square one’ or even ‘square minus one’. It follows that many assemblies of plants will be ‘natural’. 

Where to from here? GORA plans to hold information sessions in early 2023. As background for such sessions Friends of Lorne is preparing an illustrated version of GORA’s plans for the various foreshore regions within Lorne. We will notify you when this work is ready.

Surf cams are digital cameras that stream video footage or still images of surf spots along the coast via the internet, continuously and in real time. In Lorne, output is streamed to the web from cameras on the Surf Life Saving Club (SLSC) to subscribers only, and from the Cumberland Resort to all web users. 

Their use is subject to regulations but, as with other aspects of these relatively new technologies, it is not clear if the existing rules are being applied or are appropriate. The Privacy Act 1988 may apply. The Act contains a number of principles by which the information cameras collect and share is managed, including the following:

• Australian Privacy Principle 4: individuals must be unidentifiable
• Australian Privacy Principle 5: individuals need to be notified or made aware that they are identifiable in footage

Many in the community assumed the surf cams, some of which have been in place for 15 to 20 years, were operating in a manner that was consistent with the above requirements and with the necessary consents. Consent to ‘Use and Develop’ coastal Crown Land is required under the Marine and Coastal Act 2018 (part 65) and the Coastal Management Act 1995 (parts 37 & 38).

The Department of Environment Land Water and Planning (DELWP) state they do not have any agreements in place for any surf cam mounted on crown land in Victoria. This includes SLSC buildings which are on land leased to them by GORA (Great Ocean Road coast and parks Authority, also known as GORCAPA).

The Marine and Coastal Act 2018 is implemented by the Marine and Coastal Policy (MACP) 2020 which requires ;

• Policy 12.4 says ‘Support meaningful engagement with all affected parties in planning and decision making.’ Policies 12.1c and 12.13b also have provision for broad and diverse consultation.
• That cumulative impacts be considered. Policy 8.1f states ‘avoidance or minimisation of adverse impacts (direct, cumulative or synergistic) on ecosystems and habitats, local values, and landscape features.’ The MACP also says (p. 26), ‘…each decision may result in an increment of change that is individually insignificant but if repeated over time may accumulate and contribute to significant environmental change.’ Managing these effects means ‘…drawing the line before effects become unacceptable.’
• Uses to be sustainable. Policy 8.3a says, ‘minimise and seek to avoid negative impacts on ecosystems and habitats, local values and landscape features.’ Policy 14.23 says, ‘Planning and management must not only be responsive to present conditions and challenges but include future scenarios and possible new uses.’
• Community benefit. The MACP (p. 32) states ‘Crown land and waters are held in trust for the benefit of the Victorian community…’ Many surf cam operators are not Victorian entities.

Consent is required from GORA for these surf cams. GORA’s CCTV policy requires lease holders to:

• Demonstrate how CCTV footage will be used
• Demonstrate the benefit of CCTV usage including wider community benefit
• Show, where applicable, appropriate consultation with stakeholders has occurred
• Have a process in place to safeguard the privacy of individuals captured on CCTV footage

The policy considers negative impacts of CCTV to be (but not limited to):

• Commercial use in which footage is sold or given to a third party
• Indiscriminate live broadcasting without a specific time limited permit in place

GORA says they want to take a balanced approach. It advised that they had directed all leaseholders (the SLSCs and the Torquay Marine Rescue Service) that have surf cams installed to have them turned off, but the cameras remain operational.

The latest information from GORA, via an article in the Surf Coast Times on 11^th August 2022, is that ‘…temporary permission has been granted to two SLSC clubs on the Surf Coast, Jan Juc and Lorne, to keep their CCTV cameras on after it was stated they were critical to maintaining public safety.’ Later in the article GORA states ‘All clubs are still required to make an application to operate the cameras where they must outline what processes are in place to safeguard the privacy of people likely to be captured on camera, consult with stakeholders about their use and demonstrate their benefit to the wider community.’

As of 31^st December 2022, some surf cams that were not granted temporary permission remain in operation.

With GORA determining the future of all surf cams on land they manage it is probably best that communities have their say sooner rather than later. GORA says they will happily receive submissions from groups and community members, although they are not in a formal consultation process. Emails can be sent to info@GreatOceanRoadAuthority.vic.gov.au