4. geotechnical issues - rhithroecology · the mt. buller granodiorite has deeply weathered to form...

4. Geotechnical Issues 5.1 Introduction This report refers to the geological conditions in the immediate vicinity of the proposed dam site in Boggy Creek valley, Mt Buller. Extreme caution is required i f the information in this report is extrapolated beyond the boundaries of the investigation. The recommendations and conclusions of this report refer only to the site specified and do not necessarily apply to the adjacent region.

The advice in this report is provided as a service, and although expertise has been utilised to the full extent possible, liability for any problems that may arise or any damages arising out of acceptance of this advice are not accepted by either the author or the University of Ballarat.

5.2 Site Geology and Geomorphology

Boggy Creek flows along the geological boundary between the Mt Buller Granodiorite and the adjacent metamorphosed sediments. The slopes of the valley walls graphically demonstrate the different geology either side of the creek (plate 1). On the western side of the creek the valley slopes are much steeper since the metamorphosed sediments (homfels) are more resistant to weathering and erosion than the granodiorite on the eastern side.

Figure 5.1 The proposed dam and reservoir site on Boggy Creek. Note the steep slope on the right hand side of the photo is underlain by homfels.

5.2.1 Site investigation

Site investigations were carried out in two stages:

43

5.2.1.1 Site mapping and initial test pit excavations

These were conducted on 23rd February, 1995, by Dr. Neville Rosengren (Geomorphologist, LaTrobe University, Bendigo campus) and Mr. Peter Dahlhaus (Engineering geologist. University of Ballarat). Also present were. Dr. Bob Boesen (Mineralogist, LaTrobe University, Bendigo campus) and Mr. Hamish McLennan (Department of Conservation and Natural Resources).

Three test pits were excavated on the eastern side of Boggy Creek, between the existing weir and the pump house. The pits were excavated using a JCB 4CX backhoe, owned and operated by Alpine Excavations. The selection of test sites was severely limited by the restricted access of the backhoe. The geological materials were described (Appendix 3) and sampled.

5.2.1.2. Additional Test Pit Excavations

Six additional test pits were excavated on 8th March, 1995.- four on the eastern side and two on the western side of Boggy Creek - under the supervision of Mr. Hamish McLennan. The pit locations were chosen to overcome the access difficulties of the previous investigation and the pits were excavated using a CAT tracked excavator. Geological materials from the pits were sampled (by Hamish McLennan) and described at a later date (by Peter Dahlhaus). The details of the investigation are appended (Appendix 4).

5.3.2 Geological Materials

A variety of geological materials are found at the site:

1. Weathered granodiorite. The Mt. Buller granodiorite has deeply weathered to form a residual sandy clay to clayey sand, with corestones (boulders and cobbles) of moderately to highly weathered rounded granodiorite. Above the watertable, the weathered granodiorite is generally orange-brown, and below the saturated zone is a distinct grey colour (gleyed). The weathered granodiorite is found at depth on the eastern side of the creek (pits 1, S1,T1) and is best exposed in road cuttings above the creek.

2. Weathered homfels. The homfels, or metamorphosed sediments, are much less easily weathered and form shallow stony soils. On the steeper slopes of the westem side of the Boggy Creek valley, the homfels are visible as outcrop. The soils developed over the homfels are shallow sandy gravelly silts, with increasing content of sub-angular corestones (cobbles and boulders) with depth.

3. Colluvial deposits. CoUuvium is the material transported downslope by mass wasting processes (landslides, rockfalls, hillside creep, etc.), and as such, comprises the entire size range (boulders, cobbles, gravel, sand, silt and clay) of material from different geological sources (i.e. granodiorite.

44

homfels and sedimentary rock). In most pits, coUuvium makes up part or all of the top two metres (eg. pits 1,2,3).

4. Alluvial deposits. Alluvium is material transported downstream by mnning water. The alluvial material on site at Boggy Creek is confined to the narrow valley floor and comprises boulders, cobbles, gravels, sands and silt of various geological origins.

5. Fill. The grooming of slopes for skiing and the excavation work carried out for the constmction of the weir, pump house and access tracks have provided up to two metres of unengineered fill in places. The fill comprises a variety of materials fi^om tree tmnks and other organic matter to boulders and sandy clays.

6. Mixed. In many areas of the lower slopes and valley floor (adjacent to the creek), the geological materials are of mixed origins and difficult to distinguish. In particular, alluvium, coUuvium and fill materials are not able to be clearly delineated.

5.3 Geological Suitability of Proposed Dam site

The suitability of the site for the constmction of a dam is limited by the following factors:

1. Geological variation across the site. The proposed dam site is not ideal because the base of the dam would be founded on different rock types with vastly different engineering properties. On the eastem side (i.e. right abutment) the foundations comprise deeply weathered granodiorite, whereas on the westem side (i.e. left abutment) they comprise fractured homfels rock. The weathered granodiorite has a much lower shear strength, is more compressible and more responsive to increases in pore-water pressures than the homfels.

The main risk this poses to the dam is differential settlement after constmction and filling of the reservoir. The subsequent movement of both the dam wall and foundatioq.would result in different rates of settlement as the homfels is far less compressible than the weathered granodiorite.

Similarly, post-constmction loads such as seismic loads fi^om (even minor) earthquakes would translate into significant shear movements when one side of the dam foundation vibrates at a different frequency and amplitude to the other. Such loads would endanger the long-term stability of the dam.

2. Erodability of the weathered granodiorite (right abutment). The weathered granodiorite, comprising sandy clays to clayey sand with corestones is a material that slakes and is easily eroded by mnning water. This problem was detailed in a previous investigation for a proposed dam site at Chalet Creek, Mt. Buller.

45

The nature of the weathered material would require either excavation to sound rock (i.e. fresh granodiorite) which may be at too great a depth to be feasible, or stabilisation of the weathered material using cement, emulsion or polymers. Detailed geotechnical investigations would be required to explore the feasibility of these options.

3. Jointed nature of the hornfels (left abutment). In general, the homfels are highly suitable rock for dam foundations, abutments and spillway constmction. However, their fractured nature makes them highly permeable, and therefore unsuited unless they are sealed. Standard methods of sealing the fractures, such as high pressure injection with a cement grout would be required.

5.3.1 Suitability of Proposed Reservoir site The proposed reservoir site has the following limitations:

1. Leakage The reservoir impounded by the proposed dam would be prone to leakage through the highly permeable fractured homfels on the westem side. This may be controlled by injection grouting to seal the fractures, or lining the reservoir with a clay or synthetic liner.

2. Erosion. As detailed in the Chalet Creek investigation, the weathered granodiorite is a highly erodable material. Even when recompacted, the material slakes in water and is therefore highly erodable. The erodability may create problems with turbidity and sediment load when the reservoir fills during periods of intense rainfall.

5.3.2 Suitability of Materials for Dam Construction.

The suitability of the geological material for constmction of the proposed dam is limited by:

1. The homfels should provide suitable material for both stabilising rockfiU in the dam constmction and erosion armouring of the dam surfaces and reservoir rim. While geotechnical testing would be required to assess its performance under freeze-thaw conditions and wetting-drying cycles, it provides a fine-grained crystalline rock source for constmction.

2. The weathered granodiorite is totally unsuited as a material for dam constmction due to its erodable nature and behaviour under saturated conditions. Geotechnical experimentation with stabilising agents such as cement, emulsion or polymers may provide a suitable modifying additive to improve its behaviour to an acceptable standard.

5.4 Conclusions

The geology and the engineering properties of the geological materials on site at Boggy Creek impose severe limitations on dam and reservoir constmction. Specifically, the variation in geology across the site and the vastly different engineering properties of the materials must be addressed in the design of the dam and reservoir to avoid failure.

46

6. Hydrological and System Model 6.1 Introduction This chapter describes the updated modelling of the water management and snow making system for the Mt. Buller Alpine Resort. It follows from the Hydrological and Water System Model prepared by R Grayson and C. Gippel in 1993. Updating was undertaken to include the possible construction of a new storage at the Boggy Creek site known as Boggy 2 (Elev. 1280 m), the alteration of the Boggy Creek pumping system, the availability of Sun Valley dam and the possible fiiture construction of a separate storage on Chalet Creek for the snowmaking supply.

This report is accompanied by a diskette containing a revised version (V3.1) of the Mt. Buller water management and snowmaking computer model (BULLER.EXE), based upon the previous BULLA2.EXE prepared by R. Grayson.

6.2 System Representation

The main components of the current and fiiture water management system for Mt. Buller are shown in Figure 1 and are described in the following:

Sun Valley Dam: A 75 M L earth and rock wall dam used as the supply for snowmaking requirements.

Village Tank: A 4ML concrete storage used to supply potable water to the meet resort needs.

Boggy 1 Tank: A small (0.06 ML) tank which receives water from an off-take from Boggy Creek, and also by pumping from Boggy 2. The minimum flow below the tank off-take is specified as "Boggy 1 min". The planned operation of Boggy 1 is to supply, where possible and when required, to both the Village Tank and Sun Valley Dam.

Boggy 2 Dam: A small on-stream reservoir with a capacity of approximately 0.03 ML. This is positioned on the site of the proposed 50ML Boggy 2 dam, and supplies water that is pumped to Boggy 1 Tank. The minimum flow for the outlet from Boggy 2 is specified as "Boggy2min".

Fault Creek Diversion: A possible diversion with the potential to increase water supply to a dam constructed on Chalet Creek. The minimum flow below the diversion is specified as "Divmin".

Chalet Dam: A storage that may be constructed on Chalet Creek, with a minimum outlet flow specified as "Chaletmin".

47

Snowmaking

Q

Divmin

Fault Ck . Diversion

X

. S u n Valley 0 a m

ClialHt Dam

D

Boogy 1 Tar

Boggy 2 Dam

Boqqy2min

Figure 6.1 Main components of the water management system

The operation of the Mt. Buller water management system at any time is dependent upon the requirements for potable water and the water required to meet the needs of the snowmaking facilities. The following section describes the way that the operation is represented in the BULLER.EXE model.

6.3 Modelling of the Water Management System The model BULLER.EXE is built around the BULLA2.EXE model develope4.previously, and similarly runs on a "weekly" time step using climatic data for the three years 1988, 1989 and 1990 (Grayson and Gippel, 1993). These years offer a range of snow conditions and winter temperatures. The snow production, snowmelt and cell hydrology algorithms are unchanged, so the calculations of snowcover and runoff production of the BULLER.EXE model are as reported by Grayson and Gippel (1993). Again, the model simulates operation of the water management system for 5 "weeks" in every month (except February), giving 59 weeks each year, or 177 weeks for the three year simulation period.

As stated by Grayson and Gippel (1993) the model is NOT a fully calibrated representation of the hydrological response of the catchment, with the hydrological system being unable to be fully tested due to a paucity of flow data in Boggy and Chalet Creeks.

In line vwth the schematic representation shown in Figure 1 and the operational flow charts provided in Appendix A, the current operating system is based on the supply of potable water to the Village Tank and snowniaking water to Sun Valley Dam.

48

The following steps describe the weekly operation of the model:

1. The Village water use is extracted from the Village Tank.

2. I f the flow at Boggy 1 is below the minimum flow, then no water is diverted at this point and this flow is maintained in the stream.

3. I f there is sufficient water available in Boggy Creek at Boggy 1 (above the minimum flow) and in Boggy 1 Tank, and sufficient pumping capacity from Boggy 1 to the Village Tank, then the Village Tank is refilled from Boggy 1 and the Boggy 1 Tank remains as fiiU as possible.

4. I f the Village water use is met (or the pump supplying the Village Tank has operated at maximum capacity for the week) and there is farther water available at Boggy 1, then this water is pumped to meet as much as is possible of any snowmaking demand from Sun Valley. Again, after supplying Sun Valley, the tank at Boggy 1 is left as fiall as possible and the flow down Boggy Creek from Boggy 1 is then adjusted according to the amount withdrawn.

5. I f the Village use and snowmaking requirements are not met, and there is still capacity for pumping more water within the week, then consideration turns to Boggy 2. I f there is sufficient water (above the minimum flow) available in Boggy Creek at Boggy 2 Dam and in Boggy 2 Dam, and sufficient pumping capacity from Boggy 2 to Boggy 1, then water is pumped to Boggy 1 and then from Boggy 1 to meet, first, fiarther Village water use requirements and, second, fiarther snowmaking requirements.

6. Chalet Creek and the Fault Creek Diversion (when constructed or "turned on" in the model) operate separately of the Boggy Creek system. The Diversion provides water to Chalet Dam where possible over winter, and Chalet Dam operates to supply water to Sun Valley when water is required and where there is water available from storage or streamflow (above minimum).

The operating algorithms for Boggy 1, Boggy 2, the Diversion and Chalet Dam are given in Appendix 3.

6.4 Model Operation

The model BULLER.EXE is run similarly to the previous version (BULLA2.EXE), with a small number of changes in variables and screen setups. The arrow keys are used to scroll between the choices presented on the model screens, the enter/return or escape key ("Esc") is used to select highlighted choices, and the escape key is used to return from one screen level to the previous level.

The model requires an I B M compatible computer with a VGA card. It is suggested that all the files on the accompanying disk be copied to a local hard drive directory and the model be run

49

from there. The command "BULLER" is used to run the model. Upon starting the model the user sees the opening page, as shown below.

Mt. B u l l e r Snowmaking Simulation; V3.1 Feb. 1995 Centre f o r Environmental Applied Hydrology The U n i v e r s i t y of Melbourne R.M. Argent Modified from BULLA2 model (R.B.Grayson) and e a r l i e r s h e l l s by C. Walters

- INITIAL CHOICES ARE: s t a r t s i m u l a t i o n e d i t map information e d i t model parameters s e t graph pane c h o i c e s s e t number of y e a r s t o simulate and s t a r t y e a r q u i t

( h i t e n t e r or e s c t o s e l e c t h i g h l i g h t e d c h o i c e )

The main areas for control and investigation of the model lie in the "edit model parameters", "set graph pane choices" and "set number of years to simulate and start year" sections. I f parameter editing is selected, the editing choices screen appears.

EDIT MODEL PARAMETERS

PARAMETER EDITING CHOICES F i n i s h e d , r e t u r n to main menu E d i t hydrology parameters E d i t s t o r a g e / minimum flow information E d i t snowmaking information Save parameter v a l u e s on a f i l e R e s t ore parameter v a l u e s from a f i l e

( h i t e n t e r or e s c to s e l e c t h i g h l i g h t e d c h o i c e )

Edit Hydrology Parameters

Selection of the first editing choice (edit hydrology parameters) brings up the screen upon which the snowmelt, evapotranspiration, runoff and soil store for each land type can be set, along with deep seepage factors for the three geological types. These values should not be altered.

LAND USE AND HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS - SHOULD NOT BE ALTERED

LAND TYPE Snow melt (mm/oC/d)

Max d l y E.T. (mm)

Runoff f a c t o r

Max S o i l S t o r e (cm)

1 - V i l l a g e 5.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 5.00

5.00 9.00

15.00 11.00 9.00 0.00

0.100 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.100

ICQ 100 100 100 100 100

2- S k i Run 3- dam/pump 4- F o r e s t 5- A l p i n e Meado 6- Car Park

50

==========DEEP SEEPAGE FACTORS - DO NOT CHANGE========== Deep Seepage f a c t o r from G r a n i t e : 0.050 Deep Seepage f a c t o r from B a s a l t : 0.050 Deep Seepage f a c t o r from Q u a r t z i t e : 0.050

Edit Storage/ Minimum Flow Information Selection of "Edit storage/ minimum flow information" from the parameter editing screen brings up the screen used for the main controls on the Boggy Creek storages and pumping for the supply of potable water, as well as the four minimum flows to be specified.

STORAGE and MINIMUM FLOW INFORMATION

==================== MINIMUM FLOWS TO BE MAINTAINED ==================

Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 1 pump ( L / s ) : 7.0 Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 2 dam ( L / s ) : 10.0 Minimum i n C h a l e t Ck. d/s dam ( L / s ) : 8.0 Minimum d/s of F a u l t Ck. d i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 3.0

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION =============

Fa c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.02 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to V i l l a g e Res. ( L / S ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up t o Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 0.1 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

On this screen the factor for the increase in Village water use is stated as being "over 1994" as the volume of water used in 1994 (100 ML) lies within the water use values of the three modelled years, namely 95 M L in 1988, 126 M L in 1989 and 98 M L in 1990. Consequently, an increase in consumption for the modelled years 1988-1990 can be seen as being equivalent to an increase over the 1994 consumption.

The minimum flow levels for the Fault Creek Diversion and Chalet Creek are based upon the previous estimates (Grayson and Gippel, 1993), while those for Boggy Creek are preliminary estimates. A range of minimum levels should be tested by the user to assess the impact of possible variations in specified minimum flows.

The Boggy 2 Dam capacity is set to 0.1 M L in the model, despite an actual volume of approximately 0.03 ML. This difference is insignificant when compared to the flow in Boggy Creek, the proposed Boggy 2 pumping capacity and the planned storage at Boggy 2 of 50 ML. At a typical Boggy Creek flow of 30 Ls', a 0.03 M L storage would fill in under twenty minutes, while a 45 Ls' pump would empty the storage in a little over ten minutes. Consequently, at low Boggy 2 storage volumes, it is the stream flow rather than the storage volume that is critical.

Various scenarios for water management, such as the unavailability of pumping from Boggy 2 during construction, can be modelled through appropriate settmg of the pump capacities.

Edit Snowmaking Information The snowmaking editing screen provides capacity for changes in snowmaking requirements through increased pumping capacity from Sun Valley Dam or through more snowmaking hours

51

over the winter months. The effects of the FauH Creek Diversion and the construction of Chalet Dam can be included in the model through setting their construction "switches" to a value of 1.

SNOWMAKING INFORMATION

========= FACTORS FOR WATER USE AND SNOWMAKING LOCATION ==

C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45 Snowmaking pump c a p a c i t y from Sun V a l l e y Dam ( L / s ) : 150 C a p a c i t y of Sun V a l l e y R e s e r v o i r (ML) : 75

Ch a l e t Ck. Dam c o n s t r u c t e d ? (1 f o r yes, 0 f o r no) : 0 D i v e r s i o n on F a u l t Ck. co n s t r u c t e d (1 Yes, 0 No) : 0 Ca p a c i t y of the C h a l e t Ck. Dam (when const.) (ML) : 20 Maximum flow i n F a u l t Ck. D i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 10 Ca p a c i t y of pump from C h a l e t Ck. to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45

=SNOWMAKING HOURS/ EACH WEEK (using 20 hours per snomaking day)==

MONTH MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER WEEK h/wk h/wk h/wk h/wk h/wk

1 0 0 20 0 20 2 20 0 20 20 0 3 0 40 40 0 0 4 20 40 0 20 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

The supply pumps for water to Sun Valley from Boggy 1 and Chalet Creek are assumed to operate up to 24 hours per day when required to meet high snowmaking loads. The separation of the Boggy Creek system from the snowmaking supply can be accomplished by setting the pumping capacity from Boggy 1 to Sun Valley to zero.

The snowmaking pump volume from Sun Valley is an estimate of the average flow drawn from the dam during snowmaking events, and is based upon a value that provides an approximately correct annual snowmaking volume. This value (currently 150 L/s) should be adjusted in conjunction with the snowmaking "hours per week" by the user to provide a realistic snowmaking pattern and annual snowmaking volume. The default numbers of snowmaking hours are based upon 20-hour snowmaking events, and were adopted fi-om the BULLA2.EXE model. Model users can set any reasonable number of snowmaking hours within each week.

In the example model scenarios provided later in this report increases in snowmaking water requirement are assumed to be due to increases in snowmaking area. Consequently, they are modelled through an increase in pumping capacity from Sun Valley Dam.

SETTING GRAPH PANE CHOICES The graphs and maps that are available for examination of the model output are listed in the "set graph pane choices" section. The default graphs, marked below with an "x", were selected to show the Boggy Creek system and the levels of the main storages. Alterations to graph choices are made through use o f

arrow and Tab keys for movement

52

space bar to clear "x" and "M" boxes "x" and "M" keys to mark boxes Esc key to exit screen after making selections

L i n e Graph Choices [ ] P r e c i p . & P.E.T.(cm [ jsnowdepth cm [x]Boggy 1 In,Out& Min [x]Boggy 2 In,Out& Min [ ] C h a l e t In,Out&Min.L [x]Snomak.:ideal&actua [ ] C h a l e t Ck. a t Rd.L/ [ ] D i v e r s i o n In,Out L/ [ 1 [ 1 t 1 t ]

[M]Land Use [M]Outflow ( c m / c e l l ) [MJSnow Cover [ ] [ ]

x]Sun V a l l e y l e v e l . ( x ] V i l l a g e tank l e v e l ( ]Boggy 1 Storage (ML

X]Boggy 2 Dam l e v e l ( M ] C h a l e t Dam l e v e l (M ] ]

Map Choices

V i l l a g e Water Use (

SETITNG NUMBER O F YEARS T O SIMULATE AND START Y E A R This option allows single or two year simulations to be run. The setting screen appears as ft)llows:

s e t number of y e a r s t o simulate, or h i t e n t e r t o use d e f a u l t ( 3 ):2 s e t s t a r t y e ar (1988, 1989 or 1990);

6.4 Management Scenarios The details provided in the previous section should allow the user to operate the model. It is suggested that a number of simple scenarios be run through the model to provide the user with a feeling for the sensitivity of various system components to changes in parameter values. Six simple management scenarios were simulated for the purposes of illustrating model operation and to provide an indication of the response of the system to small changes in management options. The 6 scenarios were: Run 1. Approximation of current conditions. Run 2. 50% increase in snowmaking. Run 3. 10% increase in Village water use. Run 4. Construction of 50 M L Boggy 2 dam. Run 5. 10% increase in Village water use and construction of 50 M L Boggy 2 dam. Run 6. 10% increase in Village water use, 50% increase in snowmaking, and construction of

50 M L Boggy 2 dam.

53

It is suggested that the user run these simulations while reading the following descriptions and discussion. This will ensure that the user is familiar with model operation.

RUN 1 Current (Village Use +2% on 1994) The setup screens for the "storage and minimum flow" and "snowmaking information" are given below. It is suggested that the user check these screens to ensure that the defauh model settings are as shown.

At a later stage these default model settings may be reset to represent the most commonly run scenario. This is done by changing the parameters to new values and saving the values to a parameter file named "BULL". I f this is done it is suggested that the current default parameters be saved as "DEFAULT" so that they can be reloaded at any stage.

STORAGE and MINIMUM FLOW INFORMATION ==================== MINIMUM FLOWS TO BE MAINTAINED ======== Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 1 pump ( L / s ) : 7.0 Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 2 dam ( L / s ) : 10.0 Minimum i n C h a l e t Ck. d/s dam ( L / s ) : 8.0 Minimum d/s of F a u l t Ck. d i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 3.0

====== RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION === F a c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.02 Cap a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 t o V i l l a g e Res. ( L / s ) : 45 Ca p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up t o Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 Cap a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 0.1 Ca p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

SNOWMAKING INFORMATION ========= FACTORS FOR WATER USE AND SNOWMAKING LOCATION == Ca p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45 Snowmaking pump c a p a c i t y from Sun V a l l e y Dam ( L / s ) : 150 Cap a c i t y of Sun V a l l e y R e s e r v o i r (ML) : 75

Ch a l e t Ck. Dam co n s t r u c t e d ? (1 f o r yes, 0 f o r no) : 0 D i v e r s i o n on F a u l t Ck. co n s t r u c t e d (1 Yes, 0 No) : 0 Ca p a c i t y of the C h a l e t Ck. Dam (when const.) (ML) : 20 Maximum flow i n F a u l t Ck. D i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 10 Ca p a c i t y of pump from Chalet Ck. t o Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45

==SN0WMAKING HOURS/ EACH WEEK (using 20 hours per snomaking day)==

MONTH MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST ^SEPTEMBER WEEK h/wk h/wk h/wk h/wk h/wk

1 0 0 20 0 20 2 20 0 20 20 0 3 0 40 40 0 0 4 20 40 0 20 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

The default output graphs ( [xjBoggy l In,Out& Min; [x]Boggy 2 In,Out& Min; [xJBoggy 2 Dam le v e l ( M ; [x]Snomak.:ideal&actua; [x]Sun V a l l e y l e v e l ; ( x J V i l l a g e tank l e v e l ) and the three maps ([M]Land Use; (M]Outflow ( c m / c e l l ) ; [M] Snow Cover ) are used for this and the following runs, so these do not need to be altered.

During the simulation there are two items to note: 1. Messages warning of low flows at Boggy 1 and Boggy 2, and an empty Village Tank, are

displayed in the top left comer of the screen. These are followed by a two second pause to allow the user to read the message.

54

B1 In B1 Out Village Tank

1 6 0

1 4 0

1 2 0

1 0 0

8 0

6 0

4 0

2 0

0

V Wi I I I '

» - c M r O ' t i o « 3 r ^ o o o 3 0 t - « N f o r t i n < o r ^

Week Number

B2 In 82 Out Boggy 2 Dam

« - c > J c o ^ i n < D i ^ o o O T O « - c M r o ^ i n < o r »

Week Number

5 0 4 5

:j 4 0 5 3 5 o. 3 0

I 2 5 I 2 0 o 1 5 « 1 0

5 0

Ideal Actual Sun Valley

iii il SI i !

' 11* ^ \!!i ft

\J, 1 1 ^

c N C O ' t i o c D i ^ o o c n o

Week Number

r- n rt m (D

1Q0 9 0 8 0 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0

Figure 2 RUN 1: Current (Village Use +2% on 1994)

55

2. The annual snowmaking and Village water use volumes are printed near the bottom of the screen at the end of each year. This is done to allow the user to fme tune the snowmaking and Village water use requirements to meet current or expected conditions. For Run 1 the annual snowmaking volume is 140.4 ML.

The output from the model is repeated in a condensed form in Figure 2. The main items to note for this run are the reductions in Boggy 1 and Boggy 2 outflow at times when supply to the Village Tank is unable to meet demand. Despite this, all the snowmaking requirements are met (as shown by the overlaying of the "Ideal" and "Actual" snowmaking volumes in the third graph), with the Sun Valley dam reaching a minimum level slighfly above half fiiU.

RUN 2 Increase Snowmaking by 50%

In this run the snowmaking requirements are increased by 50%. This is done by setting the snowmaking capacity for the pump fi-om Sun Valley to 225 L/s, as shown below.

SNOWMAKING INFORMATION ========= FACTORS FOR WATER USE AND SNOWMAKING LOCATION ===========

Cap a c i t y of purap from Boggy 1 to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45 Snovnnaking pump c a p a c i t y from Sun V a l l e y Dam ( L / s ) : 225 Ca p a c i t y of Sun V a l l e y R e s e r v o i r (ML) : 75

Cha l e t Ck. Dam c o n s t r u c t e d ? (1 f o r yes, 0 f o r no) : 0 D i v e r s i o n on F a u l t Ck. co n s t r u c t e d (1 Yes, 0 No) : 0 Ca p a c i t y of the C h a l e t Ck. Dam (when const.) (ML) : 20 Maximum flow i n F a u l t Ck. D i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 10 Cap a c i t y of pump from C h a l e t Ck. to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45

A similar approach to increasing snowmaking is to increase the hours per week section of each of the weeks during winter. This will have the effect of altering the times available for refilling of Sun Valley dam, and may be used to facilitate snowmaking scheduling.

The output fi-om this run is repeated in Figure 3. The main items to note when comparing the output with that fi-om Run 1 are the increasing volumes drawn out fi-om Boggy Creek at Boggy 1 and Boggy 2 (for example between Week #30 and #40) and also the extra drawdown of Sun Valley. The snowmaking requirements are still able to be met, as indicated by the overlaying of the "Ideal" and "Actual" snowmaking curves.

56

B1 In 81 Out Village Tank

1 6 0

1 4 0

1 2 0

5 1 0 0

7 8 0

£ 6 0

4 0

2 0

0

(tv' Ik a

• - c M n t i n « D r ^ o o < n o « - c M r O T f m « o

Week Number

B2 In B2 0ut Boggy 2 Dam

Ideal ~ Actual Sun Valley

Week Number

Figure 3 RUN 2: Increase Snowmaking by 50%

57

RUN 3 Increase Village water use by 10%

In this run the Village water use is increased by 10%. This is done by setting the factor for increased use to 1.10, as shown below.

STORAGE and MINIMUM FLOW INFORMATION ==================== MINIMUM FLOWS TO BE MAINTAINED =============== Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 1 pump ( L / s ) : 7.0 Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 2 dam ( L / s ) : 10.0 Minimum i n C h a l e t Ck. d/s dam ( L / s ) : 8.0 Minimum d/s of F a u l t Ck. d i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 3.0

====== RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION ========= F a c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.10 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to V i l l a g e Res. ( L / s ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up t o Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 Ca p a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 0.1 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

The output from this run is repeated in Figure 4. The main item to note when comparing the output with that from Run 1 is that there is little difference in the volumes drawn out from Boggy Creek at Boggy 1 and Boggy 2. On occasion there is extra drawdown from Boggy 2 dam, such as occurs at about Week #95. The snowmaking requirements are still able to be met, with little difference between the Sun Valley levels shown for Run 1 and this run.

58

B1 In - - 81 Out Village Tank

«- CM CO lO «D o o o ) o « - c M n ^ w < o r > -

Week Number

3 5 0 T

3 0 0

2 5 0 '

2 0 0

i 1 5 0 u.

1 0 0

5 0

0 -

82 In - 82 Out Boggy 2 Dam

f - c M C 0 T t i n c o i ^ 0 0 0 5 O « - c M C 0 ' * i n t o r »

Week Number

5 0 4 5

3 4 0 5 3 5 0 3 0 1 2 5 E I c

2 0 1 5 1 0

5 0


_ 1 V

i 1 V \ (li . II 1 ^

C M f 0 ' * i f t < D I ^ 0 0 a > O

Week Number

CM n ' t i f l <o

1 0 0 9 0 86" 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0

Figure 4 RUN 3: Increase Village Use by 10%

59

RUN 4 Construct 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam

In this run the construction of a 50 M L dam at the Boggy 2 site is simulated. This is done by altering the capacity of Boggy 2 dam to 50.0 ML, as shown below.

STORAGE and MINIMUM FLOW INFORMATION ==================== MINIMUM FLOWS TO BE MAINTAINED =============== Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 1 pump ( L / s ) : 7.0 Minimum i n Boggy Ck. d/s Boggy 2 dam ( L / s ) ; 10.0 Minimum i n C h a l e t Ck. d/s dam ( L / s ) : 8.0 Minimum d/s of F a u l t Ck. d i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 3.0

====== RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION ========= F a c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.02 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to V i l l a g e Res. ( L / s ) : 45 Ca p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up to Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 50.0 Ca p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

The output from this run is repeated in Figure 5. The main items to note when comparing the output with that from Run 1 are:

That the supply to the Village Tank is always able to meet demand (i.e. the Village Tank level remains at 4 ML),

That there is a marked reduction in the periods over which the Boggy 2 dam is empty or below maximum, and

That the supply to Sun Valley dam is almost always able to meet the snowmaking demand, resulting in little or no drawdown in the Sun Valley storage level.

60

B1 In - 81 Out Village Tank

160 T 140 i 120 , 100 '

-J •

i 80 s 60

40 20

0 -

Week Number

B2 In B2 Out Boggy 2 Dam

.A If

« - t N f O ' * i n c D r v o o < n o « - c M o o

50 45 40 35 _ 30 s 25 X 20 » 15 10 5 0

IT) CO I ^

Week Number


lilii !

r

/ 1)1 II

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

c M r o ^ i n c o i ^ o o o i O

Week Number

CM CO Tt lO CO

Figure 5 RUN 4: Construct 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam

61

RUN 5 Construct 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam and Increase Village water use by 10%

In this run the Village water use is increased by 10%, and the presence of a 50 M L dam at Boggy 2 is simulated. This is done by setting the factor for increased use to 1.10 and altering the capacity of Boggy 2 dam to 50.0 ML, as shown below.


====== RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION ========= F a c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.10 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to V i l l a g e Res. ( L / s ) ; 45 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up to Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 50.0 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

The output from this run is repeated in Figure 6. The system response is very similar to that of Run 4, with only imperceptible differences in the Boggy 1 outflow. This is not unexpected as a 10% increase in Village use equates to an average of approximately 0.2 M L per week, and this is less than 2% of a typical modelled Boggy Creek flow of 12 M L per week, or only 0.4% of the modelled capacity of the 50 M L Boggy 2 dam (for periods when flow at Boggy 1 is below minimum and Village water is being drawn from Boggy 2). Consequently, it is only during times of high demand that the differences between the Run 4 and Run 5 results are not negligible.

62


1 6 0 T

1 4 0 1

1 2 0

1 0 0 1

8 0

s u.

6 0

4 0

2 0

0

A,

Week Number

4

3

2

^ i ° f -1

- 2

- 3

- 4

B2 in B2 Out Boggy 2 Dam

Week Number

m (0

Ideal " Actual Sun Valley

c M c O ' t i n c o r ^ Q O C T J O

Week Number

«- CM CO i n CD

Figure 6 RUN 5: Increase Village Use by 10% and construct 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam

63

RUN 6 Construct 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam, Increase Snowmaking by 50% and Increase Village water use by 10%

In this run the Village water use is increased by 10%, the snowmaking requirements are increased by 50% and the presence of a 50 M L dam at Boggy 2 is simulated. This is done by setting the factor for increased use to 1.10, altering the capacity of Boggy 2 dam to 50.0 ML, and setting the snowmaking capacity for the pump from Sun Valley to 225 L/s, as shown below.


====== RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT and WATER SUPPLY INFORMATION ========= F a c t o r f o r i n c r e a s e s i n V i l l a g e water use over 1994 : 1.10 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to V i l l a g e Res. ( L / s ) : 45 C a p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 2 up t o Boggy 1 ( L / s ) : 45 Ca p a c i t y of the Boggy 2 Dam (ML) : 50.0 C a p a c i t y of the Boggy 1 Storage (ML) : 0.06

SNOWMAKING INFORMATION ========= FACTORS FOR WATER USE AND SNOWMAKING LOCATION == Ca p a c i t y of pump from Boggy 1 to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45 Snowmaking pump c a p a c i t y from Sun V a l l e y Dam ( L / s ) : 225 Ca p a c i t y of Sun V a l l e y R e s e r v o i r (ML) : 75

C h a l e t Ck. Dam c o n s t r u c t e d ? (1 f o r yes, 0 f o r no) ; 0 D i v e r s i o n on F a u l t Ck. c o n s t r u c t e d (1 Yes, 0 No) : 0 Ca p a c i t y of t h e C h a l e t Ck. Dam (when const.) (ML) : 20 Maximum flow i n F a u l t Ck. D i v e r s i o n ( L / s ) : 10 C a p a c i t y of pump from C h a l e t Ck. to Sun V a l l e y ( L / s ) : 45

The output from this run is repeated in Figure 7. The main items to note when comparing the output with that from Run 5 are the increases in the drawdown of Boggy 2 dam and Sun Valley dam. There are also some changes in the volumes drawn out from Boggy Creek at Boggy 1 and Boggy 2 (for example at Boggy 2 between Week #87 and #97). The snowmaking requirements are still able to be met, with the Sun Valley level being reduced to a minimum of approximately 75% of maximum during the 1990 snowmaking period. •

64


160

« - c M r O ' t 4 n < D N c o < n o « - c M c o ^ i o < o r ^

Week Number

B2 In B2 Out Boggy 2 Dam

350 Y 300 250 200

i 0

150 u.

100 50 0 -

Week Number

CM n ^ i n to i ^

50 T 45 40

s 35 OI c

30 :s o

25 20

o c 15 (0 10

5 0 i

Ideal

1

ill I H I I

J

Actual

I !

ill iiiin

Sun Valley

11 II

lit

c M O ^ i o c D f ^ o o c n o

Week Number

>- CM 00 m CO

100 9Q. 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Figure 7 RUN 6: Village Use +10%; Snowmaking +50%; 50 M L Boggy 2 Dam

65

6.5 Conclusion

The BULLER.EXE model provides a tool for the exploration of future developments of the water storage, management and snowmaking system of the Mt. Buller Alpine Resort. Through adjustment of storage levels and pumping capacities a wide range of management scenarios can be investigated. While the model is not a fully calibrated hydrological representation of the upper Boggy and Chalet Creek catchments, the comparison of results for different scenarios gives a valid indication of the relative system response to various management actions.

The results of Runs 1-6 have indicated that the current system is robust and that, with the addition of the Boggy 2 dam, the water supply is sufficient for current and short term fiiture Village water use and snowmaking supply. Model results indicate that the construction of Boggy 2 dam will provide potable supply for a more than 10% increase in potable demand and more than a 50% increase in snowmaking requirement.

For larger developments in potable demand and, particularly, snowmaking, it is suggested that a set of scenarios involving the inclusion and exclusion of Chalet Dam and the Fault Creek Diversion be investigated to ascertain the system response to these components.

66

7. Conclusions

The Boggy Creek reservoir proposal can best be evaluated by comparison with the Chalet Creek proposal evaluated by Campbell et al (1993).

Water Availability - The stream discharge at the proposed Boggy 2 site is substantially greater than at the proposed Chalet Creek site. Thus more water could be harvested for snowmaking from Boggy Creek while still maintaining envionmental flows, than is the case for Chalet Creek.

Environmental Values - The Boggy Creek site is considered to be of substantially higher environmental value than the Chalet Creek site. Terrestrial ecosystems surrounding the site appear to be significantly less disturbed and of greater value to terrestrial vertebrates. Boggy Creek is known to be high quality habitat for the stonefly Thaumatoperla flaveola which is listed under the FFG Act, and the stream has a greater aquatic invertebrate diversity than Chalet Creek. Neither stream contains fish at, or near, the proposed reservoir sites.

Engineering Suitability - Both sites are poor reservoir construction sites. Of the two the Chalet Creek site appears to be the better because the geology, while poor, is similar across the site while at Boggy Creek the geological discontinuity along the creek channel increases the risk of catastrophic dam failure.

Overall it would appear that the Chalet Creek site would be a preferable construction site.

67

8. Study Team & Acknowledgments The various components of this study were carried out by: Dr Robert Argent, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, Melbourne University (water management model), Dr Ian Campbell, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Monash University (aquatic invertebrates), Mr Peter Dallhaus, Geology Department, Ballarat University (geology), Dr Chris Gippel, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, Melbourne University (geomorphology and environmental flows), Mr John Jenkin, Deakin University, Rusden Campus (vegetation), Mr Paul Peake, Ecology Australia (vertebrate survey), Mr Michael Shirley, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Monash University (fish survey).

We gratefiilly acknowledge the assistance of a number of additional people in the preparation of this report. Matthew White (Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Alexandra); Fiona Eraser (Ecology Australia); and Graeme Gillespie (Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Heidelberg) all assisted vnth the vertebrate component. Field assistance for the geomorphological component was kindly provided by Rob Argent, Grace Mitchell and Marisa Tan. Their persistence under very difficult conditions is greatly appreciated.

68

9. References Allison, R.A. and Grayson, R.B. 1994. Mount Stirling stream monitoring programme. Report to

the Alpine Resorts Commission. Unimelb Ltd, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria (unpublished).

ANZEEC (1991). List of endangered vertebrate fauna April 1991. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council.

Bathurst, J.C. 1978. Flow resistance of large-scale roughness. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the ASCE 104 HY12: 1587-1603.

Bathurst, J.C. 1985. Flow resistance estimation in mountain rivers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 111: 625-643.

Beardsell, C , Brereton, R., Sandiford, K. and Schulz, M . (in prep.). Sites of Zoological Significance in the westem region of Melboume. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research.

Blyth, J.D. 1980. Environmental impact of reservoir constmction: the Dartmouth Dam invertebrate survey: a case history, in Williams, W.D. (Ed.) An Ecological Basis for Water Resource Management, Austrahan National University Press, Canberra, pp. 174-181.

Blyth, J.D., Doeg, T.J. and St.Clair, R.M. 1984. Response of the macroinvertebrate fauna of the Mitta Mitta River, Victoria, to the constmction and operation of Dartmouth Dam. 1. Constmction and initial filling period. Occasional Papers from the Museum of Victoria 1: 83-100.

Boon, P.J. 1988. The impact of river regulation on invertebrate communities in the U.K., Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 2: 389-409.

Bmnner, H. and Wallis, R.L. (1986). Roles of predator scat analysis in Australian mammal research. Victorian Nat. 103:79-86

Campbell, I : , Dallhaus, P., Gell, P., Gippel, C , Grayson, R., Jenkin, J., Peake, P. and Rosengren, N . (1993). Natural Resources Survey Snowmaking Water Supply Mt Buller Alpine Resort. Report prepared for the Alpine Resorts Commission by Rhithroecology Pty Ltd., Melboume.

Campbell, I.C., Peake, P. and Gell, P. (1992). Report on a flora survey of areas which will be affected by the proposed extension of the lift line and slope development works at Wombat Run, Mt Buller, with an assessment of the extent to which these may adversely affect rare or endangered flora and fauna. Report prepared for Mt Buller Ski Enterprises Pty Ltd.

Chessman, B.C., Robinson, D.P. and Hortle, K.G. 1987. Changes in the riffle macroinvertebrate fauna of the Tanjil River, southeastem Australia, during constmction^pf Blue Rock dam. Regulated Rivers Research and Management 1: 317-329.

Chow, Ven Te 1959. Open Channel Hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 680 p. Christidis, L . and Boles, W.E. (1994). The Taxonomy and Species of Birds of Australia and its

Territories. Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union Monograph 2. RAOU, Melboume. CNR (1993). Threatened Fauna in Victoria. Department of Conservation and Natural

Resources, Victoria. Cogger, H.G. (1992). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. 5th edition. Reed, Sydney. Coleman, D. 1978. Downstream effects of the Gordon Dam, Hydro-Electric Commission,

Hobart, Tasmania. Conn, B.J. (1993). Natural regions and vegetation of Victoria. In 'Flora of Victoria.' Vol. 1.

(Eds. D.B. Foreman and N.G. Walsh.) pp 79-158. (Royal Botanic Gardens Melboume and National Herbarium of Victoria: South Yarra).

Davey, G.W., Doeg, T.J. and Blyth, J.D. 1987. Changes in benthic sediment in the Thomson River, southeastem Australia, during constmction of the Thomson dam. Regulated Rivers Research and Management 1: 71-84.

69

Doeg, T.J., Davey, G.W. and Blyth, J.D. 1987. Response of the aquatic macroinvertebrate communities to dam construction on the Thomson River, southeastern Australia, Regulated Rivers 1: 195-209.

Emison, W.B., Beardsell, C M . , Norman, F.I., Loyn, R.H. and Bennett, S.C. (1987). Atlas of Victorian Birds. Department of Conservation and Environment and the Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union, Melboume, Australia.

Engman, E.T. 1986. Roughness coeflBcients for routing surface mnoff, Joumal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering ASCE 112: 39-53.

Fletcher, A.R. (1979). Effects of Salmo tmtta on Galaxias olidus and Macroinvertebrates in stream communities. M.Sc. Thesis, Zoology Department, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria. 179pp.

Frood, D. and Calder, M . (1987). Nature conservation in Victoria study report. 2 volumes. A report to the Victorian National Parks Association, Inc., Melbourne.

Galay, V.T. 1983. Causes of river bed degradation. Water Resources Research 19: 1057-1090. Gamett, S. (ed.) (1993). Threatened and Extinct Birds of Australia. Royal Australasian

Ornithologist Union Report No. 82. ANPWS and RAOU, Melboume. Gaynor, M.M. , Gippel, C.J., Pouliot, A.M. and Finlayson, B.L. 1995. Impact of water supply

diversion weirs on aquatic macroinvertebrates that prefer high velocity habitats. Report to Melboume Water Corporation, Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Melboume, Parkville, Victoria (unpublished).

Germanoski, D. and Ritter, D.F. 1988. Tributary response to local base level lowering below a dam. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 2: 11-24.

Goodman, A.W. 1980. Analytical Geometry and the Calculus. Fourth Edition, Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc., New York, 997 p. +app.

Gore, J.A. 1989. Models for predicting benthic macroinvertebrate habitat suitability under regulated flows. Chapter 10 in Gore, J. A. and Petts, G.E. (Eds) Altematives in Regulated River Management, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 253-265.

Grant, G.E., Duval, J.E., Koerper and Fogg, J.L. 1992. XSPRO: A channel cross-section analyser. Technical Note 387. U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management Service Center, Denver, Colorado.

Green, K. and Osbome, W. (1994). Wildlife of the Australian Snow Country. Reed Books, Sydney.

Gullan, P.K., Cheat, D.C. and Walsh, N.G. (1990). Rare or threatened plants in Victoria. Department of Conservation and Environment, Melboume.

Hicks, D.M. and mason, P.D. 1991. Roughness Characteristics of New Zealand Rivers. Water Resources Survey, DSIR Marine and Freshwater, Wellington, New Zealand, 329 p.

Hutchinson, M.N. and Donnellan, S.C. (1992). Taxonomy and genetic variation in the Australian lizards of the genus Pseudemoia (Scincidae: Lygosominae). J. Nat. Hist. 26: 215-64.

Hutchinson, M.N., Donnellan, S.C, Baverstock, P., Krieg, M. , Simms, S. and Burgin, S. (1990). Immunological relationships and generic revision of the Australian lizards assigned to the genus Leiolopisma (Scincidae: Lygosominae). Aust. J. Zool. 38: 535-534.

Jarrett, R.D. 1984. Hydraulics of high-gradient streams, Joumal of Hydraulic Engineering 110: 1519-1539.

Kadlec, R.H. 1990. Overland flow in wetlands: vegetation resistance, Joumal of HydrauUc Engineering 116: 691-706.

Kavanagh, R.P. and Peake, P. (1993). Survey procedures for noctumal forest birds: An evaluation of the variability in census results due to temporal factors, weather and technique, in Olsen, P.J. (Ed.) Australasian Raptor Studies. Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union and Australian Museum, Melboume, Australia.

70

Kennedy, M . (1992). Australian marsupials and monotremes. An action plan for their conservation. lUCN, Switzerland.

Land Conservation Council, Victoria (1977). Report on the Alpine Study Area. Land Conservation Council, Melboume.

Leutheusser, H.J. and Chisholm, W.O. 1973. Extreme roughness of natural river channel, Joumal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the ASCE 99 HY7: 1027-1041.

Mace, G.M. and Lande, R. (1991). Assessing extinction threats: towards a re-evaluation of lUCN threatened species categories. Conserv. Biol. 5: 148-157.

Marchant, R. 1989. Changes in the benthic invertebrate communities of the Thomson river south-eastem Australia, after dam constmction. Regulated Rivers 4: 71-88.

Marchant, R. 1987. Changes in the benthic invertebrate communities of the Thomson River, Victoria, after dam constmction. Report to the Department of Water Resources Victoria, Thomson River Post-Constryction Monitoring Program, Melboume, Victoria.

McDowall, R.M. & Frankenberg, R.S. (1981) The galaxiid fishes of Australia. Records of the Australian Museum 33, 443-605.

Menkhorst, P.W. (1987). Working list of Victorian mammals. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research. Technical Report Series No. 50. Dept. Conserv. and Environ., Melboume.

Minshall, G.W. and Winger, P.V. 1968. The effect of reduction in stream flow on invertebrate drift. Ecology 49: 580-582.

Munn, M.D. and Bmsven, M.A. (1991) Benthic macroinvertebrate communities in nonregulated and regulated waters of the Clearwater River, Idaho, U.S.A., Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 6: 1-11.

Newbury, R.W. and Gaboury, M.N. 1993. Stream Analysis and Fish Habitat Design: a Field Manual. Newbury Hydraulics Ltd, The Manitoba habitat Heritage Corporation, Manitoba Fisheries Branch. Gibsons, B.C., Canada.

Olive L.J. and Rieger, W.A. 1985. Variation in suspended sediment concentration during storms in five small catchments in southeast New South Wales, Australian Geographical Studies 23: 38-51.

Pearson, W.D. and Franklin, D.R. 1968. Some factors affecting drift rates of Baetis and Simuliidae in a large river. Ecology 49: 75-81.

Petryk, S. and Bosmajian I I I , G. 1975. Analysis of flow through vegetation. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the ASCE 101 HY7: 871-884.

Petts, G.E. 1984. Macroinvertebrate response to upstream impoundment. Chapter V I I in Petts, G.E. Impounded Rivers: Perspectives for Ecological Management, Wiley-Interscience, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 175-208. .

Raadik, T.A. (1993). A research recovery plan for the Barred Galaxias Galaxias fiiscus Mack 1936, in South-eastem Australia. (Unpublished report to Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service; Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Victoria)

Rasid, H. 1979. The effects of regime regulation by the Gardner Dam on downstream geomorphic processes in the Saskatchewan River, Canadian Geographer 23: 140-156.

Reice, S.R. 1994. Nonequilibrium determinants of biological community stmcture, American Scientist 82: 424-435.

Rhithroecology Pty Ltd 1993. Natural resources survey: snowmaking water supply, Mt Buller Alpine Resort. Report to the Alpine Resorts Commission (unpublished), Melboume, Victoria.

Ross, J.H. (ed.) (1993). A census of the vascular plants of Victoria, 4th edition. Royal Botanic Gardens, Melboume.

Schulz, M . , Beardsell, C. and Sandiford, K. (1991). Shes of Faunal Significance in the Westem Wetlands of Melboume. Wildlife Branch, Department of Conservation and Environment.

71

Shirley, M J . (1991) The ecology and distribution of Galaxias fuscus Mack, in the Goulbum River system, Victoria. B.Sc.(Honours) Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of Melboume.

Thome, C.R. and Zevenbergen, L.W. 1985. Estimating mean velocity in mountain rivers, Joumal of Hydraulic Engineering 111: 612-624.

Triggs, B., Bmnner, H. and Cullen, J.M. (1984) The food of dog, fox and cat in Croajingalong National Park, south-eastem Victoria. Aust. Wildl. Res. 11: 491-499.

Tunbridge, B.R. & Rogan, P.L. (1981). A guide to the Inland Angling Waters of Victoria. Fisheries and Wildlife Division, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 141pp.

Tumer, A.K., Langford, K.J., Win, M . and Clifl, T. 1978. Discharge-depth equation for shallow flow, Joumal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division ASCE 104: 95-110.

Volleth, M . and Tidemann, C.R. (1991) The origin of the Australian vespertilionine bats, as indicated by chromosomal studies. Zeitschrift flir Saugertierkunde 56: 321-30.

Wakhlu, O.N. 1974. Extreme roughness of natural river channel, Joumal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the ASCE 100 HYIO: 1484-1487.

Walsh, N.G. and Entwisle, T.J. (1994). Flora of Victoria. Volume 2. Fems and Allied Plants, Conifers and Monocotyledons. Inkata, Melboume.

Watts, J.F. and Watts, G.D. 1990. Seasonal change in aquatic vegetation and its effects on river channel flow. In Thomes, J.B. (ed). Vegetation and Erosion, John Wiley and Sons, pp. 257-267.

Wu, A.Y.K., Papworth, M.P. and Flinn, D.W. 1984. The effects of some forest practices on water quality and yield in the Reefton Experimental Area, Victoria, Part 1. Pre-treatment phase. Hydrology Section, Soil Conservation Authority, Melboume, Victoria.

72

4. geotechnical issues - rhithroecology · the mt. buller granodiorite has deeply weathered to form...

Documents