FREO COUNCIL PREFERS BATHERS BEACH FOR SHARK PROTECTION

The City of Fremantle will progress its plan to install a protected swimming area at Bathers Beach, with Council reaffirming the centrally-located beach as its preferred option at a meeting on Wednesday night.

Fremantle Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge said it wasn’t about choosing the busiest or most shark-prone beach, it was about creating a safe place at a currently underutilised beach.

“There are a number of reasons why we see Bathers Beach as a real opportunity. One of the things that’s really clear about enclosed swimming areas is that they attract a lot more people.  So, you’re not catering to the existing beach population, you’re catering to the population of people who currently do not go to the beach and swim.”

Council also received the results of a community engagement survey in which 159 submissions were made.

Parking was identified in the survey as a potential challenge, however Mayor Fitzhardinge welcomed the recent opening of the nearby TAFE carpark to the public on weekends, which will mitigate some of the perceived problems.

City officers will seek the maximum funding available from the state government and submit a proposal for residual costs in the City’s 2024-25 budget.

The City will also seek to formalise an offer from nearby business owners to contribute to the annual maintenance costs of the barrier, and potentially the cost of improving bathroom facilities near the beach.

Officers will also seek budget approval for further investigation of an enclosed swimming area in the river at Harvey Beach, North Fremantle, which has attracted strong community support.

Roel Loopers

WHY BATHERS BEACH SHARK BARRIER MAKES SENSE

The announcement that Fremantle Councillor wants to install a shark barrier at Bathers Beach, paid for by the State Government, has triggered a lot of debate on social media, because at first look it appears not to make much sense.

Why not, people argue, install it at one of the more popular beaches, such as Leighton or South Beach, where a shark ‘net’ would protect a lot more swimmers and surfers than at the underutilised inner city beach? Fair question.

But when one thinks a bit deeper and looks past the obvious, it actually starts to make sense, and to look like a well-considered decision by Fremantle Council. When we take into account that many more people will be living in the inner city in the foreseeable future, making Bathers Beach more attractive is common sense.

One needs to ask if we should exacerbate the parking issues at South and Leighton, where parking is already at a premium, or should that be a pain in the arse, in the busy summer months. Installing shark protection there would most certainly increase the number of beach goers, so is that a good idea? I don’t believe so.

Those who don’t want the shark barrier at Bathers Beach say there is not enough parking in the area, but that is not correct. There is a lot of parking at the Esplanade carpark, and the one south of the Italian Club. The Collie Street and Norfolk Street car parks are just minutes away from the beach, and the Little High Street car parks are basically next to it, as are the ones along Mews Road.

There is no longer a bus service along Marine Terrace and Cliff Street though, because the South Beach CAT bus has stopped. But it is only a leisurely 15-minute walk from the Fremantle train station and bus port to Bathers Beach, so that really is not an issue. And who knows, maybe if Bathers Beach becomes more popular, the Public Transport Authority might even run a new bus service past it. I know, pigs do fly, and the PTA might suddenly becomes flexible and creative.

There are very good forward planning, future-focused, arguments for the shark protection at Bathers Beach, and making the area more popular for beach goers. The activation of Fremantle’s West End has been debated ad infinitum at Fremantle Council and in the business community, and it can’t just be left to local traders to trying to do that, by creating events that attract people. The City needs to step up here and do something significant about it, and this could well be a good start for it.

The argument that Council wants to direct people which beach to visit, does not stick, as it would apply to any beach they would want to make shark safe. There can’t be any community expectation that we should have shark protection at all our beaches. That is unrealistic to the extreme.

The Fishing Boat Harbour traders have already offered Fremantle Council $ 100,000 toward the building of a toilet and change room block at Bathers Beach, because that most definitely would have to be a priority, if a shark deterrent is installed there. Currently one has to cross the railway line to use the toilets on the Esplanade, that does not have change rooms, so that is not acceptable.

The estimated costs for a 400 metre shark net at South Beach are $ 656.000-800.000, for Leighton Beach a 480 metre shark net would cost between $ 750.000-960.000, and for a 340 metre shark protection at Bathers Beach it would cost $ 585.000-680.00. If the WA Government is willing to pay the cost, as they have already done for three other beaches, the City of Fremantle would only have to pay for the maintenance.

I am a big fan of Bathers Beach, that I walk past every day of the week, and would love to see it more activated and improved. The heritage interpretations needs some TLC, the lighting up at night of the Arthur’s Head cliff face should be reinstated, and public toilets are a must.

Roel Loopers

BATHERS BEACH PREFERRED FOR SHARK NET

Fremantle Council will tomorrow night debate the City’s investigation into the preferred beach for a shark net. The Officers Recommendation is Bathers Beach, and that would be a huge boost for the underutilised inner city beach.

The estimated costs for a 400 metre shark net at South Beach are $ 656.000-800.000, for Leighton Beach a 480 metre shark net would cost between $ 750.000-960.000, and for a 340 metre shark protection at Bathers Beach it would cost $ 585.000-680.00.

The good news is that the Western Australian Government has funding available for the capital expenditure associated with installing shark barriers / enclosures.

Five such barrier systems installed in WA have received entire or partial funding through this program.

This funding however does not extend to the operational costs for ongoing maintenance and this
would be the City’s responsibility.

I hope Fremantle Council will apply for funding to get a shark net at Bathers Beach, that would hopefully see many more beach goers visiting the lovely beach at historic Arthur’s Head.

Roel Loopers

WHERE SHOULD A FREMANTLE SHARK NET GO?

North Fremantle residents are petitioning to get a shark net installed at Harvey Beach, but should that beach be prioritised over other beaches? I assume it will have to be a numbers game for Fremantle Council, to decide where and if they are putting up a shark barrier.

Should ocean beaches be considered over river beaches? Are very busy Port and Leighton Beach the ones that should be considered first to get shark protection, or maybe popular South Beach? Would the beach erosion at Port Beach have an impact on a shark net decision?

Many years ago a shark barrier was suggested for Bathers Beach, but that was not supported by council. Might that change, or does the relatively low use of our inner city beach not warrant an expensive protection against sharks? Bathers Beach has become a lot more popular in recent years, but the number of people swimming there is still very low when compared to all the other beaches. Or should the chicken or the egg argument be that by putting a shark net at Bathers Beach, it would attract many more people to the area and activate Freo’s West End more?

How popular is Harvey Beach, I wonder. How many people go swimming there daily? Is it packed with people during hot weekends?

These are all aspects Fremantle Council, and the paying State Government, would have to consider. Which ever beach will be decided on will be criticised by those who want a shark net somewhere else.

Roel Loopers