TTwo thousand cigarette butts. 

That's how many are collected from Manly Cove every week by local cleanup group Bommie Australia.  That's 10,000 a month!  Organiser Jude Furniss said it takes the group just one hour to collect the rubbish. 

"It's an absolute disgrace," said Good For Manly president and former Manly Councillor Candy Bingham. "Congratulations to  local groups who are working to fix the problem. But it should not be up to them to be responsible for Manly's rubbish collection."

Smoking has been banned from Northern Beaches beaches for years, with Manly the first council to introduce a ban in 2004.  But a spokesperson for the newly formed Northern Beaches Council said not a single fine had been issued in that time.

Bommie Australia founder Jude Furniss said the council needed to do more to enforce no smoking areas, but the real solution was for smokers to stop throwing their butts on the ground in the first place. 

As well as organising  beach cleanup days, Bommie Australia works to educate the community about the toxic effect of cigarette debris on our environment. 

Butts ends make an area look ugly and unloved, which often "permits"  people to trash it even more. 

And when butts end up in the water - either because they were dropped directly on the beach or washed down through the stormwater system -  they leach a toxic mix of chemicals, including cadmium, arsenic and lead, into our precious aquatic environmemt. 

As well the butts. which can survive in seawater for up to 5 years before breaking down, can be swallowed by marine life, including Little Penguins, with deadly consequences. 

"I am disgusted and stunned by people’s blatant littering and disregard for our beautiful surroundings," Ms Furniss said. 

"I'm asking smokers to clean up their act and take pride in where they live, work and play." 

Good for Manly says it's time for Council to take more serious action.  Provide reciprocals for butts in popular areas, fine people who litter and encourage create marketing  ideas to get the message across that there is no excuse - bin your butts!

Manly's digital parking system was brought in to end the "black market" in residents' free parking permits. But, according to many Manly locals it's awkward, unfair and unnecessary, although the right to four hours free on the oceanfront as from 3rd April,  is definitely seen as a bonus.

A new  Facebook page "Manly Council Parking - Wrecking our Beach Lifestyle" already has 543 likes, and its authors are busy establishing a committee to persuade the council to ditch the digital system.

The new system, which began in February,  requires residents to apply for a permit online by registering their car's licence plates with the council.

Then, whenever they use a metered parking area, such as the bays at Manly ocean beach, they must type their car's licence number and intended length of stay into a meter. They then then print out a parking ticket and display it inside the windscreen.

It's a huge departure from the simplicity of the previous system, when residents got one sticker a year and  all they had to do was fix it on the car windscreen. 

Complaints on the Facebook page include the sheer inconvenience of the new system, with mothers complaining they now have to join a queue at the parking meter every time they park for 10 minutes to pick up a child from school. Elderly drivers and people with poor near vision say they have trouble using the small keyboard on the parking meters. 

Many people are also annoyed that they have to carefully specify how long they will need each time, when the nature of a trip to the beach is that it may expand due to good surfing/swimming conditions or meeting up with friends. 

A "Wrecking our Beach Lifestyle" post ridicules the "digital" tag, as in fact, the new system means residents now need to print out a ticket every time they park. "It's really going more manual," the post says.
"Now instead of getting a sticker once a year, a resident could potentially have to get a ticket once a day! Privilege and convenience gone in one fell swoop. And why? I don't see any of the net benefits. A case of fixing something that wasn't broken in the first place."

What has your experience with the new system been? 

A circling shark fin is every swimmer's worst nightmare, and the recent death of surfer Zac Young near Coffs Harbour has refocused our emotions on the danger that lurks beneath.

But are we really at risk? And if we are, do shark nets - our current shark prevention strategy - actually work?

Shark meshing off Sydney's beaches was introduced in 1937 following a series of fatal shark attacks, including several on the Northern Peninsula. 

Most people think the nets are to stop sharks reaching popular beaches, but that's not true. The nets are there to kill sharks - specifically big (two metre long) sharks. Not only is this a controversial practice at a time when we are trying to protect Australia's declining shark population, but the nets kills a huge number of other marine creatures as well.

Late last month, a whale calf drowned after it became entangled in a shark net off Mona Vale Beach. And so far this season, six whales have been caught, and luckily rescued, from shark nets off Queensland.

Added up over several years, the carnage is sickening.

Over the last 20 years almost 4000 sea creatures have been caught in shark nets off the NSW coast alone. Of these, less than 150 were "target"  species -  great white or tiger sharks.  A massive 96 per cent of deaths were "bycatch" - giving a total of 3795 dead dolphins, turtles, whales, seals, stingrays, penguins, dugongs and harmless sharks.

In a further irony it's reported that 35 - 50 per cent of sharks caught in the nets are on the beach side.

However the meshing program, which is run by the NSW Department of Primary Industries, has plenty of defenders.  Most point to the fact that there has only been one fatal shark attack in the meshed area, which includes beaches from Newcastle to Wollongong, since the program began.  And that's despite the huge popularity of our part of the coast, which is enjoyed by 2 million people every summer season.

But Dave Thomas, founder of local conservation group Eco Divers, isn't buying.
"The risk of having a shark encounter is infinitesimally small," he said.  "There are five fatalities in the world per year. There are a lot of things that will get you before that - hippos, vending machines, coconuts."

Mr Thomas says the nets, which are 150m long, six metres high and sit in 10-12m of water, are by no good as a barrier as sharks can swim around or over them. What the nets do do well, is act as "indiscriminate killers of everything".

He has the support of Surf Life Saving NSW which, along with marine ecologists and environmental and animal welfare groups, is calling for more research into alternative shark protection measures.

Ideas already on the table include radio signals, sonar technology, electric nets and swimmer education.  There's no debate that swimmers should avoid swimming at dusk, dawn or in murky water. They should also stay out of the water when schools of bait fish are about, to avoid being accidentally bitten by a shark in a "feeding frenzy".

As well, shark nets were introduced in an era when our coastal waters were often dirty and sometimes contaminated with offal and blood, which meatworks used to dispose of in public waterways.

The situation is so different now, surely our swimmer safety approach should change too.

Good For Manly supports research into alternatives to shark meshing.
In the meantime we believe the shark mesh season should be shortened. The nets are currently in place between September 1 and April 30, which overlaps the whale migration season from late April to November.

This is our debate. There are shark nets off Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly.
Let us know what you think. Help us take a fair shark net proposal to Manly Council early next year.

Expect to see more police on bikes around Manly soon as the New Northern Beaches Local Area Command moves into action.  Good wins for Manly include a 34 strong beach unit based here to target alcohol-related violence and crime.

While the main Command will be based at Dee Why there will be more police in specialist and general duties based in Manly.

It is expected the Manly Police Station, which is currently undergoing an $5m renovation, will be operating again within the next 18 months.  In the meantime, the Station in Sydney Road will remain fully functional.

The decision that the Manly Station will be the custody station for the Northern Beaches with overnight cells for holding offenders is welcomed news.  (At the moment offenders have to be taken to the city, escorted by two police officers).

Local Area Commander, Dave Dacy, has undertaken to review the new arrangements, which are expected to take effect in early November, after six months to ensure that the Manly community believe the policing needs of the area are being met.

Royal Far West development approved by Planning Assessment Panel with minor conditions. Disgraceful outcome. Is this what the community can expect from NSW Government's new planning process? http://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/Projects/PACDeterminations/tabid/104/ctl/viewreview/mid/459/pac/282/view/readonly/myctl/rev/Default.aspx

Confirmation received this week from Planning Minister Brad Hazzard that Far West site will remain zoned 'special use' rather than 'commercial' as was previously drafted in the new LEP is good news for Manly. While this will not impact on the current development proposal it WILL make a big difference should the Planning Assessment  Commission refuse their current application. Decision on current highly-controversial application is expected at the end of April.

Hundreds of people crammed into the Manly Bowling Club yesterday to hear forty speakers against the proposed Royal Far West Development opposite Manly Beach, before the NSW Planning Assessment Commission.

Major concerns were raised about the total lack of consultation, lack of required reports such as a social impact study and relevant traffic studies, major overshadowing of the beach, promenade and school grounds; and the future of the Manly Village Public School and Community Centre nearby.

It is expected a determination will be made by the Commission (PAC) by the end of March.

This Report on ABC Statewide program on 15/2/13 covers the issue well:

The controversial redevelopment plan for the Royal Far West site is still on the agenda with a decision from the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) now delayed until February 2013 due to concerns that a late December public meeting (which is part of the process) would not enable all concerned parties to be present.

In the meantime concerns are still being raised by locals including  the P & C of the Village School and members of the Manly Community Centre, due to the lack of information which is publicly available on the proposal.  For example, what impact, if any, will the high-rise components of the development have on the shadowing of the children's playground in the Village School? What arrangements have been made regarding the parcel of land within the redevelpment site which is owned by the Department of Education? Who is behind the redevelopment proposal as, as a charity, the Royal Far West would be unable to mount such a proposal on their own?  And why wasn't there any community consultation on the proposal before it was lodged?

Manly Council has submitted a draft concept plan for the site which calls for a more modest approach to the redevelpment with terraced levels fronting the beach rather than the proposal high rise block.

As a $220m redevelopment on an important, major site in Manly (bounded by Wentworth Avenue, South Steyne & Victoria Avenue) the community has a right to be kept informed.  So why so much secrecy?

STOP PRESS ... Rumour has it that the Royal Far West Plans are to be rejected in their current form .....

An Extraordinary meeting of Manly Council was called on 10th October '12 because locals are concerned that their views  are not being heard by the children's charity,  Royal Far West, who has  submitted a Concept Plan to redevelop their site to the Department of Planning & Infrastructure, under the old Part 3A planning rules.

A final report will be prepared for the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) who will be the determining authority. The PAC would then hold a public meeting as part of their assessment of the proposal.

But locals believe that since the process began, almost 12 months ago, it is reasonable to believe that the true repercussions of the proposed redevelopment are only just now being realised by the community.

This is no ordinary site. It is prime real estate that overlooks one of the most famous beaches in the world - Manly Beach.
While Manly Council's Urban Design Guidelines recommend a terraced approached of four to five to six then eight storeys - the Far West proposal, on the beach front, is five storeys then eight storeys.  Locals & the Council  are saying the proposal is too big, too bulky, too high and way too much for this significant site.

The Charity says it needs to redevelop the site to fund its future and replace old, decaying facilities that no longer meet their needs.  But does a charity have the right to expect the community to bear the long-term planning scars that the current plan will create?  I don't think so. What do you think?

The decision by Manly Council this week to retain the two hour free parking in the Manly CBD carparks was simply a farce!  If you want to completely kill Manly, take away the free parking.
The real question that should be explored is what benefit would Manly gain if three hours free parking was introduced, just like the competing shopping areas nearby.

Yes, Manly is unique. It is not just shops.  It's  also beaches, schools, classes, community activities, a social meeting place.  And locals are staying away in droves because it's just getting too hard to visit, and park in Manly.  Two hours is simply not long enough.Those who do park here are constantly looking at their watches to make sure they don't go over the two hours!

Council's figures show that 80% of people who use the car parks stay for two hours.  Yes, $1.2m is generated by the 3rd hour but I wonder how much business is being lost because people are rushing back to move their car rather than ordering that extra coffee, popping into a shop or calling into the newsagent for example.

What do you think?  Is it time to review our parking approach in Manly?
Would three hours free parking encourage you to come back to Manly?  Do our Poll. Add your comment.

It’s been a long time coming, but thanks to a grant from the NSW Government and the work of our local member, Mike Baird, Manly Life Saving Club is finally able to start the much-needed upgrade of their facilities. The $350,000 grant will allow the club to begin stage one of their redevelopment, which involves a complete overhaul of their amenities block. (The current amenities were built in the 1960s when the club only had six female members- it now has over 900, so it’s no surprise that these members in particular are looking forward to the upgrade!)

The Club will also be refurbishing their training hall to increase their training program, and has plans to redevelop the equipment storage areas.

It’s wonderful to see our iconic Manly club getting the upgrade it needs. What do you think of the plans to refurbish?
Does anyone have a photograph of the Clubhouse before the existing one?