CONTRACTORS for the Bass Coast Shire Council, to its credit, have been working day and night to replace sand eroded from both sides of the geotextile bag wall defending the Inverloch Surf Lifesaving Club from the ravages of the latest high tides and storm surge.
It’s a losing battle.
In recent days, for example, the contractors added 640 cubic metres of sand but by morning only a quarter of that remained. In an increased effort the next day, they put up 750 cubic metres around the sandbag wall but following the next high tide, it was all gone.
Clearly, it’s not a project that will work long-term and brings into sharp focus the apparently approved plan to use most of the $3.3 million grant from the Australian Government's Coastal and Estuarine Risk Mitigation Program in 2022 to do essentially what they are doing now – to replace the sand.
Another 2.7 metre tide on Thursday further tested the shire contractors’ resolve.
Clearly, it’s not going to work, if the evidence of recent days is anything to go by.
And the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action seems to acknowledge that in their latest ‘Cape to Cape Resilience Plan’ Update Number 11, June 2025.
But worryingly, according to a spokesman for the Inverloch Foreshore Action Group, Alan Brown, there appears to have been a marked shift towards “developing a planned retreat approach” as the main response to coastal erosion at Inverloch.
“That’s the way I’m reading it,” said Mr Brown.
From Cape to Cape Resilience Plan Update 11:
Next steps (including): "Developing a “planned retreat approach” – this will include more details on triggers, working with community (incl. impacted residents) and local government and funding.”
Things requiring further information/clarification (including) - Further detail on pathways and actions and their technical assessment, including:
* Why the “Protect” pathway and large-scale engineering is currently less preferred in the longterm for Inverloch Surf Beach
* What is the “Retreat” pathway and how land use transition/retreat could work to benefit the community
* How different actions might change Inverloch Surf Beach and surrounding areas and impact of community values
* What does the long-term look like for the Surf Life Saving Club building, and the Club’s ability to patrol
And “Refinements to the Resilience Plan” (including):
* Inclusion of additional information of an alternate “Protect” pathway at Inverloch Surf Beach, along with implications (including trade-offs) that come with this pathway.
* Further context on “Retreat” in the Cape to Cape region, including consideration of alternate terminology (“transition”) to better convey this response as a well-planned and managed process, and further explanation of what we can “gain” from a retreat pathway.
In the absence of the chairman of the Inverloch Foreshore Action Group, Alan Brown has called on authorities to commit to protecting Inverloch rather than the “let nature take its course” approach.
“The way I read it, it means they walk away,” said Mr Brown, an Inverloch resident and former leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party in Victoria.
“The question I would ask is ‘does that mean they’re not going along with the sand renourishment and sandbag extension work around the (Inverloch) clubhouse’.
“Does the ‘next steps’ saying ‘developing a planned retreat approach’ mean they’re not going to protect Inverloch from coastal erosion, that they’re going to let nature take its course?
“Does it mean they’re not going ahead with the protective work they have planned for spring?”
Mr Brown went on to say that, clearly, the work the council’s contractors were doing each day, as commendable as the effort was, simply wasn’t working with the sand being swept away again after each high tide.
“Pumping thousands of tonnes of sand, as planned, clearly won’t work either.
“If that’s the only response, the road will be cut off for sure, and the loss of business to the town, if the RACV is cut off, will be enormous.
“The bookings they’ll receive will also be impacted if the only access to the RACV is via Cape Paterson. Their occupancy numbers will dive.”
Mr Brown said that not only was the surf lifesaving clubhouse at risk, but also 100s of houses in the firing line in Inverloch.
“They’ve done all this work, and spent all this money on plans and strategies and come up with ‘developing a planned retreat approach’.”
Mr Brown said 100s of homes would be lost with no prospect these people could be relocated elsewhere in Inverloch with the government also “putting a ring around further residential development in the area”.
He said it was time DEECA rejected the ‘retreat’ idea as an option and move strongly on to a ‘protect’ footing as the only realistic option for Inverloch.
He said the action group would soon be releasing an engineering report on the response to coastal erosion at Inverloch but that he was also interested to hear from DEECA if they intended to go ahead with their sand replacement program, which would clearly be a failure, and what they emphasis on ‘retreat’ would mean for the Inverloch homeowners in the firing line and also the town’s economy.
Cr Meg Edwards reposted Update 11 on her Facebook page this week saying:
“It does not reflect the majority of our community. Let alone the 700+ people at the rally in January or over 2500 signatures to a petition last year. My personal position has always been and remains to protect.”
Asked for further comment, Cr Edwards said she stood by her personal view but noted that it was up to the Mayor Cr Rochelle Halstead to make comment on behalf of the shire.
President of the Inverloch Foreshore Action Group, Paul Cross, who is believed to be on leave, has responded to the Facebook post highlighting some of the details in the latest DEECA Update:
Paul Cross: “Again, it’s bureaucratic waffle. I’m not surprised that this LW body refuses to acknowledge the Inverloch Foreshore Action Group and the rally we had on 5th Jan ‘25 to bring this situation to a head, complete with many politicians in attendance and a crowd of 700 calling for hard engineering. Perhaps King Canute can hold the sea back until this ‘Resilience body' can get their arse into gear.”
The Update includes the following passage on ‘Community sentiment’:
“Rapid changes along Inverloch’s coast are confronting and concerning for the community. The storms have reignited hazard resilience as an important local issue, helping to mobilise the Cape to Cape community. It’s sparked extensive commentary, especially online and in the media. It also prompted a community-led petition with a request for action on Inverloch Surf Beach. With 2575 hard copy signatures, the report was tabled in Victorian Parliament on 12 September. We’ve also seen a sharp increase in people visiting our project page, accessing information, reading the Plan and taking part in this recent round of engagement. For many of these people, this was their first involvement in the Cape to Cape Resilience Project to date.
“Influence on this engagement: This storm event has significantly influenced the recent engagement period and responses received. Many respondents provided feedback on recent events, with many responses focused on immediately protecting the club building and saving the beach. This focus often overshadowed questions on the Plan itself, including details and actions outlined and what has informed decisions made to date. As we’ve interpreted the feedback, we’ve been mindful of how this may affect the engagement findings. Our synthesis has sought to take on board this important community sentiment, motivated by recent events, and considered how it relates to the draft Plan.”
DEECA has been asked for comment, and has contacted the Sentinel-Times, saying they are preparing a response.
Read the Cape to Cape Plan Update 11 HERE