Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Information

What Can You See, Indicating Sea Levels are Rising?

By

Many Australians are fearful of catastrophic human-caused climate change because this is what the state-sponsored propaganda on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (the ABC) tells us.

In Australia, we mostly live near the sea. All along our coastline there is evidence of sea level fall, yes fall.*

Where is the evidence for rising sea levels?

Will you see how much sea levels have risen when you watch the fireworks over the Opera House in Sydney Harbour this New Year’s Eve — or will you see evidence of sea level fall?

It is that time of year when family and friends visit me at the beach. My niece told me just before Christmas that she had read so many of the comments at the YouTube thread following my first short film ‘Beige Reef’. She was surprised at how many comments there were — an awful lot she commented.

When I asked her what she thought of the film, she told me that she had not actually watched the film.

At that morning tea, under a shelter at Coolum Beach, none of my nieces or nephews or older brother could admit to having watched the film.

It is all of 12 minutes long.

This first film involved me wading into, and diving below, waters that my sister-in-law some weeks earlier had indicated put me at risk of a shark attack. But still she has not actually watched the film.

I know that there is fear within the varies communities within which I exist, of at least three things: sharks, catastrophic human-caused global warming — and that I could lead some of them down the path of global warming scepticism and from this they could end-up pariahs.

I diverge.

The best evidence is that global sea level has fallen by at least 2 metres since the the Holocene high stand about 4,000 BC; that is about 6,0000 years ago, a time known as the Minoan warm period.

The evidence in rocks and cliff faces all along the Australian east coast is that sea level was about 1m higher in the Roman warm period (year 0), and about 0.5m higher in the Medieval warm period (1,000 AD).

Conversely, it is believed the sea level was lower in the cold periods of 500 AD (Dark Ages) and the Little Ice Age (1,650 AD), maybe both 0.2 — 0.5 metres below today’s level. This last low sea level is particularly important, because it from this base sea levels are perhaps still rising back to average Holocene levels. But are they really?

When I go kayaking, and walk along the sea shore, and send my drone Skido up into the sky and look down and take pictures of things like marine potholes that feature at the top of this blog post: I see evidence for a sea shore that is receding.

The sea begins at the land’s edge. Where the sea begins is the ‘sea level’.

When I stand beside the circular pothole that you can see in the centre of the picture accompanying this blog post (… scroll to the very top).

I’m standing on a wave-cut platform of sandstone bedrock with rectangular fractures, and red iron oxide colouring.

Potholes are formed by the relentless grinding of harder rocks — perhaps granite— caught in a depression in this softer sandstone. Pounding surf causes the harder rocks to swirl — round and round — grinding down.

The grinding that created these potholes could only have happened when sea levels were higher, when this platform was between the high and low tide marks.

I took the picture on a highest tide this last year, in 2019. A year that is nearly over.

Sea levels must have been higher in the past. Because even on the highest tides this last year, the waves never reached this far?

The ABC may be concerned about rising sea levels, but where is your evidence for it? Are you brave enough, do you care enough, can you find the time enough, to think through some of these issues this next year: in 2020?

We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

I photographed this cliff face just to the north-west of the pot holes, which is just to the north-west of my favourite beach in Noosa National Park, so near where I live. What can you see in this landscape? Is there a wave cut platform, and what might have created it? Have you seen similar along other sections of sea shore?

______________________

* This is intended as the first of a series of blog posts on sea level change.

New Record Temperatures Need Justification

By

IN September 2017, the Bureau declared the hottest ever September on record for the state of Victoria based on temperature data from Mildura.

I’ve since shown that this was helped along by the Bureau replacing a mercury thermometer with an electronic probe that can record a good 0.4 degrees hotter for the same weather.

There is not only the issue of the Bureau not providing any information on how the electronic probe was calibrated, but as I’ve explained to the Chief Scientist, there is also the issue of averaging:

There is a lot of natural variability in air temperature (particularly on hot sunny days at inland locations), which was smoothed to some extent by the inertia of mercury thermometers. In order to ensure some equivalence between measurements from mercury thermometers and electronic probes it is standard practice for the one-second readings from electronic probes to be averaged over a one-minute period, or in the case of the US National Weather Service the averaging of the one-second readings is over 5 minutes.

The Australian Bureau began the change-over to electronic probes as the primary instrument for the measurement of air temperatures in November 1996. The original IT system for averaging the one-second readings from the electronic probes was put in place by Almos Pty Ltd, who had done similar work for the Indian, Kuwaiti, Swiss and other meteorological offices. The software in the Almos setup (running on the computer within the on-site shelter) computed the one-minute average (together with other statistics).

This data was then sent to what was known as a MetConsole (the computer server software), which then displayed the data, and further processed the data into ‘Synop’, ‘Metar’, ‘Climat’formats. This system was compliant with World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) standards. The maximum daily temperature for each location was recorded as the highest one-minute average for that day. This was the situation until at least 2011.

I have this on good advice from a previous Bureau employee.

It is likely to have been the situation through until perhaps February 2013 when Sue Barrell from the Bureau wrote to a colleague of mine, Peter Cornish, explaining that the one-second readings from the automatic weather station at SydneyBotanical Gardens were numerically-averaged. At some point over the last five years, however,this system has been disbanded. All, or most, of the automatic weather stations now stream data from the electronic probes directly to the Bureau’s own software. This could be an acceptable situation, except that theBureau no-longer averages the one-second readings over a one-minute period.

Indeed, it could be concluded that the current system is likely to generate new record hot days for the same weather, because of the increased sensitivity of the measuring equipment and the absence of any averaging/smoothing. To be clear, the highest one-second spot reading is now recorded as the maximum temperature for that day at the 563 automatic weather stations across Australia that are measuring surface air temperatures.

Just yesterday, the Bureau fed that “hottest ever” meme with a claim that analysis of data from about 700 weather stations across the country showed Wednesday was the hottest day recorded in Australia, with the nationally averaged maximum daytime temperature reaching 41.9C.

That was apparently a full degree higher than the previous record of 40.9C set on Tuesday, which itself broke the mark of 40.3C from January 2013.

But how exactly are the temperatures being measured, and which stations are being combined?

The Bureau has deleted the hottest day ever recorded with a mercury thermometer in a Stevenson screen, which was 51.6 degrees Celsius at Bourke in 1909.

Then there is the issue of the Bureau cooling the past. 


For example, it is a full 1.4 degrees cooler in Darwin on 1st January 1910 in the official ACORN-SAT version 2, temperature data base, relative to the actual temperature recorded back then in a Stevenson Screen with a mercury thermometer.

I have also documented how the Bureau put a limit on how cold a temperature can be recorded.

Not to mention closing stations in high altitude regions that may record colder temperatures. So the 700 weather stations used to calculate the hottest day on Wednesday may be skewered warmer since the closure of stations in the coldest places:

During June and July 2017, blizzard conditions were experienced across the Australian Alps, but we will never know how cold it actually got. Because a MSI1 card reader prevented the equipment – able to record down to minus 60 – from recording below minus 10 at Thredbo and probably also at many other locations.

It is also impossible to know how cold this last winter was relative to 1994 because the weather station at Charlotte Pass was closed in March 2015 – it is no longer in operation.

I’ve written to the National Audit Office about only some of these issues and that was some years ago now.

I could go on …

Exquisite

By

Exquisite: that is my word for an important book published this year, entitled ‘A Stray Liana’.

It is replete with the most beautiful photographs all by Neil Hewett, and all taken amongst the Daintree Rainforest where he has lived for perhaps two decades now.

Before that Neil lived for seven years within a remote Northern Territory Indigenous homeland.

The book is not just exquisite photographs, but Neil’s story about reconnecting with nature: how we are a part of nature with an obligation to manage our landscapes wisely.

Neil has long argued that it is only through the sustainable harvest of our natural wealth that wild places and wild creatures can truly flourish.

‘A Stray Liana’ is a large and heavy book replete with wildlife and also wise words.

On pages 248 and 249 there is a Chameleon Checko (Carphodactylus laevis) drinking from a leaf. The image fills the entire two pages and yet we only get to see the eyes and snout of the creature! This is enough to discern a personality.

Another favourite for me is the Northern Barred Frog (Mixophyes schevilli) sitting so quietly in that stream. Then there is the bright yellow moth caterpillar (Dysphania numana) like something from outer space daring a bird to not eat it.

If you are looking for the ultimate Christmas present, this book is it:

https://www.astrayliana.com.au/product/a-stray-liana-book/

Neil with his children some many years ago.

****
Neil shared the image of the lichen spider that features at the top of this blog post with me many years ago. I have a whole collection of them, different lichen spiders … from the Daintree, from Neil.

Why Deny the Beautiful Coral Reefs Fringing Stone Island?

By

We live in an era when it is politically incorrect to say the Great Barrier Reef is doing fine, except if it’s in a tourist brochure. The issue has nothing to do with the actual state of corals, but something else altogether.

Given that the Great Barrier Reef is one ecosystem comprising nearly 3000 individual reefs stretching for 2000 kilometres, damaged areas can always be found somewhere. And a coral reef that is mature and spectacular today may be smashed by a cyclone tomorrow – although neither the intensity nor frequency of cyclones is increasing at the Great Barrier Reef, despite climate change. Another reason that coral dies is because of sea-level fall that can leave some corals at some inshore reefs above water on the lowest tides. These can be exceptionally low tides during El Niño events that occur regularly along the east coast of Australia.

A study published by Reef Check Australia, undertaken between 2001 to 2014 – where citizen scientists followed an agreed methodology at 77 sites on 22 reefs encompassing some of the Great Barrier Reef’s most popular dive sites – concluded that 43 sites showed no net change in hard coral cover, 23 sites showed an increase by more than 10 per cent (10–41 per cent, net change), and 17 sites showed a decrease by more than 10 per cent (10–63 per cent, net change).

Studies like this, which suggest there is no crisis but that there can be change, are mostly ignored by the mainstream media. However, if you mention such information and criticise university academics at the same time, you risk being attacked in the mainstream media. Or in academic Dr Peter Ridd’s case, you could be sacked by your university.

After a career of 30 years working as an academic at James Cook University, Dr Ridd was sacked essentially for repeatedly stating that there is no ecological crisis at the Great Barrier Reef, but rather there is a crisis in the quality of scientific research undertaken and reported by our universities. It all began when he sent photographs to News Ltd journalist Peter Michael showing healthy corals at Bramston Reef, near Stone Island, off Bowen in north Queensland.

More recently, I personally have been ‘savaged’ – and in the process incorrectly labelled right wing and incorrectly accused of being in the pay of Gina Rinehart – by Graham Readfearn in an article published in The Guardian. This was because I supported Dr Ridd by showing in some detail a healthy coral reef fringing the north-facing bay at Stone Island in my first film, Beige Reef.

According to the nonsense article by Mr Readfearn, quoting academic Dr Tara Clark, I should not draw conclusions about the state of corals at Stone Island from just the 25 or so hectares (250,000 square metres) of near 100 per cent healthy hard coral cover filmed at Beige Reef on 27 August 2019. Beige Reef fringes the north-facing bay at Stone Island.

This is hypocritical – to say the least – given Dr Clark has a paper published by Nature claiming the coral reefs at Stone Island are mostly all dead. She based this conclusion on just two 20-metre long transects that avoided the live section of healthy corals seaward of the reef crest.

I will refer to this reef as Pink Plate Reef – given the pink plate corals that I saw there when I went snorkelling on 25 August 2019.

Acropora photographed by Jennifer Marohasy just beyond where Tara Clark and colleagues ran their transects. This reef, around the headland from Beige Reef, will feature in my second short documentary.

Dr Clark – the senior author on the research report, which also includes eight other mostly high-profile scientists – is quoted in The Guardian claiming I have misrepresented her Great Barrier Reef study. In particular, she states,

We never claimed that there were no Acropora corals present in 2012.”

Yet this is really the only conclusion that can be drawn from the information presented in her report, which states in different sections the following:

Using a combination of anecdotal, ecological and geochemical techniques, the results of this study provide a robust understanding of coral community change for Bramston Reef and Stone Island.”

At Stone Island, the reef crest was similar to that observed in 1994 with a substrate almost completely devoid of living corals.”

For Stone Island, the limited evidence of coral growth since the early 19th Century suggests that recovery is severely lagging.”

… by 1994 the reef was covered in a mixture of coral rubble and algae with no living Acropora and very few massive coral colonies present …”

Clark and colleagues recorded the corals along two transects, which they explain included a section of the reef now stranded above the mean low spring sea level. The sections they studied are some metres away from healthy corals – Porites and Acropora species, including pink plate corals that I snorkelled over on 25 August 2019.

Fringing inshore reefs often show distinct zonation, with live and healthy corals growing along the seaward edge. At Pink Plate Reef, the reef edge extends for some 2 kilometres and is about 20 metres wide in parts, while much narrower in other sections.

This picture was taken with my drone, Skido, looking south east towards the edge of Pink Plate Reef
on 26th August 2019.

The more inshore section of such fringing inshore reefs, sometime referred to as ‘the lagoon’ between the beach and the reef edge, is usually muddy. This mud has a terrestrial origin. From the lagoon towards the seaward edge there may be an elevated section, which is often referred to as the reef crest.

It is uncontroversial in the technical scientific literature that there has been sea-level fall of about 1.5 metres at the Great Barrier Reef since a period known as the Holocene High Stand thousands of years ago.

It is also uncontroversial that sea levels fall with the El Niño events that occur regularly along the east coast of Australia most recently during the summer of 2015–2016.

As a consequence, the reef crest at many such inshore fringing reefs may end up above the height of mean low spring sea level. This is too high for healthy coral growth; because of sea-level fall, corals in this section of these reefs are often referred to as ‘stranded’ and will be dead.

Dr Clark and colleagues clearly state that they began their transects at Stone Island at the reef crest, which they also acknowledge is at ‘the upper limit of open water coral growth’. It could reasonably be concluded that Dr Clark’s study set out to sample the section of this reef that could be referred to as stranded.

Our society places enormous trust in scientists. It is as though they are the custodians of all truth.

Yet, as recently reported in another article in The Guardian by Sylvia McLain on 17 September, entitled ‘Not breaking news: many scientific studies are ultimately proved wrong!’, most scientific studies are wrong because scientists are interested in funding their research and their careers rather than the truth.

So, while another The Guardian journalist, Graham Readfearn, may look to scientists like Dr Clark and colleagues to know the truth about the Great Barrier Reef, reef scientists may be inclined to report what is best for their career in the longer term. This is increasingly likely to be the case, given the recent sacking of Dr Ridd for daring to speak against the consensus.

This could also to be the case for film makers. The Guardian has reported my honest attempts at showing how beautiful and healthy one of the fringing coral reefs at Stone Island is – including through spectacular wide angle underwater cinematography – the headline:

Scientists say rightwing think tank misrepresented her Great Barrier Reef study”.

This was the headline in The Guardian on Tuesday, accompanying the first review of my first film – Beige Reef. Many of the comments at YouTube now uncritically link to this misinformation.

It is not easy telling the truth when it comes to the state of corals at the Great Barrier Reef.

In my film Beige Reef, I show such a diversity of beautiful hard corals including species of Acropora and Turbinaria under dappled light at Beige Reef, which is a true coral garden fringing the north facing bay at Stone Island.

Meanwhile, Tara Clark and colleagues – lauded by journalists such as Graham Readfearn – write in their study published by Nature: ‘Only nine dead corals were found along transects 1 and 2, and that these corals were covered in mud and algae.’

Such a statement is perhaps politically smart, because it plays to the current zeitgeist that suggests humankind is having a terrible impact – destroying the planet everywhere, including at the Great Barrier Reef. So, the beautiful reefs that do fringe Stone Island – not just Beige Reef in the north facing bay, but also the reef along the south western edge, the reef that I’ve name Pink Plate – must be denied.

It seems an absolute tragedy to me that the beauty and resilience of these healthy coral reefs is not acknowledged. Further, the idea that the Great Barrier Reef is in peril creates tremendous anxiety throughout our community, particularly for the younger generation.

In another part of the same report, Dr Clark and colleagues state that coral cover was 0.09 per cent at Stone Island. This is not consistent with their ‘benthic survey’ only finding nine dead corals, and is certainly a lot less than the near 100 per cent coverage that I found at Beige Reef just around the corner. It is also a lot less than would have been found if their transects had been placed in that section of Pink Plate Reef with living corals – the section of reef at the seaward edge that extended for perhaps 2 kilometres.

********

Pink Plate Reef will be the focus of my next short film.

My travel to Stone Island and the film were funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation through the Institute of Public Affairs.

I snapped the picture of the sailing boat with Gloucester passage in the background, as featured at the top of this blog post, from Pink Plate Reef in the early afternoon on 25th August 2019.

Experts Now Agree: Is Acropora Coral at Stone Island

By

APPARENTLY the Nature article I quote from in my new first film Beige Reef doesn’t claim there is no longer any Acropora at Stone Island. According to Graham Readfearn, writing today in The Guardian, I got it wrong.

In fact, he’s got it wrong.

Following are more direct quotes from the same Nature paper:

“Using a combination of anecdotal, ecological and geochemical techniques, the results of this study provide a robust understanding of coral community change for Bramston Reef and Stone Island.”

“At Stone Island, the reef crest was similar to that observed in 1994 with a substrate almost completely devoid of living corals.”

“For Stone Island, the limited evidence of coral growth since the early 19th Century suggests that recovery is severely lagging.”

“… by 1994 the reef was covered in a mixture of coral rubble and algae with no living Acropora and very few massive coral colonies present …”

The Nature article got it so wrong because the two transects were run across a section of reef where the corals are now dead, as I’ve explained in previous blog posts. The transect was run across the dead coral in front of our little boat as shown in the feature picture at the top of this blog post. At this reef, the live coral is at the reef’s edge, shown behind our boat in the picture. That edge of live coral runs for about two kilometres at varying widths around the south-western edge of Stone Island.

Following is the email I wrote to the journalist, Graham Readfearn yesterday with my four responses to his four questions.

Hi Graham,

Thank you for your email concerning my first film, Beige Reef. I reply to your four questions as inserts to your email, following.

By way of perspective, let me also comment that:

Beige Reef is a short film showing the condition and extent of an inshore coral reef that is part of the Great Barrier Reef.


We filmed this reef because, according to a scientific report in the journal Nature, there are no longer any Acropora corals at this location. The peer-reviewed article, coauthored by David Wachenfeld who is the chief scientist at the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, claims the corals at Stone Island have been destroyed by global warming and declining water quality.

Yet we found about 25 hectares of Acropora in the north-facing bay at Stone Island.

The underwater cinematography shown in this film is irreconcilable with the claims in the Nature article.

Beige Reef, my very first film, makes the point that Peter Ridd has been making for some time: that our scientific institutions are untrustworthy, that there is a need for some quality assurance of the science.

As a journalist I ask the you dispassionately consider the evidence, which should begin with you watching the film and then reading the article in Nature.

Kind regards
Jennifer Marohasy

1. In your video, you say that Dr Clark’s paper says there are “no living acropora colonies” at Stone Island. But Dr Clark says her paper did not say that, and in fact said there were some acroporas at the site of Saville-Kent’s original photographs. Clark says you have incorrectly placed emphasis on a 1994 finding from Wachenfeld, which is quoted in her paper. Your IPA colleague Gideon Rozner also repeats this claim in a promotional video.

RESPONSE FROM JENNIFER MAROHASY:

Clark et al. explain (page 11) that they took just two transects each of 20 metres at Stone Island. Based on this sampling they intended to categorized coral cover as ‘live hard coral’, ‘dead coral’, ‘soft coral’, ‘algae’, ‘other substratum’ (substrate and sediment), and ‘unknown’.

It is specifically stated that at Stone Island only nine dead corals were found along transects 1 and 2, and that these corals were covered in mud and algae.



2. Clark says that for Stone Island, her paper concentrated on the sites visited by Saville-Kent and Wachenfeld, which is a different location to much of your footage from a subtidal reef slope.

RESPONSE FROM JENNIFER MAROHASY:

Clark et al. explain (page 11) that only two short transects were taken because the reef environment was ‘highly consistent’. Based on these two transects Clark et al. draw conclusions about the situation at Stone Island in general. My first film is about Beige Reef that is just around the headland from the location of the two transects.

My second film will be about the reef to the south south-west of Stone Island.  Here there is an extensive area of coral (including Acropora spp.) just metres from the two transects from which Clark et al draw erroneous conclusions.


Acropora photographed by Jennifer Marohasy just beyond where Tara Clark and colleagues ran their transects. This reef, around the headland from Beige Reef, will feature in my second short documentary.

3. Clark says that her 2016 paper did not make any claims about other areas of the reef and no “ill-fated prognosis” was made in that paper.

RESPONSE FROM JENNIFER MAROHASY:

Following is just some of what Clark et al write about the corals at Stone Island:

“Using a combination of anecdotal, ecological and geochemical techniques, the results of this study provide a robust understanding of coral community change for Bramston Reef and Stone Island.”

“At Stone Island, the reef crest was similar to that observed in 1994 with a substrate almost completely devoid of living corals.”

“For Stone Island, the limited evidence of coral growth since the early 19th Century suggests that recovery is severely lagging.”

“… by 1994 the reef was covered in a mixture of coral rubble and algae with no living Acropora and very few massive coral colonies present …”

4. In the video you say you could not see any bleaching – yet Dr Clark says this is not surprising, because regardless, you visited in August 2019 – more than two years after the previous major bleaching episode.

RESPONSE FROM JENNIFER MAROHASY:

I am delighted that Tara Clark acknowledges that there is no bleaching of corals at Stone Island. I would like to film coral bleaching at the Great Barrier Reef, but no-one has been able to tell me where I can find bleached corals.

I would be happy to travel to any location at the Great Barrier Reef that shows significant bleaching for a future IPA short film. Could you, and/or Tara Clark could provide me with specific locations.

My First Film: Beige Reef

By

FRENCH military general Napoleon Bonaparte is quoted as saying that, “A good sketch is better than a long speech.” Then there is the expression, ”A picture is worth a thousand words.”

So, why have I spent so much of the last two decades writing, rather than sketching or painting or better still making movies — given my often overwhelming desire to communicate something.

I have sometimes placed ‘illustrations’ with my words, most usually time series charts that describe relationships by way of the number plane. I intend to keep doing this, and I am still working closely with Jaco Vlok on an historical temperature reconstruction for Australia that will include so many ‘sketches’ as time series charts of monthly temperate data.

But over the next couple of years I also want to support Peter Ridd as he battles James Cook University through the courts, and more generally communicate the beauty and resilience of the main point of contention: the Great Barrier Reef.

The best medium for doing this is surely underwater cinematography?

Back in April, I showed you some of my underwater snap shots from duck-diving off Bowen.

In that blog post I also wrote:

“Someone needs to go down with a good camera and a tank of oxygen and get extensive footage that shows the great diversity, and all the fish – there might even be a crocodile hiding somewhere.”

By August I had found that someone, Clint Hempsall. He has spent a lifetime capturing the beauty, the sometimes raw horror, and the resilience of life beneath the waves.

We loaded his camera gear into my land cruiser at Noosa and drove the 1,000 kilometres to Bowen. Clint filmed non-stop, and we now have so much footage of so many inshore reefs, including the reef with the crocodile.

This adventure would not have been possible without Rob McCulloch. Between so many overseas trips where he skippered important people on three-storey boats, Rob found time to discussed logistics for Bowen with me, and told me he would be there and with a boat from the very beginning. He is the perfect Skipper, and a great friend.

I am planning to make a lot more short documentaries — not just of these inshore reefs for which we already have footage including interviews with Peter Ridd at Bramston Reef — but also of more colourful corals in clearer waters at the outer ribbon reefs and from coral cays.

I have just confirmed a next adventure for January 2020. That diving and filming will be from a bigger boat and I will have a compressed air tank on my back.

This blog post, however, is about my very first film, it is about Beige Reef.

I still remember so vividly the dappled light and the rocking of the tide as I floated over the corals at this inshore reef in the north facing bay of Stone Island.

After snorkelling with Walter Starck, I launched my drone and some of that footage features in Beige Reef.

This was only the second time I had flown a drone from a boat, and conditions were thankfully calmer than the day before when there was quite a swell but I still managed to launch and catch. Rob filmed my very first launch, and he will be showing this to his Facebook friends in the next week or so.

Beige reef is a fringing coral reef of approximately 25 hectares in warm and shallow waters at the entrance to Bowen Harbour. It is an inshore reef that according to the scientific literature should not exist, as I explain in Beige Reef.

I am also grateful to the B. Macfie Family Foundation for their continuing financial support, and also to the Institute of Public Affairs especially John Roskam and Scott Hargreaves.

The film was shown just yesterday to some IPA members in Brisbane, and the first launch of Beige Reef was to a small group in the IPA board room in Collins Street in Melbourne.

Consider joining the IPA at https://ipa.org.au/join, so that you know about my next short documentary, and have the opportunity to join-in at future events.

Jennifer Marohasy with Emmy Award winning cinematographer Clint Hempsall in Melbourne at the first launch of Beige Reef.