It Ain't Over Until...
Narrawallee Beach is a beautiful place embroiled in an ugly fight. And, like all wars, the victims are not only those caught in violent crossfire, but also ratepayers footing a hefty battle bill.
by Cat Holloway
It's more than 20 years since Shoalhaven Council and Narrawallee locals began sparring over beach access and off-leash zones for dogs. And tonight's Shoalhaven Council meeting looks like dragging the drama out even longer with the Narrawallee Beach Environment Group claiming Council's latest steps, driven by the Paws4Shoalhaven campaigners, are illegal. Again.
So, why does this matter to the rest of the Shoalhaven?
If you are concerned for threatened native birds, you'll want Narrawallee's nesting and foraging areas protected.
If you value socialising and exercising dogs, then you'll enjoy more off-leash areas to connect with others.
But if your strategy is to mobilise impassioned community groups for personal political gain, then the lesson is clear: don't make promises you can't keep.
Shoalhaven is just one Council to have already made that extremely costly error. Councillors could vote tonight to re-enact history and risk a repeat legal challenge down the track.
Or they might take sage advice from lawyers about how to avoid court.
Either way, the outbreak of H5N1 bird flu overseas - and its recent detection in Australia - looks like overriding the rabid politics surrounding Narrawallee Beach, with epidemiologists warning that off-leash dogs at beaches and waterways could contribute to the virus spreading.
Politics is a Beach
Anyone familiar with Narrawallee's beach access brouhaha knows that its driving force is (wait for it) politics - especially the proudly anti-environment position of Mayor Patricia White and the Shoalhaven Independent Group councillors.
Not only was the Paws4Shoalhaven group a significant player in the Mayor's 2024 election, but it was also a campaign focal point for Shoalhaven Council's current CEO, Andrew Constance, back when he had more modest ambitions as a Liberal Party candidate - twice.
At one of the PAWS rallies at Narrawallee in 2024, (then) Cr White declared:
"I have been from day one with Stephen and others fighting for this since 2013."
Alongside White at that particular rally was Andrew Constance, then Liberal candidate for Gilmore. But more recently, Constance triggered an Office of Local Government investigation into whether or not his appointment to Shoalhaven Council's lucrative top administrative job was inappropriately political.
"The community at the moment is so suspicious of the Council and its decision-making that it's a major issue for everybody... Well done to everybody for fighting for their local community because this is a health issue as much as it is a dog issue." - Andrew Constance (2024)
PAWS4Shoalhaven Inc. (PAWS) is an influential and popular community organisation that has gained national media coverage as well as the ears of Councillors. It is registered as a non-profit in NSW, aiming to have more beaches and green spaces designated off-leash.
The PAWS website is clear about the group's purpose as Council lobbyists: "Improving Local Council Support & Services for Dogs and Dog Owners".
"This brings enormous community benefits, both physical and mental. Our vision is for Shoalhaven to recognise and support our needs within a spirit of mutual respect, tolerance and shared responsibility," - PAWS4Shoalhaven website.
But that respect frequently gives way to vitriol on the PAWS public Facebook group that has attracted around 1500 members to detailed and regular discussions on the Narrawallee Beach issue.
Posts and comments repeatedly call out (by name) their 'opponents' in the Narrawallee Beach Environment Group as 'wealthy elitists', 'bastards', 'corrupt', 'enemies to community spirit', a 'minority group with an eco agenda' and a 'sense of entitlement'.
Mayor Patricia White and other Councillors have, in turn, participated openly in PAWS Facebook discussions over the years.
PAWS have also taken issue with the accredited Ulladulla Community Consultative Body (CCB) for not supporting PAWS' position. In December last year, CEO Constance and Mayor White moved to abolish not only the Ulladulla CCB, but all CCBs across the Shoalhaven amid disagreements with community and legal fears.
In a post just last week urging members to attend tonight's Council meeting to support the PAWS deputation, Cr Denise Kemp (aka Denise Joy) agreed, saying "people need to show their support".
That's fair. But it is also confusing, because among Cr Kemp's numerous petitions on Change.org is this one (below) from 2020, before she entered politics and apparently changed her tune from opposing any more beach access for dogs to now calling to extend dog access at Narrawallee.
Statement: PAWS President, Andrew Sutton
The previous REF was a compromised document and that is why Shoalhaven City Council made the decision to have a new independent REF undertaken. The original draft REF prepared by independent consultants was redrafted 4 times to the extent that it bore little resemblance to the original document.
Paws4Shoalhaven is supportive of the current REF, with some concerns:
- No endangered shorebirds were sighted on the southern portion of Narrawallee Beach, but instead (the REF) relied on anecdotal evidence of sightings from persons who may or may not have a vested interest.
- The recommendation that only residential vehicles be allowed access to Victor Avenue, Surfers Avenue and a portion of Tallwood Avenue. People wanting to access Narrawallee Beach would have to park on Matron Porter Drive and walk from there. We feel this is a ridiculous recommendation, which reeks of elitism, and wonder if there has been any external influence to come up with this recommendation.
- Dog access to the north is well within the recommended minimum buffer range, so we do not have concerns about impacts to native wildlife on northern Narrawallee Beach and the Inlet.
We are an environmentally aware group, who often clean up the beach while walking our dogs, including the past 2 Clean Up Australia Days. But we believe there is a need to sensibly balance the needs of the community with those of the environment, especially when appropriate mitigation is put in place.
Paws4Shoalhaven works hard to educate dog-owners, and we feel this has been effective, and we will continue to work with SCC to maintain as high a compliance as possible within the construct of the new rules.
Letting Science do the Speaking
What of the influence, political or otherwise, of the Narrawallee Beach Environment Group Inc (NBEG)?
NBEG gathers citizen science records and images and draws attention to ecological data about birds and other native species on Narrawallee Beach. The organisation is a small group of individuals demanding adherence to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC). It has no formal alliances with other conservation or biodiversity groups, but its advocacy clearly overlaps with Birdlife Shoalhaven and the Narrawallee Foreshore Bushcare group.
Shoalhaven's previous Greens Mayor, Amanda Findley and Labor member for South Coast, Liza Butler, openly advocated for some limits on Narrawallee's dogs to protect nesting and feeding seabirds.
NBEG has no website or social media presence, instead applying pressure in formal letters and lengthy reports submitted directly to Councillors and staff as well as to State and Federal Environment ministers.
PAWS criticisms of NBEG focus on unsubstantiated claims that NBEG members are not 'local' but instead motivated by the impact on holiday properties of vehicle and pedestrian traffic from dog walkers.
NBEG formed in 2021 in order to challenge Shoalhaven Council's extended off-leash rules in the Land and Environment Court. NBEG won the case forcing Council to pay costs and complete a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) before designating areas and times where dogs would be allowed to run free on Narrawallee Beach.
That REF was completed and adopted in 2024 by a Councillor majority as a compromise for a variety of users of Narrawallee Beach: birds, dogs, families, tourists and the Surf Life Saving Club (SLSC).
The legal battle over Council's lack of compliance, and the environmental assessment process that followed was estimated to cost Council $500,000.
But instead of accepting the compromise, Mayor Patricia White and her supporters were so barking mad about that 2024 REF, that in 2025 she publicly accused Council staff of fraudulently tampering with the final document to favour the birds and environmental groups.
"It is my opinion that the documents were manipulated for a reason, and I want to get to the bottom of it," Mayor White said in the July 22, 2025 meeting.
"Because, if that's the case that you're happy to just accept any report that comes up to this council and not question it, well, what are we all sitting here for?"
During the acrimonious Council meeting, the acting CEO James Ruprai stood by the environmental services staff additions to that REF (from sources such as Birdata and BioNet) as legally required for the document to be compliant and complete.
"Ultimately, whether or not there is consultant's work undertaken, the officer who is penning or signing off on the assessment, and ultimately the approval, needs to be satisfied," Ruprai said.
"There may be things that have been omitted or missed or not accounted for which may then need to be included ... not uncommon in the DA sphere where an assessing officer needs to be confident that they are issuing a consent based on the best level of assessment ... and adherence to the correct legislative provisions."
Despite the acting CEO James Ruprai's explanation, Mayor White got away with calling Council staff criminals and successfully moved for a whole new REF to be undertaken - at an added cost of $60,000- $100,000.
Statement: NBEG President, Peter Murray
On June 29, 2026, Shoalhaven Council will decide the fate of critically endangered Australian shorebirds in a vote on two changes with serious consequences.
The first would allow dogs off-leash for 24 hours a day during the low season, from 1 May to 1 October each year, replacing current timed arrangements.
The second would allow dogs on leash through a section of beach that is currently completely off-limits to dogs, via the Victor Avenue and Surfers Avenue stairs.
Narrawallee Beach and the adjoining Narrawallee Creek Inlet are habitats for several threatened shorebird species
- Eastern Hooded Plover, Critically Endangered in NSW with fewer than 70 birds remaining in the entire state, and Vulnerable under federal law. In January 2023, Eastern Hooded Plovers were observed foraging on Narrawallee Beach itself, the first recorded sighting there in over 25 years.
- Little Tern, Endangered under NSW law and an Endangered and protected migratory species under federal law, with protection extending to four international migratory bird treaties.
- The Pied Oystercatcher, Endangered under NSW law, with the population facing severe decline due to its vulnerable nesting habits.
- Sooty Oystercatcher, listed as Vulnerable
- Beach Stone-Curlew, Critically Endangered under NSW law
These birds nest and feed on the beach itself, laying eggs directly in the sand where they are almost invisible and extremely vulnerable to disturbance.
Scientific research consistently shows that dogs, even on leash, cause greater disturbance to shorebirds than any other type of beach user. When dogs are present, shorebirds are more likely to disappear.
The proposed 24-hour access would allow dogs unfettered access at all times, providing no respite and also reducing foraging opportunities for threatened shorebirds. The breeding season for both the Hooded Plover and the Little Tern begins in August, overlapping with the proposed low-season period.
On 29 May 2026, letters were sent to NSW Environment Minister Penny Sharpe and Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt requesting urgent intervention before Shoalhaven Council makes its decision. Both letters ask that the relevant department advise Council to defer any resolution until the deficiencies in the assessment have been properly addressed.
Predictable tribalism? Enter the law to sort it out.
Grievances from both camps pit politics against science - or maybe populism against environmentalism.
This is not unique to Shoalhaven.
The Council covering Sydney's Palm Beach faced very similar legal action over dog access and threatened shorebirds in 2020.
In a case brought by a local community group, the NSW Land and Environment Court found that Northern Beaches Council failed to properly assess the environmental impacts of dog access arrangements at Palm Beach.
That Court's findings set an important precedent about the legal obligations councils must meet when managing dog access near threatened species habitat.
Nevertheless, at Narrawallee Beach, history repeated in 2023.
The NSW Land and Environment Court found that Shoalhaven Council's dog access arrangements at Narrawallee Beach were unlawful as Council failed to comply with its duty to properly consider environmental impacts under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and that the Review of Environmental Factors (REF) underpinning those arrangements had not been properly signed off by the determining authority.
Council commissioned an environmental assessment and community consultation process by Ecoplanning Pty Ltd that determined in May 2024 that a timed dog off-leash area covering approximately 35% of Narrawallee Beach was permissible, with dog-prohibited areas maintained to the north and south to protect sensitive shorebird habitat.
By August 2024, Council implemented these arrangements, still in place today.
But that wasn't enough space for PAWS members who were especially unhappy with being denied certain beach access points.
Keeping a pledge to the community who campaigned for her election, Mayor White and the SIG councillors voted for another environmental assessment and community consultation, the outcome of which is up for debate at tonight's Council meeting.
This time the environmental assessment was prepared by Biosis Pty Ltd and the community consultation was conducted by Becscomm.
But NBEG identified "serious problems" with the Biosis and Becscomm work as detailed in a 28-page submission to Council and summarised here:
- Submissions were accepted only through an online portal with a 500-character limit, roughly the length of a text message. The EPBC Act requires Council to consider all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment.
- The assessment was based on a single site visit of just six hours, conducted in February, three months before the proposed off-leash period begins and outside the season when most threatened species are present or actively breeding. No surveys were conducted during the proposed off-leash period, and no direct observation of dog and shorebird interactions was recorded.
- Three threatened shorebird species identified as requiring formal assessment under NSW law, including the Critically Endangered Beach Stone-Curlew, recorded at the nearby Narrawallee Creek Inlet as recently as 2022, were omitted from that assessment entirely, with no explanation given.
- The previous environmental assessment prepared in 2024 included sixteen individual species assessments under federal law. The current assessment replaced all of them with a single paragraph concluding that no federal referral was required, with no individual analysis of any species.
- The assessment's central argument, that the Narrawallee Creek Inlet, 600 metres away, provides adequate alternative habitat so that disturbance on the beach does not matter is not supported by the science. The beach and the inlet are different parts of the same home territory used by individual birds.
- The rock platform at the southern end of the beach, which provides critical feeding habitat for oystercatchers, was incorrectly identified in the assessment. The proposed buffer zone to protect it was directed at the wrong location entirely.
- The assessment relies heavily on proposed mitigation measures such as signage, ranger patrols and buffer zones, to conclude that no significant impact will occur. But community monitoring at Narrawallee Beach has recorded up to 565 dogs on the beach in a single day, with dozens of dogs off-leash during periods when they were required to be on leash and no rangers present.
- The surf lifesaving organisation that patrols Narrawallee Beach raised specific concerns about off-leash dogs near patrol operations during the consultation. Those concerns appeared in the original version of the consultation report but were removed from an updated version published later, without explanation.
NBEG's concerns were mirrored in a 7-page letter from an environment and planning lawyer at Dentons that was received on June 17 by Shoalhaven Council's lawyer and forwarded to the REF authors, Biosis.
The letter itemised numerous ways that the Biosis REF and the Becscomm consultation process was flawed, including a fundamental question over the validity of the unsigned and incomplete document.
Bizarrely, Dentons legal advice was not provided to Councillors who must actually vote on the legality of the REF tonight.
In an NBEG letter sent yesterday to every Shoalhaven councillor, the President, Peter Murray, wrote to "respectfully request that you vote AGAINST the recommendation" and warned councillors that if this current REF was endorsed "NBEG will be left with no option except legal action in the Land and Environment Court (LEC)."
So, what now? The latest tragic twist.
Tonight Council will consider public and stakeholder comments following the release of its second Review of Environmental Factors (REF) for dog access on Narrawallee Beach.
Some on Council will aim to put this sick puppy to bed with a yes vote. They'll say it has sucked up way too much staff time, public money and personal sanity already.
Others may vote no, realising the legal risk to Council if this REF is approved - and the risk to native wildlife and other beach users who don't want free dogs nearby
Among the unorthodox aspects of the current process was the insertion of five extra yes/no questions into the public survey three days after it opened, at Council's request following pressure from PAWS4Shoalhaven.
"We were disappointed with the construct of the survey questions and felt it didn't adequately balance the needs of the community with those of the environment," said PAWS President, Andrew Sutton.
Stakeholder and community feedback from the 1046 survey questionnaires and in-person feedback did identify a wide range of perspectives, including support for increased dog access, concerns about safety, and "strong interest in protecting environmental and social values."
Ward 3 Councillor Gillian Boyd has paid close attention to the Narrawallee Beach fiasco since entering chambers in 2023.
Following last week's release of papers for tonight's meeting, Cr Boyd submitted several important Questions on Notice.
Among the answers provided by an unnamed staff member, possibly Council's CEO, is a claim likely to be hotly debated tonight, namely that the elected Councillors, not Council staff are in charge of Narrawallee's outcome.
"The Elected Council will be the determining authority with respect to both the Review of Environmental Factors AND designation of dog access areas at Narrawallee Beach ... As the determining authority, implementation of this particular mitigation measure is considered to be at Council’s discretion."
But the lawyers and bureacrats assert that EPBC Act obligations sit entirely outside Council's jurisdiction. Councillors cannot vote to disagree with an objective finding of "likely significant impact".
Community sentiment about dog access, however strongly held, is not relevant to determining whether an activity will likely affect threatened species.
A frightening twist in the tale came swooping in just this month with the detection of the deadly H5N1 Bird Flu on Australian shores.
The Federal Department of Environment (DCCEEW) issued a warning to keep pets away from wildlife, for their own safety and to stem the spread of the virus.
"Prevent cats from roaming. Always keep dogs on leash, especially in areas with native species."
H5N1 high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI), commonly known as H5 bird flu, is a serious and contagious strain that has killed millions of wild birds and tens of thousands of wild mammals predating or scavenging on sick birds or faeces.
Current DCCEEW alerts warns that H5 bird flu poses significant risks to wildlife, ecosystems and especially our threatened species.
"Australia has unique animals that are found nowhere else in the world. This means the impacts of this disease are hard to predict."
"Migratory birds spend part of each year in Australia and the rest of the time living elsewhere in the world. They can carry diseases, like H5 bird flu, over very long distances as they travel between countries. These birds are on the move and share habitats with other native species."
"If this strain of bird flu establishes in Australia, our native species may face long term population setbacks. Some species might even be pushed towards extinction."
When I first looked into Narrawallee's dog debate and made a public comment supporting the rights of nesting birds, I was pigeonholed with a pointed message:
"You're one of those dog haters, aren't you?"
Those who know me, my spoiled dogs and my backyard near a bird-filled estuary, would laugh at that. I love seeing dogs run and swim, but I also hate that they frighten birds and other wildlife. It's a tricky enough balance at home, let alone on a popular public beach bordered by a nature reserve.
Which is exactly why planning decisions balancing community hopes with nature's needs must be made by expert scientists and lawyers, not a handful of politicians shamelessly seeking election on the back of false promises.
20 Years of Narrawallee Beach Dog Drama
Pre-2005
Dogs strictly prohibited on Narrawallee Beach
2005
Council allows on-leash dog access on a portion of Narrawallee Beach.
2015
Council begins a dogs-off-leash trial
2015-2021
Council resolutions try to balance needs of dog owners, wildlife, residents and tourists.
2021
Council allows on-leash access from Victor and Surfers Avenue stairs. Narrawallee Beach Environmental Group forms, takes Council to the NSW Land and Environment Court, arguing environmental impacts not assessed.
2023, August
Land and Environment Court declares Council’s 2021 extensions for dogs invalid because Council failed to complete a proper Review of Environmental Factors (REF).
2023, November
As per court ruling, Council suspends dog access via the highly contested Victor and Surfers Avenue stairs, sparking backlash and petitions from local dog owners in a "Save Our Stairs” campaign.
2024, May
Council publishes a detailed REF incorporating endangered and threatened species protections alongside community needs and the desires of dog owners’. NBEG is satisfied with the multi-use solution. PAWS is not.
2024, August
Council (under Mayor Amanda Findley) adopts interim rules as a permanent, legally sound compromise for the various users of Narrawallee Beach. Dogs won a timed, off-leash area plus an extended boundary to the north, but lost the Victor and Surfers Ave stairs. Narrawallee Inlet environment was protected for birds and other wildlife.
2024, September
Patricia White elected as the Shoalhaven Council’s new Mayor, alongside six other SIG party reps. The “Narrawallee Dogs” debate was a major campaign talking point, especially for Patricia White, who attended a large public rally and promised PAWS members that, if elected, she would ensure more access.
2025, July
Mayor White moves for (and the SIG majority carry) a whole new REF at a cost to ratepayers of $60,000-$100,000. White claimed ecological data in the 2024 REF was purposely “manipulated for a reason”. Acting CEO James Ruprai defends Council input as standard compliance. Liza Butler MP alerts the Minister for Local Government and calls Mayor White’s allegations "distressing, damning and totally inappropriate”.
2025, September
Councillors vote to increase their “allowance” to the maximum, but also remove more than 100 staff in a cost-saving restructure, eliminating the role of Environmental Services Manager. The Environmental Services division is dissolved, with remaining positions spread across different divisions, controversially placing the Biodiversity Assessment unit under development.
2026
The 2026 Draft Review of Environmental Factors (REF) was officially released for public exhibition and submissions in May. On June 29, Council will consider the REF outcomes and vote on accepting the assessment.