| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SteveB
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 241
Location: Dagun
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:34 am Post subject: MUST READ!! Federal EPBC summary of Traveston investigation |
 |
|
Here is the federal department of Environment and Water's appraisal of the Traveston EIS process to date.
http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/notices/assessments/2006/3150/index.html
The reports from the independent investigators are essential reading, and a clear indication of why this project would never get through the Federal legislation
Well done DEWHA.
_________________
"Bad luck ... you dickheads. Suffer in your jocks". (from: the Castle) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The review by Drew Bewsher of the hydrological model used in the Draft EIS and Supplementary Report for the dam determined that the model (IQQM) was appropriate for modelling the impacts of the proposed dam on the Mary River hydrological regime. Mr Bewsher also reported that the underlying data and assumptions used in the EIS modelling were sound and that the model is capable of producing relatively accurate predictions. However, the reviewer did not extended his endorsement to the hydrological information selected by the proponent for presentation in the Draft EIS or its usefulness for the purposes of environmental impact assessment. |
I especially liked the last line in this paragraph. Makes you want to say.......well DER!!!!!
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm hoping that this whole DEW advice and involvement has not been to assure the QLD Gov an approval in two or three years time. Did they say, here, our independent experts have reviewed the EIS and based on these flaws you won't get approval? We'll help you fix them because if you send it to us now you won't get approval and you won't be able to apply again. This way, you may have to wait a few years, but in the end it will help you get what you want.
Sorry for being cynical....so, those initial fears aside, I too would like to thank the dew for their work on this.
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darren E
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 2075
Location: Dagun, Qld
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's how Tony Moore of the Brisbane Times reports it:
| Quote: | Report to Garrett says dam species will die
An independent expert called on by Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett to study the Mary River's lungfish, cod and turtle species says they will not survive if the Traveston Crossing Dam goes ahead.
Associate Professor Keith Walker from Adelaide's School of Earth and Environmental Sciences said it was "extremely unlikely" the dam could provide the breeding habitat to needed to support self-sustaining populations of the species.
The Mary River turtle, the Mary River cod, the Australian Lungfish and the Southern Barred frog are all under threat by the proposed dam, which the Queensland Government is promoting as a source of drinking water for the south-east.
Professor Walker's report also found the Government's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) drew conclusions based on "scant evidence".
"In many cases, the EIS makes assumptions on the basis of scant evidence and draws conclusions about impacts with little or no justification," Professor Walker wrote in his November report, requested by Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett.
It is also critical of the steps being proposed to help the endangered species, concluding the fauna has "significant risks" of failure.
"Most of the impact assessments suggest that the dam would have no significant impact, or, if there were an impact, it would be compensated by mitigation and offset trategies that are often ill-defined and individually have significant risks of failure."
The study rejects claims that a Freshwater Species Conservation Centre proposed for the Traveston Dam site was a strong enough feature to prevent the four species dying out.
"The EIS offsets these claims by indicating that the project includes a number of sustainability strategies, the principal one being a Freshwater Species Conservation Centre(FSCC).
"The need for the centre is a reflection of how little is known of the biology and ecology of the iconic species," he said.
"This information should be available before a project on the scale of Traveston Crossing Dam is contemplated."
The report is also also damning of the planned fish and turtle ladders proposed for the dam, describing them as "speculative" and unproven.
Mr Garrett issued a statement this morning welcoming the "rigorous" environmental consideration being given to the dam.
"As Federal Environment Minister, my role is to assess the potential impacts of this proposal on matters of national environmental significance," Mr Garret said.
"I have noted the Premier's announcement and I certainly welcome the rigorous consideration being given to the potential environmental impacts of the dam by the Queensland Government.
"I will continue to exercise my responsibilities with regards to this proposal diligently and in accordance with the national environmental legislation."
The State Government announced yesterday that it would delay the construction of the dam for several years to meet the conditions necessary to rule out its environmental impact. |
Chances of Federal Approval = None
Now, instead of a back-room under-the-table warning from Garrett to Anna that the dam would never get approval so she better put it on hold, we must insist that the Assessment process proceed to its natural conclusion - formal rejection of the proposed dam because it cannot comply with the requirements of the EPBC Act.
_________________
"If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything" - anon.
"There can be no liberty for a community which lacks the means by which to detect lies" - Walter Lippman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darren E
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 2075
Location: Dagun, Qld
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neo's friend
Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Must read indeed. If a lungfish can't climb the ladder will someone pick it up nd carry it? Every time? Forever? They must be joking!
_________________
Man has no right without responsibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What surprises me is that they are going to reach into the public coffers to regenerate habitat (allegedly) even knowing that these Federal reviews have stated that environmental flows cannot be sustained and EVR species cannot survive in the pondage. Regenerating riparian habitat upstream and claiming those areas from landholders that were in the EIS Map - Vegetation Offsets (which I can see as the next blow to the community) is not mitigating the loss of river habitat, it can only provide better habitat quality for areas already being lightly used by these species. So do they expect all the EVR fauna to concentrate in these regenerated areas when over 3000 hectares of the valley is wiped out? And aren't these regenerated areas only going to be a single part of certain species lifecycle?
These renewed ecosystems will end up being the George Street of the Valley. You can erect the buildings and hope to fill them, but that doesn't guarantee that it is going to make the area relevant to the main populace nor provide habitat for more than weeds and pests.
| Quote: | Australian lungfish
November 26, 2008 - 1:58PM
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/australian-lungfish/2008/11/26/1227491615020.html
The verdict on the Australian lungfish:
"The (environmental impact statement) points to the Brisbane River, where lungfish have been translocated and now live above and below Wivenhoe Dam, as evidence that the species can live in regulated-flow environments.
"Comparisons are deceptive, however, because daily flows below Wivenhoe Dam are five-to-10-fold greater than those likely to prevail downstream of Traveston Crossing Dam.
"There will not be equivalent habitats in the Mary below the dam, and diminished flows during the breeding season (July-December) could threaten spawning and recruitment.
"The EIS concedes that it is doubtful that lungfish would recruit successfully in the Traveston reservoir,
and there is no evidence that they do so in other impoundments.
"Lungfish may lay eggs in still or flowing water but this is not, as the EIS implies, an affirmation that they could breed in a large reservoir."
- excerpt from a report by Associate Professor Keith Walker from Adelaide's School of Earth and Environmental Sciences
|
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand"
Last edited by westholme on Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:05 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darren E
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 2075
Location: Dagun, Qld
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Westholme,
I don't think there is any intent by Bligh to actually do any of these things.
It is all just a poorly thought out, hurriedly slapped together exit strategy.
The announcement was aimed at Brisbane, not us, and deliberately focused on the recycling issue. The target audience were not expected to think too hard about the Traveston part of the announcement, but just get some sort of vague feeling that Bligh is doing something "for the environment" and fixing problems "caused by farming".
_________________
"If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything" - anon.
"There can be no liberty for a community which lacks the means by which to detect lies" - Walter Lippman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay..now...I'm really going to pay for saying this, but I just have to get it out...
Doing 'something for the environment'? Or doing 'something for the Green's'? It's on many people's lips so that's why I am putting it out there.
That is one of the queries coming from people I have talked to about the dam announcement, and from people I have overheard talking about the dam announcement. I am not saying that the Green's are up to something sinister. It is the QLD labour Gov I am attacking here
I am saying that this dam has always been about elections and politics and that this Labour Government could be messing around the lives of the valley folk in a last ditch attempt to lure the Green's into bed.
I hope it is not a bid for Green support at the election and if it is I hope the QLD Greens stand their ground over Traveston. It is NO Traveston Crossing Dam. No how, no way.
Got that Bligh???? You want two years to build your case for a dam, well, you've given the dam supporters two more years of building our case against the dam.
I also think it's possible that these 'mitigation's' are the QLD Gov's way of getting out of the dam, and, in the process, still getting their hardwood timber plantations. Contractually (I may be wrong here), but if they pull the plug on the dam then they must allow those people who took the option to buy back their homes and land the chance to do that. If they 'postpone' the dam for a few years, they get to put in their hardwood plantations and also give the Apiculture industry their specialised plantations.
There are no doubt many reasons why the QLD Gov may have made this decision and there are many possible outcomes or theories we might chew on. I guess unless we were a fly on the wall of that emergency meeting then we'll never really know and can only surmise.
I think we'll just have to wait this out and see if the truth rises to the surface. Whether that's after the election, or in 6 months, or two years or so on, surely it'll rise eventually.
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
