| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:54 am Post subject: Freshwater Species Centre |
 |
|
Was doing some rereading of the Supp Report in preparedness for my submission to the Feds when the EIS is opened for comment..and I decided to copy and paste this gem.
Seriously, what kind of mind writes (or genuinely believes) this shyte? They have always maintained their holier-than-thou, arrogant, condescending manner and they've done it with the utmost bullheadedness, so, what else should I expect?
p.s Quote from below: an artificial breeding facility or hatchery to replace natural habitat destroyed by the dam. I believe that was me who said that, though it is such an obvious thing that I'm sure that there were others that hit on the same wording when making comments on the FSCC.
Supplementary Report to the EIS page 20-94
20.6.4 Freshwater Species Conservation Centre
| Quote: |
A number of submissions indicated the function of the FSCC was misunderstood, variously referred to the FSCC as:
a zoo, museum, fish tank, “would condemn threatened species to display cabinets”;
not a mitigation strategy; and
an artificial breeding facility or hatchery to replace natural habitat destroyed by the dam.
None of these are correct. The FSCC is a research facility dedicated to undertaking targeted investigation related to the long term viability of the species. The current languishing status of many actions within the Mary River Cod Recovery Plan and the lack of plans for Lungfish and Mary
River Turtle was the key driver for QWI to develop the FSCC concept. It was not driven by government scientists and the tertiary sector as one submission asserted, but primarily from within QWI. QWI then invited key departmental and academic scientists to assist with development of the
concept.
For some submissions to suggest that the FSCC is not a mitigation strategy shows a misunderstanding of what constitutes mitigation. Mitigation strategies have been designed to specifically apply to the relatively short term design and construction phase and also to the much
longer term operational phase. The FSCC relates to the latter whilst a substantial number of mitigation strategies relate to the former. |
My comment to the sentence I highlighted.....God forbid that THEY should actually be the one's who actually misunderstand what constitutes mitigation.
If we were so wrong, then why did the Federal reviews that Garrett commissioned nearly reflect word for word our own opinions and views?
I guess they misunderstood what constitutes mitigation too.
_________________
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: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Westholme, you may not have been the only person to describe "an artificial breeding facility or hatchery to replace natural habitat destroyed by the dam", but you can certainly claim 100% credit for it's common local name - the P&PZ (Poke and Prod Zoo). 
If "The current languishing status of many actions within the Mary River Cod Recovery Plan and the lack of plans for Lungfish and Mary River Turtle" were really "key drivers" for the author of these words - silver-tongued Environmental General Manager of QWI, Lee Benson - then QWI would have already started building the FSCC.
But it's construction has always been clearly stated as contingent on approval for the dam. The P&PZ has never been more than a token "hey, look how green we are" gesture, and/or a bribe to get genuine but underfunded scientific researchers to "come on board".
"Mitigation", for QWI, is all about mitigation of opposition, not of the inevitable environmental impacts of their actions. "Short term" is tomorrow's news-byte, "long term" is the next state election.
Even now that the official State Govt position is that the Mary catchment requires "significant rehabilitation", and the FSCC has been "brought forward" for that reason, the P&PZ is still contingent on approval for TCD.
_________________
"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: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote Darren E
| Quote: | | If "The current languishing status of many actions within the Mary River Cod Recovery Plan and the lack of plans for Lungfish and Mary River Turtle" were really "key drivers" for the author of these words - silver-tongued Environmental General Manager of QWI, Lee Benson - then QWI would have already started building the FSCC. |
I am glad I am not the only one who thought this when they read it!! I was going to write something about that myself in my post and didn't really know how to word it at the time and put it in the too hard basket. Thankyou for picking up the same thing and not putting it in the too hard basket.
The P&P Zoo should, perhaps, have had it's own assessment and implementation process. It could have been put through local planning and development assessment by now and they could be building the damn thing already. They could have left it out of the Dam EIS and said it was going in, approval by the feds or no approval by the feds. That would give their statements in the Supp Report some credibility.
Anyone can walk in off the street and knock on someone's door and offer them a bundle of money to buy their property. They could have made offers on a property and gone through the usual avenues to purchase land for the P&P Zoo totally exclusive of the dam land purchase agenda.
But they didn't.
They are putting it on land acquired for the dam.
They have put it in the Traveston Crossing Dam EIS.
It is a mitigation strategy, but it does not mitigate anything. It perpetuates the belief that breeding/research facilities are a legitimate substitute for taking genuine habitat.
It is "an artificial breeding facility or hatchery to replace natural habitat destroyed by the dam"
I get so sick and tired of them treating us like idiots.
Let me quote a quote (if that makes sense) from an article I put in my EIS submission.
| Quote: | Something's Fishy by Ted Williams - Audubon magazine
Hatcheries, like drugs, can be healing, or hurtful and addictive. They can and do serve as genetic reservoirs, saving species from extinction until habitat is repaired, and they can and do provide fishing in waters where there was never a chance of natural reproduction. But when their mission is to replace habitat degraded by industrial and municipal pollution; siltation from watershed disturbances; loss of streamside shade; and, especially, the construction of dams, they fail.
"If you cross a sacred cow with a military base in Washington State, you get a fish hatchery," says Bernard Shanks, former director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, who in 1998 was hounded out of office for merely suggesting that hatchery production be de-emphasized.
But there's more to be said. I object to the hatchery bureaucracy not just for what it does to wild fish but for what it does to people.
It creates the illusion that habitat is expendable. (Why protect clean, free flowing rivers and watersheds from dams, pollution, and watershed abuses when you can mass-produce in concrete fish factories). |
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bensoncooroy
Joined: 28 Jun 2006
Posts: 223
Location: Ridgewood
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:28 pm Post subject: Freshwater species |
|
|
| Westholme the quote from your submission says it all. I think it to be reproduced on a hand out for the centre and put up on the wall for all to read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
It certainly does say it all, bensoncooroy, you're right there. And this piece of the article, or in fact the article in it's entirety, would be a good handout for it is a pearler. In my submission I went ahead and nearly quoted the whole thing because it was so meaty. I knew the submissions would not be made public, so I wasn't infringing on copyright laws.
If there was to be a handout with part of the article, I, or someone from the STMRCG may have to email the author and/or the magazine asking permission to reproduce the article in part for public display.
Copyright is a tricky thing and I have limited knowledge of what is and isn't allowed when it comes to handouts or hanging it up in a public place.
Would be good if we could do both.
_________________
CESARE LOMBROSO "The ignorant man always adores what he cannot understand" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westholme
Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 2628
Location: Amamoor
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveB
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 241
Location: Dagun
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:44 am Post subject: Turtle breeding facility at Paradise an abject failure |
|
|
Not only is the the fishway at Paradise Dam a dismal failure (hence the court case underway at the moment), the captive turtle breeding facility at Paradise may well have killed more turtles than the dam itself.
Strong rumours going around the Burnett that the whole facility recently ran into some problem that has resulted in mass deaths of the turtles being raised there. So I guess that they will just have to come up with a new mitigation strategy to compensate for the adverse impacts of the turtle breeding facility.
How about a issuing some credit certificates in a threatened-species-mass-killing trading scheme - that might solve the problem. I'll suggest that to ministers Lucas and MacNammara - they're sure to think it will work well enough to get an approval for Traveston. It might save a bit of time as well - it would be bit easier to achieve your objectives than any of these obviously unsuccseful "real world' mitigation strategies.
_________________
"Bad luck ... you dickheads. Suffer in your jocks". (from: the Castle) |
|
| 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
|
