Sue Brooks September 23rd, 2009
Here is the media release of the FCRC released this morning. Councillors are very concerned about the planned dam and are unanimously opposed to it. We are very concerned about the impacts that any large dam on the Mary River would have on the local fisheries and RAMSAR wetland not to mention the impacts on endangered species and the loss of valuable rural producing lands.
22 September 2009
Fraser Coast Regional Council continues to oppose Traveston Crossing Dam
The Fraser Coast Regional Council has re-iterated its opposition to proposals to build a dam on the Mary River at Traveston Crossing, near Gympie.
At its meeting last week the Council moved again to state its opposition in light of reports that the Queensland Co-ordinator General had approved a list of conditions that would need to be met for the dam to be approved and state government moves to push ahead with the project.
The Queensland Government submission is being investigated by the Federal Minister
for Environment, Heritage and the Arts , Peter Garrett.
“This is not the first time Fraser Coast Councils have opposed the dam,” Fraser Coast Regional Council Mayor Mick Kruger said.
”The former Councils helped fund a $120,000 independent study to find alternatives to the dam. The South East Queensland Water Optimisation Study was undertaken by Dr Stuart White of the University of Technology, Sydney. It was funded by the nine local governments that made up the Mary River Council of Mayors.”
The mayors initiated the study after being told by then Premier Peter Beattie that if they wanted to look at alternative sites for a proposed Mary River dam they would have to fund the investigations.
The study examined the social, environmental and economic impact of the proposed dam.
In May, 2008, the Fraser Coast Regional Council endorsed the actions of the previous Councils and challenged the Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the project.
The Council directed the following concerns to the Queensland Premier Anna Bligh and the Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure Paul Lucas, the Project managers and the Federal Minister Peter Garrett and Federal Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Penny Wong.
The concerns included:
1. Water supply security for the Fraser Coast Region is not adequately considered;
2. Justification for the dam is made on the basis of flawed and / or inadequate economic analysis;
3. The effects of downstream changes on social and economic factors have not been adequately considered;
4. Hydrological analysis probably underestimates the downstream flow impacts to a considerable degree;
5. Hydrological modelling is not linked with aquatic ecology and water quality; there is no predictive analysis of water quality or biota in the impoundment or downstream and the discussion on impacts is necessarily speculative;
6. In some cases, the evidence from research, case studies and even studies within the EIS are contrary to the conclusions in the executive summary;
7. The Mary River Water Resource Plan (WRP) is not considered to have sufficient scientific basis to provide reliable flow targets; most of the targets are expert panel derived, and there is an acknowledged lack of scientific understanding of the flow requirements of several of the iconic species;
8. Inconsistent and sometimes misleading treatment of Stage 2 and other related projects that will have cumulative impact on the Mary River (Northern Pipeline and Borumba Dam raising); these are included in the water supply benefits, but not in the costs or impacts;
9. No allowance for climate change in the modelling, which is likely to further reduce the frequency and volume of flushing flows;
10. Inconsistency about mitigation measures – many of the measures recommended in the chapters are not included in the executive summary and even fewer are included in the cost assessment; and
11. In consideration of points 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 9 particularly, the downstream impacts on the Mary estuary and the Great Sandy Straits are inadequately predicted and the optimistic assessment has no evidentiary basis.
When the Council re-iterates its opposition to the dam it will send another copy of its concerns to the state and federal governments and ask for the points it raised be answered and considered during any investigation into the proposed dam.
”The Council also will write to the Premier to ask that the Co-ordinator General’s report be released to the public,” Cr Kruger said.
ENDS
I attended the Greater Mary Association meeting last night and was pleased to see so many dedicated people volunteering their time to keep fighting against this dam. We all need to write to Minister Peter Garrett and to the National papers. I fear that unless we gain public support nationally we will lose our battle.
