Traveston Dam - rejected

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Traveston Dam rejected

Traveston Dam rejected
TONY MOORE
November 11, 2009 - 1:00PM

Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett today rejected the controversial Traveston Crossing Dam on the Mary River, south of Gympie.

Mr Garrett said he had made the decision based on science and the "unacceptable impact" it would have on threatened species, including the Mary River turtle and Australian lungfish.

"I'm not satisfied that the impact on the long-term survival would be adequately addressed by the mitigation and offset measures proposed," Mr Garrett said in Brisbane just before 1pm.

"They haven't been proven."

Mr Garrett said the economic benefits of the project did not stack up against the "serious and irreversible adverse effects" on endangered species.

"The fact is that this proposal in my opinion will have unacceptable impacts.

"Australia's environment is of importance to all Australians and those nationally listed species we need to protect to the best possible extent we can. I recognise that the overall threats to fresh water species are great."

"I know there has been massive interest in this project. I take my responsibility as Environment Minister very, very seriously."

The former Australian Conservation Foundation president's decision comes after three years of detailed tests and submissions - plus three years of uncertainty for the people of the Mary Valley.

It also follows thousands of submissions from conservationists, wildlife experts, business groups and nearby councils, and a Senate inquiry in 2007.

Latest estimates show Stage 1 of the project would have cost $1.8 billion and provide 70,000 megalitres  - or 70,000 Olympic swimming pools - of drinking water as part of South East Queensland's $9 billion water grid.

But conservationists have argued that damming the Mary River would pose a major threat to the Australian lungfish, the Mary River turtle, the Mary River cod and the giant barred frog.

On October 7, Queensland Co-ordinator General Colin Jensen gave the proposed dam his tick of approval, but imposed 1200 conditions for the Queensland Government to meet.

Those conditions included a specially designed fishway and turtle bypass system for those endangered Mary River species, the restoration of about 2000 hectares of riparian vegetation, and a $10 million project to protect and rehabilitate habitat elsewhere in the Mary River catchment.

Other than the ruling Queensland ALP, all political parties have opposed the dam.

At the state election in March, Queensland's Environment Minister Andrew McNamara lost his seat of Hervey Bay largely because of the anti-dam mood of his electorate.

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

Peter Garrett rejects Traveston Dam

Peter Garrett rejects Traveston Dam
Article from: The Courier-Mail

Kristin Shorten and agencies

November 11, 2009 12:45pm

BREAKING NEWS: THE controversial $1.8 billion Traveston Dam will not go ahead, Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett has announced.

"After considering the Traveston Dam proposal and the best available scientific evidence and other material ... it is my intention to say no to the Traveston Dam,'' Mr Garrett told reporters in Brisbane on Wednesday.

"It is clear to me that the Traveston Dam cannot go ahead without unacceptable impacts on matters of national environmental significance.''

"The ecological and social benefits are outweighed by the list of threatened species.

Mr Garrett's interim decision triggers a 10-day consultation process during which the dam's proponent, the Queensland government, and other federal ministers can comment and provide further evidence to support their views to dam the Mary River in southeast Queensland.
Mr Garrett will then announce a final decision on November 25.

Earlier today, Queensland Premier Anna Bligh told state parliament the dam was "absolutely critical'' for the future of the fast-growing region.

"We are the fastest growing region in Australia and the people who are moving here need to drink water, their families need water to bathe, the industries that employ them need water to operate,'' Ms Bligh said.

The alternative to the dam is at least two desalination plants, at a significant extra cost to taxpayers.

Ms Bligh said the opposition had ``no position'' on water for the region, as they didn't support the dam, recycled water or desalination plants.

"People should be very clear, the Labor Party stands for a comprehensive water supply for southeast Queensland, the Liberal National Party believes that the people of this part of the state should be on strict water restrictions for ever,'' she said.

"They believe that buckets are the answer for the future, they believe that we should simply pray for rain.''

Conservationists argue the dam could sentence rare and endangered species - like the Mary River turtle, the Mary River cod, lungfish and the giant barred tree frog - to extinction.

Agriculture lobbies also argue the dam will flood prime agricultural land, much of which has already been purchased by the Queensland government.

Queensland Senator Barnaby Joyce says it's D-day for Mr Garrett and the principles he stands for.

"Mr Garrett has the capacity to stop the destruction which is associated with the planned building of the Traveston Dam or he can hand over the last vestiges of authenticity for everything he previously believed in,'' Senator Joyce said in a statement.

"If Mr Garrett allows construction of the Traveston Dam then he will only have himself to blame for his self-proclamation of hypocrisy.''

Opponents of the dam will gather at the Kandanga No Dam Info Centre to hear the result of Mr Garrett's announcement.

They have also called a public meeting at the Kandanga Hall at 7pm (AEST), whichever way the decision goes.

[Dean Quick]

Well Done Peter Garrett!!!!

[ozbob]

The Mary Valley railway was under some threat from the planned Traveston Dam.

Steam on!

[Fares_Fair]

Talking of steam,

I have been told by QR personnel that QR is no longer training people to run the steam trains
and that when the current round of engineers retire there will be none to fill the void.

Seems they will run out of puff.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[mufreight]

Nothing like a rational decision, Mr Garratt as steamed into history, he has saved the Mary Valley, the lungfish, the Mary River Cod, a unique turtle and as a bonus for rail enthusiasts assured the ongoing operation of the Mary Valley rattler, definately deserving of a  .
On the subject of training of steam locomotive drivers there are very restricted opportunities for main line operators to train crews but the enthusiast groups seem to have no problems in sourcing potential crews for steam, often this training by enthusiast groups is undertaken by persons whose fulltime employment is on mainline rail (diesel or electric trains), these are enthusiasts who already have a working understanding of train operation and then gain understanding of steam operation.
The limitations of enthusiast operations will restrict the pool of experience but while ever there are boys (and girls) who have an interest in steam the skills of steam operation will never die out.

[Fares_Fair]

As a sunshine coaster one feels a lot of pride that common sense has prevailed.
There'll be a few parties up Gympie way tonight !
Thank you Peter Garrett for the courage of your convictions.

The government still has 10 days to appeal the decision and provide more information
with a truly final decision to be made by 25th November, 2009.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

P.S. I hope you are right about the steam trains mufreight. 

[ozbob]

The state government has accepted the decision.  It's a done deal.

[QGT]

The Mary Valley railway was under some threat from the planned Traveston Dam.

Steam on!

I'm curious which parts of the Mary Vally Line would have been near or in the Dam? If it went ahead lucky It didn't 

[ozbob]

As I understand it, and I stand to be corrected stage one didn't have a direct impact but stage 2 would have caused some relocations of the line and the need for a new corridor for a section.

Others may know more.  The is nothing on the MVHR web site as they do receive some funding.

[QGT]

As I understand it, and I stand to be corrected stage one didn't have a direct impact but stage 2 would have caused some relocations of the line and the need for a new corridor for a section.

Others may know more.  The is nothing on the MVHR web site as they do receive some funding.

Ok thanks