Bob Irwin pushes petition against Tin Can Bay marina projects

[bungie]

BOB Irwin is on a mission to see a million objections lodged against proposed marina developments in a pristine bay near Australia's iconic Fraser Island.
The father of the late crocodile hunter Steve Irwin is promoting an online petition that aims to gather a million signatures calling on the federal government to prevent two marina developments in Tin Can Bay.
"This is not a local issue. The area provides habitat for species that are threatened all over the world, and we need to make a stand and save some critical habitat for them," Mr Irwin said today.
"Should the proposed marinas go ahead, the mangroves and the sea grass beds - home to the rare and endangered coastal dolphins, dugongs and turtles - will be gone forever.
"This is the nursery for the Great Barrier Reef and the Pacific Ocean ... We shouldn't be interfering with it at all."


http://www.marina.tincanbaydolphins.com.au/ click the link if you want to help or see what its about

bungie

[tunaticer]

Build the infrastructure, the amount of real development that is stifled by public outcry is rediculous. In 20 yrs time the locals want more in their area and they can't get anything done because the land was saved from development and nobody is game to get that overturned.

[trymyluck]

Build the infrastructure, the amount of real development that is stifled by public outcry is rediculous. In 20 yrs time the locals want more in their area and they can't get anything done because the land was saved from development and nobody is game to get that overturned.

Have you seen where its going mate????????

[PinHead]

yeah...let'sa not build anything at all anymore..let's not have a balanced society...no more development and the greens can then find jobs for us all and feed and house us all under their communist ideals.
I have the perfect solution..first item to be restored to its natural environment..Australia Zoo..then a property up Nanango way.

[tunaticer]

Have you seen where its going mate????????

Yep, and I fully support them going in there.
Both sites are well and truly influenced by man already and yet the wildlife still thrives there.
Add to that, the military training ground that feeds waters into the system is still there and still used frequently with more than minimal impact on the environment and still the wildlife flourishes.

This whole argument is not about the wildlife, but rather about the locals that do not want change yet using the wildlife as their tools to beat any new development.

I know several locals in that area and they want these things to go ahead.

[NEWBY]

6,782 Votes. And just over half of them are in Queensland.
That says it all I reckon and aint it a long long way from the million mark?

BUT WAIT, I got a hundred says this extreme minority vote gets a win...AND I WILL GIVE ODDS...

[PADDLES]

i don't know about the situation in tin can bay, but like pinhead says we need to have development to put food on our table and fuel in the boat. there's no such thing as zero impact but as long as it's sustainable and the impacts are minimised, then i reckon a development is all good.

we're staring down the barrel of something like this affecting our little river, the tin can bay marina is a baby one at 243 wet and 120 dry berths, the marina proposed for the caboolture river (8km upstream) is 900 wet and 400 dry, all 1300 plus boats to access it by our river. i can fully understand why locals don't want this sort of development in these underdeveloped areas but if it's sustainable and the impact is minimised then that's progress i guess.

[FNQCairns]

If it's primarily over low grade waterway areas best to stop it IMO, if it's over an area with enough grade to add the depth needed quickly without lots of work/damage/theft of natural habitat then it would be ok by me.

[PADDLES]

i do have an issue with the destruction caused by dredging, but my main issue is additional boat traffic and all the problems associated with those extra boats

[Mrs Ronnie H]

i do have an issue with the destruction caused by dredging, but my main issue is additional boat traffic and all the problems associated with those extra boats

I'm with you on all the traffic but if it cleans out alot of the trash that is causing so much congestion around the ramp and etc at Beachmere then I will go with it and on the job front--- If progress gives me a job then I will quite happily accept one.

We all know change is for the better as they say but when its in our backyard we don't want anything to do with it. Why is that. ????

I know there are pros and cons to every development but sometimes we need to look a little further down the track-- I am sure that given time all things recover to a certain extent and if governed properly then I can see the areas around this kind of development recovering to a sustainable level.

You may say i have done a back flip in support but where will we be in 20 years time if every time someone wants to do something we knock it on the head--- Wheres the future in that ???

LOL
Ronnie

[Camhawk88]

IF this recreational facility (no long term economic benifit such as port industry) involves a large footprint over seagrass and mangrove areas as is indicated then I do have an issue with it. Just because there is some near by impacts it does not give a green light to flog or remove an important habitat area. An accumulation of impacts in any area is a worry- especially if it has significant fisheries value- ie nursery habitat, breeding/feeding grounds.
Sustainability is an overused, misunderstood term when used in conjunction with this type of development. The development will abolish all current habitat within the footprint- it cannot and is not sustainable. They can minimise and mitigate a footprint, they can offset a footprint- they can't make it sustainable- once it is gone its gone.

Perhaps this is propagander - the use of flagship species such as dolphins and turtles always rings alarm bells - however if there is truth to the type of habitat being destroyed here (I admit it is thin on actual facts) then I find it hypocritical of those that say 'the greenies wont let us develop anywhere" when the same people will turn around and defend recreational fishing by blaming various governments for habitat loss as the reason for declining stocks (which i totally agree has merit). You cant have it both ways.

If I were an outsider looking in to the rec fishing community and read the past few months posts on such topics I would think to myself- 'these guys will chop and change their values to accomodate whatever suits their agender.' - much like the greens do!
I hope this is not the case as we as a group loose all credibility if we are not consistant.

[PADDLES]

i'm hearing ya ronnie, we need the development, it's just the boat traffic to the 1300 boat marina that freaks me out. i won't even have to drive the boat onto the trailer down at the ramp, i'll just surf it on. hopefully our ramp will get a little less busy when the new one over at burpengary opens up hey.

[Mrs Ronnie H]

hey Paddles

with that much surf and wash I won't have to use the winch anymore either.

When i first heard about the development i was dead against it but like I said we need to progress and anything that brings jobs, money, new business to an area has to have its good points.

lol
Ronnie

[grammel]

I have been there recently,in my opinion build the marina.

[snapperdan]

you guys are so lucky with all your marinas in QLD. This is abit off topic but.

Wish we could get some more in NSW. South coast especially. Bermagui, batemans (in the works i beleive).

Could move the Navy out of garden island in the harbour to Jervis Bay. 2 big marinas at Jervis Bay and redevelop garden island into a killer waterfront precinct with o/s passenger terminal big enough to take all the massive ships that cant fit under the bridge.