You have to be kidding !

[Lucky_Phill]

OK.............. back on topic.

anyone else got something constructive to add to the proposed ports and impacts on the environment and communities ? Yes, it ties in with world trade and the likes.

IMO.......... bump up prices so high ... we sit in the seat of power and dictate terms to them.

There is a delagation from The Klingons arriving here soon to talk Mineral reserves. At least we know exactly what they want the Uranium for ??



LP

[nigelr]

The question may possibly be "will the dash for cash preclude reason?"
Hopefully not, win/win would be the best scenario, and certainly what the area and it's people deserve.
Cheers.

[MudRiverDan]

Well they dredged the Brisbane river and still do claim more of the shoreline through the airport and the eve increasing Port of Brisbane.

I seems the deep water is good for fishing, however not sure about the habitat removal and the increased velocity of the river.

As far as Gladstone Harbour; the fish kills it doesn't look good but if it has to be dredged maybe they could implement a rehabilitation plan to ensure that Gladstone harbour is still a not turned into an underwater desert.

Are they dredging sea grass beds?
If so I would say just at a laymans guess this would be irreversible, due to sea grass needing reasonably shallow water, same goes for other ecosystems that rely on light.

Truth is I have not seen any such rehabilitation in Moreton Bay other than a few chunks of cement thrown off a barge while a few polies get their picture taken.

The government talk big about environmental funding but it seems they have cut back, I just guess this because I have been watching the environmental job market in private and government sectors for the last 4 years and really opportunity in marine rehab is almost non existent job.

The government wants to out source all of the environmental work to companies that are not obligated to share their findings to the public.

[Camhawk88]

The government wants to out source all of the environmental work to companies that are not obligated to share their findings to the public.

You seem confused here. Marine rehab work is operational and as such government would be required to have qualified consultants/specialists undertake. The findings you refer to would have nothing to do with rehab but rather impact assessments and the like- 2 different things.
again this is something all governments contract consultants to do- that is what a consultant does.
As for obligation to make public- if the work is commissioned by the government, the results are the property of the government and can be obtained through a process called the Freedom of Information Act (FOI).

[MudRiverDan]

You seem confused here. Marine rehab work is operational and as such government would be required to have qualified consultants/specialists undertake. The findings you refer to would have nothing to do with rehab but rather impact assessments and the like- 2 different things.

Not really I think you will find they intend to outsource for Moreton Bay.

again this is something all governments contract consultants to do- that is what a consultant does.

Yes they are kinda like Lawyers these days hey, hire em and they will sing a song (Bloody expensive too, they charge like Lawyers).

As for obligation to make public- if the work is commissioned by the government, the results are the property of the government and can be obtained through a process called the Freedom of Information Act (FOI).

Only if the data is archived, and to do this, it has to pass very stringent standards, in other words it is "cleansed", LOL! are you seriously trying to say that all the controversial data the Government has found is sitting in a file waiting for everyone to access.... nice fairly tale.

You obviously work in the sector.