How Good Is this

[manta man]

Barrier Reef authority approves dredge spoil dumping

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority has approved a proposal to dump dredge spoil from the Abbot Point coal terminal expansion in the Marine Park area.
Three million cubic metres of spoil must be dredged as part of the project at Bowen in North Queensland green-lighted by Federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt last month.
Scientists and conservation lobbyists had urged the Authority to reject the expansion, with 233 signing a letter to chairman Russell Reichelt that said: "The best available science makes it very clear that expansion of the port at Abbot Point will have detrimental effects on the Great Barrier Reef. Sediment from dredging can smother corals and seagrasses and expose them to poisons and elevated nutrients."
Greenpeace warns that any dumping of dredge spoil on the World Heritage-listed reef will be an "international embarrassment" and akin to "dumping rubbish in the Grand Canyon".
"We wouldn't throw rubbish on World Heritage sites like the Grand Canyon or the Vatican City, so why would we dump on the reef?" spokeswoman Louise Matthiesson said.
"Scientists are clear that the potential impacts of dumping the dredge spoil so close to fringing reefs and the WWII Catalina plane wreck are significant."
The reef already faced pressures from climate change, land-based pollution and crown of thorns starfish outbreaks, she added.

[Nslfishing]

I heard about this on the radio this morning and it makes me sick. Clearly cash takes precedence over the environment. How is something like dumping millions of tons of sediment and silt on the reef even considered. How is it not illegal. I'm outraged if you can't tell. Booo mr hunt very bad form

[Nslfishing]

This guy is the environment minister? I wonder how much cash went under the table.

[Gimme5]

MM, I see you have very carefully chosen to quote a section of the article and deliberately omitted the rest which clearly does not suit you and your agenda. In all fairness, here's a small section of it:

"“It's important to note the seafloor of the approved disposal area consists of sand, silt and clay and does not contain coral reefs or seagrass beds.”The Authority placed 47 environmental conditions on the project, which they said included measures to reduce the impact on biodiversity including coral, long-term water quality monitoring and offset measures for commercial fishermen if the dumping caused other problems.
The dump site approved is 25 kilometres east-north-east of the Abbot Point port. As part of his approval, Mr Hunt has also required the proponents to investigate an alternative site 20 to 30 kilometres from the area being dredged."

If anyone is dumping anything ON the reef, I'm sure the whole country will be up in arms.

[Still_Dreamin]

How about taking the sediment to one of the pacific islands about to be inundated by global warming and building it up. No climate refugees and no sediment on the reef. Win win. Why can't other people see the is.

[captain red beard]

Thanks Gimme5 for the rest of the story.

[Nslfishing]

I'm no genius or authority on the matter but won't ocean currents carry sediment and generally f things up in that area. What chain reactions could this set off in the ecosystem. IMHO any thing above a zero risk anywhere near the reef should be ruled out. It's too late when it's f*****.

The dump site composed of sand and clay has settled there in a natural way over time allowing for a certain state of compaction in these materials. Loosely dumping spoil into the ocean is not a natural occurrence so my worry is what's stopping currents from carrying this stuff to who knows where and covering your favorite fishing spot in sediment. And as others have pointed out what impact will it have on pelagic species that breed in that area, and how will it affect things down the coast. There seems to be some expected impact because they make offers to offset commercial fisherman.

Like I said I'm no real authority on this issue this is just my opinion. Feel free to correct or enlighten me 😃

[Gimme5]

Neither am I and the greenies could very well be right, who knows? That said, hippy groups like Greenpeace are always against any sort of commercial undertaking and won't rest until we're dressed in loin cloths and living in caves. I like to think that in this case, the GBR Marine Park Authority and all concerned would have gone through due process and diligence and would have considered countless proposals and studies by all sorts of experts on the possible impact on such undertakings. There's always going to be an element of risk and uncertainty, it comes down to how you manage that risk and mitigate its impact which is the reason behind the 47 environmental conditions imposed. I'm all for environmental protection but just saying there's always 2 sides to an argument.

Have a good weekend.

[Nslfishing]

I see your your point gimme5. I too am not against progress but the barrier reef is such a precious system. I don't think its wise to mess with stuff anywhere near it. Especially when it's already under threat from global warming and other things

[Louis]

G'day Nslfishing,


Please don't tell me you have fallen for the Global Warming Scam.

And if you have.

Please watch the following.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ

If you still don't agree I can give you other things to look up.



Louis


PS: Man Made Global Warming is BS

[Louis]

I put the below post on another thread but the idea behind it is the same.

It is a balancing act.

Example: I bet the Greens would not allowed this if they could.

And what might happen. The company beomes unprofitable and shuts or decides to go 'OFFSHORE' as the saying goes. In other words, goes to another country.





I don’t know enough to make a decision either way on this issue. However as a general rule I’m against the subsidizing of businesses full stop.

However I am totally for making it cheap and easy for businesses to do business in this country so that businesses come to Australia and stay in Australia rather than going to another country instead.

Perhaps instead of subsidization the government should simply drop the industries taxes a little bit.

It would create far less government and business paperwork and expenditure tracking and dishing out subsidies.

Remember Businesses are what literally feed us, house us, and clothe us.

All our money whether you work in the private sector or in the public sector comes from businesses.

They do businesses in our country to make money and the Government takes some of their profits for the right to do so.

If we take too much of their profits or they become unprofitable due to government compliance legislation they simply go to another country.

If too many leave. We go into recession, eventually depression, and when the rest of the Worlds countries that are smart enough to look after their businesses, (not too many of them around in the Western World these days), stop lending us the money that their businesses are making for them, then we literally collapse and start starving and live in abject poverty like about 80% of the Worlds countries because their Governments have been too stupid to look after their businesses.



Louis

[Triple]

Any truth to the area they are dumping in is a spottie mac spawning/breeding ground?

[Louis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq4Bc2WCsdE

[nathank]

How can anyone on this site which is about fishing and the environment in which we do it in.. suggest that this is ok????

[Nslfishing]

G'day Nslfishing,


Please don't tell me you have fallen for the Global Warming Scam.

And if you have.

Please watch the following.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ

If you still don't agree I can give you other things to look up.



Louis


PS: Man Made Global Warming is BS

Hi louis,
lol I believe the earth is warming but due to a natural cycle. Sure, humans may have contributed. But really, I'd like hard evidence before ruling out one or the other.