Sunshine Coast Hinterland Times

Three and a half years from Peter Beattie’s “bolt from the blue” announcement of a Traveston Crossing Dam, all eyes are now on Federal Environment Minister, Peter Garrett for a decision… a decision that must come before November 18.

NEVER HAS a dam proposal received such widespread condemnation and political vilification. From the start, environmental opposition was predictable but all councils along the river also opposed it strongly and even commissioned their own study into alternatives.

The Save the Mary River Coordinating Group was quickly formed and established an infocentre base at Kandanga, and when Greens leader Bob Brown visited to lead the first canoe flotilla on the Mary, it threw the dam and the opposition to it, into the national spotlight.

At every turn opposition to the dam has been strong. A senate enquiry received over 200 submissions with only the state government supporting the dam. After four days of hearings, the majority of the senators recommended the dam not proceed.

When the Environmental Impact Statement was released, it was a mammoth and daunting document. Superficially it looked thorough and exhaustive, but reviewers soon found a host of errors and misleading statements. To justify the superior nature of the Mary catchment, for example, rainfall figures were supplied for Crohamhurst, near Peachester. The only problem was that Crohamhurst didn’t actually lie in the Mary catchment.

There was a record public response to the EIS with over 16,000 submissions being received. More than 10,000 of these came from downstream of the dam, around Maryborough and Hervey Bay, where residents were understandably hopping mad at claims the dam would have minimal downstream impacts.

In fact, so many responses were received to the EIS that the task of dealing with all the issues raised would take another eighteen months.

Always central to the government’s plan for the dam was a fishway, especially suited to lungfish, that it had used on the Paradise dam on the Burnett River. But by the time the EIS surfaced the government was beginning to backpedal on its “state of the art” claims for the fishway and admit that it had problems.

The Wide Bay Burnett Conservation Council began a landmark Federal Court case that the dam had failed to comply with its original conditions. Seeing direct implications for any Traveston decision, the Save the Mary group also became involved. The case was to be heard in September this year but was adjourned until early November after the Solicitor General advised there had been a request to alter the original conditions relating to the fishway. Commendably, Peter Garrett in the past few weeks decided against changing the conditions, a wise decision that will allow the court case to go ahead.

On October 6, after something of a media-grabbing false start a few weeks earlier, the Queensland Coordinator general released his report and consigned the EIS, supplementary EIS and additional material to federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett seeking approval.

Central to the Coordinator General’s report is that no details are provided for any fishway, nor indeed for the “world first” turtle ramp and nesting beaches referred to in the EIS. Rather, the tone of the report is to ask for approval, and the details will be sorted out later.

The scrutiny by Peter Garrett’s department is really the last chance for independent review as any subsequent assessment, should approval be granted, would be carried out by the state Coordinator General. However, the Coordinator General has a fundamental “conflict of interest” in being responsible for both delivery of major state infrastructure and assessment of the impacts.

Release of water from both Somerset Dam and North Pine Dam in mid-year provided a preview of what could be in store for the Mary. Despite distressing video evidence of a much higher death toll, SEQWater admits that 90 lungfish were pummelled to death by being swept out with the released water.

Despite this, the government claims that the 1200 conditions imposed by the Coordinator General would make it “the greenest dam building proposal in Australian history” and even that “without this project proceeding, the sad fact is that species could become extinct.”

Plainly it won’t be Peter Garrett’s decision alone. He’ll be guided principally by his assessors but also by political colleagues notably the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

The widespread public opposition has come well outside  the “dam footprint” and has shown no sign of abating with the passage of three and a half years. In Brisbane, a Griffith University survey found 59% of people opposed.

Save the Mary River Coordinating Group President Glenda Pickersgill says the government has done everything to make Traveston look like the only option but says that’s far from the truth.

“Since Peter Beattie’s announcement, the yield of the proposed dam has been scaled back by a factor of three while the costs have doubled. South-east Queenslanders can see when they’re being sold a pup, an expensive edifice that won’t give the water security they so badly want. ”

“As for alternatives, it has to be understood that this dam was based on a water requirement of over 300 litres per person per day, with a long term aim to cut this down to 230 litres. Consumption in Brisbane has been reduced to far below this, to levels previously regarded as unachievable. People are plainly ahead of planners and politicians on this one. Making the same water go further has financial bonuses for everyone,” she said.

“As the extra water is needed to supply a growing population, we have an excellent opportunity to make new developments more water independent. Rainwater tanks, watersaving devices, collection of stormwater run-off, use of dual reticulation are becoming increasingly common and make good sense with the uncertainties of climate change.”

“Along with councils, a host of environment groups and thousands of citizens, we’ve called on Peter Garrett to “just say no,” to this dam,” she said.

“But should he decide to grant approval, albeit with a string of conditions, we won’t be packing up our bat and ball and be going home. We’re always mindful that construction was well underway for the Franklin Dam before it was finally canned and we don’t plan to go away. It’d be much simpler though, if Peter Garrett recognized the impact his decision could make and assisted the Queensland government to plan for less rainfall-dependent water security more in line with the Prime Minister’s National Water Plan.”

Plainly the battle to stop the Traveston Crossing Dam and save the Mary River is far from over.

Ian Mackay is a biology and chemistry teacher, environmentalist and poet living on the Mary River near Kenilworth in the Sunshine Coast hinterland. Since the early nineties he has been president of the Conondale Range Committee, one of the Sunshine Coast’s longest- serving conservation groups, and has been involved with, and written widely on forestry and water issues.