SEDIMENT predicted to flow into Great Barrier Reef waters from onshore dumping of dredge material at Abbot Point has been underestimated by as much as 30 per cent, according to scientific advice to government. In one of more than 80,000 submissions received on the controversial project, WWF-Australia said expert advice had raised several “alarming concerns”. These included that the ponds may be too small to hold the dredge spoil, that sediment flowing to reef waters had been seriously underestimated, and that acid sulphate impacts had not been properly considered, WWF said. The Queensland government has proposed dumping millions of cubic metres of dredge spoils on land following strong objections from tourism and environment groups to offshore dumping that has already been approved, but environment groups have continued a strong campaign against the plan, favouring instead an extended wharf plan that would limit dumping. WWF said the project would have serious impacts on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and must not be fast-tracked. “We urge the Queensland government to reconsider this proposal and look once again at the less damaging alternatives that are available,” its submission said. Expert advice to WWF included in the submission said the amount of disturbed dredge material that needed to be stored was likely to be greater than the capacity of the ponds built to hold it in the short term. Brett Miller, principal engineer at the University of NSW School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, said the project modelling “underestimates by almost 30 per cent the amount of water and sediment to be discharged by pipe to the ocean from these ponds during the second dredge stage”. WWF said it was concerned because these fine sediments caused water pollution and would smother nearby seagrass beds. Richard Bush from Southern Cross University told WWF the project’s acid sulphate soil assessment did not adequately identify or quantify potential impacts. Former Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority director Jon Day said the project impact on World Heritage values was based on old criteria “clearly wrong in the light of today’s knowledge”. WWF campaign leader Louise Matthiesson said there were many other concerns including that the ponds would not be lined, allowing seepage, and their construction was proposed in the wet season early next year. “There’s a risk of storm surge and cyclone damage, impacts on turtle hatchlings on the adjacent beach, and … maximum disruption to wetland birds as their numbers swell at this time of year,” Ms Matthiesson said. The Queensland government said 80,690 submissions had been received as part of the public consultation process despite the comment period being open for only 10 days. The submissions will be passed to the federal environment department and Environment Minister Greg Hunt will have 40 business days to make a decision. North Queensland Bulk Ports has been authorised to begin dredging in March 2015. The Queensland government has acknowledged the project will have an impact on nearby wetlands but said an “offset” program was in place. The project would affect an area covering 307ha next to current Abbot Point port and terminal sites, including 148ha of existing wetland, representing 2.17 per cent of the existing wetland area. An offset strategy has been proposed covering 1409ha, more than four times the amount required by the commonwealth. The Queensland government said while impacts to threatened species and migratory birds were possible, these impacts were considered acceptable once mitigation and offsetting measures were implemented.
Posted on: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 23:45:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015