A New Dam On The Mary???

[Cammy]

hey,

i heard a rumor on another fish forum, that they are wanting to put a dam on the mary river? is this true? anyone hear about this? apparently its gonna wipe out a very endanged turtle along with the lungfish and mary river cod of that area.

sorry if this has been posted before.

Cammo

[ffejsmada]

Cammy, have you been hiding under a rock for the last 2 years???????????;D;D
The dam wall will be at Traveston, just north of Cooran .
The government has bought heaps of properties out already.
Not a good thing but I suppose dams have to go somewhere.:-/

You should be able to find info, do a google search on "Traveston Dam".

ps, my toga is powering, put a bass in the tank yesterday, toga doesn't eat livies as yet, i've got glassy perchlet, hardyheads, rainbowfish, gudgeons, pacific blue-eyes in the tank with it, all caught out of my local creek. Cool hey?

Cheers Jeff.

[Didley]

Cammy, have you been hiding under a rock for the last 2 years???????????;D;D


Well said Jeff;D

[Cammy]

lol im an idiot, ahh well. Now i feel like a BIG fool!! you can tell i have never fished that area lol

Just had to check and confirm, as i supported the idea on this other forum ( aquarium forum )and i got hammered for it, they are trying to get people to sign this petition to stop the dam being built and they recon its going to stop it, because of the endangered turtle stocks.

heres teh link anyway to check the petition out, THE LINK (http://http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/741410919)

thats great news about your toga mate!and he has some nice tank mates;) ,
i recently put mine into a 6ftx24x28H (inches) tank and he is powering on!

Cammo

[Luc]

Can't see the dam endangering turtles and lungfish. Both seem to thrive in other dams in SE.

Cod may loose breeding sites but stocking and providing suitable nesting sites may fix that.

The turtle and lunfish argument is the same one that was tried to stop the construction of the Paradise Dam. Just a load of c--p.

Luc

[Cammy]

Can't see the dam endangering turtles and lungfish. Both seem to thrive in other dams in SE.

Cod may loose breeding sites but stocking and providing suitable nesting sites may fix that.

The turtle and lunfish argument is the same one that was tried to stop the construction of the Paradise Dam. Just a load of c--p.

Luc

Thats exacly what i said, except for the Paradise Dam bit.

try telling that to other peeps on the forum.

Cammo

[greenbeest]

Info here >>> http://www.themaryvalley.com.au/articles/cms/12/traveston---proposed-water-infrastructure

[Dirtysanchez]

Thing I don't comprehend is that they say it will endanger these creatures, and well god forbid, but umm, aren't they aquatic critters in the 1st place, so a bit of water would be OK for them ?

I appreciate on the other hand that this proposed dam isn't popular with farmers etc in the area, a few of which are members of this forum, and in an earlier thread things got a bit heated about their long term prospects

[shayned]

As long as there is adequate weed and lilly cover the lung fish will continue to breed. Still haven't read any official proof that Mary River Cod are breeding in the impoundments they have been currently stocked in to, but according to people more knowledgeable than me, they should be able to. Not sure on turtle.

[Outdoor Guy]

I would like to know where the new Bruce Highway will go,and how much we will have to pay for that and the dam

[Cammy]

here is a bit of info about the turtle.

The Mary River Turtle was only described by Cann and Legler in 1994. It is a monotypic (one of a kind) genus representing a very old lineage of turtles that has all but disappeared from the evolutionary history of Australia. It is one of Australia's largest species of freshwater turtle with specimens measuring in excess of 50 cm carapace (shell) length! The tail structure, particularly in males, is a unique feature that has been lost in all other modern turtle species! This species is able to absorb oxygen via the cloaca/vent whilst underwater which is a survival strategy, particularly for hatchlings and juveniles. To do this, they require the water to be highly oxygenated and therefore impounded or dammed areas do not provide suitable habitat for their survival! Dams also have the effect of dividing or fragmenting populations thus impeding the gene flow and causing a loss of diversity.

The main threatening factors to the survival of the Mary River turtle include slow maturation (20+ years), the continued use of historic nesting sites (even when nests are heavily predated by feral pests and trampled by livestock), loss of habitat and loss of specific foods associated with the lack of aquatic and riparian ecosystems. Do they really need a dam to add to all of this?

Prior to the announcement of this dam the Mary River Turtle was federally and internationally listed as endangered by the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) and the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2000), respectively. This listing is currently being revised using available data and, even before this dam is constructed, their status may be changed to ‘critically endangered’.

The Federal Minister for Environment and Heritage is the only person with the power to stop this dam. He has to be made aware of the potential destruction of this species, to be persuaded to act!


and it sounds like i brang up an old thread, so sorry for that. this was just the first i heard about it cause i live under a rock lol;D :P



Cammo X

[Dirtysanchez]

Cammo, are there any endangered species under this rock you live under ?

Just a heads up, if there are, get out before you get blamed for any sort of extinction ;)

[ssab1]

wont happen !! the powers to be are already realising it would be and expensive hole in the ground only fools build dams in a drought to solve water shortages.If and when it rains all our existing dams will fill and there wont be a water shortage .desalination maybe expensive but is the only way to have reliable drinking water in times of drought ,Ask the Arabs. cheers Alex

[bigboss]

good comments from all! As for Lung fish and turtles being endangered Wivenhoe dam is full of them. so dams won't affect them to much as long as they stay protected.The turtles i'm not so sure about, but IM sure that if they need oxygen they can go to the surface for a breather!(oxygen galore) now that this problem is solved, lets move on to the dam and the f$#kn greenys they have stopped over 10 dam proposals since the completion of wivenhoe,and we 're all here wondering why in this day and age of technology that we don't have a stable water supply . dont blame the govt blame the wankers that stop these dams from going ahead. hows it gonna be for our kids with no water?morons snap out of it.Mate I hope they build a dam on my property if its gonna save our kids or your kids give me the money and I'll move. really people take one for the team,think about others for a change,or go hug a tree.( I got my vest on )

[hondaguy]

my biggest concern about the dam is the effect it will have downstream when the natural flooding does not occur that the mary river current does regularly. Will the waters of the Great Sandy Straits and Hervey Bay Marine Parks be affected with out the extra nutrients that the flooding provides to the saltwater ecology? If so will it be for the better or the worse?

[Jim_Tait]

Seems likes there so many bloody experts capable of knowing that the Traveston Dam wont't impact endangered species that the government need not have engaged any to do an impact assessment - should have just asked the fishing news forum on Ausfish hey?? Makes me weep.:'(

For your information the turtles concerned are a riverine habitat (not dam - big difference!) dependent species restricted only to the Mary River catchment - i.e. endemic to it, occur nowhere else. While adults may be able to live in the artifical lake habitat created by the dam the prospects of successful breeding and recruitment of young are poor to non-existent due to their dependence on bank, flow and cover features only associated with a flowing riverine environment.

The fish concerned Mary River Cod are also endemic to the basin although they have been stocked elsewhere - they also are a riverine dependent species that has not be shown to breed successfully in impoundments. There are good indications that the area propsed to be flooded by the Traveston Dam contains the best remnant habitat and population of Mary River Cod in the main river system (some other remnant populations occur in isolated tributaries) - basically the construction of this dam will severely undermine the recovery prospects for this species in the main river channel - stocking is a poor cousin compared to having a breeding viable wild population of this species.

That Ausfishers would support a proposal that threatens such an iconic Queensland freshwater fish and proposes to dam the last free nflowing river representative of the south east Qld bioregion beggars belief!!

The main thing that needs to be addressed in dealing with the water drought in SE Qld is the people flood! Any bloody cow cocky knows that there is only so many head you can put in the bottom paddock - yet when it comes to the so called 'growth corridor' of SE Qld no one is prepared to confront the obvious reality that there are limits to growth. How bloody big a suburb do you want to live in in SE Qld anyway??? So we can have an extra 50-70 thousand people living in Brisbane / SE Qld each year are we prepared to continue damming all rivers within reach (or even out of reach - bloody absurb proposal to build pipeline to north Qld etc..) - and once we've dammed all them, then what?? desalination plants - and once we've built all them then what??? etc. etc..

Wouldn't it be more sensivble to manage growth? put real ecologicaly sustainable constraints on it, redirect it to more resource rich regional areas (if we must have growth) - growth for the sake of growth is the bloody philosphy of cancer and that is what is going to consume the natural ecosystem values of South east Qld - rather than more dams being in our kids interests I'd suggest that sustainability of our natural ecoystems is and the sooner we confront the bloody mythological belief in growth for ever is good paradigm - the better!!

[Jim_Tait]

Couple of links to some other background to the Mary River Dam issues posted in freshwater photos

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=109192 (http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=109192)

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=65091 (http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=65091)

Go and fish it and see if you still think damming it is a good idea!!

[TonyM]

Thanks for your insight Jim. You are probably amongst the most qualified to comment on this subject so it's always great to hear your opinion.

Whilst I'm no expert on the subject I can't help but think the impact of the dam could possibly stretch futher down the system - i.e. The estuarine reaches of the Mary and the Great Sandy Straights. Are you aware of any studies made in relation to that aspect?

Cheers
Tony

[Jim_Tait]

Tony,
aspects o fthe geomorphological impact of teh dam on the lower estuarine / sand straights system were covered by the IAS see IAS documents at;

http://www.qldwi.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=63

Like many elements of the IAS (those made public at least) you may find that there is a bit of 'dominant orientation' when it comes to the assessment of risks to the lower river system. General belief is that the dam is not big enough to have a major impact on the volume /frequency of big flood flows reaching the bottom of catchment so these parts of the system will not be significantly affected - not so for the project reach!

[TonyM]

Thanks Jim

Looks like I better put on a pot of coffee before I begin reading the IAS!

I'm also thinking I better fast track getting a yak so I can fish the upper section of my hometown river while I still can :-/

Cheers
Tony

[Little grey men]

Thanks for your input Jim, very insightful as per usual. But I just can't get over the thought of an arse breathing turtle...how cool is that ???

I suppose when people here of Lungfish and these bum breathing critters not doing so well in a proposed dam...people naturally think about how well lungfish and turtles do in other dams. But we really need someone with your obvious experience to show us the bigger picture and explain excactly what we'll be losing.

Cheers mate.

[shayned]

I've had a more than passing interest in Lungfish for some time and if anyone is interested in a little more info check out following 2 links. The first is written with a definite EPA lean as can be dtermined from use of language. I will try and find the study they butcher in terms of impoundment breeding of Lung Fish. I'll also try and find the reference material to the turn of the century stocking program which put fish into Pine Rivers which they gloss over as well.

The second link for Dr Kind and Mr Brookes shows a more balanced if drier peice of research which directly relates to the area in question. Both gentlemen have an extensive knowledge of this fish.

At this point I still believe Lung Fish will breed in impoundments with the right conditions being available. The big question as always with any translocated stocked population is a lack of genetic breadth in the population to allow it to deal with cataclismac changes.

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/n-forsteri.html

http://www.sunwater.com.au/pdf/BurnettWater-Archive/paradise_eis_appH_ReviewOfDraftLungfishReport.pdf

[Little grey men]

At this point I still believe Lung Fish will breed in impoundments with the right conditions being available.

Standing out at North Pine Dam every Sarturday morning, watching them surface all around you, it'd be hard not to think these things are breeding quite well in there. Or in the small creeks that run into it. I didn't see one on the weekend as the wind made a bit of chop on the waters surface, but where I fish we usually spot at least 3 or 4 in a morning.
Some are BIG COOTS too.
If someone wanted to do some research on these things, it'd be the place to do it. Still can't get a photo of one yet, I find myself just staring at them, they are really amazing creatures.

[shayned]

The first time one pops up near you and exhales can scare the crap out of you, but they are amazing to watch in the water and I'd hate to lose 'em.

[hondaguy]

Growing up on the Burnett river you use see them at night with your torch out of the water eating the grass or insects on the bank. Lived later at Gympie and the Mary river lungfish is of a smaller average compared to the Burnett river ones. March/April they use to school up for what I believed was breeding time. A school of 30-40 odd lungfish up to 1800mm long and smallest about 1200mm. Average fish caught or seen was around 900 to 1500mm long in the Burnett river and in the Mary river max size seemed to around 1200mm and average size of about 700-900mm. Do not know if they are identical species or slightly different strains. At time of flooding the lungfish are trapped at the bottom of the weirs as they try to head up stream. As a young fella you'd hop in the shallows and try to catch them by hand and get whacked by the tails big time. Paradise Dam has a large population near the dam wall and time will tell if the lungfish can breed upstream of it to the weir Gayndah. It will take time to see if the younger or smaller fish appear in this section of the Burnett river as I can not remember ever seeing smaller than 600mm long lungfish in this part of the river. All of this is personal observation over the years.

[Mike Delisser]

According to this Lungies are now able to be bred at a hatchery and in fact they even export them to collectors.
http://www.australianlungfish.com/

[Bender]

The dam is actually at the Traveston Crossing of the Mary river (on the western side of the ridge from Traveston) and not actually Traveston itself.

[Jim_Tait]

Guys personally I think the Lungfish issue is a bit of a sidetrack to the really threatened species which will be the Mary River Cod and Turtle. Notice I never mentioned lungfish in my post.

While there are still some residual concerns regarding lungfish i.e. drowning some of the last prime examples of free flowing riverine habitat in one of the two river basins they occur naturally in, and the ultimate breeding success in the modified habitat, I personally think they have proven themselves to be a resiliant and adaptable species as shown by the translocated populations that have established in other south east Qld impoundments - from a conservation biology popint of view a translocated population is still a poor cousin compared to a insitu wild one in its natural riverine habitat.

However, the Mary River Cod and turtle have a range of habitat and breeding requirements that tie them to unregulated river systems and riverine habitats for survival. These species are endemic to the Mary River. In the case of the cod besides some refugial populations in some disconnected tributary systems (which join below the tidal reaches) indications are that the best remnant (not stocked)main channel populations occur in the proposed impoundment area and ditto for the turtle. It would be a bullshiitting conservation biologist who would put their hand on their heart and say that drowning potentially the best remnant main channel habitat for both of these species bodes well for their recovery prospects!!

Even without the threatened species concerns, where is the sense of balance at a regional / river basin scale?? Basically all of the major rivers of the South East Qld bioregion (other than the Noosa which is unique and atypical of the bioregion) have been dammed or modified to buggery - think about it Burnett, Pine, Brisbane, Stanley, Logan Albert etc.. So which one are we going to keep in a semi natural 'free flowing' state to meet the conservation biology needs of the freshwater ecosystems of the bioregion?? Even the Mary has dams on its side tributaries, and a barrage on it lower freshwater reach - but still retains an essentially 'natural' flow regime and good examples of riverine habitat populated by native including threatened species.

It basically boils down to values - is the continued spread of urban sprawl in the west of Brisbane and surrounds promulgated under the 'growth is good' myth worth more than retaining an example of a (semi) wild SE Qld river complete with threatened species - I think not, but obviously the Govt with an eye on its future political fortunes thinks so!

The sad thing is under a continued 'growth for ever' paradigm it wont't stop with the Mary River - it will be additional desalination plants next , plus more dam proposals on the Baffle, upper Stanley, Tweed, Clarence?? where ever the engineers reckon they can bail up some more water to keep the urban masses getting more massive and the vested interests - property developers etc.. cashed up - and the people of SE Qld will live in one humongous suburb (running from about the NSW border to Hervy Bay) and those that like to fish freshwater can go to a local dam and catch fish stocked in a big pond, and those that like wild fish and rivers...can go to hell..or at least up to tropical Australia and the NT ..for the time being..until the growth paradigm gets us looking at all the 'water resource development' options there as well...already on the books!!

If you do like 'natural' SE Qld rivers you at least owe it to your self to go and visit the part of the Mary Thats going to be drowned before it goes under..it isn't all clapped out cow paddocks as some would have you belive.

Regards - Jim

[PinHead]

interesting comments Jim..BUT...the one you make about growth ..now how do you propose to "manage" it..tell people they cannot move here..tell kids they cannot move out of home and get their own property or should we tell them all where they have to live..build some communes perhaps?

[Jim_Tait]

There are numerous town planning / economic incentive / disincentive options ++ for controlling growth in an area if the political will is there.

People are 'told where to live' all the time in terms of where and how land is released and government infrastructure established (or not established) to support it. Even in free market economies if the broader population decides there are good reasons to do it - that is called democracy (BTW P**S off with your reference to communes if you are just trying to make me out to just be some lefty commo)

I would ask you how you intend to 'manage it' once the population density of SE Qld is past satuartion and the density of the constructed landscape has left no space for healthy natural ecosystems and quality of life has deterioated to such a degree that no one wants to live here any more?, or is that when you start suggesting that maybe there does need to be some controls on population size, density and the extent of the development 'footprint'?

Easier (and cheaper) to hang onto natural values and systems in the first place than try and re-establish them later!

[PinHead]

There are numerous town planning / economic incentive / disincentive options ++ for controlling growth in an area if the political will is there.

People are 'told where to live' all the time in terms of where and how land is released and government infrastructure established (or not established) to support it. Even in free market economies if the broader population decides there are good reasons to do it - that is called democracy (BTW P**S off with your reference to communes if you are just trying to make me out to just be some lefty commo)

I would ask you how you intend to 'manage it' once the population density of SE Qld is past satuartion and the density of the constructed landscape has left no space for healthy natural ecosystems and quality of life has deterioated to such a degree that no one wants to live here any more?, or is that when you start suggesting that maybe there does need to be some controls on population size, density and the extent of the development 'footprint'?

Easier (and cheaper) to hang onto natural values and systems in the first place than try and re-establish them later!

Oh, did i hit a nerve there???
Such language..very unbecoming.

How would I manage it? This is a democracy..if people want to live somewhere then they can..I am also a believer that we need to increase the population of this country dramatically..it is already shown by the skills shortage that we have.
I want a life and jobs for my grandkids and if some turtles have to suffer then I do not really care...obviously many animals suffered by building the dams we already have, by the mining etc for the products to build my house as well as the clearing of the land for same. I am afraid i cannot be hypocritical and stand and complain about land clearing or anything else similar (including dams) when I am living and using products that would not have been possible without these environmentally damaging processes.

Some can be sustainable but alas some cannot. As for the Traveston Dam, I am not in favour of it..if people did some simple maths they would realise that the Wivenhoe and Somerset dams have plenty of water in them. Don't use percentages but use megalitres and it will become obvious.

[turley]

Jim Tait, it is so nice to see someone talking some sense in this thread! Unfortunately it seems these days that an environmental assessment only needs to be conducted and the results of any assessment doesn't matter. The mary river cod (from all the evidence I have seen) are not successfully breeding in the stocked impoundments at the moment the mary river turtle, as perviously stated, is an endemic and extremely unique turtle that should be protected!

A reminder to everyone that Barra will not be allowed to be stocked in the proposed dam under current DPI legislation.

Pinhead, stop living upto your name and go have a read of some of Tim Flannery or David suzuki's books and then come back and tell me we still "need" to increase the population.

And with all of this, who is going to be complainning the most when the EPA starts to create marine parks in the freshwater systems to try and conserve the very "biodiversity" that this dam will destroy?

[PinHead]

Jim Tait, it is so nice to see someone talking some sense in this thread! Unfortunately it seems these days that an environmental assessment only needs to be conducted and the results of any assessment doesn't matter. The mary river cod (from all the evidence I have seen) are not successfully breeding in the stocked impoundments at the moment the mary river turtle, as perviously stated, is an endemic and extremely unique turtle that should be protected!

A reminder to everyone that Barra will not be allowed to be stocked in the proposed dam under current DPI legislation.

Pinhead, stop living upto your name and go have a read of some of Tim Flannery or David suzuki's books and then come back and tell me we still "need" to increase the population.

And with all of this, who is going to be complainning the most when the EPA starts to create marine parks in the freshwater systems to try and conserve the very "biodiversity" that this dam will destroy?

I have no intention of reading their books...especially Flannery's..and I will still stand by what I said..just because my opinion varies from the greenies viewpoint does not make it wrong.

We still need to increase the population...simple economics.

[Jim_Tait]

I have no intention of reading their books...especially Flannery's..and I will still stand by what I said..just because my opinion varies from the greenies viewpoint does not make it wrong.

We still need to increase the population...simple economics.

Yeah just because satelite imagery says our planet is a globe - doesn't mean your world ain't flat, right Pinhead? Reading books now that would be radical - especially ones that don't fit our world view, never know where it would take you!

Is increasing the country's population the only way to overcome skills shortages? It might sound a bit too 'socialistic' for those on the conservative side of politics but I thought investing in the education of the nation was how skills shortages were overcome??? Know the previous federal government certainly didn't believe in it - hence the shite were in now - oh well bring in some more shkilled migrants hey?

So if increasing the country's population is the answer (what was the question?) at what magic number does all our problems get solved (and how does it work) is it a poopulation of 50 million, 100 million...hell go for broke (literally) lets try 1 billion + in Australia (China's population) or do we need more?- you describe to me now how the landscape looks, how the economy booms, how every one's educated and most importantly (well to me and lots of others on this web site) what's the fishing like???

Growth for the sake of growth is the philosophy of cancer - hell look at human growth settlement patterns in a satelite image it even looks like cancer - massive undifferentiated growth - consuming the nutrients from the living system around it and excreting system dysfunction downstream.

Time we confronted it, drew a few lines in the sand to say enough is enough. No more dams in SE Qld especially on the Mary would be a good line to draw ! (knew I could get back on topic if I tried,.. just that you light my fuse Pinhead and you know it!!

[Poseidon]

You have summed it up pretty well once again Jim, and I thank-you for the way that you continue to approach these issues and put some real facts forward for the listeners on here.

Regards Cameron.

[Cammy]

You have summed it up pretty well once again Jim, and I thank-you for the way that you continue to approach these issues and put some real facts forward for the listeners on here.

Regards Cameron.

Agreed!

Cammo

[PinHead]

Yeah just because satelite imagery says our planet is a globe - doesn't mean your world ain't flat, right Pinhead? Reading books now that would be radical - especially ones that don't fit our world view, never know where it would take you!

Is increasing the country's population the only way to overcome skills shortages? It might sound a bit too 'socialistic' for those on the conservative side of politics but I thought investing in the education of the nation was how skills shortages were overcome??? Know the previous federal government certainly didn't believe in it - hence the shite were in now - oh well bring in some more shkilled migrants hey? Perhaps if you read some relevant literature regarding this, you may find out that they introduced many incentives for apprentices..such as topping up pay, refund of TAFE fees, health card etc etc and $850 per annum in tools. It take 4 years to complete most apprenticeships...we need skilled workers NOW

So if increasing the country's population is the answer (what was the question?) at what magic number does all our problems get solved (and how does it work) is it a poopulation of 50 million, 100 million...hell go for broke (literally) lets try 1 billion + in Australia (China's population) or do we need more?- you describe to me now how the landscape looks, how the economy booms, how every one's educated and most importantly (well to me and lots of others on this web site) what's the fishing like??? somewhere around 40 million should be a good mark.

Growth for the sake of growth is the philosophy of cancer - hell look at human growth settlement patterns in a satelite image it even looks like cancer - massive undifferentiated growth - consuming the nutrients from the living system around it and excreting system dysfunction downstream.

Time we confronted it, drew a few lines in the sand to say enough is enough. No more dams in SE Qld especially on the Mary would be a good line to draw ! (knew I could get back on topic if I tried,.. just that you light my fuse Pinhead and you know it!!

Your attempts at humiliation and sarcasm are rathhr feeble Jim..I would have more respect if you opposed the dam for the sake of the residents that will be affected by losing their properties and livelihoods..but for turtles?? Now that certainly does not justify either building the dam or not. I am a people person..the effect on peopel is of the utmost importance as far as I am concerned.

Just blow the fuse out Jim..I don't let anyone light mine.

[tunaticer]

I actually think the dam wall will be in the wrong location. It should be downstream about 8 miles of Gympie and force the town into moving to a FLOOD FREE ZONE! Every time it gets a decent shower they town has 3m of water in the main street. God knows Gympie needs a face lift at the very least, even Dayboro is presentable these days.

As for the fish and turtle stories..........I'm sure they will write e=xactly the same story they do in every other catchment and its always good news.

Jack.

[TonyM]

As for the fish and turtle stories..........I'm sure they will write e=xactly the same story they do in every other catchment and its always good news.

Jack.

Hi Jack,

Sorry, you lost me there!

Who is "they"? and what's the story they'll write?

Cheers
Tony

[turley]

Just want to thank jim again for his reply.

Pinhead, I understand your people point but we (as a community as a whole) fail to realise that our resources are limited and can only support a certain number of people physically on this planet. Because of the age of this country (Australia) we do not have the nutrients for our agriculture to support a large population hence the reason the USA has millions of people more than us even though it was settled around a very similar time by white men.

You can read books and disagree with their views. But until you read them you cannot make a truely educated opinion. By no means do I agree with everything that Tim Flannery has to say but he certianly has many valid points which should be considered.

Already the economics of uncontrolled growth of human populations is costing us in the form of global warming and the subsequent control measures that will be enforced in an attempt to slow the effect. Economics cannot continually rely on continual population growth or we will simply over populated the planet and most likely die out. My personal lifestyle will suffer from increased population in the form of inflated housing prices, increasing disease rates and general decreased health due to the density of people living in the modern urban environment.

I am by no means a "greenie" but I hope that I understand enough of the australian ecosystem to realise that it is as important to my lifestyle as it is to conservation. The mary river dam will have dramatic impacts on both my lifestyle and conservation.

[Ozwald]

Jim
Good stuff mate, keep it up!
Oz



We still need to increase the population...simple economics.

I think "simple" is probably the right description for this.

[PinHead]

it is obvious from this thread why infrastructure in this country is pathetic. Everytime something is proposed someone jumps on the bandwagon and sprouts that we might harm a butterfly or some other fauna or flora and millions are spent on environmental impact studies and then nothing is done. No one wants wholsesale destruction, however this environmental stuff is way out of hand. You want better roads and other facilities then perhaps the NIMBY syndrome and the green groups need to be put in their place for once and let's move ahead with some of these projects.

[elprez]

What if you dont want all the infastructure. I dont want super highways to the front door of my quiet little fishing shak. By the way I bought that shack because it was surrounded by national park, water front to a ramsar area, now a marine park, and all because of the Mary river delta. No sewerage, no water and never will be. Why should I have to compromise for those that want everyone to fall in line with the SIMPSONS mentality and live in Springfield. That reminds me that recently Ive been working in the burbs and see the biggest trailer boats of all time sitting in front yards yet on the coast the boats on average are much smaller. Theres a word for that P####e envy isnt there. I think to releive fishing pressure you may need to releive pressure put on the fishermen by themselves. Those that are always "targetting" a species, have to catch fish to justify expenses, invite a "mate"fishing then hit him up for fuel, this is fishing pressure. Yep I go fishing for fun and to see the sights.

[PinHead]

geez elprez..I thought all the bigger boats were tied up at marinas along the coast

[elprez]

trailers on or off ?

[Mike Delisser]

Jim you make a lot of good points and know doubt know your subject well but I still feel I'm being conned by the "green side" of the anti Trav Dam movement to a certain extent.
I'm being told it will mean the end of the Lungfish (not by you) and I know thats not true. We will never see Mary Riv Cod again and I know that's thats not true either. It never gets enough water to fill, they're grasping at straws here. Arse breathing Turtles, well I concede that as I wouldn't recognise one if it bit me on my arse.
And I don't blame anyone displaced by the dam from protesting, sh#t I would if I was in their shoes.

I've seen a couple of sections of the Mary to be flooded and I'd hardly call them pristine, they showed the effects of many years of farming and even in one spot a farmer had strung barbed wire accross the river to keep his cattle in (not wishing to judge but true).
I have seen some truely pristine sections of the Mary and tributaries that do support reasonable populations of the cod and they're many miles away from the proposed dam and won't be effected.
In fact this whole process may force the Q Gov to let more hatcheries breed the cod because as it stands now they have only given out one licence to do so and supply is limited (I think, somebody please correct me if I'm wrong).
Every weekend in summer thousands of people flock to our dams in Qld for recreation. There were a couple of thousand spent Easter at Somerset, it was overflowing, house full sign was up, you and others might not think that sounds like fun but you know what, those campers did, and they'll be back again and again. A lot more people will use the dam than currently use the river.
I'm not pro the dam or against it, I don't believe any Gov Minister that says those 2 new dams and the water grid will drought proof us either. I just don't like the gov or greenies trying to pull the wool over my eyes.
Cheers

[Jim_Tait]

Mike,

you have presented a number of considerations concerning the dam that would justify a 'neutral' type attitude that probably is fairly representative of a lot of South East Queenslanders and I need to be honest in saying that until I got to know the system and issues in a bit more depth I was fairly ambivalent (although generally opposed to damming anymore rivers) about putting a dam on what I considered a fairly flogged river system. Responding to points you raised in turn:

Lungfish - I don't think this dam will be the end of them in the Mary River though I would lament the further loss of their natural riverine habitat in one of only two river basins they're endemic to

Never see Mary River Cod again? - I never claimed that, but I do believe that the proposed dam reach contains some of the best remnant habitat and populations in the main river channel and is critically important for the recovery prospects of the species in the main river system (i.e. not tributaries). As far as I'm concerned as a conservation biologist, if you are trying to recover a fish called the Mary River Cod - then the re-establishment of self sustaining populations in the Mary River is the ultimate goal for success. There are populations in tributaries (I’ve fished for them there too - legally under permit) - but these populations are not large, or secure and by no means guarantee the future of the species. The largest populations in Coondoo and Tinana Creeks are functionally isolated from the Mary River as the confluence of this creek system with the Mary (besides going past barrages) joins in the tidal estuary reach - so fish in this system cannot provide recruits to the main Mary River. The other tributary 'strongholds (sic)' - Six Mile Creek (small and has lack of flow issues) and Obi Obi Creek (upstream dam, water quality and aquatic weed issues) - also do not provide populations that secure the future of the species - events like disease outbreaks or catchment wide bushfires or water quality collapses could undermine the viability of these creek based populations - and their is some recent anecdotal information that not all of these creek populations are tracking as good as you would hope (why only anecdotal information? - because Governments - State and Federal have never fully funded their statutory recovery plan for the species and have bugger all good data on them!) - Interesting to note that the proposed dam reach and its cod habitat / populations lies equidistant between two of these sub catchment tributary cod populations (Six Mile and Obi Obi) - one could dare suggest that makes the populations and habitat concerned a critical asset for the recovery prospects of the species in the upper Mary River catchment.

Mary River Turtles - I'm not a turtle expert but I do know from talking to my turtle expert colleagues that similarly to the cod, the proposed dam reach represents the best remnant populations and habitat in the Mary River (reasons being the things that make it a good(?) dam site also make for good turtle and cod habitat - i.e. steeper sided valley=remnant riparian vegetation, snags & deeper holes, and base flow = better water quality and less exotic aquatic weed dominance), and also that this species forms breeding aggregations in key sites - the only documented good one to date being in the proposed dam reach) - to me the survival of a unique endemic aquatic animal species is the sort of constrain that human populations have to accept and work around if we are going to have a sustainable relationship with the earth - which in the end isn't about altruism but saving our own arses!

Pristine River reaches ? - I would be the first to agree that the Mary River is by no means 'pristine' - but I'm not particularly aware of anyone making that claim? - certainly not me - but what I do know after nearly 3 decades as a nature conservationist is that nature conservation value is all relative- when it comes to representative rivers in the South East Queensland bioregion we are not exactly over endowed with choices - I have flown and canoed the Mary from top to Bottom and many other rivers in the bioregions and I can post some photos (and I will) of reaches in the section to be affected by the dam which one could believe were 'near pristine' - and were complete in terms of still harboring threatened native species - certainly there is no other large SE Qld river system that still has the hydrological integrity of the Mary and as most Ausfishers would appreciate this is one of the key things that maintains aquatic biota - yes there are some truly 'near pristine' tributary reaches in the Mary River system but for reasons discussed above they do not provide representative and comprehensive conservation prospects for the broader Mary River - in terms of balance (which we always hear the development lobby saying 'we need a greater sense of') - isn't it fair enough to expect that we can keep one large river system in SE Qld 'free' flowing? - by the way have you really traveled the full length of the Mary River concerned or just had a bit of a squiz upstream and downstream from accessible road crossings? (like most people including many that have previously been involved in accessing it ecologically)

Cattle on River Banks - yes cattle on river banks can do ecological harm - but hey not all of the Mary River bank is subject to cattle grazing, some of it has been rehabilitated in the last couple of decades (the Mary River was where the Integrated Catchment Management ICM movement was born in Qld) and by the way total cattle exclusion can also be damaging where some of your worst ecological weeds are exotic pasture grasses - as I have witnessed on the Mary where Para grass dominates the water's edge or (hot fire generating) Guinea Grass / Green panic dominates the upper levee where cattle grazing has been totally excluded in some reaches - therefore don't write a system off just because it still has some cattle grazing the riparian zone - NB there are worst cattle flogged/ bank collapsed / sediment in filled reaches downstream and upstream of the dam reach.

Hatcheries to breed cod - well my response to this is a little bit like the old argument do you fix injuries received by people falling off a cliff by putting a fence at the top of the hill or an ambulance down in the valley?? Hatcheries are definitely the latter, still a necessary thing but no where near as valuable as re-establishing natural breeding and recruitment. Hatcheries should have been fully funded by Government anyway as part of their statutory commitment to the Mary River Cod Recovery Program - so to offer them know as some sort of sweetener for accepting the drowning of some of the best remnant main channel habitat and populations is a bit rich! Indications are that the reach concerned could with further management investment be one of the best places for re-establishing (if it is not already happening - we don't know because no one has looked hard enough) natural breeding and recruitment of the species - based on the fact that remnant populations appear to have hung on in it better!

Dams for recreation - Dams are great for recreation (not really my choice admittedly but keeps the masses happy) - but hey so are rivers!! They're what I grew up on and dare I suggest most of the other freshwater fishing Ausfishers over 35 years of age. By the way the fact that the Government has now purchased 75% of the land required for the dam (what ever happened to due process ?? - how can they proceed as though the dam is a goer when the IAS has not even been reviewed as yet or National Matters of Significance issues passed by the Feds??) - means that we could develop an outstanding State River recreational Park for all to enjoy (and rehabilitate) the Mary River once we knock the Traveston Dam on the head hey?? what do you reckon ;D ?

Drought Proof SE Qld - well like you I think this is a crock of ka ka - the only way we could drought proof the SE Qld population would be to get them to live within the constraints of the regions natural resources - that means slowing the population influx for one - or if you are an advocate of growth (which I'm not!) do as the Qld Govt Opposition has suggested (only yesterday) and direct people to where the natural resource base including water and land isn't as constrained i.e. North Qld (sorry to my fellow NQ landers):-X .


Importantly lets keep the discussion about Traveston Dam going, communicate the issues to fellow Queenslanders - because when it comes down to the line (which it will soon) it is going to need a lot of us to stand up and be counted in opposition to the dam if we are going to tell Anna what to do with her dam proposal!!

Regards and happy river loving - Jim

[Jim_Tait]

For those that think the section of the Mary River to be drowned by the Traveston Dam Proposal is all clapped out cow paddock the following is an admittedly selected presentation of images from the affected reach - showing areas where riparian and instream habitat values are more there than not - with further managment investment this part of the upper Mary River could really be recovered to something truly representative of a natural south east Qld River for all to enjoy. NB at the time these photos were taken (December 2006) flows were really low and weed infestation rife - so these sites wwere not looking as good as they now would be after the recent flushing flood flow - enjoy Jim

[Jim_Tait]

More photos all heading downstream

[Jim_Tait]

and more...lots of good fishy habitat - beats an impoundment hands down!!

[Jim_Tait]

Continuing right along...

[Jim_Tait]

and there's more...

[Jim_Tait]

And for any red blooded, patriotic sweetwater Ausfisher - these guys should be the source of our committment to keep the river looking like what it does in the above photos8-)

Regards and tight lines - Jim

[Mike Delisser]

Excellent stuff Jim, it's great to see such a combination of passion and knowlege, more power to you.
Cheers

[Jim_Tait]

Intersting media release from the Qld opposition today - if your going to have and need to service SE Qld population growth their proposal definiately needs assessment given the environmental, social and economic costs of Traveston!

see link http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/05/2235752.htm

[Metalstorm]

Not a rumor mate. Their already trying ways to farm the species of fish and other aquatic life. Lots of people up there are going to loose their homes, farms ect. Just another knee-jerk reaction form the Gov:-/ .Jays

[Straitened Out]

I'm an unabashed NIMBY, living on the banks of the Mary and enjoying fishing in the Sandy Strait [hence the moniker!]. The river where I live is certainly not in pristine condition, though it's getting better and I would suggest this is a good reason for opposing the Traveston Crossing dam. A 4% reduction in flow is still a reduction!!!

[Jim_Tait]

Hey Guys just a reminder that State Department (EPA, DPI, NRW) approval for this dam proposal has not yet come through and that the supplementary study to the impact assessment is about to hit the desk in the next couple of weeks - so keep talking to friends and colleagues and your local MP and media outlets about why this dam is a bad idea !!

Regards - Jim

[CHAPPY]

Last week the Frazer Coast Council was knocked back by the EPA for a proposed sewerage treatment plant on the banks of the Mary river. The reason given was that the EPA's own report suggests that at certain times of the year there will be NO FLOW due to the Traviston Dam. This is in total contradiction to the EPA released data which indicartes only a 4 percent decrease. This would also decimate the fruit and verg growers down stream and increase the cost of same to the Brisbane consumers.

The effect on fishing in the sandy straits will be the same as the study on the Clarence.

Rainwater tanks, stormwater management, are all more practical solutions.

This dam is not for recreational purposes this was stated publicy at a local meeting. So forget boating, sailing etc. on this dam.

This is strictly for Brisbanes water supply. How big a back yard does Brisbane need?

Chappy

[Lovey80]

"This is a democracy..if people want to live somewhere then they can"

I agree pinhead but does that really have to be at the cost of others?

The people of the Mary river area should NEVER have to have thier backyard dammed until every other avenue has been exhausted in the Brisbane Area. Has every house got a rain water tank? Has recycling been exhausted? (If anyone doesnt want to drink recycled water move to an area that can sustain itself) Has Desalination been exhausted? Of course the answer to these questions is NO so until the answer to all of these is YES then leave other area's of QLD alone.

Sure everyone has the right to live where they want. They also have the right to pay for that privelege (by way of the costs of the above solutions and level 6 water restrictions permenantly if need be). If the population is to double (fine) then those that wish to live in already saturated area's need to pay for the right.

The people of Brisbane (to which I am one) need to realise that they live in an area where currently water is not sustainable (without restriction) and if more development is intended then sacrifices have to be made. Plain and simple!

It annoys me that some people in Brisbane feel they have the right to live how they want at the expense of others. If they want to live in Brisbane they need to realise that they need to do certain things for that to happen...... One of those things isnt daming someone elses back yard!

I don't want to see endagered species die either but like pinhead I agree that people come first in most cases. If this was the last straw then i'd say "Go ahead and dam the Mary" but the fact is it's not the last straw and many other things can be done!

Cheers

Chris

[Straitened Out]

It interests me that the vast majority of people whose homes will be inundated exist on tank water. How can we justify displacing them to give "town water" people more water?

[TimiBoy]

Government should buy back all the houses where the Wolfdene dam was going to be. Make Kebbin pay for it. He's the effwit who put them there in the first place. Then the Mary'd be fine, Brisbane'd be fine, we'd all be swimming in the stuff.

I swear the amount of trouble that one decision has caused (he was a key driver) - if I saw that perky bespectacled little twit bobbing up and down on my front doormat I'd snot the bastard.

My two cents.

Tim

[TimiBoy]

This idea that we should artificially control the growth of a community (Brisbane) is visionless and just plain daft. What happens when we limit growth? Well, housing prices go up. Thus rents go up, and those who don't have the money are forced out the bottom.

Those who are forced out have lost everything trying to survive, so cannot afford to move.

Increased crime, homelessness, mortgage stress, and so on. We're already seeing it given not enough land is being released nation wide.

There is sooo much work in SE Qld, and some folks want to stop workers coming here to do it? Staff are costing me a fortune, so guess who's paying their wages? You guys! But then the same people complain about prices going up.

Simple Economics. Very simple.

Tim

[Jim_Tait]

Simple Economics. Very simple.

Tim

Thats the problem - its so freaking simple its retarded!

[Mike Delisser]

This dam is not for recreational purposes this was stated publicy at a local meeting. So forget boating, sailing etc. on this dam.
Chappy
Not being built for recreational purposes is the info I have Chappy, same as every dam. I saw a proposed plan once that had a 3 lane boat ramp.
Mike

[TimiBoy]

Here's my latest happy thought.

After building this dam, stealing Council's water assets and melding them into a bureacratic jumble of sh!t, laying a gazillion pipes and and playing in the sandpit... wait for it...

They will privatise the lot.

Happy Days.

Tim

[tunaticer]

Personally I think the dam should be built at a much better location about 20km downstream, there is a perfect set of adjutments naturally needing bridging and the best part Gympie will have a high tide mark for most of the yr. That town needs replacing.

Jack.

[Cammy]

Geez this thread is still going, what have i started! althought its good in a way for all the new members to know whats happening and no how they can help to prevent this from happening.

Cam