"In the beginning"


The views expressed in this blog are not necessarily the views of the blog management, (on the other hand, they are not necessarily not the views of the blog management).

No effort has been made to stay within the bounds of the truth in this blog as it has always been the view of the management that the truth should never be allowed to stand in the way of a good story.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Traveston (Tragedy) Dam.

It is an oft stated and well recognized fact that Australia is amongst the driest continents on earth, sure in the far northern area there is a WET season that sees torrential rains each summer, but the fact remains that well over 75% of our land is very DRY.

What has tempted me to repeat this theme is yesterdays rejection of the proposed Traveston Dam by our Federal Governments Minister for the Environment, Mr Peter Garrett (who until recently was known only as the raucous lead singer for the rock group Midnight Oil) the decision was based on the possible danger to the habitat of a little know fish and turtle that currently make their home in the section of the Mary River which was to be dammed (BTW, nobody I have spoken to has ever seen the "lungfish" which is threatened).

I wonder which Peter Garrett made the decision?

Now I am a nature lover and as anyone who has read this blog for any length of time will know, I am very enamored with all things Australian whether they be animal, vegetable or mineral, this includes people and brings me to the point of this post.

The Mary River has historically flooded every 2 or 3 years causing a lot of very expensive damage to the town of Gympie where I live, this flooding has caused the "Mary Valley" to become a quite fertile area, home to many farmers who have already had their land resumed by the Queensland Government in preparation to building the dam.

This process has been going on for almost three years now and what with the cost of land resumptions, environment studies, engineering work to establish the viability of the project has already cost the government (read taxpayers) many millions of dollars, and has caused hardship for a lot of people who have been subjected to a need to relocate.

This post is not so much about whether the dam was good or bad, there is a line of thought that it was to be too shallow over much of its area thus allowing excessive evaporation in our hot climate, as a balance to that theory the beauty and recreational value would have been considerable, but the real issue here is the need for more water storage for the Sunshine coast and Brisbane areas, both of which struggle to maintain adequate water supply in the not infrequent dry years we have here.

This struggle is with the current population level of some 4 million people and it is one of the fastest growing population areas in the country so when we project forward just a few short years to a population of over 5 million the existing water storage will not cope, more water is needed!!!

The decision to ban the dam has met with delight from the many opponents the proposed dam had attracted, now I'm not going to pretend that had I been directly affected by the dam I wouldn't have been opposed to it too, but surely the greater good for the greater number should be what we look at.

The first reaction from the Queensland Government (lets hope its not just a knee-jerk reaction) was to announce another desalination plant on the Sunshine coast, these plants are expensive to build and to maintain, as opposed to a dam, where after the initial cost there is minimal cost for maintenance, the fact remains that we have a desperate need for more water in most cities and towns throughout Australia and it is the responsibility of this generation to provide the facilities needed for the future.

End of Rant???


Walker said...

We are talking about the govt here right?
Where the dumb elect the dumber.
Where we elect people who started off with headlines in rags such as the national equirer.

We decided we needed a Go Train.
Spent 50 million to do a study.
Hired someone to design and build it.
Then they changed thier minds.
Got sued paid another 40 million to the company in damages.
Now we are going to go through with it and may just hired the same company who sued us.

Buy Perrier, at least you can get ten cents back for the bottle

Dave said...

This happens everywhere Peter, not just in OZ... we do it here in the US every single day.
Government that THINKS they know what we need... only to screw it up beyond comprehension.

Puss-in-Boots said...

Do you know the first thing that struck me about Peter Garrett's decision was the fact that so many people had their lives disrupted...for nothing. People lost money or moved out and for what...sweet FA. For three and a half years this BS has been going on and to be quite honest, I'm glad it's resolved, whether for right or for wrong.

Apart from that, it's another nail in Anna Bligh's coffin...