Unwise or clearly unacceptable?

Toondah Harbour quilt made of panels painted at the recent Welcome Back Shorebirds community event.

Publication by Walker Group of its Draft EIS for Toondah Harbour has prompted many people to write letters to Redlands2030 observing that the proposal is unwise, inappropriate and clearly unacceptable.

If you have something to say, email your letter to theeditor@redlands2030.net

Toondah plans are clearly unacceptable

I recently wrote to Minister Plibersek asking her to reconsider the decision of the then Minister for the Environment, Josh Frydenberg, to assess the Third Referral by the Walker Group for the development of Toondah Harbour by an environmental impact statement (EIS).  

Former Minister Frydenberg’s decision was made contrary to scientific and departmental advice that the Toondah proposal was “clearly unacceptable” because it would “result in permanent and irreversible damage to the ecological character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar wetland”

For more information listen to the excellent ABC Podcast, Background Briefing: The Bird and the Businessman, December 2018.  

Unwise use of Ramsar wetlands

The proposed reclamation of some 40 hectares of wetlands would not only destroy the ecological character of the Moreton Bay Ramsar wetlands but also put aspects of the Bay’s wider ecology at an unacceptable risk.  Clearly, the massive residential and other planned uses of reclaimed wetlands are not of “urgent national interest” and rather than satisfying the “wise use” provision of the Ramsar Convention, are indeed “unwise” as that term is identified under the Convention. 

The Australian Government has an obligation to honour both the substance and the spirit of the Ramsar International Convention as well as other environmental treaties.  Clearly, a decision to reconsider Minister Freydenbeg’s decision is a simple correction of a wrong decision. 

If Minister Plibersek has to decide whether to approve or not the Draft EIS, this will have wide implications not only across Australia but also internationally.

Dredging of the wetlands will destroy the natural defence they provide against storm surges, rising sea levels, floods and climate change.  Research shows that wetlands adapt to rising sea levels by increasing the height of soil layers while capturing even more carbon that helps mitigate the impacts of climate change.  Dredging will not only negate this protection, but result in the emission into the atmosphere of the carbon that has been stored in the wetlands ecosystems for centuries.

The Walker proposal also affects the continued survival of the eastern curlew and our iconic koalas which were both included in the Threatened Species Action Plan 2022-2032.  Mitigation strategies, including the use of offsets, raise many of the shortcomings documented in the Samuels Review of the EPBC Act.

Contrary to Walker’s media hype, the recently published Draft EIS essentially confirms the advice conveyed in each of the three Referrals by the Group under the EPBC Act that the proposed development of Toondah Harbour would have a “significant” impact on three Matters of National Environmental Significance being:-

• Wetlands of international importance,
• Listed threatened species, and
• Listed migratory species.

To approve Walker’s proposal for Toondah Harbour would see the continuation of the destruction of Australia’s natural flora and fauna highlighted by the Senate Committee’s Extinction Crisis Report, the Samuels Review of the EPBC Act and the latest State of the Environment Report that Minister Plibersek released after she assumed Ministerial responsibility after the Federal election. 

B.D.
Cleveland

Alarming loss of wetlands

Wetlands are being lost at alarming rate.​

With 35% loss globally since 1970, wetlands are our most threatened ecosystem, disappearing three times faster than forests.

Land-use change is the biggest driver of degradation.

And yet, the Toondah development partners (the Walker Group, Redland City Council and the State Government) intend to build on our Moreton Bay Ramsar site. We (and they) are supposed to protect not destroy a Ramsar site.

This will be a big loss to the environment and loss of migratory birds feeding and resting stops and other species.

The current ferry service is adequate and Queensland’s Department of Marine Safety has confirmed the current channel achieves safety requirements for ferry access to Toondah Harbour. So the dredging ferry channel bigger is not required.

The Draft EIS mentions does mention future sea rises in the future! High tides we are used to, and these are becoming more pronounced plus the global environment of flooding. When you start to change the composition of the waterways, tidal flows change and with the wash from marine vessels, this means high maintenance. The sea walls that will be needed will require ongoing maintenance and care and this will be down to Redlands ratepayers.

Lastly, the development will be ongoing for a vast period of time. The impacts of site work and building construction will mean impacts from heavy vehicle traffic for years. The traffic noise, vibrations and damage to air quality, (dust etc) will last for decades.

These are just a few of the impacts. In my view this draft EIS has not come close to justifying approval of the Draft EIS by the Minister. The proposed plans to construct 3,600 dwellings on Ramsar wetlands are not acceptable.

P.B.
Thornlands

Unwise development would be a tragedy

I oppose Walker Corporation’s inappropriate and environmentally destructive proposal.  I am a Brisbane resident who loves going to the Toondah Harbour and Stradbroke Island area for its beautiful natural environment.  Brisbane is unique as a capital city with a Wetlands of International Importance at its doorstep.

In my view, the attraction and value of Toondah Harbour to residents and visitors is in its unspoilt habitat and ecological significance.  It would be such a tragedy for this unique environment to be irreversibly damaged after surviving up to this point.  

Similarly, the surviving populations of shorebirds need their habitat protected more, not less. 

I refer to the publicly available scientific responses to the Draft EIS made by experts in environment, ecology and ornithology.  I believe they expose fundamental weaknesses in the arguments put forward by Walker Corporation.  I also refer to verified recent bird counts of critically endangered migratory shorebirds such as the Eastern Curlew, which expose significant under-estimation of current bird numbers by Walker Corporation.

Whilst I agree that an upgrade to the ferry facility is required, the size of the proposed development will clearly cause irreparable environmental damage both during construction and in the ongoing impacts of 3,600 apartments and marina located right on top of Ramsar-listed wetlands. 

I believe that a smaller development further away from the Ramsar boundary should be investigated as an alternative to this environmentally destructive proposal.

It would be a tragedy if Moreton Bay was to gain notoriety as a cautionary tale highlighting the environmental destruction caused by unwise development within Ramsar wetlands.  

H.C.
Ascot

Toondah Harbour plans are unwise

I completely oppose Walker Corporation’s inappropriate and environmentally destructive proposal for Toondah Harbour. 

Protecting shorebird habitat and Ramsar wetlands is vital for the survival of sea life, migratory birds and ultimately, human life. 

We can learn from the past. Overseas, migratory bird habitat has been systematically destroyed. Three decades ago in North America, conservationists and citizen scientists reported that the number of birds migrating south on their traditional flight paths were falling. What was once a wetland where the migratory birds  could forage and rest, was now a marina ( sound familiar?)

What once was a lake – a haven to recharge,  and for the younger birds making their first migration, a place of orientation, was now a shopping centre. 

The birds were dying from exhaustion and hunger now that they had nowhere to stop on their long flight south – and return. 

By definition, Ramsar wetlands are those that are representative, rare or unique wetlands, or are important for conserving biological diversity.

The Moreton Bay Ramsar site meets all of the nine criteria to achieve this listing.

The site includes one of the most extensive intertidal areas of seagrass, mangrove and saltmarsh communities on the eastern coast of Australia, and is valuable for supporting fisheries resources, waterbirds and marine megafauna of conservation significance.

The site regularly supports more than 50,000 waterbirds, representing at least 43 species of shorebirds and at least 28 migratory shorebird species.

Eastern Curlew feeding habitat cannot be replaced or offset. The destruction of any of their feeding habitat will result in a net loss of habitat for the species and is thus a significant impact. 

The Toondah Harbour proposal does not fit the definition of “wise use” of Ramsar wetlands. The destruction of internationally important wetlands and shorebird habitat for a private apartment complex and marina is incongruous with the objectives of the Ramsar Convention.

Please refuse this totally inappropriate development and show Australia that Environmental Protection is important to the Government

S.R.

Redlands2030 – 5 November 2022