Constant dredging not sustainable

Thank you for the subtle page layout in CCN393 demonstrating the Member for Terrigal’s double standard on marine seafloor destruction: FOR inshore dredging and AGAINST offshore mining.

Dredging in North Broken Bay (which is not “Ettalong”) will have significant adverse environmental impact in an area with listed threatened marine species adjacent Bouddi National Park.

Costing half a million dollars of public money every couple of years, the State Government should allocate this expenditure to other more broadly beneficial demands (eg. affordable housing, road replacements).

Other boats, including yachts of a suitable size for this estuary, are still using the channel.

Private ferry passengers may have assumed that humans can control a volatile and much-valued natural environment through dredging at disproportionate public cost.

However, they have alternatives, particularly the Patonga option.

More sensitivity to the North Broken Bay environment is needed.

Neither repeated dredging nor offshore mining for non-renewable energy is sustainable.

Email, Jun 13
HF Monks, Pretty Beach

1 Comment on "Constant dredging not sustainable"

  1. Would like to point out that if you look at the whole of Brisbane Water Broken Bay. There is no end of human influence to the flow and natural environment of the waterway. Waterfront housing causeways Oyster leases Atificial Islands Briges Halftide Rocks WW2 defence and two Ettalong Breakwaters (now covered with sand) unit blocks Ettalong point making an atifical headland roads blocking sand dunes (Esplanard) not forgetting three rounds of dreadging in the last 20 years this means the whole water way has been engineered if endangered species are thriving after this then maybe dreadging is beneficial and sustainable and a benefit to the community ,environment and local economy.

Comments are closed.