Magnetic Island North Queensland
  Phone 0427 398 838 Tuesday 22nd o May 2018 on Magnetic Island editor@magnetictimes.com  
A young koala's beach adventure

May 29th 2008
Nelly Bay sand replenishment notice

Following is a message from Queensland Transport regarding forthcoming work to move sand at Nelly Bay Beach























Nelly Bay sand replenishment notice
 
3 comments
 
chasmac
May 30th 2008
Sorry to see that these works are now casually labelled "yearly". As if digging out the sand from the imaginary "sand trap" under the Constitution Bridge is some sort of sustainable activity which Queensland Transport feels compelled to carry on indefinitely. Year after year. Until there is no Esplanade left.
Why do they do it? Oh, they are required to by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. And what for? Oh well, because. Because GBRMPA says they must.
Of course QT has no plan. They don't even know why they do it. But every time they do the beach erosion starts up again because the frontal dune is constantly disturbed and will continue to be disturbed so long as they keep removing sand from under the bridge. This is pig-headed ignorant madness. Wilful vandalism carried on by a government bureaucracy completely unable to account for its actions.
 
Kylee
May 30th 2008
How flippant to say that these works are "casually" labelled. The State Govt saw fit to allow and eventually take over the construction of the harbour so they must wear the issues as a result of the breakwaters' existance. QT has been given the devil's job of having to oversee the organisation and delivery of these works as they are a integrial part of the Nelly Bay Harbour Operational Plan (NBHOP)that is governed by the regulations and requirements of both the EPA and GBRMPA. The NBHOP was the first of it's kind developed in Australia and ensures the sustainability of both the delicate marine enviroment and harbour operations. The NBHOP has a series of sub-plans such as water quality, dredging, coral monitoring, storm water, flora and fauna and subplan 13 which is "water surrounding the breakwater". Sub-plan 13 ensures that the operation of the harbour does not inhibit water flow around the breakwater island and under the breakwater bridge". Performance criteria to ensure that this is being adhered to is that water flow is maintained around the breakwater island and under the breakwater bridge at mean low water (-0.696 AHD). The bridge connects the mainland with the breakwater island hence water quality and flow is maintained. Due to coastal forces and the movement of sand it is necessary to undertake the yearly sand removal exercise from the sand trap. The sand that is removed is replaced on the foreshore at a site or sites that are determined by the EPA. The EPA undertakes a foreshore survey to identify the site or sites for the deposit of this sand. One would assume that the EPA and GBRMPA would have the enviroments best interests at heart, they afterall are the experts. So, there is a plan, always has been. Erosion has existed at Nelly Bay and around the globe since the day dot, whether the breakwater, etc has excelerated this is for bigger minds. Your ignorance of this process placing QT as the would be vandalist is embarrassing...for you.
 
chasmac
May 31st 2008
Both Kylee and I, and the Nelly Bay foreshore, suffer the consequences of our forced acceptance of the view that, "One would assume that the EPA and GBRMPA would have the environment's best interests at heart, they after all are the experts." The GBRMPA had little choice (back in 1988-89) but to accept a bodgy arrangement that no one knew the consequences of. Later, the Queensland government guaranteed the developers and the electorate that it would take over the site, come what may, when the harbour was completed. It even paid for half the work to be done. All that is on the record. But it isn't what was on the plan in the 1980s when the concept got rolling.
What Kylee may not know is that the Constitution Bridge is not an essential component of the harbour's circulation, hydrodynamics or water quality plan. In fact the bridge, which is only there to solve a constitutional question - converting a breakwater attached to land into a Queensland island in the Marine Park - is the main cause of the ongoing beach erosion problem. This problem can be solved literally with the stroke of a pen but only with federal legislation which would settle the constitutional question and make the bridge opening unnecessary. If the opening was then blocked off by stone in the way it was while the harbour was in limbo between 1990 and 2000, the hydrodynamics of the bay would soon settle, a smooth curving 'headland' of sand would re-form in that corner and some equilibrium would return.
But that's all too hard for the Queensland government so it will continue to spend around $100,000 a year on a scandalous vandalism of Nelly Bay - spurred on by the likes of Kylee who seem to believe that this is how it is supposed to be.


What do you think? Send us your comments.
Name
Email

Readers comments
FROM cp_articles
[ read more ]
The poll
Should Magnetic Island commission a sculpture to celebrate the achievements of Julian Assange?
98%       2%
Great idea No thanks


Cypress created this page in 0.31 seconds