Mark posted last week on Queensland, dams and the politics of water. Now there’s another reason to oppose dams in Southern Queensland’s insufficient watershed areas - proposed damming of the Thompson Mary and Burnett rivers is going to destroy the habitat of the Australian lungfish, which is actually one of those fascinating transitional creatures anti-evolutionists are always asking biologists to show them.
A groundswell is starting on leftie science blogs to write letters to our politicians about saving these rare creatures from extinction. Email addresses for our relevant pollies are here.
Considering that wind farms in Victoria were blocked by the Federal Environment Minister because of alleged danger to the endangered yellow-bellied parrot, how can the mob in Canberra justify letting this one past the keeper?
Well, the parrot is cute you see and the lungfish is slimy and wet. They are just not cuddly enough.
Thanks for posting this tigtog. I’ll be emailing the relevant pollies this evening.
I think that should read, “alleged possible danger to a single yellow-bellied parrot if it takes the unprecedented move of flying out of its usual territory in the next 5 years.”
Considering that wind farms in Victoria were blocked by the Federal Environment Minister because of alleged danger to the endangered yellow-bellied parrot, how can the mob in Canberra justify letting this one past the keeper?
Erm, because the Environment Minister’s discretion under the relevant legislation (EPBC Act) is just wide enough to enable its use for political purposes.
Looking at the federal electorates in the regions to be affected by the dams is probably (unfortunately) going to give a better idea of how this will turn out than a look at the biodiversity concerns in the area.
Just saying.
comicstriphero, you are totally correct on the difference in political will between the two situations, and I am sadly aware that in Victoria the locals hated the wind farms whereas in SEQ the locals love the dams.
It’s still a hypocitical abuse and neglect respectively of the environmental override powers.
* * *
Shaun, how can you say this fish isn’t cuddly?
image from here
I support fully the continuation of the lungfish.
But is it in danger?
It seems to me that they are pretty hardy creatures. The links provided hardly make a strong ’scientific’ case for their damnation.
In QLD we have just had the farce about the supposed demise of every platapus in Obi Obi Creek. Hasn’t happened. They simply went to different parts of the creek. The lungfish are likely to do something similiar, surely?
PLATYPUS (sorry)
Good post tigtog. I will likewise email the pollies.
If Brisbane is like Melbourne, the some amount of water falls in the metro area as falls in the catchments. We should be recycling this water rather than flushing it out to sea complete with contaminants like plastic bags that kill the fish and birdies.
Ideally, we would also be recycling and drinking our toilet water which is something other countries do in an economical fashion. But sadly our state governments think recycled piss wouldn’t be a vote winner. Wimps.
wpd- your reference to “platapus” says all we need to know about your knowledge of Australian ecology.
I don’t think you mean the Thompson. It runs through Longreach. Although it is brackish enough, I don’t think I have ever heard of any Lungfish in the Thompson/Barcoo.
I think you mean the Mary.
And we need to know about your knowledge of Australian geography. Typos can happen.
wpd, this Sydneysider’s knowledge of Qld geography sucks. Sorry about that. Have edited to present more correct information.
As to their danger, they were listed as endangered before this dam proposal, so it certainly isn’t going to help.
From the post’s link to Pharyngula:
They’re not an especially resilient species, unfortunately.
Tigtog, i am quite sincere when I say I am worried about the future for the lungfish.
I should point out that I was opposed to Woolworths building at Maleny until I spoke to environmental scientists who put me straight.
By the way, the Email list includes one:(The Hon. Robert Evan, Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing, Queensland Government.)
It is wrong. The person is Robert Schwarten who in a previous life as an organiser for the Queensland Teachers’ Union crossed the Thompson, about 1100kms from Brisbane, many times a year.
As a committed conservationist, he would know that any dam across the Thompson would hasten the demise of the Coongie lakes in NSW.
But the EMAILS will give him a good laugh if he ever gets to see them.
I am still tending to the view that the lungfish is a great survivor. I know the area well and believe you me the water levels fluctuate enormously. Mary River floods are legendary.
Nevertheless I agree that sewerage ought to be recycled etc
comicstriphero and tigtog,
I don’t believe that a majority of bass coast local on a whole had a problem with windfarms.
The liberal/national party were behind a campaign that many would conclude was lead by Ted Bailleu and Peter McGauran (The guy who switched camps)
The liberal/nationals (and in McGaurans case he changed shirts from one to the other), are pushing out lies that wind energy is not cleaner than coal.
[link]
This is rubbish, as an engineer, (and refer to any electrical/aerospace/mechanical engineers for a proper understanding), I know that coal is a shockingly inefficient source of power generation.
It only has two things going for it. 1. Infrastructure already exists. 2. Lignite (Brown Coal) is in abundance.
Ian campbell’s use of Federal legislation to run a political campaign that compromises the environment, locally and globally will be shown to be a crime against humanity. When significant breakup of the antarctic ice sheet occurs, seriously raising water level of oceans around the world.
I hope there is some provision for forcing consistency, or using inconsistency over this issue of the lungfish to overturn the previous decision on the Bald Hill windfarm.
Cuddly is different from huggable. I mean, the guy’s shirt is all wet. Still they are magnificent creatures.
Steve Munn, I don’t what you do for a crust, and in a sense, I din not care. But your backhaner, re my knowledge or lack therefore of Australian ecology, is unwarranted.
It would seem you have jumped very quickly to unjustified conclusions. You seem to do so on the basis of a single spelling error for which I apologised.
.
On the other hand, you Emailed ‘the pollies’ about a river that was never going to be dammed and did so the basis of two links that were, to say the least, incestuous.
And by the way, you accepted that Email list as gospel.
I hope you are not in academe.
I will return the insult. Your inattention to detail:
“says all we need to know about your knowledge of Australian politics and geography’.
Generally, however, I agree with the points you make.
steve, it’s unnecessary to be so combative. You can demonstrate your ability to make a point without having to belittle other commenters.
Please Kim, not ‘belittle’ but attempt to so do. And I will refrain from further comment.
Matthew Wright,
That’s not what McGuaran said; he has half a point (if only half a one). Without doubt, wind farms are cleaner than coal. Where McGuaran is unfortunately quite correct is that they are not (with current technology) in any way able to replace coal at anything like a realistic cost.
That said, the Bald Hill windfarm decision was clearly about politics, not the environment.
Oh, wpd, I think you’ve taken what I wrote the wrong way. “Attempt” was meant to be implied.
I think LP should avoid pointing to US websites which are politically uninformed when it comes to Australia. Pharyngula’s blog (which is wonderful and which I read almost daily) is typically US when it comes to this sort of issue. His posts talk as if it is the Federal Government which is damming the rivers and the list of people to email includes Anthony Albanese. Now AA is a wonderful bleeding heart pollie but he is a memebr of the Labor Party (he represents Grayndler) so the point of emailing him alone out of all the Federal ALP rather escapes me. If LP is going to encourage people to participate in these sort of campaigns please supply your own lists of pollies to contact and don’t rely on US ones (however worthy).
Mea culpa, Andrew (although top of Pharyngula’s list is actually Senator Ian Campbell, who is actually the Federal Minister for the environment and such, and the Queensland pollies listed seem to be the relevant ministries). I too have no idea what Albanese is doing on the list.
Now the kids are back at school I’ll have a bit more time to chase up such resources for myself properly, but yesterday was just a tidge hectic in a “Mum where’s my pencilcase/lunchbox/saxamophone” kind of way.
While we are clearing up errors, it is Julian McGauran (Peter’s brother) who switched from the Nats to the Libs. Peter has so far not done so. Not sure which of them (or maybe both) was stirring up hatred of wind farms in Gippsland.
I guess if the issue ever comes to the Senate we can assume that Steve Fielding will be keen to support the dams to rid the world of the evolutionary evidence.
Yes, alright, sorry wpd. I objected to your “she’ll be right” attitude.
It isn’t just the lungfish that matters in issues like this and whether or not the lungfish is seriously effected or not is just one piece of the jigsaw. Most native fish etc do not like dams for various reasons, one being that the water at a depth of only a metre or two is too cold. As such the deep water ends up being a dead zone- it might as well be desert.
Dams also effect the proper seasonal flows of rivers, the crucial cycle of booms and busts and the inundation of floodplains. So the whole river ecology ends up being destroyed and this helps weed plants and feral fish which can then come to dominate the new ecology.
The lungfish is really just a “hook” on which environmentalists can rally public support to stop an unnecessary development (see previous post) that has far wider ramifications than the welfare of a single fish species.
Steve, as I have said on a number of occassions, I have not seen, on this thread at least, any scientific arguements on why the lungfish will not survive a dam.
Maybe it won’t. But it is a hardy bugger. And if it is under threat I will be at the barricades.
If you Google ‘Mary River Queensland’ and then click on the ‘Catchment Map’ you will see the extent of the Mary River catchment. It is huge, about 7 000 sq kls. {Sorry, I don’t know how to create links}.
On that map you will see the Borumba Dam. Lungfish still exist in this area. Personal experience.
I also accept your point about the importance of ‘hooks’. But I believe those ‘hooks’ are much better politically if have a solid basis.
PS, I think you mean affect rather than effect.
“On that map you will see the Borumba Dam. Lungfish still exist in this area. Personal experience.”
In the same numbers? Are they breeding successfully? Are they slowly being displaced by exotics? And what about floodplain flora and fauna- are they impacted by the dam?
Nothing you have said so far leads me to believe you have any great insight into river ecology. If I’m wrong, please fill me in.
PS, I think you mean argument rather than arguement.
Actually, how about we quit with the tit for tat spelling thing. Its belittling and tedious.
Touche! Totally agree. Didn’t start it. Very juvenile.
I know I have no particular insight into river ecology. Never claimed any expertise.
All I was looking for was someone to tell me from where to get that information/scientific info.
Can you help?
Are you looking for a summary of the scientific knowledge about those particular river ecologies, or are you looking to learn about river ecology in general? For the latter, you might try your local university bookshop and look through the biology/ecology texts to find one on river ecologies, and prepare to do a buttload of reading.
For the former, this Catalyst transcript references an expert you could probably contact with a bit of googling. Here’s a summary of scientific findings from the Federal DoEaH. The Qld DoPIaF has a summary of a five year study into the lungfish population and spawning habits along the Burnett River, just so you can see how the data is collected.
Is that enough to be going on with?
I’m still conflicted and agnostic about this one. The Qld govt report (pdf file) reckon the population of SEQ will rise from 2.7m to 5m by 2050. The report seems to have covered all the bases and if all those people are going to come then we probably need the water. I’m not really qualified or knowledgeable enough to disagree. To be honest I’d rather forego the extra people.
While you’re at the site there is a map of the dam area on p56. Also p57 shows the rainfall averages of the whole SEQ area. Part of the attraction of the Mary River is the higher rainfall, whereas the Wivenhoe is in a lower rainfall area. Also you can have a deluge in one part of the area, as when they had half a metre in one day on the Gold Coast last summer, when other parts are dry. So building dams north, centre and south gives some climatic diversity.
Wpd, there is a section on the environmental impact at the end from p83. It is superficial but it all sounds pretty negative to me. We have to understand that politically it is a choice between the Traveston Crossing site and the socalled Four dams option, which the Nats would give us. Assuming the Feds don’t block it, which I doubt they will. Most rural folks are quite keen on dams as long as they are somewhere else.
Wpd I think the article you were looking at was the Wikipedia one with this catchment map. The Traveston Crossing site is a bit south of Gympie. This shows that quite a lot of the Mary basin is below the site with other tributaries feeding in. I don’t know whether this would save the lungfish.
Steve is right in saying that the lungfish is only one of the concerns. It is also found in the Burnett River where the Paradise Dam has recently been built (about 20k northwest of Biggenden on the map, well south of Gin Gin, which is west of Bundaberg) which captures a fair proportion, if you look carefully, of the 32,000 sq km Burnett River basin. Beattie claims the lungfish has been OK there, but the dam is not long completed.
Tim Dunlop at Surfdom hosted a post by Mark White which identified also the Mary River cod (it’s the ‘cuddly’ pic further up the thread), the Mary River turtle, and the great barred frog. They may all be in even greater jeopardy.
A joint Israel/America/Belgian scientific project is underway that it is testing a new rainmaking system.
If the technology works, hopefully it will be applicable to Australia and help us deal with our water woes without building countless dams. see [link]^l1350&enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enVersion=0&enZone=Technology&
Thanks Tigtog and Brian, I will follow them up. Much appreciated.