Illustrations depicting greenwash. Click on the images below.

Great egret in an artesian spring on Edgbaston Station, Qld PHOTO: WAYNE LAWLER/ECOPIX

Ancient artesian springs boasting arguably Australia’s most endangered fish species have been saved for future generations with the purchase of a Central Queensland property by conservation group Bush Heritage Australia.

Edgbaston’s unique artesian spring network, fed by pure million-year-old spring water from the Great Artesian Basin, has allowed for the survival of the world’s only remaining population of the endangered redfin blue-eye fish – Australia’s smallest freshwater fish.

Additionally, the springs are the only known home of a number of other species of fish, snails, plants, and a crustacean. Edgbaston is a property which emphasises the spectacular evolutionary niches that have been created in Australia.

Bush Heritage Australia’s vision is to protect one per cent of Australia’s most important conservation land by 2025.

Bush Heritage Australia CEO Doug Humann said the acquisition of Edgbaston would assist in the protection of the significant plants and animals in the area.

“Edgbaston has exceptional biodiversity value and Bush Heritage is proud to own, manage and protect such an important Australian landscape,” he said.

“This purchase will allow us to closely manage the health of Edgbaston’s incredible artesian springs, which support a variety of life forms unique to the region.”

Edgbaston Station was purchased with funding from the Australian Government’s recently concluded Maintaining Australia’s Biodiversity Hotspots program. Assistance with the acquisition was also received from the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Water and the Queensland Department for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation.

“This achievement would not have been possible without the financial support of the Australian Government and Bush Heritage’s dedicated volunteers and donors,” Mr Humann said.

“We need further support from the public and the government in coming years if we are to make our vision of protecting Australia’s unique animals, plants and their habitats a reality.”

Located in Central Queensland, 140 km northeast of Longreach, Edgbaston Station is a pastoral lease of 8100 hectares. It is the traditional country of the Iningai people with whom Bush Heritage will be working to understand and protect the cultural values of the property. The property’s grasslands, woodlands and wetlands also provide habitat for a range of migratory and other birds.

Sitting in the upper catchment of the Pelican Creek which flows into the Thompson River and Lake Eyre, Edgbaston’s network of more than 50 artesian springs is home to an extraordinary diversity of life forms found nowhere else on the planet.

Bush Heritage Australia, which was founded in 1990, is a not-for-profit organisation that protects Australia’s unique animals and plants and their habitats. It owns and manages 31 reserves throughout Australia covering almost 1 million hectares.  Bush Heritage Australia’s goal is to protect more than 7 million hectares by 2025 through ownership, management and partnership.

Dumping to landfill should be a last resort, instead of the first option

The hillside is bare earth, strewn with litter, and dotted with towering mountains of rubbish. As a Sunshine Coast resident, you would have created 1.28 tonnes of waste over the last financial year, and 0.71 tonnes would have ended up in landfill like this. Crows swoop among the piles of refuse, while earth-moving machinery sits silently nearby. Sunshine Coast Environment Council Manager Narelle McCarthy says landfill sites like this can often be out of sight and out of mind for residents. “They just close the lid on their rubbish bin and don’t think any more about it,” she says.

But space at the region’s two biggest tips is running out. This has placed the Sunshine Coast Regional Council at a crossroads, as it decides what to do with the 378,683 tonnes of rubbish that Sunshine Coast residents create every year.

To add urgency to the problem, the region’s rubbish will soon come directly into sight and into mind when extra costs are passed on to ratepayers. The federal government will impose a price on carbon emissions by 2010, and the state government is proposing a landfill levy, which could be introduced later this year.

But since two of the Sunshine Coast’s three major landfill sites are almost full, the council is in a position to find a solution that avoids new government levies and creates a more sustainable future. To discuss those solutions, the council held a forum on September 25, 2008 called the New Directions in Waste Management Symposium. Around 60 people – including environmentalists, councillors and the state Sustainability Minister  – gathered at the Kawana Community Centre.

The Sunshine Coast Environment Council was one group invited to participate. Ms McCarthy says, “Basically it was an opportunity to explore alternatives to waste management.” She says landfill is now recognised as yesterday’s way of dealing with waste, and that new and innovative methods need to be looked at.

The Kulangoor Anti-Dump Action Group (KADAG) was another group invited to the forum. The former Maroochy Shire had planned to solve its waste problems by opening a new dump at Kulangoor, between Nambour and Yandina, and KADAG has spent the last two years fighting the plan. Spokesman Peter Sheen says the group is relieved the Sunshine Coast Regional Council is looking at alternatives to the Kulangoor dump, although the council has still not made a final decision.

That decision could be made next month. The Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s environment portfolio spokeswoman Cr Keryn Jones says the official report from the waste forum will be completed by mid-November. The report is likely to recommend a regional waste taskforce, comprised of council staff, experts and outside consultants. Cr Jones says the taskforce will guide the council towards an aspirational target of 75 per cent recycling of all waste. Council documents show the region recycled only 45 per cent of its waste in 2006/07.

Increased recycling will divert waste away from the region’s landfill sites, which are almost full. Cr Jones says the Nambour landfill will be filled in four years, and the Caloundra landfill will be full in just two years. The Noosa landfill, though, could last another 20 years.

Cr Jones says the proposed landfill levy, emissions trading and new technology has changed the way we need to look at waste. She says that under the proposed new charges, landfill could become as expensive as alternative waste treatment. “At the moment, they are by-and-large not feasible, because landfill is ridiculously cheap, because none of the externalities are factored in,” she says.

But once carbon trading is introduced, landfill could cost upward of $90 per tonne, which is the same price as alternative waste disposal. Cr Jones says there is also uncertainty surrounding carbon trading. “Emissions trading permits are likely to come in at $20 per tonne straight off, but who knows how high they’ll go? They could go sky high, because they’re auctioned every year, and nobody knows what the price is going to be.” She says an alternative waste system would provide certainty in prices.

Carbon trading will be costly for the council because landfill is the council’s biggest carbon emitter. A council report states that in 2006/07 the former Maroochy Council produced 144,027 tonnes of greenhouse gases, of which 65 per cent was from waste. When that 65 per cent was divided into individual sites, the stand-out producer of greenhouse gases was the Nambour landfill. It produced just over 70,000 tonnes, followed by the Coolum landfill, which produced less than 10,000. Mr Sheen says that capturing all greenhouse gases from existing landfills in Australia could cut carbon emissions by 7 per cent. “That’s an enormous figure for one industry alone. It’s absolutely crazy if we don’t start doing that sort of thing. So we don’t want to put organic waste into landfill. We want to process that waste,” Mr Sheen says.

Ms McCarthy says there are ways of ensuring our landfill produces less carbon emissions. “Organics shouldn’t even end up in landfill in the first place,” Ms McCarthy says. She says people need to be more responsible for their organic waste, which means improved composting and recycling.

The state government could also impose a landfill levy as part of the new Queensland Waste Management Strategy, which is expected to be introduced later this year. The discussion paper, which was released 12 months ago, states the new strategy will be based on the waste hierarchy. Ms McCarthy says, “The waste hierarchy is where you’ve got a pyramid, and the biggest base of the pyramid should be waste avoidance, and then minimization, and then management, and then the very tip should be disposal.”

This system encourages recycling or reusing waste, so that dumping it in landfill is a last resort instead of the first option. Reusing rubbish can also generate revenue for the council, and a council report shows it made over $4 million in 2007/08 from selling recovered rubbish “It’s about looking at waste as a resource,” Ms McCarthy says. “There’s a lot to be gained from recovery and recycling.”

The discussion paper states the new government strategy will also be based on a user pays principle. Queensland, Tasmania and the Northern Territory are the only states or territories which do not impose a landfill levy. The aim of a levy would be to encourage recycling and discourage dumping rubbish at tips.

Ms McCarthy says it’s exciting to see the Sunshine Coast Regional Council working towards less waste. “These are the tangible initiatives … It’s not just a motherhood statement about becoming sustainable – they’re looking at real ways to implement that sustainability. So having that symposium was a fantastic way forward.”

KADAG’s Mr Sheen says, “We’ve worked hard to get this. We’re not saying that we did it all ourselves, by any stretch of the imagination.

“But at least we put the signals out there, and this is what we’ve been trying to do for two years – and that’s to convince the council that there’s other ways of doing this other than landfill. And we’re quite confident now that there’s not going to be any more landfill on the Sunshine Coast.”

Illustration: Alex Mankiewicz

Green consumerism in Australia is increasing.  There is a growing list of products that are marketed under the labels environmentally friendly, eco-friendly, recyclable, biodegradable, climate neutral, organic or just simply green.   Advertisers are finding all sorts of ways to the promote the environmental credentials of products and companies.  However, these claims are often unsubstantiated and vague.

The term ‘environmental’ may relate to an array of issues such as greenhouse-gas emissions, carbon offsets, water quality, and energy and water consumption – through to toxicity, soil management and animal welfare. A recent Choice supermarket investigation found 637 environmental claims on just 185 items. It appears that we are increasingly inundated with claims of environmental friendliness. As a result we are becoming lost in a green labyrinth of exciting and intoxicating advertising.

So how do we safely navigate the maze that is green marketing, without being misled? In fact, being misled by false environmental claims has been given a name – greenwash.

Greenwash has made an appearance in the Oxford dictionary and is defined as: “disinformation disseminated by an organisation so as to present an environmentally responsible public image.”

It can be applied to a product or service, and arises from a growing range of companies, government departments and industries.

Greenwash adds to the confusion and diverts spending towards products with negligible or non-existent environmental benefits. It prevents truly green products from differentiating themselves and encourages more greenwash, rather than product innovation.

In 2007 US group Terrachoice Environmental Marketing undertook a major study which identified six major sins of Greenwashing as:

1. Hidden trade-off
2. No proof
3. Vagueness
4. Irrelevance
5. Fibbing
6. Lesser of two evils

There are numerous examples of greenwash. Sanyo Airconditioners Manufacturing Singapore promoted its Eco Mutli-series of air conditioners as environmentally friendly by using HFC (R407C)  “for a new ozone era – keeping the world green”.  R407C is a product which does not damage the ozone layer but on the other hand, it contributes to global warming.

The federal court found that these claims were misleading and deceptive and contained false and misleading representations in representing that its air-conditioning units were environmentally friendly.

Last year the ABC Radio’s PM program discredited a Woolworths claim that its Select brand of toilet paper and tissues came come from an environmentally managed company, that is certified as being environmentally, socially and economically responsible.

The ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) has launched an action against nappy maker Senevens International, alleging the company misled consumers by falsely claiming its disposable Safeties Nature Nappy were “100% biodegradable”.

The consumer advocate Choice questioned Coopers’ slogan for its Cascade Green beer: “Australia’s greenest beer”, “Big beer. Tiny footprint” and asserted that Coopers doesn’t provide the reassurance of third-party certification, or support its claims with much evidence. When they asked the company about its green practices, Choice claimed that Coopers cannot provide comparable data on how it was performing in relation to other beer manufacturers in Australia.

Laws relating to Greenwash in Australia
The Trade Practices Act 1974 (the Act) states that businesses must not mislead or deceive consumers, or make false or misleading representations.  The ACCC chairman says that: “Green claims are like exactly any other claim that’s made if they are excessive, if they over reach in terms of overselling and under delivering, then they run the risk of breaching the misleading and deceptive conduct provisions of the Trade Practices Act.”.

There is an Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS ISO 14021:2000)   Environmental labels and declarations, Self-declared environmental claims, which contains information about the different types of claims that may be made and the considerations needed to be undertaken by business before making the particular type of environmental claim.

The Advertiser Code of Ethics also includes a clause about not exploiting community concerns in relation to the environment.

Certification & endorsements
A number of national environmental labelling and declaration programs have emerged to assist in the choice of environmentally sound products.  These programs are typically organised by non-profit organisations.  They consider the actual environmental impact of products, undertake independent assessment of the manufacturing operations and provide independent evidence in the market of the environmental load that has been assessed.

What can you do about it?
Do you really need to buy it? Most of our environmental problems arise from excessive consumption, green or otherwise. A simpler lifestyle, using fewer resources, is the most important step in reducing our impacts.  When we do make a purchase, then we need to consider the best options.

Some questions to ask yourself

What natural resources were used? What is the content of recycled materials?  How much water and energy was used to make and transport the product?  What toxic substances are in the product or emitted into the water, air or soil during its production?  Can it be re-used or recycled? And, how is the product packaged?

And don’t forget the social aspects of the production of goods. Does the company making the product respect human rights and labour laws? Does the company support and give back to the community in which it is operating?

When assessing whether you are being greenwashed, then the following question may help.

• Does the product focus on one or two environmental issues while ignoring others that may also be important?
• Does the product offer evidence of its green claim, either on the package, or on the company website?
• Does the product provide details for all environmental impacts throughout its life cycle?
• Are the certification endorsements from a reputable organisation?
• Is the claim trying to make you feel good about a product that is perhaps not so green? For example, is organic tobacco really a green product?

One person in particular was recognised for 18 years of communicating the major environmental issues facing the Sunshine Coast. Jillian Rossiter, received what was considered a long-overdue award for ‘outstanding dedication to the environment’.

Jillian Rossiter (left) and councillor Vivien Griffin

“Jillian is a very unassuming person who quietly undertakes her enormous commitment to the environment,” said councillor Vivien Griffin, before presenting the award.

“It is the dedication of people like Jillian that allows the Sunshine Coast Environment Council to continue its valuable work.”

Jillian produced the precursor to Econews, the Eco Echo magazine, which enjoyed widespread support around the Coast for many years. More recently, she has tirelessly organised the popular GREENhouse at the Woodford Folk Festival.

She spent 10 years producing the seasonal Eco Echo magazine, and the last eight years building an impressive list of speakers at the GREENhouse. These have been the highlights of Jillian’s environmental career. A career that has emphasised showing, not telling – a trait, that so often appears in quiet achievers.

“They have enabled me to bring the stories and expertise of many activists, scientists and other experts to the public,” said Jillian.

Jillian said she was honoured to be recognised in this way.

“Especially from such an outstanding organisation as SCEC, that has now, and has had in the past, so many skilled and dedicated people.”

Almost 200 people attended the evening, held at the Lake Kawana Community Centre on November 28. The night was hosted by the Sunshine Coast Environment Council, with special guest speaker, and recent Greens convert, Ronan Lee attending, along with local award-winning singer/songwriter Kate Gibson and artist Blair McNamara.

SCEC manager, Narelle McCarthy said the night was another success, which highlighted how important it is for the Coast to continue with its aim of becoming Australia’s most sustainable region.

“We need to build on the community’s efforts and continue the momentum,” she said.

“However, we wouldn’t be able to hold this event without our hard-working volunteers and the support of the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, as well as our other sponsors. I can’t thank them enough.”

Affectionately known as the ‘froggies’, the Sunshine Coast Environment Awards are now in their thirteenth year.

Full list of winners and award sponsors

Biodiversity
Winner: Leigh Warneminde.
Highly commended: Downes Survey Group, Collins Rd Development & Queensland Timber Plantations in partnership – Collins Road Development
Sponsor: Sunshine Coast Regional Council

Climate Change Mitigation
Winner: Liza Neil, Cool Schools & Community Solar Energy
Highly Commended: Sustainable Maleny
Highly Commended: Qld Complete Printing Services
Sponsor: Maleny Credit Union

Eco Attraction
Winner: Eumarella Shores Lakeside Cottages
Sponsor: Rockcote

Environmental Communication
Winner: RAID @ Bridges (sub-group of Yandina and District Community Association)

Sustainable Agriculture
Winner: Rose-mere Farm
Highly commended: Templeton’s Ginger Farm
Highly Commended: Kookaburra Organics Aust P/L
Sponsor: Cedar Hill Flowers and Foliage

Sustainable Project
Winner: S.E.A.C
Highly commended: Veggie Village
Sponsor: Sunshine Coast Regional Council

Sustainable Schools
Winner: Noosa District State High School
Highly Commended: Noosa Pengari Steiner
Sponsor: Insulation and Solar Centre

Waste Management
Winner: Brite Side Industries
Sponsor: Sudtec

Water Quality and Conservation
Winner: Noosa & District Landcare
Sponsor: Downes Survey Group

Outstanding Dedication to the Environment
Jillian Rossiter

Excellence in Journalism
Bill Hoffman

Majestic pelicans

As a wildlife carer I am always saddened by anything that negatively affects a country’s native animal population.  Unfortunately, it’s usually our species that is the crux of the problem.

I was recently appalled when watching a television program on the Galapagos Islands.  To see the amount of waste created by the increased visitors to the island was alarming, to say the least.  The resident population of the islands has almost doubled from 18,000 in 2004, as tourism creates new employment and business opportunities.

Often referred to as the inspiration for Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, this paradise is just over a thousand kilometres off the coast of Ecuador, and is now a major tourist attraction.  It is bad enough that introduced species, both plant and animal, lead to habitat destruction and new diseases, but on top of that is the dilemma of mountains of garbage.

All that garbage and where to put it?  The animals will suffer, as if they haven’t endured enough with the increase in human visitors.  Earlier this year over fifty sea lions were battered to death. Legislation in Ecuador now allows seasonal harvesting of sea cucumbers, and illegal fishing, especially for shark fin, is rife.

Many of the animals in this once pristine environment are so trusting and haven’t learnt to fear humans.  The Islands are of course renowned for six species of giant tortoises.  Who could forget beautiful “Harriet” at Australia Zoo?

Here on the Sunshine Coast the WILVOS have seen the death of turtles, platypus and numerous other wildlife, following ingestion of garbage.  The culprit is predominantly plastic bags, from small bait bags in the case of the platypus to larger bags in all sizes and colours. Marine turtles are often observed as ‘floaters’ after swallowing plastic bags – they cannot dive for their food and die unless rescued.

Constantly, seabirds are being entangled in fishing line or have fishing hooks imbedded in their flesh (these hooks do not rust away in a few days).  However, fishing line affects not only seabirds.  We have seen carelessly discarded fishing line in nests of birds such as magpies.  They don’t see the danger in using it as nest-building material, but the young chicks often become entangled and consequently die.

The WILVOS recently held a workshop with Marny Bonner, from Ballina’s Australian Seabird Rescue, made us even more aware of the plight of the pelicans on the Sunshine Coast. Where discarded fishing line often ends up on the water’s edge and affects the waders, pelicans become victims at the heart of the fishing sites. If they swallow a hooked fish or a baited hook, the line is often just cut, and the poor pelican is forgotten.  We saw some very disturbing photos, even lines with two hooks attached, where one hook was in the pelican’s beak and the other in its leg.  The excruciating agony that animals have to go through because of our waste!

Marny also demonstrated the simplicity of dealing with pelicans.  Although they are one of the larger bird species, they cannot seriously harm us.  It is just a matter of catching the pelican (believe it or not, simple effective methods were shown – its’ not rocket science) and removing the hook or line immediately.

Because these entanglements and hook injuries happen so often, Marny impressed on everyone that the answer to the problem is having regular pro-active patrols.  After removing the hook and if no infection is evident the pelican can then be released. The birds quickly recover and very few pelicans need rehabilitation. Better for them, better for us! We can all do our bit towards waste management and make a difference.

SCEC is the umbrella organisation of more than 50 community groups. In this issue of Eco, we look at a member group from the beleaguered Bribie Island.

Members of the Bribie Island Environmental Protection Association

Rampant development can be a juggernaut that crushes eco-systems in its path, but on Bribie Island a community group is managing to apply the brakes.

The Bribie Island Environmental Protection Association Inc (BIEPA) has been fighting to keep the island’s natural assets safe forever, and has notched up some impressive wins in its 30 year history.

Bribie Island is the only island in Queensland connected by bridge to the mainland, and being close to Brisbane, it is well in the firing line of creeping urbanisation. Housing estates and canal developments have had a huge ecological impact. Much of the interior is a monoculture of sterile pine forest, and a far cry from what artist Ian Fairweather described as Bribie’s “friendly bush” where he painted many masterpieces.

BIEPA’s role in protecting some of this friendly bush has been crucial.

A good example is the preservation of Lot 402. This 37 hectare block of untouched bushland in the island’s south had the highest conservation rating of any block in the Caboolture Shire. It’s a beautiful mosaic of eucalyptus, tea-tree and banksia forest and wallum heath. Then in 1998 a developer persuaded Council to rezone – to change its classification from Open Space to Urban Designation.

Galvanised by a strong community spirit and representing themselves in court, BIEPA lodged a successful appeal with the Planning and Environment Court. Lot 402 was saved from urbanisation, and this year, along with other parts of Bribie totalling 3690 hectares, was gazetted as national park. This took the total area of national park to nearly 10,000 hectares, or about half the area of the island.

Another notable victory involved Buckley’s Hole, a freshwater lake close to the ocean, and one of Queensland’s top birding sites with over 280 species recorded. Just the place for a marina, some thought, until BIEPA managed to have the Hole and surrounding area protected as a conservation park in 1992.

Strong community participation is the key to the BIEPA’s effectiveness, according to President Ian Bell.

“We have over 240 members who are passionate, determined and contribute all sorts of skills, such as technical expertise, which has given us credibility and some influence with government ministers and bureaucrats.

“We also link with other organisations including the Bribie Island Community Association and Friends of Woorim Beach on issues of common concern.

“BIEPA’s vision for Bribie is a special natural area where a vibrant and cohesive community can live in harmony with the wonders of our national parks and marine parks and Ramsar areas.

“A community-led approach to development and proper community consultation is essential if we are to achieve this.”

As part of community engagement, the group sponsors a wildlife carer on the island, as well as environmental awards to local schools.

BIEPA’s regular meetings often feature a guest speaker. Recently dugong authority Dr Janet Lanyon gave a talk on the plight of this threatened creature. Where Pumicestone Passage was once home to huge herds, now a mere dozen remain, and they may soon be as impossible to sight in the Passage as the mermaid, the legendary creature described by early European sailors when seeing a dugong from a distance.

Harassed by speeding boats and jet skis, dugongs face a major threat from the algae lyngbya majuscula, commonly known as fireweed or mermaid’s hair. It’s a toxin best avoided by swimmers, and can blanket sea grass beds, the dugong’s food source.

There was an unprecedented outbreak of the deadly algae in Pumicestone Passage last year, with Council harvesting 6000 tonnes and trucking it to landfill sites. It’s thought that high water temperatures combined with massive nutrient loads – phosphorous, nitrogen, iron and dissolved organic matter, are responsible.

Many more threats to Bribie’s environment keep BIEPA busy.

Coastal erosion, especially on the southern side of the ocean beach, is a significant issue, and likely to increase as climate change generates rising sea levels and more storm surges.

As part of the SEQ Water Grid Plan, Caboolture Council last year began the Bribie Bores project, which involves extracting fresh water from underground aquifers. Community consultation was zero and no environmental impact studies were done.  BIEPA has identified risks of seawater intrusion and lowering of the water table, with possible devastating consequences for plant communities and associated fauna of Bribie’s delicate wetlands.

Another disturbing proposal involves a desalination plant on the eastern shore. BIEPA is concerned with high tension power pylons creating an ugly blight on Bribie’s holiday skyline, and the effect of concentrated saline discharge on marine life.

Challenges for the future revolve around Moreton Council’s Town Plan, which doesn’t effectively recognise Bribie’s unique features, according to Ian Bell.

“Moreton’s growth rate of 3.3 per cent is a real concern. If maintained it will cause the population to double within 21 years,” he said.

“If environmental impacts double as well, how can we retain dugongs and other iconic marine species such as turtles in Pumicestone Passage?

“Exponential population growth must be curbed if we are to successfully manage environmental threats in the region,” said Mr Bell.

Capitalism was hailed as the victor after Gorbachev brought perestroika to the former Soviet Union in the late 80s. Since that time, the West’s confidence in its own economic system has grown. Confidence that, until recently, had bordered on arrogance. Capitalism has allowed greed to flourish, to such an extent, that we are now witnessing a meltdown of a system, with global consequences.

No doubt the economy will return to some sense of normality in the future, but the lessons should not be forgotten. Any system that requires constant growth to survive on a planet with finite resources, is surely doomed to fail time and time gain. Any system that promotes greed before common sense — before the well-being of people and our environment — cannot be sustained.

The residents of the Sunshine Coast have felt the impacts of greed for decades. The State Government has, and is, insisting on more growth, with developers cheering them on and as a result the Coast constantly fights to protect its biggest asset — the natural environment. The economy and lining the wallets of a select few, it seems, is more important than even the basic fundamentals of democracy. Even if the economy and its architects have been proven to be faulty and lacking in principle.

Residents on the Sunshine Coast want a focus on sustainability not development. Image Greg Hardwick

Residents of the Coast, and its elected council have made it clear that they want and need a sustainable future. The Sunshine Coast can lead by example and display to the rest of the country, that it is possible. We have the talent right here in our own backyards, as was on display at the recent Sunshine Coast Environment Awards. It’s time the government was reminded that it is the servant of the people. Voters already understand that growth must have its limits.

The hopes and wishes of residents in the Mary Valley have been blatantly ignored by a government determined to build a dam, regardless of the impacts — be they economic, social, environmental, or ethical. Recently, as our lead story displays, a victory was won with a delay in proceedings of the Traveston Crossing dam. It’s now time for common sense to return and for some human decency to be restored so that the entire idea is scrapped.

Econews has long been an opponent of the dam, based on the wishes of the people, sound scientific facts, and the rule of law. We can no longer stand by and let an elected government sustain an ideology of growth at all costs. A government that has stopped listening to the very people that fund its wages.

Bundaroo Creek. Image John Burrows

Not too far inland from the coast is a lush green wonderland of mountains, forest and crystal-clear streams flowing through hidden gorges – the Conondales. It’s the largest area of sub-tropical rainforest on the Sunshine Coast and a must for exploring.

Access is most convenient from Maleny, but it’s good to approach from the north following the Mary River Valley.  It’s a pleasant journey, and you’ll admire the very visible efforts by locals to stop the proposed dam. Do visit the Information Centre at Kandanga to learn more about the proposal and how you can help prevent it.

Where to go in the Conondales? If time is limited, the Kenilworth Forest Drive provides a good overview and a sampling of the range’s many delights.

The Drive is a circuit which links camping areas at Charlie Moreland Park and Booloumba Creek (both reached from the Maleny-Kenilworth Road) and basically circumnavigates Mount Allan, at 593 metres one of the higher peaks in the area. It’s 37 kilometres of narrow gravel road, winding beautifully through forest, very steep in parts and unsuitable for driving in wet weather.

No need to drive along the Drive though. It’s a quiet shady road running through rainforest and sclerophyll forest, a wonderful two day walk. That said, other walking options in the Conondales may be more satisfying. Rock hopping up creeks is especially sublime. Formed walking trails are available, with a major one on the way – the state government has begun work on a 60 kilometre “Great Walk in the Conondales”, traversing the most spectacular parts of the range. It should be complete in 2010, with some sections (notably the Mt Allan trail) ready much sooner.

Cycling the Forest Drive is very feasible – recommended in fact. It’s not extreme by mountain-biking standards, but because of the steep terrain it is unsuitable for inexperienced cyclists. You will need a mountain bike or sturdy hybrid. Good brakes are essential and have them checked!

Starting from Charlie Moreland Park – a popular family spot with rock pools excellent for swimming – the Drive begins a long and steep ascent to reach a lookout with views of Mt Allan, hoop pine plantations and the Blackall Range in the distance.

Forestry’s impact is very apparent from this viewpoint. Plantations cover hills and valleys once cloaked with natural forest which was decimated by logging then obliterated by monoculture. Conservationists struggled for decades to prevent more of the same before the Conondales were finally protected with National Park or Forest Reserve status. Only plantation timber is logged now and the native forest is secure.

It was a long campaign to save the Conondales, and it gained national prominence with the discovery of the Platypus Frog or the Southern Gastric Brooding Frog, unique in that the young are raised in the stomach and born through the mouth of the mother.

“Don’t Log the Frog” was the irresistible slogan that captured the nation’s imagination. Too late however – once found nowhere except in the mountain streams of the Conondales and nearby ranges, the frog is now almost certainly extinct.

Frog populations worldwide have been devastated by the chytrid fungus, and this may have played a part in the demise of the Platypus Frog, but from the lookout on the Kenilworth Forest Drive, with its vast view of plantation, you can’t help but think that destruction of habitat was the reason for the loss of this unusual creature.

Happily, now largely protected, the Conondales provide safe habitat and a fighting chance at survival for other species in trouble – among them the Plumed Frogmouth, the Black Breasted Button Quail and Coxen’s Fig-Parrot.

Continuing along the Drive – if motoring, stop often to properly appreciate the ambience – the road keeps ascending until reaching the top of the range, then continues up and down in a roller-coaster fashion. There’s a turnoff to Jimna well worth following if there’s time to explore the western part of the range.

Further on, the road drops to cross Peters Creek. A short walking trail leads to an area downstream where the creek cascades over rocks and into lovely pools.

After ascending from Peters Creek, the Drive drops again to cross Bundaroo Creek, another ascent, then another drop to Booloumba Creek. These ups and downs can be quite steep.

All three creeks offer rock hopping opportunities. Bundaroo, with the only catchment untouched by logging, is especially attractive. There’s a walking trail to Booloumba Falls, where you’ll find an attractive rock pool for swimming, and the Breadknife, a serrated rocky outcrop well worth a closer look if you’re able to scramble a bit.

Climbing out of Booloumba Creek, you’ll soon reach the Booloumba View Lookout, with a fine view of the valley far below and Mt Allan far above. A little further along, the Drive begins descending to the Booloumba Creek camping area, just a few kilometres from your starting point.

The book “Walking on the Wilder Side… in the Conondales” published by the Conondale Range Committee, is a comprehensive guide and can be ordered via the website: exploreconondales.com.  EPA’s “Upper Mary Valley” brochure is good for basic information. Part of the Forest Drive is closed to motor vehicles at the time of writing because of an unsafe bridge, contact EPA’s Kenilworth office for details – 5446 0925. For camping permits visit the EPA website or phone 131304.

Dam opponents happy to see some hope. Image Arkin Mackay.

It was a surprise announcement, from left field, as they say. The Premier on the morning news stating that Traveston Dam may be delayed by “at least several years” and that water re-cycling was in doubt. The Courier Mail would call it “Gone to Water” while the Gympie times led with “Dam’s End is Bligh”.

It seemed to show the first backing away from a plan that was hastily announced on the eve of the previous state election and it looked like great cause for celebration. Media and campaigners converged on Traveston Crossing and spirits were high. It was a clear sign that the dam proposal wouldn’t have passed the federal approvals process.

The Premier took a totally different angle, pointing out that 85 per cent of the area was degraded by farming and that substantial mitigation works needed to be carried out, presumably both upstream and downstream of the dam area, before it might get approval. By next day, though, she was backing away from the “delay” statement, saying that the EIS should still be with the federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett by next April as planned.

While it was locals hastily gathered together on the banks of the Mary River that day, the case has well and truly entered the national environment arena. As well as peak national conservation groups, the Senate has now passed three motions relating to Traveston, the latest by Queensland Liberal Senator Ian McDonald to scrap it completely. Media reports now consistently refer to the “controversial” Traveston Dam proposal.

Confusing any thoughts of a government exit strategy on the dam, though, is the fact that Queensland Water Infrastructure, a wholly government-owned company has run well ahead of the pack in preparations for the dam. An aggressive purchasing strategy has seen many properties sold to QWI .

“It was as if they were totally thumbing their noses at even the possibility that the Federal Government might reject this proposal,” said one.   “We were told it was a definite goer and that if we wanted the best price we should sell now.”

Businessmen report similar experiences, with a host of seminars organised, offering opportunities arising from the construction of the dam. Even the local Mayor, a self-professed opponent of the dam seemed to have become swayed toward inevitability by the insistence of QWI, and had even started to talk about community off-sets.

In the local community QWI strategically targeted its financial largesse. The Gympie Muster reportedly received some $100 000 in funding which many saw as little more than a bribe, especially when Muster star John Williamson was advised he couldn’t wear his Mary River Turtle T-shirt on stage.

Coinciding with, and probably precipitating, the Premier’s “delay” announcement, was the release of several damning independent reports originally commissioned by the Federal Department of Environment and subsequently tabled in state parliament by Gympie MP David Gibson.  The reports simply gave more credence to what opponents have been saying all along.

When Peter Beattie referred to the Mary as “hardly pristine” and when the present Premier points to the environmental degradation from farming, they conveniently overlook two key points. The real test of environmental degradation has to be measured in terms of what still manages to live in and near the river. With several unique species, the Mary scores well in that department. The other is that the least degraded section of river is precisely that part proposed for inundation. Cattle may indeed trample some Mary River Turtle eggs, as was claimed in Parliament, but the Traveston area shows the best recruitment of juveniles.

It was all eerily reminiscent of Harry Butler loosing all environmental credibility when he entered the Franklin Dam debate, declaring that the Franklin wasn’t really wilderness, not far short of Premier Gray’s labelling it a “leech-infested ditch”.

So Queenslanders approach a state election not really sure whether there is a delay or not and even less certain as to what it means for the Mary. They seem to have a much better grasp than the Premier, though, of the fundamental tenet of conservation biology, that of the imperative of conserving areas of high-quality habitat and are encouraged that the federal government seems prepared to stand up to the “bull at a gate’ approach of the Queensland government.

Persisting with the hastily conceived folly of Traveston, is simply pouring good money after bad.