 The proposed Traveston Crossing dam on the Mary River is flawed in many ways. It is a knee jerk reaction to a water crisis that could have been avoided by prudent planning in the early 1990’s. Now proponents have dug their heels in and they say that it is a necessary component of the SEQ Water Strategy, despite being a miniscule component in their water planning in fifty years time. The dam is not necessary as there are many alternatives that will not cause such large environmental damage. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to take holistic view of what their requirements will be and plan accordingly. The SEQ Water Strategy does not do this.
The water commissioners seem proud of their water strategy document when there are very many water professionals who find it an affront to their intelligence. How can this be the case? It is easy when you have a Water Commission run by water commissioners who are not trained in water engineering. Unfortunately the general public do not have this training either and unless someone points out the flaws they have no way of knowing what they are. Just one big one is that there is nothing in the document about the water that falls on Brisbane in the form of rain. It is actually one and a half times the amount of water Brisbane needs. There are ways and means of catching this, not in the minimal way that a host of rainwater tanks can provide, but in major infrastructure works. To get a lot more detail about Traveston Crossing Dam, the following links and their subsequent links provide a host of information:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
