Fisheries Talk Toondah Recording

Wednesday 5th August 2020, 6:00pm

Questions answered during the session:

• 3:10: What is the impact of PDA development on habitat quality of the surrounding area, for fish and other marine organisms?
• 5:08: Daryl, could you describe the methodology you are using to assess the fisheries impacts.
• 7:35: Are fisheries protected under the Ramsar convention?
• 7:53: Are you considering fishes as food for other species or just the recreational/commercial fishing aspects?
• 8:53: What will be the impact on the habitats of the juvenile brown tiger prawns?
• 11:09: What impacts has Daryl seen from reclamation type projects like this at other locations?
• 12:03: Are you also considering the impacts on crabs?
• 12:55: Is Toondah Harbour an important spawning location for species fished by recreational and commercial fishers?
• 16:53: Will I still be able to recreationally fish from the shore if the development proceeds?
• 20:05: Have you consulted with commercial and recreational fishing bodies? What has been the feedback?
• 22:23: The master plan includes a boat ramp but the location looks awkward and no one uses the existing ramp at Toondah anyway. Wouldn't you be better off upgrading the nearby ones at Cleveland or Vic Point?
• 26:40: If the purpose of the EIS is to assess the impact of the proposed project on the fishery and to make a decision about genuine sustainability, why is Daryl speaking as if it is a foregone conclusion and his task / focus is largely to ensure recreational fishing opportunities are inbuilt?
• 30:45: Is there any kind of weighting between the different parts of the EIS? i.e. Shore birds verses Fisheries verses Koala's etc?
• 32:07: How do the people of Cleveland know which of these proposals will actually go ahead. Craig, you have talked about the possible enhancements but as a resident, there seems to be no guarantee that this will go ahead - just that it could go ahead.
• 40:01: Will Daryl make the final recommendation with respect to the fisheries impact?
• 40:28: Daryl. Does that mean that weighting given to each part of the EIS is the same irrespective of the importance or significance of the area for particular species, whether it be commercial fish, koalas or shorebirds?
• 41:58: Who is responsible overall for determining Walker's final position with respect to the findings of the EIS?
• 45:00: Craig why don't the artist's impressions of what the development might look like not include any of the blocks of units, for example the scene included on page 2 in this weeks Redland City Bulletin. At present we have no clear idea of what 3600 units around Toondah Harbour looks like.
• 48:25: For Daryl, in your experience, how well are developers held to those conditions?
• 51:55: The area is in the Moreton Bay Marine Park. Again it would require a revocation. What is that process?
• 58:15: Craig you're talking about the master plan - is what you are talking about and showing us what Walker actually proposes to build?

Responses to unanswered questions from the Fisheries Talk Toondah Recording session

But how can Walker group be allowed to do this on a Ramsar site which is supposed to protect and preserve the marine environment?

Will these recorded sessions be posted on the website?

Ramsar agreement says only in the instance of significant national interest can the agreed area be compromised. Is this project of significant national interest?

What are you planning to do to avoid the sorts of problems with canal walls at Raby Bay now 30 to 40 years after completion of the development?

For Craig - can you please confirm that you just said there is no Ramsar implication and no need to revoke any part of the Ramsar listing for Moreton Bay?