Minister rejects Landcare move to save trees at Bundaberg Port

The state government has knocked back a request from Bundaberg Landcare to save a section of forest at the Port of Bundaberg, which some believe could also have cultural significance.

Landcare's Mike Johnson shows the size of the trees.

A petition of more than 1000 signatures to save a section of land at the Bundaberg Port from development has failed to change the state government’s mind.

The section of forest belongs to the Gladstone Ports Corporation and sits off the Port Rd between Rubyanna and Hoffmans Rds and is part of a 6000ha state development Area.

Concerns around water quality in Moneys Creek

Bundaberg Landcare president Mike Johnson said the area had been slated for an electrical substation to be constructed by Ergon.

He made the announcement of the rejected petition following its lodgement to Environment Minister Meaghan Scanlon.

The minister's reasons cited for refusing the move to save the land included the government’s stance that much of the vegetation on the land was already protected.

Ms Scanlon’s office responded to the petition that “the buffer and conservation precinct designates areas of strategic Port land identified as having ecological significance” as well as areas that “separate Port operations from surrounding sensitive land”.

They’re claims Mr Johnson has labelled as a “token offering”.

“This is a typical nonsensical statement,” he said.

“What a coincidence that the only species worth preserving just so happens to be the ones that run east to west along a buffer zone probably 30m wide for the majority of the distance along Hoffmans Rd, with a bit of a useful bulge at the end which conveniently encapsulates - I am guessing - the Ficus rubiginosa which is an important part of the site.

“This is what you call a token offering for the destruction which is about to take place on the site.”

Mr Johnson said he was also aware that Energy Queensland had conducted a flora survey on the site and did not list any threatened species.

“As the saying goes, politicians use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination,” he said.

Noel Rowe appears in the NewsMail in the '90s with a First Nations relic found at the site along the Burnett River that would later become the Ned Churchward Weir. It was one of many items found in the location.

“Energy Queensland is a 100 per cent state owned government corporation. Do you really think they are going to find anything that adds expense to the government’s project?

“Their job is to provide loopholes.”

Ms Scanlon’s office, however, maintains that the Department of Environment and Science’s internal searches did not show any conservation significant fauna recorded within the area or a 1km buffer around it.

Mr Johnson said that for many years, First Nations artefacts had been discovered along the Burnett.

“After all, less than a kilometre away we have a layered Aboriginal midden that has been there for thousands of years judging by the sheer size of it,” he said.

“I have been informed by a number of people over the years artefacts have been found all the way up past the Rubyanna treatment works.

“Bundaberg Landcare have been waiting for people who have this knowledge to finally come forward - but it seems to no avail.”

Mr Johnson has questioned whether a cultural survey had been conducted at the site.

“If this survey exists we need transparency into what it says and who conducted it,” he said.

“Regarding any artefacts found I have often been assured by aboriginal elders that no legal action will be held against anybody returning such items, in fact according to traditional owners I have talked to over the years many believe that it is bad luck for white fellas to have these items.”

In a last minute bid to save the area the Bundaberg Landcare executive has met and decided to contact Senator Larissa Waters, the leader of the Australian Green in the Senate.

A spokesperson for the Gladstone Ports Corporation echoed the state’s sentiments on why development would go ahead on the land.

“The Port of Bundaberg Land Use Plan 2020 (Land Use Plan) identifies Strategic Port Land to be used for port and related industry and is an approved plan that underwent an extensive and considered legislative process and involved multiple opportunities for public consultation,” they said.

“Development within the Bundaberg State Development Area Development Scheme 2017 (BuSDA Development Scheme) is regulated by the Office of the Co-ordinator General.”

Originally published as Minister rejects Landcare move to save trees at Bundaberg Port