Abbott Point, a relatively low-populated region of Queensland, has been making headlines recently not for its proximity to the Great Barrier Reef or national parks, but for a different reason. A coal port expansion plan, which would involve dumping 3 million cubic meters of sediment inside the Great Barrier Reef’s borders, has caught the eye of environmentalists and tourist-based businesses alike. When the plan was revealed, a local uprising as well as complaints from the commercial fishing industry pushed GBRMPA to relocate the dump site.
Six new sites were identified as alternative sites for the coal port expansion plan. The area chosen is 20 kilometers north of the wreck of a WWII Catalina aircraft and 70 kilometers away from the Whitsunday tourist hotspot. This move appeased the historians interested in preserving the watercraft from the damage of the coal silt plume that will follow the dumping. The local commercial fishing industry was also relieved that the new dump site will steer clear of any coastal sea grass meadows (natural hotbeds for endangered dugong and turtles) as well as commonly known fishery grounds for scallops, mackerel, and other assorted marine life. Though the new site is a much better selection for the coal port expansion, it does not serve the best interests of all stakeholders.
The Queensland Seafood Industry, as well as the Australian Marine Conservation Society, have expressed their concern with dumping the large quantity of coal-littered sediment into the ocean in such close proximity to the coast as well as the Great Barrier Reef. A spokesman from the Queensland Seafood Industry Association remarked “We are opposed to choosing a best site because we don’t want anything dumped there at all.” As in all major relocations, the stakeholders pertaining to the expansion plan will be meeting in the next few weeks to discuss and finalize the move.
The key to understanding this relocation plan is to understand where the stakeholders stand to gain. The expansion plan is slotted to generate revenue the port has yet to see. On the other hand, tourist-based companies accrue more than $8 billion, which currently accounts for roughly 5% of Queensland’s annual revenue. These companies are looking to avoid any negative effects this plan will have on their areas of interest. Many stakeholders fear the harm done to the tourism industry will be unrecoverable in mining revenue. A common ground between these conflicting points of view may be hard to find because of the invasive nature of the coal port expansion plans.
References
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Bll3tycmmG7PpM&tbnid=xzjznOUd9hUmrM:&ved=0CAMQjhw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dredgingtoday.com%2F2013%2F07%2F17%2Fusa-king-amendment-to-prohibit-corps-sediment-dumping-adopted%2F&ei=vZkFU9nFIorXkQec5IGADg&bvm=bv.61725948,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNGTW8CJqm859ORj7UYAruS2Puem_A&ust=1392962361933623
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/abbot-point-coal-port-dredge-dump-site-to-be-moved-after-complaints-from-fishermen-tourism-and-heritage-bodies/story-fnihsrf2-1226817929741
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Queensland#Tourism
http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/