Back on Track

Over the past few months our intended path, as stated at the very beginning of our first post, has been necessarily side-tracked somewhat by the unfolding situation with the latest piece of under-regulated mining infrastructure being built in Costerfield.

The lackadaisical oversight of the project from its inception and the disgraceful marginalisation of particular members of the community, those members upon whom the most immediate impacts are being imposed, has often forced us onto paths that may have seemed merely reactionary and even peripheral.

This is not the case. In spite of recent laudable moves by Mandalay Resources towards their correction, the shortcomings of regulatory application to the construction of the Splitters Creek Evaporation and Storage Facility have been obvious. The further shortcomings in the community engagement process, by both the regulators and the mine (the latter, too, being in the process of welcome rectification) are also beyond question. And both of these sets of shortcomings - regulatory and community-centred - are illustrative of the ongoing failings that have been faced by residents and the community for at least a decade during their dealings with the various iterations of this under-regulated operation.

However, the flow of information that has been taking place between the various parties over recent weeks has necessitated a re-evaluation of the priorities of this blog. Some of the issues raised lie well beyond the scope of our intended investigations and some others have sometimes, we admit, lain beyond the scope of our immediate understanding. 

As new information becomes available and other information is re-assessed, our priorities are reverting for a time to their original intent. To continue to follow those other lines of argument exclusively in such a manner would only serve to direct our attention and efforts away from the pressing matters with which we began our investigations.

And so we shall be returning more directly - though not exclusively, be assured - to the historical matters, matters on the record that sustain our original contentions of under-regulation, lack of precautionary consideration and the profligate disregard by regulators of the central role that water plays for the members of all rural communities in Australia, be they farming or mining. 

As Yet Unsubstantiated III

Yet another episode in the ongoing vindictive and intimidatory EPA composting debacle that began here and "progressed" to here...

After dealing with COGB, it's refreshing to have had contact with a Shire with a bit of humanity, understanding and heart. In order to ease Ms King and Mr Leask's mind before Christmas, the Shire of Strathbogie promptly forwarded this email on 23 December, 2014. Obviously to reassure them that they need not worry about the intimidatory note issued by EPA regarding the composting for the chemical-free agricultural farm they run hanging over their heads. Glen Lea has enough to worry about. One would have thought that that was that.

Not good enough for EPA. Further investigations were required. And so Ms King and Mr Leask had to undergo a further period of stress while Strathbogie Shire undertook a further assessment of the composting, just to make sure...

Another inspection was required on 20 January, 2014. Another three or four weeks of worry and stress for these already worried, stressed and put-upon people.

It took the admirably sympathetic Shire of Strathbogie just three days to sort things out and notify Glen Lea of the decision and assuage their concerns:

And so, nine days later, on 29 January, 2015, Pam and Colin eventually received this cursory note from EPA.

 

Not a word of apology. Not so much as a sorry for the inconvenience. Not one word.

Twice we read "at this time". "At this time." So, it's not over yet? We're watching you...

EPA had been intending "to serve one or more remedial notices" in an endeavour to impose upon Mr Leask a requirement to construct a compacted clay base under his compost to mitigate seepage to groundwaters that might occur from his longstanding practice of making his own organic compost.

Such compacted clay bases for composting - if and when they are required - should achieve a maximum permeability rate of 10^-9 m/s.

Mr Leask and Ms King expended considerable time, effort, resources, money and heart ache in eventually having VCAT require just such a permeability rate for the terraces and 150 ML terminal dam on the Splitters Creek Evaporative and Storage Facility that is being constructed across the road from their lifelong exercise in "agriculture".

They had to take City of Greater Bendigo Council to VCAT to have this condition imposed. And it was only required after consideration by the VCAT Members of the precautionary principle; a principle wholly alien to COGB.It's in the EPA Act so handball it to them.

And EPA have no problem with toxic groundwater containing heavy metals and salts being stored forever in "ponds" with permeability of 10^-8 m/s. Such things are enforced by DSDBI, the mining facilitator according to DPI requirements from 2004; decade-old requirements. This is toxic, hazardous waste that requires a sign such as this when it is dumped, ahem, discharged into Hirds Pit in the middle of Heathcote.

Can no one see the hypocrisy? Can no one see the implications of such double standards? 

This is what happened when EPA - or was ir CoGB? Or both? - facilitated the spraying of water from the mine - over-accumulated water because it had been over-allotted for dewatering purposes - along the roadside in Costerfield.  Dead and dying bush.

Was a pollution abatement notice required?

Environment Protection Authority.

"...whilst investigating a community report."

And we understand Strathbogie Shire were not very impressed by the quality of the water in the Wappentake Creek they saw making its way into the lovely part of Victoria for which they are responsible... lovely Lake Nagambie. More on that soon.