• Change text size
• Skip to content

EPBC Act

Public notices

• About us
• Contact us

Search

• Home
  • Atmosphere
  • Biodiversity
  • Coasts and marine
  • Heritage
  • Housing supply and affordability
  • Human settlements
  • Land
  • Living sustainably
  • Parks Australia
  • Water
  • EPBC Act

• EPBC Act
  • Reform of the EPBC Act
  • About the EPBC Act
    • History of the EPBC Act
    • Reports and statistics
    • Exemptions
    • Conservation agreements
    • Advisory committees
    • Lists under the Act
    • Glossary
  • Do you need approval?
  • What is protected
    • Heritage protection
    • Wetlands
    • Threatened species and ecological communities
    • Migratory species
    • Commonwealth marine areas
    • Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
    • Nuclear actions
  • Environment assessments
    • Assessment and approval process
    • Bilateral Agreements
    • Strategic assessments
    • Fisheries assessments
  • Permits and forms
  • Wildlife trade

• Public notices and invitations to comment
  • Nominate to the EPBC Act lists

• • Information for…
    • Farmers
    • Industry
    • Local governments
    • State agencies
    • Commonwealth agencies
  • Report a breach
    • Compliance and enforcement
    • Compliance auditing
    • Case judgements
  • Policy statements
  • Publications and resources
    • General
    • Agreements
    • Compliance and enforcement
    • Databases
    • Environment assessments
    • Flowcharts and processes
    • Policy statements
    • Reports

Traveston Dam — the federal process

Final decision on Traveston Dam

Federal environment minister Peter Garrett has made his final decision on the Traveston Crossing Dam proposal, deciding the project cannot be approved due to likely unacceptable impacts on nationally threatened species.

Given the high level of interest in this issue, the minister has decided to make public his statement of reasons which outlines the reasons for his decision. It is expected it will be released within the month (December 2009).

• Traveston Dam gets final no - media release 2 December 2009
• Referral detail: EPBC 2006/3150

Due date on final decision extended

The department has extended the due date for a final decision on Traveston Dam to 2 December 2009. This is purely an administrative process to allow the 10 business-day consultation process with the proponent and relevant federal ministers to be completed.

The final decision was initially due on 18 November but because the proposed decision was made a little later than expected, the final decision date needed to be postponed until after this consultation period. Therefore, the department has extended the date for the final decision by two weeks to allow that consultation process to be completed and to give the minister time to consider any submissions before he makes his final decision.

Under national environment law, the consultation process with the proponent and the relevant ministers is legally required and the minister must consider any comments he receives during that consultation period before he makes his final decision.

Minister makes proposed decision

Environment Minister Peter Garrett made his proposed decision on the Traveston Dam proposal.

The minister announced on 11 November 2009 that he is proposing to refuse the project because of the likely impacts on nationally protected species.

• Proposed "no" decision for Traveston - media release 11 November 2009
• Notification of proposed decision: EPBC 2006/3150

Additional expert reviews

The department recently commissioned additional expert reviews of the Traveston Dam proposal. These were publicly released when the minister announced his proposed decision.

Further advice from Professor Stuart Bunn on likely impacts on nationally protected species and their habitat:

• Traveston Crossing Dam - QWI response to reviewers report - III: Reply (PDF - 88 KB) - Professor Stuart Bunn

Economic analysis of the proposal by the Centre for International Economics:

• Review of economic aspects of Traveston Crossing Dam Environmental Impact Assessment documentation - Part 1 (PDF - 323 KB)
• Review of economic aspects of Traveston Crossing Dam Environmental Impact Assessment documentation - Part 2 - Review of Coordinator General's report (PDF - 164 KB)

What is a proposed decision?

Under the national environment law, the minister makes a proposed decision before making a final decision.

The proponent and relevant federal ministers have 10 business days to comment on a proposed decision.

The making of a proposed decision and allowing the proponent to comment is a requirement under the legislation and ensures the process meets the requirements of natural justice.

It is also a statutory requirement that the relevant federal ministers are invited to comment, in particular on economic and social matters relating to the proposal, but also on matters relating to the principles of ecologically sustainable development. This ensures the minister's final decision includes full and informed consideration of these matters.

Following the comment period the minister will consider the comments provided and make his final decision in a timely manner.

The Traveston Dam proposal

The Traveston Dam proposal involves building and operating a new dam on the Mary River, about 207km from the mouth of the river and 27km upstream of Gympie, Queensland.

The Queensland Government announced the proposal as part of the South East Queensland Water Grid—a network of water transfer pipelines between existing and proposed water storages, a water recycling scheme, a desalination plant and other measures. The intention is to secure and increase the available water supplies in the South East Queensland region.

Why the federal government is assessing it

The federal government determined that the Traveston Dam proposal needed to be federally assessed because of the likely significant impacts on federally protected threatened species, in particular the Australian lungfish, the Mary River turtle and the Mary River cod.

The federal process is also looking closely at the likely impacts of the Traveston Dam proposal on the giant barred frog, Coxen’s fig parrot, migratory species such as shorebirds, the green turtle and the dugong, as well as the Great Sandy Strait Ramsar wetland and the World Heritage values of Fraser Island.

Federal vs state environment laws

The federal government is responsible for protecting matters listed under the federal environment legislation—the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, while the state government is responsible for protecting matters under state legislation. Sometimes matters are listed under both state and federal laws, such as the Australian lungfish.

However, in some instances, there may be species or other matters that the federal government cannot consider because they are not protected under the federal environment legislation. Legally, the minister cannot consider matters that fall outside the federal environment law.

The bilateral process

The Traveston Dam proposal has been assessed under the bilateral agreement between the federal and Queensland governments. This process minimises duplication by allowing one assessment to be done, which considers both the state and federal matters, rather than having two separate assessments.

The state is accredited to carry out the assessment, looking at the federal matters as well as the state matters.

However, after the assessment stages, two separate decisions are made on whether to approve the project—one by the state and one by the federal government.

Expert reports

The federal environment department has commissioned a number of independent expert reviews on the Traveston Dam proposal. This includes:

• a review of impacts of the dam on nationally protected matters by Associate Professor Keith Walker
• a review of impacts of the dam on nationally protected matters by Professor Stuart Bunn
• a review of impacts of the dam on the Mary River turtle by Dr Gerald Kuchling, and
• a review of the hydrological model used to predict flow impacts in the environmental impacts statement by Drew Bewsher

The findings of the reviews by Associate Professor Walker, Professor Bunn and Dr Kuchling found that the area to be flooded contains important habitat for the Mary River turtle, Mary River cod, Australian lungfish and the southern barred frog which is critical to their ongoing survival.

These experts also advised that it would be highly unlikely that the dam would provide suitable foraging and breeding habitat to support the self-sustaining populations of these species. The experts were also critical of many of the mitigation and offset measures proposed by the proponent.

The review by Drew Bewsher of the hydrological model used in the draft environmental impact statement and supplementary report for the dam found that the model was appropriate for modelling the impacts of the proposed dam on the Mary River hydrological regime. Mr Bewsher also reported that the underlying data and assumptions used in the modelling were sound and that the model is capable of producing relatively accurate predictions. However, the reviewer did not extend his endorsement to the hydrological information chosen by the proponent for presentation in the draft environmental impact statement or its usefulness for the purposes of environmental impact assessment.

The reports can be viewed via the links below:

• Environmental impact statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): a review with regard for species of concern under the EPBC Act 1999 (PDF - 1.2 MB) - Associate Professor Keith Walker
• Review of EIS and supplementary materials of proposed Traveston Crossing Dam, Mary River, SE Qld (PDF - 163 kB) - Professor Stuart Bunn
• Independent expert review of the information provided in the Traveston Crossing Dam EIS that relates to the Mary River Turtle (EPBC referral 2006/3150) (PDF - 133 KB) - Dr Gerald Kuchling
• Hydrological modelling review: Traveston Crossing Dam draft EIS: final report (PDF - 246 KB) - Drew Bewsher

Further information

• About the EPBC Act
• What is protected under the EPBC Act?
• Environment assessment and approval process
• Senate Inquiry report 
• Burnett River Dam (Paradise Dam) - final compliance audit report