,

Ideas for appeals, letters and emails to save North and Bibra Lakes

ALL APPEALS ARE DUE BY 27th September and cost $10. Please ask everyone you know to do one REASONS TO APPEAL the EPA DECISION (If you can please use these as ideas only. You may have your own very good reasons to appeal this unwise decision.)

  1. The loss of these wetlands is unacceptable to me/my group/community. North and Bibra Lake’s parks, reserve and wetlands are one of the last on the Swan Coastal Plain and contain Carnaby’s and Red Tailed Forest cockatoo habitat.
  2. An EPA approval for this project would signal than nowhere in the state is safe from development, especially anywhere with threatened wildlife.
  3. The EPA is supposed to protect the environment not act as a broker for development.
  4. The biodiversity in North and Bibra Lakes is greater than Kings Park’s. There are no other parks or reserves of this size and ecology in my area.
  5. No offset could ever replace or compensate the community for the loss of this wetland system, environmentally or culturally.
  6. If built the highway would disturb and destroy one of the most important cultural sites for Noongar people, this is unacceptable in this day and age.
  7. The highway would clear 97.8 ha of native vegetation and 6.8 ha of wetlands in my area/community/city/ state. Not enough has been done to minimise or avoid the prospect of this destruction.
  8. Roe 8 is out dated. There are much better ways of moving freight around now. Rail is the smarter long term solution.
  9. The Roe 8 option is too expensive. 5 km of unnecessary highway would cost upwards of $730 million or more.
  10. North and Bibra Lakes are crucially important because they are linked underground to all the other wetlands in the area and this affects for our water future. The EPA has not considered the cumulative effects on the waterways for the whole of the Beeliar Wetlands. There is not enough certainty in the evidence presented by the EPA on the proponent’s research on ground water hydrology.
  11. Not enough research has been done. There is not enough evidence in the EPA report that the proponent has acknowledged or planned to avoid, mitigate or manage the cumulative health effects from the proposed Roe 8 highway for my/kids/family/ community’s/all the wildlife in the area. We face long term affects from emissions, noise, the removal of so many trees and vegetation, and, pollution of the waterways.
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *