SSD 6395 - Bobs Farm Sand Mine Project

I wish to object to the proposed sand mine development SSD 6395 at Bob's
Farm. Objections as follows Within the Development Application the
site is described by Wildthing documentation in the following terms:
The study area forms part of a significant ecological corridor that
runs down the coast from the
Tomago Sandbeds in the south along the Stockton Bight to the Tomaree
Peninsula in the north. The
ecological corridor occurring along Stockton Bight is restricted by
the bare shifting sand dunes to the
east and largely cleared agricultural land to the west. The Lower
Hunter Regional Strategy (Planning
2006) identifies this area as part of a key green corridor linking
large vegetated areas, allowing the
movement and dispersal of biodiversity within the region. This
corridor links the Watagans and
Yengo National Parks with the coastal plains of the Tomago Sand beds,
Stockton Bight and Port
Stephens. The Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Biodiversity
Conservation Strategy (House,
2003) also identifies the Coastal Sand Apple - Blackbutt Forest
occurring along the Stockton Bight
dune system as a regionally significant habitat linkage. The Hunter
Regional Plan 2036 (NSW
Government, 2016) also shows the site to occur within a Biodiversity
Corridor.
The fragment of vegetation that the study area is situated has also
been mapped as a key habitat
(NPWS 2002). Key habitats define areas identified as centres of high
native species diversity for a
range of fauna assemblages (NPWS 2002). The proposal will result in
the removal of approximately
25.90ha of key habitat largely consisting of Coastal Sand Apple
Blackbutt Forest from the north-east
section of the corridor. The section of the corridor where the study
area is located is approximately
1.5km wide. (1)
This describes a significant ecological corridor site that Planning
NSW has identified as part of a key green corridor linking large
vegetated areas, allowing the movement and dispersal of biodiversity.
The Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Biodiversity Conservation
Strategy describes the forests occurring here as a regionally
significant habitat linkage. The area occurs within a Biodiversity
Corridor and is identified as a key habitat.

Despite these descriptors of an ecologically significant area within a
biodiversity corridor, this proposed sand mine development at Bob's
Farm is yet another example of habitat vs profit. The NSW State
government is unable to protect and defend our unique and fragile
environment. The government has in fact introduced legislation for
koala protection which in practice, does the exact opposite. Documents
obtained by the North Coast Environment Council and the National Parks
Association, under Freedom of Information Legislation show that the
government's proposed koala reserves fail to overlap with the location
of koala populations. The NSW government is ignoring expert advice
from one of its departments which found only 0.2 per cent of actual
koala habitats are included in the reserves earmarked by government.
Senior ecologist with the National Parks Association of NSW, Dr Oisín
Sweeney, said the findings are distressing. "This analysis shows that
unless the government starts taking koala protection seriously, we're
going to see the large-scale wipe-out of koala colonies in NSW," he
said. "The government's strategy has reserves with no koalas. That's
not going to work. To protect koalas, we need to protect where they
live, as well as protecting habitat to connect the colonies."(2)
The documents also show that only 14 per cent of the state's koala
habitats are protected. Logging, land clearing and development put 86
per cent of koala habitats at risk, located as they are on private
land and state forests. The World Wildlife Fund estimates koalas face
extinction in NSW by 2050 due to land clearing. In a report released
earlier this month, the WWF used satellite imagery to show bulldozing
rates of koala habitats have tripled since August 2017 when the
state's Native Vegetation Act was repealed.
"WWF-Australia estimates there are likely less than 20,000 koalas left
in NSW and at the current rate, they are on track to be extinct in the
state by as early as 2050," WWF-Australia conservationist Stuart
Blanch said. "We have to stop this excessive tree-clearing if we want
to keep koalas alive in the wild for future generations."(2)
Stephens Council has acknowledged the inadequacy of the environmental
assessment for the Bob's Farm Sand mine. PS Council in their
submission state:
P1 ENVIRONMENT AND ECOLOGY
A significant amount of inconsistencies and inadequacies were noted
throughout the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (Tattersall Lander
2018) and Biodiversity Assessment (Wildthing 2018) in relation to
biodiversity values for the proposed development. These include:
1. Incorrect threat listing status applied to EPBC Act listed species
resulting in incorrect assessments of significance i.e. Koala (listed
as Vulnerable, EPBC Act) has been assessed as Endangered under EPBC
significant impact criteria and Tiger Quoll (Endangered, EPBC Act) has
been assessed under Vulnerable species criteria.
2. Failure to assess the likelihood of occurrence and potential
impacts on the threatened Greater Glider, which is predicted to occur
within the locality.
P2 .......the biodiversity assessment is considered inadequate to
determine the potential impacts of the proposal on threatened species
and their habitats.
Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). The proposal site contains preferred
and supplementary Koala habitat. However, Spot Assessment Technique
(SAT) surveys were not conducted for Koala.
P3.
Inconsistent and unclear reporting of Koala habitat buffer zones to be
established. Section 14.23 of the EIS reports that "a 50m buffer over
supplementary habitat would also need to be put in place around areas
of Preferred Koala Habitat" (i.e. the area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
in the North west of the proposal area), however, site plans and
Sections 14.13, 14.16 only report a 15 metre buffer to be retained
around the area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.(3)

While Port Stephens Council expresses concern about assessments
contained in the application, the Wildthing Ecological Report itself
contains damning statistics. A total of 1217 habitat (hollow-bearing)
trees were identified within the study area as a result of a
hollow-bearing tree survey. The vast majority of hollow-bearing trees
were present within Smoothbarked Apple - Blackbutt - Old Man Banksia
woodland on coastal sands assemblage. Many of these trees were
considered to be significant as a result of their very large size as
well as the variety and number of hollows they contained. Hollows were
available for roosting or nesting avifauna species, arboreal mammals,
reptiles and tree roosting microchiropteran bat species. (4)
Of these 1217 hollow bearing trees, 877 will be cut down to make way
for a sand mine. The map indicating these trees, (see below), is very
confronting. The assessment concludes ... The loss of hollow-bearing
trees is a Key Threatening Process under Schedule 3 of the TSC Act
1995. The removal of 877 hollow-bearing trees would be a significant
loss of this resource in the local area.
P64 Wildthing Biodiversity Assessment Report 1217 habitat trees
indicated by

In conclusion, Wildthing Ecological Report lists the likely impacts of
the Sand mine development:
The proposed Sand Mine will result in the following direct and
potential impacts or losses:
* Approximately 25.90ha of Coastal Sand Smooth-barked Apple Blackbutt
Forest;
* Approximately 9.5ha of Orchard;
* Approximately 25.90ha of Supplementary Koala Habitat;
* Approximately 25.90ha of known habitat for ten affected threatened
fauna species;
Glossopsitta pusilla (Little Lorikeet), Ninox strenua (Powerful Owl),
Haliaeetus leucogaster
(White-bellied Sea Eagle), Petaurus norfolcensis (Squirrel Glider),
Scoteanax rueppellii
(Greater Broad-nosed Bat), Falsistrellus tasmaniensis (Eastern
Falsistrelle), Miniopterus
australis (Little Bentwing-bat), Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis
(Large Bentwing-bat),
Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) and Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed
Flying-fox);
* Suitable habitat for a number of additional threatened and other
flora and fauna species likely
to utilise the study area;
* Approximately 877 hollow-bearing trees;
* Habitat Fragmentation;
* Injury/Mortality to native fauna during felling of trees.(5)

The destruction of 25.9ha of known habitat for threatened fauna
species, including the bulldozing of 877 hollow-bearing trees, is
unacceptable.
As well as my concern with the loss of habitat as a result of this
proposal, I also add the following. I am concerned:
For the health of the local residents who will have their previously
peaceful rural existence destroyed by noise and air pollution
About the longevity of Bobs Farm School where the students and staff
will be constantly disturbed by laden trucks passing in close
proximity for the next 15 years. Enrolments will soon decline if this
development proceeds.
About the road and traffic safety on March Road and Nelson Bay Road
which already has to cope with a high level of heavy vehicular
traffic.
That this development is not in the public interest and has generated
widespread condemnation in the Bobs Farm and wider Port Stephens
community
That extraction below the water table has not been allowed in other
developments including sand mining, in this area.That the development
of a lake with evaporation of 90 million litres of fresh water per
year is not sound environmentally. Fresh drinking water is becoming an
increasingly valuable commodity.
I implore that this application will not be accepted. As well as the
above there will be the loss of tourism in the area because of the
amount of trucks causing traffic chaos as well as the ugly site of the
sand mine by tourists and the community.

It's not good for the environment in so many aspects!

Why is it that the NSW government who are voted in by the public NEVER
NEVER LISTEN to the public.
There are families in the area who will be effected. Doesn't anyone
care about human lives?
Bad enough the RAAF have contaminated our waterways. Now sand mining
will loosen soil around homes. Sink holes will appear HOMES will be
lost, lively hood of struggling people will be effected. Please please
have a heart have a thought for our planet. Instead of MONEY MONEY IN
THE NAME OF DEVELOPMENT you can't take it with you when you die, your
future generations will squander the wealth on drugs cause they have
been given everything on a silver plate & have NO conscience. The
future you are looking to build will ONLY HURT THE FUTURE

I am against this proposal because I believe
There has been inadequate environmental impact studies
The proposal wants to dredge below the water table which is not
consistent with usual practices as I understand
There would be further significant increase of truck movements
requiring road improvements for both traffic and pedestrian usage

I oppose the sand mine due to the high volume of heavy vehicle traffic
this will bring onto the already congested Nelson Bay road and the
surrounding roads that are generally in a poor condition. There have
unfortunately been an increased number of fatal road incidents in our
local area and the sharp rise in heavy vehicles may directly lead to
another more.

As residents surrounding the proposed site, there is absolutely no way
this application should be approved.
There is enough traffic travelling along Nelson Bay road, an
additional 100+ truck movements daily is ridiculous.
We strongly object.

I oppose the creation of a sand mine in the Bobs Farm area, due to the
negative environmental impact that the proposal will have.
The natural beauty of this area is one of the key reasons it is chosen
as and area to live in. The mine will also damage the local water
table which is part of the local water supply. The increase of traffic
(truck movements will have an adverse effect on the local traffic not
to mention the holiday traffic. The tourist industry is a major
employer in the area and any development that will effect the industry
should be strenuously opposed by local resident and local government
sometimes the greater good should be put above the greed of a company
or individual. Please NSW Planning oppose this development and show
the public that you care about our beautiful area

To whom it may concern,

Re: Response from Hunter New England Health SSD6395

I would like to formally respond to the submission by Hunter New
England Health. Hunter New England Health has relied only on the
information supplied in the EIS. There are several issues that I do
not believe have been addressed within this response as I believe they
have been omitted, whether intentional or simply because it is
currently not a requirement within the EIS itself.

The information in the EIS indicates the Air Quality modelling being
relied on from several locations which are not entirely indicative of
the location of the proposed Sand Mining operation itself. The Avocado
Farm for instance is located approximately 2.6km from the proposed
site. There are dozens of homes and businesses between these two
locations including but not limited to a Blueberry farm, a Farm Stay
accommodation, boutique brewery, boutique winery, boarding cattery,
and boarding kennels.

Within the same radius from the site, that being approximately 2.6km,
there are dozens of additional homes and businesses, including but not
limited to a Go-Kart track, a shark and ray centre, a Barramundi Farm,
Valhalla food and entertainment venue, new construction of an over
55's lifestyle resort, a Public School, and many more.

There has been no recommendation, that I am aware of, by any
Government Authority, including the EPA for specific studies into the
silica dust aspect to ensure that there are already safe levels in
existence, let alone as potential sand mining operations commence,
making it impossible at this point to ensure the safety of the public.
Residents breathe this air, are there any guarantees that this is
safe?

To its credit, Safe Work Australia, and other Government departments,
have highlighted the extreme dangers of Silica Dust. I urge that their
facts be taken into consideration during this assessment of the
SSD6395, Bobs Farm Quarry application.

I would also like to point out, as Hunter New England Health
highlighted, that the Potable Water Supply also affects the
surrounding residents as there is no source of town water available to
the surrounding residents. Surrounding residents rely on rainwater for
drinking, bathing, laundry etc which will potentially become
contaminated by the airborne silica generated by the proposed
operation. Is there a guarantee that this is safe?

Hunter New England Health has also commented on Community Engagement.
I would like to add a personal comment, which I am sure is shared by
the vast majority of the community that attended public meetings. Mr
Landers "Community Engagement" was very hostile. Whilst mentioning and
encouraging the establishment of a Community Consultation Committee,
Mr Lander was perceived as only stating this as part of his
requirement under the "community engagement" requirements of the EIS
submission. His hostility was definitely not encouraging of making
this a reality. The implication was that this was a done deal with the
Planning Department and all we, the community, could do was to object,
but then decide on what we wanted for the site after the sand mining
operation was finished! The arrogance was palpable. "Community
Engagement" this was not.

How can this even be considered where concerns include, but are not
limited to:

The Government are aware of the dangers.
Existing protections seem to only extend to the workers, not the
community.
The EIS process is outdated and offers little protection to the
community.
Modelling, in this case, has little to no bearing on the actual
location.
Modelling has no consideration for the deadly substance silica dust.


In conclusion to this response, I believe that it is totally
unacceptable to even consider this application knowing the dangers of
silica dust contamination, that ultimately being death, until such
time as the Department of Planning, the EPA, and ultimately the
Government of both the state of New South Wales, as well as the
Federal Government, can guarantee the safety of its people.

This Sand mine is poorly thought out, It will be a scare on the face of
Port Stephens, whilst operations like this have been approved in the
past, time has come to put an end to mining like this.
It is soley for the benefit of just one organization, a money making
scheme to rob the area of a natural beauty.
Whilst not a 100% pristine environment, this area of land still is
home to many native species of plant and animal life. The mine will
rip this area apart forever , the Sand mining/ Rutile and Zircon
mining that occured in Port Stephens during the 60s 70s and early 80s
still shows through with massive areas of unreabilitated land. For
example all along the side of the road at Soldiers Point turn off at
Anna Bay, robbed of natural minerals the land has never been the same.
Satellite images of Fingal Beach show there was sand mining on the
back of the beach more than 40 years ago, the area of land has not
recovered, the mining company walked away left a mess took all the
money and will never be the same
The addition of 100s more heavy vehicles traveling along the road will
increase the possibility of road crashes, not to mention the damage
caused to the road by the weight and number of trucks carrying the
sand whom do not contribute locally to the local council for road
works or repairs.
The Proposed mine will be right on the door step of a Primary School,
these children and teachers and familiar will be exposed to toxic
silica dust which is proven to cause lung disease.
This is Terrible a mine right next to a school, are we living in the
21st century or the 18h century? At the beginning of the Industrial
revolution this might have been ok but NOT today.
This is a semi rural enviroment with 2 small businesses, these
businesses rely tourism, a mine on their doostep will be devistating.
The Irikanji Shark and Ray Center which is very close is set to expand
, a neighbour like this mine, will be devistating,
This is a very ecofriendly business and produces near to no waste yet
it benefits or our communities, this is the sort of Industry/
development that we should be investing in, not mines.
The Families in the area live where they live because they want a
rural open space with clean air, this mine with trucks and loaders and
mine vehicles running making noise blowing horns will spoil this for
these families.

Sand mining in the area of Bob's Farm is not in the best interest of the
local environment. It may provide jobs in the short term but will lead
to irreparable damage to what is already a fragile ecosystem. Local
fauna and flora will be impacted plus the filtration system provided
by the sand for water runoff.
The proximity to housing and school is also a major concern.
Council needs to listen to its residents and their concerns .... so
far they DO NOT!

I am opposed to the proposed Sand mining at Bobs Farm.
I have read widely re this proposal and agree with all negative press
about this proposal. It should not be allowed to proceed.

We are against the Sandmine!
As we life near by we are very concerned about our water quality and
our water level! The framers will feel it first when they run out of
water. And slowly all other business as more and more water need to be
safed special in the summer and in the holidays season. Nelson Bay
Road is allready very busy it can't handle anymore traffic, especial
when the Tourists coming. And they are coming, in this area to enjoy
the flora and fauna, same as we locals doing. Witch will be destroyed
by the Sandmine! The Sandmine will ruin an other beautifull peace of
landscape, the water quality and will take a lot of life quality.

According to all this:
Farmers will have not enough water for they plants animals ->
farms will close ->we will get less Tourists -> local
business,hotel, restaurant ect. will run out of business ->loacals
have to leave the area were
the work is -> the housemarket will trop dramatic -> in the end
this area will turn in to a very a poor sad one

Conclusion not enough water no life !

I have read reports and information from both Port Stephens Council and
Hunter Water as they are our representatives for our area I believe
they should have the final say on any project in my area and they both
have major concerns do not approve something which is going to end up
an environmental disaster. You only have to see the mess of the Murray
Darling to know the project must not go ahead .

I am objecting to the proposed project for the following;

General EIS - define the project footprint with clear and precise
figures and plans. the figures and plans of the EIS were difficult to
understand and were not clear. please re-do.

Traffic and Transport - the proposed haul route is not supported by
Council or public due to the increased number of trucks on the road,
the potential interactions with trucks and school buses and public
transport bus stops, increase in traffic noise, cumulative impact with
other sand mining trucks in the Port Stephens LGA, Mackas Sand,
Sibelco, Redi, etc. the potetnial to damage pavement and costs to
Council (pending the Voluntary Planning Agreement)

Biodiversity - loss of threatened species habitat, most notably
koala/grey headed flying foxes, tiger quoll and cryptic orchids. the
biodiversity offset package should be further defined.

I strongly oppose the Bobs Farm Quarry my reasons are,
- it will increase large trucks on our road by upto 200 trucks a day
which equates to 400 when you cosider return trips between 7am and 6
pm, as we live only 20mts from Nelson Bay Rd this means that we will
have a large truck go past our house every 1.5 to 2 minutes.
- the increased noise and dust pollution i believe will be unhealthy
and could cause heath issues in the future for my family and as i have
asthma i am very worried about the increse in pollution
- i have 2 school aged children who are at the age where they will
start to catch buses and will have to cross a busier road.
- i have only been living here 1 year and have already had a near miss
with a large truck who was'nt happy that i had to slow down to pull
into my drive even though i indicated with plenty of warning.
-i think the plan of the trucks going north from Marsh Rd is not
feasable, i often have difficulty pulling out from Marsh rd in a car
as there is no merge lane and i strongly believe that it will be a
matter of when, not if, there is a serious accident.
-to even think about putting this quarry in so near to a public school
is ridiculous the amount of disruption this will cause to students
with the trucks going within 8mts of their classes will be
unacceptable.
-i am also worried of the health risks with silicosis with the
possibilty of the sand particles going airborne
- Port Stephens bush land has a very fragile eco system and our Koala
population has recently been decimated by fires i dont think removing
100 acres of old growth koala habitat is acceptable.
- Port Stephens already has a RED ZONE, i think this has the potential
to cause another by dredging and digging below sea level.
- for more proof of how damaging the trucks are to our roads you need
look no further than the damage caused by the loaded trucks south of
Williamtown sand mine north of the mine there is minimal damage to
pavement due to trucks entering being empty when they leave loaded it
cases major damage.

I do not support the plans to undergo with sand mining near bobs farm as
the threat to local water resources too large.

The Koala Bears in Port Stephens are endangered, mainly due to habitat
loss.This proposal will not only destroy 49 acres of Koala habitat, it
will reduce the land to a 15 metre deep sand hole, with the possible
side effects of dredging 15 metres below sea level.It has been
proposed that Port Stephens be listed as a World Heritage site.The
Sand Mines Environmental Impact statement ignores, Andrew Tindall
having approval for 20 eco-cabins, and spending $500,000 on road
upgrades, a 120 acre organic vegetable farm, the Irukandji shark and
Ray encounters.This amounts to Environmental Vandalism, it should not
be allowed!

Not complying development and in the wrong area. Too much risk to
environment and water aquifer.

This sand mine with an extra 180 trucks on the road will affect the
already very congested roadways.
It will have great impact on local fauna and Flora.
It will have detrimental Affects on the water table, Port Stephens
Council need to step in and make this right.
I completely object to this sand mind.

The Bobs Farm Sand Mine proposal is an unacceptable proposal, on an
unacceptable site, with unacceptable local impacts and outcomes for
the local community! I live within a kilometre of the site as the crow
flies not far from Bobs Farm school and the Marsh Road exit onto
Nelson Bay Road and did not even receive notice about this abdominal
proposal in my backyard!

The Bobs Farm area is a beautiful rural area that offers
environmentally sustainable and pleasing tourism opportunities that do
and could compliment the tourist trade of the main tourist centre of
Nelson Bay and this Sand Mine will ruin the area for future
generations, and importantly will have a negative impact on the
environment, local farming and rural residential lifestyles the area
provides now and in the future. I'm sure there are more suitable
locations than right on the doorsteps and in the middle of our
community.

Some of the many reasons this proposal should be abolished from the
table that I am aware of are as follows. I'm sure there would be
further impacts that are unforeseen and shudder to think of how this
monstrous mine will ruin the area and our lives.

Threat to ground water: Acid sulfate soils and water run off. Local
farming practices, livestock, all the rural properties reliant on bore
water. Aquifers will be threatened, confirmed by Hunter Water.

Environmental disaster threat and dredging below the water table to
15meters!!! Not allowed elsewhere and this area is a sensitive
environment!!!

Air pollution - dust will infiltrate our homes and local tourist
businesses including dust covering roofs that capture drinking water.
The threat of Silica dust causing cancer and damaging the lungs of
local residents and developing children especially the local school
children, also pets and livestock.

Excessive truck movements - causing alot of noise along and entering
Nelson Bay Road, from Marsh Road especially passing the school and my
house nearby where I work from home providing customer service and
trucks already make it difficult to hear when passing. This is also at
the bottom of a hill and on a bend where traffic exits the Sandhills
in an 80km zone and known as a black spot over the years. Increase to
Main road congestion especially in peak periods.

Industrial noise and vibrations will effect the lifestyle of the
community, the school, nearby homes, wineries, tourist businesses and
a proposed neighbouring eco friendly tourist business.

Excessive and damaging land clearing with no suitable option for the
enormous void left behind. This could also lead to problematic erosion
of the hill and deem the land useless. Including the loss of ancient
sand dunes.

Impact on the future of Bobs Farm school - Bobs Farm is a growing
rural community that should be nurtured and supported. This school
will have trucks passing it along a narrow road, it will be noisy,
dusty and dangerous. This mine will destroy the lifestyle and future
of this valuable and worthwhile community and will impact local
families greatly.

Loss of habitat for many native and threatened species of flora and
fauna! Confirmed by Port Stephens Council.

The threats and negative impacts far out way any benefit of this
ludicrous, selfish and inconsiderate proposal in this rural farming
and tourist town that is Bobs Farm.

Regards

Ronelle Swan