Gladstone harbour - the truth and the pain to bring it to light

Truth never lost ground by enquiry. - WILLIAM PENN, Some Fruits of Solitude

 

Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains taken to bring it to light. - GEORGE WASHINGTON

Photo by John Mikkelsen

Finally the truth has come out in the major metropolitan newspapers about what has been killing marine life in Gladstone harbour. To be fair the situation wasn’t helped by the Gladstone Port Corporation (GPC) withholding reports from public examination for over two years. The local newspaper, the Gladstone Observer, has finally reported the news instead of printing the version presented by the GPC without too much outside inquiry. The full page advertising by GPC at the time may have been co-incidental.  

The enquiry for truth has largely been pursued in the alternative media on blog sites. The most prolific writer about the disaster besetting Gladstone harbour is John Mikkelsen or Mikko to his online friends, a semi-retired journalist living at the time at Tannum Sands who could see first-hand the fish deaths, could talk to the local fishermen and the scientists who came to investigate.

John Mikkelsen in his latest blog post, Gladstone Harbour- dredging up what went wrong, writes of the “latest of the belated reports emerging showing how environmental breaches went unreported in Gladstone Harbour;” referring to Tony Moore’s December 20th Brisbane Times newspaper article, Gladstone Harbour bund wall failures explained.

The Australian in the November 18^th issue carried the article, Fish fears rise over LNG port dredging, revealing how GPC withheld reports for more than two years containing evidence contrary to the GPC claim that the problems were all caused by a flood in 2011, a scenario that as time went on became increasingly apparent to be unlikely.  The author of this article in the Australian is the Environment editor, Graham Lloyd who has since followed up with two more articles, Bad build blamed for fish deaths and Gladstone port plea to stem toxic leak.



 

Photo Brisbane Times

The evidence now available supports what John Mikkelsen has been writing since September 2011. His articles were published in two of Australia’s largest blog sites, Something’s really fishy in the Gladstone waters at The Punch on October 2011 and then on the 26^th at ABC’s Unleashed, Gladstone fish can't read.

But the enquiry into truth was not without cost, on October 17^th 2011 Mikko who several years previously had held the position of editor of the Gladstone Observer wrote:

“”Yesterday I watched a convoy of tugs towing barges loaded with dredging spoil past Tannum Sands to the dumping grounds in open waters just outside the entrance to Gladstone Harbour, the scene of widespread controversy surrounding continuing catches of sick fish and dead marine animals.

On Wild Cattle Island, a national park just south of Tannum beach, I saw the carcass of another dead adult turtle washed up at low tide, the latest in more than 200 strandings.

In the past week, local media outlets have all run full-page advertisements from the Gladstone Ports Corporation stating “Water quality in Gladstone Harbour is OK”. Tell that to the fish.

Meanwhile, for almost five years I have been writing a weekly column, ‘What Goes Around’ in The Gladstone Observer. For the past month, I have focussed on the harbour controversy but it has now been axed because of “budget restrictions”. All online comments to articles relating to the harbour and diseased fish were removed just over a week ago and since then new articles have not allowed online comment.

All that could be coincidental and I am not suggesting otherwise, just presenting the circumstances. My last article, published in today’s Observer (October 17)”

The above quote was published at a community blog site that no longer deserves to be named. This article attracted several thousand views to the ongoing comments that kept people up to date to the unfolding situation at Gladstone harbour. Most of these views would have been from people keeping themselves informed rather than those actually commenting.  Unfortunally the article also attracted a couple of people with the zealous desire to discredit the evidence being presented and although living far away from Gladstone were very persistent in harassment often using cherry picked Google searches. The article was deleted in November 2012 because of the abuse of trust that the community placed in one person to hold the site’s password; it was deleted for no other reason than this person choose at the time to disagree with it.

The original post was copied and is available at the pindanpost blog site. Many pages of updated comments, including informed scientific commentary, are lost.   

It appeared that the motivation to persistently harass the events at Gladstone harbour to be reported and commented upon was that environmental groups had subsequently become active about the issue and that if the ‘greenies’ were making statements they had to be automatically wrong. While it is certainly easy to find many examples of the extreme end of the environmental movement in their ‘the end justifies the means’ approach using alarmism, misinformation and even sabotage, it is simplistic to assume that everyone interested in environmental issues are of bad character with incorrect information. Whenever in this harassment it was pointed out the greenies were involved with Gladstone harbour, Mikko would patiently reply that “even a broken clock is right twice a day.”    

Social media can be and is being used for good; the enquiry into the truth about Gladstone harbour would not have proceeded without the use of blog sites. However it also provides a soap box for those that society would not have otherwise have provided for some people. It brings out the ‘haters’ from both the politically left and the right. It provides the opportunity for you to hear the viewpoint that you want to hear and to attack every view expressed by other sources that have been pigeon holed as wrong. Social media provides the opportunity for those that wish to rant, engage in absolutes and abuse just as it can provide the opportunity for enquiry, positive engagement and thoughtfulness. 



Photo sourced -

Science panellooks at water, not sick fish

 Those of us who are politically conservative and are interested in a balance of conservation with economic development and community values should stand strong against the attacks of some on the left who believe that the only legitimate comment on environmental issues is owned by them. Also those of us you are politically conservative and are interested into the enquiry into the truth of a situation should resist the weakness that requires one to retreat to known absolutes and not allow new events to challenge one’s thinking. Sometime there are circumstances where you end up on a parallel course to others that are normally in opposition; it appears that some are so insecure in their own convictions that they create an artificial world of “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet”.

 

 

Congratulations Mikko for the truth belatedly being reported in the major metropolitan main stream media. You have stuck to your guns; the truth has ultimately prevailed thanks to the pains you took to bring it to light. The pursuit may have not been without pain; there are a few people that owe you an apology.

The event of November 2012 was the catalyst for the beginning of this blog site and below is the list of the posts published by John Mikkelsen about the Gladstone Harbour

Turtle, dugong deaths 'directly linked to dredging'

Did the floods two years ago cause this?

 

Gladstone fishers unimpressed by compensation offer

Dredging resumed at the height of Gladstone's record flood

Gladstone Ports Corporation swimming in sea of controversy

Gladstone Ports Corp should stick with coal, not seafood marketing

Science panel looks at water, not sick fish

Resource consultants 'like supermodels who won't get up for less than $5000 a day'

Photo sourced from,

Bacterial infection ‘linked to dredging’

Call to halt Gladstone port development proposals

UNESCO's latest warning on threats to Great Barrier Reef

Bacterial infection ‘linked to dredging’

Fishers' lucky to have survived toxic algae'

‘Mining captures politics’ – author claims

Author calls for Royal Commission into 'political capture by mining'

 

Gladstone Harbour- dredging up what went wrong

 

UPDATE #1

May 9 2014

The independent report to federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt was released on and it reveals that there was an obvious determined attempt to cover up the whole devastating effects of the dredging and leaking bund wall, coinciding with the fish disease and toxic algae outbreaks.

Bad build and oversight failure at Gladstone gas hub.

.

Fishers 'lucky to have survived toxic algae'

(Second in a series on evidence to a Senate select committee as published in the Queensland Telegraph

http://www.queenslandtelegraph.com/fishers-lucky-to-have-survived-toxic-algae/

http://www.queenslandtelegraph.com/bacterial-infection-linked-to-dredging/

Looking up Gladstone Harbour towards The Narrows with Curtis Island towards the top of picture.

By John Mikkelsen

EVIDENCE that two Gladstone fishers were lucky to have survived an encounter with toxic algae, was presented to a Senate committee hearing into a proposed new bill to halt development  in environmentally sensitive Reef waters. 

Serious  health concerns had coincided with the outbreak of disease in fish and other marine life claimed to be associated with the massive dredging project in Gladstone Harbour, the committee heard.

The Telegraph last week reported the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee had been told of a ‘cluster’ of  rare bacterial infections, by environmental medicine specialist Dr Andrew Jeremijenko.

Evidence was given later of other fishermen who were hospitalized, “two by ambulance,on morphine drips, who were lucky to have survived”.

Replying to a question from committee chair, Sen Doug Cameron, aquatic disease vetinarian Dr Matt Landos, said he was aware of the shewanella bacteria referred to previously by Dr Jeremijenko. He said there were two human health concerns that had arisen from the harbour development process.

“ Around 50 people became ill in a very short time which coincided with all the animals in the harbour becoming ill and dying.

“There were two things that happened. They started dredging without any

sediment control before re-suspension. It is possible, when you dredge, to minimise how far all of that sediment that you stir up goes. It is like putting a blender into the bottom, and you can either put a net around your blender and hold all the suspended sediment in, or you can just let it run with the tide.

“In Gladstone, they just let it run with the tide. Unfortunately, the tides are four metres and they run at four or five knots. So the satellite images show we have a 34 kilometre dredge plume of uncontrolled, re-suspended, toxic sediment going throughout the harbour. 

“Harbour sediments contain nutrient, so what we have done is fertilise the harbour.” This generated more bacteria and toxic algal blooms. The toxic algal bloom appeared to have been the reason why the harbour was shut to all fishing at that time.

“Several of the fishermen were hospitalised and, as a result of the advice I gave them, through to their GP, they identified that algal toxins were being inhaled off their nets.

“Two of those people had to be immediately taken to hospital by ambulance on morphine drips and are lucky to have survived.

“The reason the algal bloom happened was not natural. It was driven by the increased flux of nutrient from uncontrolled re-suspension. It was not just chance that it happened when it did.

“It also drove these infections with Shewanella that Andrew Jeremijenko spoke about.

“Some of those people are still sick and have lost the use of limbs as a result of these

infections,” Dr Landos said.

Sen Cameron:  “Are you aware of any action by the Queensland health authorities on this?

Dr Landos:  “No, their action has been largely to suggest that there is no problem with eating the fish, there is  no problem with eating the crabs and the water is fine. They have supported, with Gladstone Ports Corporation, sponsoring a $1.2 million media program locally to say, 'The water's fine, go out and use the harbour; everything's

great.'

He said the idea that all the problems were caused by a flood was “somewhat fanciful”.

The problem with approval of projects like Gladstone’s and  other ports projects now in the pipeline, was that there were ‘multiple beneficiaries’ including government.

“With the government then managing the project, we have an issue with the independence of management; and, with the proponent running the science program, we have an issue with the management of the science,” Dr Landos said.

A four metre tiger shark washed up on Tannum Beach, January 2011. Dredging started in September- October 2010.

Bacterial infection ‘linked to dredging’

by John Mikkelsen

First published at the  

 

 EVIDENCE of a likely link between serious bacterial infections and contaminated dredge spoil in Gladstone Harbour has been presented to a Senate select committee by an environmental medicine specialist previously employed by a major resource company.

Dr Andrew Jeremijenko told the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee last week he knew of three cases of the rare shewenella bacteria infecting Gladstone fishermen. He said this was normally associated with heavy metals and it was “extremely rare” to find a cluster of three cases.

A patient of his had been on the verge of having a leg amputated  when the infection was finally diagnosed after 12 months. Before that, doctors had been unable to find the cause or effective treatment.

Gladstone patient left leg & foot


“This person was written off as an undiagnosed case—just a swollen leg. It took a year to find out what he had. A friend of his also had shewenella, so we have had a number of cases,” Dr Jeremijenko said.

He said he knew of another case in Gladstone he was not involved with, where the patient did lose a leg. “In that case it was a vibrio infection."

"The study by the (State) government is a fairly superficial one. In my view it did not follow up these patients for long enough,” Dr Jeremijenko said.

His Gladstone patient was a shark fisherman. “He chops off shark fins for a living, then he pushes the body of the shark away and wraps up the fins and sends them to Asia.
“The shark has had all that disease on it. The juice was falling on to his left leg, which is the leg that got infected….

The other case was a fisherman who got it from washing his boat out. He had to go down into the water to adjust the pump and got the infection there.”

Dr Jerimijenko said the bacteria was more often seen in ‘boat people’ refugees, where there were dead fish and ‘hot water’ at the bottom of the boats.

He told the committee the bacteria was also found in “a lot of the sick fish in Gladstone Harbour”.
“Shewenella is very interesting because it is associated with heavy metals.

In fact, if you have a site contaminated with heavy metals, an anaerobic environment, it can chew up the metal and clean up the site.

“I think that what has happened in this case is that the dredging has pulled up all these bacteria along with the metals that we see in the dredge spoil. It has made the shewenella bio-available and that has caused the infection in these people…. It is extremely rare to have a cluster of three cases…. you would need more cases than that to call it statistically significant—but it is certainly an aberration that needs to be investigated,” Dr Jeremijenko said.

The Senate committee has been gathering evidence from a number of scientists and other interested groups to report on the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Great Barrier Reef) Bill 2013.

Dr Jeremijenko said he was previously employed as Chief Medical Officer for Woodside, a major resource company, and had worked closely with them for years on improving health in the Pilbara. The company he now runs, TeleDoctor, has for three years supported QGC and Origin Energy (which are involved in the multi-billion dollar coal seam gas and LNG industries in Central Queensland).

“We have done dredging in Woodside for many years to open that harbour, but we have not seen infections like this (at Gladstone).
“There are ways to do dredging safely. You can use things like silt curtains. You can use closed containment systems. You can now suck out the spoil from underneath the top area and that can protect you from having all the tides washing up the turbidity… but they cost more money.”

With Abbot Point (near Bowen), they said that they looked at onshore disposal, which is the preferred method for acid sulphate soils, and they found that it was too expensive; it was economically prohibitive,” Dr Jeremijkenko said.

.

UNESCO's latest warning on threats to Great Barrier Reef

I think it's good to have articles posted recently suggesting threats to our world icon  the Great Barrier Reef are grossly exaggerated, but here is the other side of the coin. Parts of the Reef no doubt are still healthy, other parts are obviously under threat, including the southern section off Gladstone and the World Heritage Area which includes all of Gladstone Harbour.
My article below as published on the Queensland Telegraph at  . http://www.queenslandtelegraph.com/lack-of-report-cards-on-barrier-reef-health-a-concern/

and  the Great Barrier Reef Blog at
 http://www.greatbarrierreef.org.au/great-barrier-reef-fed-and-state-govt-crap-response-to-unesco/

The three massive LNG plants under construction on Curtis Island in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area (construction much more advanced now).  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the effects on water quality in a once pristine waterway, and what was once hundreds of hectares of mangroves.

Heron Island, a popular international tourist destination off Gladstone.

Lack of report cards on Barrier Reef health a concern

ENVIRONMENTALISTS remain pessimistic that the Great Barrier Reef will be placed on the World Heritage Committee’s in danger list,  despite a new ultimatum to the State and Federal Governments to take prompt action to protect it.

In an interim report recently released, UNESCO gave both governments until next February to convince it that effective measures were being taken to halt new port developments and improve water quality.

Following major concerns raised in a delegates’ mission report last March, the international body said some progress had been made, but not enough to demonstrate that the Reef’s outstanding universal value  (OUV) was protected.

Coastal development and water quality issues in Gladstone were again highlighted, together with proposed development at Port Alma and Balaclava Island.

When the World Heritage Committee meets in Cambodia next month, it is expected to adopt the new recommendation. This states that the Great Barrier Reef be included in the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2014,  ‘‘in the absence of a firm and demonstrable commitment’’ from the state and federal governments to take action.

UNESCO referred to a draft Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy released by the Queensland Government last October which proposed to prevent “significant” development outside existing port areas until 2022, but said this did not restrict development to existing footprints of individual ports.

“According to the strategy, development can occur in all areas identified in the land use plans for each port,” UNESCO said.

“The World Heritage Centre and IUCN received reports indicating that in recent years a number of port boundaries were extended significantly to include areas of significant habitat that contribute to OUV.

“They note that the Queensland Deputy Premier’s media release announcing the draft Port Strategy stated that future development would be possible ‘at several locations such as Balaclava Island and Port Alma in the Port of Gladstone’.

“They also note that both these locations are outside existing major port areas (40 to 50 km away from the port of Gladstone), in the relatively undeveloped Fitzroy River delta, and that there is currently no development on Balaclava Island that could justify its classification as an existing port area.”

It was also critical of the lack of promised annual “report cards” on the Reef, pointing out that so far only one had been published for 2009 as the baseline.

“…another key concern is the lack of clarity about whether the negative trend in water quality continues to be reduced and the positive signs of restoration are maintained, as annual water quality report cards have not been published as predicted. They recommend that the  (World Heritage) Committee urge the State Party to confirm a clear financial commitment by the Australian Government to maintain the Reef Rescue program as a matter of urgency…”

In response, Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke claimed the government had already taken steps and would work with the WHC to protect the value of the reef.

‘‘It’s one of the most precious places on earth,’’ he said.

‘‘Some of the recent announcements have not yet been incorporated into today’s  (UNESCO) report, such as a $200 million commitment to the next stage of Reef Rescue.’’

But according to Save the Reef spokesman Dr Andrew Jerimijenko, that was not nearly enough.  He told the Telegraph:

“It is like getting a butterfly net to stop a plague of locusts.  It is not going to bring back the 50 percent of coral already lost, it is not going to even stop us losing the next 50 percent in 10 years.

“ We need something like the $12 billion given to save the Murray River.

“The Crown of Thorns is being driven by sediment (dredge spoil feeds them).  He has to stop industry using the Great Barrier Reef as a dump.  He has to stop approving the industrialisation of the Reef, and he has to do this in less than four months, because I can’t see (Opposition Environment spokesman) Greg Hunt being any better.

“If I were a betting man I would put money on a 2014 In Danger listing”.

Australians for Animals coordinator Sue Arnold  said the UNESCO warning indicated “the same old story”.

“Both the state and federal governments will allow the GBR World Heritage Area to be destroyed in the name of economic development.

“Gillard’s government is the most anti-environmental government in the history of this country, only equalled by the crap coming out of the Newman ministers,” she claimed.

However, Queensland Environment Minister Andrew Powell is confident the reports required of the State Government would be presented to UNESCO in time to avoid the threatened in danger listing.

He said the LNP government was already reviewing Gladstone Harbour and compiling a ports strategy. It was already assessing the health of the Reef through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority in cooperation with the Federal  Government.

By John Mikkelsen

Science panel looks at water, not sick fish

From the Queensland Telegraph and also published at The Great Barrier Reef Blog
http://www.greatbarrierreef.org.au/new-science-panel-looks-at-water-not-sick-fish-by-john-mikkelsen-the-queensland-telegraph/

By John Mikkelsen

SPECULATION has been running hot over membership of the State Government’s new science panel to oversee Gladstone Harbour water quality, with claims there is no focus on the health of marine animals.

Makeup of the panel under the leadership of marine scientist Dr Ian Poiner was announced recently by Environment Minister Andrew Powell, but in local media comments, some Gladstone residents have pointed out the notable omission of a scientist who has already conducted independent research in the harbour, aquatic veterinarian  Dr Matt Landos.

Dr Landos yesterday confirmed to the Telegraph there was no one on the panel with veterinary fish health expertise.  He said the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists had an aquatic animal health chapter, of which he was a long term member.

“None of the members are on the panel. Only registered vets are qualified under the Veterinary Surgeons Act to make a diagnosis as an act of veterinary science.

“You go to a doctor when you are sick for a diagnosis.....not some other scientist. 

“They are obsessed with looking at indirect measures of health- for example, water quality, rather than look at the outcome- which is the animals living in the toxic soup they are creating.

“A classic case of they don’t know, what they don’t know, so a multi-disciplinary team approach is warranted…” he  said. (Dr Landos recently released a detailed scientific report on behalf of charity group, the Gladstone Fishing Research Fund, which blamed major dredging as the most likely cause of continuing disease in marine life).

Mr Powell said the science panel was tasked with providing independent expert advice about the long term management of water quality in Gladstone Harbour . It would provide open, transparent, peer-reviewed science to the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership.

"The Independent Science Panel brings the key experts together at one table to integrate research and monitoring into a report card that gives a picture of the management of Gladstone Harbour and its surrounds," Mr Powell said.

He said the other panel members were chosen by Dr Poiner and were experts in their particular field. Local expertise was also being sought on the panel  from Central Queensland University.

Panel members to date include: Dr Richard Brinkman – hydrodynamics; Dr Michele Burford – biogeochemistry; Dr Rob Coles - marine biodiversity; Dr Cathy Dichmont - decision support and modeling; Dr Britta Schaffelke - water quality;Dr Jenny Stauber - marine toxicology; Dr Eva Abal - ecosystem health.

 Mr Powell said some of the first tasks the panel would undertake included mapping existing monitoring and research in the harbour to identify duplication and knowledge gaps.

"They will make recommendations to the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership on actions required to address any emerging science issues.

"The group will also develop the design for future Gladstone Healthy Harbour Report Cards,” Mr Powell said.

"This is an important step that sees industry, government, research and the local community all working together to achieve and maintain a healthy Gladstone Harbour."

Dredging resumed at the height of Gladstone's record flood

This article was published in today's Queensland Telegraph. Fair minded people might question how dredging at the height of a record flood which left a plume photographed by an astronaut in space days later, could be reconciled with claimed environmental safeguards.

 Above: The fast Dutch dredge Rotterdam sails past Tannum Sands on return from the spoil dumping grounds off Facing Island. Photos taken four days after dredging resumed On January 27, the day the Boyne River peaked at 8.3metres over the Awoonga Dam spillway.

This vessel was washed away from its mooring and foundered near the Boyne mouth. Photo taken the morning that Gladstone Ports Corporation resumed its major dredging project. Apparently turbidity readings showed it was safe to dredge.

Photos and article by John Mikkelsen

GLADSTONE Ports Corporation resumed its controversial  major harbour dredging  at the height of the Australia Day weekend floods, after a brief halt.

This was revealed by a GPC spokesperson in response to questions by The Queensland Telegraph following the re-appearance of the dredges Rotterdam and Al Mahar in harbour waters, which still appeared to be visibly murky from flood waters.

The Rotterdam is a fast, self-propelled trailing suction hopper dredge which dumps spoil at East Banks, off shore near Facing Island. It featured recently in a French TV Planet Hope news feature which focussed on the port developments at Gladstone and Abbot Point. Al Mahaar is a non self-propelled suction cutter dredge.

According to the GPC spokesperson, the dredges resumed operating at 6 am on Sunday, January 27, which was several hours before the Awoonga Dam spillway reached a record overflow height of 8.3 metres and houses downstream at Benaraby and low-lying sections of Boyne/ Tannum were inundated. More than 200 people sought refuge at emergency centres set up at Tanyalla in Tannum Sands and the PCYC in Gladstone. The overflow was about twice the height of the 2010 – 2011 event.

These are facts which we present without comment as historical context. Our questions and replies by the GPC spokesperson on Monday (February 4) are also presented without embellishment below.

“Q. What is the current status of dredging and turbidity? 

A. Dredging stopped when harbour was closed by MSQ at 6pm Thursday 24 January and recommenced when harbour was opened with all dredges operating at 6am on Sunday 27 January.   The initial response to the recent flood event in the Western Basin was extremely high turbidity (300+ NTU). Since the flows have slowed down the harbour is now a mixture of sea water and freshwater. The brackish water leads to the ‘flocculation’ of suspended particles and this causes suspended material that causes turbidity to reduce. This is most pronounced at the surface of the water column and is likely to be the reason for the low turbidity currently being observed in the basin. During our routine monthly monitoring last week we observed very high turbidity in the lower water column, further supporting the process previously described (Jan 2013 WQ report will be related in late Feb on http://www.westernbasinportdevelopment.com.au/environmental_reports/section/environmental). In the medium term this material will settle to the seabed, but if a high energy event occurs (i.e. storm event with strong wind) this material is likely to be resuspended into the water column. This process is not new to the western basin, or any other nearshore marine environment, and has been observed in the past.  Turbidity and Light graphs are updated daily on the Western Basin Port Project website.

Q. Are there any other dredges operating and when did the Rotterdam actually re-commence dredging?  

A. As above.  (There is currently two dredges working on the WBDDP, the Rotterdam and the Al Mahaar.  However, the Castor works periodically on the WBDDP.  All this information is available on the website.

Q. Is it too early to tell how the floods have impacted the shipping channels here (and at Burnett Heads and Port Alma?)

A. At this time surveys are taking place to determine if the floods have impacted shipping channels. Once complete for Gladstone, Port Alma and Bundaberg will be done when safe to do so”.

Meanwhile, an environmental group has questioned how an astronaut saw and photographed the flood plumes on Tuesday, February 29 as published in last Saturday’s Telegraph while harbour monitors apparently showed no problems with turbidity.

Save the Reef said the dramatic pictures of the Queensland flood plume taken by astronauts showed a brown muddy harbour from outer space, “yet Gladstone Ports Corporation’s  water quality monitoring program says it is safe to dredge the inner harbour.

“If Gladstone Ports Corporation’s light monitors say conditions are OK in a flood plume, there must be a problem,” according to spokesperson Dr Libby Connors.

She said Environment Minister Andrew Powell had expressed his concern that the plume would deposit sediment on seagrass meadows, severely damaging them.

‘Despite high turbidity, the light monitoring continues to indicate there is no problem but any lay person can see from the flood plume photos that light cannot reach the harbour floor and the seagrass will struggle to survive, “ she claimed.

“Save the Reef says that these events provide more data for UNESCO to question the capacity of the Queensland and Australian Governments to manage the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.”

(The Federal Government  reported to UNESCO on the management of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area as requested on Friday, February 1. If UNESCO rejects the report, the Great Barrier Reef may be placed on the "In Danger" list).