Skip to the record
For the highest quality transcripts.

Original source · versioned page text

2021-01-18 GC - Item 2 - Attachment 2 - Consultation Report River Plan Version 1 (2018)

of 22

Page text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.

Plans and drawings

This document appears to be plans or drawings. Its page text below holds only the words printed on the drawings, without the drawings themselves, so it may be jumbled or hard to follow. To see the plans as drawn, choose Original above or download the file (both need you to log in).

Log in to see the plans as drawn
                        -   It is important that plan items are prioritised, to ensure the most important are worked on first.
                        -   Only then should new items be added, as these milestones are ticked off.
                        -   In short it should be a ‘living document’ that is constantly being updated.
                        -   Turning to the specifics of the Draft River Plan, our interests are on amenity, health, safety and managing risk.
                        -   If NC are able to take over management of the river, we would like to see the following (listed in other sections).
                        -   In summary, a more compact plan with a clear performance timeline will achieve better results.
                        -   There is a need for better management of what occurs on the Noosa River.
                        -   Contingency plans need to be developed so when there is a threat on the Noosa River Council are able to respond immediately with mitigation
                            measures.
                        -   If there is no transfer of river management powers then the plan will become words on paper with no meaningful results.

Pelican Boat Hire / T   -   BACKGROUND
Boat Hire               -   Pelican Boat Hire has operated on the Noosaville Foreshore for 62 years and provides services to locals, visitors, charter boat operators, commercial
                            tourism companies, transport companies and recreational boat users.
                        -   We have a vested interest in ensuring the health and safety of the NR and welcome the development of a well-considered and properly consulted on
                            river plan.
                        -   We also live directly on the main river and believe we have a unique insight as both a river resident and river business operator.
                        -   T Boat Hire has operated on the Noosaville Foreshore for 90 years and provides services to locals, visitors, commercial tourism companies, transport
                            companies and recreational boat users.
                        -   We have a vested interest in ensuring the health and safety of the Noosa River and welcome the development of a well-considered and properly
                            consulted on river plan.
                        -   We have also been involved in the management of the NPF the most successfully managed prawn fishery in the world that only came about with the
                            involvement of fisherman, government and the fisheries cooperating.
                        -   There are so many proposals from the 2004 river management plan, that council has failed to act on, shouldn’t you address these before more red tape
                            is created i.e. houseboat live a boards, mooring strategy 2008 which council engaged a consultant at considerable expense to the community.
                        -   While councils come and go management of the river should be left to the departments that currently manage the river with a consistent detailed
                            knowledge of what is involved in maritime matters at no extra expense to the community.
                        -   We feel there are more pressing needs in the Noosa community to be spending rate payer’s money on.

Noosa and District      -   Action 7c (version on pg. 58) is missing in the main body of the document text on page 24
Landcare                -   Action 34 (bio passage) on pg. 63 doesn’t appear in the main body of the document in the bio passage section
                        -   Appears to be two bibliography lists?
                        -   Lidar report in bibliography appears twice – once under Shannon’s name and ones under HL&W – think it should be HL&W?
                        -   The word ‘Noosa’ appears twice in the bibliography reference for the waterways report that we did.
                        -   KPI’s or ways to actually measure levels of the plan’s achievements / outcomes or effectiveness as part of the monitoring and evaluation program.
                        -   Is it planned for them to be at this level as per document or are their more detailed measures behind each action?
                        -   Always the hardest part of a Plan though so I get the difficulties trying to pin them down.
                        -   Overall though well done!!

Noosa Slipway           -   Re ACTION PLAN
Boat Owner x 2          -   Action No. 1 & 2 ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY MANANGEMENT UNIT OF STAKEHOLDERS AND COUNCIL, CHAIRED BY A STAKEHOLDER.
Marine Services x 2         ADMINISTRATION BY COUNCIL
                        -   [3] AGREE MAN. COMMITTEE AND ADMIN
                        -   [4] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE AND ADMIN
                        -   [5] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE
                        -   [6] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE
                        -   [7] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE a,b,c,d,e,f,g AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE
                        -   [8] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE & GOV
                        -   [9] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE & GOV;
                        -   [10] AGREE + CHAPLIN PARK TO TEWANTIN MARINA
                        -   [11] + A AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE & GOV, B AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE & GO
                        -   [12] DISCUSS MAN.COMMITTEE & GOV
                        -   [13] DISCUSS
                        -   [14] DISCUSS
                        -   [15] AGREE
                        -   [16] AGREE
                        -   [17] AGREE
                        -   [18] DISCUSS MAN.COMMITTEE & GOV AGENCY
                        -   [19] AGREE COUNCIL & NAT RESOURCES
                        -   [20] DISCUSS & COUNCIL
                        -   [21] DISCUSS & COUNCIL
                        -   [22] AGREE MAN. COMMITTEE & COUNCIL
                        -   [23] AGREE
                        -   [24] AGREE
                        -   [25,26,27,] ALREADY A COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITY
                        -   [28] AGREE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
                        -   [29] ALREADY A COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITY
                        -   [30] AGREE MAN.COMMITTEE & COUNCIL
                        -   [31] ALREADY A COUNCIL PROGRAM
                        -   [32] DISCUSS MAN.COMMITTEE, COUNCIL & GOV AGENCIES
                        -   [33] "[34]” [35, 36, 37] MAN.COMMITTEE & TRAD. OWNERS
                        -   [38, 39] NOT A RIVER PROBLEM. EMPIRE BUILDING
                        -   [40] MAN.COMMITTE TO CONSULT WITH GOV.AGENCIES
                        -   SUMMARY.
                        -   WHILE GENERALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES, IT SMACKS OF EMPIRE BUILDING BY COUNCIL BUREAUCRATS. SEVERAL OF
                            THE ITEMS ARE ALREADY COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITIES AND SHOULD BE LEFT IN THEIR DEPARTMENTS.
                        -   IT CAN WORK BY MAKING THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTE A MIX OF STAKEHOLDERS, COUNCIL AND INTERESTED GROUPS; THE CHAIR
                            BEING A STAKEHOLDER.
                        -   SUGGESTED MAKEUP COUNCIL 3 TRADITIONAL OWNERS 1 COMM.BOAT OPERATORS 1 PRIVATE BOAT OWNERS 1 TOURISM NOOSA 1
                            MARINE SERVICES 1 ECO GROUPS 1 FARMING & FISHERIES 1
                        -   TOTAL 10

Private                 -   Future representation on Community/Working Groups:
                        -   It was unfortunate that representatives of the Noosa North Shore - many of whom actually live on the river, did not participate in the Jury.
                        -   We request that Council have a standing invitation for any/all public meetings.

Private                 -   2019 and the years ahead.
                        -   Corrective measures and action need to be articulated if a valuable NR Management Plan is to be accepted, effective and of community benefit.
                        -   It is not sufficient to tell us all what is wrong with the NR as we already know.
                        -   If NC wants to become the manager of the NR then articulate how it is proposed to be better managed than what we currently have.


                                                                                                                                                                                    21
Log in to download the original file

2021-01-18 GC - Item 2 - Attachment 2 - Consultation Report River Plan Version 1 (2018)(PDF, 607KB).pdf · 621 KB (small file)

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.