18.8 C
Byron Shire
November 27, 2022

Belongil rock wall to be built against govt advice

Latest News

Emergency radio tower

An emergency radio tower is proposed for Teales Lookout, Koonyum Range. It is proposed by the telco authority via Catalyst...

Other News

Guitar Journeys & Symbiosis

Two of the Gold Coast’s iconic artists, Felicity Lawless and Black Rabbit George (aka Tijuana Cartel frontman Paul George)...

Ruled by fools

What an outrageous scandal that already stressed-out refugees, living for years in limbo after been held in detention centres...

Low density residential

At the Council meeting on 13/10/2022, Council decided to approve a DA in a low-density residential, ‘environmentally sensitive’ zoned...

Spanish tortilla obsession

Simon Haslam Ambrunah is a specialist Spanish takeaway in Byron that passionately upholds the foundational culinary tradition of tortillas –...

Support for the Mullum Show

What a privilege it was as an older resident to be able to participate and enjoy the annual Mullumbimby...

NSW Forestry challenged over failed forestry practices in precedent setting case

What makes bushfires worse, causes native species collapse and creates forest dieback? NSW Forestry is being challenged over its logging of Cherry Tree State Forest in the NSW Land and Environment Court.

Belongil landowner John Vaughan addresses council (October 30, 2014). Photo Eve Jeffery.
Belongil landowner John Vaughan addresses council (October 30, 2014). Photo Eve Jeffery.

Chris Dobney

Belongil residents will ‘get their rocks on’ after Byron Shire Council on Thursday voted to go ahead with plans for an ‘interim’ rock wall on their beach against the advice of the Office of Environment and Heritage.

Thursday’s decision follows the rejection of a motion by Greens Cr Duncan Dey to put the project on hold until the council completes a long-awaited Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP), now due in June next year.

But if councillors expected to receive any thanks from the affected landowners they had to think again.

The plan’s greatest advocate, Belongil resident John Vaughan, spent much of his allocated public access time railing against a legal agreement council had asked landowners to sign, describing it as a ‘40-page tome’ and comparing it to the ‘one-page document’ he had been provided in 2001, when a previous council was considering the issue.

Echonetdaily understands Mr Vaughan is the only affected landholder still to sign the document, and ironically now the only impediment to the rock wall going ahead.

Also speaking on the subject at public access was Karl Goodsell from Positive Change for Marine Life, who said there were ‘literally hundreds of examples from around Australia of dire consequences’ that had resulted from the building of sea walls.

‘A UNSW thesis written specifically on [Belongil] said that intervention can “interfere with and interrupt the natural processes”,’ he said.

‘If this [sea wall] goes ahead I predict there will be similar fight from residents further north within a decade,’ he added.

Mr Goodsell’s speech received a round of applause and accolades from the gallery but did not sway a majority of the councillors.

OEH withdraws funds

The move to hold off construction followed a series of letters from the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) this month, which spelt out to council staff that the the rock wall in its current design would not attract some $300,000 funding that it had previously promised.

But OEH said that funding could still be available if council instead chose to first complete the CZMP and reconsider the design in that context.

The carrot of state funds did not tempt conservative councillors, however, who defeated the motion with the aid of Greens defector Cr Rose Wanchap (Crs Dey, Richardson, Spooner and Cameron for).

Cr Wanchap spoke against the motion, using a slide-show of the ageing geotech bags, which she said were ‘there one day and gone the next’ to bolster her argument.

‘There’s a very small distance between the beach and the estuary. If we have a breakthrough in the middle of a storm, the rest of the people on that spit will be in danger,’ she said.

Source of funds

Cr Cameron raised the issue of alternative funding and said ‘we should give the community the opportunity to decide on whether to pay a million dollars for maybe six months’.

He was also critical of the options for funding the wall provided by council staff.

‘There’s $398,000 to come from the infrastructure renewal fund, which is meant for potholes and parks,’ he said.

‘I see the employee leave entitlements reserve is also to be raided.

‘Pictures of geobags moving, shows they’re working. The bite is caused by the rocks. Where is it going to cut in? At the most sensitive area, further north, where the endangered shorebirds are nesting,’ Cr Cameron said.

Rocks vs geobags

Under questioning from the mayor, infrastructure services director Phil Holloway said council had spent in excess of $2 million over 10 years on the existing geobag structure, ‘including repair and replacement’.

He also admitted some batches of the bags used were considered to be too small for the job, which had exacerbated the problem.

He added that new, larger sizes were now available but that geobags overall were ‘designed for small storms and small tides’.

Mr Holloway said a new wall constructed of geobags instead of rocks ‘would cost around $600,000’.

He was asked by Cr Dey how the sandbags would be removed to make way for the rocks.

‘I’m imagining I would just go down there with a Stanley knife,’ Cr Dey quipped, to which Mr Holloway replied it would be no easy task.

‘Some bags have compacted sand in them, which is not a simple matter to remove. The bags are designed so as not to be easy to cut. So it’s not just a case of cutting them and tipping out the sand,’ he said.

Mayoral passion

Mayor Simon Richardson gave perhaps the most impassioned speech of his career in a last-ditch attempt to get the motion up.

‘This is a simple notice of motion to give credence to some sense of process and science,’ he said.

‘What’s changed now is OEH won’t fund it because the wall is way too big, unnecessary and will undermine the CZMP.

‘The state’s pre-eminent coastal scientists [the NSW Coastal Panel] have said the same thing. Do we spend [a large amount of money] for 100 metres now, when if the CZMP says we shouldn’t have sea walls we then have to pay to remove it?’

He added staff had to use a loophole to get the proposal up at all.

‘This had to go through an infrastructure SEPP because rocks are not considered to be temporary. There’s not one case in Australia’s history where rocks were put on the beach and then removed.

‘We should acknowledge the OEH – that green extremist group – has withdrawn funding and said we should have a CZMP, and we should suspend it until we have a proper plan.

‘We should put process ahead of individual landowners and put science before spin,’ Cr Richardson said.

But his pleas failed to win over the conservatives and the decider, disaffected former Greens Cr Wanchap. The motion was lost by one vote.

Support The Echo

Keeping the community together and the community voice loud and clear is what The Echo is about. More than ever we need your help to keep this voice alive and thriving in the community.

Like all businesses we are struggling to keep food on the table of all our local and hard working journalists, artists, sales, delivery and drudges who keep the news coming out to you both in the newspaper and online. If you can spare a few dollars a week – or maybe more – we would appreciate all the support you are able to give to keep the voice of independent, local journalism alive.


  1. self interest of a few, supported by pro-development councillors who clearly do not respect the advice of experts, but will happily waste our money on a project that will not last and cause long term problems across a much larger area? WHY?

  2. Wouldn’t councillors who are involved in property development/rental have a conflict of interest and should not vote on issues like this?

  3. Why indeed Peter. And yes Robyn, there is a conflict of interest for certain councillors, one in particular.
    But they are not budging. They were bankrolled by pro development big business end of town into council to push through these types of damaging projects and are not listening to the majority of ratepayers or any creditable experts who report without vested interests on the matter at hand.

  4. Firstly, someone is so blinkered that they don’t understand Duncan’s comment on cutting bags. Regardless of how hard it would be to cut one open, the implication is that they are, have been and would be incredibly easier to remove/reduce than removing boulders. About artificial reefs: At 60,000 cubic meters, the Gold Coast Reef (or Narrowneck Reef) is massive by comparison (yet still only 175 feet of Long Beach breakwater). The reef sits approximately 200 to 450 meters offshore. The mega-SFC’s used at Narrowneck are similar to the bags used at the Mount Reef. The Narrowneck Reef is a true ‘multi-purpose’ reef in that it was designed to be a coastal protection structure first and a surfing reef second. It has succeeded on both fronts. The beach nourishment placed on that section of the beach in 1999 has been stabilized by the presence of the reef. During clean swells, the reef produces good surfing conditions and is utilized by the local crew. In 2000, the Narrowneck reef project won the prestigious Queensland State Environmental Award for a coastal project. After ten years there has been, I’m led to believe, no erosion to the north of the reef and to the south, the beach remains around 15 meters wider then when the reef was put in. I’m not saying is is the answer for Belongil Beach or if there should be mitigation or not, but please, not boulders and not with out design consultation for the site.

  5. David, the pro rocks lobby have never listened to ANY arguments about alternatives ways to protect their properties (and for the rest of us, the beach and the ocean). Countless people and engineers have explained to them that rocks are the very worst option, are never interim, and become increasingly expensive and damaging over time. The sand bags work and when they are split, at least the beach gets a bit more sand. Artificial reefs, better geo-bags and many other environmentally sympathetic approaches which protect rather than fuel further damage, have been suggested. B288ut 5 councillors refuse to listen or appraise alternatives. Their minds are set in concrete. John Vaughan wants his rocks or else he threatens litigation. Its that simple. And they’ve won the day. Its frankly appalling.

  6. Isnt their the planned retreat ruling in the 1988 lep. Why arent we addering to that. All land owners knew of this when they purchased land on the spit. I had the chance to buy land at Belongil when it was very cheap but heeded the warning of sea inundation and settled on the hill instead. Get real, buyer beware. Every land owner has some problem with their property but usually dont want the communitee and in this case the world of visitors to cope it.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Ballina water supply

A recent Echo article regarding Rous County Council’s plans to access Alstonville ground water through bores for its Future Water Project 2060 via an...

For the record

Since early January 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic started, when the world population started to be informed of the new health danger facing everybody,...

From an okay Boomer

As an okay Boomer who has lived in Mullumbimby most of my life, I’ve seen many changes in town, particularly since the Great COVID...

Rally against a waste incinerator for Casino

Residents Against the Richmond Valley Incinerator (RAVI) and community members have planned a rally for tomorrow to alert the community about the issues surrounding waste incinerators and the problems they bring.