David Milledge
The two-page advertisement by Byron Council describing progress on construction of the Byron Bay bypass and containing a number of claims in relation to biodiversity impacts, in my opinion, represents a blatant misrepresentation of the facts.
The so-called ‘extensive set of environmental approvals’ was gained on the basis of deficient and inaccurate information, and can hardly be described as a ‘rigorous’ process.
‘Diligent environmental management’ has not been applied in the route selection, impact assessment or implementation of the bypass project.
If Council had exercised due diligence, then the findings of their 2001 Species Impact Statement, which stated that the bypass route with the least detrimental impact on biodiversity values was located along the rail corridor, would not have been ignored in the recent assessment and approvals process.
Diligent environmental management would not have involved ignoring the stand of floodplain rainforest at the southern end of the bypass – an endangered ecological community listed under State and Commonwealth legislation, and core habitat for the critically endangered Mitchell’s Rainforest Snail.
Diligent environmental management would not have dismissed this floodplain rainforest as swamp paperbark forest ‘with some rainforest elements’ or conversely as ‘marginal habitat’ that ‘does not have rainforest components within the understorey’, and disregarded its presence as ‘not found within or in the vicinity of the site’.
Similarly, diligent environmental management would not have described the Mitchell’s Rainforest Snail habitat in the bypass footprint as: ‘the vegetation within the site would not be preferred habitat’, and as only ‘marginal habitat’ for the species – a fact clearly contradicted by the recent discovery of 163 individual snails there during the construction stage.
Diligent environmental management also would never have involved the relocation of these snails into the area of rainforest between the bypass and existing town development that includes a section of the rail corridor.
This is an area that Council recently resolved to urge State government to prioritise for the removal of its vegetation.
If Council had conducted a rigorous assessment of the impact of the current route, early in the development process, and obtained the information on biodiversity values that has now been revealed, it is unlikely that the ‘extensive set of environmental approvals’ and determinations would have been issued by State and Commonwealth governments.
A rigorous assessment would also not have denied the bypass objectors’ request for an independent flora assessment, at no cost to Council, to resolve the legal status of the rainforest at the southern end of the construction footprint. Despite a further dubious report, Council has still not correctly established the status of this stand.
The finding of 163 individual snails during clearing operations demonstrates the significance of the habitat in the bypass footprint for this species.
In this context, the stylised diagram comparing the area of impact with the areas of the biobanking offset sites is misleading. A large proportion of the habitat in the Wallum Place and Lilli Pilli sites is marginal habitat for Mitchell’s Rainforest Snails and the Wallum Place site was not used to calculate available biobanking credits to offset the destruction of the habitat in the bypass footprint.
Far from being proud of an engineering project that has abused the assessment process, Council should be acknowledging its lack of environmentally responsible governance.
The Byron Bay bypass is merely another example of the failure of Australia’s nature laws.
No amount of spin and glossy ads can disguise the fact that Byron Council has destroyed a stand of an endangered, and over-cleared, vegetation community and significant habitat for a critically endangered species – listed as not able to withstand further loss. This is a species that has the core of its world distribution centred on the Cumbebin wetlands.
The Conservation Ecologists Association (CEA) has been formed by a group of professional biologists and ecologists with extensive experience in the conservation and management of the North Coast’s native flora and fauna. One of the main aims of CEA is to promote and foster the conservation of the natural environment for its evolutionary, ecological, scientific and intrinsic values.
♦ David Milledge is from the Conservation Ecologists Association.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
