State mines minister rejects two applications at reserves west of Cape Tribulation which campaigners say should set a precedent

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

The “archaic” practice of mining rivers in north Queensland is making a mockery of Australia’s key policy to protect the Great Barrier Reef, wasting multimillion-dollar efforts to cut runoff pollution, its opponents say.

“Instream” mining in Queensland, the only state still allowing the excavation of rivers for gold, tin and silver, is unleashing torrents of fine sediment in one of the reef’s largest catchments.

Some 20km of riverbed and banks are earmarked for excavation in Normanby basin in Cape York, where a $2m-a-year federal program to cut sediment flows into reef waters costs $297 for every tonne of sediment saved.

Adani may face fine over sediment released in floodwaters after Cyclone Debbie Read more

The state mines minister, Anthony Lynham, rejected two mining applications this week on a government nature reserve at Springvale station because of potential impact on the reef through the release of up to 22,000 tonnes of sediment a year.

Tim Hughes, a director of a conservation reserve downstream from Springvale who opposed the project in a land court case, said Lynham deserved congratulations on a “very responsible decision that recognises this mining practice is no longer compatible with the greater public interest in protecting the Great Barrier Reef”.

“If this was happening in southern Queensland where everyone could see it, there wouldn’t be a second thought, this would not be allowed,” Hughes said.

“It is very much a 19th-century or third-world mining practice, which has only been able to persist in Queensland because it’s been in very remote areas and out of sight, out of mind.

“My view is this sets the precedent. There will be no more alluvial mining in the Great Barrier Reef catchment.”

But up to 22 existing and proposed mine leases covering 700 hectares remain in the Normanby basin, posing a threat to the reef and the habitats of more than 30 endangered and vulnerable species, the Australian Conservation Foundation says.

An ACF campaigner, Andrew Picone, said Lynham’s decision was “a welcome first step from the Queensland government to rein in an archaic mining practice that should have been outlawed 100 years ago”.

“Queensland must now move to ban the practice altogether. Unfortunately, there are many similar mines already approved,” he said.

The state has approved 18 river mining lease applications in the Normanby basin since 1984, seven of them between 2010 and 2012.

John Withers, one of the applicants at Springvale Station denied by Lynham, said he was concerned the decision spelled out the Labor government’s intention to close down the industry.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest A $2m-a-year federal program to cut sediment flows into reef waters costs $297 for every tonne of sediment saved. Photograph: Kerry Trapnell

Withers, who has mined rivers for gold for decades and said there was still “good money” in the practice, does not accept that sediment from the proposed mine would have flown into reef waters.

Withers said he knew a former mining warden who spoke to a mines department official on Thursday in a discussion that suggested “the Labor party is dead set wanting to close down alluvial mining in creeks”.

“I’ve got four or five leases in the pipeline already and I’ve been a miner all my life and all my super [superannuation] coming from years ago I was ready to put into future mining leases either to sell or work myself,” he told the Guardian.

“One of them’s running into the east coast and I’ve had no objections against it. But as the minister said, he’s got the authority to knock it off anytime he likes.

“But if it happens again, I’m starting to sue someone, because the act is there that you can peg mining leases for alluvials.”



An ACF report last September warned that a single mine releasing 100,000 tonnes into the West Normanby river over its lifetime “would write off 20 years of commonwealth reef funding to improve water quality”.



Despite costing taxpayers up to $30m to combat sediment, such a mine, typically a small-scale enterprise employing a handful of people, would generate no royalty income for the state, it said.

A month later, the ACF urged the federal environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, to investigate the cumulative impact of the mines and “potential breaches” of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

Waterways in the Normanby basin, west of Cooktown, flow into Princess Charlotte Bay, regarded as one of the jewels in the crown of the reef marine park.

Picone said: “The harm caused from vegetation clearing, erosion, agricultural runoff and this archaic mining will take a massive toll on our reef, which is trying to recover from the worst coral bleaching event in history.”

The state government is considering an application to mine the region’s Laura river, which traditional owners say may threaten world-renowned ancient rock art galleries.

Exclusive: government inaction leading to increased pollution on Barrier Reef, says WWF Read more

Withers, whose step-son Patrick O’Shane is the applicant, said the rock art gallery was 3km from the propose mine and would not be threatened by it.

The North Queensland Miners Association, which represents some river miners, was approached for comment.



Hughes, a former chief investment officer of major superannuation funds, said he was “a strong supporter of the mining industry” but there was no economic case for river mining.

“I’ve overseen the investment of billions of dollars of Australian savings into mining projects,” he said. “It is one of the great comparative advantages of Australia and helps support our way of life and standard of living.

“It’s just that there are some forms of mining where there is no public benefit, where there is major environmental cost, and basically mining should not be given the pre-eminence of land use in Australia that it’s been given.

“One of the things that’s changed here is not just that we’re all very aware that the barrier reef is under threat and that sediment is one of the factors that makes it less resilient and more prone to damage – we’ve actually now got a price on sediment.

“Because of the massive taxpayer investment in trying to improve reef water quality, why on earth would you effectively subsidise people to go and dig up your rivers and create yet more sediment?”