Jump to content


Photo

We need help in protecting Great Barrier Island.


  • Please log in to reply
179 replies to this topic

#21 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,747 posts

Posted 11 July 2019 - 05:36 AM

 

15 miles seems close to me at 1 knots of current we would see silt come ashore in 15 hours in easterly wind. We know currents can be in easterly direction from the Rose Noel drifted onto Great Barier over a 100 days drifting back against prevailing wind. 60 miles would be three days and much safer. 

 

To clarify this a little, Wind does not create, nor does it alter the course of the current that flows up the East Coast. Wind against a current causes the Sea state to increase. The sediment will not "blow" onto the Islands Coast. A floating object can and will be influenced by the Wind, with the influence being proportional to the amount of its surface is clear of water and thus influenced by the Wind. 
The sediment should run with the current and in many respect, be little different than a River in flood, of which that River is capable of moving a heck of a lot more silt than any barge can.


  • 2

#22 Cazzate

Cazzate

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 221 posts

Posted 11 July 2019 - 08:53 AM

But still they are taking toxic silt/mud from downtown Auckland and dumping it somewhere very clean which is wrong regardless of any damage it may or may not do .

They could barge it up harbour to somewhere it can be trucked inland and contained safely like Dr Watson says happens in Germany
  • 1

#23 lateral

lateral

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts
  • Locationauckland

Posted 11 July 2019 - 08:58 AM

That is the difference between Germany and NZ!

Don't see that where the sediment ends up mitigates the concept of dumping the washings of Aucklands past into the relatively

clean water of the Pacific ocean.

Currently it is bound up in the bottom over time, so breaking it up and and redistributing it in our "designated rubbish dump "

I feel is foolhardy and short sighted. Surely with our #8 wire mentality we can do better than this?

 

Farkin amazed at the response here on those that can't recognise the stewardship required to preserve there own playground.

All about the money once again.

 

SIGNED, sealed , delivered & shared.


  • 2

#24 lateral

lateral

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts
  • Locationauckland

Posted 11 July 2019 - 09:09 AM

Makes total sense. Dig up tailings and redistribute in the water column to kill more larvae to make room for more tourists

to stretch our infrastructure further, so we have more "spills", toxic by- products to settle where they shouldn't.


  • 0

#25 Aleana

Aleana

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,375 posts
  • LocationAuckland

Posted 11 July 2019 - 09:40 AM

So Cazzatte and lateral raise the issue of toxicity - which might be the killer argument here....

Has there been a study that proves the mud that would be lifted is indeed polluted / toxic? Or is it just an assumption?

If you read my earlier post carefully I said I’m not convinced but could be if the evidence is there.

If someone here offers up something compelling on the toxicity argument then yes I’ll change my tune and sign the petition.

But emotion and assumptions won’t win me over (we have enough so-called leadership in NZ based on emotions & herd instinct populist sentiment vs high quality decision-making).
  • 0

You can judge a person by how much they help someone who can do nothing for them in return.


#26 Rehabilitated

Rehabilitated

    Rehabilitated

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Locationon the waters Land and else where

Posted 11 July 2019 - 10:05 AM

To clarify this a little, Wind does not create, nor does it alter the course of the current that flows up the East Coast. Wind against a current causes the Sea state to increase. The sediment will not "blow" onto the Islands Coast. A floating object can and will be influenced by the Wind, with the influence being proportional to the amount of its surface is clear of water and thus influenced by the Wind. 
The sediment should run with the current and in many respect, be little different than a River in flood, of which that River is capable of moving a heck of a lot more silt than any barge can.

 

Disagree. Going on the Aussie consent. The experts claimed the same thing and the sediment was dumped in deep water they claim was sufficient  and far enough distance away not to pollute or end on the reef, Approx  15KLS and convinced the resource consent authority to grant the consent,. When it was bought to there attention with expert advice and photographs showing it on the reef and trail, it was reversed.


  • 0

©  2013 2014 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

 

RETIRED ADVANCING MULTIHULL, MONOHULL SAILOR, ORGANIZER , NAVIGATOR, PREVIOUS SKIPPER

OCEAN COASTAL WATERS COMBINED, CRUISER / RACER ADVANCING MEMBER.


#27 Rehabilitated

Rehabilitated

    Rehabilitated

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Locationon the waters Land and else where

Posted 11 July 2019 - 10:08 AM

But still they are taking toxic silt/mud from downtown Auckland and dumping it somewhere very clean which is wrong regardless of any damage it may or may not do .

They could barge it up harbour to somewhere it can be trucked inland and contained safely like Dr Watson says happens in Germany

Ask KM...MB that member was the person that started / stated it was toxic and would make some yachts glow in the dark. !!!  :wave:  :idea:


  • 0

©  2013 2014 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

 

RETIRED ADVANCING MULTIHULL, MONOHULL SAILOR, ORGANIZER , NAVIGATOR, PREVIOUS SKIPPER

OCEAN COASTAL WATERS COMBINED, CRUISER / RACER ADVANCING MEMBER.


#28 lateral

lateral

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts
  • Locationauckland

Posted 11 July 2019 - 10:12 AM

Fair comment.

Doesn't seem to be a comprehensive study done that I can find.

Only Cu & Zn. There are a myriad of other HM's,  chemicals of greater concern.

I would have thought it would have been part of the RC.

Oh, but then it is in the councils interest to have it approved.

Going on NZ's  clean/green facade and bureaucratic rubber stamping for

there own projects.


  • 0

#29 Cazzate

Cazzate

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 221 posts

Posted 11 July 2019 - 11:01 AM

So Cazzatte and lateral raise the issue of toxicity - which might be the killer argument here....

Has there been a study that proves the mud that would be lifted is indeed polluted / toxic? Or is it just an assumption?

If you read my earlier post carefully I said I’m not convinced but could be if the evidence is there.

If someone here offers up something compelling on the toxicity argument then yes I’ll change my tune and sign the petition.

But emotion and assumptions won’t win me over (we have enough so-called leadership in NZ based on emotions & herd instinct populist sentiment vs high quality decision-making).


Ok having seen the black sh*t that accumulates on boats in westhaven which I’m guessing is a combo of brake pad dust , tyre rubber dust and exhaust soot surely that’s going into the harbour as airborne and road runoff contamination . Then there is all manner of crap washing out of the inner city when it rains. The big unknown is what’s come off the commercial vessels over the decades that used Wynyard and the other side of the tank farm that was shipyards before containment was a thing . Then there are all the super boats that have done sneaky late night pump outs both sides of the tank farm ...and on it goes I bet there is more than I’ve touched on here .
  • 0

#30 Aleana

Aleana

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,375 posts
  • LocationAuckland

Posted 11 July 2019 - 11:41 AM

Ok having seen the black sh*t that accumulates on boats in westhaven which I’m guessing is a combo of brake pad dust , tyre rubber dust and exhaust soot surely that’s going into the harbour as airborne and road runoff contamination . Then there is all manner of crap washing out of the inner city when it rains. The big unknown is what’s come off the commercial vessels over the decades that used Wynyard and the other side of the tank farm that was shipyards before containment was a thing . Then there are all the super boats that have done sneaky late night pump outs both sides of the tank farm ...and on it goes I bet there is more than I’ve touched on here .

I agree that all sounds very plausible. But it’s still not proof it’s still assumptions. And science and the environment has a habit of surprising us.

Why doesn’t someone simply scoop up a piece of sludge from the seabed and get it tested - it would tell us all definitely whether your assumptions are right or wrong.

And if they’re right I would change my position and join the protests. And I suspect you’d get lots of others too.

But until someone stands in front of me with a lump of seabed mud in one hand a lab report in the other that proves it’s nasty and harmful to the waters off GBI, then I’m not convinced.

And why should I be?
  • 0

You can judge a person by how much they help someone who can do nothing for them in return.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users