Maules Creek Coal Mine

I vehemently oppose the proposed Maules Creek Coal Mine. The environmental destruction which will result from a project of this nature are absolutely unacceptable.
The Liverpool Plains is a major food producing area for NSW- a mine of this size and depth will have adverse impact on the water table; the clearing of native vegetation and loss of habitat for threatened species likewise is totallly unacceptable. I find it most alarming, and very sad, that short term profits can so outweigh all considerations of food and water for the natural environment and all humans and other life forms dependant on it.

I very strongly believe this mine should not go ahead as it will impact severely if not fatally on the ecosystem that is the Leard Forest, and will severely impact the area's water table. There is no need to be embarking on this mass destruction - the unrecoverable environmental cost far outweighs the truly short term gains that may be made. The Australian community cannot sustain such decimation of its lands.

I strongly object to this development, it should never be approved.

I am the land owner of property, The Calpe, at 1159 Upper Maules Creek Road, Maules Creek.
We are worried about the loss of our ground water, and also we have had 99 species of birds identified on our property, and we are worried obout the loss of these with mining activity in the area. Our property is a native habitat with native grasses and Iron Bark, White Box and Red Gum timbers. Have any studies been done in our area as to the repercussions from coal mining activity. We have had no communication about mining in our area

I object to this proposal in its entirety due to the unacceptable environmental impacts, subsequent greenhouse gas emissions & associated negative impacts on local communities & society in general.

I am appalled that this proposed mine would impact so severely on:
1. National Park which belongs to the whole of the people of NSW
2. Security of food and water in a crucial production area of priceless value to the people of this state due to the the rarity of productive soil and readily available water
3. Destruction of threatened species and endangered native woodland
It is not acceptable that for the benefit of a few, the heritage, food and water security of the state of NSW is destroyed.
I object absolutely with this proposal
Yours sincerely
J N Cuhertson

This an appalling use of a State Forest tract. There is no going back to useful land or a viable ecosystem for our native flora and fauna. Just look at Singleton and the land around. A bit of 'cosmetic' bulldozing and plantings of trees to screen the mess.
I would personally damn to hell the person or persons who gave permission for this project and others like it to go ahead in this area of the country. Permanent damage to scarce and precious water resources is only one more large item on the list against the mine at Maules Creek porceeding.

I strongly oppose the proposed Maules Creek Coal Project on the basis of the environmental, social and ecological value of the existing landuse as state forest that includes EECs, as well as the impacts on groundwater.

Enough. It's time the NSW government put a halt to the increasing number of invasive coal mines which provide little benefit for the local community, especially in environmentally sensitive regions and regions which already have a well regarded agricultural base.
This huge deep open cut will cause massive depressurisation of the water table, deplete groundwater, interfere with aquifers and divert surface water.

Please do not approve this application.
1. Coal is dirty and polluting and we need to be moving away from it and towards renewables.
2. It will dig a pit so deep it will be below sea level.
3. It will pollute groundwater for hundreds of kilometres and hundreds of years.
Plus:
The Maules Creek Coal Mine will:

* Clear a total of 1,665 hectares of native bush, taking the total clearing in the Leard Forest to over 3,500 hectares.

* Clear 545 hectares of the White Box Grassy Woodland endangered community, taking the total clearing of endangered communities in Leard Forest to over 1,169 hectares.

* Impact on habitat for up to 36 threatened species which are known or likely to occur in Leard State Forest, including Painted Honeyeater, Koala, Turquoise Parrot and Eastern Cave Bat.

* Contribute to the destruction of the largest remnant of vegetation left on the heavily cleared Liverpool Plains.

* Result in a final pit depth of 320m that will cause massive
depressurisation of the water table and impact on springs and unique groundwater dependent ecosystems.

* Result in a final void that will permanently deplete groundwater, interfere with aquifers and divert surface water.

* Make an enormous contribution to global warming amounting to at least 25 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per annum from burning the coal that is produced.This is equivalent to more than15% of all emissions from NSW annually.

* Forever change the quiet rural community of Maules Creek into a giant industrial zone with impacts on health, air quality, noise and amenity.

Please do the right thing and say refuse approval.

I strongly object to further coal mine approvals and any expansion of the coal and coal seam gas industries because of impacts on the environment and on human communities and especially because of the enormous contribution to the pressing problem of global warming

I especially object to this Ashton Coal proposal because it involves clearing State Forest, which is absurd.

The Maules Creek Coal Mine will:

Clear a total of 1,665 hectares of native bush, taking the total clearing in the Leard Forest to over 3,500 hectares.

Clear 545 hectares of the White Box Grassy Woodland endangered community, taking the total clearing of endangered communities in Leard Forest to over 1,169 hectares.

Impact on habitat for up to 36 threatened species which are known or likely to occur in Leard State Forest, including Painted Honeyeater, Koala, Turquoise Parrot and Eastern Cave Bat.

Contribute to the destruction of the largest remnant of vegetation left on the heavily cleared Liverpool Plains.

Result in a final pit depth of 320m that will cause massive depressurisation of the water table and impact on springs and unique groundwater dependent ecosystems.

Result in a final void that will permanently deplete groundwater, interfere with aquifers and divert surface water.

Make an enormous contribution to global warming amounting to at least 25 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per annum from burning the coal that is produced. This is equivalent to more than 15% of all emissions from NSW annually.

Forever change the quiet rural community of Maules Creek into a giant industrial zone with impacts on health, air quality, noise and amenity.

I strongly oppose this proposed development of State Forest land. Not only does it destroy an intact habitat, the drastically increased carbon emissions will make it even harder for Australia to achieve its carbon emissions target. Projects such as this will have long term effects on the health of the local residents and the habitat that will outlive the short-term gains of coal mining.
It is time the impact on the environment was the major consideration, not the financial gain.

FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF OUR NATIVE FORESTS AND THE HABITATS OF ALL SPECIES THREATENED OR NOT IS APPALLING TO EVEN CONSIDER. WE HAVE SO LITTLE FOREST LEFT IN AUSTRALIA AND YET THIS PUSH TO COMPLETELY DESTROY WHAT IS LEFT SEEMS LIKE A MADNESS OVERTAKING A SUPPOSEDLY RATIONAL SOCIETY.

I have been unable to attach the photos mentioned here since they are not pdf files. If you send an email to the above address I can forward these photos separately.

My overriding concern is that I don't believe the coal mining industry in general is being made to foot the real bill including all impacts of their activities on rural communities, environments, infrastructure and other agricultural industries.

Firstly I note in an article in the Newcastle Herald (1/10/2011) that the Upper Hunter Shire Council has been unsuccessful in securing Regional Development Australia Funding of $15 million to provide a railway overpass to aid traffic flow through the town. As you know the New England Highway crosses the rail line at a boom-gate level crossing at Scone (in addition to another level crossing on a major street within the CBD of Scone). My observations of rail traffic on that line as I travel the Highway are that its use for public transport pale into insignificance next to the number of kilometre-long coal trains (including the empty returns) that use it daily (see attached photo;) and this is before a proposed major expansion of the coal industry in the Gunnedah Basin (Aston Resources

Given the current global trend toward lowering carbon emissions, I feel it is counter-productive to allow both the clearing of a large area of forest and subsequent mining of coal. Not only will this produce greater carbon emissions through the burning of the coal, the clearing of so many trees will result in poorer re-absorption of carbon from our atmosphere.

Also, as a former resident of the Maules Creek area, it makes me shudder to think how this mine will destroy the peace and purity of the area. The noise alone would be enough to ruin it, but when you add the dust that the mine will inevitably inject into the atmosphere, and the irreversible damage the pit will cause to the water table, the area will no longer be as attractive as it once was.

I object to the proposed mine because it will have major unacceptable environmental impacts.

The forest proposed to be cleared has very high ecological values which will be completely lost in the short to medium term and will only be partially recoverable in the very long term if the forest is re-established from soil seed or other means. While mine revegetation has been improving over decades, we cannot be sure that a community with the same floristic composition will ever grow back, let alone the fauna. Changed subsoil conditions or weed invasion or localised loss of some key species may preclude complete recovery. The vertebrate wildlife that depend on this forest as habitat, particularly species dependent on hollows, are likely to be mostly lost - any that survive and reproduce due to the proposed offsets are unlikely to be sufficient to contribute to the long-term maintenance of local and regional populations in the way that this forest's biota currently can. The loss of this forest cannot be effectively offset. The threatened species and community will be significantly more threatened if the mine proceeds.

The Revised Environmental Risk Assessment (appendix E) revised downward the assessed risks of loss of biodiversity, disruption of threatened species and habitats and disturbance of federally listed species from "high" to "medium" risk. It claims that offsets and management of the development mean the risks are of likelihood D (unlikely/an event that does occur somewhere from time to time/expected once every thirty years) and of consequence III being "Serious but confined medium term environmental effects near the source". This is a serious misuse of the risk matrix. The disturbance will not just be equivalent to an occasional wildfire. Disturbance and disruption of the threatened species and habitats fits the "almost certain" likelihood so the overall risk should be rated as high - unacceptably high.

I am also concerned about many other likely adverse impacts of this mine, alone or with other adjacent mines if they continue/commence. These includes short and possibly longterm impacts on hydrology and aquatic ecosystems, stygofauna, and on the productivity of areas that are currently used for agriculture, and social impacts on some sectors of local communities. Whatever social benefits occur, they will mostly be shortlived whereas loss of productivity will have longer social consequences.

This site may include good quality coal but that does not mean it ought to be mined. Economic benefits can be obtained from different use of capital and other resources. There are much better choices, notably choices that enable reduction of world carbon emissions rather than increasing emissions.

Please refuse this development application.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Kate Boyd

I object to the proposed mine because it will have major unacceptable environmental impacts.

The forest proposed to be cleared has very high ecological values which will be completely lost in the short to medium term and will only be partially recoverable in the very long term if the forest is re-established from soil seed or other means. While mine revegetation has been improving over decades, we cannot be sure that a community with the same floristic composition will ever grow back, let alone the fauna. Changed subsoil conditions or weed invasion or localised loss of some key species may preclude complete recovery. The vertebrate wildlife that depend on this forest as habitat, particularly species dependent on hollows, are likely to be mostly lost - any that survive and reproduce due to the proposed offsets are unlikely to be sufficient to contribute to the long-term maintenance of local and regional populations in the way that this forest's biota currently can. The loss of this forest cannot be effectively offset. The threatened species and community will be significantly more threatened if the mine proceeds.

The Revised Environmental Risk Assessment (appendix E) revised downward the assessed risks of loss of biodiversity, disruption of threatened species and habitats and disturbance of federally listed species from "high" to "medium" risk. It claims that offsets and management of the development mean the risks are of likelihood D (unlikely/an event that does occur somewhere from time to time/expected once every thirty years) and of consequence III being "Serious but confined medium term environmental effects near the source". This is a serious misuse of the risk matrix. The disturbance will not just be equivalent to an occasional wildfire. Disturbance and disruption of the threatened species and habitats fits the "almost certain" likelihood so the overall risk should be rated as high - unacceptably high.

I am also concerned about many other likely adverse impacts of this mine, alone or with other adjacent mines if they continue/commence. These includes short and possibly longterm impacts on hydrology and aquatic ecosystems, stygofauna, and on the productivity of areas that are currently used for agriculture, and social impacts on some sectors of local communities. Water extractions from the Namoi should be decreased not maintained or increased. Whatever social benefits occur, they will mostly be shortlived whereas loss of soil productivity will have longer social consequences. Excessive water extraction already has adverse social and ecological effects way downstream which should be reduced. While water extraction may have localised social benefits in the Namoi area, change that reduces extraction may or may not involve social cost in this area but is more likely to be costly if one group has to decrease its use more in order to enable the mine to take water.

This site may include good quality coal but that does not mean it ought to be mined. Economic benefits can be obtained from different use of capital and other resources. There are much better choices, notably choices that enable reduction of world carbon emissions rather than increasing emissions.

Please refuse this development application.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Kate Boyd

Submission Maules Creek Coal Project

I object to the Maules Creek Coal Project proposed by Aston Resources for Leard State Forest on the grounds that it will destroy a major part of Leard State Forest, one of this State

11th of October, 2011

Submission to the Maules Creek Coal Project Assessment by the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure


Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Maules Creek Coal Project, proposed by Aston Resources.

I object to the project on a number of grounds. Firstly, because it will involve the clearing of a further 1,665 hectares of native bush, taking the total clearing in the Leard State Forest to over 3,500 hectares. This includes 545 hectares of the White Box Grassy Woodland endangered community which would mean that a total of 1,169 hectares of endangered communities will have been cleared in the Leard State Forest if the project goes ahead. As one of the largest stands of remnant vegetation left on the heavily cleared Liverpool Plains, home to threatened species such as Koalas, Painted Honeyeaters, Turquoise Parrots and Eastern Cave bats, this area should be protected, not turned into a massive open pit with associated infrastructure.

I am also aware that the the final pit depth of 320m will have serious impacts on water resources by causing the depressurisation of the water table, permanently depleting groundwater, interfering with aquifers and diverting surface water.

I also object to the project going ahead because it will destroy the lifestyle and well being of the people of Maules Creek by turning it into an industrial zone with impacts on health, air quality, noise and amenity. The social impact of huge mining projects such as this on the mental health of rural communities by causing widespread emotional distress and social disruption is one that should be taken seriously by the NSW State Government.

Leard State Forest is a community asset that the following generations deserve to inherit undamaged and one that mining companies, shareholders and governments do not have the right to exploit, for short term profits and revenue raising. Furthermore, this coal mining project will represent an enormous contribution to global warming amounting to at least 25 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per annum from burning the coal that is produced.

Our property "Oakleigh" is situated east of the mining lease, bordering Leards Forest on the Southern and partial western boundary. Our operations consist of cropping, beef cattle and fat lamb production. We have 2 residences, one residence occupied by Ellen Brennan (aged 76) and the other occupied by us....Marty, Karen and our sons Jack and Jed Brennan (aged 39,36,12 and 10). Our children attend the local school, Fairfax Public School. "Oakleigh" has been in our family for 30 years, and have recently bought an adjoining block "Onavale" to our east.

We recognise the right to mine the resource, and can see the benefits that this will create. We have done some work for Aston Resources, and hope to continue this working partnership.

We find Maules Creek a fantastic place to live, and would like to outline some of our concerns, regarding the project.

1. Our property is in a unique position, having Boggabri Coal as our eastern and part southern neighbours (in land purchased), Leards Forest on our southern and part western boundary. Maules Creek Coal to our west, Boggabri Coal to our south and proposed Goonbri to the south east. Whitehaven Mine have purchased a large property to our North East, adjoining Mount Kaputar National Park, which in turn joins other offset country of Boggabri Coal and Maules Creek Coal.
Our concerns of being surrounded by mining leases and mine owned land are:
a) The devaluation of our land.
b) The ability to sell, if need be (due to health or financial constraints, or the fact that we may find it uncomfortable to live here, as mining progresses.)
c) The increased pressure from noxious weed and feral animal populations.
d) The possibility of offset country being handed to National Parks (known to be difficult neighbours)
e) The inclusion of our property for animal corridors and linking purposes.
f) The cumulative impacts of the existing Boggabri Coal operation, its expansion, Maules Creek Project and proposed Goonbri project. All being close neighbours to our property.
g) Our intention of building on our "Onvale" block, at the southern end of our property, has now become "not an option".

2. Other issues are of the more obvious nature. These have been covered in the EA, based on modeling, but we feel that the impact on noise, water, air, light, visual will not be properly known until the mine is in production.
The modelling shows that our property is within the management boundaries for Dust, Water, Visual and to a lesser extent noise (but this is yet to be known).

Whilst we are supporters of the "project", there are issues that need to be addressed. With the right consultation and postitve attitude this can be achieved, a "win/win" result being the best outcome.