Page 1306 - Week 05 - Thursday, 26 April 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Wales Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. During the study, close consultation was maintained with Mr Geoff Da Deppo, his curator, and the Office of Industry and Development.
The consultant supports the basic concept and design of the aquarium and endorses the display of freshwater fish and aquatic invertebrates proposed for display at the aquarium, subject to the adoption of several recommendations. In essence, the consultant recommends three basic actions to minimise any possible damage. The first is, where practicable, to ensure that stock for the aquarium comes from sources known to be free of major diseases. I think that is commonsense. The second is to ensure that the organisms go through an adequate quarantine procedure before being introduced to the major display. The third is to collect all wastes and sterilise them before discharge to the sewer system and hence from there into the Murrumbidgee system. The detailed recommendations are contained in the report which has been circulated, I believe, to Assembly members.
The ACT Government endorses the report and its recommendations and will implement those for which it is responsible. Mr Da Deppo also accepts the report and has implemented or is implementing the recommendations that apply to him.
The consultancy into the impact of the introduction of waterbirds, reptiles and other animals was undertaken by Mr Frank Gnauck of Documentation Pty Limited. Mr Gnauck concluded that the impacts that could be expected from displaying exotic waterbirds and aquatic reptiles as proposed by the developers, subject to certain controls, are not serious. He recommended that the purpose of the lease be redefined to enable the display of waterbirds, sea-snakes, freshwater crocodiles and turtles but that other non-aquatic animals not be displayed without public consultation.
Mr Gnauck further recommended that the details of the animals which can be displayed, the display conditions and the measures required to protect the environment should be determined by a legally binding management plan for the aquarium. As part of his report, Mr Gnauck considered the request of the developer for special consideration to enable early display of waterbirds at the aquarium. He concluded that this should be permitted under appropriate conditions by issuing a certificate under section 72A of the Real Property Act 1975 with a time limit of six months as an interim change to the lease pending final consideration of the full report by this Assembly. It is proposed to follow this course of action.
The ACT Government and Mr Da Deppo support the report of the consultant. It is proposed that the report by Mr Frank Gnauck be tabled in the Assembly and be available for public comment, as recommended by the Conservation,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .