Page 611 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is the opinion of all present that even in times of medium river flow ... a potentially dangerous hydraulic is present.
Referring to the tragic circumstances involved in the 1986 incident, the police commented:
It is only a matter of time before this unfortunate incident is repeated.
In conclusion the police report states:
All members of the rescue squad are in support of the destruction of the weir. Messrs Maley and Marshall in their capacity as experienced white water rafters and rafting instructors also support this proposal.
A further engineering assessment was commissioned in 1989. This concluded that the modifications had had some effect in reducing the intensity of the dangerous conditions. However, the report recommended that:
Further modification to the weir would provide only a marginal improvement in safety.
The only possibility was the construction of a rescue apparatus on site. Permanent rescue facilities that could be installed include a walkway or flying fox over the weir wall. These suggestions have been around since the weir was first built and have been investigated thoroughly. They are completely impractical as they presuppose that the system would be applicable in all circumstances, that at least six people capable of operating the equipment safely - people who have been extensively trained - will be present in times of emergency, and require the system to be in perfect working order at all times. In addition, such a structure would itself become a magnet for daredevils and may be implicated in future accidents.
All alternatives to removal of the weir have been explored in the five years since the last drowning. Many incidents have occurred over this period, Mr Speaker, and it is only a matter of time before another drowning occurs. Visitors to the area deliberately ignore warning signs and locked gates. There is no way of warning others who may inadvertently enter the area, such as those washed down from the Cotter, or those rafting the river from many kilometres upstream, or, for that matter, people who do not speak English all that well. Indeed, as an aside, whilst Cabinet was inspecting the site, we were amazed to watch a 10-year-old lad and his sister go for a swim in this very area. He used the sign advising that swimming conditions were dangerous to pull himself over the chain supported by buoys which keep people away from the weir wall. He proceeded to swim dangerously close to the weir wall. This was done in the full view of police, members of the Cabinet and park ranger officials.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .