50 likes | 143 Views
In the Land Court v’s Hancock Coal. Peter Anderson, Grazier Clermont/Alpha. brother Paul Anderson, starting pump jack. The Process of Protecting a Grazing Operation Outside of the Proposed Mining Operation. Objection to EIS No precedence for projects this size
E N D
In the Land Court v’s Hancock Coal Peter Anderson, Grazier Clermont/Alpha brother Paul Anderson, starting pump jack
The Process of Protecting a Grazing Operation Outside of the Proposed Mining Operation • Objection to EIS • No precedence for projects this size • Make Good Agreements vs Make Good Provisions • Negotiations with the Multi-National and multiple personnel • Breakdown of Negotiations • Land Court of Queensland- Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Kelly & Ors and Dept. of Environment and Heritage Protection (No.4) [2014] QLC 12 • The decision by Member Smith • The fallout and costs, still no MGA
Suggestions for amendments to the Water Act • The distance from the mining lease where a miner should be required to enter into MGA with Landholders • Time Frame for MGA • Level of drawdown to trigger MGA • Cumulative modelling • No landholder should be left in the position of going into the Land Court to seek security over their groundwater hence their business & livelihood
“Water is where you find it” The late Neil Anderson, “Glenlea Downs”, Clermont