Hi crew,
I know a number of you frequent the waters of Elanda Point and Lake Cootharaba many times a year.Not only is the place great for rigging of gear, right next to the water. But it also has great sailing in numerous directions and is a rare place with shallow water that kids, can learn without the hassle of jetskis and power boats.The site looks to be changing hands and the prospective new owner is trying to build a jetty, right where windsurfers launch from.Not only will it make sailing back to the beach much harder, but it will attract more powerboat activity to the area.If you feel that the issue matters enough to you, please go ahead and sign the petition and follow the updates on the the facebook page. ELANDA POINT NEEDS YOUR HELP.
thanks guys and happy sailing.
www.change.org/p/dr-steven-miles-protect-elanda-point-as-declared-fish-habitat-management-a-area
.yeah we saw the owners doing their thing with unknown interested parties last time we were there.
How we can influence the the process is something to consider.
ROTSA RUCK
Waterstart, Beachstart...looks like you guys are going to invent the Jettystart. Kinda like jumping but with a running start 
The changing of hand of the camp ground and the construction of the jetty are two different things.cheers
do you know how long the jetty will be and where it will be built? Off to left, middle or to right of beach? 100m,200m or longer?
at this stage I don't want to commit/comment as there is a lot I don't know about the plans
however I'm very attached to my Elanda point holidays and unsure of what changes are occurring other than rumours and hearsay
dont want to antagonise the new owners and create attitude against windsurfer's
cheers Jeff
Totally understand.The plans for the development of the camp area, look to be quite good, except that general camping will be up the back of the area.
The Jetty and campground upgrade, in my eyes are two different issues.The fact that the planned owner has made no effort to consult local communities or groups, as well as trying to change environmental status of the fish habitat, simply to build a private jetty, that will benefit his own profit, is the worst part.If you want more info, i'd happy send you the plans and proposals.
www.noosanews.com.au/news/jetty-plan-marooned/3134897/
might take awhile by the looks of this news article
This Sunday from 12 onwards there will be more information displayed at Boreen Point. Local artists will be present and hopefully the information provided will bring clarity.
We all love Elanda, she needs some TLC...not sure if we need more traffic on this fragile body of water.
100% agree Custom1111.
And thanks for showing support.We would love to see everyone at Boreen this Sunday and if the SE keeps blowing it could be some good sailing on the lake too.It also seems Seabreeze is quite wide spread.I was quoted today, sourced from here.Have a good weekend crew.
www.noosanews.com.au/news/rally-to-make-point-about-preserving-elanda/3164095/
Win News reporter was here today @ Elander Pt .... So I asked her what story was she covering 'The proposed Jetty' was her answer
The Jetty would be annoying, but still possible to sail there. If its a public jetty as they claim it would have to be then do day trippers (windsurfers) get access for free or do we still pay for access to the area.
The issue which my family is concerned about is the ability to camp on the water front or anywhere on the lower level. i.e from the current house down to the water front. On the map it looks like all roads/paths/tracks will be removed from this area and a controlled camping area( does this mean marked sites as per usual caravan parks) on the far side of the football field is being established.
If we can't camp on or near the water we probably won't be back.
Am I reading the map wrong? or are they wanting to get rid of tent/van city to provide uninterrupted views for their new bar, lounge an dining area.
Also I think the current owner will be more pissed off if they jetty doesn't get approval. ( Isn't the jetty approval a condition of the sale proceeding.)
Select to expand quoteThere is some print saying edge of bush camping on a few spots down the front. Hopefully that will remain as is for free camping. No idea if that is actually the case though.
Don't think you could do anything more formal anywhere down from the house as I think it has flooded up to the house fence in the past. Perhaps that will work in the favour of the regulars who brave the wind to be close to the water. I would not be keen to haul my gear from the back oval.
Hopeful that the regulars are still considered in the plans. One advantage is that there is a lot of land to work with.
Thinking about it, it might even help to have a few powered sites as I have been told that it is too cold in winter to camp there. Maybe an electric heater could swing things in my favour??
Select to expand quotelungs said..
The Jetty would be annoying, but still possible to sail there. If its a public jetty as they claim it would have to be then do day trippers (windsurfers) get access for free or do we still pay for access to the area.
The issue which my family is concerned about is the ability to camp on the water front or anywhere on the lower level. i.e from the current house down to the water front. On the map it looks like all roads/paths/tracks will be removed from this area and a controlled camping area( does this mean marked sites as per usual caravan parks) on the far side of the football field is being established.
If we can't camp on or near the water we probably won't be back.
Am I reading the map wrong? or are they wanting to get rid of tent/van city to provide uninterrupted views for their new bar, lounge an dining area.
Also I think the current owner will be more pissed off if they jetty doesn't get approval. ( Isn't the jetty approval a condition of the sale proceeding.)
Hey Lungs,see my replies:1). If you look at the proposal for the updated cabins etc. The general camping is now up the back and the fancy "glamping" cabins etc are by the lake. (happy to fwd to you if you wish)2). Public access means free access. As it stands, you will have to pay to enter per day, which means pay to access the jetty. In laymen's terms means, its not public.3). The jetty will also mean that the 2 tour boats, would be based there. At present the lack of power boats is the major appeal to me.
Disclaimer: I've camped a lot and windsurfed even more at Elanda and would love to teach my kids to windsurf there. I'm part of the Protect Elanda action group and i can openly say we are not against an upgrade to the land based facilities, but we are against environmental degradation, especially when its for the sake of private profit and has no positive outcome to the public and community.This will change the area, a lot and forever.
So i urge you to at least take the time to read up on the plans and proposal.cheers
Josh
Select to expand quoteAre you referring to the concept sketch above, or is there something else?
There is a line around an area down the front which says edge of bush camping area. This runs to the edge of the existing road to the waterfront. This road is proposed to be removed and there is a proposed new access road north of the existing brown toilet block. There are two new ablution blocks, in this area, does this not suggest that this area is to be camping?
Looks to me that the open grassed area, Tornando alley, may not be camping anymore and the area north east of this will still be "Bush Camping".
Would be keen to hear if you have heard otherwise.
I believe the new lease is attached to the guYs that run the Noosa discovery tours. Most of what they are proposing looks great. Will expose many more people to this beautiful area and boost local tourism.
the really big concern appears to be an application to downgrade the fish habitat from a to b. Not sure why this would be necessary.
apparently the plan is to bus tourists to elanda and then stick them on the boats to go into the Everglades. Much better option than the current trip all the way from Noosa itself.
must be possible to deliver a great eco tourism product without stuffing up the lake.
Select to expand quoteblackattack said..
the really big concern appears to be an application to downgrade the fish habitat from a to b. Not sure why this would be necessary.
As currently stands, A FHA Habitat A can only have a jetty if it doesn't affect the environment and is installed for public use.Noosa council were approached to act as the public identity, to the public jetty, but declined.
So now Eco Tours is pushing for a downgrade, because under Habitat B you can build a private jetty.
But there are guidelines to this, that are not being followed. Including size of foot print, amounts of boats stationed there, public accessibility etc.
Its a total spit in the face of eco tourism operators everywhere and honestly really dilutes the ECO tourism banner.
protect the environment, while downgrading it at the same time.
I did have a quick read, so went back over it again, the closest cabins to the water would probably be the ones in the SW corner an area most likely above flood levels, but on a area currently used by campers who probably don't like the wind and are still reasonably close to current amenities.
I don't see any cabins or glamour tents along the water front or in so called tornado alley. It seems that they will be reducing the area available on the flood plain (for want of better wording). The map is only a concept sketch, but the number of campers would be reduced because of a reduction in available area. I too would not like to haul my gear back to the football field every day.
In the proposal to the council to act as the public entity for the jetty, they state that they only have a heads of agreement, not an actual contract of sale. They also state that on a few occasions that the jetty is intrinsic to and a necessity if the development is to be a success. (between the lines no jetty no contract of sale no development, hence pissed off current leasee - until he finds someone else to take it over)
They also can't seem to make up their mind where they want the jetty (3 maps 2 different locations).
If we can't camp on or close to the water and have the kids roam around safely and freely then the place wouldn't be as appealing.
We would like to see the amenities renewed and maybe some powered sites and communal bbq areas (such as at cotton tree), but we would hate it to become another cotton tree or the like.
I have signed the petition because the potential new owners are gearing up for a completely different market and I hope that they will pull out if the jetty is not allowed.
The lake is in the Biosphere. It's a big deal just google Noosa Biosphere. So the due diligence around this idea is going to match the level of significance. Windsurfers, sailors and campers alike are not featuring in this application but the Biosphere will.
Interesting about the, subject to, in the contract of sale. Typically this would mean the deal is yet to be unconditional. So some inadvertent advertising by the proprietor if the deal falls over.
How about some crowd funding to purchase? I hear $1M is the right number to secure management rights for the remainder of the lease and associated infrastructure already in place.
Select to expand quotebrynoz said..
The lake is in the Biosphere. It's a big deal just google Noosa Biosphere. So the due diligence around this idea is going to match the level of significance. Windsurfers, sailors and campers alike are not featuring in this application but the Biosphere will.
Interesting about the, subject to, in the contract of sale. Typically this would mean the deal is yet to be unconditional. So some inadvertent advertising by the proprietor if the deal falls over.
How about some crowd funding to purchase? I hear $1M is the right number to secure management rights for the remainder of the lease and associated infrastructure already in place.
What about a Co-op.
All interested community groups could become partial owners and use the area for community project and events.
- like a Elanda wind fest etc
It would appear to me that the Cootharabah windsurfing camping group, headed by Jeff, Morgan, Andy and their mates, need 3 questions answered:
1) Does the jetty location interfere with windsurfing?
2) Does the tourist boat traffic interfere with windsurfing activities?
3) Can they still camp alongside the lake shore?
I think the location of the jetty, as shown to the north of the bay, does not overly interfere with windsurfing activities. However, clear answers to questions 2) and 3) are not obvious from reading the proposal in the council meeting minutes.
I think that 3) is possibly irrelevant John as it is private leasehold land and they can pretty much do what they like as long as they don't break any laws or regulation. However 1) and 2) are pretty good questions, as the proposed jetty will be on public land in the lake.
Something not defined in any of the documentation is the number of proposed boat movements (unless I just didn't look hard enough). We should note that there is the benefit of reduced boat movements in other parts of the river and lake that will be offsetting the cost of their boat being based at Elanda.
I actually feel for the current owners, they just want to move it on and get on with the rest of their lives and the interested buyers need to make sure that whatever they buy will be financially viable. The long and the short of it is that whatever is there now mustn't be financially viable and so something has to change to make it so. Redevelopment of some sort just has to happen, obviously it cannot adversely impact the environment.
Hi John340All legitiment questions:1). Its my understanding that the proposed jetty will extend from the small gap in the trees, were the majority of windurfers launch from and often leave gear rigged at. The overall shape is for it to be a double T floating style.
2). At present the operator runs 1500 vessel movements a year. with 2 vessels (i believe). Thats 750 per boat. Thats 4 a day per boat. You tell me if having 2 large, dual outboard boats, driving through your launch and gybe spot, 4 times a day will have any affect on windsurfing activities. The operator has also stated that he plans to increase operations by 8%. Thats an additional 2 trips a week.
3). The details of setup of the camping, glamping, cabin mix is hard to find. It's my understanding that basic camping will either be in the trees near the Mill Point track entry or up the back on the air strip. I think the current area often occupied by windsurfers will become cabins.
The other factor that you haven't considered is the longterm environmental affects. Surely as a user of this area, you have some level of interest in the protection of the natural area?? No?
Select to expand quotePaddles B'mere said..
Something not defined in any of the documentation is the number of proposed boat movements (unless I just didn't look hard enough). We should note that there is the benefit of reduced boat movements in other parts of the river and lake that will be offsetting the cost of their boat being based at Elanda.
From the horses mouth.
"The installation of a jetty at Elanda Point and removal of 1500 vessel movements from the lower and middle reaches of the Noosa River will deliver significant long term sustainable outcomes." Mr Batty.
www.noosanews.com.au/news/looking-to-enhance-biosphere/3164097/
And he forgot to mention, be a huge money saver for the operator, as it reduces fuel consumption and "wear and tear" costs.
Maybe the savings can go into rehabilitation programs for the area or upgrading the roads between the current tour departure point and Elanda (which will now be bringing bus loads of guests up for tours)
Hi guys.
In regard to the comments above.
1. Sketch above shows jetty north of where people launch from, on a section of small beach that is not easily accessible at present.
Is there another plan showing another location? Where we store our boards and walk out from is 200m South west of this.
I would assume the jetty will extend to where the drop off is, about 300m from the shore. No point in going further as it says pretty level from there on.
Only boards that tend to sail inside this line are learners with shorter fins, or SUPS etc. Most of us walk out to here to launch anyway. Personally, I don't often sail inside this line anymore as I tend to use fairly big fins these days.
2. Pretty sure that there are generally far more boat movements than 4 a day in busy periods. Between hire and private boats and cats etc. Not saying it would be fun having more, but not the end of the world in my opinion.
3. As mentioned before, not sure how cabins could be placed at the front unless they are mobile as it is flood prone. Fine to move them I guess, but not sure how services to them would be protected. Some may remember the timber shed that was down the front that stored the gear for the hire boats that was destroyed in a flood more than 20 years back.
I have been a visitor to Elanda, multiple times every year since '81, and would like nothing more than to see it stay just as it is. However, finally after many years of threatening, the current owner is going to move on. I honestly thought he would have left in a pine box, not a Porche as he said in one of the articles. Good luck to him, I say.
My only hope we can find a satisfactory place in all of this. Not quite sure what we would do as an alternative if we can't.
Cheers, Brad.
I agree with you Brad, I just hope that a satisfactory development can be proposed that will suit everyone including the new owners and we can continue to camp and sail there. I've only ever windsurfed there for a week and a half last year with the guys, but don't see the proposed jetty and boat movements as an issue for the same reasons that Brad has described, maybe strict speed limits on vessels could mitigate a few issues. As long as the impact on the environment and people is assessed and found to be less than the overall benefits of moving the tour boat to Elanda then why not? It brings people and commerce to the area and if done properly it may educate people too.
One of the most galling (and frankly typical) aspects of this is the lack of transparency. If anybody proposes changes which affect others and most especially, the environment, then it becomes their duty to engage the stakeholders in an effective and open manner and actually listen and be prepared for some adjustments.
It is glaringly obvious that no-one who is responding to this issue , be it on Seabreeze or the pro and anti groups on Change.org, is in full possession of the facts and so comment is based around speculation and questions or uninformed opinion. Mr Eco Warrior Batty has provided what cherry-picked pieces of information he thinks us "chooks" should be fed; meanwhile, instead of engaging the local community, the windsurfers, sailors, fishermen, campers and other interest groups, he has spent his time courting government ministers such as Kate Jones to try and present the whole shebang as a done deal. The process is wrong.
Mr Batty's claims of consultation via a public meeting is true enough, but having talked to a couple of attendees it was poorly done, with apparently, a public notice in the Noosa paper about a day before the meeting and no other promotion( I may be a little out here but the time frame was definitely short and with limited promotion.). Bad enough, but I was then told that the opening statement from Mr Batty was "there will be no questions". Draw what you will about why enquiry was shut down in such a way.
The dangers in this proposal are clear
1. If a fish habitat has been graded at a certain level, then the reasons for that grading remain, so a downgrade is a concession purely on the basis of development and not according to the same criteria that were used to grade the habitat in the first place. Barnaby Joyce, our 2IC, has the same perverted viewpoint when he proposes to downgrade the status of an endangered species to enable access to exploit resources. The Australian Bight is under threat from foreign oil companies. It has a marine park and whale sanctuary.
2. Elanda is quite unique, it provides relatively natural, low cost camping and great lake access. Any "upgrade" to the level that we think is proposed (remember, no detail) will result in greater restrictions and costs to families and other users. Could it do with a bit more TLC and perhaps considerate renewal? I think so.
3. Businesses regard making money as criteria number one ; should this proposal be successful, what happens when it starts to become popular? Will prices rise and limit access to those who have more money?
4.Will any claimed benefit of reduced boat movement in the lower Noosa River simply result in a transfer of activity to Lake Cootharaba and the Everglades and will that further increase as more people ( who are blissfully unaware or ignorant of the effects) take advantage of the tours. This raises the question of putting a cap on boat movements; if the tours are that good, the customers will wait.
5. Given the very shallow nature of the water at Elanda I assume a jetty would need to extend a fair way, certainly further than 70m and more like 150m. There is no way a long structure can avoid interfering with sailing and other recreation of itself, and the boat movements will further add to the mix. Will there be restrictions placed in the Discovery docking areas? How will they re-fuel and maintain the boats, and what about potential fuel spills and other contamination which is currently much less risk at present? Will it attract more recreational powercraft in a well established sailing and canoeing environment? Oh yeah, a public jetty with a fee for access from land; sounds a bit commercial to me.
6. These "resort" type proposals with a green "eco" wash used as promotional currency are often found to be much less environmentally beneficial; they are often just a few degrees better than some who don't give a **** at all. Once in place they are impossible to shift and serve as pioneers for others who want to cash in. We live in and visit the northern end of the Sunshine Coast; pause and consider why we bother to gravitate this way, and why indeed Mr Batty is currently making a dollar.
7. Boreen Point has recently been described by a Noosa News journalist as "a backwater". I'm not sure what the intent was but if a backwater is a quiet, largely undisturbed oasis of green surrounded by fantastic natural assets and good people then I'll take it as a compliment. It's general absence of commerce is its attraction. What will happen to our backwater when it is "Discovery(ed)"? Will there be more traffic on roads leading to Boreen and indeed with sightseers in the village itself? Will other developers be pushing for access to the area all in the name of competition...it could happen.
8. Current low impact tour operators like the canoe groups must be concerned about the potential for increased river and lake traffic and a diminution of the pristine, quiet and unique experience that they offer to visitors.
Sure,there is plenty of speculation, but in the absence of detail and based on historical precedents it would be prudent to be suspicious and demand that other views be heard.
The thing Mr Batty has not considered is the trust factor. He has been closed and secretive with the people that are affected the most. Reality suggests that he could not win over everyone, especially with his current proposal as we understand it, but if he genuinely wanted to showcase best practise and better practise eco-tourism, he would have wanted a broad spectrum of input before putting together his "done deal" with government and media and "I'll take my bat and go home if you don't let me have a jetty" approach.
He could start over, reconsider some contentious aspects of the proposal and listen to the concerns and suggestions of people who care about more than themselves.
Disclaimer: I windsurf at the lake :)
Would you still go there for windsurfing if you had to camp up the back somewhere a distance from the water?
Unless I'm misinterpreting the plan in the document link, it looks to me like the bush camping area is still down near the water and not too far to walk (refer the dashed black line). The camping has just been pulled back from the waterfront along the beach. To answer your question Greg, yep i'd still go there to go windsurfing and would be happy to pay more to have better facilities than what is there now. I didn't sail anywhere near that jetty when I last went there so it wouldn't affect me. Boat movements are an issue, but as long as there are controls placed on thing such as boat speed and the heading the tourist boats can use to approach the proposed jetty then i'm sure that compromise can prevail.
