Points that should be considered re Fence at St Lucia Public Golf Course
Phone 07 3371 9355 or Email
25 August 2003
Did you see the article in a recent paper?
As more of the posts are falling over (having been bent down and then bent back!), it appears Council is going to ignore community knowledge and wisdom ... and continue with building the fence!
According to Council, it has to ... basing the argument on a recent case where a golfer hit on the head by a golf ball sued another golfer ... the golfer who hit the ball ... and quite rightly too ...!
But while that provides an excellent legal argument for Council to no longer operate golf courses, it is irrelevant to building "the fence".
Here is why. In the case of the golfers, the golfer hitting the ball has to be responsible for the safety of other golfers on the course ... a bit like shooting a gun or using poisons or ....!
And arguably, this responsibility of the golfer hitting the ball also extends to not hitting anyone else on or near the course too. That would include people walking across the course , legally or "illegally" ... and nearby ...!
So Council thinks "the fence" will stop people walking on or near the course ... but will it? How? The basic responsibility remains with the individual golfer hitting the ball.
So what is the role of "the fence"?
If golfers still hit their balls "out of bounds" which is the reason that Council has used to justify clearing all the "natural bush", then how will "the fence" stop the balls from going over it, and how will golfers retrieve their lost balls ... again the primary reason Council used to justify the "bush clearing"?
If there are gates in the fence, how will they be secured?
Increasingly, it appears "the fence" is nothing but an eyesore, a symbol of futility, which Council and presumably its advisers think will discourage people from walking on the course.
Will it?
Care will be needed to allow Council an "out" ... otherwise it will build "the fence" to prove it is right ...! And when "the fence" does not "work", Council will again blame us ... so why build "the fence"?
This is especially the case as it appears Council has apparently advised some residents it does not intend to completely enclose the golf course ... which it probably cannot do given the wildlife and safety and security
implications ..!
What else can be done to get a better outcome? What else has Council considered and who has it discussed those options with?
It seemed to me that Council through the new Lord Mayor undertook to consult with "the community" yet there has been no consultation with "the community" ... yet.
Perhaps Council will be raising some options and alternatives in its forthcoming letter to residents ...?
I hope so as nothing short of that could be construed as consultation with "the community".
Also it is worth noting that Council has resumed its poor management of the golf course and Sandy Creek. If you look up from Indooroopilly Road, you can see an area of the "natural bush" has been turned into a dump site ... not the hectares of bare grass though ... this dump is in "the bush".
And the poisoning has returned. The waterways are very badly "designed" so they cannot be managed ... so Council brings out the poisons ...
The problem with this however is that the dead material
adds to the dreaded nutrients to the watercourses, providing a rich bed of material for even more regrowth and an increased supply of the very enrichment materials that are currently causing major problems to the Brisbane River and Moreton Bay.
This is the BCC equivalent to residents hosing the lawn clippings down the stormwater drains ... the very thing BCC says not to do!
Have a look at Sandy Creek in Robertson Park and the drain beside and downstream of Indooroopilly Road across Indooroopilly Road ...!
The problem here is that having identified the need for better management and the need for community involvement in that process, in good faith and in public, sought Council support for increased community involvement, Council has abused that process too ... for one of the issues was a means to better manage the selected and desirable regrowth in the creek lines for wildlife and water quality purposes ...yet the result is a complete poison application ...!
So much for the breeding and protection areas for the ducks and turtles that frequent Sandy Creek ...!
Michael Yeates