Hi everyone,
Please see below this communication from Heathmont Bushcare regular Sarah Dutton:
This morning (at Heathmont Bushcare’s Working Bee on Sunday 02/11/25) I discussed the issue of the Montrose Boral Quarry referral to the minister to expand and the community objection for many reasons including environmental. I only just found out about this last week and many others only seem to have heard of this recent attempt to expand last week as well, even though it was submitted 6th October, 2025 and a decision to be made by the minister is to take “typically” 20 business days, landing tomorrow, 3rd November but it could be anytime. So we are urgently emailing the minister our pleas to consider the importance of the necessity for an Environmental Effects Statement (EES).
The decision the minister needs to make is whether or not an Environmental Effects Statement (EES) is required. If the minister decides not then Boral will plough ahead with their expansion which is expected to cause environmental damage and destruction at and around the site. Part of this includes “relocating the existing discharge point upstream of the predicted drawdown areas to allow quarry water to be returned to Bungalook Creek”. The “returned water” would be treated water. As well as affecting the area, this can have effects to the creek that is a tributary of Tarralla creek that feeds into the Dandenong creek and so any effects caused can also affect Heathmont too. While there can be effects to local vegetation, trees that are essential habitat to the Powerful Owl that could die and make the “vulnerable” ecological vegetation class (EVC) 17 more at risk, and there are more species that could be at risk such as the burrowing crayfish, the short-finned eel and the galaxia fish. Effects to aquatic species in the Bungalook creek can have flow-on effects downstream in Dandenong creek, as can any pollution event that has more chance of occurring with interference to the creek that Boral wish to do. There is also no guarantee the returning water will be at the correct level to really compensate either.
Attachment K discusses the Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem (GDE) assessment for Boral and does show that there will be effects but claims it will be minimal while we disagree. It is not a risk worth taking and there is no proof of where this has previously occurred.
Attachment C discusses the Biodiversity Impact. It seems to rely on very insufficient surveying of fauna.
While it is not necessarily related to an EES, it seems an important legal consideration to enquire why a cultural heritage management plan (CHMP) has not been triggered with it affecting an Aboriginal named creek within 200 metres with major works. (Bungalook is Wurundjeri for Stringybark.) It seems not legal if they have neglected to trigger a CHMP that is supported by the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 and the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. And I’m not sure how the treaty legislation affects this either.
This is the link to the submission with the attachments:
There is also the Facebook group “STOP MONTROSE QUARRY EXPANSION” for more info and suggestions for letter writing. THere is also suggestions to write facebook posts and tag the minister too for more attention.
If you would like to support this please write an email and address it as follows:
To:
The Hon. Sonya Kilkenny
reception.kilkenny@transport.vic.gov.au
Minister for Planning
Department of Transport and Planning,
Victoria
CC:
EPA Victoria
Yarra Ranges Council
Kind regards,
Sarah Dutton
HEATHMONT BUSHCARE 