Erosion works not a popularity contest

AT BEST, information about the risks posed by erosion, temporary inundation and permanent inundation at Inverloch is confusing.

At worst, it’s disgracefully misleading.

What’s also a worry is the way the Victorian Government-appointed Cape-to-Cape Resilience Project team, led by the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA), is trying to massage community sentiment towards (a.) accepting that there is a significant risk of flooding by the sea at Inverloch and (b.) accepting that the relocation of assets, including removing houses along the foreshore, is the best way to go rather than protecting them with proven engineering solutions including rock walls, groynes, breakwaters and the like.

The reality is that the response to the beach erosion problem at the Inverloch Surf Beach is not a popularity contest.

The community has already expressed its concern.

They love the beach and want it protected.

And those with homes along the coast want them to stay there and, where necessary, they want them protected. That’s it.

As far as the best engineering solutions; rock walls, groynes and breakwaters, and how to complement those with revegetation and nourishment of the dunes – that’s science, surely.

Another reality, however, and one you won’t find addressed in the survey the project team is asking people to fill out, relates to the real level of risk that exists at Inverloch.

At the Sentinel-Times we love a good heading as much as the next news outlet, but the fact is, the risk from erosion, temporary inundation by the sea and permanent flooding by the sea at Inverloch is very low.

Even if sea levels should rise by 0.8 metres by 2100, the risk of permanent inundation at Inverloch is rated as ‘low’ and ‘medium’, not ‘significant’ or ‘high’, even beyond 2100.

The risk of damage by erosion becomes ‘significant’ from 2040 onwards.

The risk of damage from temporary flooding by the sea only becomes ‘significant’ from 2070 onwards.

And in all these cases, it’s only a very small part of the foreshore that might be affected.

The risks posed do not warrant the sorts of scary questions included in the department’s survey and canvassed at the drop-in session at Inverloch last Saturday.
* How would you feel about moving private properties out of at-risk areas over time, if it meant we could continue having a sandy beach at Inverloch?
* How would you feel about moving the Bunurong Road, if it meant we could continue having a sandy beach at Inverloch?

We’ve already seen that the impact on Bunurong Road can easily be managed by a rock wall, and the same would go for the handful of private properties that might be impacted later this century.

It’s time the Cape-to-Cape team went easy on the scare tactics, got real about the risks and handed it over to some independent engineers for a workable, non-political solution to what is a relatively minor problem.

And for goodness sake, get on with it!