My submission to the Department of Main Roads is too long to place here, however if anyone is interested to further pursue please don’t hesitate to contact. The main thrust of the submission is outlined below.

The proposed realignment of the Bruce Highway is virtually a new highway from Federal to Curra, the major length of the deviation. The proposed Traveston Crossing Dam in the south near Federal, the proposed “bypass” of Gympie, and the following of the rail route to the north of Gympie dictates a new highway rather than an upgrade.  This rerouting has meant the intrusion of the highway into areas not previously subjected to the noise, visual, and pollution problems associated with the ever growing highway traffic. Further, long term planning for the demands for City development will see demand for land inevitably creep into the area adjoining and both sides of the proposed corridor. It is happening everywhere else, why not Gympie? It is therefore submitted that the proposal is shortsighted as far as future planning is concerned. Apart from that the road traverses populated areas again north of Gympie.  The fact that as few as possible houses are planned within the corridor perimeters does not eliminate the amenity and health factors introduced to those living within pollution fallout distances, more particularly those living adjacent and not eligible for compensatory measures should they wish to remove themselves and family from this impost affecting their amenity and well being.  As depicted in the submission discussions there is an ever growing mountain of evidence available for those ignorant of or blinkered to the drastic problems associated with highway pollution that research is adding to a fast growing momentum around the world. In the short time since the date of my submission there have been two new studies emerge. Both are the result of long term and scientifically acceptable research. The first (a United Kingdom investigation) involves studies on breast cancer as caused by main road particulate pollution. The second (a Queensland first) involves the incidence of road pollution fallout as to its affect on the human foetus. Both studies have resulted in positive identification of the adverse affects mentioned above in alarming new consequences of exposure to highway pollution to be posted in addition to those already listed in my submission. Although visual and noise amenity disadvantages the locality residents to the proposed highway the most important factor by a long measure is human health. In the USA, California has and is, leading the way in emission control targets for road pollution. Other States have emulated California and as with that state, driven by people demands. An end to exposure to cancer causation is on the move in that country. Unfortunately the targets set by the individual states have to be ratified by the USA EPA. When the Clinton administration was deposed by the Bush administration, Bush replaced the head of the EPA with his own appointment. The EPA has now signalled that they will not ratify the Californian emission targets and this has a roll on affect to other states wanting to follow California. A legal battle is in progress and lets hope Governor Schwarzenegger prevails. The principle supporters of the Bush administration are the oil and automobile industries.  My submission seeks compensation for all those living within 500 metre of the boundaries of the proposed highway in order that they may remove their families to a safer location should they so wish. There is bound to be those prepared to take the risk and stay put and their decision must be respected as relocating, to some, is a harrowing event. However those wishing to move should also be respected as should be their considerations for their health.