Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Martin's concerns

CH front page nov 15 well now we wait from from some comment from the experts ?We know the settlement requirements could be difficult to meet, but is it too costly Counsellors? .

Friday, November 10, 2006

Bypass H Option H highest

Bypass only -Option M midstream

This option put forward by a member of the yacht club -Geoff Hunter shows how a reasonable sailing course can be retained inside the southern section.

Bypass only Option L- Lowest min 1km from shore

The Bypass with Yachtclub Option B

Chris Meades original idea - the original option for discussion .

The Bridge option A

I think Tom Dennis is right about the photo of Mr Jellies idea.
Not exactly the way to properly consider the possibilities.

What's the really big issue- pollution or depth

One thing is clear , while pollution is a contributor , the main problem for improving water quality in lake Colac is the depth .
The major problem with a body of relatively fresh water big enough to easily supply the household population of Melbourne for a year ( even half empty) is that, its too big to deepen all over and its too shallow to prevent eutrophication. Getting enough depth over the base to reduce the eutrophic and wave effects is not possible on a lake of this age, without changing its whole character - its not a purrumbeet. Geologically its ready to becomeone big swamp

CONCLUSION My view of the limits
The best that we can hope for is to change part of the lake .To turn Lake colac into lakes,lakes colac
Hence the idea above - Titled Lakes Colac

what do you think ? hopefully commonly asked questions about practicality will be raised shortly . Some already have ( see links ) The discussion is limited ( mainly for space purposes) to practical options to change lake colac without overty changing its character. This blog is not intended to explaincmplex challenges in each proposal but to list the proposals, new questions and answers as they arise.