Attached is the text of an email from the PDCA to the Director General of Qld Transport and Main Roads regarding the lack of clarity on the proposed permit system and the plan for full opening of the range road.
From: Jamie Oliver <j.k.oliver@outlook.com>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 7:17 AM
To: director-general@tmr.qld.gov.au <director-general@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Cc: ann-maree.greaney@townsville.qld.gov.au <ann-maree.greaney@townsville.qld.gov.au>; paul.jacob@townsville.qld.gov.au <paul.jacob@townsville.qld.gov.au>; engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>; Bob.Katter.MP@aph.gov.au <Bob.Katter.MP@aph.gov.au>; Nick Dametto <hinchinbrook@parliament.qld.gov.au>
Subject: Permit System for Mt Spec Range Road
Dear Ms Stannard
The Paluma and District Community Association supports and represents the residents of Paluma Village and surrounding districts including Black Friars and Hidden Valley.
The community acknowledges TMR’s efforts to keep residents of the District informed about progress to reopen the Mt Spec Range Road since the closure in early-February.
After more than three months we were disappointed to be informed that a full road opening is not presently contemplated (nor apparently scheduled). The current alternate routes have provided infrequent access to some members of the community but are not acceptable means of access in the medium- or long-term because they are rendered impassable by adverse weather, are not suitable for all vehicle types and are unusable by persons with health issues that make them sensitive to the rough surfaces.
The advice that there will be a limited opening of the road under a permit arrangement did assist the community to continue the significant patience that it has exhibited to date. However, TMR’s approach to the implementation of the permit system – as outlined in TMR’s update 22 of 16 May 2025 – has caused great concern.
The failure by TMR to detail the criteria that will be applied when determining whether a permit is to be issued is unacceptable. That failure leads the community to the view that TMR is either unsure what criteria will be applied or is unprepared to provide the detail necessary to openly discuss the merit of any decision. Given TMR’s corporate experience, it would be very surprising if TMR does not already know what criteria it will apply. In that regard we note references in prior TMR updates to the decision being made in compliance with established policies and processes. We observe that our review of TMR’s website does not disclose a relevant policy. To assuage community concern, we also ask that TMR detail the logic that underpins its adopted criteria.
Further, TMR’s advice to date about the permit system leads to views that:
- permits will not be equally provided to “full-time” and “occasional” residents.
- permits will not be issued to non-residents, even if those people are high-frequency visitors to the district.
The advice states that travel will only be permitted between 6 am and 6 pm. A Friday night closure of the road prior to 7pm, effectively prevents weekenders from utilising their properties until Saturday, reducing their weekend visits to one-night only. That this impact is unacceptable was made very clear to TMR during TMR’s road works campaign some years ago and TMR has adequately accommodated the community’s concern until now. It is disappointing that lesson has been ignored (we assume in the interest of managing budgets and 12-hour shifts).
We ask that TMR provide the following information to the community in its next Update scheduled for Tuesday May 20 – the urgency arising from our desire to not further delay the opening of the road:
- Will TMR share with the community the engineering reports and risk assessments that are being relied upon to deny public access?
- What are the specific criteria and the underlying logic for each criterion which will be applied when determining who will get a permit?
- Is it TMR’s intent to provide permits to high-frequency users of Paluma – including weekenders who are not property owners?
- Is it TMR’s intent to regulate the number or identity of passengers in vehicles driven by permit-holders?
- How long will it take to issue permits?
- Will TMR undertake to implement the system by a specific date and to process all permit applications within a specific time?
- When does TMR anticipate allowing unrestricted use of the Mt Spec Road, and what are the criteria that will be applied to that decision?
Yours sincerely
Jamie Oliver
President Paluma and District Community Association
Cc: The Honourable Bob Katter MP, The Honourable Nick Dametto MP, Acting-Mayor Cr. Anne-Maree Greaney, Cr. Paul Jacobs.
UMMMMM ?? These dot points seem a little counteractive! And given that Sunrise is 0635 and sunset is 1744. I am not sure how they anticipate reviewing the hours to accommodate shift workers….there are NO MORE HOURS!
.While TMR previously outlined that permit holders will allow road access between 6am and
6pm, TMR is currently reviewing these hours to accommodate shift workers and part-time
residents.
• Due to visibility issues and the lack of road lighting, motorists will not be permitted to
access Mount Spec Road at night to avoid potential hazards.
in addition…
It seems absurd that naturally occurring vegetation and debris from landslips must be removed from the area due to Wet Tropics management policies. What kind of regulation dictates that this debris be relocated? If there were no road, the material would simply have gone over the edge, so why can’t the woke environmental policymakers recognize that reality?
Great email, Jodie. I fully agree with your points. If TMR decides to provide documentation on the geotech assessments and logic behind setting criteria, we could follow this up with very specific challenges to their risk assessments and decisions.
Your point about having to relocate debris is spot on, and probably indefensible from an ecological perspective.
Hi all
I have also sent an email to TMR and Nick Dametto
I appreciate the efforts being made to ensure safety on the range, and I acknowledge the importance of responsible risk management in light of ongoing concerns about potential landslips. However, it is incredibly frustrating to see that traffic control workers are not required to undertake the same six-hour round trip to reach their post each day, while locals who rely on this road for daily travel are forced to navigate these restrictions.
If it is already known that a landslip will happen eventually and it is simply a matter of when—not if—why can’t mitigation efforts be undertaken in controlled circumstances rather than waiting for an inevitable failure? Proactive measures would reduce uncertainty, minimize risk, and ensure a more effective approach to safeguarding all road users.
Furthermore, the risk of a landslip has always been present, particularly in adverse weather conditions. As locals, we have long performed our own risk assessments before traveling on the range, making informed decisions based on firsthand experience and prevailing conditions. The new requirement for inspections before 6 AM by TMR only adds unnecessary inconvenience and bureaucratic hurdles to a situation that requires practical, experience-based responses rather than micromanaging.
I urge consideration of a more balanced approach that recognizes the everyday realities of those who rely on this route, while maintaining essential safety measures.
Looking forward to your response.
Good points, Jamie.
As an aside, may I suggest that the PDCA print out all of the TMR updates (preferably A3 and in colour) and file them in one of the folders used in the history display? This event is unprecedented in the length of time Paluma has been isolated (previously only three weeks straight in the last 43 years), and is now certainly part of our local history.
Thanks Linda,
Interesting idea. It should not take too much to put the updates into a single folder that could be used in the History Display. Of course, the History open displays won’t start up again til the road fully opens!