DOCSLIB.ORG

Professionals Australia's Response on Behalf of Members in Relation to The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Professionals Australia’s response on behalf of members in relation to the proposed restructure PA met with engineers who work in the Engineering Division on two occasions at WNSW Parramatta offices with members dialling-in from regional NSW. PA encouraged members to put forward their professional views on the proposed restructure on whether it addressed existing problems. PA has received some very detailed responses from our members. It is clear there is a high level of concern that the restructure will have undesired impacts on both employees and the functions of Engineering. Many members have taken the opportunity to respond directly to the WNSW email address set up for feedback. This submission does not repeat those comments. This submission is concerned with the first order issue – Does the restructure enhance the undertaking of engineering functions by WaterNSW or not? The next level of concerns which appear to be the main focus of the input provided via the WNSW email are the detail of position descriptions and the arrangements for filling the structure. We understand such matters have also attracted a large number of comments and concerns from members. However, those issues arise only when the first order issue is satisfied. The focus of this submission is whether the restructure has accurately identified the deficiencies and whether the proposal will address those deficiencies. What can a restructure address? A restructure can address issues such as resourcing levels, specific function focus and functional alignment. It cannot address issues caused by dysfunctional organisational behaviour, lack of effective processes, etc. Does the restructure enhance engineering functions at WNSW? The view of WNSW engineers is that overall the restructure will not result in the enhanced performance of the engineering functions required by WNSW. The following is a selection of comments put forward by engineers with PA comments on those set out in brackets: • The apparent reduction in the number of mechanical and electrical engineering positions in the business. [PA does not see a demonstrable business case for this reduction] • The mandatory experience requirements for the Project Engineering positions do not appear to require technical experience. Currently the design team provides significant assistance on highly technical aspects to the projects team, it is unclear in the new structure where this will come from? Who will be invited to design review meetings? The design team does not believe it was resourced to achieve what it was established to achieve. [PA notes that in other organisations (e.g. Ausgrid), a key reform is to put design functions in the Projects area. This enables the commercial implications of variations to be appreciated by the design team, amongst other things.] • The new projects structure appears to have each Project Manager and Project Engineer across a large quantity of projects. The concern is this will lead to project engineers doing project manager work and not the engineering. Has industry benchmarking been undertaken regarding the practicality of such an arrangement. [PA notes a similar arrangement was set up in Delivery Management at Sydney Water. However, this was an employee driven change which permitted flexibility for those opting one or the other without a set number established. It was purposely developed to enable a business supported skill uplift]. • The inclusion of the maintenance auditing team within the SOAM business unit. Maintenance audits provide significant input to asset planning driving the requirement for new projects. Having the same team charted with the maintenance budget doing the audit is a conflict of interest. Previous experience has shown having maintenance providers perform assets audits to be problematic. [PA agrees that there is an implicit conflict of interest in the roles as proposed.] • The apparent reduction in the number of personnel conducting the maintenance audits is likely to lead to a reduction in the quantity and quality of the audits. Specifically, only one mechanical and no electrical auditors being transferred. [PA does not see how this aspect of the proposal enhances the performance of the engineering function at all] • The structure appears to be reinforcing silo creation as opposed to breaking them down, with perceived barriers and potential conflict between the managers and engineers. • It is not clear how the proposed structure will reduce duplication of work or clarity of which team does what work. Note in some circumstances the appearance of duplication of work is inaccurate because the people involved bring different skillsets. Having different skill sets that complement each other in different roles assists breaking down silos. It is also required to come to the solution or true identification of the problem and promote knowledge transfer. [PA notes that ‘matrix’ organisations require engaged employees – engagement issues at WNSW are discussed further below.] Abolition of reliability engineering The decision to remove a dedicated reliability engineering group raises serious questions with some of a public interest nature. This view is shared across the PA membership including those outside of the Engineering Division. Firstly, the work undertaken by this group is not limited to audit work as the following indicates: 1. Reliability Engineering Non-Audit Tasks – major work only • Warragamba Pipeline inspection and rectification of defects. Mamre Rd works, report writing, design, development procedures, engineering solutions, data entry, etc. • Parcelling of painting work at proposed sites – • Prospect pump rebuild – Specification, Inspection • Tallowa Dam access road and crane. • Tallowa Dam Flood damage • Standardised crane maintenance • Glennies Creek Land Slide • Fish River pipeline lead issue • OPT procedure • ACAC and PM Backlog– Substitute for maintenance planners • Pipeline sink hole at AB66 • Kangaroo Pipeline support failure • Cataract FCDV • Pindari FCDV • Burrawang pumping Station. Urgent specification for mechanical works (~1.5 Mill.) • Warragamba Dam Rock bolting • Warragamba Prospect Pipeline valves • Warragamba Dam Radial gate investigations • Warragamba Dam Drum gate refurbishment works • Warragamba Dam Drum Gate stop log Design and specification input for Geotech. • Warragamba Dam turbidity issue • Warragamba Dam radial gate brakes • Woronora Bridge • Cascade Dam electrical upgrade • Hume Dam – Penstock Internal protective coating • Euston Lock Gates (Redesign, Identification & Rectification of Issues • Assisting ASI with CIMS • Burrendong Dam expansion joint • Upper Avon Road support • Tallowa Dam fish lift support • Organised and conducted hydraulic training • Burrendong Dam CWPC– weeks of onsite support • Nepean Dam VSD and refurbishment works spec. • Warragamba Corridor Bridges - review of load ratings • Pipeline third party bridge proposal Archbold road • GSR known issues list and risk evaluation • Northern Rd upgrade • Greaves Creek handrail augmentation on crest • Warragamba Dam radial gate exercising and maintenance program to CIMs • Establish pilot program for LV single line diagrams • State wide WHS infrastructure register • Menangle Weir bank restoration and fishway Piping • Mollee Fishway post project defect rectification Secondly, the proposal to abolish reliability engineering when it has identified significant serious issues that have exceeded the capacity of the Projects Team to meet is a strange business response. WH&S risks identified by reliability engineering (those which could cause serious injury to WNSW staff or the public) Woronora Spillway Bridge • Corroded bearing fasteners and loose public handrails providing unsafe public access. Consultant reports will validate. Glenbawn Dam • Unterminated compressor cables lying on floor providing potential electrocution. • Overhead crane hitting high bay lights. Risk falling objects/electrocution. Cascades Dam • Fire hydrants non operational Avon Dam • Risk to public due to spalling concrete • Handrail over Spillway Bridge corroded to point of failure. Risk injury/death. Nepean Dam • Access ladder to thermistor chain for the dam does not prevent falling from height.(>30m) • Upper Valve House plated flooring is not safe due to inadequate load bearing. Risk injury/death, fall from height (>10m) Prospect Reservoir • Pooling water in electrical cubical risk of panel explosion due to major short. Chaffey Dam • High voltage transmission line in flood zone. Major Public safety risk. Oberon Dam • Insufficient earthing to switchboard, floating earth. Risk of electrocution. Broughtons Pass • Accessible Live power found in building. Extreme risk of electrocution. Various Locations • Non-compliant stop board lifting frames – i.e. Risk injury/death. Warragamba DWPS • Gas detectors not functioning whilst personnel working in station. • SCADA Alarm disabled for Sydney water chlorine leak. Risk chlorine inundation of station and risk of death to occupants. • Crane rail loose risk of crane derailing causing injury/death. Pheasants Nest • Stoney Gate access ladder/platform corroded beyond repair. Counter weight for gate suspended above walkway/platform. Risk fall injury/crush injury/death. Kangaroo Control Structure • Eye-wash stations not compliant. Risk serious injury/electrocution. • Gate at first level of Surge Tank not self-closing or lockable. Risk fall from height (>3m) injury/death • Kangaroo Shaft inspection lift for personnel not certified. Risk injury/death. Bendeela Control
Recommended publications
  • Fish River Water Supply Scheme

    Fish River Water Supply Scheme

    Nomination of FISH RIVER WATER SUPPLY SCHEME as a National Engineering Landmark Contents 1. Introduction 3 2. Nomination Form 4 Owner's Agreement 5 3. Location Map 6 4. Glossary, Abbreviations and Units 8 5. Heritage Assessment 10 5.1 Basic Data 10 5.2 Heritage Significance 11 5.2.1 Historic phase 11 5.2.2 Historic individuals and association 36 5.2.3 Creative or technical achievement 37 5.2.4 Research potential – teaching and understanding 38 5.2.5 Social or cultural 40 5.2.6 Rarity 41 5.2.7 Representativeness 41 6. Statement of Significance 42 7. Proposed Citation 43 8. References 44 9. CD-ROM of this document plus images obtained to date - 1 - - 2 - 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Fish River Water Supply Scheme [FRWS] is a medium size but important water supply with the headwaters in the Central Highlands of NSW, west of the Great Dividing Range and to the south of Oberon. It supplies water in an area from Oberon, north to Portland, Mount Piper Power Station and beyond, and east, across the Great Dividing Range, to Wallerawang town, Wallerawang Power Station, Lithgow and the Upper Blue Mountains. It is the source of water for many small to medium communities, including Rydal, Lidsdale, Cullen Bullen, Glen Davis and Marrangaroo, as well as many rural properties through which its pipelines pass. It was established by Act of Parliament in 1945 as a Trading Undertaking of the NSW State Government. The FRWS had its origins as a result of the chronic water supply problems of the towns of Lithgow, Wallerawang, Portland and Oberon from as early as 1937, which were exacerbated by the 1940-43 drought.
  • Sydney Water in 1788 Was the Little Stream That Wound Its Way from Near a Day Tour of the Water Supply Hyde Park Through the Centre of the Town Into Sydney Cove

    Sydney Water in 1788 Was the Little Stream That Wound Its Way from Near a Day Tour of the Water Supply Hyde Park Through the Centre of the Town Into Sydney Cove

    In the beginning Sydney’s first water supply from the time of its settlement Sydney Water in 1788 was the little stream that wound its way from near A day tour of the water supply Hyde Park through the centre of the town into Sydney Cove. It became known as the Tank Stream. By 1811 it dams south of Sydney was hardly fit for drinking. Water was then drawn from wells or carted from a creek running into Rushcutter’s Bay. The Tank Stream was still the main water supply until 1826. In this whole-day tour by car you will see the major dams, canals and pipelines that provide water to Sydney. Some of these works still in use were built around 1880. The round trip tour from Sydney is around 350 km., all on good roads and motorway. The tour is through attractive countryside south Engines at Botany Pumping Station (demolished) of Sydney, and there are good picnic areas and playgrounds at the dam sites. source of supply. In 1854 work started on the Botany Swamps Scheme, which began to deliver water in 1858. The Scheme included a series of dams feeding a pumping station near the present Sydney Airport. A few fragments of the pumping station building remain and can be seen Tank stream in 1840, from a water-colour by beside General Holmes Drive. Water was pumped to two J. Skinner Prout reservoirs, at Crown Street (still in use) and Paddington (not in use though its remains still exist). The ponds known as Lachlan Swamp (now Centennial Park) only 3 km.
  • BANDING PROJECT REPORT No.5 Prospect Nature Reserve, New

    BANDING PROJECT REPORT No.5 Prospect Nature Reserve, New

    Corella, 2017, 41: 48-52 BANDING PROJECT REPORT No.5 Prospect Nature Reserve, New South Wales (Abridged version – complete paper can be accessed at www.absa.asn.au) Aim: Avian research at Prospect Nature Reserve has been Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). conducted as part of an ongoing longitudinal study to document Within Prospect Nature Reserve, both Shale Plains Woodland and monitor the avian faunas occupying remnant areas of and Shale Hills Woodland elements of the Cumberland Plain Cumberland Plain Woodland in the north-western sector of the Woodland are present (Tozer 2003). Cumberland Plain. Other study sites include: Scheyville National Park (Egan et al. 1997), Agnes Banks Nature Reserve (Farrell Approximately two-thirds of the reserve has been mapped et al. 2012), Nurragingy Reserve (Farrell et al. 2015), Windsor as Shale Hills Woodland, with a canopy comprising Grey Box Downs Nature Reserve and Wianamatta Nature Reserve. Eucalyptus moluccana, Forest Red Gum E. tereticornis and Narrow-leaved Ironbark E. crebra, and a shrubby understorey Location: 33° 48′ S; 150° 54′ E. Elevation 61 metres above sea dominated by Blackthorn Bursaria spinosa. The remainder level. The reserve is located at Prospect, approximately five of the reserve is Shale Plains Woodland, with E. moluccana, kilometres south of Blacktown. E. tereticornis, Spotted Gum Corymbia maculata and Thin- leaved Stringybark E. eugenioides representing the dominant Description: Prospect Nature Reserve (Fig. 1) borders Prospect canopy species, and an understorey similar to that of Shale Hills Reservoir and comprises an area of 325.3 hectares. Woodland. The study site (Fig. 1) contains both Shale Hills and Shale Plains Woodlands.
  • Submission on the Environmental Impact of Badgerys Creek Airport

    Submission on the Environmental Impact of Badgerys Creek Airport

    Submission on the environmental impact of Badgerys Creek airport. Dr Anthony Green, Visiting Principal Research Fellow, Microsimulation Risk Group, University of Wollongong 17/12/15 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Federal and New South Wales State Government have released a preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the operation of a new double runway class 1 airport by 2060. This follows a report in 2012 on the joint Study on Aviation Capacity in the Sydney Region and publication of preliminary plans for the new airport operation in 2014 together with the preliminary EIS for the proposed Airport. This reports concentrates on the decision that an airport is actually needed within the Sydney Basin and the risks associated with siting this airport at Badgerys Creek which have not been adequately assessed within those documents. The forecasts on aircraft flights were based on unrestrained projections. There is no interaction considered with other systems that would limit these forecasts. As a result all passenger numbers, aircraft movements and employment figures are over stated. Furthermore the loss to the economy from not building Badgerys Creek airport are not as great as stated and the cost benefit in building the airport is questionable. The unreliability of forecasts is demonstrated in the forecast for 2014 from 2010 which is 10% higher than the number of aircraft movements that actually occurred in 2014. KSA already has an additional 10% capacity compared to the forecasts. The document also demonstrates that there was no cost benefit comparison with alternative forms of transport or with integrated transport systems. Since 42% of aircraft movements in 2014, were to Brisbane, Canberra, Coolangatta or Melbourne a cost benefit comparison of benefits and risks should have been undertaken involving integrated transport.
  • Dam Failure Warning and Evacuation Planning in New South Wales

    Dam Failure Warning and Evacuation Planning in New South Wales

    DAM FAILURE WARNING AND EVACUATION PLANNING IN NEW SOUTH WALES: RECENT PROGRESS AND THE FORWARD PROGRAM Chas Keys State Planning Co-ordinator NSW State Emergency Service Planning for the kinds of floods which would follow the failure of large water storage dams is relatively new in Australia. In New South Wales it began in the late 1980s following the realisation, based on improved scientific comprehension of severe weather and flood events, that some dams had spillways which were incapable of safely passing very severe floods. For a time progress was slow as far as plan development was concerned but over the past year or two it has picked up significantly. Several plans, under preparation for a considerable length of time, have been completed to final draft stage and a number of new ones have been started. At the same time the ‘rules’ by which the planning is being done and on which responses to dam-failure would be based have been fine-tuned. Moreover, the shape of the future planning program and associated activities can be seen with increasing clarity. Until quite recently the State Emergency Service was, like most emergency management organisations in this country, much more oriented towards responding to emergencies than in preparing to respond to them. Planning, as a consequence, was not given a high priority and there were few trained planners appointed to the organisation and few resources allocated to them. Activities involving planning for floods were in their infancy and planning expertise was lacking. Accordingly, the organisation was not well placed to react quickly when, in the mid-1980s, the PMP/PMF revisions made it clear that several of the state’s major water storage dams had inadequate spillway capacities and were in a few cases quite dangerously underdesigned in terms of their security during significant flood events.
  • Regional Water Availability Report

    Regional Water Availability Report

    Regional water availability report Weekly edition 7 January 2019 waternsw.com.au Contents 1. Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 3 2. System risks ............................................................................................................................................. 3 3. Climatic Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 4 4. Southern valley based operational activities ..................................................................................... 6 4.1 Murray valley .................................................................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Lower darling valley ........................................................................................................................................ 9 4.3 Murrumbidgee valley ...................................................................................................................................... 9 5. Central valley based operational activities ..................................................................................... 14 5.1 Lachlan valley ................................................................................................................................................ 14 5.2 Macquarie valley ..........................................................................................................................................
  • Government Gazette of the STATE of NEW SOUTH WALES Number 112 Monday, 3 September 2007 Published Under Authority by Government Advertising

    Government Gazette of the STATE of NEW SOUTH WALES Number 112 Monday, 3 September 2007 Published Under Authority by Government Advertising

    6835 Government Gazette OF THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES Number 112 Monday, 3 September 2007 Published under authority by Government Advertising SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT EXOTIC DISEASES OF ANIMALS ACT 1991 ORDER - Section 15 Declaration of Restricted Areas – Hunter Valley and Tamworth I, IAN JAMES ROTH, Deputy Chief Veterinary Offi cer, with the powers the Minister has delegated to me under section 67 of the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991 (“the Act”) and pursuant to section 15 of the Act: 1. revoke each of the orders declared under section 15 of the Act that are listed in Schedule 1 below (“the Orders”); 2. declare the area specifi ed in Schedule 2 to be a restricted area; and 3. declare that the classes of animals, animal products, fodder, fi ttings or vehicles to which this order applies are those described in Schedule 3. SCHEDULE 1 Title of Order Date of Order Declaration of Restricted Area – Moonbi 27 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Woonooka Road Moonbi 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Anambah 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Muswellbrook 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Aberdeen 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – East Maitland 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Timbumburi 29 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – McCullys Gap 30 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Bunnan 31 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area - Gloucester 31 August 2007 Declaration of Restricted Area – Eagleton 29 August 2007 SCHEDULE 2 The area shown in the map below and within the local government areas administered by the following councils: Cessnock City Council Dungog Shire Council Gloucester Shire Council Great Lakes Council Liverpool Plains Shire Council 6836 SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT 3 September 2007 Maitland City Council Muswellbrook Shire Council Newcastle City Council Port Stephens Council Singleton Shire Council Tamworth City Council Upper Hunter Shire Council NEW SOUTH WALES GOVERNMENT GAZETTE No.
  • Trout Waters Recreational Fishing Guide (Central)

    Trout Waters Recreational Fishing Guide (Central)

    Trout waters recreational fishing guide (Central) October 2014 Primefact 1038 Second edition Recreational and Indigenous Fisheries Unit Introduction NSW DPI Fisheries Officers regularly patrol Our State's fisheries are a community-owned waterways and impoundments ensuring resource. We all have a responsibility to protect compliance with NSW fishing regulations and and safeguard this natural asset for present and distributing freshwater fishing guides and sticky future generations. fish measuring rulers. Fishing regulations are in place to protect and Fishcare Volunteers can also be found at boat conserve our fish stocks and aquatic habitats to ramps and on the water in dedicated Fishcare ensure that fishing activities remain sustainable. vessels, advising anglers about responsible fishing practices and distributing fisheries Central NSW waterways provide many fishing advisory information. opportunities for fishing enthusiasts. This guide will give you an idea of the fishing on offer and Information on bag and size limits, fishing the closures and restrictions that apply to this closures and legal fishing gear can also be great region. obtained free of charge from the NSW DPI website www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries, or by The central region offers excellent lake, river and visiting your local NSW DPI fisheries office. boat fishing opportunities and anglers have the chance of catching a wide variety of fish including To report illegal fishing activity, call your local Murray Cod, Golden Perch, Rainbow Trout and fisheries office or the Fishers Watch Phoneline Brown Trout. on 1800 043 536. All calls will be treated as confidential and you can remain anonymous. Figure 1. The Central NSW waterways region Recreational Fishing Fee When fishing in NSW waters, both freshwater and saltwater, you are required by law to pay the NSW Recreational Fishing Fee and carry a receipt showing the payment of the fee.
  • Precinct 7: Prospect Recreation

    Precinct 7: Prospect Recreation

    PRECINCT 7: PROSPECT RECREATION The Prospect Recreation Desired Future Character Key Management Priorities Precinct (148 hectares) is To be a major destination for a distinct recreation and tourism, structured and unstructured Environmental Protection tourism destination shaped recreation. To protect critical and Land Stewardship WaterNSW and Sydney Water supply — Work with Sydney Water and by the Prospect Reservoir infrastructure and their cultural WaterNSW to improve biodiversity catchment area and the heritage values. quality and links to the Prospect M4 Motorway. It contains Nature Reserve Objectives — Explore and interpret the area’s PROSPECT RECREATION PROSPECT Wet’n’Wild Water Theme — Protect the integrity of Prospect Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Park, the state heritage Reservoir, its infrastructure and cultural heritage significant setting of the cultural heritage values Prospect Reservoir, the — Create a major destination precinct Creating Recreational and Atura Hotel, the state for recreation, leisure and tourism Community Facilities — Retain and enhance the walking and — Expand the existing network of heritage significant Royal cycling track network, including the walking and cycling tracks and link Cricketers Arms Hotel, Prospect Cycling Track to the Prospect Cycleway Blacktown Drive-In, popular — Create lookout opportunities to Land Use Opportunities maximise views across the reservoir picnic grounds, Peckys — Unstructured recreation and water body Disability Services, an associated facilities — Build a major new regional
  • History of Sydney Water

    History of Sydney Water

    The history of Sydney Water Since the earliest days of European settlement, providing adequate water and sewerage services for Sydney’s population has been a constant challenge. Sydney Water and its predecessor, the Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board, has had a rich and colourful history. This history reflects the development and growth of Sydney itself. Over the past 200 years, Sydney’s unreliable rainfall has led to the development of one of the largest per capita water supplies in the world. A truly reliable water supply was not achieved until the early 1960s after constructing Warragamba Dam. By the end of the 20th Century, despite more efficient water use, Sydney once again faced the prospect of a water shortage due to population growth and unreliable rainfall patterns. In response to this, the NSW Government, including Sydney Water, started an ambitious program to secure Sydney’s water supplies. A mix of options has been being used including water from our dams, desalination, wastewater recycling and water efficiency. Timeline 1700s 1788 – 1826 Sydney was chosen as the location for the first European settlement in Australia, in part due to its outstanding harbour and the availability of fresh water from the Tank Stream. The Tank Stream remained Sydney’s main water source for 40 years. However, pollution rapidly became a problem. A painting by J. Skinner Prout of the Tank Stream in the 1840s 1800s 1880 Legislation was passed under Sir Henry Parkes, as Premier, which constitutes the Board of Water Supply and Sewerage. 1826 The Tank Stream was abandoned as a water supply because of pollution from rubbish, sewage and runoff from local businesses like piggeries.
  • RECREATIONAL FISHING Fishing Fee Receipt Is Current

    RECREATIONAL FISHING Fishing Fee Receipt Is Current

    INTRODUCTION TO FURTHER INFORMATION A GUIDE TO Before fishing in NSW waters it’s always a good idea to check bag limits, protection laws and make sure your RECREATIONAL FISHING fishing fee receipt is current. For more information refer RECREATIONAL to details below. Fishing from banks as well as from boats is a popular pastime of locals and visitors within the Goulburn NSW Recreational Fishing Licences can be obtained via region. There are a number of ideal locations for you Service NSW: FISHING to explore, where you can go fishing for a variety of 267 Auburn Street, Goulburn NSW 2580 IN GOULBURN species (as listed in this brochure). Phone: 1300 369 365 or visit: https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing When fishing, be sure that, unless you are exempt, Sources: you have paid the NSW recreational fishing fee Animal Species in Goulburn Mulwaree. (2011, 12 1). and have the receipt for current payment in your Retrieved 1 12, 2006, from Commissioner of the Environment immediate possession. All money raised from NSW for Sustainability: http://www.envcomm.act.gov.au/soe/ recreational fishing fees is placed into recreational soe2004/GoulburnMulwaree/nativespeciesanimals.htm#fish fishing trusts and spent on a variety of programs such Goulburn Mulwaree Council, Parks and Recreation Dep. (NA). as improving recreational fishing facilities (eg. fishing Recreational Fishing. Goulburn, NSW, Australia. platforms, cleaning tables, boat ramps, artificial reefs Office of Environment and Heritage. (1998). etc.), policing illegal fishing and stocking of fish in Tarlo River National Park Plan of Management. local dams and rivers (see back for details).
  • Maximising Returns from Water in the Australian Vegetable Industry

    Maximising Returns from Water in the Australian Vegetable Industry

    Maximising returns from water in the Australian vegetable industry Scroll down or skip this page. This document is part of a larger publication that has been broken into four parts. The remaining parts of the publication can be found at the main page: Maximising returns from water in the Australian vegetable industry This document is subject to the disclaimers and copyright of the full version from which it is extracted. S E C T I O N 3 – WAT E R U S E I N T H E N S W V E G E TA B L E I N D U S T RY SECTION 3 – WATER USE IN THE NSW VEGETABLE INDUSTRY 3.1 – MANAGEMENT OF WATER RESOURCES IN NEW SOUTH WALES In New South Wales, water policy and regulatory functions are undertaken by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). State Water is a state-owned corporation responsible for delivery of bulk water to retailers. State Water incorporates, into a single business, all of New South Wales’ bulk water delivery functions outside the areas of operation of the Sydney Catchment Authority, Sydney Water Corporation, Hunter Water Source: from the Corporation and other water supply authorities. It owns 19 large dams and one small dam, State Water website. and manages another 11 small dams on behalf of the Department of Lands. (The capacities of NSW’s main water storages are listed in Table 8.) Table 8 – Main water storages in NSW, 2004 Catchment Major storage Storage capacity (ML) Murrumbidgee catchment Blowering 1 631 410 Burrinjuck 1 026 000 Lachlan River Slopes Carcoar Dam 35 800 catchment Wyangala Dam 1 220 000 Upper Macquarie River Ben Chifley Dam 30 800 catchment Oberon Dam 45 400 Burrendong Dam 1 188 000 Hawkesbury–Nepean Lake Burragorang 2 031 000 catchment Murray catchment Hume Reservoir 3 038 000 Dartmouth (Victoria) 3 906 000 NSW total 19 015 000 *Source: State Water and Sydney Catchment Authority websites Additionally, State Water owns and manages more than 280 weirs and regulators.