Submission by Glenelg Hopkins CMA
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Environment and Natural Resources Committee of Parliament: Inquiry into Rural Drainage Victoria Submission by Glenelg Hopkins CMA 21 December 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Terms of Reference ................................................................................................................. 8 1.2 Basis of Submission ................................................................................................................. 8 2. Response to Terms of Reference ........................................................................................... 10 2.1 TOR 1: The historical basis for the establishment and operation of former drainage schemes including management arrangements .............................................................. 10 2.1.1 Legal Framework ................................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Prior Management Arrangements ........................................................................................ 12 2.2 TOR 2: The status of rural drainage across Victoria, including effectiveness, regulation, ownership, responsibility and maintenance on both public and private land ................. 15 2.2.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................ 15 2.2.2 Effectiveness and Maintenance ............................................................................................ 16 2.2.3 Regulation .............................................................................................................................. 17 2.2.4 Ownership, Responsibility and Funding ................................................................................ 18 2.3 TOR 3: The benefits of rural drainage for both productive land and environment together with community expectations for rural drainage programs ............................................ 21 2.3.1 Benefits to productive land ................................................................................................... 21 2.3.2 Benefits to environment ........................................................................................................ 22 2.3.3 Community expectations for rural drainage programs ......................................................... 22 2.4 TOR 4: The impacts of rural drainage, including on other land holders and the environment including waterways, wetlands, flora, fauna and water quality ...................................... 24 2.4.1 Impacts on other Landholders ............................................................................................... 24 2.4.2 Impacts on the Environment ................................................................................................. 24 2.5 TOR 5: Options for improved rural drainage management across Victoria, including regulation, institutional and funding arrangements, operation, responsibility and maintenance on both public and private land ................................................................. 25 2.5.1 Cost‐benefit analysis ............................................................................................................. 25 2.5.2 Management framework ...................................................................................................... 27 Option 1: CMA Management ................................................................................................................ 27 Option 2: Local Government Management .......................................................................................... 28 Option 3: Joint Management between CMA and Local Government .................................................. 29 2.5.3 Drainage scheme inception mechanisms .............................................................................. 32 Option 1: Declare Drainage Courses under Section 218 ....................................................................... 32 Option 2: Declare a Water Management Scheme under Section 215 ................................................. 32 2.5.4 Advisory Committee .............................................................................................................. 33 2.5.5 Management Plan ................................................................................................................. 33 2.5.6 Funding .................................................................................................................................. 34 2.5.7 Regulation and Approvals ...................................................................................................... 35 2.5.8 Best Practice Design, Operation and Maintenance ............................................................... 38 2.5.9 Prioritisation .......................................................................................................................... 39 2.5.10 How could the legislation be changed to facilitate these arrangements? ............................ 39 Glenelg Hopkins CMA Submission to ENRC Inquiry into Rural Drainage 21/12/2012 Page 3 of 53 2.6 TOR 6: The Committee’s report on the Inquiry into flood mitigation infrastructure in Victoria ............................................................................................................................. 41 Appendix A List of Formalised DraiNage Areas ................................................................................... 42 Appendix B Case Studies ...................................................................................................................... 45 Eumeralla Drainage Area ...................................................................................................................... 46 Strathdownie drainage Area ................................................................................................................. 47 Yatchaw DraiNage Area ........................................................................................................................ 48 Bunnugal drainage Area ........................................................................................................................ 49 Goose Lagoon drainage Area ................................................................................................................ 50 Nullawarre Drianage Area ..................................................................................................................... 51 Glenelg Hopkins CMA Submission to ENRC Inquiry into Rural Drainage 21/12/2012 Page 4 of 53 1. INTRODUCTION The western district volcanic plains which cover most of the Glenelg Hopkins region are characterised by stony rises, clay plains, and numerous lakes and swamps. Because of the volcanic geology which disrupted drainage, natural drainage networks are poorly‐developed in many areas. When these areas were settled, significant areas of the swampy and low‐lying land were drained to improve agricultural productivity. The Glenelg Hopkins region has 44% of Victoria’s wetlands, 90% of which are on private land. Since European settlement, 78% of the shallow fresh water meadows and 66% of deep fresh water meadows have been lost (Glenelg Hopkins Regional Catchment Strategy 2003‐2007). The recognised drainage areas make up approximately 196,000 hectares, or 8% of the Glenelg Hopkins region. The agricultural value of the drainage land is high, with the major agricultural enterprises being wool, prime lambs, beef cattle, crops and dairy. The objectives of the drainage schemes are simple – to mitigate the more frequent inundation events and to quickly drain the more extreme inundation events. Most drainage areas in the Glenelg Hopkins region are not significantly influenced by overflows from large rivers and are mostly affected by rainfall in the local catchment. The role of the Glenelg Hopkins CMA in rural drainage management is currently limited to works within its existing floodplain and waterway management roles. The CMA has the legislative capability to manage rural drainage, but there is no recognised management framework and no resources with which to undertake this role. The Glenelg Hopkins CMA has been providing coordination assistance to landowners on an ad hoc basis since the early 2000s. The Glenelg Hopkins Region covers all or part of 11 Local Government Areas, as listed below, and shown in Figure 1‐1. Glenelg (all) Southern Grampians (all) Warrnambool City Council (all) Moyne (most) Ararat (most) Pyrenees (half) West Wimmera (part) Horsham (part) Northern Grampians (part) Ballarat City Council (part) Corangamite (part) The location of recognised drainage areas within the region is shown in Figure 1‐2. Glenelg Hopkins CMA Submission to ENRC Inquiry into Rural Drainage 21/12/2012 Page 5 of 53 Figure 1‐1 Glenelg Hopkins CMA and Local Government Boundaries (http://www.ghcma.vic.gov.au/media/images/Glenelg%20Hopkins%20CMA_v2.jp g) Glenelg Hopkins CMA Submission to ENRC Inquiry into Rural Drainage 21/12/2012 Page 6 of 53 Figure 1‐2 Location of Rural Drainage Areas within Glenelg Hopkins Region (Glenelg Hopkins Strategy for Existing Rural Drainage Areas 2004‐2007) Glenelg Hopkins CMA Submission to ENRC Inquiry into Rural Drainage 21/12/2012 Page 7 of 53 1.1 Terms of Reference The terms of reference for The Environment and Natural Resources Committee