Review of the River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program

June 2005

RNMENTS WO VE RKI GO NG IX IN

S P

A

Y R T T I N N E U R M SHI M P WITH THE CO Murray-Darling Basin Commission

We will manage and conduct our business in a highly professional and ethical manner, and according to the values jointly agreed with the Community Advisory Committee. These values require particular behaviours that will cement our relationships with our stakeholders and the wider community, and will underlie all decisions, actions and relationships we enter into. We will promote the values so that all people and organisations which have dealings with the Commission know what to expect from us and what we expect from them.

Our values Respect and honesty • We agree to work together, and • We will respect different views, ensure that our behaviour reflects respect each other and acknowledge the following values. the reality of each other’s situation. • We will act with integrity, openness Courage and honesty, be fair and credible, • We will take a visionary approach, and share knowledge and provide leadership and be prepared information. to make difficult decisions. • We will use resources equitably and respect the environment. Inclusiveness • We will build relationships based Flexibility on trust and sharing, considering • We will accept reform where it is the needs of future generations, needed, be willing to change, and and working together in a true continuously improve our actions partnership. through a learning approach. • We will engage all partners, including Indigenous communities, and ensure Practicability that partners have the capacity to be • We will choose practicable, long term fully engaged. outcomes and select viable solutions to achieve these outcomes. Commitment • We will act with passion and Mutual obligation decisiveness, taking the long-term • We will share responsibility and view and aiming for stability in accountability, and act responsibly, decision making. with fairness and justice. • We will take a Basin perspective • We will support each other through and a non-partisan approach to necessary change. Basin management. Review of the River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program

Brian Lawrence and Lucy Paterson

RNMENTS WO VE RKI Murray-Darling Basin GO NG IX IN

S P

A Y Commission R T T I N N E U R M SHI M June 2005 P WITH THE CO Published by Murray-Darling Basin Commission Postal Address: GPO Box 409, Canberra ACT 2601 Office location: Level 5, 15 Moore Street, Canberra City Australian Capital Territory Telephone: (02) 6279 0100 international + 61 2 6279 0100 Facsimile: (02) 6248 8053 international + 61 2 6248 8053 E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: www.mdbc.gov.au For further information contact the Murray-Darling Basin Commission office on (02) 6279 0100 This report may be cited as: Review of the River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program MDBC Publication No. 15/05 ISBN 1921038470 © Copyright Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2005 This work is copyright. Graphical and textual information in the work (with the exception of photographs and the MDBC logo) may be stored, retrieved and reproduced in whole or in part, provided the information is not sold or used for commercial benefit and its source (Review of the River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program) is acknowledged. Such reproduction includes fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968. Reproduction for other purposes is prohibited without prior permission of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission or the individual photographers and artists with whom copyright applies. To the extent permitted by law, the copyright holders (including its employees and consultants) exclude all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this report (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it. Cover Photo: River Murray – Renmark, South Australia © Peter Solness Design and typesetting: Ideas and Directions I&D10224 Printing: Union Offset Canberra ACT This publication is printed on Monza Satin, a 50% recycled and coated paper.

2 Acknowledgements

The Commission acknowledges and appreciates the assistance provided to this project by the government members of its Water Quality Monitoring Working Group: Stuart Minchin – Victoria Bruce Cooper – New South Wales Derek Rutherford – New South Wales Dennis Steffensen – South Australia Charles Lewis – Australian Government The authors acknowledge past and present MDBC staff - Norman Mackay, Martin Shafron, Jody Swirepik, Sue Grau and Scott Keyworth - for their sustained support for long-term monitoring. This report was considerably improved by the comments of independent reviewer Dr Terry Hillman.

3

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements 3 Executive Summary 7 Introduction 11 1.1 Objectives 11 1.2 Methodology 11 1.3 Geographic Scope 11 Water Quality Monitoring Program 13 2.1 Background 13 2.1.1 The Murray-Darling Basin Agreement 13 2.1.2 Policy Responses to the Agreement 14 2.2 Description of the program 15 2.3 Reviews 15 2.3.1 Early Reviews of the WQMP 15 2.3.2 Recent Reviews of the WQMP 15 2.4 Other River Murray System Monitoring Data and its usages 16 2.4.1 Water Quality Data 16 2.4.2 Water Quantity Data 17 2.4.3 River Condition Data 17 Water Quality Objectives 19 3.1 Terminology 19 3.2 Background and Diffi culties in Formulation 19 3.3 Provisional WQO’s and their Status 20 3.4 Provisional WQO’s and the WQMP 20 Recommendations 21 4.1 The WQMP 21 4.1.1 New Objectives 21 4.1.2 Physico-Chemical Monitoring 21 4.1.3 Macroinvertebrates 24 4.1.4 Phytoplankton 25 4.1.5 Bacteria Monitoring 26 4.1.6 Data Publishing 26 4.1.7 QA/QC 26 4.2 Management Response 26 Concluding Remarks 27 Appendix A Part V of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement 1992 29 Appendix B State by State Break up of Water Quality Monitoring Program Sites 31 Appendix C Current MDBC Water Quality Monitoring Programs 33 Appendix D Provisional Water Quality Objectives 35 Appendix E Proposed Water Quality Monitoring Program (Sites, classes / parameters and frequencies). 37 Appendix F Format Specifi cations for Water Quality Monitoring Data 39

5

Exec utive Summary

The River Murray Water Quality Monitoring • The periodic reporting and assessment of Program (WQMP) is a monitoring network of 35 water quality to determine trends; sites located on the Murray and its tributaries • The indication of changes in water quality which has been routinely monitoring physico- brought about by control measures; chemical and biological parameters since 1978. In • The requirement for additional investigation addition to the data being periodically analysed, on control measures; and the data is also reviewed to allow for updating • The characterisation of the effect of long term and improving the program in order to fulfi l the changes in land use and land management on statutory responsibility of maintaining an effective water quality. system for monitoring. The initial network of 32 stations monitoring The two objectives of this review project are to physico-chemical parameters has undergone ensure the Commission’s WQMP: periodic improvement over the years which has • Collects relevant and useful data in resulted in the current program of 35 sites extending an integrated and consistent fashion along the River Murray, in the tributaries at or near to adequately meet natural resource the confl uence with the Murray and in the stored management functions, statutory obligations waters. Up to 20 physico-chemical parameters and business needs; and are measured at the one site with frequencies of • Provides accurate and reliable information either weekly or monthly, depending on the class of in a timely manner for internal and external station. Of the 35 sites 12 are monitored for algae, stakeholders through effi cient data and 7 are monitored for macroinvertebrates and 1 site record management systems monitored for heavy metals. Background New South Wales (7 sites), Victoria (18 sites) and South Australia (10 sites) conduct the monitoring, The Commission’s statutory responsibilities with samples analysed at their respective in regard to water quality evolved from an laboratories and fi nal results available to the expression of concern by the South Australian Commission approximately one month later. Premier in 1973 of the quality and quantity of water available in the River Murray. This resulted in Review process the establishment of the River Murray Working Party A number of reviews of the WQMP data have been which recommended amending the River Murray undertaken over the years, which outline methods Waters Agreement to broaden the function of the and results, characterise the River Murray in terms Commission and design an interim water quality of the attributes being monitored, present trend monitoring program which commenced in 1978. analyses and make recommendations for future The amendments to the Agreement were fi nalised monitoring. These reports were drawn upon during in 1982 and included the powers to monitor and the course of this review, providing the basis for a investigate, coordinate information, set objectives number of recommendations made in this report. and to make representations regarding water An internal needs analysis was conducted to quality. determine requirements of the data users within Description of the WQMP the Commission, the results of which highlighted the need for a higher degree of awareness of the The WQMP was designed according to the WQMP. following stated functions: An inter-jurisdictional Working group was • The provision of data which will enable convened with members from NSW, VIC, SA, the development and improvement of MDBC and the Commonwealth, providing a forum management plans for meeting water quality where proposed changes to the WQMP were objectives in the River Murray; considered.

7 Proposed changes to the program suffi cient to maintain observation of tributary impact and of ionic dominance in the main stem of the Murray. The WQMP was reviewed by the authors and considered by the Working Group at two meetings during 2004. Soluble Organic Carbon A number of proposed changes were put forward It is recommended that the frequency of monitoring including changes to the objectives of the program and soluble organic carbon be increased from monthly to to the monitoring of major ions, soluble organic carbon, weekly to match nutrient data. This recommendation is colour, bacteria and phytoplankton. Further investigations based on the assumption that soluble organic carbon can into the monitoring of phytoplankton, metals and be considered together with the nutrients phosphorus, macroinvertebrates were also recommended. The location nitrogen and silica, better refl ecting fl oodplain dynamics of the stations was considered to be still appropriate to the and giving a more complete picture of the nutrient status of intent of the program and the usage of the data, however a water body. an additional site to monitor algae and Class 2 (Figure 2) Colour parameters at Goolwa, South Australia is recommended. It is recommended that the frequency and intensity of Objectives monitoring colour be increased to match that of turbidity. This recommendation is based on concerns over apparent The proposed amendments to the objectives aim to better increasing colour trends in the upper Murray and the refl ect the nature of this type of surveillance monitoring, advantage and economy of having both colour and update the terminology and better refl ect modern turbidity measurements together. management processes, as well as to further evolve the Bacteria approach of undertaking special studies to meet specifi c information and knowledge needs. The proposed new It is recommended that the current monthly monitoring objectives are: of coliforms at Class 2 stations in South Australia be discontinued, on the assumption that monitoring for • To periodically report and assess water quality to operational purposes is being undertaken by the relevant understand variability and determine trends; State agencies. • To provide data which will assist reporting against Phytoplankton water quality objectives in the River Murray and will inform management of the River system; and The primary aim of the phytoplankton component is to relate changes in species abundance and composition to • To undertake additional investigations to changes in the river environment. In order to best meet characterise and understand the factors and this aim it is recommended that sampling of chlorophyll processes affecting water quality and the river ‘a’ and phaeophytin be introduced at all 12 algal sites and ecosystem, and inform management. that algal monitoring be included at the new site at Goolwa Parameters in South Australia, together with Class 2 physico-chemical parameters. Major Ions Metals Major ions are currently sampled at 31 of the 35 stations and have been monitored on a monthly basis from 1978 to It is recommended that further investigation into a more present. appropriate way to monitor metals in the River Murray be conducted and that monitoring of metals at Morgan It is recommended the sampling of ionic composition continue until new arrangements are fi nalised. be reduced in intensity to the 4 major salt contributing tributaries and 2 sites on the main stem of the Murray and that the frequency be reduced from monthly to quarterly. This recommendation is based on the review of the variability in the 25 years of anion and cation data and the effect of reducing frequency, the assumption that the ionic composition of these sites are adequately characterised, and the expectation that the remaining sites will be

8 Macroinvertebrates QA/QC Within the objectives of the WQMP, the primary aim of No changes are recommended to the current process, the macroinvertebrate component, known originally as on the assumption that the NATA accreditation process the Biological Monitoring Program, is to sample aquatic adequately meets the programs requirements. macroinvertebrates in such a way as to complement Management Response physical and chemical data and provide an additional The position of Principal Water Quality Scientist should aid in detecting and interpreting changes in water quality be reinstated. Management of the WQMP is a major and environmental condition in the River Murray and its component of the position and should include, but not be tributaries. To meet this aim, it is recommended that the limited to, the following functions, which are necessary if macroinvertebrate monitoring continue in its current form the objectives of the monitoring program are to be met: pending further analysis and investigations as detailed in • Investigating potential specifi c investigations and the report. coordinating their implementation; • Reporting and interpretation of data to the users; and Data Publishing • Conducting periodic reviews on the program. Pending the development of the Commission’s own This position would also play a vital role in addressing the web-publishing capacity, an interim arrangement of web statutory responsibilities of Clauses 39 to 46 of the Murray- access is recommended through the use of Victoria’s ‘Data Darling Basin Agreement 1992, which at this stage the Warehouse’, with data being submitted to the Warehouse authors consider are not being adequately addressed. at the same time it is submitted to the MDBC. Specifi cations for when the data is to be sent and the format are also Overall, the WQMP provides the only baseline set of water recommended and are detailed in the report. Incorporation quality data for the River Murray, thereby providing the basis of WQMP data into the Warehouse has commenced. against which all subsequent evaluations and investigations can be designed and measured. Its importance should not be overlooked.

Dean Jukes takes a sample from above Euston Weir for the WQMP Photo: Phil Cocks 9 10 Introduction

The quality of water in the River Murray and its tributaries • Preparing a preliminary needs assessment through has been monitored routinely since 1978. Samples are internal workshops and individual consultations and collected at weekly or monthly intervals from 35 sites interviews with MDBC staff; along the River Murray and its tributaries and analysed for a • Consulting with representatives of the governments range of physico-chemical and biological parameters. This of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and monitoring is a statutory responsibility and its data provides Australia, through the Water Quality Monitoring Working the most signifi cant and extensive long-term, continuous Group; record of water quality in the River Murray. In order to fulfi l • Developing revisions to improve the Water Quality the statutory responsibility for maintaining an effective Monitoring Program and recommending these to the system for monitoring, the data is periodically reviewed, Water Quality Monitoring Working Group; with the intent of updating and improving monitoring • Finalising the recommendations with the Working group techniques and enhancing the information coming from the through an independent review and submitting them monitoring. back to the contracting governments for costing; and 1.1 Objectives • Submitting the fi nal proposal for a revised Water The two objectives of this project are to ensure that the Quality Monitoring Program to the Murray-Darling Basin Commission’s River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Commission for approval. Program (WQMP): 1.3 Geographic Scope • Collects relevant and useful data in an integrated and The area to which this review applies is the area defi ned consistent fashion to adequately meet natural resource in Clause 41 of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement 1992 management functions, statutory obligations and where the Commission “must establish, maintain and business needs; and operate an effective and uniform system” for measuring and • Provides accurate and reliable information in a timely monitoring quality, of: manner for internal and external stakeholders through • the water of the River Murray; effi cient data and record management systems. • the water in the tributaries at or near the confl uence 1.2 Methodology with the Murray; and This review was undertaken by the following process: • the stored water (which includes Menindee Lakes as • Defi ning the task through the preparation of a Project well as the Commission dams and weirs). Brief and Business Plan according to the PRINCE 2 project methodology; • Preparing a Project Plan outlining the major tasks required to complete the review; • Documenting all of the existing MDBC-funded water quality monitoring under way in the River Murray System;

11 12 Water Quality Monitoring Program

2.1 Background through the late 1980’s as the Agreement was redrafted into the current Murray-Darling Basin Agreement. The Commission’s statutory responsibilities in regard to water quality evolved from a January 1973 approach to 2.1.1 The Murray-Darling Basin Agreement Prime Minister Whitlam from South Australian Premier Part V of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement 1992 (the Dunstan, expressing anxiety for the maintenance of both Agreement) covers the Commission’s role in “Investigation, quality and quantity of water available in the River Murray. Measurement and Monitoring” Within Part V, Clause 41 (c) In March 1973 the Prime Minister invited the Premiers of covers the WQMP specifi cally. Part V is reproduced in full the three States to discuss the River Murray, the existing in Appendix A. powers of the River Murray Commission and the problems Monitoring of water quality was one of a number of which had arisen in regard to ensuring water quality. This additional powers that had been conferred on the meeting resulted in a directive of the Prime Minister and Commission in the revisions made to the River Murray State Premiers to investigate measures to protect and Waters Agreement in 1982. improve water quality in the River Murray. A River Murray The 1975 Working Party Report documents more detail Working Party was formed, comprising River Murray regarding the fi ndings of three committees and the content Commissioners of the day and reporting to a Ministerial of other submissions. That Report was explicit in stating Steering Committee. that in protecting and improving water quality, the powers The Working Party convened sub-committees on water to monitor and investigate, to coordinate information, to quality, irrigation practices, salinity and biological set objectives and to make representations, would be conservation. It’s report1 recommended broadening of required in order to be effective. These provisions now the functions of the Commission by amending the River exist in Clauses 41, 44 and 45. Murray Waters Agreement. The three State governments In addition, making representations as provided in Clause and the Commonwealth government accepted the 45 was identifi ed as having a correlative duty on the recommendations of the Working Party Report and in parties to provide information on proposals that may have October 1976 authorised the Commission to operate on an a cumulative effect – hence Clause 46, which requires the interim basis within its proposed water quality functions, parties to inform the Commission of proposals. pending completion of legislative action to amend the The proposing of quality standards that were applicable at River Murray Waters Agreement. a reach scale, was seen as providing consistency between Accordingly, the Commission established a Water the State approaches to pollution control and being Quality Committee comprising experts nominated by necessary in order to make recommendations to the parties the Commonwealth and the States of New South Wales, on standards to be maintained - hence Clause 44, which Victoria and South Australia, who in turn assigned a requires the development of water quality objectives. Working Group with the task of designing a monitoring The Agreement already contained a clause (now 48) program having due regard for the Commission’s expanded requiring New South Wales and Victoria to take effective responsibilities in the fi eld of water quality. The Water measures to protect the catchment of Hume Reservoir Quality Committee’s report was published in 19792. from erosion. They report annually on the condition Sampling had commenced in accordance with their initial of their portion of the Hume catchment, including design in July 1978. information of land management, river improvement works, The amendments to the Agreement were subsequently soil conservation, forestry matters, fi re protection and formalised in a major revision to the Agreement, fi nalised in proposed works and measures. 1982. The water quality responsibilities were strengthened

1 River Murray Working Party (1976) River Murray Working Party Report to Steering Committee of Ministers October 1975. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 2 Water Quality Committee (1979) River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Programme – Water Quality Committee Report to River Murray Commission. River Murray Commission, Canberra. 13 MDBC WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM Water Quality Parameters Monitored at Each Class of Station CLASS 4 CLASS 3 CLASS 2 CLASS 1 Includes Class 4 Includes Class 3 Includes Class 2 parameters plus: parameters plus: parameters plus:

Weekly Monthly Weekly Monthly

Menindee pH bicarbonate oxidised nitrogen boron Lakes WEIR 32 turbidity chloride total kjeldahl nitrogen cadmium conductivity (salinity) sulphate total phosphorus copper

SOUTH temperature potassium soluble phosphorus chromium r

AUSTRALIA e NEW SOUTH WALES sodium silica iron v

i calcium lead R

g magnesium manganese

n

i l

r soluble organic carbon mercury a

D colour nickel zinc

Caliform bacteria also monitored at Class 2 sites in South Australia Lake Phytoplankton monitored weekly and macroinvertebrates twice yearly at selected sites (see legend) Victoria Burtundy LOCK 5 Merbein Morgan LOCK 3 LOCK 9 Wailkerie Red Cliffs Hay Euston Balranald Mu e River rrumbidge Mu rray R Yass iver Kyalite B ADELAIDE i lla Murray bo ng W Creek Bridge a Wagga Wagga Swan Hill k Tailem Bend oo l R CANBERRA iver

Milang Lake Deniliquin r

Barham e

Alexandrina v

i TORRUMBARRY R

G Kerang e

u WEIR YARRAWONGA Lake n e Murray B b

a o g tt w

Albert d C e WEIR i r r

Mouth e b e C Albury k re

e m k

u r

r

e B r r v Echuca o Hume Reservoir k u i en Creek

R M

VICTORIA

n r Shepparton

e o O

v d w

Rochester i e Tallandoon d r n M R e s

o v R i L i t e t R iv a p e M s n r i r tt a a Dartmouth u p

b r R Reservoir l e

m i

u v v a i

o e

C R r

G

a

w

e i

Sampling Site Legend K

Class 1 parameters and phytoplankton

Class 2 parameters MELBOURNE Class 2 parameters and phytoplankton Class 2 parameters and macroinvertebrates Class 2 parameters, phytoplankton and macroinvertebrates

Class 3 parameters

Class 4 parameters

Figure 1: Current Water Quality Monitoring Program sites, parameters and frequencies

2.1.2 Policy Responses to the Agreement To maintain and, where necessary, improve existing There has been a recurring policy theme amongst the three water quality in the rivers of the Murray-Darling Basin State governments and the Commonwealth government of for all benefi cial uses - agricultural, environmental, maintaining or improving water quality in the River Murray. urban, industrial and recreational:- The 1973 meeting of Premiers with the Prime Minister • in the case of those parameters such as salinity and discussed problems which had arisen regarding “ensuring” nutrients which are already recognised as causing water quality. The terms of reference of the subsequent problems, the policy is to improve existing water 1975 River Murray Working Party included examining and quality; recommending measures required to “protect and where • in the case of other parameters which may at the necessary improve” the quality of the River Murray. moment be well below recognised limits, the policy The Working Party recommended that “As a basic is to endeavour to ensure that existing quality is not requirement for the River Murray, the water quality in allowed to deteriorate. the main stem should be maintained so that the river remains a satisfactory raw water source for domestic This central principle of either improving or maintaining, purposes for the entire length of the river.” This approach but not allowing deterioration, has since guided all of seeking to prevent any further deterioration of water recommendations and representations made by the quality formed the basis of the Commission’s actions in Commission under Clauses 45 and 46 of the Agreement. response to declining water quality through the late 1970’s and the 1980’s and was formally adopted as a policy by the Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council at their ninth meeting on 31 August 1990, as follows: 14 2.2 Description of the Program 2.3 Reviews

The River Murray Commission (now the Murray-Darling 2.3.1 Early Reviews of the WQMP Basin Commission - MDBC) commenced the Water Quality A review of the fi rst eight years of the WQMP was Monitoring Program (WQMP) in July 1978 according to the published in 19883. A review of the fi rst fi ve years of design of its Water Quality Committee. The WQMP had phytoplankton data was also published in 19884 and a been designed according to the following stated functions: review of the fi rst fi ve years of macroinvertebrate data was • The provision of data which will enable the published in 19895. All three of these reviews outlined development and improvement of management plans methods and results, characterised the River Murray for meeting water quality objectives in the River Murray; in terms of the attributes being monitored, presented • The periodic reporting and assessment of water quality trend analyses and made recommendations for future to determine trends; monitoring. The reviews confi rmed the need to continue • The indication of changes in water quality brought the WQMP and a number of revisions were made to the about by control measures; sampling program as a result of these reviews. A number of supplementary investigations into water quality issues were • The requirement for additional investigation on control also undertaken. measures; and • The characterisation of the effect of long term changes 2.3.2 Recent Reviews of the WQMP in land use and land management on water quality. In accord with the recommendations made in this fi rst The WQMP had in its initial form a network of 32 stations review regarding future reviews, the MDBC commissioned a located on the main stem of the River Murray and the second review of the WQMP in 1998, with Australian Water lower end of its tributaries. A suite of up to 20 physico- Technologies (AWT). chemical parameters was measured at varying frequencies The two key objectives of this second review were: according to the class of station. During 1980 the WQMP • To assess and report on the MDBC’s water quality was expanded to include three more stations, as well as monitoring data, including the determination of any algal counts, macroinvertebrate sampling and heavy metal trends, and describe the ecological condition of the sampling at selected stations. River Murray; and During 1983 the frequency of nutrient measurements and • To review the design and implementation of the the extent of major ion measurement were both increased. water quality monitoring program in relation to the Figure 1 shows the location and class of each station and Commission’s needs for water quality and river health the parameters and frequencies sampled. information. Each station is monitored by one of the three States, with The review process was divided into three stages; review, samples being analysed at their respective laboratories and analysis and revision. fi nal results available to the Commission approximately one Stage 1 – Review month later. Of the 35 sites, New South Wales monitors 7, There were three main aims for Stage 1: Victoria 18 and South Australia the remaining 10. Appendix B contains a State by State break-up of the monitoring • A description of the spatial and temporal trends activity. in the physico-chemical, phytoplankton and macroinvertebrate data using summary statistics

3 Mackay, N., Hillman, T. and Rolls, J. (1988) Water Quality of the River Murray – Review of Monitoring 1978 to 1986. Water Quality Report No.1, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 62pp. 4 Sullivan, C., Saunders, J. and Welsh, D. (1988) Phytoplankton of the River Murray, 1980-1985. Water Quality Report No. 2, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 61pp. 5 Bennison, G. L., Hillman, T. J. and Suter, P. J. (1989) Macroinvertebrates of the River Murray (Survey and Monitoring: 1980-1985). Water Quality Report No. 3, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 77pp. 15 and down-river and time-series profi les of selected Stage 3 – Revision variables. This report represents the revision stage of the review. • Trend analysis and an analysis of the infl uence of physico-chemical variables and stream fl ow on the 2.4 Other River Murray System Monitoring macroinvertebrate fauna; and Data and its Usage • Justifi cation for and recommendations of any Since the commencement of the WQMP in 1978 there has further statistical analyses of the physico-chemical, been signifi cant development of monitoring programs phytoplankton or macroinvertebrate data. throughout the Murray Darling Basin, supported both by The Stage 1 report 6 was published in 1999 and provided individual State jurisdictions and through MDBC. a general description of the water quality variables Existing programs have also been modifi ed over the period monitored and the macroinvertebrate community. It – including the WQMP (see Section 2.3). identifi ed the role of each variable as an indicator of The data provided by these programs are advancing water quality or ecological condition. This fi rst stage also our knowledge of the system and thereby our ability, as reviewed the broad relationships between the physico- natural resource managers, to use the resource wisely and chemical variables, phytoplankton, macroinvertebrates and sustainably. Vigilance is also required to avoid wasteful stream-fl ow data. overlap of effort. The following discussion summarises the Stage 2 – Analysis types of data currently being collected, their purpose, and The objectives of Stage 2 (for the period 1978 to 1997) their contribution to the management of the Murray System. were to: 2.4.1 Water Quality Data • Identify any changes in measuring methods; In addition to the WQMP’s suite of sites and parameters, • Analyse the temporal trends of key water quality there are other water quality parameters monitored variables; at certain sites throughout the same geographic area • Describe the relative impact of the tributaries on the for certain purposes. Such water quality sampling is water quality of the River Murray; and undertaken by the relevant authority in each State, usually in a project based format, covering specifi c areas or specifi c • Describe changes in the River Murray phytoplankton attributes (such as algae). community. Within each of these projects is a network of linked The Stage 2 report 7 was published in 2002 and activities and often the sampling undertaken for the provided specifi c analyses of temporal trends of key WQMP parameters is included as one of these activities. physico-chemical quality parameters and phytoplankton A detailed description of each of these monitoring communities. It also described the relative impact of the projects in each State has been assembled as part of this tributaries on the water quality of the River Murray. review’s documentation of existing activity 9 and includes a The macroinvertebrate component of the WQMP was tabulation of sites, parameters and frequencies. considered separately in this Stage 2 Analysis. A summary of this is included as Appendix C to this report. A discussion paper was produced by AWT in August 20008 Some of this data, such as turbidity levels and algal counts which reviewed sampling methods and contained six at some sites, is collected daily and/or is available over a recommendations for changing the program. shorter timeframe than that of the WQMP data, hence it is used for operational purposes at times.

6 AWT (1999) Water Quality Monitoring Program Review – Part 1 Data Summary and Recommendations. Report no. 98/169 AWT Melbourne. 7 Water Ecoscience (2002) MDBC Water Quality Review Stage 2 – Data Analysis. Report No. 653. Water Ecoscience Melbourne 8 AWT (2000) MDBC Biological Monitoring Review – Macroinvertebrate Sampling Discussion Paper. Report no. 498 AWT, Melbourne 9 Paterson, L. (2002) Current MDBC Water Quality Monitoring Programs. Draft document. 16 2.4.2 Water Quantity Data This modelling suite supersedes the existing suite of Dyer (2000)10 describes the fl ow (and water usage models and provides capability to simulate fl ows from data) collected by the state agencies as part of their 1891 to 2001 on a daily basis and salinities for the entire responsibilities under the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement Murray and Lower Darling System for the Basin Salinity 1992. Much of this data is supplied to River Murray Water Management Strategy benchmark period of 1975-2000. on a daily basis for use in managing the River Murray Under this modelling framework, fl ow and salinities can be System11. This data is known as operational data and is modelled on a daily basis while the resource assessment, generally obtained by interrogating each fl ow site early in water accounting, irrigation demand computation and the morning (nominal time is 8:00 am). As such the data policies relating to transfer of water between storages are does not account for any fl ow variation during the day. carried out on a monthly time step13. The majority of sites used have a data logger or meter In addition to the operational function, outputs from the associated with the site, which allows for the collection of River Murray models have underpinned all predictive time series data. assessments and policy advice made under the Living This is where any variation of fl ow during the day is Murray initiative, provided the basis for the Ministerial accounted for and a total daily fl ow is determined (of Council’s decision to cap diversions and enabled the hydrographically corrected data). subsequent management of the Cap on Diversions. Flow, or data used to calculate fl ow, is measured either They also support a host of ecological research projects continuously or instantaneously at a network of 140 and the analyses of fl ow scenarios in the scientifi c and gauging stations funded by the MDBC throughout the River community forums convened under the Living Murray Murray System. The location of these and the frequency Initiative. and techniques with which fl ow data is recorded and 2.4.3 River Condition Data processed is summarised in Swann (2002)12. The National Land and Water Resources Audit’s Assessment The fl ow monitoring network is extensive and has been of River Condition (ARC) uses available environmental developed over a long period to meet the needs of measures to report river condition according to seven conserving and regulating the water of the River Murray indices: System and modelling its fl ow. • macroinvertebrates; Flow data is generally available and adequate to meet • hydrology; the needs of interpreting or calculating information from the physico-chemical data. The fl ow data is the basis of • nutrient and suspended sediment loads; the hydrological models of the River Murray System such • nutrient concentrations and instream salinity; as MSM and BIGMOD, which are now established into a • riverine habitat; modelling suite for running sequentially to address various • bank condition; and issues at time steps of a month or a day. • catchment impacts on river.

10 Dyer, B. G. (2000) Changes to the River Murray Accounts. MDBC Technical report 3/2000, MDBC Canberra. 8pp. 11 Defi ned as the main course of the Murray, all its effl uents and anabranches, its tributaries above Albury, the Darling below Menindee, the Commission dams and weirs and the Menindee Lakes storage. 12 Swann, J. (2002) A brief guide to Data Management within MDBC. Summary of workshop presentation by author, 27 February 2002. 18pp. 13 Close, A., Sharma, P. and Mamalai, O. (In press) Setting up of MSM-BIGMOD modelling Suite for the River Murray System. MDBC Technical Report unnumbered 2002, MDBC, Canberra 17 The assessments are reported as good, poor, very poor or The SRA uses three river health indices in its initial form extremely poor - relative to a reference condition defi ned – macroinvertebrates, fi sh and hydrology15, with more to be for each index. added over time. The SRA has been established to provide These indices have been reported for the River Murray a holistic assessment of the health of the system at the large System in combination with other data and on a zone-by- scale and extending over the whole Murray Darling Basin. It zone basis14. While the data is not fi ne enough to allow will provide a means of tracking changes in health between the detection of individual management interventions catchments and over time (in any one catchment). and not regular enough to allow the detection of trends, The design and frequency of sampling to achieve this it does indicate signifi cant degradation in biological and ‘big picture’, at acceptable cost, results in the SRA being environmental measures throughout the River Murray. unsuitable for linking cause and effect at the scale of The more recent approach developed by the MDBC for a individual impacts or management interventions. The WQMP Sustainable Rivers Audit (SRA) represents an advance on is designed to provide data at this scale and, with the SRA, the ARC approach in that it involves repeating the condition provides a powerful suite of data for the management of the assessments on a regular cycle, with regular reports to the system at a range of spatial and temporal scales. Ministerial Council, at the whole-of-valley scale.

14 Norris, R., Liston, P., Davies, N., Coysh, J., Dyer, F., Linke, S., Prosser, I. and Young, B. (2001) Snapshot of the Murray-Darling Basin River Condition. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 48pp. 15 MDBC (2004) Sustainable Rivers Audit Program. – A 6 year program for the design and implementation of the Sustainable Rivers Audit Program November 2004. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 99pp. 18 Water Quality Obj ect ives

3.1 Terminology government, formulate water quality objectives for any part of the River Murray and make recommendations to the Terminology used within both the NSW interim governments regarding these. Environmental Objectives and the MDBC Provisional Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) differs from that now used Throughout the remainder of the 1980’s, the formulation of water within the National Water Quality Management Strategy quality objectives was repeatedly deferred by the Commission 2000 (NWQMS). because of the risk of objectives being set that may: NWQMS uses the term “environmental values” to describe • be inapplicable given the large variability throughout the higher level aims eg Protection of aquatic ecosystems, the River system, both over time and over area; primary and secondary contact etc, while “water quality • prove over time to be lower (worse) than either the objectives” relate to the quantitative measure of water current or natural condition and therefore legitimise a quality necessary to maintain the environmental value. deterioration in quality; or Water quality objectives have been previously used to • prove to be unattainable and irrelevant, having been refer to the higher level aim or what we now refer to as derived from aspirations for water quality conditions environmental values. that have never existed or will never exist. To avoid confusion, terminology in this report will be consistent The Commission instead pursued the policy of no with that used in the NWQMS unless otherwise stated. degradation in existing water quality, encouraging works and measures which maintained or improved water quality, 3.2 Background and Diffi culties in and making representations to the governments on matters Formulation that threatened deterioration of existing water quality. The During the 1970’s, the governments of New South Wales basis for this response is outlined in Section 2.1.2. and Victoria were implementing pollution control The Clause allowing water quality objectives to be set was approaches adopted from England and North America strengthened in the 1992 Murray-Darling Basin Agreement, respectively, both of which were predicated on identifying with the responsibility to formulate being changed to the benefi cial uses to which waters could be put, assigning “must” rather than “may” and the obligation to consult with a level of protection to a given waterway and licensing the State authorities removed. Clause 44 now stated “The discharges to those waterways with defi ned water quality Commission must formulate water quality objectives for limits. the River Murray and make recommendations with respect As a result, both States were creating separate water quality thereto to the Ministerial Council”. standards for the tributaries of the River Murray. The Commission had previously considered the NSW In advice to the 1975 River Murray Working Party, Clark16 process of developing objectives that was under way noted that it had sometimes been asserted that the at the time and found it inconsistent with the Ministerial standards being applied and adopted in individual States Council’s Water Quality Policy. The Commission now invited were of no concern to other States or to the Commission. the NSW Environmental Protection Authority to propose He described this assertion as being, hydrologically, objectives and subsequently received a paper17 outlining a “impenetrable nonsense”. possible process. The Working Party recommended the Commission be That process was accepted by the Commission and empowered to recommend objectives for water quality in initiated further work by the EPA on modelling historical the main stem of the Murray and to make representations datasets to identify the most likely in-stream levels on these to the Contracting governments. As a of pollutants. In February 1995 the EPA wrote to the consequence, the 1982 River Murray Waters Agreement Commission attaching a preliminary approach and included a clause stating that the Commission may, in recommending the involvement of Victoria and South consultation with the appropriate authorities in each Australia.

16 Clark (1975) Possible Changes in River Murray Administration In River Murray Working Party (1976) River Murray Working Party Report to Steering Committee of Ministers October 1975. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra 17 Leece (1993) Water Quality Objectives for the River Murray. Agenda paper to the 24th meeting of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, 19 March 1993 19 In 1997 the NSW government produced a discussion The Group acknowledged that the statutory construct paper on setting interim environmental objectives for of formulating water quality objectives and then making the Murray and Lower Darling catchments18, outlining a recommendations with respect thereto to the Ministerial six-step process with extensive community consultation. Council, established an expectation that, to at least some This process involved considerable communication and extent, data from the Water Quality Monitoring Program consultation with the community and was observed to should reveal the water quality situation of the Murray result in the development of aspirational objectives and the relative to the provisional water quality objectives. creation of unrealistic expectations. However in order to report against water quality objectives, The national protocol agreed by ANZECC/ARMCANZ in quantitative objectives need to be set. It was also 200019 contained interim trigger values that could be used acknowledged that a water quality monitoring program that pending the development of locally relevant objectives. could fully evaluate the attainment or otherwise of these Instead of commencing with the full community provisional objectives would be prohibitively expensive in consultation process, it was decided in 2002 by the the light of the Commission’s total operating budget. Commission’s Project Board for Environmental Flows Further, it was recognised that other sources of data were to develop provisional objectives fi rst to focus and available from State and other monitoring programs that guide environmental fl ow management, and to assist in could assist in such an evaluation. identifying broad community aspirations in a subsequent Given the existence of at least one, and up to six, sites in each engagement process. of the eight identifi ed reaches of the Murray, together with the availability of other data, the Group considered that it was: 3.3 Provisional WQO’s and their Status • possible to characterise the background conditions to The decision to develop provisional objectives fi rst, varying degrees in each reach; represents both a reversal and a short-cut of the NSW • possible to report against the provisional objectives process and is likely to cause diffi culties unless carefully albeit with a number of shortfalls; implemented. • not feasible to expand the Water Quality Monitoring Through this process a set of water quality objectives was Program to report against the entirety of the provisional established, including environmental values and objectives objectives due to prohibitive cost; and for eight reaches in the Murray and Darling Rivers. The • possible to obtain and use data from other sources to ‘objectives’ however were not quantitative. Nevertheless, enhance the capacity to report against the provisional the Ministerial Council approved, at its 32nd meeting in objectives. November 2002, the set of interim Water Quality Objectives for the River Murray – these appear in Appendix D. The Group noted that the non-attainment of provisional objectives such as recreation contact or drinking water During the review of the Water Quality Monitoring Program supply, would often have public health implications that concerns were expressed regarding omissions of particular were already the subject of existing State monitoring environmental values along certain reaches of the River and programs, with alert levels and management responses will need to be investigated. triggered on an operational or day to day timeframe. 3.4 Provisional WQO’s and the WQMP As the Water Quality Monitoring Program was not intended to operate in real time, it was felt that the retrospective The relationship between the Water Quality Monitoring analyses that would be undertaken would be of greatest Program and the Provisional Water Quality Objectives signifi cance by identifying long-term trends towards adopted by the Ministerial Council in November 2002, was non-attainment of objectives and the need for further considered by the Commission’s Working Group on Water investigations and preventative responses. Quality Monitoring in July 2004 as part of this review.

18 EPA (1997) Proposed Interim Environmental Objectives for NSW Waters: Interstate Catchments Murray and Lower Darling. Environment Protection Authority, Sydney, 72pp. 19 ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000) Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality. Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, ACT 20 Rec ommendations

4.1 The WQMP New objective number 3 more explicitly provides for additional investigations than does the fourth original 4.1.1 New Objectives objective, and the fi fth original objective was overly reliant The original objectives of the WQMP as published in 1979 on establishing causality between land management and (refer Section 2.2) were worded as functions and were: water quality. 4.1.2 Physico-Chemical Monitoring 1. The provision of data which will enable the The physico-chemical monitoring component of the development and improvement of management Water Quality Monitoring Program was designed by the plans for meeting water quality objectives in the River Commission’s intergovernmental Water Quality Committee Murray; and published in 1979. It was then amended slightly in 2. The periodic reporting and assessment of water 1980 and 1983 (see Section 2.2). The data was reviewed in quality to determine trends; 1988 and 1999 with further analysis of trends in 2002 (see 3. The indication of changes in water quality brought Section 2.3). about by control measures; The existing suite of parameters and locations (Figure 1 – 4. The requirement for additional investigation on Section 2.2) was reviewed by the authors and considered control measures; and by the Water Quality Monitoring Working Group (WQMWG) 5. The characterisation of the effect of long term at two meetings, in June and July 2004. changes in land use and land management on water The location of the stations was considered to still be quality. appropriate to the intent of the program and the usage of the data.

The Commission’s Water Quality Monitoring Working Group An additional site in the Lower Lakes at Goolwa, South has considered a proposal to amend these objectives Australia (actual site still to be determined) has been to better refl ect the nature of this type of surveillance recommended to enhance the algal monitoring component monitoring, update the terminology and better refl ect of the program. The algal monitoring will be supplemented modern management processes, as well as to further with physico-chemical monitoring at a Class 2 level (Figure evolve the approach of undertaking special studies to 2). meet specifi c information and knowledge needs. The In terms of the parameters being sampled, it was recommended new objectives are: considered that the basic salinity, turbidity, nutrient, 1. To periodically report and assess water quality to temperature and pH data should continue. It was agreed understand variability and determine trends; that adjustments could be made to the monitoring of major ions, soluble organic carbon, colour and metals, as 2. To provide data which will assist reporting against outlined in the following sub-sections. Figure 2 illustrates water quality objectives in the River Murray and will the proposed revision to the monitoring program. inform management of the River system; and Appendix E gives more detail on the sites monitored. 3. To undertake additional investigations to Ionic Composition – Frequency and Intensity characterise and understand the factors and processes affecting water quality and the river • Reduce sampling frequency of anions – Chloride, ecosystem, and inform management. Bicarbonate and Sulphate – from monthly to quarterly at all sites currently monitored; New objective number 1 retains the fundamental function of determining and reporting trends, as pursued in the • Reduce sampling frequency of cations – Sodium, second, third and fi fth of the original objectives. Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium – from monthly to quarterly at all sites currently monitored; and New objective number 2 clarifi es the relationship with Water Quality Objectives according to the construct in the Agreement, as well as replacing the management plan instrument in the fi rst original objective with a broader informative function.

21 r ive R ta it M July 2005 a t it ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸

M TALLANDOON

. a R
ew Ki Hume Reservoir ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ CLASS 1CLASS 2 CLASS 3 CLASS r e r v i e v i R R

y s

y n a e r

v r

O r u

en e

g v horus

M i p R

y Water Parameters Monitored Quality at Each Class of Station

Phytoplankton, Chlorophyll a and Phaeophytin monitored Chlorophyll Phytoplankton, Macroinvertebrates monitored twice yearly at selected sites Metals monitored at Morgan : n

erature erature ke

p Bro s s s Mercury, Nickel, Zinc. Boron, Cadmium, Copper, Chromium, Iron, Lead, Manganese, Boron, Cadmium, Copper, Chromium, Iron, Lead, Manganese, weekly at selected sites (see legend). weekly (see legend).

H r Filterable Reactive Phosphorus Phosphorus Filterable Reactive Silica Soluble Organic Carbon Quarterly Bicarbonate Chloride Sulphate Potassium Sodium Calcium Magnesium p Colour Nitro Oxidise Electrical Conductivit Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Total Kjeldahl Total Phos Turbidit Tem Weekly e Weir

v

i

R

Yarrawonga

n r

u

b l SHEPPARTON s s u o

G

r e

v k i e

R e r

e C

e g g

s d n

i o

b

r b

r

e

a e .

m v

v l

l i R i p

a

R s e p u i m

a r

 C

l

R B Torrumbarry Weir r

o n u

o ECHUCA

a

l M k h a

BARHAM c

W a

ROCHESTER L

Loddo

n

R i v e r BALRANALD
s s KYALITE KERANG NEW SOUTH WALES MURRAY-DARLING BASIN MURRAY-DARLING SWAN HILL SWAN

EUSTON

r

e

v BURTUNDY

i

RED CLIFFS R

g

n

i

l MERBEIN

WEIR 32 r

h a

c VICTORIA

D

n

a

r

b

a

n

A

g

n i l t D

a r a e r G LOCK 9 LOCK Lake Victoria LOCK 5 LOCK Revised MDBC River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program Monitoring Quality Water Murray River MDBC Revised LOCK 3 LOCK WAIKERIE TAILEM BEND TAILEM MORGAN Physico-chemical sampling Physico-chemical Physico-chemical sampling with Macroinvertebrates sampling Physico-chemical sampling with Phytoplankton sampling Physico-chemical sampling with both Macroinvertebrate andPhytoplankton sampling SOUTH AUSTRALIA Legend MILANG BRIDGE MURRAY

Figure 2: Revised MDBC River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program

22 River Murray @ Morgan 350

300

250

200 MG, 150

100

50

0 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 12/yr 4/yr 2/yr Bicarbonate Bicarbonate Chloride Chloride Sulphate Sulphate Potassium PotassiumSodium Calcium Sodium Magnesium Calcium Magnesium

Figure 3: An example of analysis carried out on major ion data. Ranges of data and confi dence intervals for mean, at different sample frequencies (12/yr = monthly (current sampling), 4/yr = March, July, September and December, 2/yr = July and December)

• Reduce sample intensity of anions and cations from Colour – Frequency and Intensity all Class 2 stations to the 4 major salt contributing • Increase frequency of monitoring colour from monthly tributaries (Barr Creek, Loddon River, Darling River and to weekly; and Campaspe River)20 as identifi ed by Mackay et al, as • Increase intensity of monitoring colour to the same sites well as 2 sites on the main stem of the Murray (Morgan as turbidity. and Swan Hill).These recommendations are based on These recommendations are based on concerns over a review of the variability in the 25 years of anion and apparent increasing colour trends in the upper Murray and cation data and the effect of reducing frequency (see the advantage and economy of having both colour and for example Figure 3), the assumption that the ionic turbidity measurements together. It will also composition of these sites are adequately characterised provide the opportunity to investigate light penetration in and the expectation that the remaining sites will be the water column and how water quality impacts on algal suffi cient to maintain observation of tributary impact indicators. and of ionic dominance in the main stem of the Murray. Metals - Investigation Soluble Organic Carbon - Frequency • Investigate the most appropriate methods and sites for • Increase frequency of monitoring soluble organic monitoring metals within the River Murray; and carbon from monthly to weekly to match nutrient data. • Continue monitoring metals at Morgan until new This recommendation is based on the assumption that monitoring soluble organic carbon can be considered together arrangements are fi nalised. with the nutrients phosphorus, nitrogen and silica, better refl ecting fl oodplain dynamics and giving a more complete These recommendations are based on concerns that the picture of the nutrient status of a water body. One issue current monitoring is not satisfactorily characterising the that was not resolved in the review process was whether status of metals in the River Murray. the measurement of soluble organic carbon should be replaced by the measurement of total organic carbon.

20 Mackay, N., Hillman, T. and Rolls, J. (1988) Water Quality of the River Murray – Review of Monitoring 1978 to 1986. Water Quality Report No.1, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 62pp. 23 4.1.3 Macroinvertebrates The actual number of animals and the number of taxa Within the objectives of the Water Quality Monitoring being found is not signifi cantly changing, showing no Program, the primary aim of the macroinvertebrate solid indication of either decline or improvement in the component, known originally as the Biological Monitoring macroinvertebrate communities at these seven sites. Program, is: In terms of the relationships between the macroinvertebrate fauna and the physico-chemical and fl ow data, these To systematically sample and record the aquatic relationships were found to be inconsistent, suggesting macroinvertebrate populations of the rivers in site-specifi c processes which impeded generalisations into such a way as to provide a substantial long-term broader relationships. biological record to complement the physical and chemical data already being collected, The discussion paper on macroinvertebrate sampling 24 and so provide an additional aid in detecting produced by AWT in August 2000 (referred to in Section and interpreting changes in water quality and 2.3.2) recommended the development of a broader environmental conditions in the River Murray river health assessment program, however a valley-scale and its tributaries. assessment of river health across the Basin, including on the River Murray, is now to be undertaken by the Commission’s The fi rst fi ve years of the program were reviewed by Sustainable Rivers Audit (SRA), commencing in Spring 2004 21 Bennison et al in 1989 which noted the discovery of new and using the AUSRIVAS methodology at up to 140 sites species and new ranges for species, the establishment of a along the Murray and lower Darling Rivers. baseline reference collection of River Murray invertebrates, By sampling and reporting at this scale (together with other the characterisation of communities along the Murray river health indicators such as fi sh and hydrology), the consistent with the river continuum concept and some SRA will fulfi l the major role in reporting the health of the indicators of stress. River Murray at the broader scale, and leave this current To accommodate the further investigations identifi ed in this macroinvertebrate monitoring within its original aim of review, the program was reduced from 14 to 7 sites. The complementing the physical and chemical data collected frequency of sampling had already been reduced from under the Water Quality Monitoring Program. 4/year to 2/year in 1983. During these discussions there was some concern in The next review of the macroinvertebrate component was relation to the representativeness of the ASS method and 22 undertaken by AWT in 1999 , examining temporal trends in its continued use. the macroinvertebrate fauna and their relationship with any To justify the use of the ASS method and to meet the aim of changes in the physico-chemical or fl ow data. The program the macroinvertebrate monitoring it is recommended that consists of samples taken at the seven sites along the main the macroinvertebrate monitoring continue in its current form stem of the River Murray, in spring and autumn each year, pending a detailed analysis including the following actions: using Artifi cial Substrate Samplers (ASS) that have been in situ for six weeks, together with hand net samples of • The observed increases in numbers of taxa at Jingellic, microhabitats in the vicinity of the ASS. Yarrawonga and Burtundy be checked to ensure they are not due to identifi cation changes (Recommendation The data continues to show23 a variation over time in the 1 from Section 5.3 of the 1999 AWT Review report); composition of the macroinvertebrate community and in the biotic indices calculated from the data, with these • The abundance data from Lock 5 and Tailem Bend changes not consistently related to any particular variable. be further analysed to discern the relative association of each variable with invertebrate abundance

21 Bennison, G. L., Hillman, T. J. and Suter, P. J. (1989) Macroinvertebrates of the River Murray (Survey and Monitoring: 1980- 1985). Water Quality Report No. 3, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 77pp. 22 AWT (1999) Water Quality Monitoring Program Review – Part 1 Data Summary and Recommendations. Report no. 98/169 AWT Melbourne 23 AWT (1999) Water Quality Monitoring Program Review – Part 1 Data Summary and Recommendations. Report no. 98/169 AWT Melbourne. Section 4.4.4 24 AWT (2000) MDBC Biological Monitoring Review – Macroinvertebrate Sampling Discussion Paper. Report no. 498 AWT, Melbourne 24 (Recommendation 2 from Section 5.3 of the 1999 AWT 4.1.4 Phytoplankton Review report); The primary aim of the phytoplankton component is: • The relationships between changes in the To provide long term data on the algal populations of macroinvertebrate community and changes in the the River Murray, in order that changes in the species physico-chemical conditions at each of the seven sites abundance and composition may be identifi ed and be further investigated in the light of the above, using related to changes in the river environment. higher resolution indices and analytical techniques; The fi rst fi ve years of the program (1980-85) were reviewed • The sampling of natural snags be investigated as an by Sullivan et al 198825. adjunct to the ASS and hand net sampling currently That review described the abundance and distribution undertaken at each site (Recommendation 2 from the of major algal groups, assessed phytoplankton diversity, 2000 AWT Discussion paper); identifi ed relationships between the major phytoplankton • The development of a proposal to undertake additional groups and selected physico-chemical variables and related SRA-style sampling as a replication at one of the ASS changes in phytoplankton to fl ow, turbidity and nutrients. sites to explore if any further understanding of change To accommodate further investigations identifi ed in over time or relationships with the physico-chemical the review, the program was reduced from 15 sites to data can be developed; and the current 12 sites, maintaining the weekly sampling • A review of the possibility of this monitoring frequency. Chlorophyll ‘a’ and phaeophytin have been complementing the monitoring that will occur as part of monitored downstream of Torrumbarry Weir, Barr Creek at the management actions taken under the Living Murray Capels Flume and Swan Hill since 1982. Initiative. The next review of the phytoplankton component was These recommendations are based on the assumptions that: undertaken by AWT in 199926. This report examined the • The sampling will continue to record the composition spatial and temporal trends in the phytoplankton data of the macroinvertebrate communities in the vicinity of and justifi cation for and recommendations of any further the sites (which have management signifi cance) and statistical analyses of the phytoplankton data. for which physico-chemical data is available, as well An analysis of trends was made in the Stage 2 review27. as reveal changes in that composition over time (which Associations with physico-chemical variables were also may aid the interpretation of apparent condition of the made revealing complex interrelationships. site and of changes in water quality); In order to best meet the aim of the phytoplankton • continuation of the long-term program will allow further component it is recommended that: characterisation of the natural variability in • Chlorophyll ‘a’ and pheaophytin sampling be included macroinvertebrate populations (which may aid in at all 12 of the algal sites; distinguishing natural variability from disturbance effects); and • Changes in the entire algal community at sites using ordination and classifi cation techniques be described; • the monitoring is meeting its stated aim of providing a (Recommendation 7 from Section 5.2 of the 1999 AWT substantial long-term biological record to complement Review Report) the physical and chemical data already being collected, and so provide an additional aid in detecting and • The infl uence of key environmental factors on interpreting changes in water quality and environmental phytoplankton communities within the system conditions in the River Murray and its tributaries, noting using multivariate statistical analysis be examined. however that the tributaries are no longer sampled (Recommendation 4 from Section 5.2 of the 1999 AWT following the 1989 review. Review Report)

25 Sullivan C, Saunders J. and Welsh D. (1988) Phytoplankton of the River Murray 1980-1985. Water Quality Report No. 2, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra. 26 AWT (1999) Water Quality Monitoring Program Review – Part 1 Data Summary and Recommendations. Report no. 98/169 AWT Melbourne. 27 Water Ecoscience (2002) MDBC Water Quality Review Stage 2 – Data Analysis. Report No. 653. Water Ecoscience Melbourne 25 4.1.5 Bacteria Monitoring The option of reinstituting the inter-laboratory comparison • The monthly sampling of bacteria at Class 2 stations in was considered by the Working Group. Having been some South Australia monitoring should be discontinued. time since the last inter-laboratory comparison (1996) it was assumed the NATA accreditation procedures currently This recommendation is based on the assumption that in place are adequately meeting the QA/QC requirements bacteriological monitoring for operational purposes is for the program. undertaken by the relevant State agencies. In the event that a State agency wishes to conduct an investigative study 4.2 Management Response into bacterial contamination in the Murray, the Commission A major recommendation of this project is for the position would consider involvement. of a Principal Water Quality Scientist at the MDBC to be 4.1.6 Data Publishing established. Management of the WQMP would be a major Web-publishing of the WQMP data was considered by the component of the position and should include, but not be Commission’s Water Quality Monitoring Working Group, limited to, the following functions, which are necessary if who noted that while the MDBC Offi ce was pursuing the the objectives of the monitoring program are to be met. development of its own web-publishing capacity for data Conduct periodic reviews on the program over the longer term, an interim arrangement that provided Periodic reviews of the water quality monitoring program web access to the data collected under this statutory need to be conducted every 8-10 years to analyse the data program was necessary and quite overdue. In response to for long term trends. this the following arrangements have been agreed; Reporting and interpretation of data • The results will be provided as fi nal, validated data at least at quarterly intervals and updated to 30 June as Observations of declining water quality need to be soon as possible each year; investigated and acted upon. Annual reporting of water quality condition would form a fundamental input to • The data will be formatted according to the attached the management and review tasks of the River Murray specifi cations (Appendix F) and a copy submitted Environmental Manager and of River Murray Water. to Victoria’s ‘Data Warehouse’ at the same time it is submitted to the MDBC; and Reporting needs to be undertaken on the attainment or otherwise of the water quality objectives, to the extent • In the case of corrected or additional data, the entire that the WQMP allows (with the inclusion of other state dataset is to be resupplied to both the MDBC and the monitoring), and recommendations need to be made to Data Warehouse for replacement. the Murray-Darling Basin Commission as appropriate. 4.1.7 QA/QC Investigating potential specifi c investigations and All laboratories involved in the WQMP must be NATA coordinating the implementation. accredited for the physico-chemical variables they analyse, The supplementary investigations required to address and each laboratory has a range of QA/QC methods the WQMP objectives need to be identifi ed, defi ned, in place – for fi eld and laboratory work (these too are purchased and their fi ndings reviewed if these additional currently being compiled). investigations are to add to the program by answering In the past the Commission has periodically undertaken questions raised by the WQMP data. an inter-laboratory comparison program using laboratory- The Principal Water Quality Scientist position would also prepared and real water samples. The results of these play a vital role in increasing awareness and use of the comparisons were compiled into a report provided to Water Quality Monitoring Program both externally and each of the participating laboratories, and considered by internally within the Commission, which was highlighted as the program management committee. a problem by the internal needs analysis carried out as a As the sole analysts of the phytoplankton samples, AWT part of this project. This would also assist in informing users Victoria participates in an inter-laboratory comparison of the monitoring programs capacity to meet their needs. program for phytoplankton. Taxonomic workshops have been previously held for macroinvertebrate identifi cation, to ensure consistency in classifi cation.

26 Concluding Remarks

It was apparent when preparing this review that the Most importantly, it has a crucial role in enabling the signifi cance and merit of the WQMP is poorly understood Murray-Darling Basin Commission to fulfi ll the statutory and easily overlooked. Virtually all that is known of the responsibilities of Clauses 39 to 46 of the Murray-Darling background status of the River Murray’s water quality comes Basin Agreement 1992. from the WQMP. By establishing the background condition, the WQMP forms the basis for all evaluations, research and investigations undertaken on the River Murray environment. It also provides the only long-term record for this set of fundamental water quality parameters.

27 Full page pic here

28 App endix A

Appendix A - Part V of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement 1992 PART V: INVESTIGATION, MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING Investigations and Studies 39. (1) The Commission may co-ordinate, carry out or cause to be carried out surveys, investigations and studies regarding the desirability and practicability of works or measures for the equitable, effi cient and sustainable use of water, land and other environmental resources of the Murray-Darling Basin, including but not limited to works or measures for: a) the conservation and regulation of river water; b) the protection and improvement of the quality of river water; c) the conservation, protection and management of aquatic and riverine environments; and d) the control and management of groundwater which may affect the quality or quantity of river water. (2) The Commission may, without further approval of any Contracting Government, carry out, or cause to be carried out surveys, investigations or studies pursuant to sub-clause 39(1) on or adjacent to: a) the upper River Murray; and b) the River Murray in South Australia. (3) Except as provided in sub-clause 39(2), the Commission must not carry out or cause to be carried out surveys, investigations or studies within the territory of any State without: a) informing the Ministerial Council of the proposed surveys, investigations and studies; and b) obtaining the consent of that State Contracting Government. (4) The Commission may initiate proposals for works or measures resulting from surveys, investigations or studies carried out under this clause. (5) If the implementation of any proposal is likely signifi cantly to affect water, land or other environmental resources under the control, supervision or protection of a Contracting Government or a public authority responsible to that Contracting Government, the Commission must - a) inform the Ministerial Council of the likelihood; b) consider any submissions made by that or any other Contracting Government, or public authority; and c) report to the Ministerial Council on any such submissions and the result of the Commission’s consideration thereof. Monitoring 40. The Commission - a) must, from time to time, advise the Ministerial Council on the adequacy and effectiveness of the arrangements for monitoring; and b) subject to Clause 42, may establish, maintain and operate effective means for monitoring c) the quality, extent, diversity and representativeness of water, land and other environmental resources of the Murray- Darling Basin, including but not limited to - (i) aquatic and riverine environments; (ii) the effect of groundwater on water, land and other environmental resources. Measurements of water quantity and quality 41. The Commission must establish, maintain and operate an effective and uniform system- a) for making and recording continuous measurements of - (i) the fl ow of the River Murray, and tributaries of the River Murray within the boundaries of each State, and (ii) the volume of stored water, at such locations as the Commission deems necessary to determine the volume of the intake from the several portions of the drainage area of the River Murray, the fl ow at selected locations along the River Murray and the losses from selected reaches of the River Murray, with their positions and modes of occurrence; (ii) the volume of stored water, at such locations as the Commission deems necessary to determine the volume of the intake from the several portions of the drainage area of the River Murray, the fl ow at selected locations along the River Murray and the losses from selected reaches of the River Murray, with their positions and modes of occurrence; b) for making and recording continuous measurements of all diversions, whether natural or artifi cial, or partly natural and partly artifi cial, from the River Murray and its tributaries; and 29 c) for measuring and monitoring the quality of - (i) River Murray water, (ii) water in tributaries of the River Murray at such locations at or near the confl uence of each of those tributaries with the River Murray as the Commission, after consultation with the appropriate authorities of each of the Contracting Governments, deems necessary, (iii) stored water. Need for approval in certain cases 42. (1) The Commission may, without further approval of any Contracting Government, establish, maintain and operate any system or means referred to in clauses 40 and 41 on or adjacent to - a) the upper River Murray; b) the River Murray in South Australia. (2) Except as provided in sub-clause 42(1), the Commission must not establish, maintain or operate any system or means referred to in clauses 40 and 41 within the territory of any State without - a) informing the Ministerial Council of the proposed system or means; and b) obtaining the consent of that State Contracting Government. Power to arrange data in lieu 43. Instead of establishing, maintaining or operating systems and means referred to in clauses 40 and 41, the Commission may - a) adopt the results of any measurements or monitoring made by any Contracting Government, or b) request a State Contracting Government to carry out any monitoring or measurement within its territory in such manner as the Commission considers necessary. Water quality objectives 44. The Commission must formulate water quality objectives for the River Murray and make recommendations with respect thereto to the Ministerial Council. Recommendations re water quantity and quality 45. The Commission may make recommendations to the Contracting Governments, any authority, agency or tribunal of a Contracting Government, or the Ministerial Council, concerning any matter, including the carrying out of any works or measures by a Contracting Government, which, in the opinion of the Commission, may in any way affect the quality or quantity of the waters of the River Murray or the stored water and shall inform the Ministerial Council of the recommendations at the time they are made. Commission to be informed of new proposals 46. (1) Whenever a Contracting Government or a public authority is considering any proposal which may signifi cantly affect the fl ow, use, control or quality of any water in the upper River Murray and in the River Murray in South Australia, that Contracting Government must, or must ensure that the public authority shall - a) inform the Commission of the proposal, and b) provide the Commission with all necessary information and data to permit it to assess the anticipated effect of the proposal on the fl ow, use, control or quality of the water. (2) The necessary information and data must be provided in suffi cient time to allow the Commission - a) to assess the possible effect of the proposal on the fl ow, use, control or quality of that water; and b) to make representations thereon to that Contracting Government or public authority, before the Contracting Government or public authority decides if the proposal will proceed. (3) The Commission shall consult with each Contracting Government, and with any public authority responsible to a Contracting Government which that Contracting Government or the Commission considers is likely to consider a proposal of the type referred to in sub-clause 46 (1), with a view to reaching agreement with that Contracting Government, or that public authority, as to - a) the types of proposals to which sub-clause 46 (1) shall apply; and b) the criteria to be used in assessing those proposals to which sub-clause 46 (1) applies. 30 App endix B

Appendix B: State by State Break up of Current Water Quality Monitoring Program Sites.

AWRC Station Class Code Name Authority River Distance Latitude Longitude Number (km) 414206 River Murray at Merbein * 2 MERBEIN NSW 871 3410.0 14205.0 425007 Darling River at Burtundy *# 2 BURTUND NSW 3345.0 14216.0 425012 Darling River d/s Weir 32 (Menindee) 2 WEIR32 NSW 3226.3 14222.8 414209 River Murray u/s Euston Weir *# 2 EUSTUS NSW 1117 3435.0 14246.0 410130 Murrumbidgee River at Balranald * 2 BALRAN NSW 1236 3440.2 14329.3 410134 Billabong Creek at Darlot (Windouran Weir) 3 DARLOT NSW 3502.5 14411.8 409025 River Murray d/s Yarrawonga Weir *# 2 YARRADS NSW 1992 3600.8 14559.7 414204 River Murray at Red Cliffs 4 REDCLIF VIC 910 3418.0 14214.0 414200 River Murray d/s Wakool Junction 4 WAKJUNC VIC 1282 3451.0 14320.5 409034 Wakool River at Kyalite 2 KYALITE VIC 1284 3457.1 14328.8 409204 River Murray at Swan Hill * 2 SWANHIL VIC 1402 3520.0 14334.0 407252 Barr Creek at Capels Flume (Crossing) * 2 CAPELSX VIC 1405 3536.5 14257.0 407202 Loddon River at Kerang Weir 2 KERANGW VIC 1405 3542.0 14355.0 409005 River Murray at Barham 3 BARHAM VIC 1524 3537.9 14407.3 407209 Gunbower Creek at Koondrook 2 KOONDSP VIC 1525 3539.5 14407.5 409207 River Murray d/s Torrumbarry Weir * 2 TORRDS VIC 1638 3556.5 14427.5 406202 Campaspe River at Rochester 2 ROCHEST VIC 1695 3621.0 14442.5 405232 Goulburn River at McCoys Bridge 2 MCCOYSB VIC 1728 3611.0 14507.0 404210 Broken Creek at Rices Weir 2 RICESWR VIC 1763 3558.0 14458.0 403241 Ovens River at Peechelba 2 PEECHEL VIC 2029 3609.9 14614.3 409016 River Murray at Heywoods * 2 HEYWOOD VIC 2223 3606.1 14701.5 402205 Kiewa River at Bandiana 2 BANDIAN VIC 2209 3608.2 14657.1 409011 Lake Hume 3 HUMEUS VIC 2225 3605.5 14703.5 401204 Mitta Mitta River at Tallandoon 2 TALLAND VIC 2240 3624.5 14714.0 401201 River Murray at Jingellic # 2 JINGELL VIC 2352 3556.0 14743.0 426524 Lake Alexandrina at Milang 3 MILANG SA 25 3524.0 13859.0 426551 River Murray at Tailem Bend *# 2 TAILEMB SA 88 3516.0 13927.0 426522 River Murray at Murray Bridge 2 MBRIDGE SA 118 3506.0 13917.0 426554 River Murray at Morgan * 1 MORGAN SA 315 3401.0 13941.0 426539 River Murray at Waikerie 4 WAIKERI SA 383 3411.0 14059.0 426516 River Murray at Lock 3 3 LOCK3US SA 431 3411.0 14021.0 426512 River Murray at Lock 5 # 2 LOCK5US SA 562 3411.0 14046.0 426200 River Murray d/s Rufus River Junction 4 MRUFUSR SA 695 3404.0 14114.5 426553 Lake Victoria 3 LVIC SA 697 426501 River Murray at Lock 9 *# 2 LOCK9US SA 765 3411.0 14136.0

* phytoplankton monitoring # macroinvertebrate monitoring

31 CLASS 1 Class 2 parameters plus... CLASS 2 Class 3 parameters plus... CLASS 3 Class 4 parameters plus... CLASS 4 Weekly Monthly Weekly Monthly pH Bicarbonate Oxidised Boron Turbidity Chloride nitrogen Cadmium Electrical Sulphate Total kjeldahl Copper nitrogen conductivity Potassium Chromium Total phosphorus Temperature Sodium Iron Filterable reactive Calcium Lead phosphorus Magnesium Manganese Silica Soluble organic Mercury

carbon Nickel

Colour Zinc

Faecal coliforms at Class 2 stations in South Australia Phytoplankton monitored weekly and macroinvertebrates twice yearly at selected sites

32 App endix C

Appendix C: Current MDBC Water Quality Monitoring Programs

Basin Monitoring Barmah-Millewa Hydrographic Monitoring Basin Salinity Management Strategy Monitoring Objective: Monitor water levels and temperature Objective: to determine if end-of-valley and basin within the forests, to aid in the management targets are being met and to assist in of fl ood fl ows in the area. attributing salinity to its source. Monitoring details: 15 sites within and around Monitoring details: 37 sites throughout the Barmah-Millewa Forest measuring gauge height basin, each measuring level, fl ow and EC. and temperature.

River Murray System Monitoring NSW Monitoring Projects funded by MDBC Daily data Menindee Lakes Water Quality Analysis Objective: to obtain data on fl ow and various other Objectives: Ongoing determination and documentation parameters to assist in daily river operations. of the ecological impacts associated with the ongoing operation of the Menindee Monitoring details: 108 sites along main stem Lakes Storage. and tributaries of the River Murray System, all sites measuring either gauge height and/or fl ow Monitoring details: 8 sites within Menindee with many measuring, salinity and temp. Lakes and upstream of the Lakes, each measuring EC, pH, TN, TP, turbidity and Algae. Weekly data MDBC Water Quality Investigations, Reporting and Audit Objective: provide update on the status of the (salinity) River Murray System, including storages, diversions, salinity and water-order data. Objectives: Establish an effective monitoring network for determining long-term salinity trends Monitoring details: 45 stations within the River within the region, identifi cation of Murray System with data including active landscape hot spots for salt generation, storage, turbidity, EC and diversion. monitoring the effectiveness of and Monthly data identify opportunities for, salt management Objective: evaluates how water is shared between the initiatives and fi nd sources of saline States within the River Murray System. groundwater seepage. Timeseries (hydrographic) data Monitoring details: not available. Objective: provide data which is vital for modelling and Hume Dam Thermal Monitoring long-term records. Objectives: Gather water quality data within Hume Dam Monitoring details: 134 stations within the as part of general storage maintenance, River Murray System, measuring stream level, with the possibility of future analysis data conductivity, temperature, velocity and rainfall. regarding thermal impacts. Collect long- Water Quality Monitoring Program term temperature and EC data on tributary Outlined within this report. streams and the River Murray d/s Hume Dam. Run of River Salinity Survey Monitoring details: 14 sites measuring Objective: determine where salt accessions are temperature, pH, EC, turbidity, DO and gauge occurring and determine the effectiveness height of the existing salt interception schemes. Monitoring details: sampling occurs at a reach by reach scale with salinity readings taken at set river distances. There are no specifi c sampling/ gauging sites.

33 Murray Darling Algae Investigations/Monitoring Program Macro-invertebrate Monitoring – Mitta Mitta River Objectives: Monitor Blue-green algae levels within all Objectives: To monitor the macroinvertebrate DIPNR operated storages and waterways communities in the Mitta Mitta River below within the Murray Region. Dartmouth Dam in order to detect and Monitoring details: 41 sites distributed amongst assess changes in river health resulting from Hume Dam, Menindee Lakes, Murray River, either the operations of Dartmouth Dam Lower Darling, Edward and Wakool Rivers and (water quality, hydrology, physical habitat) Billabong Creek measuring algae, fl ow, gauge or local catchment related impacts (water height and depth, wind speed and direction quality, hydrology, physical habitat) and cloud cover, water temperature and water Monitoring details: 7 sites within Mitta Mitta light profi les, pH, turbidity and EC. River measuring macroinvertebrates, in situ physico-chem (pH, DO, velocity, temperature and EC) and physical habitat. VIC Monitoring Projects Funded by MDBC Microbiological Testing – Dartmouth Algal and Water Quality Monitoring (MSOMP) – Yarrawonga and Dartmouth Objectives: To provide Goulburn Murray Water with Objectives: Provide algal and water quality information the necessary level of understanding to to MDBC to assist in operational activities. ensure the provisions of bacteriologically safe water to users within the prescribed Monitoring details: 3 sites within Dartmouth boundaries. and Yarrawonga weir, measuring EC, NOx, pH, FRP, TKN, TP, turbidity, ammonia, Phaeophytin Monitoring details: 2 sites within Dartmouth ‘a’, Chlorophyll ‘a’ and algal scan of outlet and Dam measuring total bacteria counts. leeward samples. Water Quality Monitoring – Dartmouth Objectives: to provide the necessary data, which will enable the MDBC to fulfi l its responsibilities in relation to water quality in Dartmouth Dam and adjacent streams. Monitoring details: 10 sites within and below Dartmouth measuring EC, Fe, Mn, NOx, pH, FRP, Silica, TKN, TP, true colour and turbidity.

34 App endix D

Appendix D: Provisional Water Quality Objectives Approved as interim objectives by MDB Ministerial Council 1 November 2002

Reach DESCRIPTION Environmental Values/ Benefi cial Uses Provisional WQO as defi ned as identifi ed by EPA (1995) by EPB* 1 Dartmouth Dam to a) Snowy Mountains NP Hume Reservoir. 1. Conservation area streams Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • near pristine ecosystems • ecosystem protection Secondary Contact Recreation • recreation and aesthetics b) Outside NP boundaries Irrigation Water Supplies 2. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural water supply streams Medium Salinity for Hume Dam: • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • agricultural water supply 3. Hume Reservoir pooled waters Primary Contact Recreation • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics

2 Hume Dam to 1. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural Yarrawonga Weir streams Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics Secondary Contact Recreation • agricultural water supply 2. Major Town Water Supplies Irrigation Water Supplies - • drinking water Medium Salinity for Yarrawonga Weir: 3. Yarrawonga pooled waters • modifi ed ecosystems Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics • agricultural water supply Primary Contact Recreation 3 Yarrawonga to a) Yarrawonga to Torrumbarry Torrumbarry 1. Conservation area streams Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • near pristine ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics Secondary Contact Recreation b) Edward/ Wakool Anabranch 2. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural Irrigation Water Supplies water supply streams - Medium Salinity • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics • agricultural water supply

35 Reach DESCRIPTION Environmental Values/ Benefi cial Uses Provisional WQO as defi ned as identifi ed by EPA (1995) by EPB* 4 Torrumbarry to Lock 1. Conservation area streams (NSW: Perricoota and 11 Koondrook SF Hattah-Kulkyne NP and Ki, Mallee Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems Cliffs and Manie SF; Vic: Gunbower Island SF) • near pristine ecosystems Secondary Contact Recreation • recreation and aesthetics 2. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural Irrigation Water Supplies water supply streams - Medium Salinity • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics • agricultural water supply

5 Lock 11 to Lock 3 1. Conservation area streams (Wallpolla and Lindsay Islands: Vic and Moorna, Wangumma Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems and Lake Victoria SF) • near pristine ecosystems Secondary Contact Recreation • recreation and aesthetics 2. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural Irrigation Water Supplies water supply streams - Medium Salinity • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics • agricultural water supply 6 Lock 3 to Wellington 1. Major town water supply, recreation and agricultural stream Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • modifi ed ecosystems • drinking water Secondary Contact Recreation • recreation and aesthetics • agricultural water supply Irrigation Water Supplies - Medium Salinity

Drinking Water Supply (clarifi cation and disinfection) 7 Wellington to the 1. Lake Alexandrina and salt water estuary Murray Mouth/ • modifi ed ecosystems Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems Coorong • recreation and aesthetics Primary Contact Recreation

Consumption of aquatic foods (cooked) 8 Menindee Lakes to 1. Swimming, fi shing, water-life and agricultural Lock 10 streams Protection of Aquatic Ecosystems • modifi ed ecosystems • recreation and aesthetics Secondary Contact Recreation • agricultural water supply

Irrigation Water Supplies - Medium Salinity

Note: Drinking Water Supply (clarifi cation and disinfection) will be included as a Provisional WQO for all major towns extracting from the River Murray eg Albury, Swan Hill, etc. * EPB is the Environmental Flows and Water Quality Objectives for the River Murray Project Board

36 App endix E Appendix E: Proposed Water Quality Monitoring Program (Sites, classes/parameters and frequencies)

River AWRC Station Class Code Name Authority Distance Latitude Longitude Number (km) 414206 River Murray at Merbein * 2 MERBEIN NSW 871 3410.0 14205.0 425007 Darling River at Burtundy *# 1 BURTUND NSW 3345.0 14216.0 425012 Darling River d/s Weir 32 (Menindee) 2 WEIR32 NSW 3226.3 14222.8 414209 River Murray u/s Euston Weir *# 2 EUSTUS NSW 1117 3435.0 14246.0 410130 Murrumbidgee River at Balranald * 2 BALRAN NSW 1236 3440.2 14329.3 Billabong Creek at Darlot (Windouran 3 DARLOT NSW 3502.5 14411.8 410134 Weir) 409025 River Murray d/s Yarrawonga Weir *# 2 YARRADS NSW 1992 3600.8 14559.7 414204 River Murray at Red Cliffs 3 REDCLIF VIC 910 3418.0 14214.0 414200 River Murray d/s Wakool Junction 3 WAKJUNC VIC 1282 3451.0 14320.5 409034 Wakool River at Kyalite 2 KYALITE VIC 1284 3457.1 14328.8 409204 River Murray at Swan Hill * 1 SWANHIL VIC 1402 3520.0 14334.0 407252 Barr Creek at Capels Flume (Crossing) * 1 CAPELSX VIC 1405 3536.5 14257.0 407202 Loddon River at Kerang Weir 1 KERANGW VIC 1405 3542.0 14355.0 409005 River Murray at Barham 3 BARHAM VIC 1524 3537.9 14407.3 407209 Gunbower Creek at Koondrook 2 KOONDSP VIC 1525 3539.5 14407.5 409207 River Murray d/s Torrumbarry Weir * 2 TORRDS VIC 1638 3556.5 14427.5 406202 Campaspe River at Rochester 1 ROCHEST VIC 1695 3621.0 14442.5 405232 Goulburn River at McCoys Bridge 2 MCCOYSB VIC 1728 3611.0 14507.0 404210 Broken Creek at Rices Weir 2 RICESWR VIC 1763 3558.0 14458.0 403241 Ovens River at Peechelba 2 PEECHEL VIC 2029 3609.9 14614.3 409016 River Murray at Heywoods * 2 HEYWOOD VIC 2223 3606.1 14701.5 402205 Kiewa River at Bandiana 2 BANDIAN VIC 2209 3608.2 14657.1 409011 Lake Hume 3 HUMEUS VIC 2225 3605.5 14703.5 401204 Mitta Mitta River at Tallandoon 2 TALLAND VIC 2240 3624.5 14714.0 401201 River Murray at Jingellic # 2 JINGELL VIC 2352 3556.0 14743.0 426524 Lake Alexandrina at Milang 3 MILANG SA 25 3524.0 13859.0 426551 River Murray at Tailem Bend *# 2 TAILEMB SA 88 3516.0 13927.0 426522 River Murray at Murray Bridge 2 MBRIDGE SA 118 3506.0 13917.0 426554 River Murray at Morgan * 1 MORGAN SA 31 3401.0 13941.0 426539 River Murray at Waikerie 3 WAIKERI SA 363 3411.0 14059.0 426516 River Murray at Lock 3 3 LOCK3US SA 431 3411.0 14021.0 426512 River Murray at Lock 5 # 2 LOCK5US SA 562 3411.0 14046.0 426200 River Murray d/s Rufus River Junction 3 MRUFUSR SA 695 3404.0 141145 426553 Lake Victoria 3 LVIC SA 697 426501 River Murray at Lock 9 *# 2 LOCK9US SA 765 3411.0 14136.0

37 Class 3 Class 2: Class 1: Class 3 parameters Class 2 parameters plus... plus... WEEKLY WEEKLY QUATERLY

pH Oxidised nitrogen bicarbonate

Turbidity total kjeldahl nitrogen chloride

Electrical total phosphorus sulphate conductivity Temperature fi lterable reactive phosphorus potassium

Colour silica sodium

soluble organic carbon calcium

magnesium

* Phytoplankton, Chlorophyll ‘a’ and phaeophytin monitored weekly # macroinvertebrates twice yearly Metals monitored monthly at Morgan pending outcomes from an investigative study

38 App endix F

Appendix F: Format Specifi cations for Water Parameter Names Quality Monitoring Data There are considerable variations between the laboratories Murray-Darling Basin Commission in nomenclature for various water quality parameters. For River Murray Water Quality Monitoring Program example “Sol React Phosphorus” is also called: “Phosphorus Format Specifi cations – fi lt. Reactive”, “PO4f” and “Phosphorus – reactive for Water Quality Monitoring Data (orthophosphate) - dissolved (FRP)”. This inconsistency Data Table may lead to misunderstandings of the types of data measured. It is therefore necessary to standardise the Microsoft Access is currently the accepted format for the parameter names that are supplied to the MDBC. The table supply of Water Quality data to the MDBC. There is an below lists the parameters that are measured for the MDBC, Access table shown below which details the standard using the standardised names. All results will need to be format for the Data Table within Access. supplied according to these names.

39 Water Quality Data Table Example Showing Parameters

AWRC Sample Sample Parameter Sample Sample SiteNumber Date Time Desc Value Units 426554 01-Jan-04 11:26:00 AM Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 425007 01-Jan-04 11:28:00 AM Boron (B) mg/L 414204 01-Jan-04 11:40:00 AM Cadmium (Cd) mg/L Calcium (Ca) mg/L Chloride (Cl) mg/L Chromium (Cr) mg/L Colour HU Copper (Cu) mg/L EC (Salinity) Field Reading - Compensated uS/cm@25DegC EC (Salinity) Field Reading - Uncompensated uS/cm EC (Salinity) Lab Reading - Compensated uS/cm@25DegC Gauge Height Field Reading m Iron (Fe) mg/L Lead (Pb) mg/L Magnesium (Mg) mg/L Manganese (Mn) mg/L Mercury (Hg) mg/L Nickel (Ni) mg/L Oxidised Nitrogen (NOx) mg/L pH – Field Reading pH - Lab Reading Potassium (K) mg/L Silica (SiO2) mg/L Sodium (Na) mg/L Soluble Reactive Phosphorus (PO4) - Filtered Reactive mg/L Soluble Organic Carbon (Dissolved Organic Carbon) mg/L Sulphate (SO4) mg/L Temperature Deg Celsius Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L turbidity - Field Reading NTU turbidity - Lab Reading NTU Zinc (Zn) mg/L Phytoplankton – dominant species counts Cells/mL Chlorophyll a ug/L Phaeophytin ug/L Coliforms – total count Cells/100mL Coliforms – E. coli count Cells/100mL Macroinvertebrates – ID (species or lowest level) and counts

40 RNMENTS WO VE RKI GO NG IX IN

S P

A

Y R T T I N N E U R M SHI M P WITH THE CO