Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy

Finn Pratt AO PSM Secretary

Ref: EC18-000363

Mr Andrew Broad MP Chair Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy PO Box 6021 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600

Dear Mr Broad

I write to provide the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy with a supplementary submission to the Inquiry into the management and use of Commonwealth environmental water. The Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder (the CEWH) provided a preliminary submission to the Inquiry on 21 March 2018, which addressed the Terms of Reference. This submission expands on the preliminary submission.

The Inquiry will have a particular focus on the role of the CEWH, a statutory position established by the Water Act 2007. This position is a First Assistant Secretary within the Department of the Environment and Energy. Under the Water Act; the CEWH has statutory responsibility for the management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings acquired by the Australian Government. The CEWH makes all the day-to-day decisions on the use of the water portfolio and the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holdings Special Account.

The CEWH is supported by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office to manage the Commonwealth's water portfolio. Having the CEWH role within the Department encourages the integration of a whole-of-government approach to the protection of Australia's environment.

There are a number of synergies between the management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings - undertaken for the purpose of protecting and restoring environmental assets of the Murray-Darling Basin - and other work undertaken by the Department. This includes supporting the conservation and wise use of Australia's Ramsar wetland estate, helping to conserve threatened species and habitat, and providing advice on the impacts of development on matters of national significance listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

The Australian Government's 2017-18 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook budget confirmed operational funding has been provided out to 2027 to undertake the statutory functions of the CEWH, including the management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings. This funding re-affirmed the Government's commitment to delivering the Basin Plan 2012.

GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601 • Telephone 02 6274 1111 • Facsimile 02 6274 1666 • www.environment.gov.au The enclosed submission addresses the Terms of Reference for the Inquiry and provides supporting documentation. I note the submission is a public document and the Committee may publish the Department's submission on its website.

Should the Department wish to provide additional evidence or comment on other evidence obtained by the Committee, a further supplementary submission will be provided.

The contact for this submission is Ms Jody Swirepik, the CEWH, who can be contacted on or

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission.

Yours sincerely

Finn Pratt /g April 2018 Enc.

2 SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INQUIRY INTO THE MANAGEMENT AND USE OF COMMONWEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL WATER

Purpose

This document is a supplementary submission to the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy’s (the Committee) inquiry into the management and use of Commonwealth environmental water, which will give particular consideration to the role of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder (the CEWH).

The CEWH provided a preliminary submission to the Inquiry on 21 March 2018 that contained an overview of the CEWH’s functions against the Terms of Reference. This supplementary submission provides most of the information contained in the first submission and further detail to assist the Committee with their inquiry.

Information is provided against each of Committee’s four Terms of Reference, which are:

1. maximising the use of environmental water for the protection and restoration of environmental assets (Part 1 to 3, Appendix 1); 2. considering innovative approaches for the use of environmental water (Part 2 to 4, Part 6); 3. monitoring and evaluating outcomes of the use of environmental water (Part 4 to 5); and 4. options for improving community engagement and awareness of the way in which environmental water is managed (Part 2, Part 6);

and any other matter of relevance that the Committee wishes to consider.

Structure of the submission

The submission is structured in the following way:

Part 1 overview and summary of CEWH’s activities Part 2 portfolio management and business operations Part 3 maximising environmental water use Part 4 monitoring, evaluation, reporting and adaptive management Part 5 environmental outcomes Part 6 partnerships, engagement and communications Appendix 1 Ramsar Convention and wetlands

PART 1: OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY

• About the CEWH.

• What does the CEWH do? – in brief

1. About the CEWH

The CEWH is a statutory position established under the Water Act 2007 (Water Act) responsible for managing the Commonwealth environmental water holdings 1 and the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holdings Special Account. The Commonwealth environmental water holdings must be managed to protect and restore the environmental assets of Murray-Darling Basin (the Basin), including watercourses, lakes, wetlands 2 and floodplains, in the national interest. The CEWH’s function is a critical part of the sustainable management of the Basin’s water resources over the long-term for environmental, social and economic outcomes.

The CEWH is governed by the requirements of the Water Act, such as managing the Commonwealth environmental water holdings in accordance with the Basin Plan 2012 (the Basin Plan) environmental water plan (Chapter 8), including the principles and methods to determine priorities for applying environmental water. The Basin Plan requires the CEWH to perform its functions and exercise its powers in a way that is consistent with the Basin-wide environmental watering strategy and have regard to the Basin annual environmental watering priorities developed by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.

The Water Act also requires the Commonwealth and Basin States to manage the Basin’s water resources in the national interest and give effect to relevant international agreements. The relevant international agreements are:

• the Ramsar Convention

• the Biodiversity Convention

• the Desertification Convention

• the Bonn Convention

• CAMBA, JAMBA, ROKAMBA (migratory birds – China, Japan, Korea)

• the Climate Change Convention

• any other international convention Australia is party to that is relevant to the management of the Basin’s water resources.

1 The water holdings were recovered by programs managed by the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. 2 See information about the Basin’s wetlands: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/wetlands

The Basin Plan must give effect to these international agreements to the extent that they are relevant to the use and management of the Basin water resources. 3

A number of elements of the Basin Plan that are important for the CEWH and how Commonwealth environmental water can be managed are scheduled to be in place by 2019. These include the acquisition of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings; the development of water resource plans (WRPs), long term environmental watering plans and other policy measures, like the protection of environmental water, by the Basin States; the completion of the Northern Basin Review; and the Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism. A number of these processes will continue through to 2024 before the Basin Plan is reviewed in 2026.

In addition to meeting the requirements of the Water Act and Basin Plan, the CEWH must comply with other relevant policy and frameworks, including:

• Commonwealth policy, frameworks and environmental legislation, including the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

• state frameworks (e.g. state water management laws).

Ms Jody Swirepik commenced in the role of CEWH in February 2018. Ms Swirepik is supported by staff of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office (the Office) within the Department of the Environment and Energy in Canberra (the Department). The Office also employs six full time local engagement officers 4 who live and work in regional centres across the Basin connecting Canberra to the regions.

2. What does the CEWH do?

The CEWH is committed to being a diligent, responsive and prudent water manager who uses water efficiently and effectively. We are focused on maximising environmental outcomes across rivers, wetlands and floodplains from the use of the Commonwealth environmental water portfolio. This includes the considered use of the tools available to all water users, such as carryover and trade, and the application of adaptive management with:

• clear objectives • robust planning and decision-making processes • comprehensive risk assessments • meaningful engagement with other water users, river operators, land managers and local communities • long-term monitoring programs that assess the effectiveness of water use and inform future decisions.

While the full results of environmental watering across the Basin will take many years to be realised, progress towards these outcomes is being measured as part of a continuing Long Term Intervention Monitoring (LTIM) Project ($30 million over 5 years). The LTIM monitors and evaluates environmental outcomes and supports the adaptive management of Commonwealth environmental

3 Section 20(a) of the Water Act 4 See who our Local Engagement Officers are: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/local-engagement

water. It has shown that Commonwealth environmental water has contributed towards achieving a range of types of environmental outcomes, including:

• providing river flows that support good water quality for the environment and water users • connecting rivers to floodplains to maintain floodplain health, food chains and support fish movement • filling wetlands that support native fish, birds and other native animals • supporting the recovery of the environment following drought, and building resilience in preparation for the next drought . Building on these outcomes and achieving the full intended benefits of the Basin Plan relies on:

• entitlements that the Commonwealth holds being subject to no less favourable conditions than similar entitlements held for other purposes, consistent with the Intergovernmental Agreement on Implementing Water Reform in the Murray Darling Basin • the implementation of commitments under the Basin Plan , including the assumptions used to calculate the volume of environmental water required to meet the Basin Plan targets and objectives.

National water reform is being undertaken in collaboration between the Australian Government and Basin State governments (Queensland, New South Wales (NSW), Victoria, South Australia (SA) and the Australian Capital Territory). Two other Commonwealth agencies with responsibilities under the Water Act framework are:

• The Department of Agriculture and Water Resources administers national water policy and is responsible for recovering the water managed by the CEWH.

• The Murray-Darling Basin Authority is responsible for the Basin Plan, including the Basin-wide environmental watering strategy , is the Basin Plan regulator and operates the River Murray.

The CEWH cannot undertake its functions without the support of others. All Commonwealth environmental water delivered in the Basin occurs in partnership with state governments, local groups and non-government organisations, including the irrigation industry, environment groups and Indigenous communities.

PART 2: PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

• What is Commonwealth environmental water?

• Being a responsible and transparent financial manager.

• How does the CEWH manage the portfolio?

• Who do we work in collaboration with?

1. About Commonwealth environmental water

The Commonwealth environmental water holdings are water entitlements and rights, issued by Basin State governments that were acquired by the Australian Government through investments in water-saving infrastructure and purchases on the water market. The current suite of Commonwealth environmental water holdings consists of 102 different entitlement types in 230 water accounts across 22 catchments.

The rules governing the Commonwealth environmental water entitlements vary across states and across catchments but they are subject to the same fees, allocations, carryover and other rules, as equivalent entitlements held by other water users. These rules determine how the Commonwealth’s water can be used, the value of the portfolio and the environmental outcomes that can be achieved.

The total volume of the holdings as at 28 February 2018 was 2672 gigalitres of entitlements. Over the long-term, the average annual amount of water allocated against these entitlements is estimated to be 1836 gigalitres. The original Basin Plan water recovery target of 2,750 gigalitres is based on the long-term average. At June 2017, the estimated value of the portfolio was $3.15 billion. The Commonwealth environmental water holdings have grown progressively over time since 2008 (see graphic below). They will continue to grow until at least 2019, and possibly until 2024.

It is a Basin Plan principle that the Commonwealth’s water entitlements held for environmental use will not be enhanced or diminished relative to similar entitlements held and used for other purposes, except by agreement to improve environmental watering. This includes changes to fees and charges, access to allocations, and the capacity to use, trade, and carryover, compared to like entitlements held for other purposes, including irrigation. Changes that disadvantage the Commonwealth's holdings compared to equivalent entitlements held by other users have the potential to devalue this public asset.

2. How are the Commonwealth environmental water holdings administered?

The CEWH is responsible for administering the Commonwealth environmental water holdings and the Environmental Water Holdings Special Account. Most of the Special Account funds are used to pay statutory fees and charges to individual state water authorities and delivery partners for delivering environmental water. These fees and charges can be fixed or variable and invoiced in accordance with fee schedules that have been agreed to between the Commonwealth and the individual state government or delivery partner. The costs associated with the delivery of environmental water vary from year to year and across each state, depending on the volume of water allocated and the demand for environmental water.

The Special Account is also used to manage money from the sale or purchase of environmental water on the water market, in accordance with section 106 of the Water Act and to fund the monitoring of the outcomes of environmental watering. By statute, decisions to trade are made by the CEWH to optimise environmental outcomes, not for financial return.

The Office has business processes in place to ensure financial management is carried out responsibly, supporting the CEWH to be transparent and accountable. The processes allow us to report on all the water entitlements in our portfolio, their value and water allocations and use.

The business systems established by the CEWH make sure there is an accurate record of:

• water allocations (states announce water availability throughout each water year)

• portfolio transfers of water allocations to delivery partners to conduct environmental watering actions

• portfolio transfers between Commonwealth water allocation accounts where required and possible within the constraints of inter-valley trading rules

• water allocations disposed of through trade and/or forfeit (through events, including dam spill and reset, and/or excess water held in accounts at the end of a water year that can’t be used)

• carryover of water between years to provide water for early season environmental watering actions when state allocations, in a new water year may be low.

As the portfolio of Commonwealth environmental water holdings has increased in size, the level of detail the Australian National Audit Office goes into during annual audits has increased. The Office supports the Department and the Auditor General to conduct annual impairment testing of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings to enable valuations to be audited in the Department’s Annual Financial Statements.

Transparency in portfolio management

The Office has set a high standard of transparency for the management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings. The CEWH is not aware of any other water holder who displays the volume of holdings in water accounts with the level of transparency the Office currently maintains. The CEWH reconciles and reports on the holdings every month. This information is made available to the public on the website, including detail about: 5

• the river systems where the CEWH holds water

• the security (whether low, medium, high or other)

• how much water is held

• the Long Term Average Annual Yield.

The Office publishes graphics on the website to ensure maximum transparency in:

• Allocations and carryover.6

• The amount of water held in Basin storages compared to the total in the storage. 7

• How much water has been used in the current water year. 8

Inter-valley transfers are subject to limits under state law. If water is transferred between valleys, the Office makes a public announcement to demonstrate that the CEWH’s trading activities do not exhaust trading limits that may be in place. This is an example of the ‘good neighbour’ policy where we aim to harmoniously co-exist with commercial entitlement holders throughout the water year.

3. The Commonwealth Resource Management Framework

The Commonwealth Resource Management Framework governs how officials in the Commonwealth public sector use and manage public resources, including the CEWH’s water portfolio. The framework is an important feature of an accountable and transparent public sector and informs the Australian people of the daily work of Commonwealth entities and public servants.

The framework has many elements to comply with, including the PGPA Act, PGPA Rules, Instructions set by the Department’s Secretary, Department policies and Resource Management Guides. The PGPA Act sets out the requirements for governance, reporting and accountability. The Secretary of the Department is responsible for the operations of the Office and is ultimately accountable.

5 https://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/about/water-holdings 6 http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/5972374e-4aaf-4f30-a264-1f6f1b0a0de7/files/allocations- carryover-february-2018.pdf 7 See how much water is in storage: https://environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/5972374e-4aaf-4f30-a264- 1f6f1b0a0de7/files/cew-basin-storages-february-2018.pdf 8 See how much water has been delivered this year: https://environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/5972374e- 4aaf-4f30-a264-1f6f1b0a0de7/files/water-use-february-2018.pdf

Section 107 of the Water Act provides the CEWH with independence in executing its functions. In accordance with section 107, the Secretary or Minister cannot direct the CEWH in these commitments.

Most importantly, when using water or spending money the CEWH must make sure it is an efficient, effective, ethical and economic use of the resource. We maintain oversight, accurate records and account for all transactions by having risk management controls, governance arrangements and through annual accounting and reporting. Examples are provided below.

Risk management and controls

• Being aware of possible risks, managing them and reviewing them over time.

• Assessing environmental water use proposals and information supplied by external sources to make sure they are robust.

• Making sure our partnership arrangements include risk management.

• Making sure the CEWH has oversight of Commonwealth environmental water delivered by partners through participation on operational advisory groups/coordination committees.

• Undertaking watering action reviews and acquittals.

Governance arrangements

• Formalising how we work with others (e.g. through partnership agreements, funding agreements, Memorandum of Understanding) to establish a common understanding of the expectations, roles and standards required.

• Promoting shared ownership for Commonwealth environmental water use objectives.

• Active participation in multi-agency groups, committees and other forums that influence portfolio management.

• Having delivery arrangements with the authority that implements environmental watering actions in each Basin state.

• Requiring high standards in the reporting on Commonwealth environmental water use, including where, when and the outcomes achieved as a direct result of its use.

• Undertaking due diligence on information provided from external entities.

• Establishing internal governance arrangements.

• Developing guidelines, frameworks and position statements to ensure rigorous business processes that are consistent in conduct and ensure the ethical use of resources.

• Conducting routine reviews of business processes (internal and external) to support on-going continuous improvement (e.g. review of CEWH business processes and operations).

• Collaboration on joint projects and information sharing (e.g. LTIM, Black Box Working Group).

Accounting and reporting

• Keeping complete, accurate, reliable and up-to-date records of environmental watering activities which reflect the decisions of the CEWH (e.g. Environmental Water Management System, Environmental Asset Database).

• Conducting an appropriate level of due diligence on information provided to the Office from external entities, including reconciliation of water accounts using multiple lines of evidence.

• Treating water allocations as a financial asset with its value reported based on an agreed volume for use, physical delivery and trade (e.g. acquittal reporting).

• Collaborating with delivery partners and resource managers on methods to improve the measurement and accounting of environmental water.

• Placing appropriate obligations on delivery and monitoring partners (e.g. appropriate accounting and reporting standards, consistent with the CEWH’s statutory reporting requirements).

• Completing statutory reporting on the performance of the CEWH and its use of Commonwealth resources (e.g. Annual Performance Statements (PGPA Act), Annual Report (s114 Water Act), Schedule 12 reporting (Basin Plan)).

The graphic below explains more about how the PGPA Act relates to the management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings.

4. The CEWH Review

The Office fosters an environment of continuous improvement of business processes to ensure the legislative requirements placed on the CEWH are met. An independent review was undertaken during 2017 to evaluate the effectiveness of the Office’s operations and business processes that support the CEWH management of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings (the Review). The Review was led by Dr Neil Byron (ex-Productivity Commissioner) who was supported by a Reference Panel of experts comprising Mr Peter Cochrane (governance), Mr Denis Flett (practitioner), Ms Alex Anthony (community), Dr Steven Morton (science) and Mr Gavin McMahon (industry). While the exercise initiated was an internal review, it is relevant to the Inquiry and so we are making it publicly available on our website. 9

The Review concluded that “ there is little need for, or obvious potential for, improvements to the internal business processes, except as they relate to external relationships with stakeholders. ” So while all of our portfolio management activities were concluded to be sound and effective, the Review identified some opportunities for improvement through building a network of supporters by deepening relationships and fostering a greater understanding of the CEWH’s efforts to restore the Basin among local communities. The Panel acknowledged the complex nature of the CEWH’s operating space and that the outcomes to be achieved under the Basin Plan will take decades.

The CEWH’s response to the Review is on our website10 and is currently being implemented.

5. Managing the portfolio

The CEWH’s planning and decision-making is driven by the need to fulfil legislated environmental outcomes. In managing the portfolio of Commonwealth environmental water, the CEWH looks to maximise the outcomes that can be achieved with the available water to ensure the best environmental return. This broadly involves trying to best match the available water (that is, ‘supply’) with identified environmental needs (or ‘demands’) using all available management options. Existing state-based management tools set the rules for how the CEWH can manage water in each valley. There are generally three options:

• Deliver water to a river or wetland to meet an identified demand (‘delivery’).

• Leave water on the accounts and carry it over for use in the next water year (‘carryover’).

• Trade water, that is, sell water and use the proceeds to either:

o buy water in another catchment or in a future year (‘trade’), or

o use the proceeds from selling water to invest in complementary environmental activities (‘investment’).

The best mix of water delivery, carryover, trade and investment will be different in each catchment and different every year.

The decisions made are guided by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s Basin-wide environmental watering strategy and the Basin annual environmental watering priorities and informed through

9 Read the CEWH Review: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/cewo-review-final-report 10 Read the CEWH’s response: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/response-cewo- review

collaboration with delivery partners and communities. In the future, our decisions will also be guided by the Basin States long-term environmental watering plans.

The portfolio of Commonwealth environmental water is actively managed to be able to flexibly adapt to seasonal, operational and management conditions in the same way that an irrigator adapts to changing conditions to achieve the best outcomes with their water. This is particularly important because conditions differ across catchments and years.

We plan for watering and management of the holdings every year

The Office undertakes annual planning prior to the start of each water year. The overarching approach to planning is based on the Commonwealth Environmental Water Portfolio Management Framework 11 and plans are made publicly available each year. 12 The Framework provides a broad overview of how supply and demand influence both the purpose of environmental watering and the different management options.

The Office’s planning process involves conversations with state environmental water managers, site managers, river operators, state regulating agencies as well as the organisations responsible for monitoring the outcomes from environmental water. This collaboration lets us learn from previous watering activities and discuss barriers to delivery (e.g. infrastructure maintenance), potential risks and the potential to use other complementary sources of water.

Planning informs decisions on how Commonwealth environmental water is managed throughout the year. Commonwealth environmental water planning is largely driven by:

• supply: how much water is available, and

• demand: what are the environment’s needs (see graphic below).

Working out the environmental demand

Identifying environmental ‘demands’ involves looking at the water needs (e.g. frequency, size, duration and timing of flows) of rivers, wetlands, plants and animals. These demands are influenced by the flow history, that is, the sequence of wet and dry years.

Information on environmental demands is provided by:

• state government agencies (through the catchment annual environmental watering priorities)

• regional natural resource management groups, local environmental water advisory groups, Traditional Owners and other interested community members (through stakeholder meetings, including those organised by state government agencies)

• the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (through the Basin annual environmental watering priorities)

• observations from monitoring and evaluation service providers undertaking field work for the Office at selected areas across the Basin.

11 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/framework-determining-cew-use 12 See this year’s Portfolio Management Planning: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/e10cf42e-4105-4670-acca- 4aed7b8a0c11/files/portfolio-mgt-plan-approach-planning-2017-18.pdf

The influence of environmental demand and water availability on the purpose of Commonwealth environmental water management 13

Working out how to supply the demand

In considering ‘supply’, there are a range of water sources available to meet the identified demands. Held water is available for the environment under a water access right or water entitlement established in state law. The amount of held water available each year varies in line with water allocations. For instance, when there is less rainfall or under drought conditions the Commonwealth environmental water holdings receive lower allocations and water availability is reduced, as with other entitlement holders.

In addition to Commonwealth environmental water, environmental outcomes codified into flow demands can be met by natural flows, water delivered for human uses, and environmental water held by state governments. River operators help to ensure that environmental water is appropriately delivered around water managed for other purposes. In this way other water can sometimes help meet environmental objectives along the way to its intended use, meaning multiples outcomes can be achieved.

13 This figure does not include the provision of contingency flows which are planned for separately, usually in response to deteriorating water quality conditions.

Using environmental water

Decisions about how Commonwealth environmental water will be used each year are made by the CEWH in real time following the annual planning processes. Detailed proposals for the delivery of environmental water on ground are developed throughout the water year.

Watering proposals vary in scale significantly, both in terms of the target area, volume of water and whether it’s a single or repeated event. Watering also varies in duration from one year to multiple years (up to five years).

Proposals are developed in consultation with a range of stakeholders, including community representatives. State governments hold and use environmental water in the Basin too, which is often delivered in partnership with Commonwealth environmental water.

Consistent with the Basin Plan, every proposal is assessed against the following five criteria:

1. the ecological value of the targeted site(s)

2. the expected outcomes

3. potential risks

4. the long-term sustainability and management of the site(s) (including any complementary management activities)

5. the cost effectiveness and feasibility of the watering action.

The delivery of Commonwealth environmental water is a collective effort. Local groups, state governments and others are involved in helping to determine how and where water can be best used, identifying potential risks, delivering the water and also monitoring the outcomes. The Office engages through a number of forums, such as customer advisory groups, customer service committees, environmental water advisory groups and operational advisory committees, to name a few. These are forums where Commonwealth, state, local and industry representatives can discuss the planning and delivery of environmental water.

More detail about how the Office assesses watering actions can be found on the website. 14

The CEWH then makes a decision on whether to commit the water and funds as outlined in the proposal based on the assessment provided. When a decision is made by the CEWH to proceed with a watering action, arrangements are made with state government and local delivery partners to deliver the water.15 The CEWH has entered into a number of formal partnership agreements with state governments and non-government organisations across the Basin to support environmental water delivery.16

14 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/Office/publications/criteria-assessing-options-cew-use 15 See who our delivery partners are: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/delivery-partners 16 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/agreements-use-commonwealth-environmental- water

The CEWH has built-on existing Commonwealth and state government systems that were already in place to manage held environmental water. For example, The Living Murray program 17 and water held by state environmental water holders, such the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and the Victorian Environmental Water Holder. The learnings from other environmental watering programs were incorporated into the Basin Plan from inception and form part of the foundation for the management of Commonwealth environmental water (e.g. held and planned environmental water).

Commonwealth environmental water is transferred to state accounts or licences for water orders to be made and the water to be delivered. Like all water orders, water regulating authorities and river operators in the Basin are responsible for the delivery of Commonwealth environmental water. As part of their responsibility to manage water resources and the rivers, they have the ability to delay, deny, or suggest changes to, the delivery of the CEWH’s water orders. This might occur if there is contrasting or competing water delivery requirements for other objectives. Environmental water is always delivered in accordance with state rules and regulations governing the delivery of water in each catchment.

We engage regularly with delivery partners to discuss how watering events are tracking. Local input is crucial during water delivery as weather and flow conditions can change rapidly and may result in the need to adjust, suspend or even cancel the watering action.

Since 2009, over 7,999 gigalitres of Commonwealth environmental water has been delivered to rivers, wetlands and floodplains across the Basin. Not all of the water travels down the Basin to the end of the river system. More than half of the water is “used” in the upstream states to protect and restore the environmental assets located there. Often the flow is used to get multiple environmental outcomes along the way as it travels downstream to South Australia.

The Office publishes graphs, such as the one included below, to show how the portfolio has changed over time, including how much water is available, how much has been carried over and how much has been used across the Basin.

17 See The Living Murray program: https://www.mdba.gov.au/managing-water/environmental-water/delivering- environmental-water/living-murray-program . It is managed in partnership with the Commonwealth, NSW, Victoria, South Australian and Australian Capital Territory governments.

Avoiding third-party impacts – the ‘good neighbour’ approach

While the CEWH’s primary focus is on achieving, monitoring and reporting environmental outcomes, it also has a responsibility to minimise risks to communities while undertaking its activities. As a member of the Basin community, the CEWH is committed to being a ‘good neighbour’. Operating effectively in a working river system where much of Australia’s food and fibre is produced necessitates that environmental water management must co-exist with agricultural production in a mutually respectful and harmonious manner.

The good neighbour approach is based on practices that guide the management of Commonwealth environmental water. 18 It aims to promote mutually beneficial relationships with other water users and landholders, in a way that is consistent with the CEWH’s statutory obligations.

A conservative, risk based approach is taken to managing environmental water, so that unintended impacts do not occur. All decisions are informed by risk assessments, which draw on previous results captured through effective monitoring activities. River operators provide important advice to us on whether our water orders might affect other users and they will not deliver environmental flows above the operational limits that apply to all water deliveries.

18 Read about the good neighbour policy: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/local-engagement

Examples of good neighbour policy in action include:

• The CEWH has not, and will not, place water orders that would flood private land without the consent of the landholder.

• An appropriate share of the channel capacity in a river system is used by the CEWH for environmental watering so as not to impact on agricultural producers.

• The Office works closely with communities and delivery partners (including state agencies, river operators and local advisory groups) so they can engage meaningfully on Commonwealth environmental water management.

Case Study: Environmental water use in response to the 2016 –17 blackwater events

The blackwater story

There was widespread flooding in the southern Basin in 2016, including in the Murray, Murrumbidgee, Lachlan and Goulburn catchments. The floods spread over much larger areas than the high flows experienced in 2010–11. The floods inundated both agricultural land and forests, including parts that had not been flooded in more than 30 years. The large volume of organic matter collected by these natural floods resulted in hypoxic blackwater events, which caused large-scale fish kills.

Creating a safe haven for fish in the Edward-Wakool

Over 200 gigalitres of environmental water was used across the Edward-Wakool river system to improve conditions for fish (see pictures below). Some water was delivered through Murray Irrigation infrastructure. It was a collaborative effort amongst agencies and local water managers, including our state delivery partner, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, together with Murray Irrigation Limited, WaterNSW, NSW Fisheries, NSW SES, Murray Local Land Services and others. Working together ensured that watering did not increase regional flooding.

Monitoring supported by anecdotal evidence from stakeholders indicated that the water increased oxygen levels, which provided safe haven for fish and other aquatic animals using these areas, such as the endangered Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii ) and Murray crayfish (Euastacus armatus ).

See a short video on the Murray Local Land Services Facebook where you can watch how Commonwealth environmental water delivered into the Edward-Wakool system created fish refuges during the 2016 hypoxic blackwater event.

Further information on blackwater can be found in the Blackwater Review 19 that looked at our watering events during 2016-17.

19 Read the Blackwater Review: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/52c2c4a4-dce1-40ff- 9bb8-49ff958c5dba/files/blackwater-review.pdf

6. Trading environmental water

What guides the CEWH’s trading activities?

The Water Act sets out the conditions under which Commonwealth environmental water can be sold and prioritises how the proceeds from sales can be used. Water can only be sold in the following circumstances:

• If water allocations are not required in the current year to meet environmental objectives and it cannot be carried over for use in the next year.

• If water allocations are not required to meet environment objectives and, if retained, would likely reduce future allocations due to account limits being reached.

• If the proceeds are used to purchase water that would improve the capacity to achieve the environmental objectives set out in the Basin Plan through environmental water use.

• If the proceeds of water allocations can be used for environmental activities that would improve the capacity to achieve the environmental objectives set out in the Basin Plan and are complementary to environmental water use.

All trading activities are guided by a published Commonwealth Environmental Water Trading Framework.20 This makes sure all trades comply with a standard set of operating rules, protocols and procedures for buying or selling water, including the Basin Plan water trading rules. The framework was first released in 2014 and most recently updated in November 2016 to incorporate amendments to the Water Act. The framework ensures that trading activities:

• support enhanced environmental outcomes

• have regard to social and economic outcomes

• are undertaken in a manner which meets legislative requirements

• consider impacts on the market, including any third-party impacts

• are financially responsible, fair, equitable, transparent and accountable

• the CEWH and Office staff act with integrity and high ethical standards.

Trades completed to date

Since 2014 the CEWH has sold 39.9 gigalitres of water allocations in four trading actions, worth $12.6 million. The proceeds of trade are held in the Environmental Water Holdings Special Account. Less than 0.5 per cent of the allocations received by the CEWH have been sold to date.

The CEWH will always look to use water directly in the landscape for environmental outcomes where possible. To date, the CEWH has taken a conservative approach to trading so that the potential impacts of its trading activities on the water market could be identified. Without pre- empting future trading activities, it’s likely the CEWH will become a more routine participant in the

20 Read the trading framework: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/water-trading- framework-nov2016

water market, as the Office gains more experience, maximising environmental outcomes while managing risk.

Being transparent and accountable in trade

The Office has continued to improve the business processes it uses to sell water since the first sale in January 2014. The most recent sale featured an online application process, which was put in place to streamline processes for people interested in buying the water. These processes helped us to assess the applications and notify successful and unsuccessful applicants of the outcome promptly.

The CEWH is a leader in water market transparency and openness, publishing a quarterly update that signals what trading actions are being considered.21 Our trades are open tenders and any water user can put in an application to buy water. We aim to minimise barriers to access for market participants and will continue to refine our processes over time.

7. Carrying over water for future use

Carryover is an essential management tool for any water user as a prudent risk management strategy and also allows the most effective use of water. In times when the demand is met, whether for the environment or for commercial use, most water holders carryover water. The rules for carryover vary for different entitlement types and in different water plan areas across the Basin. The CEWH complies with the same rules that apply to all.

Access to carryover is important as it allows the CEWH to maintain sufficient water in accounts to undertake environmental watering actions in seasonally optimal times. Water reserved in good years can be used later to mitigate the risk of environmental damage during drier periods. The CEWH has generally used water early in the water year (i.e. late winter and early spring), whereas peak demand for agriculture is summer. Carrying water over for use in the next water year when opening allocations may be low is very beneficial for the environment. This is because spring has traditionally been a period of high natural flows and the CEWH can use water to support positive environmental outcomes such as fish and bird breeding events.

Commonwealth environmental water makes up a very small portion of all water stored across the Basin. Commonwealth environmental water carried over into 2015–16 was equivalent to approximately 2 per cent of the capacity of public water storages across the Basin. At February 2018, the total amount of Commonwealth environmental water in public dams and other storages as a percentage of the Basin-wide storage capacity was 2.7 per cent. The CEWH publishes carryover information on the website to provide transparency in the management of the portfolio.22

8. Investing in activities that complement water use

Review of the Water Act 2007 provides increased flexibility

A 10-yearly scheduled review of the operation of the Water Act was carried out in 2014. The Water Act was amended in 2016 to provide increased flexibility to the CEWH. The changes allowed the

21 See our trading intentions: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/trade/portfolio-mgt-update 22 See information about our carryover: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/5972374e-4aaf- 4f30-a264-1f6f1b0a0de7/files/allocations-carryover-january-2018.pdf

CEWH to use proceeds from the sale of water allocations to fund environmental activities. These changes recognise that environmental outcomes in the Basin require both water and other complementary activities. The majority of annual water allocations assigned to the CEWH will be used in rivers, wetlands and floodplains to meet environmental needs. However, the positive injection of investment funding from trade proceeds could improve the environmental outcomes of environmental water delivery, if a need is identified and proceeds are available.

Developing an investment framework

The Office is in the process of developing an Investment Framework 23 to guide the CEWH on how and what types of environmental activities should be considered for investment. The activities must improve environmental outcomes from the use of Commonwealth environmental water and be undertaken for the purpose of protecting and restoring environmental assets in the Basin.

Environmental activities could include activities that enable or improve the efficiency of environmental water delivery, which complement and improve the effectiveness of environmental water delivery, or that improve the knowledge base that informs the management of Commonwealth environmental water. It is also important that any investment made:

• contributes to long-term and Basin-wide environmental benefits

• will improve environmental water management

• has strong community support

• will be undertaken collaboratively

• is demonstrably viable and cost-effective.

Only the proceeds from the latest trade and any future trades (after the Water Act changed) can be used to invest in environmental activities. Almost all proceeds from CEWH trades prior to the change to the Water Act can only be used for water purchase.

The Investment Framework Discussion Paper 24 was released on the Department’s website in 2017. The Discussion Paper proposed guiding principles for investment and identified a range of environmental activities that may be eligible for funding. Feedback was invited from the community and 30 submissions were received by the 30 November 2017 closing date. The Consultation Outcomes summary report is available on our website.25 The key themes that emerged during the course of the consultation period were:

• the need for eligible projects under the framework to demonstrate enduring positive environmental outcomes

• capacity building investment in regional communities including the need to increase community involvement in environmental watering

23 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/investment-framework 24 Read the Discussion Paper: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/consultations/832e318a-dc82- 453f-9900-5c11852c6bf5/files/investment-framework-discussion-paper.pdf 25 See the consultation outcomes: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/58a98dae-81af-405e- b1c9-9493db4573ce/files/investment-framework-discussion-paper-outcomes-report.pdf

• a range of funding options available to cater for differing project types.

Examples of the types of projects that may be eligible for funding when the framework is completed include:

• Works to facilitate fish passage and fish screens to stop recruited fish entering irrigation networks.

• Regulators to enable a wetland to be watered during drier times or enhance the inundation of wetlands to improve vegetation and aquatic fauna.

• Investigations into options to improve the effectiveness of environmental water.

• Community-based activities to rehabilitate priority wetland and riverbank areas, or establishing monitoring programs for fish, water birds or other fauna.

The CEWH will not provide funding for projects that should or would otherwise be principally funded by other Commonwealth, state or local government agencies. Proceeds raised from the sale of water allocations will not necessarily be reinvested in the same catchment from which it was traded.

Project proponents could include community groups, Aboriginal nation representative bodies, private landholders, state government and agencies, natural resource management organisations (such as Catchment Management Authorities and Local Land Services), irrigation or agribusiness organisations and non-government organisations, such as environmental groups.

Consultation will occur with our environmental watering delivery partners to ensure that the CEWH’s investment priorities align with and complement environmental watering priorities and activities.

PART 3: MAXIMISING OUTCOMES FROM ENVIRONMENTAL WATER

There are many opportunities to maximise environmental outcomes from the use of Commonwealth Environmental Water. Investment by the CEWH in complimentary activities is one option that is now possible (see Part 2). A number of activities occurring under, or related to the Basin Plan, will also be fundamental to maximising the outcomes that can be achieved and ensuring the most efficient use of environmental water:

• Water resource plans will set the rules for how the CEWH will operate in each valley, so will likely determine how innovatively and efficiently we can use environmental water. Basin State long-term environmental watering plans will guide how the portfolio is used.

• The environmental outcomes to be achieved under the Basin Plan were based on both water recovery and the implementation of policy measures, including changes to river operations and “pre-requisite policy measures”.

• The Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism provides an avenue to achieve outcomes efficiently (its legislated purpose is to achieve equivalent environmental outcomes with less water), and if passed comes with significant funding. Water saved from irrigation efficiency programs will also provide greater scope to achieve environmental outcomes.

• Protection of environmental water in the northern Basin will be important. The Northern Basin Review included toolkit measures that sought to target event protection, purchase water strategically, coordinate environmental watering and change infrastructure.

Partnerships with landholders, Indigenous people and the broader community are integral to maximising outcomes (see Part 6), as is adaptively managing the portfolio of water (see Part 4).

1. Water resource plans

Water resource planning is a key component of the Basin Plan that will set many of the rules for how all water resources, including the Commonwealth environmental water holdings can be managed and delivered in each valley into the future. Commonwealth-accredited WRPs are required to be in place by July 2019 and once approved will set state regulation of water until 2029.

The rules and policies to be established in WRPs should provide the means to ensure that environmental water is protected from being repurposed, or extracted, as it flows throughout and between river systems. Restoring the health of the river system does not just rely on Commonwealth environmental water. The same levels of state government held and planned

environmental water – that are included in the model underpinning the Basin Plan Sustainable Diversion Limits and the associated recovery target – are also needed. Also, environmental watering is most efficient and effective when environmental watering supplements water already planned to be in the river system, whether for consumptive purposes or naturally occurring flows.

The CEWH has developed a set of 15 key principles (see below) provided to Basin States for consideration when developing their WRPs for Commonwealth accreditation. These are premised on the requirements of the Water Act, Basin Plan and PGPA Act, as well as the commitments in the Intergovernmental Agreement on Implementing Water Reform in the Murray Darling Basin (June 2013).

The Basin States are currently preparing their WRPs and the Office is actively engaging in surface water WRP development. We attend WRP stakeholder advisory panel meetings in NSW and have recently become a member of an interagency working group formed by NSW to identify interim solutions for improving environmental water management, to be embedded in WRPs. We engage with Queensland on their WRP development by attending meetings with the Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy. Victoria and South Australia are still preparing their WRPs and the Office will continue to engage where opportunities arise.

The CEWH’s w ater resource planning principles

1. No less favourable conditions for environmental water entitlement holders – the characteristics of licensed entitlements held for environmental use should neither be enhanced nor diminished relative to like entitlements held and used for other purposes.

2. No growth in consumptive use – there should not be any growth in consumptive use where Baseline Diversion Limits exceed Sustainable Diversion Limits.

3. No adverse impact on existing entitlement reliability.

4. Managing river systems for multiple purposes – WRPs should recognise that water management operations should make the best use of available water by achieving multiple objectives. This could include for the agricultural, urban, industrial and environmental sectors as well as for socio-economic and Indigenous purposes.

5. Protecting environmental flows – WRPs should include provisions that protect environmental water from extraction by other consumptive users whether it is used instream or on land.

6. Maximising environmental outcomes – new WRPs should enable further use of return flows at multiple locations, both along the river and at the end of the river or at a downstream border for use at another location.

7. Accounting for environmental water passing between valleys – environmental water is most effective when it can be used to achieve multiple purposes (e.g. use at multiple sites).

8. Environmental water provisions meet environmental need – provisions relating to all types of environmental water should be clearly related to environmental requirements.

9. No reduction to planned environmental water provisions.

10. Codification of practices in place for sound hydrological or risk management reasons – any established water management practices should be codified explicitly in the WRPs.

11. Flexible carryover provisions – carryover arrangements should provide flexibility for all water users, where feasible.

12. Flexibility and consistency in trading rules – trade provisions in WPRs should provide flexibility for all water users and ensure consistency with the Basin Plan’s water trading rules.

13. Transparency – consideration should be given to including provisions in water sharing plans relating to improved information and data transparency to assist all water users to make informed decisions.

14. Monitoring and reporting of planned environmental water – WRPs should facilitate public reporting of information and data on volumes of planned environmental water made available, along with environmental objectives and outcomes.

15. Clear criteria for the suspension of water sharing plans – there should be clear criteria as to why and how WRPs can be suspended, and the extent of temporary rules that can be put in place while the WRP is suspended.

2. Long-term environmental watering plans

Basin States are currently developing long-term environmental watering plans in areas of the Basin where surface WRPs are required under the Basin Plan. These plans must have regard to the Basin-wide environmental watering strategy and be consistent with environmental watering principles and relevant international agreements. The plans should capture and document local knowledge within catchments, increasing the CEWH’s ability to have regard to local knowledge in decision-making, as required in the Basin Plan environmental watering principles.

Once developed, these plans will not only help inform the management of environmental water but also provide a basis for integrated environmental water planning across the Basin. The plans will identify the key environmental assets in each catchment and their requirements, which in the longer-term, will be a key input into the CEWH’s portfolio planning and decision making.

3. Changes to operational management of environmental water

Operational delivery

The operational delivery of environmental water happens in an adaptive management framework that is constantly evolving. River operations were developed historically to meet the needs of extractive uses. Environmental watering is a relatively new activity but one that is changing through our ongoing work with state agencies and river operators to optimise the effectiveness of water delivery both for the environmental and for operational and extractive industries.

In developing and trialling new operational rules to maximise the efficient and effective use of environmental water, waterway managers and environmental water holders work together to ensure that changes won’t have any significant effect on other water users (see example below). The

approach uses evidence based decision making, cross-jurisdictional collaboration and implementation through adaptive management. Instituting operational rules to support the management of environmental water is complex because of the differences between the unregulated rivers of the northern Basin and the regulated rivers of the Southern Connected Basin. We have been successful in developing local arrangements, which allow the use of operational releases to get environmental outcomes. We are working on further opportunities to trial similar approaches.

Using natural cues to guide operational management of environmental watering

Using rainfall and natural river flows (hydrological cues) to guide the delivery of Commonwealth environmental water was first trialled for implementation in the River Murray in 2015. This approach aims to support the improved integration of environmental watering into existing river operating practices. It was developed based on lessons learnt from previous environmental watering actions, new evidence and extensive consultation with river operators.

This approach to environmental watering enables greater coordination in the management of watering between multiple river valleys. It also meets environmental and consumptive water requirements sat the same time – providing opportunity to achieve environmental, economic and social benefits.

The practice for the use of ‘natural cues’ to guide the delivery environmental water within the River Murray has adapted over time and continues to be used as a key environmental water delivery strategy.

Operational practices

Operational practices by the Basin States and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority should ensure there is oversight, risk management and full accountability of environmental water use through reliable water accounting and reporting. We work in partnership with the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to test the modelling assumptions about environmental water use. These practices continue to change over time to enhance environmental watering but this requires time to meet the needs of water users. The CEWH continues to invest in new information to make sure all decision- making is supported by the best possible evidence sources.

Using environmental water is different from consumptive use where water is taken at a particular location and predominately measured through metered pumps and gauges on engineered channels. There are a range of methods used to account for, and report on, environmental water use. The Office uses the best available methods for each watering, but they vary depending on how and where the water is delivered. Examples of methods used to account for environmental water are: metered pumps, channel delivery, river gauging stations and floodplain models.

Meeting high standards of public accountability requires accurate, reliable and credible information that demonstrates how Commonwealth resources are used. Operational delivery and reporting on the use of Commonwealth environmental water is reliant on information provided to us by external parties. We continue to work with delivery partners and river operators to review delivery arrangements and establish a future model of best practice accounting and reporting for environmental water use.

Coordination of flows in partnership

Commonwealth environmental water is delivered in partnership with government agencies, water authorities, industry groups, scientists, non-government organisations and community groups. These partnerships build a shared ownership of the environmental outcomes, identify opportunities to maximise environmental water use and enable innovation in environmental management.

Coordinating environmental water with irrigation water for better outcomes

The environmental water requirements of Gunbower Creek have been supplied through a unique approach of using a combination of held environmental water and consumptive water en route to downstream demands. River Murray flows destined for downstream use are routed through Gunbower Creek, providing for the instream environmental requirements of the creek.

This approach was developed in collaboration with Goulburn Murray Water, North Central Catchment Management Authority and the Victorian Environmental Water Holder.

Environmental water entitlements are debited the additional ‘losses’ associated with the change in operational practice. This is an efficient approach, using scheduled environmental water alongside water already in the river for other purposes. The early use of water through the Gunbower Creek (part of the Torrumbarry irrigation system) provides a pre-wetting that has a side-benefit of reducing the operational losses for irrigation water delivery.

The CEWH is committed to establishing best practice in the arrangements for the management of environmental water by finding new ways to do things and partnering with others (see Part 6 ).

4. Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism

The Basin Plan includes the Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism, which provides an opportunity to recover less water if other changes could provide equivalent environmental outcomes in the Southern Connected Basin.

Supply measures

The Basin Plan was recently amended to include a series of projects modelled to supply the equivalent of 605 gigalitres of water. This amendment is currently with the Parliament and is subject to a disallowance motion in the Senate. The types of projects include:

• removing physical constraints or barriers to environmental water flows

• putting in place infrastructure that helps deliver water to wetlands and floodplains more effectively and therefore need less water for an equivalent outcome

• changes to river operating rules that provide environmental outcomes.

Basin governments made a preliminary agreement to accept 37 projects 26 (see map below) proposed by the Basin States following the completion of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s assessment in January 2018. Subject to the amendment not being disallowed, Basin States are required to implement the projects by 2024 in collaboration with Commonwealth agencies, including

26 Note: One project has not been nominated as a supply measure.

the Office. Working together effectively is critical to ensure that the projects have equivalent environmental outcomes, as required by the Basin Plan, and that water recovered for the environment can be managed effectively in the context of the new works and operational changes.

The two examples below explain how equivalent or better environmental outcomes can be achieved through the implementation of such projects.

Case Study: Hattah Lakes North Floodplain Management Project The Hattah Lakes North Floodplain Management Project is designed to complement existing environmental works at Hattah to deliver a landscape-scale approach to protecting and enhancing the Hattah-Kulkyne Lakes Ramsar site, which is an area of national environmental significance. The project should maximise the outcomes that can be achieved through the delivery of Commonwealth environmental water. The works would enable wetlands to be inundated to natural levels experienced under River Murray flows of 120,000 to 140,000 ML/d that now rarely occur. The project is located 60 km south-east of Mildura in north-western Victoria. The Hattah Lakes site has declined under river regulation due to reduced peak flows and changes to the seasonality of flows. The wetland habitats of the Hattah Lakes would have naturally been regularly inundated, providing fish and bird habitat and refuge during periods of regional droughts. Declining ecological condition has meant the lakes are less able to support native species during extended dry periods. Some of the area of the Hattah Lakes has already benefitted from the construction of works under The Living Murray Program that provide environmental water to some of the site. This project will involve the construction of two regulators and supporting levees to inundate 1,130 hectares. The infrastructure would allow environmental water to be delivered to the northern most part of the Hattah floodplain system. The infrastructure would also allow greater flexibility in the delivery of environmental water allowing closer alignment with the flow regime and frequency the Hattah Lakes requires to flourish. The project could provide water to areas of red gum woodland and black box woodland improving the quality and extent of habitat for a wide range of native species, including threatened species. Colonial nesting waterbird breeding should improve from additional foraging habitat provided through the inundation of red gum woodlands and shallow wetlands. Environmental water should also stimulate the dormant seed bank leading to the growth of plant species, resulting in greater diversity and abundance. The project could also support recreational activities at the Hattah- Kulkyne National Park, including fishing, bird watching and canoeing.

Case Study: Wallpolla Island Floodplain Management Project The Wallpolla Island Floodplain Management Project will construct two major regulating structures, supplementary works and levees, which would enable widespread inundation and connect parts of the floodplain through mimicking flows from 30,000 ML/day to 120,000 ML/day. Wallpolla Island is in the Lower Murray floodplain downstream of the junction of the Murray and Darling Rivers and is part of the Murray-Sunset National Park. The River Murray flow at Wallpolla Island is altered by storages, regulation and diversion upstream on both the Murray and Darling Rivers. This has caused a reduction in large winter and spring flow peaks and an increase of low summer flows. Locks and weirs have also changed the natural river flows. The project will allow watering to occur at a landscape scale to potentially restore ecosystem function to approx. 2,651 hectares of floodplain with river red gum woodland, black box woodland and lignum shrub land, contributing to habitat requirements of waterbirds and fill wetland habitat to support the breeding and life cycles of native fish species.

Investment by the CEWH and the states in natural resource management activities that are complementary to environmental watering will be important to ensure the CEWH can achieve the environmental outcomes required under the Basin Plan. The largest prospective investment will be by the Commonwealth through the Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism projects to be delivered by the states.

Efficiency measures

Irrigation efficiency measures are intended improve the environmental outcomes under the Basin Plan through the recovery of water savings while having neutral or better social and economic outcomes. These measures could increase the recovery of water for the environment by up to 450 gigalitres. The Department of Agriculture and Water Resources is responsible for administering the efficiency measures program, in consultation with the Basin States and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority. Examples of efficiency measures include:

• replacing or upgrading less efficient methods of on-farm irrigation

• lining channels to reduce water losses within an irrigation network.

Having additional water in the Commonwealth environmental water holdings would provide greater scope to increase environmental outcomes and target more of the key ecological assets in the Basin.

5. Pre-requisite policy measures (in the Southern Basin)

The Basin Plan was based on modelling which made assumptions about protecting environmental water from extraction, and allowing environmental water to be used to build on flows throughout the river system. 27 These measures were intended to maximise environmental water outcomes from use in the Southern Connected Basin. Without these policy assumptions, more water would have needed to be recovered under the Basin Plan, to achieve the same outcomes. Without their implementation, the environmental outcomes from the effort put into the Basin Plan will be significantly less.

27 'unimplemented policy measures' section 7.15 Basin Plan

Basin States committed to change their state frameworks and put these policies in place by July 2019:

1. credit environmental return flows for downstream environmental use (protection of environmental water)

2. allow the call of held environmental water from storage during un-regulated flow events (piggybacking).

These two policy measures are directly linked to the CEWH’s ability to achieve the best environmental outcomes.

• Recognition and accounting for flows returning to the river from environmental watering will provide a mechanism to ensure environmental water can be used more efficiently and effectively throughout the length of the river system (e.g. return flows are able to be re-used more than once providing a benefit to multiple sites). This will deliver many environmental benefits by maximising the environmental outcomes that can be achieved from the same water.

• In regulated rivers, piggybacking allows Commonwealth environmental water to be used to build on the flows already in the river to mimic what would have been larger natural events. It provides for environmental water to be used more efficiently because a greater outcome can be achieved with the same volume of water. Piggybacking is also necessary to maximise the outcomes Commonwealth environmental water can achieve and is essential to achieve the Basin Plan objectives.

As with entitlements held for consumptive use, Commonwealth environmental water should be protected from extraction by other users. This can be difficult as the environment ‘uses’ its water instream and most valleys have traditionally had no provisions to identify and account for a water user’s holdings instream. Before the Commonwealth’s entitlements were recovered under the Basin Plan, they were owned by consumptive users and the water was not available for extraction by other water users from within the same water resource area. Therefore protection of environmental water instream should not affect other users, but new rules will need to be developed, and other users will want to know the environmental water is accounted for and does not impact their reliability.

In parts of the southern Basin, operational rules have already been developed that allow water to be re-used multiple times as it flows downstream. For example, environmental water managers may order a volume of water to be delivered down the Goulburn River, providing a flow cue for golden perch spawning. Some of this water will be lost into the ground or evaporate but most of the water will continue to flow into the River Murray. These ‘return flows’ can then be pumped into Hattah Lakes to support waterbirds and black box trees. Some of the water returns back to the Murray and can then flow on through to South Australia and into the Coorong.

In fact, most of the environmental water delivered to South Australia has already been used at an upstream site (see graph below). This shows the importance of these re-use rules in achieving environmental outcomes efficiently – without them, significantly greater volumes of environmental water would be required to achieve the same outcomes.

These rules are in place in northern Victoria and the River Murray. Trial arrangements have been undertaken in NSW catchments, such as the Murrumbidgee and the Lower Darling. Further work is

required in other NSW catchments, such as the Edward-Wakool system, where such arrangements have not been trialled yet. These arrangements need to become a part of normal business as they are important to the ongoing success of the environmental watering.

6. Protection of environmental water in the northern Basin

Unlike the southern part of the Basin, flows in northern river systems are highly variable and intermittent, rather than being ‘controlled’ by public dams and other infrastructure. The majority of consumptive water use in the northern Basin comes from individual diversions (e.g. pumping into farm storages, rather than irrigation districts of the south) when there is water flowing in the rivers from rainfall.

States are responsible for having compliance and enforcement systems in place that ensure water users do not increase their water use and Commonwealth environmental water is delivered to achieve the desired outcomes. However, in the north the Basin Plan does not require Basin States to guarantee the real-time protection of Commonwealth environmental water. After 2019, states are required to meet the Sustainable Diversion Limits as part of the implementation of their WRPs.

Diversion limits are restricted to long-term average diversions and flows, but do not facilitate achieving environmentally beneficial patterns of flow, because they do not adapt to climate extremes or water sharing arrangements particular to the northern Basin. Environmental outcomes in the northern Basin are dependent on a number of factors, including the pattern of water flow in the rivers (e.g. river height, timing of watering), not just the volume of water. Therefore, better environmental outcomes could be achieved if Basin States provide event-based protection of environmental water, which will also increase public confidence that the water is being used as intended.

Protection of environmental water in the northern Basin was identified as one of the toolkit measures recommended by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority in the Northern Basin Review.

7. The Northern Basin Review

The Northern Basin Review was undertaken by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority over four years and the Office was involved throughout the process. A key outcome of the Review was that similar ecological outcomes could be achieved with less water if NSW and Queensland implemented the proposed toolkit measures, which were noted in the Basin Plan amendment.

The toolkit measures, which would improve environmental water management and the outcomes that can be achieved under the Basin Plan, are:

• Targeted or strategic water purchases.

• Protection of environmental flows, as water access and management rules were developed for extraction rather than to leave flows in rivers.

• Event based mechanisms, which would assist in preserving some environmentally significant parts of rain events.

• Coordination of environmental water to make the most of environmental water to achieve outcomes down the Barwon-Darling river system under suitable circumstances.

• A ‘constraints management’ project that would enable increased environmental flows to the Gwydir wetlands through the removal of constraints.

• Targeted environmental works, such as construction of fishways and control of cold water pollution through thermal curtains.

Note: Following the disallowance of the Basin Plan amendment for the Northern Basin Review, the Sustainable Diversion Limit in the northern Basin remains at 390 gigalitres. The decision whether to pursue the amendment – and associated toolkit measures – is a matter for Basin Governments and the Agriculture and Water Resources Portfolio as the Commonwealth lead.

PART 4: MONITORING, EVALUATION, REPORTING AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

• Monitoring, evaluation and research inform how the CEWH operates.

• Adaptive management is critical.

• Innovation occurs through collaboration and learning.

Monitoring and evaluation is critical to the management of Commonwealth environmental water. These activities support the efficient and effective use of resources, promote accountability and transparency, support adaptive management and help build knowledge.

The Water Act and the Basin Plan outline specific monitoring, evaluation and reporting requirements that the CEWH must comply with. The Basin Plan places a number of obligations on the CEWH with respect to monitoring, evaluation and reporting, including to:

• report annually to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority on the identification of environmental water and the monitoring of its use (Basin Plan Schedule 12, item 9)

• report every five years to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority on the achievement of environmental outcomes at a Basin-scale, by reference to the targets we measure progress towards.

The Office developed the Commonwealth Environmental Water Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting and Improvement (MERI) Framework 28 to guide monitoring and evaluation activities and ensure we are aligning with and meeting legislative and Basin Plan obligations.

1. Key monitoring and evaluation activities

Key monitoring and evaluation activities currently in place include operational monitoring, intervention monitoring (both short and long term) and Basin-scale evaluation of Commonwealth environmental water. Broadly, the Basin Plan establishes the following responsibilities:

• The CEWH is focussed on monitoring and reporting on the outcomes from Commonwealth environmental watering.

• Basin States are focussed on monitoring and reporting on the changes in environmental health over time at a wetland and catchment scale.

• The Murray-Darling Basin Authority is focussed on evaluation and reporting on the changes in environmental health at a Basin-scale.

While each entity has distinct responsibilities, there is potential for overlap in these monitoring programmes. Recognising this, the CEWH’s LTIM program was deliberately designed to complement the activities of other agencies. Office staff continue to work with colleagues from state

28 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/Office/publications/cew-monitoring-evaluation-reporting-and- improvement-framework

governments and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to ensure the most efficient monitoring programmes are in place.

Operational monitoring

Operational monitoring is undertaken for every Commonwealth environmental watering action, typically by state government delivery partners. It involves collecting on-ground data about the environmental water delivery event, such as volumes, timing, duration, location, flow rates and river heights. Operational monitoring is undertaken to:

• ensure water is delivered as planned and accounted for appropriately

• help to identify and manage unintended consequences

• provide observations of the initial ecological response (photos and local descriptions).

Intervention monitoring

Intervention monitoring helps the Office to understand the environmental response to watering. Results are used to:

• improve environmental water planning and delivery

• demonstrate environmental outcomes

• fulfil legislative and Basin Plan reporting obligations

• build our combined knowledge of the ecological systems.

Short term intervention monitoring

The Office has been monitoring the short term environmental response of environmental water since 2010. Short term monitoring projects 29 have focussed on determining whether selected watering actions are meeting their intended ecological objectives and understanding the implications for environmental water delivery.

Long term intervention monitoring

The $30 million LTIM 30 is designed to monitor and evaluate the outcomes of Commonwealth environmental water in the Basin over 5 years from 2014 to June 2019. This LTIM Project will also assist us to demonstrate environmental outcomes and adaptively manage the water holdings. The design of the LTIM Project is guided by the Office’s:

• Long-Term Intervention Monitoring Project Logic and Rationale Document 31 • Environmental Water Expected Outcomes Framework 32

29 See some results of short term monitoring: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications#monitoring 30 Read about the LTIM and its results: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/monitoring/ltim-project 31 Read the logic and rationale document: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/long-term- intervention-monitoring-project-logic-and-rationale-document 32 Read the Outcomes Framework: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/environmental- water-outcomes-framework

Under the LTIM Project, we have engaged monitoring teams, led by research institutions, to develop and implement 5-year monitoring and evaluation plans for the seven selected areas within the Basin. More than 30 institutions are involved in the LTIM Project including some of Australia’s leading regional universities, scientific research institutions and state agencies. The focus of each monitoring and evaluation plan is to determine whether Commonwealth environmental water is achieving the outcomes expected of it from local to Basin-scale.

The teams implement the monitoring and evaluation plans in seven selected areas within the Basin – the Junction of the Warrego and Darling rivers; Gwydir river system; Lower Lachlan river system; Murrumbidgee river system; Edward-Wakool river system; Goulburn River; and Lower Murray River. These regions provide the maximum coverage possible over areas where Commonwealth environmental watering occurs and complements, rather than duplicates, monitoring activities undertaken by others.

Basin-scale evaluation of Commonwealth environmental water

Under the LTIM Project, we also engaged the Murray-Darling Freshwater Research Centre to do a Basin-scale evaluation of the contribution of Commonwealth environmental water to the environmental objectives of the Basin Plan, as set out in our Basin-scale Evaluation Plan.33 The Basin-scale evaluation is based on outcomes for six ecological indicators, derived from the Basin Plan environmental objectives:

• hydrology (flow regimes and connectivity)

• ecosystem diversity

• vegetation diversity

• river metabolism

• fish populations

• generic diversity (e.g. frogs).

We receive Basin-scale evaluation reports annually, which are published on our website. The first five year evaluation, which will represent a big step to synthesise learnings, will be completed by late 2020.

Get engaged with our monitoring

• Read a paper from the University of Melbourne , which discusses positive results from environmental watering, followed by a radio interview of one of our LTIM scientists.

• Watch a YouTube video where an LTIM scientist provides an overview of the Office’s long- term monitoring program in the Gwydir River catchment.

33 Read the LTIM evaluation plan: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/publications/cewo-ltim-basin- evaluation-plan

Monitoring and Evaluation Plans can be found on the website. Final monitoring reports are published on our website annually.

Case Study: Monitoring a waterbird breeding event in the Macquarie Marshes

Commonwealth environmental water was used in 2016–17 to complete a waterbird breeding event in the Macquarie Marshes in NSW. Monitoring of this event included observations of bird nests to analyse breeding success, analysis using imagery from a drone, and satellite tracking of straw- necked ibis (Threskiornis spinicollis ).

Working in partnership

A partnership with one of Australia’s leading universities allowed breeding success to be monitored across multiple sites that were targeted for environmental watering. We found that the success rates for some species were considerably lower in one of the two targeted sites. This information will be used in the future to improve the effectiveness of environmental watering efforts in this region.

Multiple monitoring methods used

The use of drones enabled improved accuracy in the counting of waterbird nests, with individual nest locations able to be recorded more quickly and efficiently than other methods.

Five satellite GPS transmitters were deployed on adult straw-necked ibis, allowing researchers to better understand how and when the birds engage with different bodies of water over a period of time. While waterbird movements varied considerably, all travelled significant distances and spent time in one or more key wetland region.

This data may be used in the future to assist environmental water managers and river operators to better tailor management of water for the environment to the specific needs of target waterbird species. Additional work progressed by the Office examining the condition of the Macquarie Marshes as a Ramsar site compliments this work and further informs the use of environmental water in the marshes.34

See the benefits

Watch this video to see water flowing into the Macquarie Marshes to support the breeding and movement of native fish between Burrendong Dam and the Barwon River.

2. Murray-Darling Basin Environmental Water Knowledge and Research Project

The Murray-Darling Basin Environmental Water Knowledge and Research Project is a 5 year, $10 million project to improve the best science available to underpin environmental water use and to

34 See a factsheet about the Macquarie Marshes Ramsar site: http://www.environment.gov.au/water/wetlands/publications/assessing-condition-macquarie-marshes-ramsar- site-factsheet

inform future reviews of the Basin Plan. The Project commenced in 2014 and consists of on-ground monitoring and research projects for vegetation, waterbirds, fish and food-webs.

Strong science is required to underpin the management and use of both Commonwealth and State environmental water, so better environmental outcomes can be achieved. The ability to predict ecological responses is reliant on understanding the connections between the responses to environmental watering events and how these translate into changes in environmental health over time. Research is also helping us to understand the threats that impact on the environmental improvement expected from applying environmental water. Improved knowledge will enhance environmental water management and help the CEWH to understand the benefits of complementary environmental activities.

3. Adaptive management

Adaptive management 35 is learning from past experiences to improve future decisions. The CEWH manages environmental water adaptively, drawing from the best available science and monitoring, and the knowledge, insights and experiences of those people living and working in the Basin. Examples of how we adaptively manage include:

• using the learnings from previous years to inform our planning and priorities for subsequent years

• working with states and communities to test ideas and inform how we go about our watering and selecting priorities

• connecting with researchers and state agencies through operational advisory groups who look at the specific site responses to inform real-time changes to watering events.

The development of portfolio management plans are a critical element of our adaptive management process. Our planning is informed by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Portfolio Management Framework .36 The plans set out the objectives and outcomes that environmental water is aiming to contribute to (based on input from government agencies, communities and scientists) and the actions required to achieve these outcomes. The plans are updated every year based on the evaluation of new science and monitoring results, the experience of what has worked well, or if there are areas that could be improved. The way that we integrate adaptive management into our business operations has improved over time and continues to mature.

Continuing to achieve environmental outcomes in a working river system that supports rural communities and irrigated agriculture requires the flexibility to adaptively manage water in real-time. Decisions also need to be based on the best available science and community information (see the case study below).

35 Defined in section 1.07 of the Basin Plan. 36 Read the Management Framework: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/1a947b47-08ac- 453b-901e-4ed59c0b76cc/files/managing-cew-portfolio.pdf

Case Study: Goulburn River adaptive management 2012 –2015

What was the priority?

Restoring golden perch ( Macquaria ambigua ) populations has been a priority for environmental water managers in the Goulburn River since the millennium drought broke. In 2012–13, watering to target outcomes for golden perch were small and discrete with limited fish and ecological responses. Environmental watering during the following years was enhanced to focus more on the flow regime needed to achieve improved environmental outcomes, while reducing social, economic and environmental impacts (see the graphics below).

After evaluating the ecological responses and community concerns raised after earlier environmental watering, the first spring environmental flow in 2014–15 was brought forward to October to benefit recovering bank vegetation before the hot summer (see graphic below).

A second flow was then provided at a reduced rate, in late November, to allow golden perch larvae to develop, which resulted in a successful golden perch-breeding event.

The timing of flows was further modified in 2014-15 to take into account community concerns:

• Environmental watering was deliberately arranged to be completed before the opening of the Murray cod fishing season to minimise any disruption to angling activities.

• A planned two-week window between the two spring higher flow actions was also incorporated to allow farmers to access their low-lying pumps for irrigation purposes.

• The design of environmental watering actions was adjusted to minimise natural bank erosion processes by delivering a variable water flow that reduced gradually.

• Operational releases were also adapted to improve environmental outcomes and complete environmental water flow events, while also meeting irrigation and critical human water needs.

These changes in environmental water management in the Goulburn River achieved social, economic and environmental outcomes. Adaptive management was enhanced by greater involvement of water resources managers, scientists and the community.

This case study highlights how we involve a broad range of stakeholders and information sources, along with adapting flow regimes to achieving environmental outcomes in a river system that communities and industry rely on.

Read about the vegetation outcomes in more detail in the case study about restoring river banks in Part 5.

Another way we adaptively manage the portfolio is by responding to natural cues. This approach optimises environmental outcomes through:

• ensuring the timing, magnitude, duration and frequency of watering events is appropriate

• avoiding the creation of ‘artificial’ outcomes that cannot be sustainably managed in the long-term

• providing a sound ecological underpinning to use environmental water.

It is not always possible or desirable to deliver environmental water to respond to natural flow events. Environmental watering is undertaken in a working and highly managed river system. The extent to which natural cues are followed is guided by the overarching objectives and what is possible within existing constraints and operating arrangements. Also, many wetlands are in poor ecological health and their ‘normal’ wetting-drying cycles may have to be reinstated/manipulated to assist in restoration and recovery.

The practice of environmental water management will continue to evolve as we continue to develop innovative and flexible approaches in response to what we learn each year, helping us to maximise environmental outcomes.

Read more about how monitoring information supports us to adaptively manage by feeding into future decision making in ‘Clever ways with water’.

PART 5: ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES

• The environmental outcomes we are seeing.

• There are social and economic benefits of watering.

1. What outcomes are we achieving?

Environmental water is used by the CEWH to get specific outcomes. The results of watering are being documented through ecological monitoring, as discussed in Part 3. We are investing over $40 million in monitoring, evaluation and research to help manage Commonwealth environmental water and to demonstrate environmental outcomes.

Environmental watering has shown significant environmental benefits for river systems as a whole, but specific outcomes are often targeted for fish and birds that rely on the rivers and wetlands, and vegetation in accordance with the priorities set by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority in the Basin- wide environmental watering strategy (read our case studies below).

While the full results of environmental watering across the Basin will take many years to be realised, monitoring to date has shown that Commonwealth environmental water is contributing towards a range of environmental objectives, including:

• creating the right flow conditions for fish and birds to breed and to support recruitment to adults

• providing river flows that support improved water quality for the environment and water users

• connecting rivers to low-lying floodplains to maintain food chains and support fish movement

• filling wetlands that support native fish, birds and other native animals

• supporting the recovery of the environment following the drought, and building resilience in preparation for the next drought.

Some of the key highlights so far have been: a) Supporting one of the largest Murray cod spawning events in the Basin in the last 20 years, occurring in the Darling River (read about it in the case study below). b) Providing wetland habitat to support the breeding cycles for hundreds of thousands of waterbirds, including over 100,000 nests of straw-necked ibis at Booligal Wetlands – the largest colonial waterbird breeding event at the site since the 1980’s; and the first ever recorded breeding of pelicans at Nimmie-Caira with some 6,000 nests recorded in May 2017 (read about it in the case study below). c) Mitigating the impact of widespread low-oxygen hypoxic blackwater events over August to December 2016 across the southern Basin to provide critical refuge habitat for native fish. d) Boosting natural flows to support native fish across the Basin, including helping golden perch to travel thousands of kilometres from northern NSW into the lower Murray River.

e) Protecting nationally-listed threatened species such as southern bell frog (Litoria raniformis ) and Murray hardyhead (Craterocephalus fluviatilis ) through improving wetland and river health.

f) Supporting the recovery of important vegetation, including in the Coorong where monitoring in 2017 found the highest recorded coverage of the aquatic plant tuberous seatassel (Ruppia tuberosa , a keystone species essential to fish and birds) since the Millennium Drought.

g) Exporting over 500,000 tonnes of salt from the Murray River Channel, Lower Lakes, and Murray Mouth, which is the equivalent of around 20,000 semi-trailer loads of salt.

Case study: It’s a boom for birds

The year 2016 was a boom year for many of the Basin’s water-dependent birds

The Booligal wetlands, in the lower Lachlan catchment saw the largest bird breeding event in more than 35 years. Over 500,000 waterbirds, including straw-necked ibis’ and blue-billed ducks (Oxyura australis ), nested down to breed.

In the Macquarie Marshes, breeding colonies of straw-necked ibis with around 50,000 nests, royal spoonbills (Platalea regia ), white-necked herons (Ardea pacifica ), white ibis (Threskiornis molucca ) and various species of ducks and egrets were seen.

And, the first large-scale breeding of pelicans ever recorded took place at Nimmie-Caira – the largest remaining area of wetlands in the Low-bidgee - with around 6000 breeding pairs observed.

Although these events were triggered by widespread natural flooding, environmental water played a significant role in making 2016 one of the best bird breeding years in a long time.

How did environmental water help?

In the Macquarie Marshes, Booligal wetlands, Low-bidgee floodplain and Barmah-Millewa Forest, environmental water was delivered after the high flows to maintain the water levels in these wetlands. This encouraged birds to stay with their nests for the breeding cycle, (as drying conditions would have likely caused them to abandon their nests) and provided foraging habitat for juvenile birds.

However, it was the longer term actions of environmental watering that primed these sites in order to host such large breeding events. Environmental water provided to these sites over the last few years contributed to the ongoing ecological health of the sites. The strategic and well planned use of environmental water since 2013 created an optimal platform for achieving the waterbird “boom” in 2016 as both habitats and populations were in better health owing to the use of environmental water in the lead up years.

See the benefits

The event in 2016 in the Booligal Wetlands was the biggest breeding event seen in 20 years. Environmental watering including Commonwealth environmental water, contributed to priming and maintaining the site. See it on YouTube or read about it on the NSW Office of Environmental and Heritage’s website.

Case study: Fish and flows

Increasingly, environmental flows are being coordinated across multiple catchments to support fish movement. Ongoing monitoring gives us the means to make more responsive decisions on the ‘how much, when and where’ water is required to prompt fish movement or spawning.

In spring 2016, environmental water supported one of the largest Murray cod spawning events seen in the last 20 years in the Lower Darling River. In 2016–17, watering supported the movement of golden perch populations from Queensland all the way through to northern Victoria.

In spring 2016, environmental water helped boost natural high flows in the Warrego, Border and Barwon–Darling rivers. In response to the high flows, large numbers of golden perch spawned, with juvenile fish using the Menindee Lakes as nursery habitat.

From February to June 2017, environmental and operational water releases from the Menindee Lakes into the Great Darling Anabranch and Lower Darling allowed the juvenile golden perch to migrate from the Menindee Lakes into the River Murray. Without environmental flows in the Great Darling Anabranch many of these juvenile fish would have become stranded and died.

Some of the golden perch also headed back upstream, along the Barwon-Darling. In response, environmental water was delivered in the Macquarie River to ensure its connection to the Barwon River. Monitoring showed this flow encouraged adult and juvenile fish such as golden perch, spangled perch (Leiopotherapon unicolour ), bony bream (Nematalosa erebi ) and Hyrtl’s tandan (Neosilurus hyrtlii ) to move into the Macquarie catchment, helping to rebuild the native fish population.

Case study: Restoring riverbanks

Harsh climatic conditions over the past 15 years – extensive drought between 1997 and 2010, record floods in 2010 and 2012, and then a series of dry to moderate years – have left the Victorian Rivers region in need of water.

Riverbank vegetation along the Goulburn River is being restored and revived from its drowned and scoured state after the 2010–11 floods. Annual environmental watering, assisted by naturally wet conditions, have worked to improve river health through the use of carefully managed environmental flows. To support the growth and development of riverbank vegetation, environmental water is used to provide a more gradual fall in river levels after a dam release or other events.

The slow and gradual fall in river levels wets up the soil profile, allowing a layer of silt to be deposited onto the riverbank which provides an ideal location for the germination and growth of new plants. When water levels drop too quickly, bank slumping can occur (the river bank becomes unstable and falls away in large chunks). Environmental flows have been used to reduce the likelihood of this happening by creating a more gradual change in river levels.

Improving riverbank and in-stream vegetation, and supporting riverbank stability, provides important habitat for iconic native fish species such as golden perch and the EPBC listed critically endangered silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus ).

The following photos show how vegetation recovered in the Goulburn in response to environmental watering activities between 2014–18.

2014 – Banks still largely bare following scouring of terrestrial species, increasing risk of instability

2016 – Aquatic vegetation re - establishing near the waterline, providing habitat for native fish and bugs

2017 – Semi -aquatic vegetation species recolonising the river bank

2018 – Bank vegetation community re-established and helping to stabilise the river bank

Read about how adaptive management influenced these outcomes in more detail in the case study about restoring river banks in Part 4.

Other organisations are now regularly reporting on the environmental outcomes the CEWH is achieving. Links to just a few examples of these stories for wetlands and native fish, lampreys and birds are provided below.37

• Fishing World looks at native fish on the move through the careful delivery of environmental water which also meets the needs of irrigators and the environment.

• Since 2010, Bookmark Creek has received environmental water, allowing it to remain open and flowing. Releases of environmental water are timed to provide cues for the migration of various fish species, including lamprey , which travel from the sea up the river for spawning.

• Fintrest report on environmental water success tales in the Basin.

2. Socio-economic benefits of environmental watering

Supporting cultural values

The CEWH is partnering with representatives of Indigenous communities and Indigenous organisations to get environmental, as well as, cultural benefits from environmental water.38 Some of the stories so far include:

• Enhancing sites as nesting and breeding areas for wetland birds of cultural significance.

• Restoration and maintenance of vegetation with bush medicine, craft, ceremony artefacts and food sources.

• Vegetation outcomes, which can be linked to re-establishing traditional harvest activity of the site, to enable sharing of cultural knowledge, stories and experiences as a community.

• Establishing refuge for wildlife in a highly developed and modified landscape (farmland, irrigation, river regulation), including animals of historical and cultural importance.

37 See some more of the things others are saying about the environmental outcomes we are achieving: 1. https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/Home/Full_newsevents_listing/News_Events_Listing/170824-lamprey- fish-population-increasing 2. https://www.mdba.gov.au/media/mr/lower-darling-breeding-bonanza-biggest-20-years 3.http://www.awa.asn.au/AWA_MBRR/Publications/Latest_News/Flow_project_highlights_potential_for_Murra y-Darling_fish.aspx 4.http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story/4615679/environmental-flow-to-increase-fish-numbers 5.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-25/rare-wildlife-spotted-sa-river-murray-high-flows/8975344 6.https://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/story/4369802/birds-of-a-feather-flock-to-booligal/ 7.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-22/historic-water-agreement-brings-together-irrigators-and- environ/7346778 38 Read about one of our Indigenous partnerships: 1. http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2016-04-20/ngarrindjeri-partnership/7339714 2.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/environmental-water-wentworth-wetlands/7298350

• Supporting cultural management, ongoing protection and preservation of significant sites, including artefact, burial sites and occupation sites, connected to the belief in the continuing spiritual presence of ancestors in the landscape.

As more knowledge of traditional values becomes available, we believe there will be many more opportunities for the CEWH to undertake watering that has greater co-benefits for Traditional Owners.

Benefits for other water users

Environmental water is often delivered in response to natural triggers, such as naturally occurring flow events (in response to rainfall) to attain seasonally appropriate flow regimes. Given the Southern Connected Basin receives most of its rainfall from autumn to spring, the timing of environmental watering events is often different from the timing of irrigation deliveries (i.e. winter/spring versus summer). By delivering water early in the water year the CEWH can:

• at times reduce competition for channel capacity during periods of peak irrigation demand

• reduce water losses in the system under standard river operations, resulting in improvements in state water resource shares.

Trading environmental water

The trade of Commonwealth environmental water must be undertaken for environmental purposes but it can also provide a benefit to market participants. The CEWH has traded water in the Basin on four occasions. For example, in January 2014, 10 gigalitres of Commonwealth environmental water allocations were sold in the Gwydir catchment of northern NSW. Conditions for a sale of temporary water allocations in the Gwydir were favourable at the time because the needs of the environment had largely been met and there was strong demand for water from irrigators due to drier than normal conditions. This enabled some irrigators to access water to finish off their crops.

Water quality

Commonwealth environmental water has improved water quality throughout the Basin. In addition to supporting the Basin’s ecosystems, improved water quality also supports economic outcomes. For example, salinity impacts in the River Murray have real and measurable economic costs. Managing salinity is important for all water users and ensures that water is suitable for drinking, agriculture, recreation and the environment.

The long-term salinity target for the River Murray has been set at less than 800 EC (electrical conductivity units) for 95 per cent of the time, measured at the town of Morgan in South Australia. Commonwealth environmental water has helped export between 100,000 and 4,500,000 tonnes of salt each year since 2009.

Commonwealth environmental water delivered to date has contributed to these improved salinity outcomes along with salt interception schemes that assist in reducing salt levels in the rivers by intercepting very salty groundwater before it enters the river. There are also benefits for commercial enterprises from reducing salt from rivers in the Basin, including fishers and salt producers.

Benefits for recreational river users

Commonwealth environmental water is enhancing communities’ interactions with the Basin’s rivers. Many river users enjoy fishing and camping at their local river or swimming hole. Commonwealth environmental water supports recreational fishing by supporting the breeding, migration, condition and survival of native fish in the Basin. This increases the number of native fish, such as Murray cod and golden perch, which are important to many Basin communities. Environmental watering can improve the vegetation on surrounding riverbanks, providing overall amenity, promoting tourism and recreational activities.

Delivery of Commonwealth environmental water has also been timed to avoid disruption to important social events, such as fishing events in the Goulburn and Murray that occur around the opening of the Murray cod fishing season and require more stable water levels. Such adjustments have been made without compromising the environmental outcomes to be achieved and reflects the CEWH’s ‘good neighbour’ approach (see below).

PART 6: PARTNERSHIPS, ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS

• Environmental water is managed in partnership.

• Indigenous engagement continues to be a focus.

• How the community is involved.

• Our approach so far to engagement and building awareness.

1. We have many partners

Water resource management occurs in a complex operating environment across a range of jurisdictional responsibilities between Commonwealth, state and local government and industry. The Office does not manage Commonwealth environmental water in isolation and our water cannot be delivered without the cooperation of a broad range of partners across the Basin. The planning, delivery and monitoring of Commonwealth environmental water is done in collaboration with state government agencies, river operators, catchment management authorities, regional and local land managers, Traditional Owners, non-government organisations, irrigation operators and private landholders.

The CEWH also works with other Commonwealth agencies (including the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority) and Basin State governments to undertake our functions within the context of the broader Basin Plan reforms. The CEWH seeks to ensure environmental water management is considered and taken into account, as necessary, throughout the implementation of the Basin Plan.

Coordinating the work of the Office occurs in a range of different ways, scales and across vast areas. The CEWH has many partnership arrangements that are tailored so they are fit-for-purpose – recognising that what works in one place is not always the right solution in another. There is a continuing need to increase transparency about the roles and responsibilities in the Basin Plan among those involved in environmental water management, and to grow and expand the CEWH’s partnerships.

Some of our partnerships are formalised

The CEWH has formal agreements with a number of state government agencies (including the Victorian Environmental Water Holder, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (NSW OEH) and the South Australian Natural Resource Management Board), which include commitments about how we work together to coordinate the management of environmental water. Watering schedules are put together every year with these agencies, which set out the agreed arrangement for the use of Commonwealth environmental water in the upcoming year.

The Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s Southern Connected Basin Environmental Water Committee supports the coordination of the delivery of water in the Southern Connected Basin. The Committee brings together all relevant environmental water holders, managers and river operators to share

lessons learnt, and continue to improve and coordinate the planning and delivery of environmental water.

The CEWH also has formal partnerships with a range of other stakeholders to deliver environmental water. This includes Traditional Owner representative groups (see below for more information on Indigenous engagement), environmental organisations (such as Nature Foundation SA), wineries (Accolade Wines at Banrock Station), irrigation trusts (Renmark Irrigation Trust) and many private individuals. Read about watering we have done in partnership with the Renmark Irrigation Trust below.

Case Study: Tracking flo ws down the Great Darling Anabranch

Our partners

The CEWH has a formal arrangement with the NSW OEH, which has been a really successful partnership with a longstanding environmental water program. They help with annual planning and also provide the boots on the ground, managing sites, delivering water on our behalf and connecting the Office with the local landholders.

What we did and where

Located in south-west NSW, the Great Darling Anabranch is an ancient path of the Darling River. It flows intermittently and forms an important temporary connection between the northern and southern basins. In 2017, the CEWH and NSW OEH provided approximately 100 gigalitres of environmental water to a watering event in the Great Darling Anabranch. The purpose of the watering was to provide a flow from Lake Cawndilla to the River Murray to disperse golden perch and other native fish species that were likely to have become stranded in the lake without further significant inflows to the system. In addition, the watering event aimed to mobilise and transport salts and nutrients to the Lower Murray, maintain the condition of fringing plants and support waterbirds and frogs.

Key to the success of the watering action was the involvement of landholders along the length of the Anabranch who were engaged in the planning and monitoring of the event. Landholders were actively involved in monitoring the release of flows and provided regular updates on water levels, the progression of the flows, and environmental observations such as the response of frogs to the arrival of water. NSW OEH regularly corresponded with landholders and other stakeholders incorporating this information and using it to inform real-time management of the watering event.

The flow took around two and a half months to reach the River Murray and initial results indicate that golden perch and other native fish species dispersed from Lake Cawndilla to the River Murray. The environmental water flow to the Great Darling Anabranch resulted in other environmental outcomes being observed including supporting large abundances of waterbirds and growth of fringing plants.

Case Study: Working together to protect and restore floodplains in the Renmark Irrigation district

Our partners

The CEWH has formed a partnership with an irrigation water provider, the Renmark Irrigation Trust, in South Australia. The five year partnership enables the delivery of Commonwealth environmental water to wetland and floodplain sites in the Renmark area using the Trust’s extensive infrastructure during the irrigation off-season.

What we did and where

Environmental watering in the Renmark area is aiming to rehabilitate areas affected by salt from rising water tables and improve the health of vegetation, including restoring areas of black box and river red gums. The partnership offers economic benefits as well as environmental. For instance, delivery of environmental water helps flush the irrigation network reducing sediment build-up at the end of the irrigation drains and pipes. It is also fostering recreational and tourism benefits by providing healthy and vibrant public places for walking, cycling and visiting.

In addition to providing water, the CEWH has also provided the Trust with funding to undertake infrastructure works to facilitate the delivery of water to these wetlands.

While it is early days for the partnership, the initial results are encouraging. The infrastructure works have been completed, allowing environmental water to be delivered to the wetlands this year, providing benefit for the environment and local community.

The Renmark Irrigation Trust has just become the first irrigation scheme in the world to be certified for good water stewardship by the global Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS). The innovative partnership between the Trust and the Office supports which floodplain rehabilitation was instrumental in attaining the Gold level AWS International Water Stewardship Standard.

2. Indigenous engagement

The CEWH engages in a number of ways with Indigenous Nations in recognition of the cultural importance of the Basin to Indigenous people. This is of particular importance given the recent commitment by Basin Ministers to improve the inclusion of Aboriginal interests in water resource management and the incorporation of Aboriginal values in the Basin Plan implementation.

We work directly with Indigenous peoples from across the Basin including the Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority, the Tar-Ru Lands Board of Management, the Nari Nari people at Toogimbie Indigenous Protected Area and the Ngiyampaa Wayilwan people in the planning and delivery of Commonwealth environmental water.

The CEWH established a formal partnership agreement with the Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority in South Australiain November 2015. This first of its kind agreement includes engagement protocols and agreed processes for the Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority to put forward environmental watering proposals that achieve mutual benefits for wetlands in the lower River Murray region. Watering has yet to commence under this arrangement but discussions with the Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority are ongoing to progress the partnership.

The CEWH has been working with the Ngiyampaa-Wayilwan since 2016 to build stronger relationships based on goodwill and mutual respect to contribute to the management of Commonwealth environmental water in the Macquarie catchment. We have been working towards developing a Memorandum of Understanding that reflects how we will work together to share information, collaborate, and recognise cultural values in the planning and use of Commonwealth environmental water in Ngiyampaa Wayilwan country.

We worked collaboratively with the Nari Nari Tribal Council and the NSW OEH to deliver Commonwealth environmental water to Toogimbie Indigenous Protected Area since 2016. Watering is overseen by Nari Nari Rangers who make sure the environment is being cared for using established cultural protocols of the Nari Nari People as they apply to their traditional country.

Environmental water has also been delivered to the Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks system in Western NSW as part of a collaborative effort with the Tar-Ru Lands Board of Management. The CEWH has been helping to build the capacity of the community through this collaboration. This includes supporting the Maraura Barkindji Traditional Owners to monitor changes in ecological and cultural values from environmental water delivered to significant creeks and wetlands on the Tar-Ru Lands. This has facilitated knowledge exchange where Tar-Ru participants have shared their cultural knowledge with us and gained valuable ecological monitoring skills.

Commonwealth environmental water is used to achieve legislated environmental outcomes. However, in delivering environmental water to achieve these outcomes, the CEWH can and in fact is legally obligated to have “regard to Indigenous values”. To help meet this obligation, we appointed our first Aboriginal local engagement officer, who is based in Walgett, NSW. We also work closely with state government agencies, who in many instances have established relationships with local Indigenous communities and processes for their participation in the management of important cultural and environmental sites. We will be endeavouring to grow our engagement with Indigenous people in the management of Commonwealth environmental water.

Case Study: Collaborative partnerships in far south west NSW

Our partners

Commonwealth and NSW environmental water holders have partnered with the Murray Darling Wetlands Working Group Ltd (MDWWG) to deliver environmental water to wetlands in far south west NSW. The MDWWG is a non-profit community-based wetland management group. They play an important role in engaging with interested landholders and managing the on-ground delivery and monitoring of environmental water.

How we worked together

In 2016, a coordinated effort was undertaken to provide water to improve the health of wetlands on the Tar-Ru Lands. NSW National Parks and Wildlife is facilitating the hand back of Tar-Ru lands to Traditional Owners, the Maraura and Barkindji people. MDWWG worked with the representative group, the Tar-Ru Lands Board of Management to deliver the water. The CEWH also provided funding for local environmental consultants, Sunraysia Environmental, to train Traditional Owners in field monitoring techniques. This helped to build capacity locally by providing the opportunity for trainees of the Aboriginal Learning on Country Program to learn environmental monitoring methods for water quality testing, bird surveys, weed identification and vegetation assessments on country. The hands-on participation in environmental monitoring

resulted in an inspiring exchange of knowledge as Traditional Owners imparted cultural knowledge, while learning environmental monitoring techniques.

In 2017–18, MDWWG is delivering Commonwealth environmental water to nearby properties, Wingillie Station and Lucerne Day. The property is a not-for-profit private conservation reserve on an old sheep station, which is being transformed through the application of environmental water. The manager of the station has been working with a small cohort of volunteers to restore and re- license old irrigation infrastructure that was originally established in 1930, but is now being repurposed to deliver environmental water.

Traditional owners learning valuable skills

The MDWWG, as well as Traditional Owners from the Tar-Ru Lands, have been undertaking monitoring of the watering action and have seen positive a responsive from native vegetation, birds and frogs. As Ken observes, the return of water to property and the restoration of the local environment has been “bloody marvellous!”

Watch a drone video of Wingillie Station on the Department’s website that shows water flowing again to wetlands disconnected from the River Murray.

The Office has provided over $600,000 to the National Cultural Flows Research Project. The project is helping to build the capacity of Indigenous communities. It is identifying and describing Indigenous cultural water values, needs and flows, while working out how ecological and cultural values intersect to inform future environmental water management.

These examples are just part of what is an evolving set of collaborative relationships with Indigenous communities. The CEWH is engaging at the appropriate scale to deliver environmental and cultural outcomes with water. Although these types of partnerships are in their infancy and will require ongoing commitment over many years, they are important to help build an understanding of our mutual aims, maximising the outcomes that can be achieved together.

3. Getting others involved

The CEWH aims to build social licence through active engagement and participation, not just consultation. Commonwealth environmental water is delivered in partnership with state environmental water holders and managers, non-government organisations, their local delivery partners and river operators. We stay actively engaged with people in the community who contribute to bottom-up planning processes for Commonwealth and state environmental watering each year. This usually occurs through Committees and local forums, run by state governments, where communities can engage with the Office building long-term relationships. This approach to planning enables the CEWH to manage water in the national interest while harnessing local knowledge and experience.

Local communities

Local people are well placed to see the changes in their local environment and often have an understanding or knowledge that can date back generations. This wealth of knowledge and experience is important in informing environmental water use decisions. State government-led local engagement groups, such as environmental water advisory groups (EWAGs), provide a forum to get local input and access a range of people who are experienced in local water and land management

issues. We ensure there is no duplication with state government processes. For example, for most of NSW we attend established EWAGs but there was no group in the Edward-Wakool so we established the Edward-Wakool Environmental Water Reference Group. This allows us to have an ongoing discussion with local community members who are highly engaged and passionate about the health of their local river systems.

Case study: A template for community participation in environmental watering – the Macquarie Cudgegong Environmental Flows Reference Group

Involving the community

Environmental watering has been happening in the Macquarie since the 1980. This has provided a template for successful community participation in environmental water management for other regions across the basin. The Macquarie Cudgegong Environmental Flow Reference Group (EFRG) was established in 2000 to bring together a range of government and local stakeholder representatives to participate in the planning, management and monitoring of environmental watering.

The Macquarie catchment supports domestic water use, agriculture, tourism, recreation, mining and the cultural values and practice of local Traditional Owners. The catchment contains the Macquarie Marshes, which are one of the largest and most important wetlands in the Basin. Around 200,000 hectares of the Marshes have been listed as nationally important, with 19,000 hectares also listed as internationally significant under the Ramsar Convention. The Macquarie Marshes are a terminal wetland, except during wet periods.

Historically, the EFRG has focused on environmental water use within the Macquarie catchment. Stakeholders in the Macquarie are strong advocates for the use of environmental water in their catchment to support local significant assets

Photo: Junction of the lower Macquarie River and Barwon River during the 2017 connection flow.

Following a wet spring in 2016, there was an opportunity to pass water through the Macquarie Marshes to the Barwon-Darling River, so that young-of-year fish in the Barwon-Darling could help to re-build native fish populations in the Macquarie catchment.

This opportunity required support from the EFRG and an agreement with landholders in the lower Macquarie catchment not to pump the flow that would connect the two rivers.

Open and constructive communication between members of the EFRG, State and Commonwealth officials, and landholders enabled an agreement to be reached, with the majority of water allowed to pass through the lower Macquarie into the Barwon-Darling.

Monitoring during the flow showed that native charismatic species such as golden perch, and unexpected native species such as Hyrtl’s tandan, migrated from the Barwon-Darling into the lower Macquarie.

Photo: Juvenile golden perch found during connection flow event. Credit: Rodney Price, NSW DPI – Fisheries.

4. How do we engage?

Our community engagement activities are supported by a regular flow of information via a range of mechanisms including emails and phone calls, field trips, site visits, workshops, conferences, newsletters, media opportunities, twitter and the Office’s website. As touched on in other sections, the CEWH makes information on the ongoing management of Commonwealth environmental watering publicly available to support transparency and accountability. Information made public includes: • annual portfolio management plans

• all watering or trading decisions, including the purpose, the status of all current actions and the outcomes

• all monitoring reports as well as summarised outcome reports

• monthly updates on the Commonwealth environmental water holdings, including volumes of water available and delivered

• quarterly updates on trading intentions

• annual reports on:

° how Commonwealth environmental water has been managed (including with regard to water quality and salinity targets)

° the volume, timing and location of water delivery

° the volumes and location of water carried over

° how local communities have been engaged.

Local Engagement Officers

In July 2017, the CEWH renewed our commitment to local engagement with a decision to appoint six permanently employed officers across the Basin.39 The local engagement officers live and work in regional towns throughout the Basin. The full-time, permanent officers are located in Berri, Mildura, Wodonga, Wagga Wagga, Tamworth and Walgett. Their locations were an outcome of where we found individuals with extensive local knowledge and the right skills to link the Office to the community. They provide a local contact point for stakeholders wishing to discuss and be involved in environmental watering in their communities.

The six officers are skilled in building and managing relationships locally. Individually and collectively they have worked across different levels of government, with a diverse range of stakeholders, on local waterway management, natural resource management, environmental science, nature conservation, bushfire and flood recovery, irrigation and agriculture activities and Aboriginal cultural heritage management. The officers undertake regular on-ground engagement through activities, such as attending local forums where water management is of interest and developing relationships with influencers in the water management space. They often participate in grass roots activities, including organising school visits, attending local field days and engaging with interest groups like the recreational fishing community.

Read more about a day in the life of one of our officers Jason Wilson in the article below written in the context of our LTIM Project (from Warrego Flows – Issue 5, produced by Eco Logical Australia).

Top: Jason Wilson and Neal Foster (Northern LEOs), Bottom: Gary ‘Red’ Trindall, chair of Mungindi fishing club with Jason.

39 http://www.environment.gov.au/water/cewo/media-release/leos-appointed

The CEWH is always looking to improve the way the Office engages and how we can best get our stories out to local, Basin-wide and national audiences. In order for environmental watering to be more widely accepted and understood we need to find the best format to tell our stories and reach a range of audiences.

5. Our communication challenge

We recognise there is a need to more effectively:

• support a better understanding of how environmental water is used in the context of water resource management

• show the role of Commonwealth environmental water in achieving environmental outcomes

• communicate how our efforts support ecosystem services that benefit communities, the environment and the economy

• demonstrate the value of the Commonwealth environmental water holdings to the tax payer.

Our challenge is to consolidate communication, community engagement and outreach efforts to support the broadening of conversations around the use of environmental water and the inter- relationship between water and land management.

Appendix 1

RAMSAR CONVENTION AN D WETLANDS

Australia is a Contracting Party to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention). The aim of the Convention is to conserve Ramsar wetlands and promote the wise use of all other wetlands. Australia became a party to the Convention in 1974 as one of the early signatories, and listed the first Ramsar wetland under the Convention (the Cobourg Peninsula Ramsar site in the Northern Territory). Australia has 66 Ramsar wetlands listed under the Convention (see map below). 40

A key requirement under the Convention is for parties to ensure the effective management of listed wetlands. Site management is the responsibility of land owners – mainly states, territories and private owners but the Australian Government also manages a number of listed wetlands. Listed wetlands are protected under the EPBC Act as a matter of national environmental significance. Ramsar is directly relevant to the use and management of Basin water resources and are included as environmental assets in the Basin Plan with specific environmental objectives to be achieved.41 One element of the Basin Plan is supporting the maintenance of the ecological character of the Basin’s Ramsar Sites. There are 16 Ramsar sites within the Murray Darling Basin. It is the responsibility of site owners and managers to monitor and evaluate the environmental outcomes of management actions (including the application of environmental watering) to maintain the ecological character.

The majority of Basin Ramsar sites are owned and managed by state governments (QLD: Currawinya, NSW: Fivebough and Tuckerbil, Central Murray, Narran Lakes, Paroo, Victoria: Barmah, Hattah-Kulkyne, Gunbower, Kerang, Lake Albacutya, SA: Coorong), one site is privately owned by Banrock Station,

another three sites have a combination of government and private ownership (Riverland, Gwydir, Macquarie Marshes). One This is achieved through six monthly reporting by state and territory government officials at the Wetlands and Aquatic Ecosystems Sub Committee site, the Ginnini Flats Wetland located high in the catchment is (WAESC) of the National Water Reform Committee (NWRC) drawing on monitoring and condition assessments undertaken by the site managers. not affected by water resource management activities. Australia’s international obligations under the Ramsar Convention are managed by the Office. An Assistant Secretary of the Office is the current The Australian Government must be informed at the earliest Ramsar Administrative Authority. The Office chairs a national committee, the WAESC, comprising staff from the Commonwealth, state and possible time of any change, or likely change in the ecological territory agencies. character of a Ramsar wetland.

40 Note: The 66 th Ramsar site is not on the map provided. 41 Section 8.05(2) of the Basin Plan – an objective is to protect and restore a subset of all water dependent ecosystems of the Murray Darling Basin by ensuring that (a) declared Ramsar wetlands that depend on Basin water resources maintain their ecological character. Section 8.49 indicates that the ecological objectives to be considered in determining environmental watering requirements for environmental assets must be consistent with the criteria used to identify those assets which in the case of Ramsar sites, the ecological objectives must be directed towards maintaining the ecological character of the Ramsar wetland.