25 Gavin Cerini.Pdf 773.57 Kb
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
20/12/2012 03:20 PM The Secretary, Please find my submission below, with attachments. I would be happy to appear if the aspects I have covered so briefly elicit further interest. Gavin Cerini Environment and Natural Resources Committee [email protected] Submission to Enquiry into Rural Drainage in Victoria Gavin Cerini, Ballarat 3350 Tel/fax CONTENTS: Bio. Recommendations: Opening remarks: The Terms of Reference addressed Case Studies Bio: Diploma of Agriculture, Dookie, 1957. 1959 – 1993 Employed by Fisheries and Wildlife Department, State of Victoria, and its successor Departments. Participated in, or managed: Establishment of wildlife reserves on public land across Victoria. Management of up to 27 mainly wetland reserves in south‐western Victoria. Threatened species work, including: Protection of Shearwater and Penguin breeding colonies. Brolga (Grus rubicundus) nest site survey and new wetland creation. Koala relocation to new sites, and protection from road traffic. Eastern Barred Bandicoot recovery. 1986 – 2003 Fish and Wildlife Planner, Ballarat Region, CFL/NRE/DSE 1993 ‐ 1998 Environmental project consulting; wetlands and habitat restoration. Member of the LINCS Project committee, managing restoration of indigenous vegetation to urban creek reserves in Ballarat. 1995 –1998 Honorary Conservation Officer, Victorian Field and Game Association - Member of Executive. - Trained branch conservation officers. - Contributed to policy development, and campaign submissions. - Newsletter and quarterly journal contributions. 1999 – 2001 Conservation Officer, Ballarat Branch, Field and Game Australia. - Restoration of local wetlands. - Development of a wetland management database. - Contributed to municipal conservation strategy and implementation. 2000 – Member of Ballarat Environment Network, contributing to management of 50 reserves, and attempting to have the growth and development of Ballarat take the natural environment into account. 2009 – Member of Brolga Recovery Group, monitoring brolga nest sites, developed criteria for selection of sites for improvement/creation as nesting wetlands. 2011‐12 Conservation Officer, BirdLife Australia, Ballarat Branch. Recommendations: 1. That the intent of the 1992 proposed planning amendment to protect wetlands be included in any new or revised drainage legislation and/or regulations. 2. That any revised or new legislation does not impede wetland restoration. 3. That actions relating to wetlands in the Brolga Action Statement be implemented. 4. That Ballarat City be requested to revise its plans and to conserve Carngham Road Wetland. Opening remarks: My working association with wetlands began in December 1959 with my appointment to one of the first three Game Management Officer positions. My job in particular was to end wetland drainage in Victoria. I note with considerable regret that it has not been achieved; drainage of wetlands is still legal, and the State continues to assist wetland drainage with services and funding. The impact of 170 years of wetland drainage can be seen in the parlous status of Victoria`s Brolgas, the State`s largest waterbird. Refer to http://www.empken.com/wiki/index.php5?title=Brolga “The Brolga is listed as threatened on the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act (1988). Under this Act, an Action Statement for the recovery and future management of this species has been prepared. On the 2007 advisory list of threatened vertebrate fauna in Victoria, the Brolga is listed as vulnerable” Unfortunately funding of the Action Statement is sparse, and little progress has been made. The Terms of Reference addressed, in part, are: 1. The historical basis for the establishment and operation of former drainage schemes including management arrangements; No drainage scheme in Victoria has been established with retention, creation or enhancement of wetlands as mandatory actions. In my experience Strathdownie Drainage Trust retained wetlands only if they were on public land, by a direction of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission made after several wetlands on public land had been drained. In practice many important wetlands were drained for conversion to agricultural uses. 3. The benefits of rural drainage for both productive land and environment together with community expectations for rural drainage programs; Rural drainage has almost no benefit for the environment, in particular for wetlands. The exception is where drainage increases water flows to wetlands that would otherwise lack adequate water, and where the flows are not excessive to the point of over‐watering. (Wetlands require dry periods to prevent a decline in production). 4. The impacts of rural drainage, including on other land holders and the environment including waterways, wetlands, flora, fauna and water quality; The very negative impacts on wetlands have been more than adequately stated in numerous reports, particularly those published in support of the 1992 proposed State planning amendment to protect wetlands. The proposal was abandoned by the Kennett government after it took office in October 1992. 5. Options for improved rural drainage management across Victoria, including regulation, institutional and funding arrangements, operation, responsibility and maintenance on both public and private land; Provision should be made in any changes instituted to achieve `improved rural drainage management` for restoration of wetlands. In addition, the principal value of wetlands in a `drainage` sense is their flood detention capacity. Even drained wetlands detain floods, but minor works on the outlets of most wetlands would enable them to hold much more water. An example is the Mount Emu Creek catchment upstream from Skipton and the Lake Goldsmith Steam Rally site, both of which were flooded in 2011/12. Almost all wetlands in the catchment are drained, but improving their flood detention capacity would reduce flood peaks substantially. There are considerable barriers to wetland restoration. Very few drained wetlands have been restored to water. One recent and notable example is Lake Condah, drained finally in 1954 when it was not even part of the Condah Drainage District, overseen by the Local Government Department. Lake Condah was one of the many ibis breeding colony sites drained. Its part ‐restoration to water in 2009 resulted from a long and expensive campaign, initially by hunters and later by and on behalf of the local aboriginal community. I estimate that the cost of the necessary on‐ground works was far exceeded by the largely unrecorded costs over 45 years of inspections, letters, meetings, consultations, consultant`s fees, surveys, salaries, travel, reports, flights, ineffective ‘remedies’, etc. A history of Lake Condah is attached. Case studies 1. Mount Wallace Swamp. This large swamp was drained many years ago, and re‐drained in about 2003. The work was carried out through Corangamite Catchment Management Authority. No natural wetland remains. An attempt to compensate for loss of wetland involved excavating a number of dams along the main drain which are tiny in area compared with the original wetland, and of little value. A pair of brolgas attempted to nest in the area form about 2008 when they tried in the edge of a farm dam, without success. They nested somewhere in the area with success in 2011 when they reared two young. In 2012 they nested in the N‐W end of the drained swamp where water lay temporarily, but did not succeed. The pair evidently has no other viable nest site, and urgently require restoration to water of part of the former swamp sufficient to nest in. Large areas of Poa tussock grassland were drained, allowing the owners to destroy the Poa and crop the land. Poa areas retained in the swamp bed are significant but receive water only with rain; they now experience little standing water. One owner attempted to restore water to part of the swamp in early 2012 but was forced to remove the temporary drain blockage he had installed. 2. Carngham Road Wetland, Ballarat. Ballarat City Council has included this 13 hectare wetland in its South‐West Precinct Structure Plan as a future residential area, with 2.5 ha. of open space. (The locality is not yet “regional urban”, which the Enquiry is not addressing, but is rural with cattle grazing the wetland paddocks). This resulted from persistent denial by Council`s planners that a wetland exists there, and consultants reports on the Plan area that did not mention the wetland. The consultants visited the area exhaustively during the 1996 – 2010 drought, but pretended not to have noticed the wetland. Council planners had one consultant revisit in September 2012, after the drought broke, but have no written report from the consultant. Photographs of the wetland are attached. Several documents relating to this wetland are available. Attachments: Lake Condah history. Carngham Road Wetland photos. Gavin E Cerini. 19/12/12. CIMG7792.JPG CIMG7793.JPG CIMG7794.JPG WMCS Lake Condah .