DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 3 Measurement of Landscape Quality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 3 Measurement of Landscape Quality Mt Lofty Ranges Landscape Quality Project CHAPTER 3 MEASUREMENT OF LANDSCAPE QUALITY 3.1 COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE The basis of measuring landscape quality PARADIGMS lies in the science of psychophysics which was developed by Gustav Fechner (1801 – The challenge in measuring landscape 1887), an early German psychologist. quality is to appreciate its subjective nature Psychophysics measures the effect on the and to ensure that this is what is brain of stimuli from the senses – sight, measured. Many early attempts measured sound, taste, touch and smell. A vast everything in the landscape that was literature has developed in psychophysics. measurable – the height and steepness of landforms, the extent and nature of In the 1980s and 1990s, psychologists vegetative cover, water bodies, the land mainly in the US, turned their attention to uses, colours and a host of other attributes applying its methods to understanding how anticipating that through doing so, a humans comprehend landscape quality. measure of landscape quality would Researchers including Terry Daniel, emerge. It never did. Stephen and Rachel Kaplan, T.R. Herzog, Bruce Hull, Herbert Schroeder, Greg The reason is that as a subjective quality, Buhyoff, Paul Gobster, Philip Dearden, landscape quality can only be assessed Roger Urlich, and, in Australia, Allan via our affective capacity, our likes and Purcell, Richard Lamb and Ian Bishop dislikes, our aesthetic preferences, not via carried out numerous studies which our cognitive abilities which analyse and established a methodological framework logically comprehend the environment. and greatly enhanced understanding of The error was in confusing paradigms, human-landscape interaction. using the cognitive analytical approach to measure a subjective quality. The paranoia of analysts not to be subjective missed the 3.3 USE OF PHOTOGRAPHS point, it is possible to objectively measure subjective qualities. An issue which was investigated by many researchers was whether photographs Dictionaries reinforce the distinction could serve as an adequate surrogate for between the cognitive and the affective in in-field assessments of landscape quality. their definition of aesthetics as “things Research by Daniel and Boster, 1976; perceptible by the senses (i.e. affective) as Dunn, 1976; Shuttleworth, 1980; Trent, opposed to things thinkable or immaterial Neumann & Kvashny, 1987 and Stamps, (i.e. cognitive) (Shorter Oxford, 1973). 1990 established that the results of photographs could be comparable with Using an analogy from music, an field assessments. Applying meta-analysis individual’s liking for music does not derive to existing studies, Stamps (1990) found a from an analysis of the use of instruments, high correlation of 0.86 in the ratings of the number and range of notes, the photographs and on-site assessments. scoring for the orchestra, or a detailed analysis of the score. Rather it is Photographs provide significant advantage immediate and without analysis. The same in not having to transport large groups of can be said of our preferences for coffee, participants through the countryside. They chocolate, holiday destinations, even also enabled areas remote from each love… other to be assessed on a comparative basis which would not be possible through field assessment, and for the effects of 3.2 PSYCHOPHYSICS temporal landscape changes such as seasonal colour to be assessed. Finally, photographs enable the visual effects of Dr Andrew Lothian, Scenic Solutions Page 17 Mt Lofty Ranges Landscape Quality Project changes in the landscape such as new scene can otherwise appear as developments or changes in land use to be though it was taken from an aircraft; assessed using scenes with and without the change. The researchers identified a range of criteria that photographs should meet, and 3.4 COMMUNITY PREFERENCES I have extended these in my studies. The METHOD aim is that the photographs be standardised as far as possible so that the The method that the researchers differences are in the landscape quality, established has the following components: not the quality of the photograph. • Rating scale Use of a rating scale The photographs should meet the such as 1 (low) – 10 (high) by which following criteria: the landscape quality can be judged. The scale is a surrogate for landscape • Use 50 mm focal length (equivalent to quality and forces the participant to 35 mm in digital camera) in horizontal condense their assessment of the (landscape) format; use colour scene into a number. Experience of photographs - black & white may be thousands of participants in surveys more dramatic but loses the indicates that this is not difficult and dimension of colour; the results reflect closely their perception of landscape quality. • Not include people or animals as their Ratings on a 1 – 10 scale provide an inclusion enhances ratings; absolute measure of landscape quality at the interval scale which can be • Avoid photographic composition of a analysed statistically. Rankings (i.e. scene to frame a view or to lead the scene 1 is better than scene 2) only viewer into a scene; such composition compare one scene with another and enhances its appearance; are an ordinal measure which cannot be analysed statistically. • Aim for good lateral and foreground context to scenes and of typical • Survey instrument Use of a survey representative scenes, not unusual instrument – a form provided to (i.e. rare) scenes. However significant participants, or an on-line survey that features such as cliffs, waterfalls and they are invited to enter. water bodies may be included; • Participants Access to a large number • Avoid transitory effects of special of participants in the survey to achieve atmospheric lighting such as sunsets statistical validity. Based on a 5% or particularly vivid side lighting. Aim (0.05) margin of error and a for sunny cloud-free conditions to confidence interval of 95%, a sample standardise scenes against a blue of around 380 is required. sky. However this ideal may be sometimes difficult to achieve in some The technology that is now available localities; facilitates landscape surveys and was not available to the early researchers: • Extend scene to horizon and provide lateral and foreground context of • Digital cameras that allow large single landscape unit, avoid close-up numbers of photographs to be taken of confined views; the study area; typically 2 – 3,000 in a survey, thus providing a large data • Scenes from mountain tops of valleys base from which a sample may be and vistas below should include some drawn for the survey; foreground to provide context as the Dr Andrew Lothian, Scenic Solutions Page 18 Mt Lofty Ranges Landscape Quality Project • Digital manipulation of photographs through use of Photoshop® and similar • Placement of the survey on a website programs which enable features to be such as Survey Monkey® either on a removed from scenes, or proposed developments inserted for assessment; Independent variables Landscapes sampled Survey Analysis Applications and characteristics Statistical analysis of Applications of described Prepare & implement survey results and identifying knowledge involving relationships between gained including preferences and mapping of participants Dependent variable landscape components landscape quality Human preferences derived for landscapes Figure 3.1 Framework of landscape quality assessment restricted or open basis; invitations to 2. Classify the region’s landscape into participate are sent by email with the link landscape units of similar character. to the survey included, thus making it very convenient. The surveys can be entered 3. Select a set of 100 – 150 photographs to at the participant’s own work place or sample the landscape units. A survey of home and at their timing, thus not 150 scenes can be processed by most requiring attendance at say a university or participants very quickly, say 15 - 20 community centre to be shown the minutes. The brain is able to rapidly scenes. The on-line survey enables the discriminate the appropriate rating for a participant to complete it at their own scene (Herzog, 1984, 1985) and rapid pace. The survey instrument evaluation minimizes the likelihood of automatically re-randomises the scenes analysis and revision. The aim is to draw for each survey respondent. on the person’s affective judgement, not on their cognitive processes which • Statistical packages including Excel® involve analysing each scene. Around and SPSS® readily enable analysis of 20% of the survey comprises the results. benchmark scenes from outside the study area to provide a wider range of Figure 3.1 illustrates the framework for likely ratings; the range within the study measuring landscape quality through the area may extend only over 2 – 3 units of survey instrument, the dependent variable the 1 – 10 scale. (i.e. the rating of landscape quality) and the independent variables (significance of land 4. Prepare an Internet survey containing forms, land cover, water etc.), and analysing the scenes and instructions. The survey and applying the results. The method is includes randomisation of the scenes called the Community Preferences Method and automatically entering the ratings as it relies on members of the community into the data base. The survey includes expressing their landscape preferences basic demographic data (age, gender, rather than having these determined by education, birthplace) and also gauges some ‘expert’. their familiarity with the region and whether they reside
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Photography by John Hodgson Foreword By
    Editor in chief Christopher B. Daniels Foreword by Photography by John Hodgson Barbara Hardy Table of contents Foreword by Barbara Hardy 13 Preface and acknowledgements 14 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 35 Box 1: The watercycle Philip Roetman 38 Box 2: The four colours of freshwater Jennifer McKay 44 Box 3: Environmentally sustainable development (ESD) Jennifer McKay 46 Box 4: Sustainable development timeline Jennifer McKay 47 Box 5: Adelaide’s water supply timeline Thorsten Mosisch 48 CHAPTER 2 The variable climate 51 Elizabeth Curran, Christopher Wright, Darren Ray Box 6: Does Adelaide have a Mediterranean climate? Elizabeth Curran and Darren Ray 53 Box 7: The nature of flooding Robert Bourman 56 Box 8: Floods in the Adelaide region Chris Wright 61 Box 9: Significant droughts Elizabeth Curran 65 CHAPTER 3 Catchments and waterways 69 Robert P. Bourman, Nicholas Harvey, Simon Bryars Box 10: The biodiversity of Buckland Park Kate Smith 71 Box 11: Tulya Wodli Riparian Restoration Project Jock Conlon 77 Box 12: Challenges to environmental flows Peter Schultz 80 Box 13: The flood of 1931 David Jones 83 Box 14: Why conserve the Field River? Chris Daniels 87 CHAPTER 4 Aquifers and groundwater 91 Steve Barnett, Edward W. Banks, Andrew J. Love, Craig T. Simmons, Nabil Z. Gerges Box 15: Soil profiles and soil types in the Adelaide region Don Cameron 93 Box 16: Why do Adelaide houses crack in summer? Don Cameron 95 Box 17: Salt damp John Goldfinch 99 Box 18: Saltwater intrusion Ian Clark 101 CHAPTER 5 Biodiversity of the waterways 105 Christopher B. Daniels,
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Groundwater Recharge Estimates for the Catchments of the Western Mount Lofty Ranges Prescribed Water Resources Area
    TECHNICAL NOTE 2008/16 Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER RECHARGE ESTIMATES FOR THE CATCHMENTS OF THE WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY RANGES PRESCRIBED WATER RESOURCES AREA Graham Green and Dragana Zulfic November 2007 © Government of South Australia, through the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 2008 This work is Copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission obtained from the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Chief Executive, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001. Disclaimer The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. ISBN 978-1-921218-81-1 Preferred way to cite this publication Green G & Zulfic D, 2008, Summary of groundwater recharge estimates for the catchments of the Western
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Farm Dam Development on the Surface Water Resources of the South Para River Catchment
    DWLBC REPORT The Impact of Farm Dam Development on the Surface Water Resources of the South Para River Catchment 2003/19 The Impact of Farm Dam Development on the Surface Water Resources of the South Para River Catchment Kim Teoh Knowledge and Information Division Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation June 2006 Report DWLBC 2003/19 Knowledge and Information Division Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 25 Grenfell Street, Adelaide GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone National (08) 8463 6946 International +61 8 8463 6946 Fax National (08) 8463 6999 International +61 8 8463 6999 Website www.dwlbc.sa.gov.au Disclaimer Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. © Government of South Australia, through the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 2007 This work is Copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission obtained from the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Chief Executive, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001.
    [Show full text]
  • Groundwater Management Zone Allocation Status (November 2019)
    Western Mount Lofty Ranges - Groundwater Management Zone Allocation Status (November 2019) Number Groundwater Management Zone 1 Lower South Para River KANGAROO") ROSEWORTHY 2 Middle SouthPara River FLAT 3 Upper South Para River (Adelaidean) ") 4 Upper South ParaRiver (Kanmantoo) 5 Gould Creek SANDY 6 Little Para Reservoir GAWLER CREEK LYNDOCH 7 Lower Little Para River ") ") ") 8 Upper Little Para River EDEN 9 Mount Pleasant ANGLE VALLEY 10 Birdwood VALE ") ") 11 Hannaford Creek 12 Angas Creek 1 WILLIAMSTOWN 13 Millers Creek ") 14 Gumeracha 15 McCormick Creek SPRINGTON 4 ") 16 Footes Creek ELIZABETH 3 17 Kenton Valley ") 2 18 Cudlee Creek 6 19 Kangaroo Creek Reservoir 5 20 Kersbrook Creek MOUNT 9 21 Sixth Creek 7 KERSBROOK PLEASANT ") 22 Charleston Kanmantoo ") Inverbrackie Creek Kanmantoo 13 23 TEA TREE 11 24 Charleston Adelaidean GULLY 8 20 10 TUNGKILLO 25 Inverbrackie Creek Adelaidean ") GUMERACHA ") BIRDWOOD HOUGHTON ") ") 26 Mitchell Creek ") 14 16 27 Western Branch 28 Lenswood Creek 17 15 29 Upper Onkaparinga 19 12 30 Balhannah 18 ") MOUNT 31 Hahndorf ROSTREVOR TORRENS 32 Cox Creek ") LOBETHAL CHERRYVILLE ") 22 33 Aldgate Creek ") 24 34 Scott Creek ADELAIDE 27 35 Chandlers Hill ") 21 28 23 HARROGATE 36 Mount Bold Reservoir WOODSIDE ") URAIDLA ") 25 37 Biggs Flat ") 38 Echunga Creek ") INVERBRACKIE 39 Myponga Adelaidean 32 40 Myponga Sedimentary 29 ") 26 BRUKUNGA ") 41 Hindmarsh Fractured Rock BALHANNAH 42 Hindmarsh Tiers Sedimentary BLACKWOOD 30 ") HAHNDORF NAIRNE 43 Fleurieu Permian 33 ") ") 44 Southern Fleurieu North 31 45 Southern Fleurieu South MOUNT BARKER 34 37 ") Please note: 35 Allocation status category is based on information ECHUNGA CLARENDON ") WISTOW MORPHETT ") ") available November 2019 and is subject to change.
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Report, 1982-1999 Graham Carpenter, Andrew Black
    NOVEMBER 2003 93 BIRD REPORT, 1982-1999 GRAHAM CARPENTER, ANDREW BLACK, DAVID HARPER and PHILIPPAHORTON INTRODUCTION added, particularly details of specimens donated to and held by the South Australian Museum. For the nineteen years from 1963 to 1981, · Further details of these specimens are available periodic Bird Reports were collated and published from the Museum. in theSouth Australian Ornithologist(Glover et Priority for inclusion goes to reliable and al. 1964; Glover 1965-1975;Cox 1976a; N. Reid verifiable reports of birds rarely recorded for the 1976; J. Reid 1980; Bransbury 1984; note that state or region, namely those of birds recorded references for this section of the report appear on near or beyond their previously recognised range pp. 96-98). With increasing observations it be­ limits, unusual numbers and unusual seasonal came more difficult to do justice to all records occurrences, and breeding records. Note also that submitted to the South Australian Ornithological additional details, such as ecological data and Association. John Bransbury (1984) undertook field notes, may be available from the quarterly the demanding task to cover the five years 1977- SAOA Newsletters that are referred to by number 1981, a particularly active period when many of edition, or from the author of the record as SAOA members were engaged in compiling indicated by surnameand initial. records for the first Australian Bird Atlas The SAOA Newsletter Bird Notes and Bird (Blakers, Davies and Reilly 1984). Records for the period were collated and vetted The Bird Reports provided readers with a by Brian Glover until March 1984, Graham summary of interesting records for the year, thus Carpenter to March 1995 and David Harper to encouraging further records to confirm, extend or March 1999(SAOA 1982-1994 and 1994-1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Drinking Water Quality Report 2013-14
    SA Water Drinking Water Quality Report 2013-14 Government of South Australia 4 / A Message from our Chief Executive 5 / SA Health Statement 5 / Economic Regulation 6 / Safe Drinking Water Legislation 7 / The Adelaide Services Alliance 8 / Drinking Water Quality Management 13 / Our Water Supply Systems 13 / Our water supply sources 15 / Water treatment 20 / Country drinking water supply system sources and treatment 22 / Metropolitan Adelaide water treatment plant sources 23 / Metropolitan Adelaide water quality systems and treatment 24 / Drinking water supply systems and towns/suburbs supplied 27 / Managing our water supplies 29 / Water Quality 2013–14 29 / Catchments, land management and source water 33 / Water treatment and distribution 34 / Water quality monitoring and testing 35 / Drinking water quality and performance 37 / Customer satisfaction 38 / Incident management 40 / Research and Innovation 42 / Employee Awareness and Training 44 / Glossary of Water Quality Terminology 48 / 2013–14 Water Quality Data This report covers the period of 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014. Total water usage (raw water for treatment) 2013-14 213 926 ML Population served Highlights 1 173 000 in metropolitan Adelaide through 9 190 km of water mains Raw water sources Number of routine 432 000 in country areas through % of total water supplied water quality tests 17 582 km of water mains. carried out River Murray: 36% 295 519 (total) Drinking water quality and performance Surface water: 30% 49 529 (metropolitan Adelaide) Seawater: 28% 43 862 of the routine 245 990 samples collected from our drinking Groundwater: 6% (country) water supplies throughout South Australia were used to determine health-related compliance.
    [Show full text]
  • ACWS Technical Report No.3 Prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee, July 2005
    Stage 2 Research Program 2003 - 2005 Technical Report No. 3 July 2005 Audit of contemporary and historical quality and quantity data of stormwater discharging into the marine environment, and field work programme Audit of contemporary and historical quality and quantity data of stormwater discharging into the marine environment, and field work programme Authors Jeremy Wilkinson, John Hutson, Erick Bestland and Howard Fallowfield Flinders University of South Australia GPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001 Copyright © 2005 South Australian Environment Protection Authority This document may be reproduced in whole or in part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority. Disclaimer This report has been prepared by consultants for the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and the views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the EPA. The EPA cannot guarantee the accuracy of the report, and does not accept liability for any loss or damage incurred as a result of relying on its accuracy. ISBN 1 876562 86 2 July 2005 Reference This report can be cited as: Wilkinson, J., Hutson, J., Bestland, E. and H. Fallowfield. (2005). “Audit of contemporary and historical quality and quantity data of stormwater discharging into the marine environment, and field work programme”. ACWS Technical Report No.3 prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee, July 2005. Department of Environmental Health, Flinders University of South Australia. Acknowledgement This report is a product of the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Historical Stormwater Flows in the Adelaide Metropolitan Area
    Stage 2 Research Program 2003 - 2005 Technical Report No. 10 September 2005 Reconstruction of Historical Stormwater Flows in the Adelaide Metropolitan Area Reconstruction of Historical Stormwater Flows in the Adelaide Metropolitan Area Author Jeremy Wilkinson Department of Environmental Health Flinders University of SA GPO Box 2100 Adelaide SA 5001 Copyright © 2005 South Australian Environment Protection Authority This document may be reproduced in whole or in part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority. Disclaimer This report has been prepared by consultants for the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and the views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the EPA. The EPA cannot guarantee the accuracy of the report, and does not accept liability for any loss or damage incurred as a result of relying on its accuracy. ISBN 1 876562 94 3 September 2005 Reference This report can be cited as: Wilkinson, J. (2005). “Reconstruction of historical stormwater flows in the Adelaide metropolitan area.” ACWS Technical Report No. 10 prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee, September 2005. Department of Environmental Health, Flinders University of SA Acknowledgement This report is a product of the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study. In preparing this report, the authors acknowledge the financial and other support provided by the ACWS Steering Committee including the South Australian Environment Protection Authority, SA Water Corporation, the Torrens Patawalonga and Onkaparinga Catchment Water Management Boards, Department for Transport Energy and Infrastructure, Mobil Refining Australia Pty Ltd, TRUenergy, Coast Protection Board and PIRSA.
    [Show full text]
  • Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions a Multi-Disciplinary and Cross-Country Perspective Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions Kurt Schwabe • José Albiac Jeffery D
    Kurt Schwabe · José Albiac Jeffery D. Connor · Rashid M. Hassan Liliana Meza González Editors Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions A Multi-Disciplinary and Cross-Country Perspective Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions Kurt Schwabe • José Albiac Jeffery D. Connor • Rashid M. Hassan Liliana Meza González Editors Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions A Multi-Disciplinary and Cross-Country Perspective 123 Editors Kurt Schwabe Rashid M. Hassan Department of Environmental Sciences Department of Agricultural Economics University of California Extension and Rural Development Riverside, CA Faculty of Agricultural and USA Natural Sciences Centre for Environmental Economics and José Albiac Policy Analysis in Africa (CEEPA) Department of Agricultural Economics University of Pretoria Agrifood Research and Technology Centre Pretoria (CITA-DGA) South Africa Zaragoza Spain Liliana Meza González Department of Economics Jeffery D. Connor Ibero-American University CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems Mexico City, Distrito Federal Glen Osmond, SA Mexico Australia ISBN 978-94-007-6635-8 ISBN 978-94-007-6636-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-6636-5 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London Library of Congress Control Number: 2013940749 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013; Chapter 24: Ó Australian Government This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
    [Show full text]
  • Insert Cover Here
    DRAFT WATER ALLOCATION PLAN Western Mount Lofty Ranges 2010 Western Mount Lofty Ranges Draft Water Allocation Plan Draft Water Allocation Plan Western Mount Lofty Ranges Prepared by Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board October 2010 2 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board DISCLAIMER: The Government of South Australia, its Employees and servants do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of use of the information contained herein as to its correctness, accuracy, currency or otherwise. The Government of South Australia, its employees and servants expressly disclaim all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice contained herein. © Government of South Australia 2010. This work is Copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission obtained from the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the General Manager, Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board, 205 Greenhill Road, Eastwood, SA 5063. Produced By: Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board Maps produced by: Department for Water Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 Source: Department for Water Date: October 2010 Western Mount Lofty Ranges Draft Water Allocation Plan 3 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drinking Water Quality Report
    SA Water Drinking Water Quality Report 2015-16 A MESSAGE FROM OUR CHIEF EXECUTIVE 2 SA HEALTH STATEMENT 3 ECONOMIC REGULATION 3 SAFE DRINKING WATER LEGISLATION 4 THE ADELAIDE SERVICES ALLIANCE 5 DRINKING WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT 6 OUR WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS 10 Our Water Supply Sources Bringing Customers Improved Services Through New Technology Water Treatment Country Drinking Water Supply System Sources and Treatment Metropolitan Adelaide Water Treatment Plant Sources Metropolitan Adelaide Water Quality Systems and Treatment Drinking Water Supply Systems and Towns/Suburbs Supplied Managing Our Water Supplies WATER QUALITY 2015–16 29 Catchment Management Reservoirs and the River Murray Water Quality Monitoring and Testing Drinking Water Quality and Performance Customer Participation and Strategy The Evolution of the Right Dose Incident Management RESEARCH AND INNOVATION SERVICES 39 GLOSSARY OF WATER QUALITY TERMINOLOGY 41 2015–16 WATER QUALITY DATA 45 ii SA WATER DRiNKiNG QUALiTY WATER REPORT 2015-16 2015-16 HIGHLIGHTS RAW WATER SOURCES NUMBER OF ROUTINE ESTIMATED POPULATION % of total water supplied WATER QUALITY TEST SERVED River Murray: 83.1% ANALYTES CARRIED OUT 1,194,000 in metropolitan Adelaide Surface water: 8.0% 357,387 (total) through 9,266 km of water mains. Seawater: 3.4% 85,017 (metropolitan Adelaide) 490,000 in regional areas through Groundwater: 5.5% 272,370 (regional) 17,633 km of water mains. SAFE DRINKING TOTAL NUMBER OF DRINKING WATER WATER ACT ROUTINE WATER QUALITY AND We successfully completed the second QUALITY TEST ANALYTES PERFORMANCE round of yearly audits and inspections FOR HEALTH RELATED and met all legislative requirements. 42,355 of the routine samples PERFORMANCE collected from our drinking water INCIDENT MANAGEMENT 42,355 (total) supplies throughout South Australia 12,789 (metropolitan Adelaide) Incident response index exceeded the were used to determine health-related 29,566 (regional) 85% target by 8%, achieving 93%.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Allocation Plan Western Mount Lofty Ranges
    Water Allocation Plan WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY RANGES Water Allocation Plan Allocation Water WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY R ANGES 92356 WMLR Water Allocation Plan COVER FIN PRINT.indd 1 9/10/13 9:07 AM Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au Copyright Owner: Crown in right of the State of South Australia 2013 © Government of South Australia 2013 Produced by: Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board Maps produced by: Department for Water (now Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources) Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994 Source: Department for Water (now DEWNR) 92356 WMLR Water Allocation Plan COVER FIN PRINT.indd 2 9/10/13 9:07 AM Water Allocation Plan WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY RANGES Western Mount Lofty Ranges Water Allocation Plan | 3 Contents 1. Introduction 8 3.3. Northern Adelaide Plains PWA 63 1.1. The Prescribed Area 8 3.4. Barossa PWRA 65 1.1.1. Western Mount Lofty Ranges Prescribed 8 3.5. Marne Saunders PWRA 65 Water Resources Area 3.6. Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges PWRA 65 1.1.2. Little Para Proclaimed Watercourse 8 3.7. River Murray Prescribed Watercourse 66 1.2. McLaren Vale Prescribed Wells Area 8 4. Assessment of demand on 67 1.3. Water allocation planning 11 water resources 1.3.1. Water licences and allocations 11 4.1. Needs of water users 67 1.3.2. Existing users 11 4.2. Demand 67 1.3.3. New use 11 4.2.1. Historical demand 67 1.4.
    [Show full text]