Department of Agriculture and Food Department of Environment and Conservation Department of Water Salinity Investment Framework Phase II Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series REPORT NO. 34 DECEMBER 2006 Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series Salinity Investment Framework Phase II SLUI 34 SALINITY INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK PHASE II by T Sparks1, R George2, K Wallace3, D Pannell4, D Burnside5 and L Stelfox1 Department of Water1, Department of Agriculture and Food2, Department of Environment and Conservation3, University of Western Australia4 and URS5 SALINITY AND LAND USE IMPACTS SERIES REPORT NO. SLUI 34 DECEMBER 2006 i Salinity Investment Framework Phase II SLUI 34 Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series Acknowledgments Many people contributed to the investigations described in this report and to the preparation of the document. These people came from the State Natural Resource Management (NRM) Council, the Departments of Agriculture and Food, Department of Environment and Conservation, Department of Water, the Avon Catchment Council, the University of Western Australia, the Conservation Council of Western Australia, and consulting companies in NRM. The authors thank them and their organisations for their contributions, advice and assistance. The authors acknowledge funding for the project from the Western Australian and Australian Governments through the National Action Plan on Salinity and Water Quality. For more information contact: NRM Senior Officers Group Locked Bag 4 BENTLEY Delivery Centre WA 6983 Telephone (08) 9368 3166 Facsimile (08) 9474 3196 Recommended reference The recommended reference for this publication is: Sparks, T, George, R, Wallace, K, Pannell, D, Burnside, D & Stelfox, L 2006, Salinity Investment Framework Phase II, Western Australia Department of Water, Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series, Report No. SLUI 34, 86p. ISBN 1-92084-983-1 (Print) ISSN 1447-7394 December 2006 Cover photograph: Range of assets Montage by Tim Sparks ii Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series Salinity Investment Framework Phase II SLUI 34 Foreword This report was prepared with the State Salinity Investment Framework Steering Committee on behalf of the Natural Resource Management Council of Western Australia. This is the second report documenting the work in developing a framework for the investment of public funds in salinity management. The report is not Government policy but aims to promote debate on how we manage the State’s natural resources, especially those at risk from salinity. The first report (Department of Environment 2003), described processes for selecting a list of assets of highest value to the State, and which face the highest level threats from salinity pressures. These so-called ‘Tier 1’ assets were developed for four domains: agricultural land, rural infrastructure, biodiversity and water resources. The social assets essential for addressing salinity threats were also identified. This study is based on a range of assumptions about the treatments that could be used in different situations, and about their costs and benefits. The analysis was done on a ‘desktop’ basis, with varying methodologies for the agricultural land, rural infrastructure, biodiversity and water resource assets. It was an ambitious analysis with feasibility assessments generated by experts from several government agencies and consultancies. The findings presented are preliminary, but will be useful in helping to set priorities for further investigations. The information on the suggested interventions will be used to provide a preliminary assessment of what might be needed to address the salinity threat to the assets. The report has two broad dimensions: the Salinity Investment Framework methodology, and the results of its application at the state level. The report demonstrates the value of the overall framework approach, and the need for a systematic and outcome-focused procedure for selecting salinity investments. It highlights that the feasibility of achieving salinity management goals varies widely between individual assets in each of the domains, and between the domains themselves. The total cost of direct intervention estimated across all 48 assets in this investigation is large — $950 million over 30 years. Since public expenditure of this magnitude seems unlikely to occur in Western Australia, it is important that there is further investment in industry development to address the salinity threats while at the same time yielding economic returns. Only by that strategy will we be able to extend the range of assets adequately protected beyond a short list of the most significant. This report provides fundamental concepts, methods and important information for governments and regional natural resource management bodies to decide how limited public funds can best be used to manage salinity. Some of the information is challenging, but nevertheless needs to be understood and recognised as we together develop achievable strategies and actions over the coming years. Finally, it is emphasised that priorities for action and the decision methods used to generate them must constantly be adjusted in the light of new knowledge and techniques. The information and ideas presented here are a milestone in a journey, not the endpoint. John Ruprecht on behalf of NRM Senior Officers Group December 2006 iii Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series Salinity Investment Framework Phase II SLUI 34 Contents Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Principles in salinity investment planning ................................................................6 1.2 Salinity Investment Framework Phase I ..................................................................7 1.2.1 Summary of the work completed in Phase I of SIF.....................................7 1.3 Salinity Investment Framework Phase II .................................................................8 1.3.1 Specific tasks for Phase II ..........................................................................9 1.3.2 Project management in Phase II ................................................................9 1.4 This report.............................................................................................................10 2 Assessing the feasibility of asset protection — the approach ............................. 11 2.1 Tier 1 assets for feasibility assessment.................................................................11 2.2 Selecting goals for feasibility assessment.............................................................12 2.3 Identifying the biophysical threats .........................................................................12 2.4 Assessing the technical requirements and costs of achieving the goal.................15 3 Results................................................................................................................. 16 3.1 Biodiversity assets ................................................................................................16 3.1.1 Introduction...............................................................................................16 3.1.2 Achieving the goal — recharge or discharge management ......................17 3.1.3 The technical feasibility and economic cost of conserving biodiversity in the assets .................................................................................................17 3.1.4 Categorising the assets ............................................................................20 3.1.5 Benefits of intervention for neighbouring agricultural land........................22 3.1.6 Interpreting the results..............................................................................22 3.1.7 A second assessment ..............................................................................24 3.1.8 Provisional analysis, conclusions and recommendations.........................25 3.2 Water resource assets ..........................................................................................26 3.2.1 Introduction...............................................................................................26 3.2.2 Collie Water Resource Recovery Catchment ...........................................26 3.2.3 Denmark Water Resource Recovery Catchment......................................28 3.3 Rural town assets..................................................................................................29 3.3.1 Introduction...............................................................................................29 3.3.2 The nature of townsite salinity ..................................................................30 3.3.3 Options in managing townsite salinity.......................................................31 v Salinity Investment Framework Phase II SLUI 34 Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series 3.3.4 The costs and benefits of managing salinity in 16 towns..........................31 3.3.5 Categorising the towns.............................................................................33 3.3.6 Recommendations for all towns ...............................................................35 3.4 Roads and railways...............................................................................................35 3.4.1 Roads .......................................................................................................35