INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ON ADDRESSING WATER OVERALLOCATION AND ACHIEVING ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES IN THE MURRAY-DARLING BASIN Between the Commonwealth of Australia and the Governments of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and the Australian Capital Territory PREAMBLE 1. The Parties agree to implement this Agreement in recognition of the need to address overallocation of water resources and achieve environmental objectives in the Murray- Darling Basin (MDB). 2. In August 2003, the Parties to this Agreement agreed to provide new funding of $500 million over five years to address water overallocation in the MDB, comprising the following contributions; Commonwealth Government $200 million, New South Wales $115 million, Victoria $115 million, South Australia $65 million and the Australian Capital Territory $5 million. 3. This Agreement establishes arrangements for the recovery and management of water to support the decision by the MDB Ministerial Council of 14 November 2003 to implement a first step to address the declining health of the River Murray system (the Living Murray First Step decision), and to address other water overallocation issues in the MDB. 4. The Murray-Darling Basin Agreement (1992) and the relevant legislation enacted by each of the Parties to support the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement (1992) and joined by the Australian Capital Territory through a Memorandum of Understanding dated 27 March 1998 provide the statutory framework within which the Parties will work to achieve the specific objectives of this Agreement. 5. The Parties agree to implement this Agreement consistent with the National Water Initiative Intergovernmental Agreement and its objective of a nationally compatible system of managing surface and groundwater resources for rural and urban use that optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes. 6. Implementation of this Agreement will be dependent upon agreement by the Parties to the National Water Initiative Intergovernmental Agreement. 7. This Agreement acknowledges the water recovery activities of the Snowy Joint Government Enterprise established in accordance with the Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed (2002) and other, State and Territory based, water recovery bodies. The Parties agree to undertake their responsibilities under these various initiatives so as to give effect to integrated water resource management outcomes. 8. Other natural resource management initiatives subject to separate agreements by the Parties, particularly the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality and the Natural Heritage Trust, play an important and complementary role in improving the sustainable management of water in the MDB. Continued implementation of the National Water Quality Management Strategy will also complement the outcomes of this Agreement. The Parties agree to implement these initiatives in a manner which facilitates the achievement of their common objectives.
1 COMMENCEMENT AND TERMINATION 9. The provisions of this Agreement will commence for each Party as it becomes a signatory to both this Agreement and the National Water Initiative Intergovernmental Agreement. 10. The funding arrangements under this Agreement will terminate five years from commencement, or on any later date the Parties agree in writing. Other elements of this Agreement, including environmental water management arrangements, auditing, monitoring and reporting, will continue beyond termination of the funding arrangements, until such time as agreed by the Parties.
INTERPRETATION 11. In this Agreement, words and phrases have the same meaning as in the National Water Initiative Intergovernmental Agreement, the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement (1992) and the Murray-Darling Basin Act (1993).
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 12. Responsibility for overseeing implementation of this Agreement lies with the MDB Ministerial Council. 13. The MDB Ministerial Council will develop and agree a Business Plan for implementation of the Agreement within three months of commencement. i) The Business Plan will: (a) describe how the actions and milestones agreed in the Agreement are to be achieved, including milestones and water recovery targets; (b) include agreed indicative volumetric targets for each jurisdiction; (c) include agreed indicative financial commitments for each jurisdiction; and (d) detail the activities outlined in Clauses 72 to 77 of this Agreement. 14. The Parties are jointly and severally responsible for implementing this Agreement and accountable for the achievement of its objectives. 15. The Parties are responsible for ensuring there is adequate engagement of relevant stakeholders in the implementation of this Agreement.
OBJECTIVES 16. The objectives of this Agreement include: i) to establish a framework for implementation of the Parties’ commitment to invest $500 million to address water overallocation in the MDB; ii) to implement arrangements for cost effective, permanent, recovery of water to achieve the agreed environmental objectives of the Living Murray First Step decision (refer Clauses 3 and 17), or other such objectives as may be agreed by the Parties; iii) to provide water on an on-going basis to meet agreed environmental objectives in the MDB; and
2 iv) to improve management of environmental water in the MDB. 17. The priority for investment under this Agreement is the recovery of water to implement the Living Murray First Step decision in regard to achievement of specific environmental objectives and outcomes for six significant ecological assets; Barmah- Millewa Forest, Gunbower and Koondrook-Perricoota Forests, Hattah Lakes, Chowilla floodplain (including Lindsay-Wallpolla), the Murray Mouth, Coorong and Lower Lakes, and the River Murray Channel, through recovered water (refer Clause 21) being built up over a period of five years to an estimated requirement of an average 500 GL/year. 18. Any measures to address water overallocation or other environmental objectives in other areas of the Basin under this Agreement must be agreed by all Parties to this Agreement. 19. Water recovered under this Agreement will be held permanently within the water allocation and access entitlement frameworks of the Parties with the security, reliability and access characteristics necessary to achieve the environmental outcomes agreed under the Living Murray First Step decision or other such objectives as may be agreed by the Parties.
ELIGIBLE MEASURES 20. Measures eligible for accreditation against funding commitments under this Agreement (eligible measures) will recover or manage water to meet the environmental water needs of the significant ecological assets identified under the Living Murray First Step decision (refer Clause 17). Other measures will not be considered eligible under this Agreement unless agreed by all Parties. 21. Funding under this Agreement shall be for new eligible measures for the recovery of water agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council as meeting the purpose of the COAG funding commitment of 29 August 2003. 22. The obligations of the relevant Parties under the Snowy Joint Government Enterprise and the Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed are additional to this Agreement and are not included within its scope. 23. Water recovery proposals which may be considered eligible for accreditation against funding commitments under this Agreement may include: i) investment in water infrastructure, whether on or off farm; ii) purchase of water on the market, by tender or by other market-based mechanisms; iii) investment in infrastructure and behavioural change to increase efficiency and reduce consumption in urban areas; iv) regulatory measures as part of a broader package of proposals; and v) any other such measures as may be agreed by all Parties to this Agreement.
REGISTER OF PROPOSALS AND ELIGIBLE MEASURES 24. A central register of measures proposed for accreditation against funding commitments under this Agreement will be maintained by the MDB Ministerial Council and be available to all Parties.
3 25. The register will have two parts: i) proposed measures for further development and subsequent assessment against eligibility criteria (developmental register); and ii) measures approved for accreditation against funding commitments under this Agreement (eligible measures). 26. Only proposals on the register of eligible measures will be accredited against funding commitments under this Agreement. 27. Any of the Parties and other interested persons may nominate a proposal for inclusion on the register. 28. A proposed measure nominated to the register may comprise a number of identifiable sub-components, where such an aggregation is necessary to the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposal. Such a proposal will be assessed as a single measure and may not be disaggregated except at the discretion of the nominating Party. 29. Any proposed measure nominated to the register will include the means by which the recovered water will be permanently secured through statutory instruments for the objectives of this Agreement, and any terms which will apply to the use of the water.
ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY 30. The MDB Ministerial Council will assess a proposed measure for its: i) eligibility for listing as an eligible measure on the register; and ii) accreditation of recovered water against funding commitments. 31. Parties and other interested persons nominating proposed measures will ensure that proposals have been adequately investigated to determine their probable feasibility against the assessment criteria, and will make all relevant information available to the assessment process. 32. The primary criteria for accreditation of an eligible measure will be: i) the degree to which the characteristics of the recovered water will fulfil the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan to be developed under Clause 58, or any other environmental objectives which may be agreed; and ii) the cost effectiveness of the proposed measure, including initial cost per unit of water, and ongoing costs arising from the management, storage or delivery of the water to achieve the agreed environmental objectives. 33. Other matters which may be taken into account in assessing proposals for further development or accreditation for funding include social and economic impacts, salinity and water quality outcomes, additional environmental benefits, and third-party impacts. 34. The MDB Ministerial Council will establish assessment criteria within three months of commencement of this Agreement, based on Clauses 32 and 33. 35. Proposed measures may be accepted onto the developmental register (refer Clause 25(i)) if they demonstrate sufficient likelihood of meeting the primary criteria (refer Clause 32) to warrant further investigation.
4 36. In recognition of the need to expeditiously identify eligible measures from the date of commencement of the Agreement, the Parties agree that where, in the first three months from commencement of this Agreement, a proposal: i) recovers new water that meets the objectives of this Agreement (refer Clause 16); ii) demonstrates that the environmental water is to be managed under the Basin Environmental Watering Plan (refer clause 58); iii) demonstrates that the environmental water is to be given statutory recognition (refer Clause 29); iv) demonstrates that the environmental water is accounted for on registers (refer Clause 55) and is confirmed by subsequent auditing provided for in this Agreement (refer Clause 78); v) acquires the water at a price not exceeding $1,000 per megalitre of Long- Term Diversion Cap equivalent water; and vi) at the time it is registered, could not be substituted by any other proposal available at the time at the same or lesser cost; then the proposal would be deemed to be an accredited measure for the purposes of this Agreement and for the crediting of the volume of water recovered and the value thereof. New water, in order to be defined on a common basis, is to be defined in terms of Long- Term Diversion Cap equivalent volumes. 37. Eligible measures for recovery of water through market mechanisms, regulatory measures, or changes to river or wetland management will be credited at a price agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council which is based on the estimated market price for water access entitlements of similar characteristics. 38. Eligible measures for recovery of water through infrastructure investment will be credited at a price agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council which will not exceed an agreed multiple of the estimated market price for water access entitlements of similar characteristics, noting that the cost of the measure beyond the credited water price will be met by the relevant Party or their proposal partners from sources other than those covered by this Agreement. 39. Crediting amounts for all eligible measures in Clauses 37 and 38 above will be decided by the MDB Ministerial Council subject to agreed criteria and rules to be developed by the Council within three months of commencement of this Agreement. 40. Parties agree to recognise, in the development of the criteria and rules in Clause 39 above, the following values associated with each proposal: i) the average cost per megalitre of water recovered by the proposal; ii) the financial credit to be acquitted against each Party’s commitment upon successful implementation of the proposal; and iii) the cost per megalitre of recovered water that each investing Party is prepared to commit in light of the above two values.
5 INVESTING IN ELIGIBLE MEASURES 41. All Parties to this Agreement will have an equal first call opportunity to invest in any proposal on the register of eligible measures up to the proportion of their funding commitment to the $500 million. 42. The jurisdiction in which the water recovery measure is to be implemented will have first call on any share not taken up by another jurisdiction and at their discretion may offer any additional shares to other investing parties. 43. The relevant jurisdiction for any proposed measure must agree to the measure for it to proceed in their jurisdiction. 44. Other interested persons not party to this Agreement may fund or implement a proposal on the register of eligible measures at the discretion of the Parties, provided that their participation promotes the objectives of this Agreement. 45. Funding contributions will be separately administered by each Party to this Agreement, but will be transparently accounted for at the Basin level through a financial register maintained by the MDB Ministerial Council. Financial accounting arrangements will recognise both joint and individual proposals.
WATER RECOVERY AND INVESTMENT TARGETS 46. Targets will be established for investment and water recovery under this Agreement which will demonstrate the commitment of the Parties to an early roll-out of implementation, establish transparent measures of progress, and ensure that effort and impacts are shared equitably between jurisdictions. 47. Subject to the primary eligibility criteria under Clause 32, indicative annual investment targets will be established for expenditure of the $500 million commitment over five years and reviewed as required. Parties will contribute to the achievement of the indicative annual targets in proportion to their share of the overall funding commitment. 48. Three year indicative targets will be set for the amount of water to be recovered within each jurisdiction, recognising the differing opportunities within each, their relative share of water under the MDB long-term diversion caps established under Schedule F of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement (the Long-Term Diversion Cap), and the watering regime required under the Basin Environmental Watering Plan (refer Clause 58). 49. Indicative water recovery targets will be described in a manner, to be settled by the MDB Ministerial Council, which reflects the differing reliability and security characteristics of recovered water, for example conversion to a common measure such as MDB Long-Term Diversion Cap equivalent volumes or description of the required product mix. Where recovered water is outside the current Long-Term Diversion Cap arrangements, the MDB Ministerial Council will agree the basis, if any, for crediting against volumetric targets. 50. Progress against the three year indicative water recovery targets will be reviewed annually, including a comprehensive assessment of progress towards meeting the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan and an evaluation of remaining investment opportunities. 51. Indicative targets for water recovery and investment shall be agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council within three months of commencement.
6
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RECOVERED WATER 52. Water recovered under this Agreement will be clearly assigned in perpetuity for the purposes of this Agreement in licences and associated water accounts, as water access entitlements, or in water sharing plans, within the jurisdictions in which it is sourced, and within the jurisdictions in which it is received and managed. 53. Where recovered water is currently within the MDB Long-Term Diversion Cap, the Cap will be amended as soon as reasonably practicable to reflect its recovery for environmental purposes. 54. Parties will be bound in the use of the recovered water by the terms and commitments which accompanied the proposed measure (Clause 29), and such terms and commitments may only be amended by agreement of the MDB Ministerial Council. 55. Recovered water will be accounted for on registers to be maintained in the State or Territory where the water is sourced, and at an aggregated Basin-wide level. Such a register shall include the origin, security, reliability, associated storage or delivery entitlements, and other characteristics of the water, its application for achievement of the agreed environmental objectives, and, where relevant, any trading of the water. 56. The MDB Ministerial Council will identify as soon as reasonably practicable consequential changes to the MDB Agreement (1992) required to implement this Agreement.
ENVIRONMENTAL WATER MANAGEMENT 57. Implementation of the environmental objectives of the Living Murray First Step decision will be the priority for the use and management of the water recovered under this Agreement. 58. The MDB Ministerial Council will develop, in consultation with regional communities and within 12 months of the commencement of this Agreement, an environmental watering plan based on best available science which will address use of the recovered water to achieve the agreed environmental objectives of the Living Murray First Step decision (the Basin Environmental Watering Plan). 59. The terms and commitments attached to each implemented water recovery measure (Clause 29) will be consistent with the Basin Environmental Watering Plan. 60. Application of recovered water to environmental outcomes or sites need not be in the jurisdiction or locality where a measure is effected or where the funding is sourced. 61. The Basin Environmental Watering Plan will come into effect when agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council. Environmental watering of the six significant ecological assets of the Living Murray First Step decision (refer Clause 17) in the interim will be through current arrangements or other agreed arrangements. 62. The MDB Ministerial Council shall enter into agreements with the relevant jurisdictions to implement the watering of the six significant ecological assets (refer Clause 17) according to the flow or other environmental triggers stipulated in the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, and in accordance with the terms and commitments entered into under Clause 29.
7 63. The Parties will ensure that local watering plans will be consistent with the Basin Environmental Watering Plan prepared by the MDB Ministerial Council and give effect to any obligations therein. 64. Environmental water shall be held by jurisdictions or their nominees as an allocation of sufficient security and reliability to meet the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, and be made available for the purposes of the plan. 65. Improved environmental outcomes in tributaries of the Murray River are to be promoted through the use of the recovered water where this is consistent with and does not compromise the achievement of the environmental objectives agreed for the six significant ecological assets identified under the Living Murray First Step decision (refer Clause 17). 66. The Parties will use their best endeavours to ensure that no detrimental effect on the environmental condition of Murray-Darling system, including its tributaries, will result from the recovery of water under this Agreement. 67. The Basin Environmental Watering Plan shall be reviewed at intervals agreed by the MDB Ministerial Council.
TRADING OF RECOVERED WATER 68. Water which is recovered under this Agreement and held as a tradeable water access entitlement may be traded on the temporary water market at times when this is not contrary to the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, the terms and conditions which apply to the water recovery measure (Clause 29) or to this Agreement. 69. Net revenue from the temporary trade of water recovered under this Agreement must be separately accounted for on the financial registers of the investing parties and set aside for the achievement of the objectives of this Agreement. 70. The MDB Ministerial Council will develop, within 12 months of commencement of this Agreement, a protocol concerning the trading of recovered water and the direction of revenue to meet the objectives of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, or complementary river health outcomes where the revenue is not required for the purposes of the plan. 71. Water recovered under this Agreement may be traded on the permanent market only if the outcome of the transaction is to use the revenue derived to acquire water access entitlements which better match the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan (refer Clause 58).
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 72. The MDB Ministerial Council will coordinate all activities under this Agreement which are to be delivered at the Basin scale, including: i) development of a Business Plan for implementation of this Agreement (refer Clause 13); ii) agreement on the types of measures eligible for accreditation against funding commitments under this Agreement (refer Clause 23);
8 iii) development of assessment criteria and coordination of the assessment process (refer Clause 34); iv) maintenance of the register of eligible measures (refer Clauses 24 and 25); v) accreditation of measures against funding commitments under this Agreement (refer Clause 30); vi) determination of any crediting amount under Clauses 37 and 38; vii) coordination of opportunities for multi-jurisdictional funding of eligible measures (refer Clauses 41 and 42); viii) establishing indicative investment targets, and monitoring performance against these (refer Clause 47); ix) establishing indicative water recovery targets, defining the way in which they will be implemented and managed, and monitoring performance against the agreed targets (refer Clause 48); x) maintenance of an aggregated Basin-wide register of recovered water, including any permanent or temporary trade in recovered water, and adjustment of the MDB Long-Term Diversion Cap as required (refer Clauses 53 and 55); xi) development and implementation of an environmental watering plan for the Living Murray First Step decision environmental objectives (the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, refer clause 58); xii) agreeing and giving effect to the terms and commitments which are associated with each water recovery measure (Clause 29), and any amendments to these; xiii) monitoring and public reporting of outcomes against the Basin Environmental Watering Plan (refer Clauses 79 (iv) and 80); and xiv) review of the Agreement (refer Clause 81). 73. The MDB Commission will have operational responsibility for all Basin-scale activities under the oversight of the MDB Ministerial Council, as listed above, unless otherwise agreed by the Council. 74. Parties will be responsible for proposing, developing and implementing eligible measures, holding recovered water in a form which meets the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan and making it available for the purposes of the plan, and ensuring community engagement in actions taken under this Agreement. These responsibilities include: i) undertaking feasibility studies and bringing forward proposals suitable for registration as eligible measures under this Agreement (refer Clause 31); ii) entering into investment sharing arrangements with the other Parties (refer Clauses 41 and 42); iii) meeting jurisdictional water recovery and investment targets (refer Clauses 47 and 48); iv) maintaining financial records, including for any trade in recovered water (refer Clauses 69 and 78); v) maintaining externally audited State and Territory-based registries of recovered water (refer Clauses 55 and 78);
9 vi) implementation of water recovery measures, and giving effect to the terms and commitments accompanying each water recovery measure (refer Clause 29); vii) ensuring community consultation in the development and implementation of measures (refer Clause 15); viii) ensuring that recovered water is characterised within the State and Territory water allocation and access entitlement regimes with security, reliability, and access characteristics which meet the requirements of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan (refer Clause 19) ; ix) making recovered water available for the purposes of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan, and where necessary entering into specific arrangements for this purpose (refer Clauses 62 and 64); x) coordinating local or regional management of environmental water, and entering into agreements with local catchment authorities or their equivalents for this when appropriate (refer Clauses 63 and 77); and xi) monitoring and public reporting of outcomes at the regional, State or Territory level (refer Clauses 79 and 80). 75. Regional catchment management authorities, water authorities, water users and similar bodies may propose, invest in or implement eligible measures where this is consistent with the objectives and requirements of this Agreement. 76. Regional and local bodies will be consulted in the local management of environmental water and the development of the Basin Environmental Watering Plan. 77. Local or regional catchment management bodies or their equivalents may be responsible for local management of environmental water at the discretion of the relevant jurisdiction, provided the objectives of any such body in management of the recovered water shall be consistent with the objectives of this Agreement and occurs within the institutional framework contained in this Agreement.
MONITORING, AUDIT AND REVIEW 78. The following will be subject to annual external auditing to the satisfaction of the MDB Ministerial Council: i) financial records of expenditure accredited against funding commitments under this Agreement; ii) financial records of any temporary or permanent trade of recovered water; iii) registries of recovered water; iv) the environmental management of the recovered water; and v) management of the impacts on the MDB Long-Term Diversion Cap which result from the recovery and delivery of water under this Agreement. 79. The Parties agree to establish within 12 months of commencement a suitable monitoring and evaluation plan for this Agreement that involves annual reporting to the MDB Ministerial Council on: i) actions taken under this Agreement;
10 ii) progress against the indicative water recovery and investment targets set for each jurisdiction; iii) any trade of recovered water, and the reinvestment of any revenue so derived; and iv) performance against the Basin Environmental Watering Plan and the achievement of environmental objectives, including performance against environmental indicators. 80. All reports are to be made publicly available, including on the MDB Commission internet website. 81. The Parties will review this Agreement three years from commencement. 82. The MDB Ministerial Council and the Parties shall implement sufficient monitoring and information systems as required to enable such reporting and review.
VARIATION 83. This Agreement may be amended at the request of one of the Parties, subject to the agreement of all the Parties.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 84. The Parties agree that measures undertaken under this Agreement will be identified in accordance with a communications plan to be developed by the MDB Ministerial Council, and that opportunities will be provided for the Parties to be involved in any promotional activities associated with this Agreement or the implementation of particular measures.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION 85. If a dispute arises under this Agreement the members of the MDB Ministerial Council will use their best endeavours to settle the dispute through direct negotiation and by acting in a spirit of cooperation.
11
Signed for and on behalf of each of the parties by:
The Honourable John Winston Howard MP ) Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia )
The Honourable Robert John Carr MP ) Premier of New South Wales )
The Honourable Stephen Phillip Bracks MP ) Premier of Victoria )
The Honourable Michael Rann MP ) Premier of South Australia )
Jonathon Donald Stanhope MLA ) Chief Minister of the Australian Capital Territory )
25 June 2004
12 Saving The Lower Lakes: A local perspective. Snapshot January 2009
Is nature our best chance?
Lake Albert - December 2008
Lake Albert (same location Photographs supplied by the Fischer family as above) - February 2008 Diagram 1: Normal conditions In a nutshell: The Problem Lake Albert & Lake Alexandrina Facing the Lower Lakes Sand/silt lake bed Acid sulfate soils
The amount of water reaching the Lower Lakes is declining. Diagram 2: Drought conditions As the water levels in Lake Alexandrina and Lake Acid sulfate soils emerge when Albert recede, soils in the lake beds are turning acidic lake bed exposed to oxygen when exposed to air. As the lakes continue to dry out, the water is becoming Sand/silt lake bed Acid sulfate soils increasingly saline and more acidic hot spots are emerging on exposed lake beds. Diagram 3: How to manage acid soils How to address the dangers associated with this 1. Revegetation natural phenomenon is the subject of much debate and 2. Apply lime & mulch anxiety. The South Australian Government is proposing 3. Slowly re-cover with water - using wind tides to open sections of the 7.6km of barrages that block the when flows return Lower Lakes from the Southern Ocean and flood the Lakes with sea water to keep the soils submerged. Sand/silt lake bed The Government is also proposing to construct a series Acid sulfate soils of weirs to cordon off areas within the lakes. The large majority of Lower Lakes residents do not want sea water used and claim the use of weirs The lakes currently receive a minimum of 350 would hinder the recovery from the current drought. gigalitres a year. This water is part of the State’s dilution Action groups on both sides of the lakes have scientific flow, an agreed volume to maintain water quality at proof that the Lower Lakes have not been a sea water levels acceptable for Adelaide’s drinking water. South environment for more than 5,000 years. They know Australia receives 696 gigalitres a year in dilution that freshwater tributaries like the Finniss, Bremer and flow. It is estimated that if this flow was increased Angas rivers and Currency Creek inject much needed marginally, enough water would reach the lakes during freshwater into Lake Alexandrina during the winter. summer to maintain them at levels that would minimise They believe a man-made sea water flood would acidification. trigger an environmental disaster. Thousands of Meanwhile locals are encouraged by the revegetation tonnes of freshwater fish would die, while some areas that has already occurred on exposed lake beds after of the lake would become hyper-saline. the winter rains. This growth has helped neutralise the The people of the Lower Lakes acknowledge the acidification process. dangers associated with acid sulfate soils, but are There is a strong belief that the management of frustrated that Government is not listening to their Lower Lakes wind tides, a comprehensive revegetation solutions. program on exposed beds, and applying lime and mulch This document hopes to highlight the united resolve to acid hot spots would keep the threat of acidification in within the lakes community and the extensive local check long enough to give nature a chance to save the knowledge that has helped develop ecologically- Lower Lakes. based strategies that can rescue this internationally significant environment.
2 The Lower Lakes are the lungs of the Murray River - Destroy the lakes and you’ll kill the river. LOWER LAKES, South Australia
Snapshot09
INDEX
Local knowledge the key - Neil Shillabeer...... 4-5 Weirs not the answer - Henry Jones...... 6-8 Softy, softly - Our Low Intervention Plan...... 9 Leading scientist backs our plan - Professor Keith Walker...... 10 Silt displacement damage not calculated...... 11 Revegetation working - Dennis Chandler...... 12-13 A little bit of water would go a long way...... 14 Will townships die?...... 15 Mayoral viewpoints - Kym McHugh & Roger Strother...... 16 Boating business rejects sea water option - Charles Irwin...... 17 Micro-manage acidic hot spots - Mike South...... 17 The human cost mounts - Dr Michael Kerrigan...... 18 New lease on life for mudflats...... 19 Time to listen...... 20 3 LOWER LAKES AND COORONG INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN’S MESSAGE
Local knowledge the key Neil Shillabeer - Community leader Lower Lakes and Coorong Infrastructure Committee Chairman Neil LOWER LAKES, South Australia Shillabeer was an irrigator on the Narrung Peninsula until March, 2007 when he had to abandon the potato, carrot and lucerne growing business he and son Ben had developed over many years. Water access and quality became major barriers to their business. It was the climatic character of the area that attracted them to the area from the Adelaide Hills: not too hot in the summer and quite temperate in the winter, which provided ideal growing conditions. Neil is also a board member of the SA Murray Irrigators and sits on the SA Murray Darling Basin Natural Resource Management Board’s 09 River Murray Advisory Committee. Snapshot
The Narrung Peninsula has not suffered from seasonal remediation programs also would no longer be an option drought in my time in the district. The drought has come because of hyper-saline conditions. from upriver, with successive years of low flows causing the People around the Lakes are witnessing significant regrowth problems in our region. of vegetation on exposed lakebed areas, even where acid However, it is the Lower Lakes that are suffering most. It is sulfate soils are visible. distressing to most residents in the region that a proposal to flood the lakes with sea water remains an option. We urge the Government to immediately release funds Letting sea water into the Lakes creates two major problems: already set aside for the long term management of the 1. It is virtually impossible to get out again (without a 1956 Lower Lakes, so bio-remediation can be implemented, type flood event) creating a compounding effect on salinity to further the work that nature has already started. levels. Whilst it initially covers and ameliorates acid sulfate soils it soon changes and exacerbates the situation Local LAP and community groups are “bursting at the seams” enhancing the manifestation of sulphidic ooze. So without to get involved with seed collection, propagation, planting, being able to freshen the sea water we’re back to where mulching, applying lime and other activities that could prove we started from and aquatic and plant life will die. useful. By working in conjunction with Government agencies, 2. It immediately negates other options to save the Lakes. a great deal could be achieved before any environmentally Nature’s successful bid to regenerate vegetation on disastrous decisions are taken. exposed lake bed areas would be killed off. Small fresh Acidification of the water body in the Lakes is amajor water volumes to maintain levels above the critical concern so recovery in Lake levels will need to be managed acidification threshold would be rendered useless. Last very carefully. year direct rainfall over the lakes and local tributary inflows provided significant recovery to the environment. Bio- Continued next page 4 “Suggestions that an additional 1000 gigalitres of water from upstream would be needed to return the lakes to pre-drought conditions is a gross misrepresentation of what we are asking for...”
Some of the members of the Lower Lakes and Coorong Infrastructure Committee, from left, Tracy Hill, Clem Mason, Neil Shillabeer, Dr Michael Kerrigan, Sharon Bland, Andrew Dawes, Michelle Ousley and Lesley Fischer.
Continued from previous page will that is preventing the lake from receiving small, but critical If some exposed lake bed areas turn to acid then re-wetting inflows to survive. needs to happen slowly so pH levels in the water body aren’t Building weirs and structures in the Lakes and Lower River, affected by rising water levels and associated wind tides breaks down the linkages in the ecology of the system. For dragging the acids back into the main body of water. every engineering solution there is another impact that has to Fortunately it is more than likely that when improved flows be dealt with. return they won’t be of any great magnitude initially, because Each structure built leaves a damaging environmental the whole system is so parched, that they can be managed footprint which can never be restored to its former status. accordingly. Generations of local knowledge exists in the Lower Lakes Suggestions that an additional 1000 gigalitres of water region. Local people work closely with and understand their from upstream would be needed to return the lakes to pre- environment better than outsiders. drought conditions is a gross misrepresentation of what I hope the Government is listening to them. we are asking for. Much lower volumes over and above the It is their future at stake. I fully understand the pain and 350 giglatires of dilution flow that passes Wellington are hardship communities are experiencing along the whole of the all that is required to get through to the winter of 2010. Murray and that there is limited water in the system, but I also There is no need to fill the Lakes up again right now. Many understand that if we don’t look after the health and well being Lower Lakes residents believe that it is only the lack of political of the whole river, then none of us will have it. 5 6
Henry Jones - Pro fisherman
LOWER LAKES, South Australia
Neil Shillabeer and Henry Jones are two of the driving forces behind the fight to save the Lower Lakes. They are regarded as two of the most knowledgeable locals 09 on the issue and both sit on the State’s River Murray Advisory Snapshot Committee. They are adamant that Government could achieve much more by working with locals to save the Lower Lakes. What a weir could do to Adelaide’s drinking water Wellington Weir’s Saline Backwash
Murray Bridge Tailem Bend Wellington Weir Lower Lakes
D ilu ti Usable freshwater River Murray o
n
fl l
o Saline water exceeding health limits w
Heavy metals and nutrient build up in soil Saline water/sea water
Adelaide and South-East Water Supply pumping stations
No Weir - Murray flushes salt & nutrient load into lakes
Murray Bridge Tailem Bend Wellington Lower Lakes
Usable freshwater River Murray Saline water exceeding health limits
Adelaide and South-East Water Supply pumping stations
Facts about the Murray and Salinity levels • Salinity levels in the Lower Lakes currently range between 7000 and 10,000 EC units - it cannot be used for stock or domestic purposes but remains a freshwater environment. • Up to 1200 tonnes of salt flows past Wellington into the Lower Lakes on average every day. A weir at Wellington is likely to increase salinity upstream in the Murray to levels that are deemed unsafe for human consumption by the World Health Organisation. • Salinity levels must remain below 1400 EC units to be safe for drinking. • Most of Adelaide’s water supply is pumped from the River Murray in these dry times. • The Lower Lakes have not been a sea water environment for more than 5000 years. While the salt levels in the lakes have varied depending on tides and weather conditions during that time, they have remained a freshwater ecosystem. • The salt content in sea water is about 50,000 EC units.
7 he planned weirs would isolate the main body of Lake Alexandrina and it 8 Twould become too salty to support freshwater animals and plants. Weir options under consideration
Map sourced from Murray Darling Basin Commission Temporary weirs to be a disaster Buying fresh water, instead of building temporary dams is the left as part of the greater Lower Lakes but the Finniss and best investment the State and Federal Governments can make Currency creek are the best set up to survive because they are in the Lower Lakes, according to Henry Jones. spring fed. “If we can get some water back into the wetlands, not all “Above where the lakes levels are, they have got fresh water of them, but something, it would have an enormous benefit,” coming in, so Yarra pigmy perch, Murray hardy heads, parrots Henry said. and emu wrens can all go up to these spring environments and “It has to be the cheapest way out instead of wasting a survive. whole heap of money on weirs that we know are going “It’s not going to be good for them, but they will survive. to do enormous damage and are going to take us a lot “So it is far more important to look after the rest of the lake. longer to recover from when the rains do come. Instead “If they put a weir to block off these wetlands from the rest of of spending money on new committees, on a whole heap the lakes system you are going to bottle up that water - there of new bureaucrats on enormous wages, for Christ sake won’t be any flows and that is not how to manage water in the spend that money getting some water into the system. Lower Lakes.” “They want to do a lot of work to save Currency Creek and Mr Jones said water that may be in the lower reaches of the the Finniss River wetlands by building weirs and the like. I don’t system one day, could be blown to the upper reaches the next believe it is as big a problem as they are saying. day. “Life giving wind tides are integral to the ecology of the “Sure some of the ponds may go acidic if the streams are lakes and weirs will ruin their effectiveness.” 9
United to save the lakes Action Group members - standing: John Yelland, Trevor Giles, Chris Bagley and Henry Jones. Sitting: Anne Hartnett, Bruce Allnut and Professor Diane Bell. River, Lakes & Coorong Action Group
LOWER LAKES, South Australia
Members of the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group come from all walks of life, but march to the beat of one drum. The group has been calling for a Common Sense Community Action Plan to save the Lower Lakes. Their pledge is a simple one: “We advocate the return of fresh water end-of-river flows. Until this occurs, we propose a low intervention strategy to reduce the acidification of soils and allow nature to 09 recover. The looming crisis requires a rapid response, Snapshot but not one that destroys the ecosystem recognised as a Wetland of International Significance under the Ramsar Convention.” 7. Reduce diversions from tributary catchments. Their 10-point Low Intervention Plan is - 8. Urge Adelaide to accept more water restrictions. 1. Work with local communities. 9. Bring water from the northern Basin. 2. Respect local knowledge of the Ngarrindjeri people, local 10. Protect the Coorong and Lake Albert. fishers, farmers and environmentalists. Group member Professor Di Bell is frustrated that there is 3. No weirs, no sea water. $200 million Federal Funding for long term measures, but 4. Invest in mitigation, especially in high risk areas, by none is being spent resourcing remediation work. planting, mulching and liming and by limiting access to “We propose a softly-softly approach where high risk areas ensure minimal soil disturbance. would be targeted for planting, liming, mulching and other 5. Maintain sanctuaries for freshwater and terrestial flora and treatment to ensure minimal disturbance of acid sulfate fauna. soils. That could start tomorrow if we had the funds. Let’s 6. Protect endangered species. not wait for last resort strategies, let’s act now.” More weirs, will mean more devastation There are few more qualified to speak on the Lower Lakes and acid Professor Keith Walker sulfate soils that threaten them than Adelaide University Earth and LOWER LAKES, South Australia Environment Sciences Adjunct Associate Professor Keith Walker. Professor Walker, who has assisted locals develop their Low Intervention Action Plan and has conducted research on the Murray for more than 35 years, writes....
Weirs store water, but that is not all they do. They also create pools that trap sediment and restrict currents, creating still- 09 water conditions. In our region, there is a risk of algal blooms, Snapshot even toxic blooms, as the water warms in summer and autumn. In fact, Lake Alexandrina is one of the first places in the world The weir proposed for the river at Pomanda Island, near where toxic algae were recorded. A bloom reported in the Wellington, would become the eleventh below the Murray- scientific journal Nature caused the death of cattle and sheep Darling junction, and add to the effects of the levees and around the lake in 1878. barrages. Weir pools are home to different plants and animals from The weir(s) on the Goolwa channel are planned to create those living in rivers or lakes. The Carp and Willows now so a freshwater refuge near the mouths of the Finniss River common in the Lower Murray are alien species, better adapted and Currency Creek, although there is no evidence that the to regulated rivers than their native counterparts. resident species need a weir to survive. The endangered fish Weirs on the Murray have changed the river in ways that can be secured in other ways. Most of the local species are many of us will only really come to understand in years to able to withstand drought, and the remainder would survive in come. other areas and recolonise the area once fresh water returns. They have alienated the river and floodplain and driven There is no need to speak of ‘extinction’. a deep wedge into an ecosystem that depends on the What are the chances for long-term recovery if weirs are put connections maintained by floods. They have caused erosion in place and Lake Alexandrina is allowed to become more and deposition, changing the bed profile of the river. They have saline? And what of Lake Albert and the Coorong? caused salt to accumulate in the floodplain soil, rather than be Nature has an amazing capacity for recovery and will make flushed down river, leaving an escalating salinity problem for repairs if we lend a helping hand. Weirs will not aid the process. the future. Weirs could be in place for 5-10 years, perhaps longer, and The acid sulfate soil problems we face today are made then would begin a long, slow period of recovery, in whatever worse by the weirs and barrages because they’ve caused remains of the river and lakes. the river and lakes to accumulate sediments. It’s ironic that This is certainly not to say that we should do nothing. There we should be considering more weirs to control problems are practical ways to mitigate acid sulfate soils, and the Low that are caused partly by weirs in the first place. Intervention Strategy is a step in that direction. 10 Silt displacement bi-product of weirs Silt displacement is an inevitable bi-product of structures or embankments built anywhere in the Lower Lakes or Murray. Silt displacement becomes very evident when water levels drop as the wind tides shift volumes of water around the lakes. The embankment constructed at the Narrung Narrows, whilst it has met its short term objectives of maintaining Lake Albert above acidification levels, highlights what would happen if a much larger weir were to be built at Pomanda Point near Wellington. 38,000 tonnes of material was used at Narrung for a 300 metre long embankment in silt depths of 7 to 9 metres. Significant silt displacement resulted, creating a huge dredging job if the area is to be restored after its removal. Narrung Narrows, Lake Albert Weir Imagine what 700,000 tonnes of material dumped into approx 30 metres of silt over 2600 metres of LOWER LAKES, South Australia weir at Pomanda would do. The silt displacement would be massive. Environmental recovery on removal of the weir has never been discussed or costed at this stage. The construction of the causeway leading to the eastern side of the Narrung Ferry in 1967 caused significant change to flow patterns through the Narrows between Albert and Alexandrina resulting in the silting of huge areas along the eastern side of the Narrows. Surely these are obvious examples of some of the damaging environmental Snapshot09 effects resulting from engineering solutions.
Silt displacement caused by weir construction
Lake bed after Lake bed before weir weir construction
Temporary Weir at Narrung Narrows
Former river/lake bed Rock weir built in silted river bed. Silt displacement 11 12 Working with nature does work
Dennis Chandler - Grazier
LOWER LAKES, South Australia
Snapshot09
Dennis Chandler has some of the best beef cattle on the maintains nature is doing the rest. Lower Lakes. “You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see what nature He has managed the Yalkuri operation alongside Loveday is trying to do. The grasses and reeds have started spreading Bay for the past 16 years and adheres to strict principles of across the bare lakebed.” sustainability in all facets of the business. Dennis doesn’t believe flooding the lower lakes with sea Dennis believes his secret to success is a personal code. water is a viable option and advocates a pro-active approach “You have to work with nature, conserve the land, look after that involves broad acre shoreline revegetation and the liming the environment and give it to the next generation in some of acid hot spots. sort of order.” “Let’s get in and have a go at revegetation, identify what When it comes to revegetation on the Lower Lakes, Dennis plants and grasses are already growing and give nature a is conscious of protecting the shoreline. helping hand.” Yalkuri does not graze cattle on the foreshore of Lake “I think the best approach would be seeding back and forth, Alexandrina. Dennis and his staff decided long ago to fence along the contour of the shoreline and just steadily creeping off the waterfront to create an environmental buffer of reeds out to the water line. and grasses right to the lake’s edge. “There is a strong argument to micro-manage the problems As the photographs above and on the right highlight, Dennis we are facing instead wiping everything out with sea water.” Loveday Bay, Lower Lakes
Now... January 2009
andDecember then. 2007 13 A little water would help a lot
The Mason family farm’s summer sleep-out used to be right on the water’s edge of Lake Albert. The Lower Lakes are Clem Mason’s life. He and his family run a large dairy and also crop about 6000 acres of grain each year. Most locals on the eastern side of the lakes know Clem and look to him for leadership. In the past year he has switched to dry land dairying and Clem Mason - Dairy, grain grower also enjoyed one of his best grain harvests in recent times: “I can’t complain about the farm, it’s been a good year all LOWER LAKES, South Australia round from that point of view. With freshwater from the new pipeline, we have been able to keep the dairy going. “But the future of the lakes keeps dragging us all back into limbo.” Clem has led the chorus of locals who have been rejecting the proposal to flood the lakes with sea water to cover acid sulfate soils. “We believe that the size of the lakes can be reduced without impacting on how they function. The revegetation occurring all around the lake is helping to neutralise the threat of acid soils and this regrowth can be sped up with the right support from government. Snapshot09 “I firmly believe that the lakes could get by with a much smaller injection of freshwater than previous estimated. It won’t be pretty but it has to be a better option than just Melanie Treloar - Dairy, horse trainer killing everything with sea water.”
‘It will be a big disgusting hole within two years’
Lake Albert couple Mel and Nigel Treloar were like a cancer up through the Murray. Before long spending $3000 a week last year carting water to the quality of the water won’t be good enough for keep their dairy business alive. anyone to use.” Mel maintains that while a new pipeline has Patches of acid sulfate soils have emerged on eased the pressure of water supply to almost all exposed lake beds near the Treloars’ property, residents on the Narrung Peninsula, they still live but Mel has been heartened by the revegetation in a world of uncertainty. occurring within these patches. “There isn’t much point having freshwater if we “I would hope these can be contained. We live in a poisoned environment,” she said. have come through too much to give up on this “If we kill off the Lower Lakes with salt water beautiful part of the world now. We love living the devastation won’t stop here. It will be a big here and see it as our duty to save and to protect 14 Mel Treloar disgusting hole within two years and will spread the environment we live in.” 15 Milang, February 2008
As these two photos highlight, revegetation is already occurring naturally to help to counter the likelihood of acid sulfate soils
Will sea water kill towns? The River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group believes that if the State Government lets salt water into the Lower Lakes the western side of Lake Alexandrina as well as Lake Albert will become hyper-saline because there is not enough circulation. Action Group member Henry Jones said the Milang side of the lake, right along to Langhorne Creek, would almost certainly turn hyper-saline. “It is a recipe for disaster: salt water, no circulation and higher evaporation rate. There is going to be a massive salt build up very quickly. There are going to be vast areas that are completely dead in a very short time. It will be a stinking mess. The example has already been set. Two thirds of Coorong is already dead for the very same reason .” “What happens to townships like Milang when that happens?”
Milang, January 2009 16 More listening needed Alexandrina mayor Kym McHugh hopes the politicians are listening to the large majority he represents. “This issue has become all-consuming for many residents and the energy and knowledge they possess is quite inspiring,” he said. Kym McHugh “It would be nice to think that all tiers of government have the same respect and trust for these people and listen to what they have to say. “The vast majority of people in this community do not want sea water flooded into the Lower Lakes and I am not convinced that enough resources are being Kym McHugh - Alexandrina mayor invested in exploring ecological solutions. “The worst thing that can happen is the lakes LOWER LAKES, South Australia acidifying, but the next worst is they become hyper- saline. “The end result will be much the same. The uncertainty surrounding the lakes is having a huge impact socially within our community. “I can appreciate why the government is taking a lot of time in making the decision and I can understand why many would like to see them speed up the process, but it is bloody important that they make the right decision.” Snapshot09
Roger Strother - Coorong mayor
The lakes must be saved Coorong mayor Roger Strother strongly supports bio-remediation work across the lakes. Having lived on the edge of Lake Albert almost all his life he has seen the changes in recent times and believes revegetation is a viable course of action to neutralise the dangers of acid sulfate soils. Roger’s brother Ken advocates aerial seeding large swathes of exposed lake beds in early winter when the ground is moist. “Based on the vegetation growth we got on the lake beds last year, the idea has a lot of merit. You could certainly cover a lot of ground at the optimum time to spark revegetation,” Roger said. “The uncertainty of Lake Albert is having a significant impact on the community. The stresses caused by living in a destroyed environment are difficult to quantify, but needless to say Meningie and the Narrung Peninsula need a healthy Lower Lakes.” Roger and Ken have fenced off the shoreline and witnessed strong regrowth. Keeping stock off the shoreline to maximise Coorong mayor Roger Strother at what used regrowth right around the lakes is an initiative that is gaining widespread to be shoreline of Lake Albert on his farm. support within the community. Adopt big picture view and 17 micro-manage the threats
Mike South - Grower, Ag-Scientist Mike South lives at Point Sturt and has a long list of achievements in both private enterprise and the public service as a management LOWER LAKES, South Australia consultant. Until recently he has remained undecided on what should be done to save the Lower Lakes. “But after looking at all the facts and doing plenty of research you have to rule out the sea water option,” he said. “What we need to do is micro-manage this. By my calculations, if we can get through the summer and have the same rainfall and evaporation levels this year as in 2008, we can control the areas that may become acidified. “I think we adopt the same approach as the CFS does with spotfires. Deal directly with the acidic hot spots and try not to do anything to damage the medium to long term recovery of the Lower Lakes.” Snapshot09
Charles Irwin - Boating Industry Right: Hindmarsh Island boating businessman Charles Irwin. Boating man rejects sea water Charles Irwin runs Alongshore Aquatics at Goolwa. He has lived on Hindmarsh Island Before the big dry he would berth 64 boats in water and for the past 11 years and after much have another 15 stored on land. research believes government officials This summer he has 2 boats berthed in water and 35 on are ignoring low intervention strategies land. Business revenue is down 65%. based on sound ecological thinking to save the lakes. Despite the drop in business, he does not want the Charles insists that flooding the lakes with sea water government to rush in and lift water levels with sea water. would be ‘bloody stupid’. “It just doesn’t make sense.” He maintains a modest purchase of water, say 60 gigaltires, He says the declining lakes levels have hurt his business, would help the lakes maintain a level that removes the but so has the global economic crisis and the negative immediate risk of acid sulfate soils and gives nature time publicity surrounding Goolwa’s plight. to remove the problem. “It would not lift the lakes to levels Charles is an active member of the Goolwa Boating Group, for boating, but it would be enough to give nature time to which has been responsible for extending boat ramps in address the problem.” the district, having the Goolwa channel re-surveyed and “There seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas within the undertaking a massive clean up of the waterway. scientific community about what’s best for the Lower He still races each weekend at the local sailing club Lakes, but government support for those with engineering although he suspects that will have to be stopped by early solutions seems to be much stronger. I am yet to see those March. solutions tick all the necessary boxes while the ecologically based solutions seem to have a lot more credence.” 18 Dr Michael Kerrigan People have said: Plants could do a better job of cleaning up LOWER LAKES, South Australia acid sulfate soils. I have found enormous amount of growth not far from where sulfate soils were first identified by the CSIRO. There are alternatives other than putting sea water in. We can assist the natural process by direct seeding and alleviating acid conditions. Former Coorong Lakes and Murray Waterkeeper Paul Davis - Advertiser January 5, 2009.
Fish, plants and animals of the Lower Lakes 09 were freshwater species and they would have Snapshot to move out if sea water came in. “Where will the birds go? There is just nowhere for them to go, not in the sort of numbers we have GP asks: what really are here. There are very few wetlands that hold the numbers of waterbirds that are here, in critical human needs? the whole of Australia Meningie doctor Michael Kerrigan deals with the human cost of the University of NSW waterbird expert declining health of the Lower Lakes day and night. Professor Richard Kingsford - Advertiser January 5, 2009. He gets angry when he hears Government justify their Murray management decisions on a critical human needs basis. We’ve got a couple hundred million dollars “Apparently the people of the Lower Lakes don’t have any critical human and we’ve said to the State Government needs,” he says. “We feel like we’ve been largely ignored.” we want a lasting solution for the Lower Dr Kerrigan and his GP wife Deborah have worked in the region for 13 Lakes and Coorong. We are happy to do it in years. They are in touch with almost every family in the district at some partnership and have to provide a lot money. stage or another and hear first hand what he describes as Government We need them to come forward with some inaction is doing to their spirit. proposals.” “Everybody hopes it will get better, but they have no faith in Government Federal Water Minister Penny Wong - The to do the right thing. Advertiser January 12, 2009. “We have seen them all come down here and say a few nice words The preferred option is to maintain the about how bad it is, but no-one has said let’s work together to fix the Lower Lakes in a freshwater condition for as problem. Our hospital is grossly under-resourced despite the increase long as practically possible, and preferably in after-hours care required, there is no sign of the community receiving through the current drought to a full economic assistance and some people have lost hope. freshwater recovery. “Maybe it would have been different had the Mitsubishi factory been in Federal Environment Minister Peter Meningie. Garrett - The Australian, January 8, 2009. “By my estimates one in 10 people in the immediate Meningie area have lost their jobs, but there has been no sign of help for these families – they We have lived in this area for thousands are largely being ignored because the Government says “we can’t make of years and as indigenous people we know it rain”. the importance of the ecology to our culture Dr Kerrigan said the workload of the three doctors in the Coorong and our spiritual connection to country. The Medical Centre has soared over the past 12 months. Ngarrindjeri will not negotiate or discuss anything to do with a weir from Clayton to There has been a significant increase in mental illness cases, particularly Hindmarsh. depression and compounding effects on chronic diseases as people drink more, smoke more and don’t eat as well as they once did. Chairman of the Ngarrindjeri Native Title Committee Matt Rigney - The Australian, “When you’re worried about your future, people let a lot things slide. The January 7, 2009 health cost of this disaster will be with us long into the future.” Revegetation taking hold
Lake Albert and its Narrows
LOWER LAKES, South Australia
Snapshot09
This time last year Joe and Lorraine Lorraine and Joe Leese on the narrows of Lake Albert Leese were wading almost 12 months ago. The top photo is the same location across silted mud early this year. flats to find water for their stock. Those In February last year Joe and Lorraine Leese were running same flats are now temporary poly-pipe hundreds of metres out over dangerously covered in plant life. silted mud flats to find water for their cows. Today they have piped fresh water from SA Water and their mud flats through the Narrows of Lake Albert are now covered in vegetation. On average rainfall, re-growth has been so vigorous previously muddy lake beds are now rich with plant life. The two photos above were taken from the same spot a year apart. Joe and Lorraine have watched in wonderment as nature tries to repair the damage caused by man. “Letting sea water in is not the answer,” Mrs Leese said. “It never has been and never will be. Our first hand experience shows explicitly what nature is capable of in a very short time and that is where our solutions must come from.” 19 SUMMARY
Locals fighting for survival Almost a year ago the people of the Lower Lakes rallied together to take their plight to the world via the publication The Lower Lakes: A Snapshot. The world’s media paid attention. There has been a steady procession of politicians from the Prime Minister down to visit various parts of the lakes but many locals are fed up repeating their stories to these VIPs. They are frustrated that many of the so called experts come to talk, but do not listen or act. The locals shake their heads when they hear radical solutions like filling the Lower Lakes with sea water and building a series of dams. There is a suspicion that behind closed doors the decision-makers have already written off the Lower Lakes as a lost cause. Locals are angry that the critical needs of the River Murray and the people of the Lower Lakes are being ignored and it has galvanized their resolve. Their plea is a simple one – “work with us to save the River Murray and the Lower Lakes.” In the words of Coorong fisherman Henry Jones “flooding the lakes with sea water would be like solving the problem with an atomic bomb”. The first annual Snapshot of the Locals have developed an ecological rescue plan that is based on commonsense, Lower Lakes, a vast amount of local knowledge and a respect for the environment. published last While many outside the region appear to have given up on Lower Lakes, the locals year. refuse to accept such prophecies of doom and insist that with sufficient political will and some help from nature their unique environment can be saved. By Tim Jackson Jackson Media Services
“....the theory behind opening the barrages (and letting sea water into Lake Alexandrina) is akin to trying to feed yourself through your anus.” Dr Kerri Muller.
20 This document has been commissioned by the Lower Lakes and Coorong Infrastructure Committee and compiled by Tim Jackson, Jackson Media Services. Allens Arthur Robinson
Energy Focus: Water – June 2004 The National Water Initiative In brief: On 25 June 2004, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed to implement a National Water Initiative that is intended to result in greater compatibility between the state water regulatory regimes and in the adoption of best-practice approaches to water management nationally. Partner Grant Anderson (view CV) and Senior Associate Robyn Glindemann outline the details of this important initiative.
• National Water Initiative
• Murray-Darling Basin National Water Initiative
The objective of the National Water Initiative (NWI) is the development of: a nationally-compatible, market, regulatory and planning based system of managing surface and groundwater resources for rural and urban use that optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes.
Attaining this objective will take some time, and the NWI is therefore to be implemented in a number of stages, with the final reforms being put in place by the end of 2014 (although substantial progress in implementing the reforms is to be made by 2010). Nonetheless, this objective is clearly an important and worthy one and so the refusal of Western Australia to sign up to the NWI is unfortunate.
Set out below is a description of the NWI's key elements.
Definition, security and recording of water access entitlements
Water access entitlements are generally to be defined as perpetual shares of a water resource that is available for consumption as specified in a water plan (although it is recognised that there may be some special circumstances that justify a different approach, eg in the case of the minerals and petroleum sectors). Such entitlements are to be separate from land and not tied to the use that may be made of the water (water use is to be regulated by a separate approval). The intention is to develop water access entitlements that have nationally compatible characteristics (eg that are defined by reference to reliability and quality), that are tradeable, and that can be dealt with like property rights (eg leased, mortgaged, subdivided and amalgamated). Moreover, the security of tenure of the water access entitlements is to be such that they can generally only be cancelled by the government where the entitlement holder has breached the obligations associated with the entitlement, and can only be varied by agreement.
By the end of 2006, all water access entitlements and trades (both temporary and permanent), including the prices of those trades, are to be recorded on publicly accessible water registers. These registers will also provide for the protection of third-party interests (eg security holders) by requiring the registration of encumbrances over the water access entitlement, and by requiring the registered security holder to be notified of any proposed dealing in relation to the entitlement (the consent of the security holder will be required before the entitlement can be transferred or before a subsequent interest is registered).
A number of jurisdictions have already implemented at least some of these kinds of measures.1 Most recently, the New South Wales Parliament passed the Water Management Amendment Bill 2004 that provides for perpetual water access rights and a water register that is similar to the Torrens title land register. Similarly, in its White Paper2, the Victorian Government has indicated that it will unbundle water entitlements into a (tradeable) water share, a share of delivery capacity and a site-use licence, and that it will also improve Victoria's register system. However, the implementation of these measures in a nationally consistent manner will obviously improve investment certainty, reduce transaction costs and enhance the ability of water access entitlement holders to raise capital.
Return to top
Environment
The NWI requires that there is to be statutory recognition of the use of water to meet environmental objectives, as well as other public benefit objectives (eg indigenous and cultural values, recreation, fisheries and tourism). This may, for example, be achieved by granting water access entitlements to meet these objectives or through a rules- based system. For this purpose, environmental water managers are to be established to manage the environmental water provisions and the achievement of environmental and other public benefit outcomes.
Water planning
The states and territories are to adopt transparent, statute-based water planning regimes that allow for the clear articulation of the trade-offs between the achievement of ecological and consumptive water uses (informed by best available science, socio-economic analysis and community input).
While each state and territory will be left to develop its own planning regime (including determining whether a plan should be prepared for a particular water source), the intention is that such plans should at least be prepared by the end of 2007 for water resources that are overallocated (ie where the total volume of water able to be extracted under water access entitlements exceeds the environmentally sustainable level of extraction) or that are overused (ie where the total volume of water actually extracted for consumptive use exceeds the environmentally sustainable level of extraction). In these cases, the water plans are to set out a pathway to correct the overallocation or overuse, and there is to be substantial progress made towards addressing these issues by at least the end of 2010.
The water plans that apply for water sources are to be developed in consultation with all relevant stakeholders so as to enable the identification and consideration of consumptive uses and environmental, cultural and other public benefit issues in an open and transparent way. Importantly, the performance of these water plans is to be monitored and they are to be subject to change to accommodate improved scientific knowledge about the water source.
The NWI also recognises that particular land uses (eg dams, bores and plantation forestry) have the potential to intercept significant volumes of surface and ground water. Accordingly, by 2011, each jurisdiction is required to identify such activities and to require additional interception activities of this kind to hold a water access entitlement where the interception exceeds a threshold level (which will vary depending on the circumstances). This initiative is necessary to ensure the integrity of water access entitlements and environmental outcomes. Indeed, the more inclusive the water management system, the more effective it is likely to be – and, on these grounds, stormwater and recycled water could also usefully be included in a comprehensive water management scheme.
Return to top
Risks associated with changes in allocation
The NWI sets out a risk-sharing regime that is to apply where there are reductions in the availability of water for consumptive use that are in addition to those necessary to address known overallocation or overuse as described above. This was potentially one of the most politically contentious aspects of the NWI, although an acceptable compromise appears to have been brokered. Under the NWI, the party that bears the risk depends on the cause of the reduction in the consumptive pool:
• where the reduction is caused by seasonal or long-term climate changes or periodic natural events (eg bushfires or droughts) – water access entitlement holders are to bear that risk;
• where the reduction is caused by improvements in the knowledge of the water source's capacity to sustain a particular extraction level – water access entitlement holders are to bear that risk up to 2014 and, where a 'comprehensive' water plan commences or is renewed after 2014 (and entails a reduction in the availability of water for consumptive use), that risk is to be shared over each subsequent 10-year period as follows:
• water access entitlement holders are to bear the first three per cent reduction in water allocation; and
• State/Territory Governments and the Commonwealth Government are to bear any further reduction in water allocation (sharing it one-third/two-thirds for the first such three per cent reduction and half/half for any greater reduction); and • where the reduction is due to changes in government policy (eg new environmental objectives) – the relevant government is to bear that risk.
Where such a risk is to be borne by a government, that government will be required to effectively resource the reduction (eg by investing in more efficient water infrastructure, purchasing water from consumptive users on market, or investing in more efficient water management practices etc).
Return to top
Water markets and trading
In order to facilitate the development of effective water markets both within and between the states and territories, the NWI requires the establishment, by the end of 2007, of compatible institutional and regulatory arrangements (eg to manage differences in entitlement reliability, supply losses, supply source constraints, inter- system trading and cap requirements). This will entail:
• the establishment of trading rules that are based on a common set of principles;
• the establishment of exchange rates and/or tagging systems;
• the immediate removal of barriers to temporary trade; and
• the immediate removal of barriers to permanent trade out of irrigation areas where those barriers take the form of trading limits that are less than four per cent per annum – it is intended to remove all such barriers by the end of 2014.
Of course, barriers to trade can take the form, not just of limits on outward trade, but also of arrangements for addressing stranded assets (eg exit fees). These kinds of barriers are also to be subject to review.
The removal of barriers to trade in the Southern Murray-Darling Basin is to be fast-tracked, although in that case there is no guarantee that the four per cent interim limit on outward permanent trade (which is to be implemented by June 2005) will be lifted further (this is a matter to be considered in 2009).
Return to top
Water pricing
Under the NWI, the states and territories agree to the use of consumption-based pricing that entails full-cost recovery for water services (including storage services and water planning and management services). In particular, metropolitan users are to continue to be moved towards upper-bound pricing by the end of 2008 and rural users are to continue to be moved towards upper-bound pricing 'where practicable' but over an unspecified timeframe (with any subsidies to compensate for less than full-cost recovery being publicly reported).
Institutional reform There is to be institutional separation, as far as possible, of water resource management (which includes water resource regulation, standard setting and enforcement functions) from service provision. Further, water service providers will be subject to annual public benchmarking of prices and service quality, and independent regulators are generally to be used to regulate the prices charged by government water service providers for water storage and delivery.
Other measures
By the end of 2007, nationally compatible water accounting systems, which include accounting for environmental water, and nationally compatible metering standards are to be implemented.
The states and territories have also agreed to develop a range of demand management initiatives, such as water efficiency labelling, permanent low-level water restrictions, and guidelines for water sensitive urban development.
National Water Commission
A new commonwealth statutory body, the National Water Commission (NWC), is to be established to assist in the implementation of the NWI and to provide advice to COAG on national water issues (including the progress of the jurisdictions in implementing the NWI). This body will be funded by the Commonwealth but will comprise federal and state/territory appointees. In addition, the NWC will assume the role of the National Competition Council in undertaking the 2005 assessment of the compliance of the jurisdictions with their National Competition Policy water-related reform commitments.
Return to top
Murray-Darling Basin At the COAG meeting, the Commonwealth, New South Wales, Victorian, South Australian and Australian Capital Territory Governments also signed an agreement dealing with the expenditure of the $500 million, which had previously been committed by those governments over a five-year period, for returning water to the Murray- Darling Basin system and restoring the health of that system. Under this agreement, the first priority will be water recovery for six significant ecological systems that are supported by the Murray-Darling Basin (by the end of the five-year period, the amount of the water recovered is targeted to be around 500GL per year). The governments are to be able to discharge their funding commitments by undertaking water recovery projects that are nominated by any interested person (including the governments) and approved by the Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council. These proposals may, for example, include investment in water infrastructure, the purchase of water on the market, and changes to river or wetland management. Moreover, the recovered water is to be permanently secured (eg as a water access entitlement or in water sharing plans) for the benefit of the Murray-Darling Basin system through statutory instruments (although such water may be temporarily traded, with the proceeds applied for the purposes of the agreement, where this is not inconsistent with achieving the environmental objectives for which it is held).
This initiative has been criticised as merely a 'rehash' of previous commitments and as falling well short of the requirement to return 1500GL per year of water to the Murray-Darling Basin system so as to restore the health of that system to an acceptable level. However, further federal funding for the Murray-Darling Basin and other water initiatives (such as the Wimmera- Mallee pipeline) may well be forthcoming in the lead-up to the federal election this year.
If you would like any further information about these COAG initiatives, please contact any of the people below.
Footnotes
1. A summary of the water regulatory frameworks that apply in each of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia is contained in 'Building a National Water Market', a paper delivered by Grant Anderson at the 9th Annual National Water Conference on 16 June 2004.
2. The major initiatives contained in the White Paper 'Securing Our Water
Future Together' are outlined in AAR Focus: Water of 24 June 2004.
Return to top
© 2008 Allens Arthur Robinson, Australia
http://ourwater.vic.gov.au/monitoring/accounts/06-07/2005-2006_summary_of_key_findings
Drought dominant in 2006-2007
Drought and its impacts are key themes of the 2006/07 Report. Victoria recorded lower than average rainfall for an eleventh consecutive year.
• Melbourne experienced its lowest ever rainfall in the year leading up to 15 May 2007. • Storage levels in 17 of the 19 river basins with major storages finished the year lower than they began. In aggregate, Victoria’s major water storages held 2,438,000 ML less water as at 30 June 2007 compared with 30 June 2006 – a decline of 52 per cent. • Increases in storage levels that normally occur during the winter-spring period did not occur in 2006/07, with aggregate storage levels declining every month until heavy rains late in the year resulted in a small increase. • Basin inflows in 2006/07 were just 26 per cent of the long-term average, with the majority of basins recording less than 20 per cent of the long-term average streamflow. Only the Thomson and East Gippsland basins experienced an increase in streamflow compared to 2005/06. • Inflows into the Murray basin were 3,253,000 ML lower in 2006/07 compared with 2005/06. • The volume of water diverted for consumptive purposes fell by 24 per cent, or approximately 1,289,000 ML, due to more stringent urban water restrictions, lower seasonal allocations for irrigators and increased bans on diversions from unregulated streams. • Groundwater use increased by 44 per cent as surface water supplies came under threat. The volume of groundwater used to augment urban supplies doubled compared to 2005/06.
Back to Top
Securing water supplies - drought contingency measures
The drought prompted Government and water businesses to implement a range of contingency measures and response plans.
• The Minister for Water used his powers under the Water Act 1989 to qualify rights to water in a number of basins to secure essential water supplies to towns and rural communities at times of water shortage. Temporary qualifications were imposed on 28 occasions in 12 different basins during 2006/07. • More than 220 emergency water supply points were in operation around Victoria where water shortages became critical. Municipal drought relief bores, urban surface water standpipes and surface extraction points including access to selected points on channels and streams were used and the emergency water supply network was expanded to meet the needs of users. • Water restrictions affected nearly all Victorian urban customers throughout the State. At 1 July 2006, 192 towns were on some form of restriction, and by 30 June 2007 the number had increased to 457 with 214 towns experiencing the highest, Stage 4, restrictions. • Seasonal allocations were significantly lower in 2006/07. The Murray, Broken and Thomson-Macalister districts were the only districts to receive more than 40 per cent allocation, with Campaspe, Loddon and Bacchus Marsh irrigators receiving zero allocation for the entire year. • Supplementary water supplies were secured from a range of sources in response to critical need. Groundwater (sometimes sourced from emergency bores), greater use of recycled water to augment urban and rural supplies, carting water and infrastructure upgrades of pipelines, storages and treatment plants were all also used as a last resort to move water from one town to another.
Back to Top
Rainfall
In 2006/07 Victoria experienced the eleventh successive year of below average rainfall. The majority of the State received between 60-80 per cent of its long-term average. Most of the Murray and Goulburn basins, home to the majority of irrigation in the State, received between 40-60 per cent of the long-term average.
Particularly low levels were experienced throughout most of the state between August – October 2006: southern regions received 40-60 per cent of their average rainfall and northern regions only 20-40 per cent.
The year leading up to 15 May 2007 was Melbourne’s driest 365-day period on record, receiving 316.4 mm of rain, less than half the average rainfall (the previous record of 318.0 mm was in 1967-68). The rainfall in central and east Gippsland, which includes parts of the Latrobe, Thomson, Mitchell, Tambo and Snowy basins, was also well below average until 26 June, when between 140 and 250 millimetres fell in 72 hours, approximately a quarter of the average annual rainfall.
Victorian average rainfall
Back to Top
Streamflows
The impact of low rainfall levels on streamflows was severe in 2006/07. At a statewide level, streamflow was just 26 per cent of the long-term average, a decline of more than half compared with the streamflow recorded in 2005/06.
Despite rainfall of between 60 per cent and 100 per cent of the long-term average across the majority of the State, streamflows were significantly lower than average. Only the Snowy and East Gippsland basins recorded streamflows of more than 50 per cent of the long-term average.
Many areas of the State experienced record low flows. Out of Victoria’s 29 river basins, 15 experienced inflows of less than 20 per cent of the long-term average, including the Murray basin where inflows declined by more than 3,273,000 ML. When compared with 2005/06, streamflows in all but two basins were significantly reduced: Corangamite (84 per cent below previous year), Ovens (87 per cent), Broken (72 per cent), Kiewa (74 per cent), Murray (74 per cent), South Gippsland (70 per cent). Only the Thomson and East Gippsland basins recorded higher flow levels.
Streamflow July 1997 to June 2007 expressed as a percentage of long-term average flow
Back to Top
Impact of bushfires
Bushfires in the summer of 2006/07 had a major influence on water availability and quality in many areas. Large parts of the Thomson, Macalister, Mitchell, Goulburn, Broken and Ovens catchments in eastern Victoria, and the Grampians in western Victoria were burnt.
Serious water quality concerns did not eventuate as contingency measures were implemented in different regions.
North of the divide, water corporations issued alerts to boil drinking water and cautioned their customers about the use of poor quality water.
South of the divide, there were acute water quality problems after the bushfires for Maffra and towns supplied by the Mitchell River, including Bairnsdale and Lakes Entrance.
The first significant rainfall events after the bushfires in the Macalister catchment resulted in extremely turbid water. Gippsland Water upgraded its water treatment plant to cope, and water was carted to the small settlements of Glenmaggie and Coongulla which are supplied directly from Lake Glenmaggie.
Post-bushfire rainfall events in the Mitchell River catchment resulted in extremely turbid water in the Mitchell River. Fortunately, East Gippsland Water had enough water stored in its off-stream storages to give it time to implement emergency measures
Back to Top
Storage levels
During 2006/07 storage levels fell from 4,709,800 ML (37 per cent of capacity) at the start of July 2006 to 2,271,500 ML (18 per cent of capacity) at the end of June 2007.
Rather than following the typical pattern of increased volumes in major rural reservoirs over the winter/spring filling period, peaking in October, storage levels in 2006/07 actually decreased during this period. They then continued to drop over the summer/autumn as water was released from the reservoirs, predominantly supplying irrigation demands. At the end of June 2007 storages in the Wimmera, Glenelg, Maribyrnong, Campaspe, Loddon and Werribee basins were all less than 10 per cent full. Storages in the Ovens basin, however, were 80 per cent full due to greater inflows received in the latter part of the year.
Water stored in key regional cities' reservoirs at the end of October, 2000-2006
Back to Top
Groundwater
Groundwater reserves became increasingly important as alternative water supply sources in many regions.
As a result of the declining availability of surface water, groundwater use increased significantly compared to 2005/06. The total estimated groundwater use across the State, including domestic and stock use, was approximately 526,100 ML, an increase of 44 per cent from the volume used in 2005/06 (366,300 ML).
Urban water businesses relied significantly more on groundwater to supplement surface water for urban supplies. Water businesses in aggregate used their 47,000 ML of licensed entitlements to extract 22,800 ML of groundwater for urban use. This is an 87 per cent increase on the 2005/06 groundwater extraction (12,200 ML).
Licensed groundwater entitlements totalled approximately 1,001,000 ML as at 30 June 2007. In 2006/07, groundwater extractions (526,100 ML) were approximately 53 per cent of total licensed volume.
Water levels in some heavily used aquifers fell throughout 2006/07. This is attributable to reduced aquifer recharge during the drought while the demand for groundwater continued.
Only one restriction was applied to groundwater use in 2006/07, for the Deutgam WSPA in the Werribee basin.
Back to Top
Water Consumption
Irrigation remains by far the highest category of water use in the State, comprising 74 per cent of all diversions. Metered urban water consumption fell as water restrictions and increased awareness of sustainable water use took effect. Total urban consumption by residential and non-residential users fell by eight per cent from 2005/06 with regional residential customers reducing their consumption by 13 per cent and regional non-residential consumption dropping by 11 per cent.
A number of Government water conservation schemes were effectively used to strengthen awareness of, and participation in, water conservation activities.
They include the Water Smart Gardens and Homes Rebate Scheme and the Stormwater and Urban Water Conservation Fund.
The Schools Water Efficiency Program was also supported by 307 schools achieving an average reduction in water use of around 14 per cent by the end of 2006/07. Total diversions for consumptive purposes in Victoria, 2006-2007
Back to Top
Recycled Water
The volume of water that was recycled by Victoria’s water businesses continued to grow in 2006/07, with a total of 95,500 ML of wastewater recycled for use external to treatment plants.
The total volume of water recycled across Victoria increased by 20 per cent in 2006/07 (an additional 15,600 ML) compared to 2005/06. This growth was predominately driven by increased availability from Melbourne Water’s two wastewater treatment plants – the Eastern Treatment Plant and the Western Treatment Plant.
Including the treatment plants operated by the Melbourne metropolitan retailers, the volume of water recycled in Melbourne was 64,650 ML, or 22 per cent of the water available for reuse. The percentage of recycled water is higher outside Melbourne where weather conditions, the availability of land and access to potential purchasers (i.e. agricultural producers) are more favourable.
The remainder of the state recycled 31 per cent, or 30,878 ML, of the wastewater available for reuse. Although the volume of recycled water used in regional Victoria fell from 2005/06 (33,105 ML), this was due to lower overall water consumption and therefore less wastewater entering the treatment plants.
Back to Top
Water entitlement transfers
Water trading in response to dry conditions, and as a result of low seasonal allocations, occurred in many areas in 2006/07. Some 450,000ML of water entitlements were traded on a permanent or a temporary basis.
As the drought continued, more irrigators decided to permanently sell their water entitlements. Approximately 70,000 ML of permanent water entitlements were traded in 2006/07, from more than 1,100 transactions. This included a net 14,570 ML transferred interstate, four times as much as 2005/06. The volume of permanent water traded increased by some 30,000ML from 40,000ML in 2005/06, an increase of 75 per cent.
Approximately 380,000 ML was exchanged on the temporary market via more than 23,000 transactions.
Temporary trades in the Murray irrigation districts, including the Murray, Kiewa and Ovens basins, more than doubled compared to 2005/06. Basins where seasonal allocations were significantly lower than 2005/06, including the Goulburn, Loddon, Campaspe, Thomson, Latrobe and Werribee basins, experienced lower volumes of temporary trades as there was limited water to sell.
Back to Top Restrictions on diversions from unregulated streams
Restrictions generally followed a typical pattern of severe restrictions during the summer and autumn months and lower restrictions over winter and spring. However, the magnitude of restrictions increased from previous years.
At March 2007, 217 unregulated streams were under restriction, with irrigation bans on the majority. In June 2007, 149 streams were still subject to some form of restriction.
Number of Victorian unregulated streams on restrictions
Back to Top
Water for the Environment
Across the State, the proportion of total flow leaving the basins has increased slightly in recent years, from 60 per cent in 2005/06 to 67 per cent in 2006/07. However, in volumetric terms the amount of water leaving the basins reduced by 49 per cent from 9,231 GL in 2005/06 to 4,747 GL in 2006/07, reflecting substantially lower basin inflows.
Back to Top
Basin Accounts
The basin accounts in part two of the Victorian Water Accounts provide a detailed report on water availability and use in each of Victoria’s 29 basins. They include a map of the basin, the current management arrangements for water resources and drought contingency measures. They also provide a summary of total water resources in each basin including surface water, groundwater, recycled water and water for the environment.
Back to Top
• Sitemap | • Copyright | • Disclaimer | • Privacy | • Accessibility | • Help
Last updated 31/10/2008