Calling All Australians
The sun came out, the wind dropped, was a walk to the Murray Mouth possible on a Saturday afternoon? We have always undertaken them at dawn. Diane Bell rugged up and set off. It was very heavy going. The four-wheel drive vehicles had ploughed the foreshore of the Sir Richard Peninsula.
Media Release: Key outcomes that Voices for the Murray-Darling Alliance are seeking from the Basin Plan
On 27 June, the Voices for the Murray-Darling Alliance launched its website and petition – please sign if you haven’t already. www.lifeblood.org
Today the Alliance brings you ‘Key Outcomes’, a document endorsed by members of the Alliance from across the Basin states. This is what we are saying must be in a Basin Plan.
The Basin Plan must be based on credible, peer-reviewed science and processes used to develop and implement the Basin Plan must be robust.
The Basin Plan must return a minimum of 4000 GL of water to environmental flows in order to restore the ecological health and resilience of the Basin’s river systems.
The Basin Plan must provide sufficient water to enable the Basin’s 2 million tonnes of salt and other pollutants to be flushed through the Murray Mouth to the ocean.
The Basin Plan must provide optimal flows so that essential ecosystem services and functions are maintained throughout the Basin including:
The Basin Plan must acknowledge Indigenous rights in cultural flows as integral to the Plan.
The Basin Plan must represent value for the $10 billion of Australian tax-payers’ money allocated to help communities adjust to the change by ensuring that policies, management frameworks and evaluation methods deliver tangible environmental outcomes, now and into the future.
The Basin Plan must have clear and transparent targets that trigger the revision of management frameworks, evaluation methods and adoption of improved scientific understanding.
The flood waters have come through but the Regulator at Clayton Bay is only partially removed and the Currency Creek regulator remains under water. Visit a photographic record of the regulators.
These regulators were built in 2009 as ‘emergency’ measures during a period of low flows and anxiety regarding the potential dangers occasioned by the naturally occurring acid sulphate soils of the region. They were to be removed in June 2011. Here is story of the life of these regulators. It is one that deeply concerns the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group (RLCAG).
As the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) prepares its Draft Plan for release later this month, we are hearing much of the virtues of ‘localism’ and ‘adaptive management’. We are concerned that these notions offer excuses for delay and are indicative of a failure to address the underlying causes of the problems we are facing in a systematic fashion.
Here is a little case study. Mismanagement? Adaptive management? You decide.
The latest move: On 26 June 2011, Barbara Jones, Assistant Secretary, Environment Assessment Branch, signed the notification of the reconsideration decision re the life of the Clayton Bay and Currency Creek regulators. The SA Dept of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) now has an extension on full removal of the ‘regulators’ till 29 Feb 2012 re Clayton Bay and 30 March 2013 re Currency Creek.
Three matters for consideration by fellow citizens.
1. How one is informed of such decisions? To find out about this decision, one would need to check the notifications of the EPBC website. Anyone you know been doing that this past week?
There you will find - 2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78C Reconsideration decision
2. The EPBC history of the regulators.
On the EPBC website we note there have been 13 sets of documents posted with respect to these regulators. The construction of the regulators was approved as an emergency measure in May 2009; reconsidered in July 2010, again Nov 2010, and again April 2011. The EIS of 2009 remains in limbo. The RLCAG asks: Does the apparent inability of the various Directors of the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth Project to craft a proposal that addresses the long term health of the region indicate poor management? Is this an example of ‘adaptive management’ or ‘mismanagement’? Have a look. You decide.
Notice Documents Re EPBC 2009/4833
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78C Reconsideration decision 26 June 2011
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Invitation for Public Comment on Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78A Reconsideration request 07 Apr 2011
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78C Reconsideration decision 13 Dec 2010
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Invitation for Public Comment on Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78A Reconsideration request 25 Nov 2010
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78C Reconsideration decision 20 Aug 2010
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Invitation for Public Comment on Reconsideration of Referral Determination: S78A Reconsideration request 20 Jul 2010
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Decision whether action needs approval/Approval Not Required - particular manner 12 May 2009
2009/4833 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel, Finniss River & Currency Creek/SA/Emergency Response for the Crisis Management of Acid Sulphate Soils Invitation for Public Comment on Referral/Comments received 06 Apr 2009
Notice Documents EPBC 2009/5227
2009/5227 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel/SA/Goolwa Channel Water Level Management Project Assessment Process Notice: Guidelines issued 26 Feb 2010
2009/5227 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel/SA/Goolwa Channel Water Level Management Project Invitation for Public Comment on Assessment Process Notice: Draft EIS guidelines 20 Jan 2010
2009/5227 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel/SA/Goolwa Channel Water Level Management Project Decision whether action needs approval/Approval Required 18 Dec 2009
2009/5227 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel/SA/Goolwa Channel Water Level Management Project Decision on Assessment Approach: Environmental Impact Statement 18 Dec 2009
2009/5227 South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage/Water management and use/Goolwa Channel/SA/Goolwa Channel Water Level Management Project Invitation for Public Comment on Referral 01 Dec 2009
3. What are the scientists saying?
We invite you to read ‘A Ramsar wetland in crisis - the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth, Australia’. In Marine and Freshwater Research, 2011, 62, 255–265. The following experts provide their analysis.
Richard T. Kingsford [Australian Wetlands and Rivers Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Science, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia]
Keith F. Walker [School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia]
Rebecca E. Lester [School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia]
William J. Young [CSIRO Land and Water, Clunies Ross Street, Black Mountain, ACT 2601, Australia]
Peter G. Fairweather [School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia]
Jesmond Sammut [Australian Wetlands and Rivers Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Science, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia]
and Michael C. Geddes [School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia].
To read the whole article
Here is the Abstract. The state of global freshwater ecosystems is increasingly parlous with water resource development degrading high-conservation wetlands. Rehabilitation is challenging because necessary increases in environmental flows have concomitant social impacts, complicated because many rivers flow between jurisdictions or countries. Australia’s Murray–Darling Basin is a large river basin with such problems encapsulated in the crisis of its Ramsar-listed terminal wetland, the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth. Prolonged drought and upstream diversion of water dropped water levels in the Lakes below sea level (2009–2010), exposing hazardous acid sulfate soils. Salinities increased dramatically … , reducing populations of waterbirds, fish, macroinvertebrates and littoral plants. Calcareous masses of estuarine tubeworms (Ficopomatus enigmaticus) killed freshwater turtles (Chelidae) and other fauna. Management primarily focussed on treating symptoms (e.g. acidification), rather than reduced flows, at considerable expense (>AU$2 billion). We modelled a scenario that increased annual flows during low-flow periods from current levels up to one-third of what the natural flow would have been, potentially delivering substantial environmental benefits and avoiding future crises. Realisation of this outcome depends on increasing environmental flows and implementing sophisticated river management during dry periods, both highly contentious options. [emphasis added]
Press Release: River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc.
Speaking as One: Voices for the Murray-Darling River
Today, with the launch of lifeblood.org.au, the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc (RLCAG) joins a diverse alliance of groups from across rural and metropolitan Australia. ‘Together we are speaking out for ‘Our Rivers, Our Lifeblood’, says Professor Diane Bell, Chair, RLCAG.
‘We invite you to become a voice for the Murray-Darling. Just visit and sign the petition to Murray-Darling Basin Authority chair Craig Knowles. We are asking for a Basin Plan that will return the rivers to health and secure the future of people who live and work there.
‘We need to act now. The Authority will soon release its Draft Plan and we are asking you to be part of the rapidly growing nonpartisan movement that understands we’ve taken far too much water out of the Murray-Darling for far too long. It’s time to get it right.
‘On Thursday 23 June, all South Australians federal politicians signed the Murray-Darling Pledge organised by the Australian Conservation Foundation. This generous and future-oriented support for a strong Basin Plan is a welcome sign that our elected representatives appreciate this is something we must do together.
‘The RLCAG has been heartened by the increasing understanding of the need for end of system flows as well as within catchment flows. We are joining with communities upstream. Together we will be asking for a Basin Plan that draws on credible science. Together, we will be telling our stories of Our River, Our Lifeblood.
‘The floods brought welcome relief to our region, but we still have a long way to go to guarantee a healthy river, healthy communities and healthy economies. Here, at the end of the system, we know that the two million tonnes of salt and pollutants that are carried down the river system each year must be flushed through the lakes and out to sea through the Murray Mouth. We need a Basin Plan that recognises that the Murray Mouth is both an icon and an indicator of the health of the system.
Voices of the Murray-Darling is an alliance comprised of the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Australian Floodplain Association, Conservation Council South Australia, the Central West Environment Council, the Darling River Action Group, the Environmental Farmers Network, Environment Victoria, Friends of the Earth, GetUp, the Goulburn Valley Environment Group, the Inland Rivers Network, the National Parks Association of New South Wales, the National Parks Australia Council, the Nature Conservation Council of NSW, Queensland Conservation, the River Lakes and Coorong Action Group and the Wilderness Society.
Prof Diane Bell, Chair, RLCAG.
0427 554 194
PRESS RELEASE: RIVER, LAKES AND COORONG ACTION GROUP INC
High Water Mark for South Australian Politicians
The Murray-Darling Pledge organised by the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and signed by all federal South Australian politicians represents a high water mark in the politics of the water reform.
The Pledge states that for too long, too much water has been taken out of the Murray- Darling system and that only strong leadership can return enough water to revive the river system.
‘The challenge now is for these South Australian elected members to make their voices loud and clear in the federal parliament and the national debate,’ said ACF’s healthy rivers campaigner Dr Arlene Harriss-Buchan.
The signed Pledge is on its way to Canberra where it will be delivered to Craig Knowles, Chair of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and the federal Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Tony Burke.
‘We have been asking our politicians to take a stand on the need for a strong Murray-Darling Plan said Professor Diane Bell, Chair, RLCAG, ‘And we are delighted by this bipartisan support. Now we are asking our fellow citizens to contact their federal representatives and to urge them to speak for a strong credible plan that returns enough water to restore the health of the River Murray.’
‘The floods have brought welcome relief to our region, but we still have a long way to go to ensure we will have a healthy river and healthy communities. The two million tonnes of salt and pollutants that are carried down the river system each year must be flushed through the lakes and out to sea through the Murray Mouth. We need a Basin Plan that recognises, as we do here at the end of the system, that the Murray Mouth is both an icon and an indicator of the health of the system.’
The River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc congratulates all who have worked to achieve this high water mark and asks that you write to your representative and ask that they stand strong for a strong Plan in the federal parliament.
The ACF has made it easy. The phone numbers of each of the signatories of the Pledge appear in the ACF advertisement in The Advertiser.
Here are links for SA politicians.
For more information about the pledge go to ACF website and see story in Advertiser.
High tide, drenching rain and wild winds did not stop Diane Bell and Elizabeth Tregenza on the thirteenth walk for the year by members of the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc (RLCAG) along the ocean beach of the Sir Richard Peninsula from Goolwa to the Murray Mouth.
It was cold setting out and we seriously considered turning back several times but the thought of the hot soup, chicken salad, meat balls and champagne lunch we had in our back packs sustained us. This week the currents were ferocious and the wind had driven water across areas at the Mouth where we previously there was wide expanses of sand.
For more photographs go to Di Bell’s flickr page and explore the various sets - including ‘Murray Mouth’ for previous walks.
The River, Lakes and Cooong Action Group Inc (RLCAG) joined the all day meeting of environmental NGOs (non-governmental organisations) in Sydney on Thursday 16 June. The ‘Points for Consideration’ developed for the 6 June meeting with Craig Knowles in Adelaide, South Australia, formed the basis of a discussion of an agreed Basin-wide position. Stay tuned for developments of this position and campaign for a scientifically-rigorous, defensible Basin Plan that will restore and maintain the health of the Murray-Darling Basin and communities that depends upon it.
Environmental groups - the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc (RLCAG), the Conservation Council of South Australia and the Wilderness Society - along a number of individuals who have been invited to meet with the Hon. Craig Knowles, Chair, MDBA, in Adelaide, on 6 June, 2011, have prepared an agreed position to guide the meeting.
The invitation to the meeting, received 2 June, stated, ‘Craig will provide an update on how the proposed Basin Plan is developing and where the current thinking is leading. He is especially keen to receive feedback on this thinking and how it may relate to local issues. There is no fixed agenda – it is an informal gathering’.
In order that the precious 45 minutes allocated to the meeting with the MDBA be as productive as possible, the undersigned have developed the following document.
Points for Consideration by the Hon. Craig Knowles, Chair, MDBA Meeting: 6 June, 2011: Adelaide, National Wine Centre, Ferguson and Broughton Rooms, 1pm – 1.45pm
Without a healthy river, there are no healthy communities
Concerned Environmental Groups ask:
1. Science: A defensible MDB Plan must be informed by rigorous science. We ask for an independent review of the science supporting the Plan and for that review to be made public.
2. A Defensible Plan: Justice delayed is justice denied. The River and communities cannot wait until 2019. We ask what does delay cost the river and future generations: What can be done to speed up the Plan.
3. End of System Flows: Science supports an end of system flow out the Murray Mouth as necessary to flush the 2 million tonnes of salts, nutrients and pollutants that are carried down the river system from other basin states each year. This figure is estimated to nearly double by 2050. Can the Authority ensure an end of system flow and that salinity targets in Lakes Albert and Alexandrina and the Coorong are an integral part of the Plan?
4. Defensible SDLs: 2800 GL is too low to be scientifically defensible. We ask the MDBA to model all scenarios up to and including 7,600GL (across different climate change scenarios) against the requirements of the Water Act 2007 and for compliance with Australia’s obligations under International Conventions such as Ramsar.
5. Buy-backs versus Woks and Measures: Buy‐backs deliver water more efficiently than engineering solutions. Works and measures will not deliver environmental outcomes below Lock 1. Will the MBDA continue to advocate for buy‐back water to ensure the freshwater flows necessary for this outcome? Will the MDBA be ‘already on the way’ when the Plan is released?
6. Cultural flows differ from environmental flows: We ask that indigenous rights in cultural flows be respected and acknowledged as being integral to the Plan.
7. A Water Audit: We ask for a full water audit of all water, ground and surface, private and public, and accountability of metered water take from all water resources for all states.
8. Ground Water: The Plan needs to ensure conjunctive management of groundwater and other water resources as well as make allowance for climate change. The Plan should address connectivity with neighbouring catchments (e.g. Great Artesian Basin).
9. Sustainable Farming: The mild climate in the lower Murray region is conducive to quality food production. Quality water is imperative to produce that food sustainably. We ask for accountability in ensuring and monitoring water quantity and water quality to the Murray Mouth.
10. Engagement Strategies: The MDBA has been widely criticised for the way it has interacted with communities. How will the MDBA now proceed? What confidence can we have that those who failed to develop proper engagement strategies will now learn to engage? How will the success of engagement strategies be measured?
The ‘Points for Consideration’ are endorsed by
Four wheel drive vehicle tracks scar the dunes near the Murray Mouth and through the dunes near the Murray Mouth. Driving on the dunes is against the law. Who is watching?
For more photographs go to Di Bell’s flickr page and explore the various sets - including ‘Murray Mouth’ for previous walks.
So What’s the Plan Now?
The Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) Draft Plan is due for release later this month; the Windsor Inquiry has reported; the Productivity Commission has spoken, but do we have a Plan for future generations? Do we have a vision of the society for which this Plan is being crafted? Is there a Plan of how to get from here to there?
The Windsor Inquiry Report (2 June 2011) provoked critical comment from both irrigators and environmentalist. It purports to be a win-win for all. So how is this to be achieved?
In developing our position on the Basin Plan, the River, Lakes and Coorong Action Group Inc (RLCAG) began with the proposition, one that draws on Indigenous knowledge, that ‘without a healthy river, there are no healthy communities’, a phrase the Windsor Report (WR) also relies upon.
What kind of plan will deliver this outcome?
We have advocated for that the Basin Plan to be informed by science that is independent, rigorous and open to public scrutiny. In terms of our communities at the end of the River, the science supports an end of river flow out the Murray Mouth. Such a flow is necessary to flush the 2 million tonnes of salts and nutrients that come down the river system from other basin states each year. Thus an end of river flows is a local indicator of basin-wide health of the river.
Through diverse and innovative actions, we have modelled modes of engagement with local communities but been appalled by the disrespect, arrogance and ignorance displayed at meeting and the inability of those conducting meetings to hear constructive criticism. We welcome the recommendation 4 of the WR.
We have stressed ‘connectivity’ as a key component of the MDB, the need for rigorous research regarding ground/surface water connectivity and note recommendation 2 WR. Similarly we are pleased to see recommendations 6 re the impact of mining in relation to the health of the basin.
That said after the expenditure of many millions, where is the Plan and do Australians understand how critical the decisions being made today re water reform are to their future? Do they understand that water can be traded separate from land? Have the consequences of the privatisation of water been explored? Have comparative cases from other parts of the world been considered?
The RLCAG is deeply concerned that both the MDBA and the Windsor Report are backing away from returning water to the MDB system and looking to engineering solutions and on-farm efficiences.
