Water shares sold off

WEEKLY TIMES

WATER shares in the northern Victorian irrigation region have dropped by a third, or 500 gigalitres, in the past five years.

Another 100 gigalitres could leave the system in the next few years.

Goulburn Murray Water managing director Gavin Hanlon said the environmental water holder had snapped up much of the 500 gigalitres. Superannuation companies and farmers had also bought a large slice.

"Some people might have bought up the water and are trading it on the temporary market," he said.

A further 100 gigalitres could leave northern Victoria through the proposed Murray Darling Basin Plan.

"The harsh reality for us is there could be another 100GL to go depending on the Basin Plan."

He said GM Water was concerned some systems might become unviable if the Commonwealth bought large volumes of water.

"Our discussions would move from irrigation upgrades and backbone connection to looking at the viability of whole districts or slabs of districts," he said.

Victorian Farmers Federation water council spokesman Richard Anderson (pictured) also said there were concerns for some districts' viability if the Basin Plan sought to recover 3200 gigalitres for the environment. Mr Hanlon said the Goulburn Murray irrigation region was facing unprecedented change via government buy-ups of water entitlements and large-scale infrastructure upgrades.

He said the 6000km of channels would be rationalised to about 3500km under the GM Water connections program. But he said the loss of water was not related to the program.

"When we do on-farm works there are efficiency gains and farmers tend to find other ways to use the water, such as selling it on the temporary market," Mr Hanlon said. He said GM Water's tariff structure would be redesigned to keep costs low for the remaining farmers.

"About 45 per cent of our customers use 8 per cent of the water. There's a lot of hobby farms or smaller high-value horticulture, so we need to redesign our tariff structure to reflect that."

Citrus dumped by tonne

WEEKLY TIMES

UPDATE: HUNDREDS of tonnes of citrus is being dumped in the Riverina and Sunraysia after an oversupply of juice fruit.

The high Australian dollar and a lack of demand for navels in juicing has been blamed for the glut.

Fruit Juice Australia chief executive Geoff Parker said dumping was happening because there had been a late, bumper crop of navel oranges, which were unsuitable for juicing.

"Less than 5 per cent of juice can come from navels because they're too bitter,'' Mr Parker said.

"What we need is Valencias and Australia just isn't growing the amount we need for juicing so we are importing a lot of fruit concentrate.''

Mr Parker said the Australian Juice Industry had a 500,000-tonne demand for Valencias, only half of which was met locally.

He also said juice was suffering from an image problem in Australia, with consumers seeing it as too sugary.

Fruit Growers Victoria general manager John Wilson said he was not surprised to hear of the dumping, after a "serious" citrus oversupply the past two years.

Grower Gary McCarten, whose farm is between Mildura and Wentworth, said he will have dumped nearly 40 per cent of his produce by the end of the season.

"This year we've already dumped hundreds of tonnes,'' Mr McCarten said.

"Growers are faced with selling the fruit for juice at $45 a tonne, when it cost them $56 a tonne just to pick it, let alone produce it.

"So many people would rather feed livestock with it than make the juicers rich while we're going down the gurgler.

"This is one of the worst years because the high dollar has meant imported concentrate is so much cheaper." 

Growers are charged to dump the oranges the citrus marketing companies can't sell.

"You can't keep it until you find a buyer because your cool stores will fill up," Mr McCarten said.

"It's easier to dump it and have the livestock eat it so you don't have to bother treating it for fruit fly.

"It's sad that what used to go to juicing is now sheep feed."

Citrus Australia chief executive Judith Damiani said fruit was often dumped due to a lack of demand, but it only represented about 2 per cent of production.

It is expected it could take up to five years before the Australian citrus industry can reduce its oversupply of navel oranges in the domestic market.

National grower group general manager Andrew Harty said, for the situation to improve, growers had to switch varieties and reduce production by 50,000 tonnes. 

Push to show whole picture

VICTORIAN farmers have called for water assets to be included on a foreign ownership register for agricultural land.

It will provide a more comprehensive picture of the specific site and location of foreign agricultural landholdings.Prime Minister Julia Gillard yesterday announced the government would soon begin talks with stakeholders on the establishment of the register.

The move won immediate support from the Victorian Farmers’ Federation (VFF), which said the register would deliver greater transparency on foreign ownership.

But president Peter Tuohey said members were keen to see water assets included.

He said VFF members had fought long and hard for the establishment of a register – passing a resolution at this year’s annual conference calling for a comprehensive registry of all agricultural land and water assets owned by foreign persons or enterprises

“Now we have to get the design right,” Mr Tuohey said.

“As far as the VFF is concerned, any foreign ownership of farm land and water should go onto the register, no matter what it is worth.

“As the Prime Minister said it has helped build Australian agriculture over the last 200 years and it is important for the future as we seek to boost food production and food security.“This does not mean the VFF is opposed to foreign ownership. 

For more of this story, purchase your copy of Wednesday's Sunraysia Daily 24-10-2012.

Figures need to stack up for McCormack vote

MEMBER for Riverina Michael McCormack has vowed he will vote against the Murray-Darling Basin Plan (MDBP) if it seeks to return 2750 gigalitres to the basin, in a move which could see him cross the floor and sit with the Greens.

While Mr Cobb wouldn't be drawn on his personal stance, Mr McCormack was emphatic.Mr McCormack toured the Riverina yesterday with opposition spokesman for agriculture, John Cobb.

"If the figure is 2750 then I won't be voting for it ... I can't in all conscience (do that)," he said.

Mr Cobb said he worried for the agriculture industry if the plan balloons to 3200 gigalitres.

"The first comment I'd make is we are talking about the food bowl of Australia," he said.

"We're talking about a part that produces a big part of the nation's fruit and vegetables."

There are only eight days left of Parliament sitting this year and the plan must sit on the table for 15 days after it's submitted.

Speculation is mounting that Water Minister Tony Burke will submit the MDBP on Monday.

When it comes before Parliament it would take two votes against it to force an official vote.

Mr McCormack said he would vote against 2750 gigalitres, meaning he only needs one more person to force the issue.

He may be joined by Greens MP Adam Bandt who is calling for further water to be returned to the system.If that happens and the Coalition resolves to vote in favour of the plan, Mr McCormack would have to cross the floor.

"I really don't think it will come to that," Mr Cobb said yesterday.

Where's the plan, Tony?

THE crippling uncertainty that has haunted Griffith since 2010 could drag on into next year after federal water minister Tony Burke failed to present a basin plan to parliament this month.

There are only eight days of parliament remaining this year and the Murray-Darling Basin Plan must sit on the table for 15 days after it is submitted.

A final plan is still nowhere in sight, despite Mr Burke’s promise to have it in place by the end of the year.

At the end of the 15-day period, the plan will become legislation without going to a vote – unless a disallowance motion is submitted by an opposing party in the meantime.

That disallowance motion will have to come from an unlikely source – the Greens.

Riverina MP Michael McCormack said the Coalition was unlikely to submit a motion if the state ministers came to an agreement on the plan, which is still under negotiation behind closed doors.

“The basin states are all under Coalition governments so, if they agree, then we’re not really in a position to knock it (the plan) back,” Mr McCormack said. 

“There is a lot of pressure on those ministers to make sure the plan will not destroy communities. 

“Some compromise will have to be reached to ensure economic survivability for the 3.4 million people living in the basin.”

While he has pushed hard for agreement from the states, Mr Burke has repeatedly threatened to “go it alone” and present the plan to parliament without their consent if necessary. 

He is expected to table the plan, regardless of the outcome of negotiations, during the last week of parliament in late November. 

Local water campaigner Paul Pierotti was certain the Greens would come to basin communities’ rescue once the plan was tabled.

“What I want to know is how we can make sure basin communities will be protected when we won’t have a chance to see the plan before it goes to parliament.“I am confident this plan won’t go straight through – whether it happens this year or next there will be a disallowance motion,” Mr Pierotti said.

“How can anyone endorse this plan without any consultation with communities? 

“It is completely unacceptable and shows blatant disrespect for everyone affected.”

Lower lakes focus

TWO local residents have called on infrastructure works to occur at the mouth of the Murray River to reduce the amount of water needed to be diverted from communities to ensure the Murray-Darling Basin's health.

The men have united with Mildura grape grower Vince Cirillo, National Civic Council vice-president Pat Byrne and former Victorian Farmers Federation Water Committee chairman, John O'Brien to form Defend Australia's Food Security - an online campaign that aims to provide farmers with a means to lobby their politicians using the internet, and expose government policies that threaten agriculture and the nation's food security.Barham resident Neil Eagle and Ken Trewin have vowed their support for five engineering projects that would mitigate the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's need to reclaim 2750 gigalitres of water annually for environmental needs.

"We are endeavouring to encourage upper state Ministers and governments to stand firm and not go along with this (supporting the plan)," Mr Eagle said.

"We continue to ask how the basin plan can ask the upper states (Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria) to reconfigure their irrigation infrastructure without asking the southern-most state (South Australia) to act on the issue.

"Unless the future management of the Lower Lakes is brought into the plan, there should not be a plan."

Some of the major projects the group support include the automation of barrage gates at Goolwa to allow natural flows between Lake Alexandrina and the Southern Ocean, dredge the channel between Lake Alexandrina and Lake Albert to increase fresh flows into Lake Albert and build a pipeline or trench from Lake Albert to the Coorong to help drain saline water from Lake Albert.

It is also suggested that freshwater flows from south-east South Australian are re-directed back into the Coorong system.

Another project that is supported by the three men is the construction of a new weir, known as Lock Zero, at the bottom end of the Murray River, north of the Lower Lakes.

The projects have received the support of the South Australian Government, local communities around Lakes Alexandrina, Albert and the Coorong and the authority.

The South Australian Liberal Opposition has called on the authority to investigate four of the options, whilst the South Australian Conservation Council supports three of the proposals.

"If (Howard Government Environmental Minister) Malcolm Turnbull had approved and built the weir at Wellington, much of the devastation of the drought last decade would not have occurred," Mr Eagle said.

"It is necessary to stop the losses at the bottom end of the area if another long drought occurs."

The campaign coincides with the completion of interviews for a television documentary focusing on the arguments surrounding the basin plan and how it will impact rural communities.

Mr Jury hosted a forum at Barham in July, which attracted more than 250 people.Veteran journalist Ken Jury has travelled throughout the basin states to hear the views of residents, industry leaders and politicians.

The final interviews were completed last week, with a televised date to be determined once post-production near completion.

More information on the Defend Australia's Food Security initiative is available at http://ausfoodsecurity.org.au/

Increased flood risk concerns

CONCERNS have been raised that the adoption to alterations to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan released earlier this week could lead to increased flood risks for the district.

Both scenarios involve the removal of key constrains, such as increasing water releases from the Hume weir from 25,000 megalitres per day to 40,000 megalitres per day.Water Minister Tony Burke released on Tuesday modelling by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority that outline how the environment would react to either 2800 gigalitres or 3200 gigalitres being diverted from community and agricultural use to the basin.

The modelling found that the plan would be able to meet previously unmet high flow targets at five iconic environmental sites throughout the basin, including the Gunbower-Perricoota-Koondrook forests.

"Importantly, this modelling shows that with constraints relaxed, there are improved outcomes for the environment, particularly the Murray River, its main tributaries and the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth,'' Mr Burke said.

"I want to work with the basin states to provide healthy working rivers and this modelling will assist us in this task."I'm willing to work co-operatively to find a pathway which delivers the healthy rivers we need in a way which is sensitive to the challenges faced by rural communities."

The modelling has been criticised by local leaders, politicians and industry groups.

Gannawarra Shire mayor, Cr Max Fehring said the modelling scenarios created risks for towns adjacent to Gunbower Island, such as Barham/Koondrook, Cohuna and Gunbower.

"Any time you increase the flows of a river you run the risk of flooding the moment you do it," he said.

"If a quarter of the rainfall that occurred (leading up to the floods) in 2011 occurred on an supercharged river, there would be big problems.

Cr Fehring, along with fellow councillors and municipal committees, have spent the past few years lobbying the authority and the respective governments regarding the impact the basin plan would have on rural communities."Plans and modelling do not reflect what happens in real life. You only need to look at the floods of last year and see that each flood is different."

"This adds another concern to a community that is already adjusting to changes," he said.

"Once again the debate has become about the volume of water (needed for the environment) and pitted people against others, rather than looking at the outcomes of the proposal."

Irrigators to dig in for fight

LOCAL irrigators have threatened to "go militant" after the federal water minister made the shock announcement he would consider taking even more water away from them.

Local farmers and water advocates have been quick to condemn the minister's statements, saying the community and the NSW government would not stand for an even greater loss of water.Minister Tony Burke called a press conference yesterday to outline the "staggeringly different" outcomes that have emerged from fresh modelling for taking 3200 gigalitres from the basin up from the already controversial figure of 2750 gigalitres.

Griffith farmer John Bonetti was one of many who said the community would continue to take radical action to protect its food production capabilities.

Mr Bonetti declared he would lead a "whole set" of protests if his fellow farmers agreed to support him.

"We will not accept the plan if it's not right for us," Mr Bonetti said. "We have a lot of big machinery and we will use it to stop this and wake up the politicians,"

"I'm basically a law-abiding person but this is ridiculous. We will take a militant stand against this if we need to.

"Even if it means I have to spend time in jail, I'd be proud to do that if it saved our community and meant we could keep producing food for the starving people of the world."

Mr Burke expected to present the final plan to parliament by November 29.

Murrumbidgee Food and Fibre Association president Debbie Buller said it wasn't in farmers' nature to play dirty but it could be on the cards.

"Even if it is a good plan, which looks unlikely at this point, we're still in massive trouble if it's poorly implemented," Mrs Buller said.

"If that happens, we all need to fight back, stand up and speak up. We could cause big trouble if we had to we could block off all of the roads in a heartbeat.

"I hope we don't need to do it but the damage this plan could create is very scary and it's something we shouldn't accept."

"Once we get a feel for what it looks like, we will have to make a judgement call on whether we can live with it," Coleambally Irrigation CEO John Culleton said.After this latest announcement, local stakeholders were even more uncertain about the form the final plan will take.

"If we find ourselves absolutely cornered with a disproportionate share of water cuts, I can assure you there will be some fight left in our farmers."

Farmers sold down river

FLOODPLAIN farmers between Albury and Mulwala are outraged by the South Australian Premier’s claims they are ruining the Murray River’s environment.

He said that, historically, they had taken too much water from the system, damaging it in the process.Jay Weatherill said farmers worried about flood damage from increased river flows did not deserve compensation.

Murray River Action Group chairman Ian Lobban said Mr Weatherill’s comments were totally without foundation.

“The Murray Darling Basin Authority draft plan has been driven all along by South Australia,” he said.

“They’re so far removed from understanding all the conditions and the impact the plan will have in the upper reaches.”

Mr Lobban said it was a real shame people making such statements did not do their homework “to understand the facts and get it right”.

“They’ve got absolutely no knowledge of the impacts up here or the restraints in the channel capacity to take increased volumes,” he said.

New modelling suggests lifting the amount of water for the environment to 3200 gigalitres a year could improve the health of the basin’s wetlands and floodplains.

South Australia has said it will take High Court action if that figure is not in the federal government’s final plan when it is produced this month.

But Mr Lobban said lifting environmental flows above channel capacity between Albury and Mulwala would cause tree losses and erode banks.

He said landholders from Lake Hume and Lake Mulwala had spent a lot of money in the past decade stabilising and revegetating river banks.

They were determined to improve the health of the river and ensure its sustainability.

“The increased flows these people are talking about can only destroy the money and the work that’s already been done,” Mr Lobban said.

“They’d probably have a better understanding if they came up and saw what we’re doing to improve the river.”

“What angers me with Mr Weatherill’s comments about not being entitled to compensation is he’s accusing us of degrading the river,” he said.Mr Lobban said not talking to “the people on the ground” had been a problem since formulation of the plan began.

“That is absolutely absurd because, up here in this reach, very few people irrigate or take water from the river — they’re dryland farmers.”

Chief executive with Southern Riverina Irrigators Louise Burge said Mr Weatherill’s comments just added to a “long list of inaccuracies” in the draft plan.

Minister's promise: 'I won't back down'

THE NSW primary industries minister has vowed to stand by the Griffith community when it needs her most following threats more water could be taken from local irrigators.

But removing an additional 450 gigalitres of water from the basin would have a crippling effect on the local economy, stakeholders say.Federal water minister Tony Burke was upbeat on Tuesday when he announced taking 3200 gigalitres of productive water would provide "staggeringly different" environmental outcomes to the proposed 2750 gigalitres under the draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

An Independent Economics study on taking 2750 gigalitres found there would be a 9 per cent impact on GDP, a $200 million loss of income and 2100 jobs lost in the south-west Murrumbidgee area alone.

Those figures would be magnified if more water was lost from the region.

Mr Burke and the state water ministers have been negotiating on the basin plan behind closed doors for six weeks, forcing locals to put their trust in NSW minister Katrina Hodgkinson to fight for balance for irrigation communities.

Yesterday, Ms Hodgkinson pledged to maintain her stance, as promised to 7000 people at a Griffith rally in June.

"I am unwavering in my commitment to ensuring that rural communities including Griffith are not devastated by a short term, short-sighted plan," Ms Hodgkinson said.

"The MIA alone contributes over $2.5 billion annually to our national economy but the social value of our farming communities is harder to measure, and impossible to replace.

"I will not compromise on either."

The modelling that sparked Mr Burke's announcement found 3200 gigalitres of water would provide markedly increased benefits to the environment but only if the natural and man-made constraints that diverted water away from the main river course were removed.

"Just feeding data into a model is not addressing the issues around the constraints," Mr Gordon said.Ricegrowers Association president Les Gordon questioned how the modelling could add value to the basin plan debate.

The Murray-Darling Basin Authority assured The Area News it had no intention of changing the volume of water in the plan before it went to parliament.

We need a better water plan

Australian governments are dismantling the irrigation sector and this will cost us dearly in the years to come, Julian Cribb writes

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/we-need-a-better-water-plan-20121004-2721u.html#ixzz293ZhoivJ

If Australia's security agencies got wind of a terrorist plot to destroy crucial national infrastructure, eliminate companies and thousands of jobs, cost the Australian public billions of dollars and undermine the health of the community, our governments would - presumably - mobilise our national resources and defence forces to prevent it.
The trouble is the perpetrators in this scenario are Australian governments themselves: federal and state, and of both political complexions. And the scenario is real. As the world grapples with its third food price crisis in four years, our governments and their bureaucracies are steadily dismantling one of Australia's most productive and important industries: the irrigation sector that supplies most of our daily needs for milk, fruit, vegetables, cotton, rice, meat and other foods essential to a healthy diet and living standard.
Irrigation channels that have fed Australians for a century are being bulldozed and farmers' water supplies turned off or sold off for non-food uses. Water prices are soaring. Food industries are contracting, local food companies being sold offshore or shut down, about 100 regional towns are dying and many farmers are quitting agriculture for good. A growing flood of overseas food - grown cheaply in Asia, often using water horribly polluted with industrial poisons, heavy metals and pesticides - now lines the shelves and freezers of our shops and supermarkets.
Not content with this, federal and state governments have also methodically demolished Australia's irrigation science efforts: the irrigation futures and e-water cooperative research centres, the national program for sustainable irrigation, the CSIRO irrigation division and Land & Water Australia have all been wound up, while state irrigation research and extension has been decimated. This will ensure that Australians lack the knowledge we need to grow more food with less water as the climate changes.
It may be that our governments and bureaucracies do not know it takes over 1000 tonnes of water a year to feed an Australian. Or maybe they simply do not care if Australian food prices go through the roof and scarcities erupt as we increase our dependence on imports while the world food supply becomes less secure. But it is hard to find any rational explanation for why this vital sector is being cut down.
In the Olympics of shortsighted decision-making, jeopardising the backbone of the nation's future food security has to be a gold-medal contender. We now rely on overseas suppliers for 30 per cent of our fruit, 20 per cent of our vegetables, three-quarters of our fish - and there is growing economic pressure to shift the dairy industry to China or New Zealand.
Irrigation is worth $9 billion to $11 billion a year at the farm gate and maybe five times that in the shops; along the food chain it helps keep half a million Australians in work. It manages two million hectares and about two-thirds of our available freshwater. It is highly efficient in what it does: turn water into good food and fibre; in the last drought it cut its water use by 43 per cent, while cities cut theirs by just 1 per cent. However, because it consists of a gaggle of regional industries and jurisdictions prone to argue among themselves, it lacks political influence, a national vision, and has no effective voice. This makes it easy meat for government razor gangs, populist politicians and self-seeking bureaucracies.
The northern Victorian federal member for Murray, Sharman Stone, is one who is deeply concerned as spur lines off the main irrigation channels are shut down and channels ploughed in, while local dairy and fruit manufacturers downsize. ''This so-called 'foodbowl modernisation project' was set up to justify piping farm water to Melbourne during the drought.'' Stone says. ''The project was so ill-conceived that a damning state ombudsman's report saw the agency dismantled and the chief executive resign. The project lives on however, now managed by the similarly inept state-owned Goulburn Murray Water Authority, which is on track to 'reduce the infrastructure footprint … by 50 per cent'. This will halve the local irrigation system by 2015.''
At federal level, Stone adds, the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is also targeting food producer's water in the Murray Darling Basin, in what she describes as ''a non-scientific raid aimed at pleasing urban green voters''.
Similarly, in Queensland and NSW, farmers in key food-bowl regions like the Liverpool Plains and Darling Downs are up in arms over state governments apparently determined to hand their water resources to coal seam gas, coal and other resource companies in search of a quick profit - potentially trading off centuries of reliable food production for a few years of cheap energy.
Australians need to understand that the real victims of this process are not so much farmers, who can sell their water and land and walk away - though most do not want to. The real victims are the 22 million-plus Australian consumers who will face increasingly erratic and high food prices, sudden shortages and a growing assault on their health due to the offshoring of our food supply. And, of course, the taxpayers who will inevitably be asked to pay billions of dollars to rebuild and restore food production when the penny finally drops, the public gets angry and governments are forced to backtrack.
The Bruntland definition of sustainability is handing the country to your kids in the same condition as, or better condition than, you received it. In the case of food production, and especially irrigated food production, this will not happen in Australia under current policies. We will pass on, at best, a brow-beaten, downsized, deskilled and demoralised system at a time global food crises are multiplying and prices soaring.
Australia has enough water for all its food and export needs, to protect and sustain its native landscapes and to embark on new industries in aquaculture, algae culture and irrigation potentially worth $30-40 billion. But to do that we need good science, technology and education to redouble water use efficiency and policies which foster sustainable water development and investment.
We should be building low-loss distribution systems (that do not require half the present network to be shut down). We should be recycling up to 100 per cent of our urban water. No Australian city or frivolous user should be allowed to touch food's supply of water. We should bank water by recharging our aquifers nationwide, plan mosaic irrigation in the north and seek to double productivity in the southern irrigation industry - instead of crushing it. We should share best practice and innovative water management the length and breadth of the land. We should build a $1 billion export sector in sustainable water know-how and technology.
The Australians of the 19th and 20th centuries built our modern irrigation sector to sustain the nation in its growth. In a world where food supplies will become increasingly scarce, expensive and unreliable as it surges towards 10 billion ravenous global consumers, the impact of our own neglect of this will be borne by our children and grandchildren. What sort of parents, indeed what sort of Australians, does that make us?
Julian Cribb is a Canberra-based science and agriculture writer, and author of The Coming Famine (CSIRO Publishing, 2010).


Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/we-need-a-better-water-plan-20121004-2721u.html#ixzz293ZIHhtP

Stakeholders condemn new MDB model

COLIN BETTLES

11 Oct, 2012 04:00 AM

FEDERAL Water Minister Tony Burke says new modelling by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) shows environmental outcomes can be drastically improved, without the river system's capacity constraints, which are regulations set to allow for bridge heights and infrastructure.But the move has been panned by the Coalition and farming and irrigation groups as being poorly conceived and inadequate, with no consideration given to the social and economic impacts of stripping 3200 gigalitres from Basin communities.
In releasing details this week, Minister Burke said previous modelling of 2400, 2800 and 3200GL, was held back due to the system's various capacity constraints.
He said diminishing returns were created where extra water was no longer delivering a particular environmental dividend.
The MDBA was asked to remodel flows of 3200GL to measure impacts with system constraints removed.
"I'm pleased to say the environmental outcomes that are present in this modelling are staggeringly different from what we had in the previous modelling with constraints in," he said.
"If you just take one section of the river system... where the Murray and the Darling meet, down to Renmark... you increase the number of wetlands and vegetation that are able to get water by 87.5 per cent.
"There is a massive difference in being able to use the water more effectively in these constraints being removed."
But Mr Burke said he still needed to work through the issue with the Basin States with argument expected from upstream States about community impacts, "and rightly so".
He said questions would also be asked about how the water was acquired.
"The new piece of information we have today - which really is a massive shift from where all the modelling has been to date - is that with volumes of water well south of the 4000GL that have often been spoken about, we can make a massive environmental difference," he said.
"We're still working through the process."
Mr Burke said the constraints could be removed with the co-operation of the States.
He said removing the constraints in the modelling allowed for increasing maximum flows out of Hume and Menindee.
It was then presumed the water could be used with easements over land and without having to take into account bridge heights and other issues.
He said there would be no cost to removing some restraints, which only required a rule change.
Minister Burke also said he did not rule out compensation arising from any additional flooding.
Despite the new modelling, Mr Burke said he was still confident of tabling a plan in Federal Parliament this year.
"I've said all along I'm determined we make a decision on this, this year," he said.
"I do have a legal authority to be able to act unilaterally. My preference is not to do that."
National Irrigators Council chief executive officer Tom Chesson said the new modelling was a "political con job" which was not grounded in reality.
He said the situation was "farcical" and warned the new modelling would be used to appease the Green movement, which is still demanding 4000GL as a minimum in the Basin Plan.
He said the MDBA was "quite clearly embarrassed" at having undertaken modelling of the 3200GL without the system's capacity constraints, knowing it did not exist in the real world.
NSW Primary Industries Minister Katrina Hodgkinson dismissed the modelling, saying removing 3200GL would flood private property, cause "massive river bank erosion" and submerge bridges and weirs.
"Even without taking into account the infrastructure and environmental damage wreaked by that level of flow, the Commonwealth is still yet to answer how any costs required to implement the Murray-Darling Basin Plan will be met," she said.
"It is best to take a common sense approach and first look at how we bridge the gap to the current target reduction figure of 2750GL before the Commonwealth considers removing constraints and buys back even more water."
Greens Murray-Darling Basin spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young said "the best available science has always said the environment needs at least 4000GL to give the system a chance at good health", and queried why Mr Burke refused to model that higher figure.
NSW Irrigators Council chief executive officer Andrew Gregson said it placed the Basin Plan process "entirely in the realm of the absurd".
"It's utterly pointless to ignore constraints within the system in thinking about what you can do with that system," he said.
"What they call 'system constraints', you probably know as roads, bridges and flooded houses. They're not so easy to 'relax' or 'remove'."
National Farmers Federation chief executive officer Matt Linnegar said at a time when critical decisions were about to be made about the future of the Murray-Darling Basin and its communities, the focus should not be about how much more water can be tipped into the system, but how improved environmental outcomes can be delivered without hurting communities.

e

FarmOnline

Source: http://www.farmonline.com.au

Senate committee finds failings in MDB planning

COLIN BETTLES

11 Oct, 2012 04:00 AM

THE Federal Senate’s Rural Affairs and Transport Committee released an interim report last week on the Murray-Darling Basin, which identified several failings in the planning process including the lack of detail, the lack of an environmental watering Plan and the lack of adequate socio-economic analysis.The Murray Group of Concerned Communities chairman Bruce Simpson said the Committee’s report highlighted the Basin Plan’s potentially negative impacts on rural communities.
“Unfortunately with regard to the socio-economic impact, the Committee recommendation is to ‘introduce support programs', for affected communities,” he said.
“The reality is that in areas like ours, where 90 per cent of business is directly reliant on irrigated agriculture, no support program will be big enough to replace a significant drop in productivity.
“Communities like ours don't want support, we want to remain vibrant, productive, self-sufficient communities.”
Independent MP Tony Windsor also took a swipe at Opposition Water Spokesman Barnaby Joyce over the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.
Senator Joyce criticised Mr Windsor for an apparent lack of transparency during a public hearing of Mr Windsor’s Regional Australia Committee last week.
The brief hearing was designed to look at Water Minister Tony Burke’s proposed amendments to the Water Act, to introduce an adjustment mechanism for Sustainable Diversion Limits in the Basin Plan that would be controlled by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) and not parliament, which farm groups have criticised.
Senator Joyce asked why Mr Windsor made the hearing closed to the public with no plans to take public submissions “and only hear in private the views of the MDBA and the relevant government department.
“There seems to be this great fear in the Green-Labor-Independent government, getting greater everyday, about this concept called democracy,” he said.
But Mr Windsor said in his haste to denigrate the Committee’s work and objectivity Senator Joyce had “once again proven he is more interested in perpetuating the problem rather than being part of a solution”.
Mr Windsor defended the Committee’s work saying its membership includes National Party, Liberal Party and government members.
“Senator Joyce has once again shot from the lip - and once again dribbled,” he said.

FarmOnline

Source: http://www.farmonline.com.au

River health plan: Call for infrastructure works at Murray mouth

A LOBBY group is calling for infrastructure works to occur at the Murray River mouth to reduce the amount of water needed to be diverted from communities to ensure the Murray-Darling Basin’s health.

Mr Cirillo has united with Barham resident Neil Eagle, Kerang’s Ken Trewin, National Civic Council vice president Pat Byrne and former Victorian Farmers Federation Water Committee chairman John O’Brien to form Defend Australia’s Food Security – an online campaign that aims to provide farmers with a means to lobby their politicians using the internet, and expose government policies that threaten agriculture and the nation’s food security.The group, which includes Sunraysia grape grower Vince Cirillo, has vowed to support five engineering projects that would mitigate the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s need to reclaim 2750GL of water annually for the environmental.

“We are endeavouring to encourage upper state ministers and governments to stand firm and not go along with this (supporting the plan),” campaign spokesperson Mr Eagle said.

“We continue to ask how the basin plan can ask the upper states (Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria) to reconfigure their irrigation infrastructure without asking the southern-most state (South Australia) to act on the issue.

“Unless the future management of the Lower Lakes is brought into the plan, there should not be a plan.”

Some major projects the group supports include the automation of barrage gates at Goolwa to allow natural flows between Lake Alexandrina and the Southern Ocean, dredging the channel between Lake Alexandrina and Lake Albert to increase fresh flows into Lake Albert, and building a pipeline or trench from Lake Albert to the Coorong to help drain saline water from Lake Albert.

It is also suggested that freshwater flows from southeast South Australia are redirected into the Coorong system.

The projects have received support from the South Australian Government, local communities around Lakes Alexandrina, Albert and the Coorong, and the authority.Another project the three men support is the construction of a new weir, known as Lock Zero, at the bottom of the Murray River, north of the Lower Lakes.

For more of this story, purchase your copy of Thursday's Sunraysia Daily 11/10/2012.

REPLY TO WEEKLY TIMES ARTICLE

First and foremost, it is my and many other peoples belief that all water required for environmental flows can be achieved through infrastructure improvement, what this requires is vision, commitment and time, elements that are severely lacking in our federal Labor government.
Second: For the MDBA to even entertain the removing of "constraints" without identifying them shows how terribly ill informed they are.
Third: By providing too much water to the wetlands and forests will be more devastating than our recent decade long drought, these trees do not need watering every year and to suggest so is complete nonsense. A female kangaroo can withhold her gestation for 3 years, this tells us how long our regular droughts last.
Dartmouth dam is at 97.8% capacity and Hume dam is at 98.3% capacity, some months ago our weather forecasters forecast an El Nino and no doubt the MDBA and their computer modelling told them the same, we had 40mm of rain here at Cobram on Saturday, we better watch out if we get another great whack of rain up in the hills.
We the farmers and communities in the Murray Darling Basin were never going to get a fair go by this narrow minded and ill informed MDBA and federal government. 
My view is that no plan is better than anything this mob will toss our way.
So we rely on our coalition politicians and clear thinking Labor & Independent MP's to try and save further decimation of the Murray Darling farms and communities.
Facebook: Murray Darling Basin ConnectionWeb: www.savemdbasin.blogspot.com.au/
Yours Faithfully,
Peter Gilmour
Cobram

TODAYS COMMENTS

What we have here is the view of a minority group of narrow minded people who do not give 2 hoots what happens to the farmers and communities in the Murray Darling Basin.
I have been saying it for months now that something idiotic like this

 would be the outcome.
Time to take the blinkers off everybody and bloody well fight for what is fair and decent, we must fight back with all our combined energies.
These idiots will just let the 2 big behemoths who are also decimating rural Australia import more food.
COME ON EVERYBODY, GET OFF YOUR BACKSIDES, BECOME ANNOYED, BECOME MILITANT
MURRAY DARLING BASIN - THE FOOD BOWL OF AUSTRALIA
STOP SAYING, YEAH SHE'LL BE RIGHT, BECAUSE IT BLOODY WON'T, IT IS UP TO ALL OF US NOW

This a story that needs to be told.
In the Goulburn Murray Valleys we have a much higher incidence of cancer than other areas. My point is this could well be tracked to the horrible old pesticides and herbicides used on the orchards until they were rightfully banned.
We need to be asking our importers of food what pesticides and herbicides have the imported foods been subjected to, because I have a bad feeling that some of those countries we import from still may well use the old terrible sprays we used to use, we need to really push our safe, fresh home grown foods.

MDBA report provides no answers on Murray-Darling

Barnaby Joyce
The MDBA’s report on recovering additional environmental water is incomplete and gives no answers on whether this approach is feasible.
 
As the modelling is only of the environmental effects it is deficient because it fails to take clearly into account the socio-economic effects of recovering more water. It is hard to judge what a three piece suit looks like on somebody when all they are wearing is the vest. The total picture of the 3200 GL (on top of the 823 GL that was returned to the system before 2009) can only be summarised when we take into account both the benefits and the costs
 
The extra costs will include the impact on the prices of houses, the future of businesses and the social fabric of the 2.1 million people who live in the basin proximate to where this water will be taken from.
 
Constraints in the system are real. Ignoring them will flood real people’s land and real bridges and roads. Today’s report provides no answers on how these constraints might be removed or overcome. The MDBA admits this itself by saying that:
 
Undertaking detailed assessments and analysis to identify whether any of the constraints tested in this study could actually be relaxed was not within the scope of this report (p. xiii). 
 
Nor does the report estimate how much removing constraints would cost and whether these costs are greater than the environmental benefits identified.
 
The Coalition stands ready to support a Murray-Darling Basin Plan but only one based on a triple bottom line, with an equal consideration of economic, social and environmental factors.
 
Just like with investments such as the NBN, the Coalition will only support projects which pass a cost-benefit analysis, and this report doesn’t even come close to being one.

Government should reveal Water Act advice

October 08, 2012 13:49

Barnaby Joyce

The Australian Conservation Foundation has today highlighted that the any Basin Plan may be open to serious legal challenge for giving too much weight to social and economic concerns. 

 

There are two problems with this.  

 

Firstly, on the basis of this analysis, conservation does not include the socioeconomic future of the 2.1 million people who live in the basin. If they need to be sacrificed they will be under this approach. 

 

Secondly, if the legal opinion is correct, then Minister Burke’s assurances that the Water Act can deliver a triple-bottom line are empty. 

 

Two diametrically opposed positions, only one can be right. So I call on Mr Burke to come out and confirm that the Water Act is safe from legal challenge. 

 

We know that the government has commissioned more than 1000 pages of legal advice on the Water Act and it refuses to release the legal advice. 

 

A Senate inquiry last year concluded that there are serious issues with the Water Act yet the government has done nothing to respond to these conclusions. 

 

What we have at the moment is total uncertainty and it’s hard to get people to invest in the Basin in such an uncertain environment. 

WE NEED TO GET THROUGH TO THE MASSES

WE NEED TO GET THROUGH TO THE MASSES
I have had a few very interesting discussion today with friends, one was with an irrigation, he said the jobs f....d and has leased his farm out, those crazy bastards (his words) in Canberra are rooting us and the country.
Another friend is running for council along with my brother and many others, Scott has been asking people what concerns do they have with the Moira Shire and to his amazement the reply he gets is "Oh I don't know". 
Australia is becoming an apathetic, let someone else do it society and it gives me the complete and utter s...s.
When I joined Apex in 1983 there was 18,000 members and we were creating new clubs, now Apex and all other service clubs struggle to survive. 
Come on we all need to lift and start caring about what is happening in our country, getting off our backsides and doing something constructive.
Instead of just reading this message, please share it so we can spread this message far and wide.
We don't need anymore Facebook pages, what we have will do fine.

Peter's ponderings

Hi everyone, I hope you all had a great weekend, I did, watched the AFL Grand Final and a brilliant game it was, well done Sydney Swans it is a well earned and deserved win. Good on Melbourne Storm also for their fantastic win.
My mother has terminal cancer, so all the family have been home over the weekend and we had a lovely family dinner last night.
I have been busy updating the Cobram High School 50 year reunion site (www.chs50yrsreunion.blogspot.com.au) and hopefully will have all annual magazines scanned into there by the time of the reunion.
We really need to push the "Australian made, Australian grown" theme as much as possible, so could you please share all articles relating to that. 
We are very fortunate in Australia to have reasonably priced, safe & clean home grown food. Who knows what the imported food has been subjected to and/or treated with, DDT, 245T, Dieldrin, arsenic? All those have been banned in Australia for decades.
Keep well and have a great week.
Cheers, Peter