The Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) and the Federal Labor Government seek to recover an estimated 765,000 additional megalitres (ML) of water, or in water entitlement terms 1,000,000ML from rural communities.
Currently, there is 4,622,000ML of held environmental water entitlements in the basin. Of that, the Australian Capital Territory provides 0ML, Queensland 136,000ML, South Australia 252,000ML, Victoria 1,493,000ML and New South Wales 2,740,000ML.
Basin communities have been left wondering why the MDBA and Federal Government’s position could change so dramatically in 10 years. In 2012, both parties conceded that further water was not a worthwhile exercise due to the inability of the system to deliver the water.
“In fairness to the Authority, there is a reason why 2,750 is the number they (MDBA) have recommended,” said former Water Minister, Tony Burke, as he addressed the National Press Club at the time.
“And that is that once you go beyond the constraints that are currently in the system, for extra gigalitres of water you don’t get an environmental benefit.
“Those constraints are things like river rules that prevent you from releasing dam water above certain levels, channels, that if you try to put more water than the channel capacity allows, instead of the water going down the system, it just goes out.
“These capacity constraints create a challenge in using higher volumes of water.
“And therefore, the Authority (MDBA) had to look at the system as it currently stands, quite rightly said, within those current constraints, 2,750 is the number we arrive at and that has a series of social, economic and environmental consequences.”
10 years on, and social, economic and environmental consequences have been replaced with deliver in full.
At this week’s National Press Club address, Andrew McConville, Chief Executive, Murray–Darling Basin Authority, stated “It needs to be delivered in full.
“Has enough water been recovered to sustain the Murray–Darling Basin? And are our rivers set up to deliver the water that was been returned to the environment? Sadly, no.”
The former oil and gas peak industry body chief executive is not mucking around. “Some communities have lost out because of the Plan. Others have thrived,” he said.
Mr McConville is right, Australian Bureau of Statistics data and countless social and economic reports all show who the winners and losers are, so will water recovery be targeted to reflect this?
There are now three major factors all competing to increase the Murray’s capacity to levels never seen before, expanding downstream irrigation areas, end of system objectives and the CEWH.
As the Murray-Darling Basin Plan progressed, protection mechanisms contained within the 2007 Water Act and the 2004 National Water initiative were ignored and aided huge horticulture developments below the natural constraints.
Hot, dry conditions on sandy soils with cheap, unirrigated land without regulation of salinity, water use intensity or water deliverability were the perfect target for Californian style permanent plantings of water intensive crops such as almonds.
According to the Almond Board of Australia, the total area planted to almonds grew from 3,546ha in 2000 to 26,589ha in 2010 and 53,014ha in 2019 – and it continues to grow.
The end of system targets within the plan relate to holding Australia’s only freshwater estuary above sea level and attempting to hold the Murray mouth open with freshwater.
The Lower Lakes and Coorong have been plagued with problems, historical manipulation such as the draining of groundwater that fed the Coorong from the east and the installation of barrages causing closing of the opening to the ocean, killing the tidal prism and estuary life such as the Mulloway.
Extensive paleoclimate data like the work from Professor Peter Gell, combined with indigenous and non-indigenous historical accounts has done little to shake the freshwater only solutions, despite a predicted drying climate and sea level rise.
Even with more than 100,000 megalitres a day crossing the South Australian border, SA Water closed the barrages due to seawater flowing into the freshwater estuary. SA Water satellite imagery also shows the current flooding is still not moving down the Coorong.
The real risk of constraints relaxation may be felt closer to home. The modification of the Barmah Choke has been seen as the crown jewel for accessing held environmental water. The choke protects Echuca-Moama and Koondrook-Barham from large Murray floods from Hume Dam, currently on display with the flows heading north down the Edward-Wakool system.
The choke was believed to have been formed around 8,000 years ago, after the earlier dramatic Cadell Fault shift 30,000 years ago. This shift redirected the original Murray course from Green Gully, the Thule Lake system and the lower Wakool (below Thule Creek) into the Edward-Wakool system.
In more recent times, the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal people recount a story of a great flood and tribal Elders using digging sticks to cut through the sand hills to release the flood waters. The Murray carved its new home through to Echuca and down what was the historical bed of the Goulburn.
Community concerns over constraints relaxation flooding farmers and potentially impacting townships has been labelled as scaremongering by MDBA Chief Executive Andrew McConville.
The plan rolls on.
This article appeared in The Koondrook and Barham Bridge Newspaper, 1 December 2022.
