NSW Water Quality and River Flow Objectives About the Objectives Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water   Select from the scrolling list, statewide map or catchment list Select a catchment Barwon-Darling and Far Western Bega River Bellinger River Border Rivers Brunswick River Camden Haven and Hastings River Castlereagh River Clarence River Clyde River and Jervis Bay Cooks River Georges River Gosford and Northern Beaches Lagoons Gwydir River Hacking River Hawkesbury-Nepean River Hunter River Karuah River and Great Lakes Lachlan River Illawarra Lake Macquarie and Tuggerah Lakes Macleay River Macquarie-Bogan River Manning River Moruya River Murray River Murrumbidgee River and Lake George Nambucca River Namoi River Richmond River Shoalhaven River Sydney Harbour and Parramatta River Towamba and Genoa River Tuross River Tweed River Williams River

Castlereagh River
Community comment on the objectives

| Contents | Background | Consultation | Objectives | WQOs | RFOs | Glossary | Bibliography | Map | At a Glance |

• Overview
• Water quality and value of the resource
• River flows
• Major issues
• Existing programs

Overview

A community discussion meeting for the Castlereagh catchment area was held at Gilgandra on 25 February 1998, and was attended by more than 40 people. Formal written submissions were also received, some from people declaring a long-standing attachment to the catchment. The issues raised and comments made will be considered by the local river management committee when developing management plans.

Water quality and value of the resource

The community identified a diverse range of uses for the river, with most consideration given to the river's economic value in terms of irrigation and stock water. People thought that the river's value for recreation was also important, as were town and homestead uses. There was some discussion about the sustainability of groundwater use, and about management, at times of little or no flow, of spearpoints (small bores) sunk into the river sand to extract water.

Considerable concern was voiced at the meeting about the cost of implementing the objectives, and who would be responsible for this. Some also felt that an increase in controls and regulations could become a burden.

While members of the community were almost unanimous in expressing preference for water quality at a level that would ensure basic river health and advanced human uses, they considered that a more realistic target in the short term would be to aim at water quality that would support basic river health and basic human uses. Support for maintaining the status quo was expressed by one community member. The benefits of working towards higher quality water were seen as being associated with less pollution, better recreation, tourism, and general community well-being.

Many people perceived the worst water quality problem to be toxic chemicals from upstream farms. One submission asserted that water-borne herbicides were affecting downstream river users, river plants and pasture productivity, and destroying wetland areas along creeks in the western part of the catchment.

It was acknowledged that clearing of native riparian vegetation was resulting in widespread instability and erosion of the riverbanks. Many people also cited the presence of weeds (particularly willows) along streams as a problem that needed to be resolved. It was suggested that revegetation with native plants would help.

Abundant carp were also seen as problem.

River flows

Significant river-flow problems in the catchment included the accumulation of silt and sand in the river, decreased flows at times of low flow and drought, and the resulting reduction of water holes. Some said too much water was being extracted, especially during low-flow periods. People felt that equitable sharing of the water allowed to be extracted was a necessary next step.

Remedies suggested included:

• Cancelling (or, at least, increasing the restrictions on) 'sleeper' licences
• Stopping the use of existing large pumps in times of low flow
• Increasing the number of dams, which stop low flows from reaching the river
• Greater controls on earthworks to avoid water-polluting runoff.

The Gilgandra meeting recorded most support for river flow objectives that would protect pools in dry times, protect natural low flows, and protect important rises in water level. Concerns were expressed about cost and the need to ensure that natural differences between wet and dry seasons were recognised.

Other river flow objectives supported by more than one group at the meeting were managing groundwater to support ecosystems (with some but not excessive limits on the use of bore water), and minimising the effects of weirs and other structures. Some people requested that no more weirs be built. Some wanted a return to more natural flows, but recognised that farm dams, pasture and cropping had changed runoff patterns.

Costs and increased regulation were identified as possible negative consequences of implementing the flow objectives. A number of people mentioned that they would prefer these issues to be further discussed within the community before specific actions were decided.

Major issues

The process of drafting the objectives and receiving comments from the community identified numerous major issues that need progressive action to achieve healthy and viable river and wetland systems. Proposals for action on these issues (not listed in any priority order) can be summarised as follows:

• Work out a way that will both achieve environmental objectives and strengthen (not threaten) the local economy, using local knowledge and enthusiasm for sustainability.
• Improve water quality monitoring and reporting arrangements for the Castlereagh River catchment.
• Reduce the causes of algal blooms-nutrient inputs, inadequate shading from riverbank vegetation, large, still waterbodies, and loss of aquatic organisms that often control the early stages of algal growth.
• Reduce ongoing pollution from point sources.
• Prevent pollution of waters from new developments in the catchment.
• Manage stormwater runoff from both urban and rural lands. This includes managing the use of herbicides, insecticides and fertilisers-particularly where used intensively or extensively, and where they have the chance to enter waterways.
• Reduce microbial contamination and nutrients by improving sewage treatment, management of septic systems and stock access to streams.
• Manage stock access to streams to protect river banks.
• Halt the degradation of riparian vegetation. This degradation causes riverbank erosion and changes to water quality, and sand from eroded banks to fill pools and large areas of the river bed. Some of the remaining native riparian vegetation is threatened. Willows and their various impacts were identified as a problem by many local people.
• Halt the loss of native trees and groundcover that is leading to rising watertables, dryland salinity and increased salinity levels in waters; also to erosion-which leads to sand and soil deposition in streams and wetlands, and to increasing water turbidity.
• Ensure Aboriginal spiritual, cultural and subsistence needs affected by river and floodplain management are recognised and equitably addressed.
• Protect groundwater quality and manage aquifers in hills and alluvium so they continue to meet ecosystem, urban and agricultural needs. The locations and levels of groundwater critical to stream flow (e.g. groundwater that feeds springs or maintains river pools), and to the health of river red gums need to be determined.
• Share the limited water resources in ways that protect ecosystems and water quality while providing for existing domestic, industrial, grazing and irrigation uses and enabling beneficial social and economic changes across the catchment. This would mainly involve deciding how to define and share low flows, recognising that some flow occurs through sand in parts of the catchment.
• Ensure that sharing of water from the catchment is consistent with the Murray-Darling Basin cap on diversions, so that the needs of ecosystems and people dependent on inflows to the Barwon-Darling River are not compromised. This could mean limiting combined diversions from the Macquarie-Bogan-Castlereagh system to levels consistent with the 1993-94 level of development-varying with climate-but should not restrict allocations to people who are able to use water during higher flows in place of water at low flows.

• Work out appropriate limits on the trading of irrigation licences or the use of 'sleeper' licences to avoid an increase in extraction from some parts of the river system.
• Work out ways of providing for the needs of native fish populations in relation to flow patterns, drought refuges and water quality, so these populations can recover and compete with carp.
• Define the extent and values of wetlands along the Castlereagh River and in the lower part of the catchment to assist local land and water managers.

Existing programs

Significant effort and progress has already been made by groups involved in Castlereagh River catchment management initiatives. Communities, through the catchment management committee, Landcare and other programs, are undertaking important on-the-ground projects and making significant progress. The NSW Government has already established and is funding programs such as Waterwise on farms, Blue-Green Algae Management, Floodplain Management Program, Wetlands Action, the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Scheme, the Carp Assessment and Reduction Program and the Urban Stormwater Management Program. At the Commonwealth level, programs are being funded through the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Landcare and the Natural Heritage Trust.

The Central West Catchment Management Committee has developed broad management strategies; Regional Assessment Panels are directing Natural Heritage Trust investments to priority issues and sites; and Landcare groups and individuals are tackling local issues.

Where management plans and programs such as these are already underway in the catchment, they should be acknowledged and, where possible, incorporated into the river management plan.

This page was published 1 May 2006