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

Murray River (NSW)
Community comment on the objectives

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

• Overview
• Value of the water resource
• General comments
• Water quality
• River flows
• Murray River and other streams affected by interstate processes
• Major issues
• Existing programs

Overview

A community discussion meeting for the Murray River catchment (NSW) was held on 19 March 1998 at Holbrook and was attended by over 40 people. Eleven written submissions were received from a range of interested people and groups. An Aboriginal discussion meeting in Wagga Wagga on 8 April concerning water reforms attracted people from several Murrumbidgee, Lachlan and Murray communities. Further comments were received from a meeting on 27 May in Deniliquin organised by local people.

The environmental objectives proposed in the discussion paper (EPA 1997) and on which comments were sought did not apply to the Murray River, its floodplain or rivers such as the Edwards, which depend on inflows from the Murray, because objectives for this area are being set by an interstate process. However, comments relating to these rivers were received and are summarised below for completeness.

Value of the water resource

The meetings and submissions identified a diverse range of uses and values for the Murray River catchment (NSW). These revolved around the enjoyment and economic benefits of maintaining a healthy river system which supports various industries in the long term. The values and uses most noted in submissions and at meetings were biodiversity and aquatic ecosystems, nature conservation, native riverbank vegetation, reliable supply of water for all valued water uses, swimming and boating, fishing for food or recreation, irrigation, domestic household water use and access, drinking water, spiritual values, and Aboriginal cultural links to rivers, lakes and wetlands.

General comments

The issues raised in comments on the environmental objectives proposed in the discussion paper (EPA 1997) can be summarised as follows:

• support by most people for improving river health
• perception that existing initiatives not mentioned or acknowledged in the discussion paper were ignored-initiatives such as the nutrient management strategy and a Murray-Lower Darling River Management Board publication
• perception that the approach of first setting up a statewide framework for environmental objectives did not allow enough local detail to be included in the proposed objectives, or sufficient local ownership of the process
• belief that there was inadequate science to demonstrate the causes of the problems
• need for improved metering, monitoring and public reporting of water use and quality to get a better understanding of the issues
• need for improved transparency, accountability and information on decisions
• need for more thorough investigation of social and economic impacts
• question of who pays-impacter, beneficiary, government, everyone-and the need for equity in distribution and timing of the short-term economic cost to the community of achieving sustainable agriculture and development
• need for gradual changes to give people time to adjust
• need for good education-a national education initiative-along with implementation
• need for water to be managed better by locals-not city folk
• need for truly integrated management to solve problems causing downstream effects.

Aboriginal people said that they felt traditional responsibilities for managing river health, and requested effective involvement in water management decisions through appropriate mechanisms. They wanted access to clean rivers for swimming, for collecting aquatic foods that are safe to eat, and for other cultural needs. They expressed concern about the lack of respect for Aboriginal cultural values, needs and places, and about the decline and threats to aquatic and wetland ecosystems.

Water quality

There was overwhelming recognition that better water quality is needed-better than some people felt was currently being managed or planned for. The lack of water quality protection for people that live downstream is a major concern.

Most written submissions called for a high level of water quality protection; for instance, to protect aquatic ecosystems and people swimming in, and eating fish from, the river. Some submissions recognised the difference between what was desirable in the long term and what may be practical to achieve in the short term. Water quality option 4 in the discussion paper (EPA 1997-basic river health and advanced human uses such as swimming) was the most favoured in written submissions and meetings. Option 3-basic river health and basic human uses-was also supported. Others said that option 2-basic river health-was the minimum needed and noted that maintenance of higher options depended on the beneficiaries being prepared to pay the cost of achieving them.

The meetings and submissions called particularly for improved stormwater and tailwater management in both dryland, urban and irrigation areas; particularly to stop the toxic chemicals (e.g. pesticides) that are currently entering waters, and reduce nutrient-rich, saline and turbid runoff. Dryland and irrigation salinity, water quality impacts of dam releases, and ongoing reduction of septic and sewage pollution were mentioned. Removal of livestock from the riparian zone and providing alternative off-river livestock water supplies was also recommended. Health concerns were raised about drinking water and water contact recreation.

The Murray Catchment Management Committee's Water Quality Working Group, provided a detailed submission which gave 3 basic principles for water quality management:

• Water quality is not to decline further.
• Actions should be taken to improve water quality.
• There is a responsibility to maintain quality for downstream users.

This working group also supported the need to apply objectives and to manage on a river-reach or zone level, setting locally applicable water quality criteria rather than necessarily universally applying the ANZECC (1992) guidelines. The working group considered that the five suggested river health options proposed in the discussion paper (EPA 1997) to guide the choice of environmental values were too restrictive. In its submission the group defined particular water quality priorities for specific river zones covering both NSW tributaries and areas affected by interstate processes.

Water quality issues raised in submissions or at the meetings in relation to specific tributaries included:

• Tumbarumba Creek urban pollution and sewage outfall
• the condition of tributaries which flow through forestry plantation areas in the Tooma catchment, and the effects of plantations on water quality downstream
• stream salinity in Billabong Creek particularly after autumn rains
• the effects of lowered flows and soil acidification on water quality
• diffuse sources of pollution causing most of the water quality problems.

River flows

Each of the river flow objectives (RFOs) gained some support. The objectives considered most important by most groups were: RFOs Maintain wetland and floodplain inundation, Manage groundwater for ecosystems, Protect natural low flows, Minimise the effects of weirs and other structures; then, RFO Protect pools in dry times. RFOs Maintain natural flow variability and Manage water for unforeseen events were also favourably mentioned. Most support in written submissions was for maintaining natural flow variability. Continual flow was also suggested as an objective.

Comments on flows in Murray tributaries and Billabong Creek included:

• Mannus Creek and the storage on it need management criteria-the storage has an impact on downstream riparian condition and on downstream flows.
• Tooma River lacks flows downstream of dams, particularly in summer. Its floodplain below Tumbarumba Creek is choked with willows.
• Freshes, low flows and groundwater intrusion are important issues in Billabong Creek above Colombo Creek.
• Flow variability is important in the regulated part of Billabong Creek.
• Floodplain management strategies for Billabong Creek need to recognise existing development and strategies.
• Mistakes of the lower catchment cannot be repeated in the upper catchment. Only smart irrigation of high value crops should be allowed. Flood irrigation should be phased out.
• People have problems coping with drought.
• Appropriate pumping levels need to be established in each Murray tributary.

The following recommendations were made in relation to improving stream flow:

• Improve biodiversity to secure long-term water supplies.
• Go back to elements of the natural flow regime-mimic nature.
• Increase research into flow regimes.
• Reduce extraction during low flows.
• Resolve de-snagging and unrestricted water-flow issues.
• Address the issue of rising watertables from irrigation.
• Improve floodplain connectivity with river.
• Properly address levee bank issues.
• Improve fish passage and native fish populations.
• Increase equity for high-value efficient uses in the upper catchment.
• Reduce the number of irrigation licences.
• Charge the full cost of water delivery and the management of related environmental problems.
• Develop and encourage agriculture practices that use water more efficiently.
• Encourage off-river storage.
• Make site-specific decisions.
• Leave regulation to local bodies.
• Address the issue of water rights-isn't it a public resource?

Some concerns were expressed about irrigation restrictions and the transfer of water licences, and that the upper region would be hindered in growing valued crops such as grapes and specialised fruits. For these crops, economic return per megalitre of water used is much higher than for most crops irrigated further down the Murray.

Murray River and other streams affected by interstate processes

No river flow or water quality objectives were proposed for the Murray River and other waterways in its floodplain. Water quality and river flow objectives for the Murray River below Hume Reservoir and the Edwards-Wakool system are being developed by a separate interstate process, which will include further community consultation. In relation to these waterways, the following issues were raised:

• agreement that cross-border coordination and cooperation is needed to achieve equity in the way the river is shared, and to address water quality problems from both states
• need for a better approach to floodplain and levee management with regard to water flow, ecosystems and control of harvesting water from the floodplain
• recognition of the importance of managing flows through rivers in the Barmah-Millewah area, minimising and managing rainfall rejection flows and protecting wetlands from unnatural high flows and inadequate flooding
• need for the Scientific Panel's snapshot-in-time view of the river to be melded with local information, including long-term knowledge
• need for recognition of the problems with irrigation in some areas; for instance, some believe that ribbon irrigation is more prone to cause direct salinity problems because water can drain quickly back into the main channel
• the serious problem of the reduction of water temperature below dams
• desire by Aboriginal people (specifically the Yorta Yorta people) for water rights
• belief that the 'cap' on surface water diversion means that people are extracting more groundwater and that the licensing and management systems in place are inadequate to prevent future environmental, land and water degradation

Major issues

The process of developing the objectives has brought out the following major issues (not presented in any order) that need action:

• Continue work already begun to further define environmental objectives and benchmarks for local zones (e.g. local water quality benchmarks based on the work of the Murray Catchment Management Committee Water Quality Working Group).
• Continue scientific research, monitoring and reporting on river issues.
• Use local knowledge and enthusiasm for social, environmental and economic sustainability-including continuing the Landcare program.
• Address equity issues (e.g. between intensive irrigation in the upper catchment and irrigation in the lower region).
• Ensure Aboriginal spiritual, cultural and traditional subsistence needs that depend on river and floodplain management are recognised, respected and provided for.
• Reverse the loss of native trees and other perennial vegetation across parts of the catch-ment, which is leading to stream and wetland sedimentation, increased water turbidity, rising watertables and increased salinity levels in waters.
• Reduce the causes of unnatural rates of river erosion and manage riparian zones to protect remaining native vegetation.
• Increase efforts to reduce faecal contamination of streams by livestock.
• Reduce remaining significant point-source pollution; for example, sewage treatment plants.
• Address water quality problems caused by unsewered villages.
• Further reduce pollution from pesticides, nutrients, salts and sediment.
• Improve the quality of stormwater runoff from both urban and rural lands.
• Improve flow regimes in streams affected by the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric Scheme.
• Enable patterns of water use (for example, transfer of water licences) to change in ways that assist or do not hinder achievement of environmental or other objectives.
• Enable continuing improvements in the efficiency of agricultural and urban water uses.
• Implement land and water management plans and other means of reducing high watertables and maintaining the agricultural productivity of irrigated land.
• Improve forecasting and management of flows in regulated rivers and supply channels to reduce unnatural variability, high watertables and excessive outflows.
• Enable restoration of native fish populations, including breeding and two-way passage of juvenile and adult fish in rivers, creeks, high-flow channels and wetland habitats.
• Increase efforts to control exotic pest plants and animal pests in rivers-particularly carp.
• Identify and protect water quality and flow needs of wetlands.
• Improve floodplain management to reduce the adverse effects of floods.
• Improve controls on the use of groundwater to avoid impacts on streams and surface environments, including salinisation from deposition of groundwater salts on soil.

These issues should be taken forward by local management committees, relevant government agencies and communities.

Existing programs

Some of the above issues are already receiving considerable attention and resources. Local communities, industry groups and local government are undertaking important on-the-ground activities through Landcare and other projects. Land and water management plans have been developed to address rising watertables, salinisation, water-bogging and other issues in irrigation areas. The cost of implementing these plans is being shared by the State and Commonwealth governments and landholders. People in some dryland regions are also beginning to develop plans that integrate land and water management issues. Greening Australia is working with interested landholders to fence
200 km of streambank along Billabong Creek after identifying sections of the creek where fences are needed. The NSW Government has already put in place and funded many programs, including Blue-Green Algae Management, Carp Assessment and Reduction Program, Waterwise on Farms, Salt Action, Floodplain Management Program, Wetlands Action, the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program and the Urban Stormwater Management Program.

At the Commonwealth level, funding is in place through the Natural Heritage Trust for Landcare and Rivercare, and through Murray-Darling Basin programs. The Basin Sustainability Program delivers the Natural Resource Management Strategy, which includes the Salinity and Drainage, Algal Management and Floodplain Wetland Management Strategies and the Native Fish Management Plan.

This page was published 1 May 2006