MACQUARIE River Food & Fibre (MRFF) says the Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) has made a belated admission that a water recovery target was dramatically increased in the final Basin Plan but without regard to scientific principles.
MRFF Chairman Michael Egan told Fairfax Agricultural Media the MDBA came clean at a recent meeting in Sydney admitting, after a long-running exchange, that the Macquarie Valley’s 65 gigalitres water recovery goal was reverse engineered.
He said the draft plan had a recovery target of 20GL to achieve the Valley’s desired environmental outcomes but that number more than tripled to 65GL, in the final document, signed into law in late 2012.
Mr Egan said the 65GL target was also based on the quantity of water purchased prior to the Basin Plan being released – which was under the watch of former Labor Environment Minister Tony Burke - rather than “robust environmental science”.
He said it was another demonstration on how dislocated the MDBA had been from understanding the needs of rural farming communities but he also welcomed recent plans to look at options for decentralising the MDBA’s operations.
“On one hand you’ve got irrigation dependent towns like Warren losing up to 35 per cent of their employment and on the other you have the MDBA in Canberra seemingly oblivious to how this is impacting people’s livelihoods; it just isn’t good enough,” he said.
Mr Egan said despite persistent requests for an explanation, no adequate reason was ever given as to why such a large discrepancy existed, in the Valley’s water recovery target.
He said the MDBA told the MRFF that the updated figure was based on new science and information and “they spun this line as recently as last month when they visited Warren as part of their community consultations”.
“The fact that the updated target conveniently matched the amount of water that the government had already purchased is something the MDBA have denied for years,” he said.
“The increased target represents around $35 million that has been ripped out of our local economy, all because the MDBA took the easy option and disregarded any impact it would have on local communities.”
Mr Egan said the $35m was calculated by using a $750/ML value on the 45,000ML difference between 20GL and 65GL, rounded up to $35m.
He said the MDBA took the easy option by using pre-purchased water rather than determining the actual environmental requirements.
“Between the ‘Guide to the Basin Plan’ - published in 2010 - which included a 20GL target and the final Basin Plan being released there was no indication that the figure was going to change so there was no opportunity to raise the concern,” he said.
“During the same period the MDBA was a ‘closed’ organisation and there was no consultation with the community, stakeholders or anyone else.
“It has only been in the last nine months that any stakeholders have been able to directly address Basin Plan issues with the MDBA.”
MDBA Executive Director of Environmental Management Colin Mues said the local reduction amount of 65GL did meet the Macquarie Marshes’ environmental needs but also contributed to broader system outcomes, in the Barwon-Darling.
Mr Mues admitted two thirds of the 65GL was saved through Commonwealth and State government infrastructure based water recovery programs.
He said before the Basin Plan was finalised, a water recovery target of 20GL was contemplated - based on end-of-system needs - but that didn’t involve any detailed analysis of the local needs of the Macquarie Marshes.
Further hydrological modelling and environmental watering assessments by the MDBA found 20GL was not enough to safeguard the long-term health of the Macquarie, he said.
But Mr Mues said the MDBA would soon decide whether to recommend a change to the water recovery targets in the Northern Basin.
He said the NSW government was also yet to decide what the Macquarie may need to contribute to meet environmental watering needs in the Barwon-Darling which would also have a bearing on whether more or less water would need to be recovered.
“The MDBA is very grateful for the time and effort people in the Macquarie Valley have put into meeting with the MDBA during the Northern Basin Review, so we can get a better understanding of the social and economic effects of water recovery,” he said.
“We have heard a wide range of views, which are being taken into account by the Authority as they prepare recommendations about whether there should be changes to the Basin Plan settings in the north.”
Mr Egan said that relocating sections of the MDBA out into regional communities, as per its recent announcement, would only help to improve the Authority’s understanding of Basin Plan’s impacts on people’s livelihoods.
He said the MDBA needed to accept that they had it wrong and in recommendations to the Minister, as part of the Northern Basin Review, rebalance their held water to reflect the Valley‘s actual requirements and return any surplus to the consumptive pool.
Purchases made before the Basin Plan was finalised were non-strategic and without regret, he said.
“Enough is enough – water recovery in the Northern Basin needs to stop,” he said.