Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy discussion paper

Transcription

SustainableWater
Strategy
Northern Region
Discussion Paper
Managing Water Scarcity
The Next 50 Years
Table of Contents
Foreword
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Planning for secure water supplies for the future
Purpose of the Discussion Paper
The Northern Region
What is a Sustainable Water Strategy
Strategy objectives
Guiding principles
Elements of a Sustainable Water Strategy
Chapter 2: Managing our water resources
Water resources in the Northern Region
Cooperative management arrangements across Australia
The Murray-Darling Basin
Institutional arrangements for managing water resources
The value of secure water supplies and healthy rivers, wetlands and aquifers
Water availability in the Northern Region
Sharing our water resources – Victoria’s water allocation framework
How water is used in the Northern Region
Chapter 3: Water Resource Outlook
Pressures and risks
Forecasting future water availability
Chapter 4: Managing water scarcity
A range of responses
Responding to water scarcity in a changing community
Using the water market
Improving the management and allocation of water resources
Modernising the distribution system
Conservation and efficiency for all users and the environment
Progressing environmental management
Water pricing
Expanding the Water Grid
New and alternative sources of water
Chapter 5: Having your say
How to make a submission
You need to know
Next steps
Further Information
Appendices
Appendix 1 - Water resource planning in Victoria
Appendix 2 - Historical reliability of water shares
Appendix 3 - Impact of future water availability scenarios on reliability of supply
& environmental flows in major regulated rivers
Appendix 4 - Impact of future water availability scenarios on urban supplies
Appendix 5 - Impact of future water availability scenarios on environmental shortfalls & significant flooding events
Glosssary & End Notes
1
2
10
10
11
12
12
12
13
14
14
14
15
18
18
19
24
25
32
32
44
58
58
60
61
67
71
73
77
81
84
86
88
88
88
89
89
90
90
91
96
122
126
130
Foreword
Our water future is a hot topic for discussion for all Victorians
– and everyone has an opinion on how best to manage this precious
resource. How much longer we face debilitating drought depends
on the weather – but how we secure our water against drought
and climate change depends on us all.
After more than 10 years of low rainfall and record low inflows,
the Victorian Government has already brought forward major
investment decisions to ensure reliable water supplies for communities
now and into the future.
Our long-term planning also includes developing regional sustainable
water strategies, so that predicted population patterns, climate change
scenarios, land use and other factors affecting water availability can be
identified and taken into account.
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy is the second
undertaken by the Government; the first, the Central Region
Sustainable Water Strategy, was completed in October 2006.
This Discussion Paper is the first step in preparing the Northern Region
Sustainable Water Strategy. It outlines water resources, river health and
key challenges, and opens the dialogue about our opinions with key
stakeholder groups and the community.
Feedback will be incorporated into the Strategy’s first draft, due for
release in mid-2008, and further public comment will be sought. This
feedback is vital for accurate assessment of the options and balancing
the demands of all water users and the environment.
I encourage everyone with an interest in the Northern Region’s water
future to contribute to the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy
by participating in community discussions, contacting your local water
corporation or the Department of Sustainability and Environment’s
project team, or making a submission.
Together we can secure northern Victoria’s water future.
Tim Holding MP
Minister for Water
Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy Discussion Paper
FOREWORD
1
E
Executive summary
Victoria’s high country
The Northern Region Sustainable
Water Strategy
Victoria is enduring one of the worst droughts on record, with well
below average rainfall and streamflows for the past 10 years. For the
Northern Region of Victoria, this drought resulted in irrigators receiving
zero allocations at the start of the 2007/08 season. Hardest hit have
been the Campaspe and Loddon systems with 12 and 5 per cent
allocation respectively at 15 January 2008. Reduced rainfall has also
hit regional towns, so that at 16 January 2008, 94 towns were on stage
three or four restrictions in the Northern Region. The prolonged dry
conditions have also severely affected the health of our river systems,
with considerable reduction in streamflows.
Refer to Chapter 3 page 42
for more detail about the impacts of drought and drought
response initiatives. Further information can also be found
at www.dse.vic.gov.au and www.dpi.vic.gov.au
It is unclear whether the severity and prolonged nature of the current
conditions can be attributed to an extended drought or are a sign
of climate change. However, it is clear that our water management
needs to incorporate long-term planning for a future with less water.
This Strategy takes a 50-year planning horizon in determining options
for the future. It aims to provide a stocktake of water resources,
consider how climate change and other risks will affect water security
throughout the Northern Region and provide an opportunity for the
community to have a say on how we manage our water future.
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
for more detail about climate change.
Strategy objectives
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy will analyse all
aspects of water management in northern Victoria, share the findings
with the community, and determine a fair balance between urban,
industrial, agricultural and environmental water needs for the future.
The Strategy aims to:
• Bring together all existing national, state and local water policies
and projects within the region, and integrate data to form a
regional perspective.
• Identify and understand threats to water availability and quality,
including the implications of climate change.
• Ensure reliable and safe water supplies for towns and
associated industry.
• Support an economically viable and environmentally sustainable
irrigation industry.
• Help protect rivers and aquifers from the impacts of drought,
climate change and other risks.
• Recognise and where relevant respond to indigenous and other
heritage values associated with the region’s rivers and catchments.
E
The Northern Region
The Northern Region includes Victoria’s share of the River Murray
and its Victorian tributaries – the Kiewa, Ovens, Broken, Goulburn,
Campaspe and Loddon River systems (see Figure E.1). The Strategy
examines the water needs of towns, industry, agriculture and the
environment and considers surface water, groundwater and alternative
sources of drainage, recycled water and stormwater.
for more detail about the Northern Region.
Northern Victoria’s thriving agricultural industry has been built on the
back of reliable water supplies delivered by the River Murray and
its tributaries. Regional centres have been created, and many have
developed rapidly because of water. The region is rich in agriculture,
has a broad tourism base linked to its waterways, heritage and natural
environment, and is an important thoroughfare to other States.
for more detail about the value of secure water supplies and
healthy rivers, wetlands and aquifers. Refer to page 25 for
information about the many uses of water.
The population of the Northern Region is 529,000 and is projected to
increase to 696,000 by 2055, at an average rate of 0.6 per cent a year.
The region’s agricultural industry alone contributes about $3.4 billion
a year to the Victorian economy.
But how would the Northern Region manage in the face of even
less water availability? Northern Victoria has experienced immense
pressures to its water supplies in the past, including the risk posed to
reliability of supply and environmental values from continually increasing
water use. However, the region has also shown a strong history of
innovation and action in response to these pressures. For example,
the introduction and commitment to the Murray-Darling Basin Cap
in 1995. While the forecasts show there is likely to be reduced water
availability, this history of innovation and action demonstrates the region
is well-placed to respond to the challenges of climate change.
But the future will not be bright without a clear plan. The region’s
growth has come at a cost, including reducing natural flows at the
mouth of the Murray to about 20 per cent, and pressures on several
farming areas as a result of changes to water availability and quality.
People’s own responses, coupled with the Government’s previous
commitments and actions, have helped the region’s local communities
to improve their response to changes, including the latest challenge
of drought. By being cognisant of what the future might look like we
are better able to plan for its challenges.
Figure E.1 Map of the Northern Region
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3
E
Executive summary
Planning for climate change
To better understand our water future, models are used to predict how
potential impacts such as climate change will affect water supplies. The
models used for this Strategy translate the CSIRO (2005) estimates1
of the potential impacts of low, medium and high climate change on
streamflows and subsequently on our water storages. The further into
the future we look, the more uncertain our forecasts become.
In this Strategy, estimates of the impact of climate change on future
water availability have been generated, collated and integrated across
systems throughout northern Victoria for the first time.
Figure E.2 shows the potential reductions in total inflows in the Murray
system for the following scenarios by 2055:
• Base case – long-term average, based on the historic record
from 1891
• Scenario A – based on the CSIRO low climate change predictions
• Scenario B – based on the CSIRO medium climate change
predictions
• Scenario C – based on the CSIRO high climate change predictions
• Scenario D – based on a continuation of the low inflows of the
past 10 years (ie. average reduction in streamflows over the
past 10 years).
Understanding the implications of these future water availability
scenarios for water users and the environment will be critical to
the resilience of the region.
If total reservoir inflows into the Murray system continue to be
reduced to those experienced in the past 10 years, it is predicted
that there would be approximately 10 per cent less water available
for consumptive use. Consumptive use includes water used for
households, industry and agriculture. Figures E.3 and E.4 demonstrate
that high- and low-reliability entitlements could be seriously affected.
The blue bars represent the allocations for each year of the historic
record (base case scenario). The red dots represent the allocations
that would have been made if water availability was the same as the
past 10 years (Scenario D). The number of years with full allocations
for high-reliability water shares would drop from 97 to 77 out of 100.
There would also be an increased risk of years with zero allocations.
Full allocations for low-reliability water shares (previously sales water)
would be available in only 24 years out of 100, rather than 34 out of
100 as currently expected.
A continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years would result
in 44 per cent less water for environmental flows in the system.
Figure E.5 illustrates what environmental flows would look like in this
situation. Average flows would be significantly reduced, and peak flood
events that help to maintain wetland and floodplain ecosystems would
no longer occur, because they would be captured in dams.
for more detail about the methodology and scenarios used
to forecast future water availability.
Figure E.2 Potential reduction in total inflows for the Murray system over 50 years
(compared with the long-term average)1
4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
E
Figure E.3 Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years on allocations for high-reliability
water shares on the Murray system (compared with the long-term average)2
Figure E.4 Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years on allocations for low-reliability
water shares on the Murray system (compared with the long-term average)3
Refer to Chapter 3 page 32 & Appendix 3
for more detail about the potential impact on the reliability of supply for low- and high-reliability water shares. See page 54 for more detail
about the impact on rural and urban water users.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
5
E
Executive summary
Figure E.5 Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years on environmental flows in the Murray system4
Refer to Chapter 3 page 54 & Appendix 3
for more detail about the potential impact on environmental flows.
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy will examine
opportunities for the community to continue to adapt to this potential
reality over the next 50 years. It will build on Government initiatives,
including the modernisation of irrigation systems, the unbundling
of water entitlements in northern Victoria and the expansion of
the Victorian Water Grid. The strategy also complements activities
undertaken by individuals in the Northern Region including on-farm
water efficiencies, water trading, and household and industrial water
conservation efforts.
A range of management responses
Northern Victoria has a history of strong leadership and innovation
in water resource planning and management. Many regional initiatives
and projects have subsequently been implemented in other irrigation
areas within Victoria and interstate. Combined with Victoria’s
conservative allocation framework, this culture provides a strong base
for the region’s continuing leadership in managing water scarcity
across Australia.
Given the differing needs and expectations of various members of
the community, there is no single answer about the best response to
water scarcity. Also, given the uncertainty about future water availability,
different choices will be appropriate at different times depending on
the circumstances. Flexibility and adaptability are essential in the face
of uncertainty.
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy will aim to ensure
sufficient options are available to the community to progressively
respond to the possible impacts of climate change and other future
pressures and risks to water resources. These options are designed to
protect community values, promote a sustainable agricultural industry,
and protect rivers and wetlands of environmental importance.
Potential responses have been grouped in eight categories. Table E.1
provides examples for each of these categories and demonstrates
which sector could benefit (rural water users, urban water users or the
environment) and the possible scale of implementation (actions
for individuals or system level changes).
Increased flexibility in the water market, and further expansion of the
Victorian water grid will enable water to move from low to high-value
uses. The arrangements around how water is managed and allocated
could also be improved to increase reliability of supply for any water
user or to benefit the environment. Changes could be made to
the reserve policy or individuals could be allowed to manage their
own reserves. Adjustments could be made to rebalance between
consumptive use and the environment, or between different types
of entitlements.
The key challenge is ensuring that the way water is managed and
allocated maximises the benefits for all community members and
accurately reflects community values.
for more detail about the range of potential management
responses.
E
Table E.1 Responses to water scarcity – potential beneficiaries and scale of implementation
Could be used to benefit:
Response categories and examples
Scale of
implementation:
Rural
Urban
Environment
Individual
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Page No.
System
Water market:
• Buying or selling water shares or seasonal allocations
• Changes to trading rules and regulations
61
✓
Improving the management and allocation of water
resources:
• Changes to the communal reserve policy
• Introduction of individual reserves
✓
67
✓
71
✓
Modernisation of the distribution system:
• Improving infrastructure to capture water losses
Conservation and efficiency:
• Improved on-farm efficiency
• Urban conservation
• Environmental water efficiency
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
73
Progressing environmental management:
• Protect priority areas
• Improve environmental water reserve
• Manage emerging risks
Pricing:
• Changes to pricing arrangements
77
81
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Expanding the water grid:
• Interconnecting supply systems
• Murray-Goulburn interconnector
✓
✓
84
New and alternative sources of water:
• Alternative sources, including irrigation drainage water,
recycled water and stormwater
• Groundwater
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
86
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7
E
Executive summary
More details on the options identified in each of these categories
can be found in Chapter 4 of this document. They represent policy
discussions, management options and infrastructure programs. More
options may be identified during preparation of the Northern Region
Sustainable Water Strategy.
The Strategy process
This Discussion Paper represents the first opportunity for community
members to contribute to the Northern Region Sustainable Water
Strategy. The Strategy will invite opinion on many of the options
available to maximise the region’s water resources, and pose questions
for community discussion. Figure E.6 summarises each of the steps in
the development of the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy.
Making your submission
We invite you to make submissions on this Discussion Paper. These
will be considered in the development of the Draft Northern Region
Sustainable Water Strategy, due for release in mid-2008. There will be
a further opportunity for community comment when the Draft Strategy
is released. A final Sustainable Water Strategy for the region will be
released in early 2009.
for more information on how to make a submission to this
Discussion Paper.
Figure E.6 How will the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy be developed?
8
1. Discussion Paper
2. Draft Strategy – due for release
3. Final Northern Region Sustainable
– released January 2008
mid-2008
Water Strategy – due for release
Provides a resource review and outlook,
and demonstrates the need to develop
a short, medium and long-term water
resource plan across geographic
boundaries. This paper includes a range
of potential management responses and
invites community submissions to help
identify further options.
Outlines the Government’s proposals
for further community comment. This
paper incorporates options provided
in community submissions on the
Discussion Paper and prioritises all
management responses/options based on
a sustainability assessment and a set of
guiding principles.
early 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sets out Government and community
actions required in an implementation plan
to secure our water future together over
the next 50 years. It will also respond to
the immediate needs caused by the record
low rainfall and inflows into our reservoirs
experienced over the past 10 years.
E
Agriculture and tourism are important uses of the Murray River at Mildura
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9
1
Planning Secure Water Supplies for the Future
In the Northern Region
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy is a Victorian Government
initiative to secure the region’s water future.
It will analyse all aspects of water management in the Northern Region, share
the findings with the community, and determine a fair balance between urban,
industrial, agricultural and environmental water needs for the future.
This chapter outlines the purpose of this Discussion Paper, describes the Northern
Region and details the objectives of the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy.
Purpose of the Discussion Paper
This Discussion Paper is the first publication of the Northern Region
Sustainable Water Strategy. It aims to increase understanding of
water resource management in the Northern Region and to help
communities and stakeholders give informed feedback on
how those resources can be planned, managed and delivered
for the future.
The Government will consider this feedback when it is developing
a Draft Sustainable Water Strategy and will seek further public
comment when it releases the Draft Strategy in mid-2008. A final
Sustainable Water Strategy for the region will be released early in 2009.
All figures in this Discussion Paper, including estimates of future water
availability, are indicative only. They will continue to be refined as the
Strategy is developed.
Figure 1.1 How will the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy be developed?
1. Discussion Paper released January 2008
Provides a resource review and outlook, and
demonstrates the need to develop a short,
medium and long-term water resource plan
across geographic boundaries.
This paper includes a range of potential
management options and invites community
submissions to help identify further options.
10
CHAPTER 1
2. Draft Strategy due for release mid-2008
Outlines the Government’s proposals for
further community comment. This paper
incorporates options provided in community
submissions on the Discussion Paper and
prioritises all options based on a sustainability
assessment and a set of guiding principles.
3. Final Northern Region Sustainable
Water Strategy - due for release early 2009
Sets out Government and community actions
required in an implementation plan to secure
our water future together over the next 50
years. It will also respond to the immediate
needs caused by the record low rainfall and
inflows in to our reservoirs experienced over
the past 10 years.
1
Making a submission
See Chapter 5 for information on how to make a submission.
Public submissions are due by 5pm on 17th March 2008.
The Northern Region
The Northern Region spans the area north of the Great Dividing
Range in Victoria, and takes in the urban centres of Mildura, Swan Hill,
Echuca, Bendigo, Shepparton, Seymour, Benalla, Wangaratta and
Wodonga (see Figure 1.2).
Its rural water supplies are managed by Goulburn-Murray Water, Lower
Murray Water and First Mildura Irrigation Trust and the urban supplies
are managed by North East Water, Goulburn Valley Water, Central
Highlands Water, Coliban Water and Lower Murray Water.
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy does not include
the urban supply systems of Avoca, Amphitheatre, Ballarat, Beaufort,
Blackwood, Forest Hill, Landsborough, Learmonth and Redbank,
managed by Central Highlands Water, and the towns on the WimmeraMallee system that are supplied by Coliban Water: Borung, Korong
Vale, Wedderburn and Wychitella.
The role as caretakers of river health in the region is shared by
the North East Catchment Management Authority, Goulburn Broken
Catchment Management Authority, North Central Catchment
Management Authority and the Mallee Catchment Management
Authority.
The region takes in the River Murray and the major Victorian tributaries
that flow north into it. The region includes the following river systems:
Murray, Kiewa, Ovens, Broken, Goulburn, Campaspe and Loddon.
Note that the Murray system refers only to Victoria’s share of the
resource, which includes 50 per cent of the Upper Murray, Kiewa and
lower Darling and all outflows from the other Victorian tributaries. Major
groundwater management areas include the Shepparton Irrigation,
Katunga, Campaspe Deep Lead and Mid Loddon.
The current population of the Northern Region is 529,000, which is
projected to increase to 696,000 by 2055, at an average rate of 0.6
per cent a year. Population data used in this Discussion Paper is based
on Victoria in Future5 estimates, adjusted for Census-based population
estimates6. Figures may be adjusted further during the development
of the Draft and Final Strategy as new data becomes available.
Figure 1.2 The Northern Region
CHAPTER 1
11
1
Planning Secure Water Supplies for the Future
In the Northern Region
What is a sustainable water strategy
In 2004 the Victorian Government released Our Water Our Future, an
action plan to secure water for Victoria’s future. The ground-breaking
plan was supplemented in June 2007 when the Government released
Our Water Our Future: The Next Stage of the Government’s Water
Plan. This document outlines critical actions to secure water for
Victoria’s growing population and economy in the face of drought
and the challenge of climate change through investing $4.9 billion
on infrastructure including:
•
A $3.1 billion desalination plant.
•
$1 billion upgrading irrigation infrastructure in northern Victoria.
•
$860 million expanding the Victorian Water Grid.
Regional sustainable water strategies complement this State-wide
water planning by analysing possible future impacts such as climate
change, land use and population growth on water supplies and
demand and focus on how individuals, industry, water corporations,
catchment management authorities and the Government can best
manage local water resources in the next 50 years. Other key water
resource planning tools are outlined in Appendix 1.
Sustainable water strategies consider all sources of water and
examine the needs of towns, industry, agriculture and the environment.
They guide the development, integration and implementation of
management plans of the water corporations and catchment
management authorities operating within each region. They are
developed in consultation with water corporations, catchment
management authorities, other State Government departments,
councils, industry, interest groups, and the community.
Regional sustainable water strategies are a legislative requirement
under the Water Act 1989 and fulfil Victoria’s commitment to the
National Water Initiative (NWI) to carry out open, statutory-based
water planning.
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy is the second regional
strategy to be developed since 2004. It will guide how the Government
manages water resources in Victoria’s north and will more broadly help
inform interstate decisions on managing the River Murray. The first
strategy, the Central Region Sustainable Water Strategy, was released
in October, 2006. Sustainable water strategies for the Eastern and
Western Regions will be developed in 2008.
Strategy objectives
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy aims to analyse
all aspects of water management in the region, share the findings
with the community, and determine a fair and sustainable balance
between urban, industrial, agricultural and environmental water needs
for the future.
12
CHAPTER 1
In doing this, it aims to:
•
Bring together all existing national, state and local water policies
and projects within the region, and integrate information to form
a regional perspective.
•
Identify and understand threats to water availability and quality,
including the implications of climate change.
•
Ensure reliable and safe water supplies for towns and associated
industry.
•
Support an economically viable and environmentally sustainable
irrigation industry.
•
Help protect rivers and aquifers from the impacts of drought,
climate change and other risks.
•
Recognise and where relevant respond to indigenous and
other heritage values associated with the region’s rivers and
catchment areas.
Guiding principles
The following principles will direct decision-making by the Government
and aid the community to comment on the best mix of actions to
achieve the Strategy’s objectives. They provide the framework for
the Government’s formal assessment of the options available to it for
the future.
Shared responsibility and shared benefit
•
Everyone needs to act to secure water.
•
Overall community benefits will be maximised and no generation
or group will incur unwarranted extra costs or receive additional
benefits.
Managing risk and uncertainty
•
Use of an adaptive management approach will ensure that we will
be prepared for the future as it unfolds, and have the capacity and
flexibility to respond.
•
Decisions to implement options may be accelerated or decelerated
to meet emerging needs and respond to new information.
Maximising flexibility
•
Committing to interconnecting our water supply systems will
maximise flexibility for water sharing across the region.
•
Options currently not viable will be kept under consideration as
new technologies emerge.
•
Endeavour to maximise individual water users’ choice and flexibility
in how they manage their water supplies (and business) to ensure
continued economic growth with a declining and variable resource.
1
•
Provide opportunities for individuals to make their own choices
regarding conservation and efficiency methods.
This approach is summarised in Figure 1.3 below.
Figure 1.3 Elements of a sustainable water strategy
Sequencing the delivery of actions
•
The implementation of management responses as identified in
the Final Strategy will balance the need to ensure that we have
sufficient water while avoiding premature investment or investment
in options that may not be needed in the future.
Environmental sustainability
•
•
Actions implemented under this Strategy, when considered
together, will aim to result in no net:
•
increase in carbon dioxide emissions, or
•
negative environmental impacts.
Actions under this Strategy will seek opportunities to maximise
environmental outcomes through the innovative use of water and/
or infrastructure.
Transparency
•
Decisions will be transparent in terms of the benefits gained
or costs imposed, including impacts on natural assets.
Elements of a sustainable water strategy
The main steps in developing a sustainable water strategy are:
Determining the resource outlook
We estimate how water needs and supplies will look over the next 50
years based on the best data available, including the potential impacts
of climate change, land use changes and events such as drought,
floods, bushfires, and population growth.
Identifying options to address the resource outlook
Options will balance economic, social and environmental outcomes
and prevent over-use of our water resources in the future. Planning will
include assessing which options are sustainable.
Establishing an implementation plan
The final Sustainable Water Strategy will outline implementation actions
and targets for the Government, community and water corporations.
Monitoring the resource outlook and adapting the
implementation plan
To ensure the Strategy is adaptable to changing needs in the region
and responsive to emerging trends, it will be reviewed and adapted
every seven to 10 years to reflect the full range of possible futures.
Any alteration to the Strategy will be communicated to stakeholders
and the broader community.
Ensuring we are prepared
We will conduct specific studies as required to build on our knowledge
and projections for the future.
Indigenous partnerships
Indigenous people in Victoria have for many hundreds of generations
sustainably managed the land, coast and sea. A special connection
exists between Indigenous people and their Country. The health of
waterways and the land remains central to Aboriginal cultures.
The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) acknowledges
and pays its respects to Victoria’s Native Title Holders and other
Traditional Owners and the rich culture and intrinsic connection they
have to Country. The DSE Indigenous Partnership Framework gives a
commitment to invite greater involvement of Indigenous communities
in the management of all areas under DSE control. DSE’s Office of
Water endorses the Framework and has undertaken to incorporate
these commitments in all dealings with Indigenous communities and
future natural resource management initiatives.
The methods used to engage Indigenous people in the development
of the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy will by guided be
the Traditional Owners.
CHAPTER 1
13
2
Managing water resources
in the Northern Region
This chapter outlines the water resources available and the existing arrangements
for their allocation within northern Victoria and the broader Murray-Darling Basin.
It recognises the value of secure water supplies to meet a range of uses, and to
maintain the economic, recreational, social and environmental significance of our
rivers, wetlands and aquifers. The complexities in managing supply systems to best
meet these needs have been explored.
Water resources in the Northern Region
The vast majority of water used in the Northern Region comes from
surface water from rivers and reservoirs. About 3,416 GL of surface
water was used in the region in 2005/06 (see Figure 2.1). The next
most significant source is groundwater from underground aquifers,
which contributed about 197 GL in 2005/06. Alternative water sources,
including stormwater, recycled water and drainage water from irrigation
can also be used for non-drinking purposes. Recycled water provided
an additional 34 GL in 2005/06 with 117 GL of drainage water returned
to streamflows in the Murray River system.
Figure 2.1 Proportion of water sources used in the
Northern Region in 2005/06 (GL and per cent)7
Cooperative management arrangements
across Australia
The Northern Region encompasses the Victorian component of the
Murray-Darling Basin (excluding the Avoca system). The following
section describes the shared management arrangements across
the Murray-Darling Basin, and highlights the complexity in achieving
a coordinated approach to water management in this region. The
section also highlights the key projects being implemented, specifically
progress towards the Living Murray Initiative.
The National Water Initiative
Through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG), Victoria
in partnership with the other States and Territories agreed that the
national water agenda needed to be reformed. In 2004 the National
Water Initiative8 (NWI) was signed to build on the processes adopted
through the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement at a national level.
The objective of the National Water Initiative is to achieve a nationally
compatible market, regulatory and planning based system of managing
surface and groundwater resources for rural and urban use that
optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes.
National Plan for Water Security
In January 2007, the former Federal Government announced a $10
billion National Plan for Water Security, which included a proposal
for New South Wales, South Australia, Queensland and Victoria to
refer their Murray-Darling Basin water management powers to the
Commonwealth. While the other Basin States supported this referral
in principle, Victoria did not, as Victoria believed that the plan was a
serious threat to its well-run water management system. In response,
Victoria released an alternative vision for national water reform; National
Water Reform: a comprehensive and balanced national water reform
plan: A proposal of the State Government of Victoria (February, 2007).
The former Federal Government rejected Victoria’s plan and elected
to push ahead and passed the Water Act 2007 on 17 August 2007
to give effect to several key elements of its National Plan for Water
Security. In particular, the Act establishes an independent authority to
undertake basin-wide planning. The Act does not include components
that would facilitate a comprehensive take over of basin management
by the Commonwealth as previously proposed, but the referral of
powers was required as a condition to gain access to funding under
a proposed intergovernmental agreement linked to the Act. This was
unacceptable to the Victorian Government.
14
CHAPTER 2
2
The election of a new Federal Government now presents a fresh
opportunity for Murray-Darling Basin States to achieve change in
the best interests of the regions, communities, farms, businesses
and environment.
Victoria supports water reform in the Murray-Darling Basin and a
greater Commonwealth role in some matters. To this end, Victoria will
continue to promote its Comprehensive and Balanced Water Reform
Plan, as a sound basis for further discussions between Victoria and
the new Federal Government and other Basin jurisdictions to negotiate
an agreed outcome for the Murray-Darling Basin and national water
reform into the future.
The Murray-Darling Basin
The Murray-Darling Basin Agreement
The Murray-Darling Basin extends from north of Roma in Queensland
to Goolwa in South Australia and includes three quarters of New South
Wales and half of Victoria (see Figure 2.2). It generates about 40 per
cent of the nation’s agricultural income and provides a vital source of
fresh water for domestic consumption and industrial use.
The River Murray, or more specifically the Victorian part of the MurrayDarling Basin, underpins large areas of irrigation in the Northern
Region. This water is a key factor in the State’s ongoing prosperity.
The Murray-Darling Basin spans across four states and a territory,
requiring a unique approach to sharing the resource. Traditionally the
Commonwealth, Victorian, New South Wales, Queensland, Australian
Capital Territory and South Australian Governments have worked
together, initially through the 1915 River Murray Waters Agreement,
and since 1987, through the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement.
Ministers from each of the Governments sit on the Murray-Darling
Basin Ministerial Council. The Ministerial Council is responsible for
policy decisions and directions needed to implement the Agreement.
These decisions are then applied by the Murray-Darling Basin
Commission, also made up of representatives from each of the
Governments.
Figure 2.2 The Murray-Darling Basin
CHAPTER 2
15
2
The Murray-Darling Basin Cap
By the mid–1990s it had become clear that continually increasing
water use from the Basin was not sustainable (see Figure 2.3). An audit
of water taken from the river found that about 80 per cent of natural
flows were being extracted before the river mouth. These severe
reductions in flow, coupled with land use change, were contributing to
rising salinity, algal blooms and the loss of native plants and animals.
In addition, the growth in use was steadily undermining the security
of existing users’ rights. If unchecked, it would have seen seasonal
allocations in Victoria cut to 30 per cent or less in some years (in the
worst case to 5 per cent)9.
To address the concerns of unsustainable growth in water use,
a “Cap” was introduced in 1995 to limit the amount of water that
could be taken from the Basin. Its purpose is to prevent diversions
from increasing, and it limits diversions within the States (except
Queensland) to those that were diverted under the 1993/94 levels
of development and operating rules that applied at that time. The
1993/94 season was chosen because it was the last year before the
Ministerial Council’s June 1995 decision to set a Cap11. Diversion caps
for valleys within Queensland have recently been agreed, while valley
caps for the Australian Capital Territory have not yet been finalised.
Victoria’s Cap on diversions from the River Murray and its Northern
Region tributaries is 3,859 GL a year on average. The amount diverted
in a particular year may be above or below 3,859 GL depending on
climatic conditions. Modelling is used to determine the yearly cap
based on 1993/94 levels and actual flow data. Figure 2.3 demonstrates
how the introduction of the Cap has prevented further growth in
diversions, and highlights the relative annual diversion levels between
each of the MDB States.
The Murray-Darling Basin Commission is responsible for auditing
compliance with the Cap. Models are used to confirm compliance,
taking into account climatic conditions. Any overrun of the Cap must
be repaid, by staying correspondingly below a later year’s Cap. Victoria
remains compliant with the Cap, with cumulative diversions for the
Victorian systems in credit12. While the Cap has been effective in
preventing further increases in water diversions, it does not constrain
new developments, provided the water for them is obtained by
purchasing water entitlements on the water market13.
Figure 2.3 Estimated growth in water use in the Murray-Darling Basin from 192010
16
CHAPTER 2
2
Sunset on the Murray River
Diversions for urban and agricultural use, while providing huge
economic and social benefits, mean that only about 20 per cent of
flows reach the end of the River Murray.
Changes to the amount and pattern of delivery of water have
resulted in large changes to natural ecosystems. The environmental
consequences are mostly due to a reduction in the frequency,
magnitude and duration of floods. This has caused a decline in the
health of the floodplain vegetation, such as river red gums, the size and
number of colonies of waterbirds like egrets, herons and spoonbills
which breed on floodplains, and the distribution and size of native fish
and frog populations. Some areas of floodplains have also become
badly affected by salt, adding to the stresses on trees.
The Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council recognised that setting
the cap at 1993/94 diversions was designed only to stop the growth in
diversions. It was understood that additional action (subsequent to the
Cap) would be needed to increase the amount of water allocated to
protect the environment. In 2002 the Ministerial Council agreed to the
Living Murray Initiative to protect and enhance environmental and other
community values (see next section).
The Living Murray Initiative
In November 2003, the Ministerial Council decided on a 'First Step'
for the Living Murray Initiative. The First Step focuses on achieving
environmental benefits for six significant ecological assets (icon sites),
by investing more than $500 million to recover up to 500 GL over five
years. The Victorian Government has committed $115 million over five
years to recover 214 GL of water for the River Murray by June 2009.
The six icon sites are:
•
Barmah-Millewa Forest
•
Gunbower and Koondrook-Perricoota Forests
•
Hattah Lakes
•
Chowilla Floodplain (including Lindsay and Wallpolla Islands)
•
Murray Mouth, Coorong and Lower Lakes
•
River Murray channel.
The ecological objectives for the icon sites include protecting wetlands,
river red gum and blackbox communities, migratory bird habitats,
colonial bird breeding events, native fish breeding events, fish migration
along the full length of the River Murray, and native frog and fish habitat.
Snowy River flows
About 1,000 GL of water is diverted from the Snowy River to
the Murray-Darling Basin each year. This has caused significant
environmental damage to the Snowy River. The Victorian Government
is strongly committed to collective actions between governments
to restore the health of the Snowy. Through the Joint Government
Enterprise, an initiative of the Victorian, New South Wales and
Commonwealth Governments established in December 2003, a
commitment was made to return 21 per cent of the original flows
(212 GL) to the Snowy River over 10 years.
CHAPTER 2
17
2
Institutional arrangements for managing water resources
The roles and responsibilities of the various organisations responsible for managing water resources the Northern Region are outlined in Figure 2.4.
Figure 2.4: Roles and responsibilities in the water sector
MURRAY-DARLING BASIN COUNCIL & COMMISSION
Makes Murray-Darling Basin policy
Implements Murray-Darling Basin
Agreement
GOVERNMENT, MINISTERS & DEPARTMENTS
Plans and
allocates
resource
Sets authority
obligations
Owns & monitors
authorities financial
performance
REGULATORS
Makes Govt.
policy
WATER CORPORATIONS AND CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES
Caretaker of river
health
Rural water supply
Urban water supply
COMMUNITY & CUSTOMERS
Essential Services Commission
Regulates prices & service quality
Environment Protection Authority
Sets environmental standards
Regulates environmental performance
Department of Human Services
Regulates drinking water quality
Energy & Water Ombudsman
Complaints
Democratic processes, customer committees, advisory groups
The value of secure water supplies and healthy
rivers, wetlands and aquifers
The Northern Region is built around, and dependent on, its natural
assets. Communities rely on healthy rivers and wetlands to provide
reliable, high-quality water for households, farms and industry, maintain
social and heritage values and provide recreational and tourism
opportunities. The community derives considerable economic benefits
from our rivers – and pays a considerable cost when their condition
declines.
Healthy rivers with good water quality result in a considerable reduction
in water treatment costs. The risks associated with declining water
quality, such as algal blooms, can have a substantial impact on
urban water systems, non-reticulated domestic and stock supplies,
agriculture and tourism. As an example, it is estimated that the
economic impacts of an algal bloom in Kow Swamp lasting one month
would cost $4.4 million in lost agricultural production14. This includes
the cost of sourcing replacement supplies, lost agricultural production
where replacement supplies cannot be sourced and the impact
on tourism.
Victoria’s river systems help to maintain recreational values such as
fishing, water sports, streamside camping and picnicking. They provide
$368 million a year in benefits as a source of recreation activity. In
addition, the value of the State’s tourist sector and fishing expenditure
that is dependent on rivers has been estimated at $533 million a year15.
Houseboat operations on the River Murray in Sunraysia, are estimated
to have a net worth of $32 million dollars, with an annual rental income
of about $4 million16. These figures show that Victoria’s rivers hold
considerable economic value for the State.
18
CHAPTER 2
Rivers and wetlands also have many social values. There are many
Aboriginal and other sites of significance associated with rivers, creeks
and wetlands. Aboriginal people have a strong social, cultural and
spiritual connection to the land and water.
Rivers are highly significant ecosystems in their own right. They support
a large number of native plant and animal species, many of which are
threatened or endangered.
Wetlands provide important habitat, water purification and storage
functions and are centres for tourism and social activities. The
biodiversity benefits of wetlands have been estimated at $146 million
a year17. The Northern Region is home to four internationally important
wetlands recognised under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands,
the framework for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and
their resources.
Current condition of rivers in the Northern Region
The Index of Stream Condition provides a snapshot of the
environmental condition of Victoria’s rivers (see Figure 2.5– basins in
the Northern Region are labelled 1-7). It combines information on five
key aspects of river health – flow, water quality, streamside vegetation,
physical form and aquatic life. Each major reach (between 10 km and
30 km long) is given a score out of 50, then categorised into one of five
broad groups of condition – excellent, good, moderate, poor, or very
poor. A similar approach is being developed to provide a snapshot of
the condition of Victoria’s wetlands
Figure 2.5 shows the percentage length of rivers and tributaries in good
or excellent condition (with a score of 37 or above out of 50).
2
Figure 2.5 River basin condition – percentage of river length in good or excellent condition18
Note: The river basin boundaries defined for the Index of Stream Condition are consistent
with the Australian Water Resource Council drainage basins. These differ slightly from the
river systems referred to in the rest of this document, which are defined in Chapter 1.
Some key facts about the health of the region’s rivers:
•
About 50 per cent of native fish in northern Victoria are listed as
threatened under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.
•
Low numbers of Murray cod and golden perch were recorded in
a 2007 survey of the Campaspe and Loddon Rivers due to low
water levels and lack of habitat. The ability for these species to
recover from the drought is low, as barriers to fish movement (such
as dams and weirs) can prevent recolonisation from other sources.
•
Large areas of the Murray floodplain in Victoria have declined in
health in recent years due to a range of factors, in particular the
extended drought conditions. Monitoring undertaken in 2003,
2004 and 2007 has found that large areas of river red gums are
dying due to the lack of floods or significant rain. The further down
the river and away from permanent water bodies, the larger the
impact. River red gum forests in the basin are up to 200 years old
and the death of these trees will significantly change the types of
plants and animals which live on the floodplain.
The importance of healthy aquifers
Groundwater is an important environmental asset that provides base
flow to streams, supports wetlands and other groundwater dependant
ecosystems and is used to support agriculture and domestic and
stock use. In some areas groundwater and surface water are strongly
connected while in others the connection is minimal.
Sustainable groundwater levels in aquifers ensure that the resource can
continue to be utilised. Groundwater is often slow to recharge and slow
to respond to extraction. Consequently extraction levels are based
on groundwater responsiveness and observed groundwater trends. If
groundwater levels decline over a period of years, use is unsustainable
and should be reduced. See Chapter 3 for more detail about the risks
to groundwater supplies.
Water availability in the Northern Region
The region now has a highly integrated system of natural waterways
and man-made channels, pipes, dams and weirs. This complex
system has enabled a substantial increase in water use, evident from
the 1970s through to the 1990s (see Figure 2.3 previously). This water
use underpins the Northern Region’s current irrigation industry.
The demands of users can vary considerably and rivers and wetlands
are often used as natural carriers of irrigation water. This demonstrates
the inextricable link between the region’s natural and built infrastructure.
The condition of the region’s natural and built assets can affect
the community benefits, including economic, social and heritage,
recreational and environmental values. There are many complexities
in managing the system to meet the needs of water users and the
environment. The following sections outline the various sources of
water available in the Northern Region and the existing arrangements
for their allocation to meet these various needs.
Over the past 150 years, 21 storages of 10 GL or larger have been
built in the Northern Region, totalling 12,116 GL of storage capacity.
The three largest reservoirs are Dartmouth (3,906 GL), Eildon (3,390
GL) and Hume (3,038 GL) - see Figure 2.6.
These reservoirs have allowed us to regulate river flows and store large
volumes of water, enabling greater control over our water resources
and improved reliability of supply for users. However, the amount
of water supply available each year is affected by rainfall patterns
and catchment characteristics, not just storage size. In addition,
part of the storage capacity may be used to provide a reserve for
drought contingency. The amount of water that can be delivered for
consumption can be constrained by the delivery capacity of the river.
CHAPTER 2
19
2
Figure 2.6 Major reservoirs in the Northern Region (GL)
Surface water
Surface water is created by the rain that falls on river catchments, and
flows into rivers and reservoirs. The Northern Region covers the seven
major river systems which form Victoria’s share of the Murray-Darling
Basin, including the Loddon, Campaspe, Goulburn, Broken, Ovens,
Kiewa and Murray Basins (see Figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7 River systems in the Northern Region
20
CHAPTER 2
2
From the historic record, it is estimated that there has been an average
of 9,788 GL a year of surface water in the Murray system (see Table
2.1, Column A). This includes the flow from each of the Victorian
tributaries and Victoria’s share of the River Murray. This total resource
can be separated into water for consumptive use, water for the
environment and unaccounted water. It is important to note that the
estimates in Table 2.1 are long-term averages. Actual volumes will vary
considerably from year to year (with climatic variability).
The average amount of water available for the environment and other
community benefits (environmental flows) is shown in Column G. These
estimates represent the flows at the end of each river system.
The data shown in Figure 2.8 and Table 2.1 are estimates only,
collated from a range of sources. They will be updated throughout the
development of the Strategy.
Figure 2.8 Surface water available for use in the
Northern Region*
The average amount of water that can be taken out for consumptive
use (Column F) can be further broken down into:
•
Entitlements for urban users on regulated systems (Column B).
•
Entitlements for rural users on regulated systems (Column C).
•
Licensed diversions for any user on unregulated systems (Column D).
•
An estimate of the amount of water captured in small catchment
dams (Column E).
Water is also lost from the system or unaccounted for (Column H).
Inefficient distribution systems result in water losses through leakage,
seepage and evaporation. Inaccurate metering systems or a lack of
metering means that water is unaccounted for in our estimates of
water availability. Distribution losses are included in the water that
can be taken under entitlements (Columns B and C).
*Data for water
from regulated river
systems unless
stated. Estimates of
surface water do not
include river losses.
Table 2.1 Availability of surface water in the Northern Region19 (GL/yr)
Total resource
System
Water that can be taken under entitlements
B
A
Average annual
streamflows
C
Regulated rivers
Urban
Murray
Average
environmental
flows
Distribution
losses
H
D
E
F
G
Unregulated
rivers
Small catchment
dams
TOTAL
Average flows at
basin outlets
Rural and D&S
7,075
58
1,563
13
8
1,641
3,946
395
Kiewa
685
1
0
13
5
19
674
N/A
Ovens
2,018
11
26
17
20
75
1,753
N/A
307
2.5
37
1
23
64
186
N/A
3,265*
44
1,810
20
57
1,931
1,580
475
Campaspe
352
47
75
2
44
166
163
N/A
Loddon
366
2
102
15
80
199
110
N/A
9,788*
165.5
3,613
81
237
4,095
3,946**
870
Broken
Goulburn
Total
Notes:
- All numbers in GL/year unless stated otherwise
A
- For Goulburn, estimated to be equal to Goulburn/Broken/Loddon valley long term
average Cap minus limits on urban (B), rural/D&S (C) and unregulated diversions (D)
for Broken and Loddon minus limits on urban (B) and unregulated diversions (D) for
Goulburn
- Except for Kiewa river system, estimates from long term inputs to resource allocation
models of systems plus estimates of usage from unregulated rivers and small dams (=
2004/05 use from State Water Report 04/05)
- For Campaspe, estimated to be equal to Campaspe valley long term average Cap minus
limits on urban (B) and unregulateddiversions (D) for Campaspe
- For Kiewa river system, mean annual system outflows estimated from input to Murray
system resource allocation model plus estimates of urban use and usage from
unregulated rivers and small catchment dams (= 2004/05 use from State Water Report
04/05)
*
- End of valley flows from upstream system/s excluded to avoid double counting
B
- Urban bulk entitlement volumes
C
- Estimates as bulk entitlement volumes for rural and D&S use from regulated rivers except
for Murray, Goulburn and Campaspe
- For Murray, estimated to be equal to Murray/Kiewa/Ovens valley long term average Cap
minus limits on urban (B), rural/D&S (C) and unregulated diversions (D) for Kiewa and
Ovens minus limits on urban (B) and unregulated diversions (D) for Murray
- Long-term average Caps estimated from modelling over long period of historical climate
data at 1993/94 level of development
D
- Bulk entitlement volumes for licensed diversions on unregulated rivers (from State Water
Report 2004/05)
E
- Estimated to be equal to usage in 2004/05 (from State Water Report 2004/05)
G
- Average environmental flows estimated as end of valley flows. This figure may include
water not used under consumptive entitlements and in some cases water being traded
out of a system.
**
- Estimated as Murray River flow at SA border
H
- Volumes also included In B and C
CHAPTER 2
21
2
Groundwater
Groundwater is created by rain infiltrating the soil into aquifers
– nature’s way of storing water underground. There are currently 14
major groundwater management areas (GMAs) within the Northern
Region where groundwater is extracted for consumptive use and for
irrigation (see Figure 2.9). Further GMAs are proposed for creation
within the Northern Region including Southern Campaspe Plains
(to incorporate Ellesmere and the broader region) and Wombat. It is
also proposed that Kialla GMA and Nagambie GMA be merged to
form the Mid Goulburn GMA. Areas outside GMAs are referred to as
unincorporated areas and generally have no significant groundwater
resource development due to poor water quality and quantity.
Table 2.2 details the maximum amount of groundwater available for
use in the region each year. Column A outlines the maximum volume
of water that can be allocated for consumptive use on an annual basis.
Column B outlines the current licensed entitlements for consumptive
users including irrigation or town supply.
In addition to groundwater licences for consumptive use, groundwater
is extracted for domestic and stock purposes, and represents less
than two per cent of consumptive use. Water for domestic and stock
purposes is granted free of charge under the Water Act 1989.
Groundwater levels in some groundwater management areas are
falling. In these cases, ‘water supply protection areas’ (WSPAs)
are declared and management plans are developed to stabilise
groundwater levels. See Chapter 3 for more detail about the risks
to groundwater supplies, including over-allocation.
Figure 2.9 Major groundwater management areas*
*Groundwater resources in the Designated Area are shared between South Australia and Victoria
22
CHAPTER 2
2
Table 2.2 Availability of groundwater in the Northern Region (GL/yr)
Groundwater management area/
water supply protection area
Licensed extraction
Private right
A
B
C
Annual allocation limit
(GL/yr)
Current licensed entitlements
(GL/yr)
Estimated domestic and stock use
(GL/yr)
Alexandra GMA
1.7 **
1.7
0.1
Barnawatha GMA
2.1 *
0.5
0.06
Campaspe Deep Lead WSPA
46 #
46.0
0.4
Ellesmere GMA
2.3 **
2.2
0.03
Goorambat GMA
4.9 *
1.5
0.03
59.8 #
44.1
1.2
2.8 *
1.5
0.05
Mid-Goulburn GMA
10.9 **
10.9
TBD
Mid-Loddon WSPA
34.1 **
34.1
0.5
Murmungee GMA
16.7 *
11.8
2.6
Mullindolingong GMA
7.0 *
1.3
0.16
203.6 **
203.6
0.8
5.1 *
4.9
0.3
Katunga WSPA
Kialla GMA
Shepparton Irrigation WSPA
Spring Hill WSPA
Upper Loddon WSPA
13.0 **
13.0
0.6
Total
409.9
377.2
6.7
Notes:
*
Permissible annual volume (PAV) as set in Our Water Our Future
**
Permissible consumption volume (PCV) set at current entitlements. Only PCVs for the Central Region have been formally gazetted. The remainder are under development, after review with water
corporations
#
Seasonal allocation limits applied through approved groundwater management plans
C
Estimated domestic and stock use based on 2ML/bore/year (ie. 0.002 GL/bore/year).
Alternative water sources
Stormwater
Alternative water sources including irrigation drainage water, recycled
water and stormwater provide a non-potable water source for a range
of uses.
Stormwater is defined as the net increase in run-off and decrease in
groundwater recharge resulting from the introduction of impervious
surfaces such as roofs and roads within urban development.
Drainage water
In the Northern Region, local governments are responsible for
managing stormwater infrastructure of towns. Urban stormwater that
is not captured and used runs into drains and is mostly discharged
to local waterways. Many households, particularly in rural settings rely
on water collected in rainwater tanks for their domestic use, although
exact figures are not known.
Drainage water is surface water or sub-surface water that is removed
from farms by drains and pumps to manage groundwater levels,
particularly after a period of high rainfall. On-farm efficiency programs
implemented in the Northern Region have decreased the level of
drainage water leaving farms and available for alternative use. Some
117 GL of drainage water was returned to the Murray River system
in 2005/0620.
Recycled water
Recycled water is derived from sewerage systems or industrial
processes and treated to a standard that is ‘fit for purpose’- that is,
fit for its intended use. In the Northern Region, usage tends to be
localised and opportunistic, with 36 GL of recycled water used in
2004/0521 and 34 GL in 2005/0622.
The reuse of stormwater to save drinking water in the Northern Region
is a relatively new undertaking. As part of the Victorian Government’s
$20 million Stormwater and Urban Recycling Fund, several stormwater
and stormwater/recycling demonstration projects have begun in the
Northern Region to increase the amount of stormwater and recycling
water available for use (see Table 2.3). Volumes appear to be modest,
but may represent significant savings in terms of urban use.
Evaluation of the existing recycling and stormwater funds in other parts
of the State has found that most projects are delivering long-term
results. Projects have saved or replaced drinking water with stormwater
and recycling at an average cost of less than $1000 per ML per year.
CHAPTER 2
23
2
Table 2.3 Stormwater and Urban Recycling Fund projects in the Northern Region
Project Description
Town
GL/Year saved
Mildura
A Recycled Water Project from the Lower Murray Water Treatment work for Mildura Rural
City Council’s Aerodrome Ovals Recreation Complex.
0.2
Wodonga
A Stormwater Project to enlarge an existing stormwater storage facility, and establish pretreatment wetlands and infrastructure, to allow irrigation of community sporting grounds at the
Wodonga Racecourse facility.
0.09
Tatura
A Stormwater and Onsite Water Recycling Project at a glasshouse tomato producer.
0.09
Beechworth
A Stormwater and Recycled Water Project involving the capture and storage of stormwater
and wastewater from a new 81- lot planned subdivision for irrigating adjacent football, cricket
0.07
fields, and a golf course.
Bendigo
An Onsite Recycled Water and Stormwater Project involving 7 discrete projects for public
hospitals and aged care facilities, including: rainwater capture for toilet flushing, treatment of
waste water (using reverse osmosis) reuse of kidney dialysis water on gardens and irrigation of
grounds, and water reuse after fire system testing.
0.03
A Water Conservation, Onsite Recycling and Stormwater Project involving the
construction of an international standard wet hockey field including provision for alternative
water storage.
0.02
Bendigo
A Stormwater Project involving the construction of a storage dam and stormwater diversion
pipe work to harvest and store stormwater for racecourse watering and maintenance.
0.02
Wangaratta
A Stormwater Education Project involving the training for managers, engineers,
environment officers and planners from local government, industry representatives, developers
and water industry representatives.
Education Project
A State wide Education Project for Professional Landscape Gardeners: ‘Green Gardeners
Training Program’ provides a free accredited training course run in local council areas.
Promotes ways to save drinking water in domestic garden settings and sustainablity e.g. water
conservation and rainwater tanks.
Education Project
Bendigo
Statewide
Sharing our water resources –
Victoria’s water allocation framework
Victoria leads the nation in water management, and has built its water
allocation system on a framework of reliable entitlements, the ability
to adapt to changing conditions and over-riding legislative powers to
enable changes to entitlements when necessary.
In 2004 when the Government released Our Water Our Future, it
took the opportunity to further improve the water allocation system
by refining water entitlements, creating a legal right to water for the
environment, and incorporating alternative water sources into the
resource pool. Bulk entitlements for water corporations were also
confirmed for the Ovens and Broken Rivers, and the mid-Loddon
system.
Allocating surface water
In regulated river systems (where flow is controlled by major dams
or weirs), the Victorian Government allocates water resources by
bulk entitlements issued to rural and urban water corporations for
consumptive use. These bulk entitlements include water allocated to
individuals under licence, water shares, and supply by agreement.
While regulated systems are only a small proportion of the total length
of rivers in northern Victoria, most water use is from these systems.
Unregulated systems (where there are no major dams or weirs on the
river) provide about two per cent of the water used for consumption
in northern Victoria. Water from unregulated systems is allocated by
licences to farmers for irrigation or domestic and stock purposes.
At a regional level, water corporations are responsible for supplying
water to towns and cities for urban, industrial and commercial uses.
They license the extraction and use of water from waterways, springs,
dams and groundwater. Catchment management authorities are the
caretakers of river health, responsible for waterway and floodplain
management, regional and catchment planning and the coordination
and management of the environmental water reserve.
24
CHAPTER 2
2
‘Unbundled’ water entitlements
Allocating alternative sources
On July 1 2007, the Victorian Government ‘unbundled’ water rights for
regulated systems in northern Victoria, giving individuals more flexibility
to manage water as a valuable asset separate from land. Unbundling is
consistent with the actions of the National Water Initiative. As a result,
water rights have now been separated into three components:
Water corporations allocate irrigation drainage water, recycled water
and stormwater that is collected in their infrastructure systems through
licences or supply by agreements. Individuals can use irrigation
drainage water, recycled water and stormwater that is collected on
their properties, subject to environmental and health approvals.
1. High-reliability water share – an entitlement to an ongoing share
of water available from a particular supply source. This amount is
equal to the previous ‘water right’.
The Government does not include alternative sources in estimates
of the surface water and groundwater available to be allocated to
water users or the environment. Therefore, there is no obligation for
these discharges to continue. While there is no obligation for them to
continue, where these discharges do occur, they form part of the water
used by the environment and downstream users.
2. Share of delivery capacity – an entitlement to have water delivered
to a property. This is equal to the previous delivery service.
3. Water-use licence – a licence to use water for irrigation on a
particular property (including any site-specific conditions on use).
As a result of unbundling, individuals now hold a high-reliability water
share equal to their previous water right.
Seasonal allocations for high and low-reliability water shares
Before allocations for high-reliability water shares are made, it is first
necessary to set aside sufficient water to fill the irrigation channels and
cover losses (from seepage and evaporation). In making the seasonal
allocations, water is first provided to high-reliability shares. Water is
allocated only if it is available in storages or guaranteed from streamflow. This means that during times of low inflows or drought, allocations
may be low or even zero at the start of the irrigation season (usually in
August), increasing throughout the season as flows into storages occur
during winter and spring.
If additional water is available after full allocations have been made for
high-reliability water shares, enough water is kept in storage to meet
full allocations for the next season’s high-reliability water shares and
licences. Previously, any additional water on top of this was allocated
as ‘sales’ water, and customers paid only for the volume of sales water
actually used. In July 2007, for customers in the Northern Region on
regulated systems, sales water was converted to low-reliability water
shares. This is allocated on the same basis as sales water. However, it
has more legal protection than sales water, and is fully tradeable and
recognised separately to land.
Allocating groundwater
Extraction of groundwater for consumptive uses in Victoria is
authorised by the State Government primarily as a water licence. When
issuing a licence, the Water Act 1989 requires that consideration be
given to various matters including the existing and projected availability
of water in the area, groundwater quality and any adverse effect the
use of the licensed volume may have on the aquifer, waterways and
existing water users.
Alternative water sources can have an impact on our rivers – both
positive and negative. Nutrients and other pollutants in irrigation
drainage water can damage our rivers therefore it is desirable to
reduce discharges, and stormwater can be detrimental to river health
on a local scale by adding nutrients and cause local erosion to a river.
However, in some systems stormwater, recycled water and drainage
water may play an important part in providing water for downstream
users and flow-stressed rivers. It is therefore important that any
significant proposals to harvest stormwater, recycled and drainage
water consider the implications for river health and downstream users.
How water is used in the Northern Region
The following section outlines the major uses of water in the Northern
Region, including rural, urban and domestic and stock use, distribution
losses and unaccounted water and water for the environment.
Water use in agricultural industries
Reliable water supplies from the River Murray and its tributaries are the
basis for the large areas of irrigation in northern Victoria. Agricultural
production in the Northern Region generates more than $3.26 billion a
year from about 6.37 million hectares of farmland23, and reliable water
supplies continue to be a key factor in Victoria’s ongoing prosperity.
Urban centres within irrigation areas, such as Shepparton and Mildura,
are thriving as a result.
There are 16 major irrigation areas in the Northern Region where a
network of storages, distribution channels and drains play an important
role to deliver water. (see Figure 2.10). Irrigation also occurs outside
these areas with water being sourced directly from a river
or groundwater bore.
In addition to licences that are formally issued, the Water Act 1989
enables individuals to take groundwater for domestic and stock
purposes without a licence.
Ritchie Reservoir, Mansfield (source: Goulburn Valley Water)
CHAPTER 2
25
2
Figure 2.10 Irrigation areas in the Northern Region
Figure 2.11 Average amount of water used (GL/year) and
economic value ($million/year) of the major irrigation
industries in the Northern Region24
An average of about 3,600 GL of water is used per year by rural and
domestic and stock customers on regulated river systems – by far the
most significant water use in the Northern Region. Unregulated river
systems and groundwater are also vital resources for irrigation. About
15 GL per year of recycled water is used for activities such as irrigation,
dairying, beef, lamb, fodder, and woodlot production.
The predominant irrigated industries are horticulture (valued at $924.8
million per year) and dairy ($707.5 million a year). These industries
generate the highest dollar value for the region, accounting for 51 per
cent of the farm gate value of irrigation to the Northern Region. Mixed
farming is also a significant and flexible industry in the region.
Water use in cities and towns
Urban water use (in cities and towns) is made up of household and
industrial consumption. Up to 163 GL a year, equivalent to 4.7 per
cent of the total volume used, is available for urban use, including
areas not served by urban water corporations. In addition to drinking
water supply, small volumes of recycled water (about 0.8 GL) are used
for urban and industrial uses, such as golf courses and other sports
grounds. In the Northern Region, water is supplied to 174 towns
and most of the population by water corporations. The urban water
corporation boundaries are shown in Figure 2.12.
26
CHAPTER 2
2
Urban systems in the Northern Region are characterised by many
small, widely dispersed, stand alone systems, as opposed to one
large integrated system like that in Melbourne. Many people also rely
on non-reticulated water supplies such as rainwater tanks and bores,
which are not connected to urban systems. Water is sourced primarily
from rivers, however some towns draw on groundwater resources to
fully supply or supplement their urban supply. Table 2.4 provides more
information regarding the region’s urban water use.
Figure 2.12 Urban water corporation boundaries and major towns in the Northern Region
Note: Omeo is excluded from this Sustainable Water Strategy but additional water may be sourced from the Northern Region for Omeo in the future.
Table 2.4 Urban water supplies and use in the Northern Region25
Water
Corporation
No. of
towns
supplied
Main Towns
Population
Connections
Volume
Supplied
(05/06)3
Largest Storages
324
Lake Dartmouth,
Lake Hume, Lake
Buffalo
341
Goulburn/Broken, Murray
Lake Eildon
22.1 GL
275
Bulk supplies from Murray,
Upper Coliban
Campaspe, Goulburn and
Reservoir, Lake
Loddon systems, Campaspe
Eppalock
Deep Lead WSPM
8,977
2.55 GL
261
Upper Loddon WSPA,
Bungaree GMA, small
tributaries
Tullaroop Reservoir,
29,190
21.19 GL
611
Murray and Loddon Rivers
Lake Dartmouth,
Lake Hume
37
96,873
41,900
20.4 GL
54
Shepparton,
Seymour
118,000
56,232
30.46 GL
Coliban1
51
Bendigo,
Echuca,
Castlemaine
117,658
62,468
Central
Highlands2
18
Maryborough
16,233
Lower
Murray
14
Swan Hill,
Mildura
63,000
Goulburn
Valley
Main Water Sources
Murray, Ovens, King,
Kiewa, Mitta Mitta rivers,
minor watercourses and
groundwater
Wangaratta,
Benalla,
Wodonga
North East
Residential
use in 2005/06
(litres/
person/day)4
1) Excludes Wimmera supply system and Coliban rural supplies
2) Clunes, Daylesford, Dean, Lexton, Maryborough and Waubra urban supply systems
3) Total amount of water diverted from surface and groundwater systems for urban use in 2005/06
4) Data includes the impact on demand of any water restrictions in 2005/06. Residential consumption can also vary from year to year due to climate variations.
CHAPTER 2
27
2
Figure 2.13 shows the division of residential water usage in an average
household in Shepparton in 2004/05. It indicates that 46 per cent
(181 litres/person/day) was used indoors while 53 per cent (208 litres/
person/day) of water was used outside. As a comparison, in 2005/06
indoor water usage in Melbourne accounted for about 80 per cent
(166 litres/person/day) of average household use, while outdoor use
accounted for 20 per cent (42 litres/person/day)26. These figures are
based on unrestricted water usage. Outdoor water usage decreases
significantly in times of water restrictions.
Figure 2.13 Residential water use by an average
household in Shepparton27
Industrial and commercial use (ie. non-residential use) accounts for
about one-third of total urban water use in the Northern Region.
Table 2.5 shows how non-residential urban water is used.
Table 2.5 Non-residential component of urban water use in 2005/0628
Water Corporation
Non-Residential use GL (% total use)
North East Water
Goulburn Valley Water
6.1 GL (30%)
Food processing, packaging, textiles, pulp, construction materials
11. 2 GL (37%)
Coliban Water
6.3 GL (29%)
Central Highlands Water
0.47 GL (19%)
Lower Murray
4.6 GL (22%)
Food processing, abattoirs, poultry, dairy manufacturing, hospital, textiles
Food processing, abattoirs, meat products, dairying, hospital
Food, manufacturing, hospital, education and local councils, and tourism
including accommodation and retail
Food processing, abattoirs, meat products, dairying, hospital
Losses and unaccounted water
The environment’s right to water
The distribution of water across northern Victoria is a complex process
that relies on an extensive network of rivers and channels (both lined
and unlined) to deliver surface and groundwater for irrigation use,
urban supply and the environment. Considerable volumes of water are
lost annually due to leakage and seepage, evaporation and outdated
measurement and irrigation delivery systems.
In the past, there was no legal obligation to provide water to the
environment but as foreshadowed in Our Water Our Future, the
Government has passed legislation that creates the environmental
water reserve – for rivers and aquifers.
On average, up to 800-900GL of water or 30 per cent of all water
within the Goulburn and Victoria’s Murray irrigation districts, is lost
each year. By modernising these systems these losses can be
reduced, generating water that can be allocated to users or the
environment. This was recognised in the Government’s recent
announcement to fund the $1 billion Food Bowl Modernisation Project
in Our Water Our Future: the Next Stage of the Government’s Water
Plan. The first part of this project will capture up to 225 GL of lost water
annually. This and other management options for system losses are
discussed in Chapter 4.
28
Examples of major industries
CHAPTER 2
The environmental water reserve (EWR) is the legal term used to
describe the amount of water set aside by law to meet environmental
benefits through:
•
Statutory environmental entitlements (such as a volume of water
held in storage).
•
Conditions on bulk entitlements, licences and permits (such as
passing flows below a storage).
•
The establishment of limits to diversions (such as permissible
consumptive volumes and caps, including the Murray-Darling
Basin Cap).
2
While it is described as environmental water, the EWR also provides
for other community benefits including recreation and tourism, social
and heritage, and economic values which are dependent on the
environmental condition of rivers. The EWR was established taking into
account existing consumptive entitlements. This means under existing
arrangements, most systems do not have enough water to maintain
ecological health of the rivers, wetlands and aquifers. This is discussed
further in Chapter 3.
Surface water
The Government has allocated responsibilities for the operational
management of the EWR to catchment management authorities.
To ensure the EWR achieves the best environmental outcomes, it will
be managed as part of an integrated river and wetland protection and
restoration program.
Estimates of the EWR for rivers in the Northern Region have been
provided in Table 3.1. Average annual environmental flows were
outlined in Table 2.1.
Estimates indicate that only four per cent of the EWR is made up of
entitlements with similar characteristics to those held by irrigators (ie.
tradeable, mix of high and low reliability, see Table 2.6). This part of the
EWR can be actively managed by CMAs to maximise environmental
benefits. Most water for the environment is provided as passing flows
and above-cap water. In addition, consumptive water can also provide
some environmental benefits through inter-valley transfers of traded
water and unused consumptive water.
In regulated systems, passing flows are the flows that a water
corporation must pass at its reservoirs before it can take any water
for consumptive use. In unregulated systems, they are established
through licence conditions, rostering, restriction rules and streamflow
management plans. While catchment management authorities have no
control over when and how this water is released, some passing flows
have been set with environmental objectives in mind. Others relating to
inflow conditions are reduced or discontinued during dry years. These
flows may be qualified (in order to meet critical human needs) during
extreme droughts when water shortages are declared.
The remainder of the EWR is very unreliable and varies from year to
year. A significant proportion is made up of spills from storages in wet
years. In dry years when storages don’t spill, the EWR is substantially
reduced and as such is particularly vulnerable to climate change.
The EWR is not simply a volume of water for the environment. Rather,
it is a flow regime including the timing (when a flow occurs), frequency
(how often a flow occurs), duration (length of time) and magnitude (size
of flow) – see Figure 2.14. As a result, the amount of water in the EWR
differs from river to river and from year to year.
Table 2.6 shows the environmental entitlements in the Northern Region
(similar to those held by irrigators). It is estimated that these make up
about four per cent of the total EWR.
Storm clouds over the Murray River. Photography by Alison Pouliot
CHAPTER 2
29
2
Table 2.6 Existing environmental entitlements in the Northern Region
River System
Volume of entitlement (GL)
Murray
99
27.6
• Living Murray Bulk Entitlement
• Forms part of the 80:20 sales deal (see Action 3.6 from Our Water Our Future)
• Long-term Cap equivalent is 37 GL
• Flora and Fauna Bulk Entitlement
• Equivalent to high-reliability water share
• Used every year, predominantly for Kerang Lakes
50
• Part of Barmah-Millewa Forest Environmental Water Allocation
• Available when high-reliability water shares 100 per cent allocated
25
• Part of Barmah-Millewa Forest Environmental Water Allocation
• Low-reliability water share available when inflow triggers are reached
30
• Goulburn Murray Bulk Entitlement
• Available any time for emergency use to manage water quality problems in the
Goulburn River or Broken Creek
• Used several times in the past few years
80
• Available when inflows for previous two years are more than about 2,800 GL per
month. Under these conditions, both high- and low-reliability water shares would
generally be fully allocated.
• These conditions mean the environmental allocation has only been available once
(in 1996) since the entitlement was created (in 1995)
Goulburn
141
5
• Campaspe Bulk Entitlement
Campaspe
Loddon
2
Total
Comments
459.6
• Loddon Bulk Entitlement
• ~4% of the average annual environmental flows
In unregulated rivers, where there are no major dams that control
releases, the Government aims to provide ecologically sustainable
environmental water reserves in these systems primarily through
management of existing diversions. However, some systems
experience increased ecological stress due to water extraction,
especially in summer months. In these systems the aim is to manage
summer extractions to reduce stress. The future management
approach being considered for these rivers is described in Chapter 4.
Ovens River, Bright
30
CHAPTER 2
2
The importance of flow for healthy rivers
Groundwater
The pattern of flow (or ‘flow regime’) plays an important role in river
ecology and provides a range of services and benefits for people, as
shown in Figure 2.14. Higher flows stimulate fish breeding, maintain
estuary openings and provide additional recreational opportunities. Low
summer baseflows help maintain fish refuges and connect instream
habitats. Floods in spring regenerate floodplains and wetlands including
agricultural soil and replenish the river channel.
The Water Act 1989 provides for establishing an environmental water
reserve (EWR) for groundwater. The EWR will be provided by limiting
the volume of groundwater that can be extracted for consumptive use.
Figure 2.14 Importance of the pattern of flow to the health of a river
CHAPTER 2
31
3
Water resource outlook
The past 10 years of low inflows have been challenging for all water users and the
environment, but rural communities have shown resilience in responding to these
conditions. A range of tools have been adopted to manage the risks associated with
drought and other pressures on water resources, and to minimise the impacts of
water use.
This chapter demonstrates how climate change and other potential risks could
reduce water availability in the Northern Region over the next 50 years. It explores
a range of potential impacts of a more long-term reduction in water and in
particular, the appropriate balance between the needs of the environment and
consumptive users. Chapter 4 outlines the potential responses that the Government
and community can use to effectively plan for a secure water future.
Pressures and risks
Over-allocation
The Northern Region has historically been home to some of the
State’s most plentiful and reliable water resources. However, the
regional community has been managing the impacts of reduced water
availability over the past 10 years.
In many northern water systems, the amount of water extracted
from rivers and aquifers is higher than that which can sustain existing
ecological objectives. This has resulted in a decline in the ecological
health of our rivers, wetlands and aquifers, as well as impacting on
towns and industries that depend on reliable, high-quality water.
The Northern Region’s water resources, and river and wetland health
are under pressure from:
•
Over-allocation.
•
Significant land use change and events.
•
Population growth.
•
Water quality issues, including salinity.
•
Climate variability, including drought.
•
Climate change.
The first step to prevent further over allocation was the setting of
the Murray-Darling Basin Cap to prevent growth in water use above
1993/94 levels. Victoria has been particularly active in making sure that
water allocations meet our obligations under the Cap.
The following sections describe these risks, the Government’s current
management actions and what these pressures could mean for future
water availability. Chapter 4 explores the responses that could be, and
in some cases already are being, implemented to manage
water scarcity.
The Murray-Darling Basin Commission has identified six risks to the
shared water resources of the Murray-Darling Basin. These include
climate change, increased groundwater use, increased number of
farm dams, bushfires, afforestation and reduced flow from irrigation
drainage. Work has begun to investigate the extent of each risk in the
Basin and to develop a strategy to address these risks. This process
will help the Commission and individual States manage these risks.
Streetscape, Chiltern
32
CHAPTER 3
3
Surface water
In the Northern Region, over-allocation coupled with drought is
threatening environmental values including icon environmental sites
such as the stressed river red gums along the length of the River
Murray. Some environmental changes that have occurred as a result
of high levels of water extraction in the Northern Region may
be irreversible.
An independent report on the flow needs of the whole River Murray
system (including the River Murray and the Victorian and New South
Wales tributaries) was prepared for the Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial
Council in 200229. These findings were used in the development
of the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council’s (VEAC) draft
recommendations report: River Red Gums Forest Investigation.
The Victorian Government will formally respond to VEAC’s final
recommendations when they are released this year.
So how do we know how much flow the region’s rivers need to protect
their health? The Victorian Government has a nationally recognised
‘best practice’ environmental flow assessment methodology for
determining the flow needs of rivers in water allocation decisions. In
the FLOWS method, a team of independent scientists determine the
flow components that have a high probability of maintaining the key
environmental values. These values are identified in each river system
by catchment management authorities through the development of
regional river health strategies.
In addition to meeting the current Cap, Victoria has committed to
several water savings projects, notably the Living Murray Initiative and
Snowy River Water Recovery Project (see Chapter 2) to further increase
water available for environmental flows. Adjustments to the Cap will be
required to account for water saved and delivered to the environment
through these projects.
In unregulated systems, the Government aims to provide ecologically
sustainable environmental water reserves primarily through
management of existing diversions. Management options for
unregulated rivers are discussed in Chapter 4.
Table 3.1 provides estimates of the additional amount of water needed
to meet the environmental flow recommendations (the environmental
‘shortfalls’ determined using the FLOWS method) for some of the
priority regulated river reaches of Victoria’s Murray tributaries.
Table 3.1 Estimated amount of environmental flows required to meet ecological objectives for major rivers in the
Northern Region
River system and reach
Total environmental flows required
Environmental ‘shortfall’- additional
to meet recommendations
environmental flows needed to meet
(average GL/yr)1
recommendations (average GL/yr)2
Goulburn River – Loch Garry to Murray3
137.1 – 199.6
21.1 – 71.8
9.1
0.2
20.2
8.8
Campaspe River – Campaspe syphon to Murray
74.9
13.3
Loddon River – Tullaroop Reservoir to Laanecoorie6
13.3
6.6
Loddon River – below Loddon weir
17.8
2.3
Lower Broken Creek
FLOWS study in progress
Ovens River
Broken River – Casey’s weir to Goulburn4
Campaspe River – above Lake Eppalock
5
5
6
Notes:
1.
Averages have been calculated based on full utilisation of consumptive entitlements and current operating and water harvesting rules including trade. These are initial estimates that will
be confirmed in the draft NRSWS.
2.
Averages of the additional volume required are based on long-term average streamflows, represented by the base case scenario discussed later in this chapter
3.
Averages for the Goulburn River are based on results for 1976–99 inclusive. Averages for the Goulburn River are provided for both the provision of minimum and maximum
recommendations (i.e. an annual flood of between 15,000 ML/d to 60,000 ML/d plus summer low flows of 610 ML/d)
4.
Averages for the Broken River are based on results for the years 1973–97 inclusive
5.
Averages for the Campaspe River are based on results for the years 1892 – 2004 inclusive
6.
Averages for the Loddon River are based on results for the years 1976–99 inclusive.
CHAPTER 3
33
3
Groundwater
Groundwater management areas in the Northern Region have generally
stable groundwater levels. However, in some parts of the region,
groundwater stores are under increasing pressure. This pressure
comes from an increasing number of licence-holders seeking to access
groundwater and through increased use in response to drought.
In particular, the Campaspe and Katunga WSPAs had declining
groundwater trends during the late 1990s. The implementation of
groundwater management plans for these areas has subsequently
stabilised the groundwater level within acceptable levels as stipulated
within the plans.
Increased use of groundwater in northern Victoria can reduce the
baseflow to streams, wetlands and other groundwater-dependent
ecosystems, and over-use may lead to deterioration of groundwater
quality. Falling groundwater levels may result in increased pumping
costs and reduced access for some users. The challenge is to manage
the resource sustainably, optimising the volume extracted while
ensuring groundwater levels remain stable. The amount of groundwater
that can be extracted for use is determined by how much water
seeps into, or recharges the aquifers, and how much is discharged to
streams and wetlands.
Resource appraisals of groundwater levels have begun for the
Campaspe Deep Lead, Mid and Upper Loddon and Spring Hill WSPAs
to ensure existing management arrangements are adequate to prevent
groundwater level declines given extraction and the forecast impact of
climate change. In addition CSIRO is completing a numerical model
for the Southern Riverine basin, which covers most of the Northern
Region aquifer. Results from this model will inform further planning for
groundwater resource management.
Over-use is prevented by setting a limit to the amount of water that can
be allocated for consumptive use from an aquifer and also by imposing
restrictions when groundwater levels fall below agreed levels. In
northern Victoria, permissible consumptive volumes, which determine
the water available for allocation, are in the process of being set at
current licensed extraction levels.
Groundwater management areas (GMAs) with decreasing water levels
have been declared as water supply protection areas (WSPAs) with
management plans developed to reduce over-use and stabilise the
resource within acceptable groundwater levels. Table 3.2 shows each
groundwater system in the Northern Region, the trend in its water level,
and the current management arrangements.
Concerns have also been raised regarding the number of groundwater
bores being constructed for domestic and stock use, especially during
drought conditions. While the construction of a groundwater bore
requires a permit, use of groundwater for domestic and stock purposes
does not require a licence and is not metered because it represents
only a small proportion of total groundwater use (two per cent in the
Northern Region). The Department of Sustainability and Environment is
completing a review of the volume and impact of domestic and stock
use on groundwater levels in the Port Phillip region, and the expansion
of this audit for priority areas in northern Victoria will be investigated as
part of the development of this Strategy.
Table 3.2 Status and management of groundwater systems in the Northern Region30
Groundwater Management Area/
Water Supply Protection Area
Alexandra GMA
Barnawatha GMA
Campaspe Deep Lead WSPA
Ellesmere GMA
Goorambat GMA
Katunga WSPA
Kialla GMA
Nagambie GMA
Mid-Loddon WSPA
Murmungee GMA
Mullindolingong GMA
Shepparton Irrigation WSPA
Spring Hill WSPA
Upper Loddon WSPA
Water level status
Approved management
September 2007
plan in place
Stable
Stable
Declining within management
plan limits#
Declining
Stable
plan limits#
Stable
Declining
Declining
Stable
Stable
plan limits#
Declining
Declining
Not required
Not required
Yes
No^
Not required
Yes
Not required
No^
No^
Not required
Not required
Yes
Yes*
No^
^ Technical work is being undertaken to inform development of management plan
* Declaration of water shortage saw groundwater rights qualified in 2007
# Groundwater management plans set the ideal level below ground level at which groundwater should recover to. This is referred to as an average recovery level. If the groundwater
stays above this level, it is sustainable.
34
CHAPTER 3
3
Groundwater / surface water interactions
Timber plantations
Reductions in groundwater levels can impact on flows into rivers
and wetland systems where these systems are connected. In some
northern systems, these impacts might be seriously exacerbating low
streamflows. Links between surface water and groundwater are being
considered on a case by case basis as interaction varies markedly
between locations. For example, the environmental flow determinations
for the upper Ovens River31 found that the connection between
groundwater and surface water is considerable. This has prompted
the commitment to develop a joint surface water/groundwater
management plan. Appropriate and reliable data on these issues is
being assembled and will inform the Draft Northern Region Sustainable
Water Strategy.
The establishment of large-scale timber plantations can have significant
benefits to a region in addition to providing timber and pulp products,
such as helping control dryland salinity, creating habitat (in some
cases), greenhouse offsets and biomass for renewable energy. There
are about 65,000 hectares of plantations in the Northern Region32.
Land use change and events
Land use changes can occur in response to changing economic
circumstances, the availability of resources including water, or
changing demographics and societal needs. In the Northern Region,
examples of land use changes impacting on water resources include
timber plantations, changes in agricultural industry (eg. from seasonal
horticultural crops to olive tree production), the increased number of
small farm-based catchment dams, and significant bushfire events
such as those experienced during the summers of 2003 and 2006.
Land use change can impact on water availability, water quality (such
as salinity), carbon storage and biodiversity. Land use change may also
impact on the socio-economic factors of a region, including changes in
the size of communities, their demographic profile or overall resilience
in times of low allocations.
However, it is well established that the transformation of broadacre
grazing to more intensive land uses, particularly forestry, uses more
water. Depending on their location, large-scale timber plantations
can significantly reduce surface water run-off and groundwater
recharge. This in turn can reduce the availability of water downstream
for consumptive use and the environment, and reduce the reliability
of water entitlements33. As an example, complete afforestation of
small headwater catchments with mean annual rainfall of about 900
millimetres can increase the number of zero-flow days from a range of
0-50 to a range of 175-225 days per year34. Timber harvesting regimes
(in particular the spatial extent of harvesting and rotation length) and
vegetation type and age, are important influences on water yield.
The Government recognises the regional development and potential
environmental benefits of plantations, and encourages sustainable
private forestry investment throughout Victoria.
In order to manage the potential impacts of land use changes on water
resources and to ensure that Victoria’s water allocation framework
can provide safe and secure entitlements, the Government remains
committed to Our Water Our Future Action 2.20 to:
•
Undertake a state-wide assessment to identify high, medium or
low hydrologic impact zones.
•
Develop appropriate tools, for example planning provisions,
incentives and pricing systems, in consultation with stakeholders
to account for the impact of new plantations (and other land use
changes such as the move from annual to perennial crops) on
water resources, salinity, greenhouse and other environmental
benefits and costs of plantations.
This project will examine the impact of moving from pasture to
plantations. It will also assess the impact of other changes in vegetation
types on the catchments’ water balance, specifically the shift from
shallow-rooted herbaceous crops to deep-rooted perennial including
horticultural crops and native revegetation.
This assessment, which is to be completed by the end of 2008, will
provide options to account for and manage the impacts of land use
change on water resources.
In 2004, South Australia introduced a regulation to declare commercial
forestry a water-affecting activity, specifically for the south-east region.
This regulation requires water-affecting activity permits to be issued for
forestry within a given management area, until an agreed threshold area
is reached. Above this level, water allocation offsets will be required
to account for the impact of forest expansion on the water budget.
This can be done by buying or leasing existing allocations. In some
instances water allocations have already been acquired with land
bought for commercial forestry.
Buffalo Creek after the 2006/07 North East bushfires
CHAPTER 3
35
3
Small catchment dams
Small catchment dams include dams for irrigation and commercial
purposes that are subject to licensing and dams for aesthetic or stock
and domestic purposes, which are not subject to licensing. In some
areas, an increase in the number of these unlicensed dams could have
a considerable impact on water resources. For instance, investigations
show that small catchment dams within the Lake Eppalock catchment
can reduce streamflow by up to 10 per cent35.
Increased peri-urban development (small rural properties on the
urban fringe) is leading to an increase in the number and volume
of small catchment dams36. In the Northern Region the amount of
water captured in these dams is relatively small compared with other
consumptive uses; about six per cent. However, as water availability
decreases as a result of climate change, the water use of small
catchment dams will become an increasingly larger proportion of total
consumptive use, as they capture run-off before it flows into rivers. This
affects all other downstream users and the environment.
While the Government does not intend to prevent the effective watering
of stock and access to water for domestic purposes, the Draft Strategy
will explore priorities and opportunities to manage the impacts of small
catchment dams where localised impacts exist.
Bushfire
Under climate change, it is likely that bushfires will become more
frequent, intense and extensive37.
Much of the fire risk in the Northern Region is in the heavily forested
areas of the north-east, where the Murray and Goulburn systems
originate. During the summer of 2003, fires in north eastern Victoria
burned a total of 494,500 hectares of largely native forest. Then during
the 2006/07 fire season a total of 404,100 hectares was burned in the
north-east.
Bushfires can have a direct impact on water resources. Water quality
is often threatened immediately after a severe fire as rain washes
ash, charcoal, nutrients and other materials into rivers and wetlands,
causing increased turbidity and changes to local stream ecology.
Increases in water quantity are generally experienced for several years
after a fire, due to the reduction in vegetation cover. In the longer term,
surface and groundwater levels may be reduced once regenerating
vegetation enters a phase of rapid growth. For example, 20 years
after a bushfire, regenerating forests use greater amounts of water
than the mature forests, resulting in reduced inflows to river systems
and storages. As forests mature, they gradually use less water and
eventually return to pre-bushfire levels of water use.
36
CHAPTER 3
Investigations commissioned by DSE and MDBC into the impact of
the 2003 alpine bushfires on streamflow indicate that the maximum
reduction in streamflow due to post-bushfire recovery for the River
Murray is 700 GL or 10 per cent of mean annual flow. The maximum
reduction in flow will occur about 20 to 25 years after the fire. The
impact of the 2003 fires alone, is expected to have a significant impact
on inflows to the Murray system by about 2025, with the impact
continuing for another 80 to 100 years after this time. These figures
assume that no bushfires will occur in these areas post-2003. This
situation is very unlikely as demonstrated in 2006 when bushfires
reburnt some of the 2003 fire areas. Therefore it is expected that the
impact on water yield will not be as extensive, because widespread
areas of forests will not enter a rapid stage of growth all at one time.
While it is impossible to prevent bushfires and their impact on water
availability, a range of activities can be undertaken to minimise the
intensity and severity of bushfires when they do occur. Victoria has a
fire prevention program in which prescribed burning is carried out to
reduce the fuel load of our forests.
Prescribed burns are assessed for strategic values and environmental
and operational requirements before inclusion in the annual fire
operations plans. These plans are developed each year, between June
and September in conjunction with local CFA brigades, park and forest
user groups and the wider community. In 2007 Government supervised
prescribed burns totalling 13,177 and 13,908 hectares in the north east
and north west fire districts respectively38. The Government promotes
the optimisation of prescribed burns to protect water supply.
Population growth
A growing population means that we will require more water for
households and industry in the future. The challenge is to ensure
sufficient water is available to supply the increasing population in a
sustainable way. Total residential demand for water depends on the
rate of population growth and the amount of water each person uses.
The Northern Region’s current population of 529,000 is anticipated
to increase to about 696,000 by 2055. Average annual population
increases to 2031 will chiefly be due to growth in larger urban centres
such as Bendigo (3 per cent), Wodonga (1.6 per cent), Echuca (1.6
per cent), Yarrawonga and Cobram (1.4 per cent), Wangaratta (1.3 per
cent), Shepparton (1.2 per cent) and Mildura (1.1 per cent). Actions
that individuals and urban water corporations can take to ensure water
supplies are sufficient to meet increased demand are discussed in
Chapter 4. More specific actions can be found in water corporations’
water supply-demand strategies.
3
Salinity and water quality
Murray-Darling Basin Salinity Management Plan
The detrimental impacts of poor water quality in northern river systems
are well documented39. Lower reaches of rivers within the MurrayDarling Basin are naturally saline, highly turbid and nutrient rich. Human
activities contribute additional nutrient and salt loads, which have
impacted significantly on agricultural production and infrastructure, and
on the environment. While land use has been a significant contributor
to water quality issues, the extraction of water for consumptive use can
also cause or exacerbate existing water quality problems. Improved
land management aims to minimise the amount of nutrients and soil
that make their way into rivers and creeks.
The management of dryland and irrigation salinity in the MurrayDarling Basin is guided by the 15 year Basin Salinity Management
Strategy (BSMS). It establishes end-of-valley targets for river salinity for
each tributary catchment. The overall basin target at Morgan (South
Australia) is less than 800 EC units for 95 per cent of the time. In
2005/06 relatively low instream salt loads and EC levels were recorded
at Morgan with the salinity level of 484 EC or less observed 95 per cent
of the time41.
Salinity is the most pervasive water quality problem in the Northern
Region, affecting irrigation districts, dryland areas, urban centres
and the environment. Considerable areas of land within the Northern
Region are under threat from salinity and a rising groundwater table.
This salt-prone area includes 72 per cent of the Kerang Region and 22
per cent of the Shepparton area40.
While the recent dry period is a major factor in the reduction of river
salinity, Figure 3.1 demonstrates that intervention within the MurrayDarling Basin through salt-interception schemes, implementation of
land and water management plans and groundwater management has
made significant headway into the management of salinity.
A mid-term review of the BSMS is currently being conducted.
The review is identifying a range of challenges related to the
ongoing management of salinity across the basin and will make
recommendations to ensure these are addressed. Implementation
of recommendations will be made with full awareness of the broader
water resource context outlined in the Northern Region Sustainable
Water Strategy.
Figure 3.1 The effect of salinity management on daily salinity levels in the Murray-Darling Basin (July 2005-June 2006)42
CHAPTER 3
37
3
Victoria’s approach to salinity management
Salinity management through the irrigation drainage program
Victoria’s Salinity Management Framework provides direction and
targets for the management of salinity within Victoria. The framework
complements the basin-wide BSMS. Land and Water Management
Plans (L&WMPs) are the key regional planning tools for irrigation
salinity and water quality management. L&WMPs include a range of
implementation mechanisms designed to accelerate on-farm practice
change and achieve best practice irrigation. They also include broader
catchment management programs. Specific activities in L&WMPs that
address salinity impacts on public and private land include:
The irrigation drainage program in Victoria manages land and water
salinity through surface and sub-surface components. The surface
drainage component reduces the rate of watertable rise by limiting the
opportunity for groundwater recharge associated with waterlogging
(ie. it addresses the causes of salinity). Groundwater pumping,
(the sub-surface component) alleviates the symptoms of salinity
by controlling watertables levels. An independent review of the
environmental aspects of northern Victoria’s surface drainage
program in irrigation areas concluded that the surface water program
provides significant and tangible environmental benefits43. The
surface component of the drainage program is managed through
the Irrigation Drainage Memorandum of Understanding between EPA
Victoria, Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (CMA),
North Central CMA, Goulburn Murray Water and the Department of
Sustainability and Environment.
•
Incentives, extension, education and training courses for farmers
to encourage on-farm best management practices - this limits
recharge to groundwater.
•
Provision of regional surface drainage to rapidly remove excess
surface water following significant irrigation events - this limits
recharge to groundwater.
•
Provision of subsurface drainage to lower watertables where
recharge remains high - private subsurface drainage also provides
an additional water resource for irrigators.
Victoria will continue to investigate options to meet commitments under
the BSMS. Several of these are discussed in Chapter 4.
Several factors are changing the nature of the water balance in irrigated
catchments and so are likely to change drainage requirements. Major
factors are:
•
The Food Bowl Modernisation Project.
•
The 80:20 sales deal.
•
Reduced water availability.
•
Improved irrigation management.
These factors will generally result in less surface water infiltrating to
the groundwater system and possibly decrease the salinity threat.
As a consequence, the type and extent of drainage required in the
catchment will change. The Government supports a review of the
irrigation drainage program. It will assess both the type and extent of
drainage provision required in Victoria’s northern catchments and the
principles underlying public/private cost share arrangements.
Vineyard, Rutherglen
38
CHAPTER 3
3
Drought and climate variability
Over the past 10 years, rainfall across almost all of Victoria has been
well below average (see Figure 3.2). This has caused catchments to
‘dry out’, so that even when rain does occur, a large proportion is
required to simply saturate the soil, and little run-off is created as
a result.
Figure 3.2 Australian rainfall deciles 1 January 1997 31 December 200644
As a rule of thumb, a decrease in rainfall results in a two to three-fold
decrease in runoff to rivers45. As has been well documented, this
means that the below-average rainfall of 2006/07 resulted in record low
streamflows throughout most of northern Victoria.
Victoria’s water allocation framework has been designed to cope with
drought, but the duration and severity of the low inflows over the past
10 years has limited the ability of people, industries, the environment
and water storages to recover. Figure 3.3 shows the average annual
inflows into the River Murray over the historic record and also shows
there has been a 49 per cent reduction over the past 10 years (from
11,630 GL to 5,940 GL), with record low inflows in 2006/07. Figure 3.4
shows a reduction in storage levels in Lake Eppalock as a result of the
reduced inflows of the past 10 years.
Note: Rainfall deciles rank
rainfall as above average,
average or below average
based on rainfall over the
historic record.
Distribution is based on
gridded data production by
the National Climate Centre.
Figure 3.3 Annual inflows into the total River Murray system46
Note: Inflows for 2006/07 are an estimate only and will be updated for the Draft Strategy. Excludes Snowy River transfers.
CHAPTER 3
39
3
Figure 3.4 Storage volumes of Lake Eppalock since last at full capacity in 1995
Impacts of drought on water users
In the Northern Region, allocations by water corporations for irrigation
and urban water use have been reduced since 2002/03 in line with
the gradual drawdown of storage levels. The greatest impact has
been felt in the Campaspe and Loddon systems. Table 3.3 shows
the allocations for the 2006/07 irrigation season, with the Campaspe
and Loddon systems remaining on zero allocations. Given that there
was virtually no recovery of storage levels during 2006/07, opening
allocations in the 2007/08 irrigation season were zero for all regulated
water supply systems in the Northern Region. The seasonal allocations
40
CHAPTER 3
for 2006/07 and 2007/08 were the first years that irrigators on the
Murray received less than 95 per cent allocation. If low allocations
continue, this may result in a loss of permanent plantings or stock or an
inability to produce annual crops. This would have significant social and
economic impacts. The low rainfall associated with the drought has
also affected Victorian dryland farmers in terms of the water available
for stock and domestic use, and impacts on crops and pastures.
The State and Federal Governments have provided additional funding
and introduced a range of drought contingency measures for the
current season.
3
Table 3.3 Allocations for high-reliability water shares for the 2006/0747 and 2007/0848 irrigation season*
Supply system
2006/07 season*
2007/08 season
Opening allocation
Final allocation
Opening allocation
Current allocation
(1 July 2006)
(16 April 2007)
(1 July 2007)
(15 January 2008)
Murray
76%
95%
0%
34%
Goulburn
0%
29%
0%
47%
Broken
37%
77%
0%
56%
Campaspe
0%
0%
0%
12%
Loddon
0%
0%
0%
5%
* The final seasonal allocation for 2007/08 for all systems will be announced on 1 April 2008.
In urban areas, the prolonged dry conditions have also triggered the
introduction of urban water restrictions to limit or ban outdoor use. At
16 January 2008 all 174 towns in the Northern Region were on water
restrictions (65 towns on Stage 1, 15 on Stage 2, 15 on Stage 3 and
39 on Stage 4 with exemptions and 40 on full Stage 4 restrictions).
Urban restrictions in northern Victoria have had a significant economic
impact on some businesses, including carwash, turf and nursery
industries. They have also had socio-economic impacts on rural towns,
with many sporting grounds and swimming pools being closed.
Impacts of drought on rivers and wetlands
During times of drought, plants and animals will only survive in key
refuges, and as a result, their populations shrink. When the drought
breaks, these refuges provide the building blocks for river recovery.
However, the capacity of recovery from drought has been further
reduced because of river regulation, water extraction and catchment
land use.
For example, in average years the environment’s share of the
Campaspe River’s streamflow is 163 GL (46 per cent of total flow).
However, in 2005 under drought conditions the environment’s share
of the Campaspe River was just 10 GL (eight per cent) of streamflows
after water was extracted for consumption. Similar situations occurred
in other rivers such as the Loddon and Goulburn (see Table 3.4).
In addition, dams and weirs act as barriers to fish movement, further
impeding recovery. Run-off from irrigation and urban centres has
increased nutrient levels and reduced water quality, while erosion as a
result of land clearing has often filled in pools in which fish and other
organisms would otherwise have found shelter.
During droughts, the priority of environmental managers is to prevent
the loss of species and protect key refuges to enable recovery.
By securing water for dry and drought years it is possible to ensure
sufficient baseflows to protect high priority environmental sites which
provide the building blocks for re-colonisation when conditions
improve.
Table 3.4 The environment’s share of water during average and dry years
River system
Average annual flows*
Flows in 2004/05 – dry year49
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total resource
Environment’s
Environment’s
Total resource
Environment’s
Environment’s
share of resource share of resource
(GL)
(GL)
(%)
(GL)
share of resource share of resource
(GL)
(%)
Murray
7,075
3,946
56
4,579
955
21
Kiewa
685
674
98
649
635
983
Ovens
2,018
1,753
87
1,510
1,453
963
Broken
307
186
61
251
113
45
Goulburn
3,2651
1,580
48
2,367
450
19
Campaspe
352
163
46
119
10
8
Loddon
366
30
161
8
5
Total
9,788
40
7,080
955
13
110
1
3,946
2
Notes:
1. End of valley flows from upstream basins excluded to avoid double counting
2. Estimated as River Murray flow at South Australian border
3. In these unregulated systems, the volume of extractions is closely linked to river flows so the environment’s average share stays much the same. However, the environment’s share can be
substantially reduced in summer, exacerbating the environmental impacts of low flows.
* Average annual flows have been modelled using DSE’s Resource Allocation Models (2007).
CHAPTER 3
41
3
River Red Gums at Lindsay and Wallpolla Islands 2006 (source: Parks Vic)
Impacts of drought on groundwater
Drought also affects groundwater systems by reducing the amount
of recharge that occurs. Groundwater use increases as bores and
standpipes are constructed as drought response measures. Declining
groundwater levels have been observed in several management
areas (as previously shown in Table 3.2). Where groundwater levels
experience significant decline on a long-term basis, management
actions will be introduced to reduce further aquifer stress and ensure
these aquifers remain at acceptable levels.
Responding to drought
Drought response plans – boosting supplies and minimising impacts
Qualification of rights – ensuring basic needs are met
In order to manage the impacts of drought, water corporations and
catchment management authorities prepare drought response plans.
In the case of water corporations, these contain detailed analysis
and rules for applying water restrictions and a range of contingency
measures to be implemented to maintain critical human needs during
extreme drought. Catchment management authority plans aim to
protect drought refuges and minimise environmental degradation
during drought.
In times of drought, the Minister for Water may declare that a water
shortage exists, in which case the Minister is entitled to qualify rights
to water supplies. Qualification of rights allows a re-prioritisation of
local water resources between different users and the environment
on a system by system basis to ensure that basic human needs
are met. This is a temporary emergency response and is not meant
to replace drought response planning or long-term water resource
planning. Qualifications are relaxed or removed once other contingency
measures are implemented to augment supplies or inflows improve.
These drought response plans must complement long-term planning
processes such as sustainable water strategies, water supply-demand
strategies and regional river health strategies. In some cases, it may
be sensible for drought response plans to bring forward future actions
already identified through these long-term planning processes. These
plans are currently being updated in light of the experience of the
2006/07 season.
When rights are qualified as a response to drought, water is primarily
obtained by reducing environmental flows. Regular environmental
flows are reinstated when conditions improve. In response to the
lowest starting water allocation on record in 2006/07 and 2007/08
(zero allocation in the Campaspe, Loddon and Goulburn systems),
the Minister for Water qualified rights in all regulated Northern Region
systems.
Government initiatives – easing the pain of drought
Water allocation arrangements need to be sufficiently robust to deal
with a future of increasing water scarcity. The Strategy will identify
opportunities to minimise the qualification of rights in the future.
The Government is responding to the current drought with a wide
range of actions to assist rural communities. In October 2007, the
42
Premier announced a further $100 million in assistance. The package
is in addition to the $178 million the Victorian Government has provided
for drought relief over the past two years. Major aspects of the $100
million package include $55 million for water rebates for irrigators, $10
million for on-farm productivity improvement grants of up to $3000
per farmer for drought-proofing works, $10 million CMA drought
employment program, and an additional $25 million for a range of
farmer, community and regional business support programs. Full
details of the package can be found at www.dse.vic.gov.au and
www.dpi.vic.gov.au.
CHAPTER 3
3
Climate change
There is now strong scientific evidence that human induced climate
change is happening50. If these trends were to continue, it is likely that
climate change will pose the biggest risk to the region’s water supplies
for the future. The Victorian Government is undertaking a significant
amount of work to investigate climate change and associated impacts
in Victoria (see www.greenhouse.vic.gov.au).
Climate change or variability – how do we know?
It may take decades before we know if the low inflows of the past 10
years are part of the normal cycle of climate variability, or whether they
are due to climate change or some other influencing factors.
It is possible that the past 10 years has simply been an episodic dry
period, similar to those experienced in the past – notably between
1895 and 1903 and between 1938 and 1946 – although the current
period of low rainfall and inflows is more severe than these earlier
events. It is also possible that the low inflows experienced since 1997
represent a permanent step change in reservoir inflows. A similar step
change occurred in south-west Western Australia in 1975 when inflows
were reduced by about 50 per cent, and up to 64 per cent in the past
10 years (see Figure 3.5). Extensive research into the causes of this
step change in south-west Western Australia indicate it is likely to be
the result of a combination of several influences, including an early
onset of the greenhouse effect, natural variability, ozone depletion, and
the impact of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation. Similar factors are likely
to be influencing Victoria’s climate.
Climate change modelling indicates that the actual reduction in
streamflows experienced over the past 10 years are (for most systems)
similar to or greater than the reductions expected in 2055 as a result of
medium to high climate change.
While forecasts suggest that average water availability will be reduced,
studies conducted by CSIRO52 suggest that climate change will
also result in increased flooding events. The implications of this are
being considered through the Government’s review of floodplain
management arrangements.
Figure 3.5 Reduction in inflows to Perth storages since 197551
Note: A year is taken as May to April
CHAPTER 3
43
3
Forecasting future water availability
Models are used to project data into the future, to predict how potential
impacts, such as climate change will affect future water supplies.
These models of what the future might look like allow us to picture
different scenarios. For example, they have been used to translate the
CSIRO’s estimates of the potential impacts of low, medium and high
climate change on streamflows into potential impacts on water flowing
into reservoirs (inflows). The further into the future we look, the more
uncertain our forecasts become.
This Strategy is the first time that estimates of the impact of climate
change on future water availability have been generated, collated
and integrated across systems throughout northern Victoria. Our
knowledge will improve as more data becomes available, helping to
refine our forecasts. As the Strategy progresses we can include data
from 2006/07 and better data on the potential impacts of all risks to
water availability, especially small catchment dams. Some of this data
will come from work carried out through the Murray-Darling Basin
Commission’s Shared Risks to Water Resources program. The forecast
impacts of low, medium and high climate change on streamflows
will be revisited to reflect the CSIRO’s latest estimates. While the
magnitude of more recent CSIRO estimates are expected to be broadly
similar to existing estimates, these adjustments will help to refine the
modelling results.
Modelling of our water resources since the 1970s has increased
our understanding of reliability of supply. Appendix 2 shows how
these models have been refined over time. This updated modelling
represents the water availability and reliability of supply associated
with the historic record of inflows (long-term average inflows). It is the
baseline against which future scenarios are compared. The modelling
accounts for the ‘unbundling’ of water entitlements, trade to July 2007
in the Goulburn and Murray systems, and all Government actions for
the Living Murray Initiative and the Snowy River to July 2007.
It also assumes full use of entitlements in all major regulated systems
(Murray, Goulburn, Loddon and Campaspe) and current use in the
Broken system.
The following modelling scenarios53 have been used:
•
Base case – long-term average, based on the historic record
from 1891.
•
Scenario A – based on the CSIRO low climate change predictions.
•
Scenario B – based on the CSIRO medium climate change
predictions.
•
Scenario C – based on the CSIRO high climate change
predictions.
•
Scenario D – based on a continuation of the low inflows of the
past 10 years (ie. average reduction in streamflows over the past
10 years).
This Discussion Paper examines two scenarios in detail. Scenario D
allows us to develop a good understanding of the impacts of the past
10 years and be prepared for the possibility that these low inflows
may continue. Planning for this ‘worst case’ scenario is less risky than
assuming inflows will soon return to average conditions. However,
given that this worst case scenario may or may not eventuate, it is also
prudent to look at the impacts of an intermediate scenario (Scenario B)
and compare these with the current situation (base case). In this way,
the community’s decisions can be based on a good understanding of
the range of possible impacts – allowing timely action in preparation
for the worst case without causing unnecessary pain or investment
should this not eventuate.
The water availability scenarios used here highlight the uncertainty
in forecasting the extent and timing of the impact. There may be a
gradual reduction in water availability over time, resulting in modest
or substantial change in 50 years. Alternatively, the extreme conditions
experienced over the past 10 years could continue indefinitely.
In light of this uncertainty, the Northern Region Sustainable Water
Strategy aims to provide current information on a range of scenarios
to individuals, the Government, industries and communities to support
long-term planning and decision-making. This kind of planning is
difficult and confronting, but it is important that we start to think about
the implications of increasing water scarcity so that we can
be prepared.
The forecasts in this chapter show it is likely there will be less water
available in the future and this will affect consumptive use and the
environment. Climate change is likely to be the most significant
of several factors contributing to this reduction.
By 2055, water availability in the Murray system could be reduced
by six per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as
40 per cent under a high climate change scenario compared to the
long-term average (see Figure 3.6). If the past 10 years of low inflows
continued, it would equal an immediate reduction of 38 per cent
compared to the long-term average. Similar figures for each of the
major regulated tributaries in the Northern Region are presented
in Appendix 3.
Please note that the Murray system refers only to Victoria’s share
of the resource, which includes 50 per cent of upper Murray,
Kiewa and lower Darling, and all outflows from the other Victorian
tributaries.
Vista, Alpine National Park
44
CHAPTER 3
3
Figure 3.6 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Murray system over 50 years
(compared to the long-term average)
Table 3.5 shows the expected reduction in total inflows for each of
the major river systems in the Northern Region. It demonstrates the
western catchments are likely to more adversely affected than the
eastern catchments. The reduction in inflows over the past 10 years is
generally similar to the expected impact in 2055 for a medium to high
climate change scenario.
Table 3.5 Scenarios A to D- Potential reduction in total inflows for the Murray system and its tributaries
(compared to the long-term average)
Inflow impact in 2055 under each CSIRO climate
A - Low
change scenario54
B - Medium
C - High
D - Impact experienced
over past 10 years55
River system
Murray
-6%
-22%
-40%
-38%
Kiewa
-5%
-19%
-32%
-16%
Ovens
-6%
-24%
-41%
-29%
Broken
-7%
-31%
-51%
-48%
Goulburn
-7%
-25%
-43%
-38%
Campaspe
-9%
-31%
-54%
-69%
Loddon
-10%
-34%
-58%
-72%
CHAPTER 3
45
3
the Northern Region. They show the impacts on total inflows and the
differing impacts on consumptive use and the environment.
Tables 3.6 and Table 3.7 summarise the potential impact of Scenarios
B and D on water availability for the major regulated river systems in
Table 3.6 Scenario B (at 2055)*- for total inflows, consumptive use and environmental flows (GL/yr and per cent)56
EXPECTED IMPACTS IN 2055
River system
– CSIRO MEDIUM CLIMATE
CHANGE
Murray2
Broken
Goulburn
Campaspe3
Loddon
Long-term average
7,062 GL
238 GL
3,225 GL
307 GL
280 GL
Medium climate change
5,275 GL
196 GL
2,417 GL
212 GL
185 GL
-1,787 GL (-25%)
-87 GL (-31%)
-808 (-25%)
-95 (-31%)
-95 GL (-34%)
Long-term average
1,698 GL
31 GL
1,669 GL
113 GL
102 GL
1,595 GL
30 GL
1,414 GL
101 GL
79 GL
-103 GL (-6%)
-1 GL (-3%)
-255 GL (-15%)
-12 GL (-11%)
-23 GL (-24%)
3,946 GL
186 GL
1,580 GL
163 GL
110 GL
Total inflows1
Difference (%)
Diversions for consumptive use
Difference (%)
Environmental flows
Long-term average
Difference (%)
2,632 GL
100 GL
971 GL
84 GL
59 GL
-1,314 GL (-33%)
-86 GL (-46%)
-609 GL (-39%)
-79 GL (-49%)
-24 GL (-38%)
*Forecast reduction in water availability in 2055 under medium climate change scenario (compared to the long-term average)
Notes:
1) The diversions for consumptive use and environmental flows will not be equal to the total inflows. The difference represents the average volume of unaccounted water including losses etc.
2) The Murray system refers only to Victoria’s share. Murray environmental flows refers to the Victorian flows measured at the South Australian border including Living Murray First Step
commitments.
3) Campaspe includes Coliban River diversions for urban and irrigation supplies.
Summary Scenario B – Potential impact of medium climate change in 2055
46
�
Overall water availability (total inflows) could be reduced by 19 per cent in the Murray system to 34 per cent in the Loddon.
�
Water availability for consumptive use (diversions) could be reduced by three per cent in the Broken to 24 per cent in the Loddon.
�
Water availability for the environment (environmental flows) could be reduced by 32 per cent in the Murray to 49 per cent in the Campaspe.
CHAPTER 3
3
Table 3.7 Scenario D (impact from now) - for total inflows, consumptive use and environmental flows (GL/yr and per cent)57
IMMEDIATE IMPACTS OF
CONTINUATION OF PAST 10
YEARS LOW INFLOWS
Murray3
River system
Broken
Goulburn
Loddon
Long-term average
7,062 GL
283 GL
3,225 GL
307 GL
280 GL
Past 10 years average
4,746 GL
153 GL
2,050 GL
100 GL
83 GL
-2,316 GL (-33%)
-130 GL (-46%)
-1,175 GL (-36%)
-207 GL (-67%)
-197 GL (-70%)
Long-term average
1,698 GL
31 GL
1,669 GL
113 GL
102 GL
1,533 GL
29 GL
1,286 GL
62 GL
37 GL
Difference (%)
Environmental flows
-165 GL (-10%)
-2 GL (-6%)
-383 GL (-23%)
-51 GL (-45%)
-65 GL (-67%)
Long-term average
3,946 GL
186 GL
1,580 GL
163 GL
110 GL
2,221 GL
64 GL
704 GL
26 GL
21 GL
-1,725 GL (-44%)
-122 GL (-66%)
-876 GL (-55%)
-137 GL (-84%)
-46 GL (-73%)
Campaspe4
Total inflows1
Difference (%)2
Diversions for consumptive use
Difference (%)
Notes:
1. The diversions for consumptive use and environmental flows will not be equal to the total inflows. The difference represents the average volume of unaccounted water including losses etc.
2. This table shows the reduction in inflows over the past 10 years compared to the long-term average of 1891/92-2005/06 (ie. the full historic record). This allows comparison with the
medium climate change scenario shown previously in Table 3.6. It should be noted that the percentage reduction shown here will not be the same as those in Table 3.5. In keeping with
the actual methodology used, Table 3.5 shows the reduction in inflows over the past 10 years compared to the long-term average of 1891/92-1996/97 (ie. the historic record prior to the
possible ‘step change’).
3. The Murray system refers only to Victoria’s share. Murray environmental flows refers to the Victorian flows measured at the South Australian border including Living Murray First Step
commitments.
4. Campaspe includes Coliban River diversions for urban and irrigation supplies.
Summary – Scenario D – Ongoing impact if low inflows of past 10 years continue
�
Overall water availability (total inflows) could be reduced by 27 per cent in the Murray system to 70 per cent in the Loddon system.
�
Water availability for consumptive use (diversions) could be reduced by 6 per cent in the Broken to 67 per cent in the Loddon.
�
Water availability for the environment (environmental flows) could be reduced by 44 per cent in the Murray to 84 per cent in the Campaspe.
Impact on unregulated systems
Impact on water shares
Estimates of the impact of the future water availability scenarios for the
Ovens system are presented in Appendix 3. By 2055, water availability
in the Ovens system could be reduced by 6 per cent under a low
climate change scenario, or as much as 41 per cent under a high
climate change scenario. If the past 10 years of low inflows continued,
it would equal an immediate reduction of 29 per cent, compared with
the long-term average. This impact is the same magnitude as for the
regulated systems shown above. This would be expected to result
in more frequent and severe restrictions on diversions and reduced
environmental flows.
The following figures show the impact of reduced water availability on
seasonal allocations for high and low-reliability water shares. The blue
bars represent the allocations for each year of the historic record (base
case scenario). The red dots represent the allocations that would have
been made with Scenario B water availability (medium climate change see Figures 3.7 and 3.8) and Scenario D (continuation of past 10 years Figures 3.9 and 3.10). Similar figures for each of the major regulated
tributaries in the Northern Region are presented in Appendix 3.
Impact on groundwater systems
As previously discussed, technical work has begun to estimate the
impact of climate change on groundwater. Resource appraisals for
several groundwater management areas, coupled with the CSIRO’s
numerical model for the Southern Riverine basin, will inform further
planning for groundwater resource management in light of climate
change.
Under both scenarios, the number of years with full allocations is
reduced, while the number of years with zero allocations is increased.
The severity of this impact varies for each catchment.
Reduced water availability has a far greater impact on low-reliability
water shares than it does on high-reliability shares. This is due to the
existing allocation policy, where water is kept in reserve to fully allocate
high-reliability shares for the following season before any low-reliability
shares are allocated (see Chapter 2 for more detail about how water is
allocated). Therefore, a reduction in inflows reduces the water available
for low-reliability water shares in most years and affects high-reliability
water shares only in very dry periods where there is insufficient inflow to
maintain adequate reserves.
Figures 3.11 and 3.12 highlight the potential impacts of Scenarios B
and D on the reliability of water shares.
CHAPTER 3
47
3
Figure 3.7 Scenario B (at 2055)*- February allocation of high-reliability water shares in the Murray system58
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared to the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Murray system
Figure 3.8 Scenario B (at 2055)* - February allocation of low-reliability water shares in the Murray system59
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared to the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Murray system
48
CHAPTER 3
3
Figure 3.9 Scenario D (impact from now)*- February allocation of high-reliability water shares in the Murray system60
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared to the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Murray system
Figure 3.10 Scenario D (impact from now)*- February allocation of low-reliability water shares in the Murray system61
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared to the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Murray system
CHAPTER 3
49
3
Figure 3.11 Scenario B and Scenario D - Potential impact on the reliability of high-reliability water shares in the major
regulated systems of the Northern Region61
River System
Murray
Loddon
Campaspe
Goulburn
Broken
Indicator
Scenarios
BASE CASE:
Long-term average
SCENARIO B:
at 2055
SCENARIO D:
Continuation of past
10 years low inflows
No. of years with
100% allocations
99 out of 100
85 out of 100
81 out of 100
Lowest allocation1
88%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
95 out of 100
77 out of 100
37 out of 100
Lowest allocation1
47%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
98 out of 100
96 out of 100
65 out of 100
Lowest allocation1
53%
28%
5%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
97 out of 100
77 out of 100
43 out of 100
Lowest allocation1
57%
16%
8%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
90 out of 100
78 out of 100
61 out of 100
Lowest allocation1
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
Note: 1. The model may show higher allocations than actually experienced over the past 10 years. These estimates will be refined for the Draft Strategy after the model is recalibrated to account
for the unprecedented dry conditions over the past 10 years.
50
CHAPTER 3
3
Reliability curve (High-Reliability)
CHAPTER 3
51
3
Figure 3.12 Scenario B and Scenario D - potential impact on the reliability of low reliability water shares on the major
regulated systems of the Northern Region61
River System
Murray
Indicator
Scenarios
BASE CASE:
SCENARIO B:
SCENARIO D:
Long-term average
Continuation of past
at 2055
10 years low inflows
39 out of 100
30 out of 100
22 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
36 out of 100
53 out of 100
59 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
27 out of 100
1 out of 100
2 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
22 out of 100
67 out of 100
93 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
75 out of 100
59 out of 100
4 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
10 out of 100
22 out of 100
81 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
27 out of 100
1 out of 100
2 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
22 out of 100
67 out of 100
93 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
85 out of 100
78 out of 100
52 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
9 out of 100
22 out of 100
39 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
Loddon
Campaspe
Goulburn
Broken
52
CHAPTER 3
3
Reliability Curve (Low-Reliability)
CHAPTER 3
53
3
Impacts on rural water users
Impacts on urban water users
Increased water scarcity means less to share between existing
entitlement-holders. This will impact on the reliability of entitlements
(see previous section). While we cannot predict the severity, there are
likely to be more years with zero allocations at the commencement of
the irrigation season, and less years with full allocations.
The reliability of water supplies for urban use can differ slightly from
that of rural allocations. Historically, urban allocations have been
high, generally negating the need for restrictions. Reliability of urban
supplies has been highest in the Goulburn system, where staged water
restrictions are expected every one in 100 years.
Regardless of future water availability scenarios, irrigation is an
essential industry for Victoria’s economy and growth and the region’s
rural water users will still have access to high and low-reliability
water shares. Victoria’s entitlement and system operating policies
aim to provide as much certainty and flexibility as possible. Victoria’s
allocation assumptions are relatively conservative compared to some
other States, to ensure that water users can make informed planning
decisions for the year ahead.
Without further action to ensure secure supplies, restrictions could be
expected more often if water availability is reduced. For example, urban
reliability on the Murray system is equal to that of high-reliability water
shares, and the impacts of reduced water availability will be the same.
Similarly, the Broken, Loddon and Campaspe systems are at risk of
lower reliability under climate change.
Individuals can manage reduced water availability and reliability by
choosing to buy more water shares on the market, possibly accessing
more high-reliability than low-reliability water shares if they require
greater certainty. Irrigators who are not competitive can generate
income by selling their water, permanently or temporarily each year.
Farmers may need to set priorities and invest in efficiencies to get the
most benefits or returns from their existing entitlements. Changes to
other management practices, including choice of crop type, may also
help meet the challenge of increased water scarcity.
If the reduction in water availability is substantial (as forecast under
a high climate change scenario or a continuation of the past 10
years), it could take significant system-wide action to maintain
reliability at current levels. With a 20 to 30 per cent reduction in water
availability, 20 to 30 per cent of entitlements would need to be retired
to maintain reliability. Given the significant impact that would result
from this approach and the uncertainty related to climate change, it
is critical for Government to consider an alternative course of action
to improve reliability. Other responses could include changes to the
way Victoria allocates water between users or to its reserve policy
or system operating rules. Although collectively all of these actions
will substantially improve reliability, under medium climate change
or a continuation of the past 10 years it is likely there will still be less
reliability compared with that associated with the long-term average.
Under a low climate change scenario, it may be possible for individuals
to manage their water supplies with slightly reduced reliability without
the need for system-wide action.
In order to ensure secure water supplies for towns and industry over
the next 50 years, urban water corporations prepare water supplydemand strategies. These strategies balance the expected growth in
demand resulting from population growth, with the expected reduction
in supply resulting from climate change and other risks.
Appendix 4 provides estimates of urban water systems’ ‘surplus’
or ‘deficit’ under medium climate change and a continuation of the
past 10 years, assuming full implementation of water supply demand
strategy actions. These estimates may be refined throughout the
development of the Draft Strategy.
Impacts on the environment
Environmental flows
The average amount of water available for environmental flows in the
Murray system could be reduced by 32 per cent under medium climate
change, or 44 per cent if the past 10 years were to continue (see
Tables 3.6 and 3.7). However, the impact can vary quite substantially
from year to year (see Figures 3.13 and 3.14). The blue bars represent
the amount of water available for environmental flows for each year of
the historic record (base case scenario). The red dots represent the
amount of water that would have been available under Scenario B
(medium climate change - Figure 3.13) and Scenario D (continuation of
past 10 years – Figure 3.14).
Similar figures for each of the major regulated tributaries in the Northern
Region are presented in Appendix 3.
It is likely that a mix of all of these responses – system and individual,
extreme and moderate – will be required. This Discussion Paper aims
to seek community feedback on the preferred responses (explored
further in Chapter 4).
More work will be carried out in this Strategy to assess whether current
production levels can be maintained or improved under a range of
water availability scenarios. However, initial research indicates that even
with the substantially reduced water availability of the past 10 years, the
gross value of irrigated agricultural production per GL of water applied
in northern Victoria increased substantially62.
54
CHAPTER 3
3
Figure 3.13 Scenario B (at 2055)* – Environmental flows for the Murray system (flow to South Australia)63
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared to the long-term average) on the availability of water for Victoria’s share of environmental flows in the Murray system
Figure 3.14 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Environmental flows for the Murray system (flow to South Australia)64
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared to the long-term average) on the availability of water for Victoria’s share of environmental flows in the
Murray system
CHAPTER 3
55
3
Table 3.1 previously outlined the additional amount of water needed
to meet environmental flow recommendations (ie. the environmental
‘shortfalls’) for some of Victoria’s priority river reaches. Appendix 5
shows the increase in these shortfalls under medium climate change or
a continuation of the past 10 years.
As well as the average reduction in flows, the types of flows that
are affected (the flow components described in Chapter 2) are very
important.
Reduced flood frequency will be problematic for floodplain survival. An
assessment of changes to key floods on the Murray shows that under
the various climate change scenarios there are increasingly long gaps
between flood events (see Appendix 5). This would impact on plant
and animal populations because they need water to survive (like fish,
frogs and trees) or because they need floods to breed (like birds such
as egrets and spoonbills). The longest time between significant floods
in the Barmah Forest for example, could be increased:
•
From 11 - 21 years between floods under the base case.
•
17 - 26 years between floods under medium climate change
(Scenario B).
•
26 - 33 years between floods if low inflows of the past 10 years
continue (Scenario D).
River red gums, a dominant feature of the floodplains, can survive five
to 10 years without flooding, provided there is some rainfall. Without
flooding, there will be no, or very limited, regeneration. River red gums
can be expected to survive under the base case, though there will be
areas of trees lost in drought periods. However, when periods between
floods exceed 15 years, as predicted under Scenarios B and D, the
red gums are highly unlikely to survive. Furthermore, the ability for river
red gums to re-establish following a drought reduces with time. Seeds
survive only 10 to 15 years, so the longer the dry periods, the fewer
seeds are available to germinate in the next flood.
The reduced frequency of floods would also impact on colonial water
birds such as egrets, herons and spoonbills, and fish populations such
as the iconic Murray cod (see Appendix 5).
Reduced water availability would also increase the frequency and
duration of ‘cease to flow’ events. As an example, Figure 3.15
compares the number of months where there are no flows in the
Loddon River under the base case scenario with Scenarios B and
D. The substantial increase in these no flow events would impact on
the regionally significant river blackfish. Blackfish are normally resilient
and can survive up to two months of no flow by finding refuge in the
remaining pools (given relatively good conditions in the river in the
previous 12 months).
Under historic long-term average conditions, cease to flow events
exceeded two months only twice in the past 114 years and only in the
most recent severe years (2004 and 2005).
Figure 3.15 Frequency and duration of 'cease to flow' events in the Loddon River under base case, Scenario B and
Scenario D (no. of months)
56
CHAPTER 3
3
The Goulburn River at dawn
With a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (Scenario D),
it is likely that river blackfish would not survive in the Loddon River due
to the increased number and duration of cease to flow events longer
than two months. Moreover, because there are many barriers to fish
movement in the Loddon River, they will not be able to recolonise when
flows return. In the face of increasing water scarcity, the community
will have to develop options to maintain blackfish populations in
the Loddon River and determine whether these actions should be
implemented in light of the economic and social implications and other
environmental priorities. It is likely that other rivers and wetlands face a
similar situation in the Northern Region.
The community and the Government have acknowledged that it is
necessary to better understand and address the current balance
between consumptive and environmental needs in rivers, wetlands
and aquifers. Victoria is participating in interstate initiatives such as the
Living Murray Initiative and Snowy Water Recovery Project, which will
be implemented over time to restore environmental flows and improve
the health of these iconic river and wetland systems. Reduced water
availability will impact on existing environmental flows, and those yet
to be recovered through these projects. More work is required to
understand if it is possible to achieve current ecological aims under a
range of future water availability scenarios.
Environmental Water Reserve
The environmental water reserve (EWR) consists of several
components, as previously described. The environment has only
very limited high-reliability and some low-reliability water shares
(see previous Table 2.6), and climate change will impact on these
components of the EWR in the same way as consumptive shares
(see Figures 3.11 and 3.12). It is possible that the environment’s
low-reliability water will no longer meet its intended environmental
objectives.
It may be necessary for the environment to have more high-reliability
water shares in the future. These can be used to provide flows for
critical drought refuge and emergency watering of wetlands and red
gum forests to counter an expected increase in the frequency and
severity of droughts. Monitoring of environmental flows will be critical
to improving our understanding of environmental needs and the
management of the EWR into the future.
We will need to continue to prioritise the importance of environmental
assets and values to the community if water availability is reduced,
as we do now with consumptive users. Catchment management
authorities and the Government will need to find new ways to
protect these priority areas and species and make the most of the
environmental benefits achieved. This can be done by changes to
operating rules and distribution systems that impact on the pattern,
timing and volume of flows in rivers and wetlands. Chapter 4 outlines
the range of potential options for how the environment can be
protected with reduced water availability.
The legislative process of a 15-year water resource review (due in
2020) will reveal if there has been a long-term reduction in water
availability with disproportionate impacts. If this happens, we as a
community will have to decide if it accepts this environmental impact
and what action needs to be taken.
Northern Victoria has a history of strong leadership and innovation in
water resource planning and management. Many regional initiatives and
projects have subsequently been implemented in other irrigation areas
within Victoria and interstate. Combined with Victoria’s conservative
allocation framework, this culture provides a strong base for the region’s
continuing leadership in managing water resources across Australia.
Most of the EWR is provided as passing flows and ‘above cap’ water,
and these are likely to be the most heavily impacted. While passing
flows in some river reaches have a very high reliability, during droughts
they can be qualified by the Minister for Water and redistributed for
consumptive use. In other reaches, they are automatically reduced
consistent with inflows and will therefore be impacted by reduced
water availability.
CHAPTER 3
57
4
Managing water scarcity
The potential impacts of climate change, land use change and population growth
will mean the community, and the environment, will have to adapt to a future of
increasing water scarcity. Although this could be challenging, northern Victoria has
a strong history in innovation and action and is already well placed to respond and
adapt as required to sustainably manage water resources. As water availability is
reduced, this legacy and approach will become even more important.
The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy provides the Government and the
community with an opportunity to work together to plan the best action.
The previous chapter outlined the impacts and implications of future
water availability scenarios on rural and urban water users and the
environment. Regardless of the scenario considered, it is likely that the
community will need to adapt to increasing water scarcity. The current
drought demonstrates that a range of responses is available to adapt
to reduced water availability. It is also clear that many people and
organisations have planned and prepared for drought.
This Discussion Paper is the first step in planning for the uncertainty
of climate change and the possibility of a more long-term reduction in
water availability. This planning will provide the opportunity to capture
the experiences of the current drought to prepare ourselves for a
repeat of these conditions in the future.
This chapter aims to encourage discussion on the range of possible
responses at the system scale (on behalf of all) and the individual
scale (to manage and respond in the way best suited to individual
businesses). These responses build on existing drought response
planning, water supply-demand strategies, regional river health
strategies and the State-wide projects announced through Our Water
Our Future (2004) and the Next Stage of the Government’s Water
Plan (2007).
A range of responses
Given the differing needs and expectations of various members of
the community, there is no single best response to manage water
scarcity. At times, it may be necessary to make trade-offs, so it will be
important to ensure that decisions maximise the community benefits
and accurately reflect community values while recognising individual’s
rights. Given the uncertainty of future water availability, different choices
will be appropriate at different times depending on circumstances.
Flexibility and adaptability are essential in the face of uncertainty.
A range of integrated responses is required. No single solution will
secure our water future.
58
CHAPTER 4
All members of the community will have a part to play – individuals,
water corporations, catchment management authorities, industries
and the Government.
As existing water resources within northern Victoria are fully allocated,
potential responses must focus on using our resources more efficiently
and effectively. More efficient distribution and use of water – for all
users and the environment – are imperative. Flexibility and choice for
individuals in how they manage their entitlements and business will be
key to improving their ability to manage and recover from dry periods.
Likewise, it will be necessary to find innovative ways to improve the
environment’s resilience to drought, and in particular, trying to ensure
that at least priority environmental areas can be sustained. Further
development of measures may be needed to help communities and
individuals adjust to reduced water availability.
The range of responses is broad and has been grouped in eight
categories. Table 4.1 provides examples for each of the categories and
demonstrates which sector could primarily benefit (rural water users,
urban water users or the environment). The secondary benefits (and
risks) of each option are discussed throughout this chapter. The table
also shows the possible scale of implementation for each example
(actions for individuals or system level changes).
The rest of this chapter discusses the responses identified in each of
these categories.
Submissions are invited on the discussions presented in this
chapter and to highlight any other responses that should
be considered (see Chapter 5 for details on how to make a
submission). In addition to any general comments, we are seeking
your comments on several specific questions in text boxes throughout
the chapter.
4
Table 4.1 Responses to manage scarcity – potential beneficiaries and scale of implementation
Response categories and examples
Rural
Water market:
• Buying or selling water shares or seasonal
allocations
• Changes to trading rules and regulations
Could be used to benefit:
Urban
Environment
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
• Changes to the communal reserve policy
• Introduction of individual reserves
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Modernisation of the distribution system:
• Improving infrastructure to capture water
losses
✓
✓
✓
Scale of implementation:
Individual
System
✓
✓
Improving the management and allocation of
water resources:
Conservation and efficiency:
• Improved on-farm efficiency
• Urban conservation
• Environmental water efficiency
✓
Pricing:
• Changes to pricing arrangements
✓
✓
Expanding the Water Grid:
• Interconnecting supply systems
• Murray-Goulburn interconnector
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
New and alternative sources of water:
• Alternative sources, including irrigation
drainage water, recycled water and stormwater
• Groundwater
✓
✓
✓
✓
Progressing environmental management:
• Protect priority areas
• Improve environmental water reserve
• Manage emerging risks
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
CHAPTER 4
59
4
Responding to water scarcity in a changing
community
Reduced water availability is not the only challenge in northern Victoria.
The communities in northern Victoria and its agricultural base are
changing – leading to a complex mix of opportunities, benefits and
risks to individuals in the region.
Key changes include:
•
Declining population in some small towns with growth in regional
centres.
•
Farms close to regional centres are being subdivided and
purchased by people who rely on off-farm income.
•
Retirement of salt-affected or unproductive land.
•
Ageing population profile, particularly of farmers, with associated
retirement.
•
Consolidation of properties, with increasing size and
corporatisation.
•
Significant investment in agricultural ventures from non-agricultural
sources.
•
International market influence.
These types of social changes are inevitable. Some of the
Government’s water management policies, such as trading, have
enabled these changes to be made more smoothly and quickly. They
enable individuals to more easily exercise their choices, while also
allowing the movement of water from low to higher value uses. This
results in increased economic activity and employment in some areas.
However, there is considerable community concern in other areas
where water has been sold. In developing policies and projects, the
Government is careful not to hinder change but to ensure it occurs at a
pace that enables people and communities to adjust.
Any decisions that the community and the Government make
about the appropriate response to increasing water scarcity
must make sense in light of these broader social changes. The
Government has recognised the importance of these changes as it
has introduced appropriate rules and regulations that govern water
allocation, entitlements, trading and pricing. These rules will evolve as
communities continue to change.
Dairy farming: One of the key industries in the Northern Region
60
CHAPTER 4
4
Using the water market
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
Individual
System
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Overview and key challenges
Trade encourages water use efficiency and by moving water from low to high-value uses, increases economic activity and jobs. Trading of
seasonal allocations is an essential tool for water users to manage their businesses, and survive and recover from drought.
The movement of water as a result of trade is one of many factors enabling the social change being experienced in regional Victoria. A key
challenge for the community is finding the balance between opening up the market sufficiently to enable it to operate most effectively and allowing
communities time to adjust to changes associated with water leaving local areas.
Description and benefits
The water market enables water shares and seasonal allocations to
be bought and sold. Water trading is voluntary and occurs where
entitlement-holders and users see a benefit to their business.
Water trading allows individuals to be responsible for decisions about
their water supplies and manage through droughts in their own way,
minimising the Government intervention required. It encourages the
movement of water from low to high-value uses, thus ensuring better
use is made of a scarce resource. Water trading does not create new
water, but it does provide the opportunity for individual entitlement
holders and users and urban water corporations to access additional
water supplies. Water trading is one of the most significant means
of doing this under the Murray-Darling Basin Cap on diversions
(see Chapter 2).
Water users now have greater flexibility in how they manage their
business. They may choose to buy additional entitlements or
allocations and boost their supplies to address the risk of declining
reliability from climate change and drought. Alternatively, they could sell
some or all of their water share or seasonal allocation. This may help
to maximise their financial returns during dry periods. Water trading
generally encourages greater water use efficiency and the movement of
water from low to high-value uses. It also provides a source of income
for farmers who wish to retire from agriculture.
Urban water corporations in northern Victoria already participate on
the water market in order to balance urban supply and demand (ie. to
address shortfalls) and sell to rural users. For example, Coliban Water
has purchased water to be transferred to Bendigo via the Goldfields
Superpipe. Urban water corporations in the Northern Region plan to
utilise the water market as part of a package of responses, including
increased conservation and efficiency and use of alternative sources
(see relevant sections of this chapter). The Government remains
committed to the policy of not allowing Melbourne water corporations
to purchase water for Melbourne.
The environment has also participated in a small way on the water
market, having temporarily sold water. A small proportion of the Murray
Flora and Fauna Bulk Entitlement has previously been sold
to generate funds to meet service delivery costs and to undertake onground works for wetland management.
This has only occured when it has been established that environmental
needs have already been met. Given the extremely dry conditions this
has not occurred since 2003/04.
Recently, the Murray-Darling Basin Commission conducted a pilot
environmental water purchase program through the Living Murray
Initiative, purchasing a total of 20 GL for the environment. This water
was predominantly sourced from New South Wales.
Active water markets also exist in New South Wales and South
Australia, so trade between states is also possible. This gives
Victorian water users an opportunity to access additional interstate
water sources.
Progress to date
A water market has existed in northern Victoria since 1991. The vast
majority of trade applies to surface water entitlements. Groundwater
licences may also be traded, although this is limited to users of a
common aquifer. Permanent trade of groundwater can occur only in
water supply protection areas as part of an approved groundwater
management plan.
Most trade occurs between individual irrigators, although urban water
corporations and the environment have also participated in water trade.
In 2005/06 interstate trade represented about eight per cent of water
trade in Victoria65.
Current trends
Activity on the water market has grown considerably in Victoria in the
past five years. Almost 300 GL was traded in the 2005/06 season.
This represents 10 per cent of the total amount of water allocated in
that year. Figure 4.1 compares the amount of water traded with the
total amount used from 1997/98 to 2005/06. It shows substantially
more trade of seasonal allocations than water shares. The trade of
allocations is more responsive to varying climatic conditions and can be
very significant in dry years.
CHAPTER 4
61
4
Figure 4.1 Volume of water traded relative to total water allocated in Victoria between 1997/98 and 2005/06
(derived data, in an internal only)66
Some 97 per cent of water trade within Victoria occurs in the Northern
Region. This is focused in the irrigation systems of the Goulburn and
Murray Rivers.
Figure 4.2 shows the trends in the movement of water shares and
allocations in recent years. Some trends that have been identified
include the:
62
•
Movement of water shares out of the Goulburn-Murray irrigation
district.
•
Movement of seasonal allocations into the Murray Valley, Central
Goulburn, Campaspe, Torrumbarry and Rochester irrigation areas.
•
Movement of water shares into Sunraysia.
•
Movement of allocations out of Sunraysia.
•
Increasing movement of allocations from New South Wales to
Victoria.
•
The movement of about 15 GL of water shares from Victoria to
South Australia and New South Wales.
CHAPTER 4
4
Figure 4.2 Net trade of water shares (1991/92 to 2005/06) and average trade of seasonal allocations (2001/02 to 2005/06)
into and out of major irrigation districts in Northern Victoria, and into Victoria from interstate67
These trends suggest that new horticulture ventures in the Sunraysia
irrigation district are securing water shares for future plantings, but
selling some or all of the allocations back until they are required.
The sale of water shares and allocations in some areas could reflect
the retirement of salt-affected land (for example, in Pyramid-Boort
and Shepparton).
This illustrates the benefits of water trade in facilitating growth, moving
water from low to high-value ventures and facilitating the movement
of water away from unproductive land. There are indications that this
approach is working. Research has indicated that between 1996/97
and 2004/05 there was an increase in the gross value of irrigated
agriculture production per GL of water applied in northern Victoria of
about 50 per cent68.
Where large areas of irrigation land are affected by salinity and are
unusable, the increasing demand for water elsewhere has allowed
farmers to retire off the land with a level of financial security. But the
net movement of water out of local areas also creates local challenges
such as ‘stranded assets’ (infrastructure left with too few customers
to pay for its maintenance) and community concern that as water is
traded out of a particular area, jobs will be lost and local populations
will decrease as a result. The rules and regulations used by the
Government to govern the water market need to consider
these factors.
Key considerations in moving forward
Continuing to improve the water market means building on the existing
developments and rules already in place. Rules and regulations around
the water market and trading are set by the Victorian Government to
protect the integrity of entitlements and minimise third party impacts
of trading. Third party impacts are any impacts on people not directly
involved in the trade of water (ie. people other than the buyer
and seller).
The National Water Initiative (NWI) represents the Australian, State
and Territory Governments’ shared commitment to water reform and
sets out guidelines for water trade rules. In addition, the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has a role in
establishing a consistent inter-jurisdictional framework for the use of
exit and access fees charged by operators of irrigation water delivery
networks (infrastructure operators) to assist the New South Wales,
Victorian and South Australian Governments meet their obligations
under the NWI69.
Trading rules have evolved as the water market has developed over
the past 15 years to cover all aspects of an operational water market
including who can trade, where water can be traded, information
disclosure requirements and compliance of trade transactions and
water delivery. Key rules and potential changes are outlined below.
CHAPTER 4
63
4
irrigation systems in the Goulburn-Murray Irrigation District each
season. During 2006/07, the four per cent limit was reached in several
irrigation districts (Central Goulburn, Rochester and Pyramid-Boort)
as individuals relied more heavily on the water market due to the
low allocations.
The four per cent limit to the amount of water shares that can be
traded out of an area within a given season aims to minimise the social
impacts of water leaving a district. However, it may also be acting as
a barrier to individuals who wish to retire or profit from the sale of their
entitlement for another reason. The rule could also be limiting the value
of water on the market if a seller is constrained to selling locally. As a
requirement of the National Water Initiative, this rule will be reviewed
in 2009.
Enjoying the river: recreation is an important value of Northern Region rivers
What is your view on raising the four per cent limit on the amount of
water shares traded out of an area in an irrigation season? Should
the review of the rule take place sooner than 2009?
Where water can be traded
Within regulated systems, trading zones have been established (with
associated rules about where water can move to and from) to suit the
physical connections and limits between supply systems. Rules about
where trading can occur on unregulated streams can vary depending
on local circumstances and the specific risks posed to other users or
the environment in that system.
A key rule about trading between districts and between States is
the introduction of ‘tagged’ water trading, effective from July 2007
in Victoria. Tagging means that, for example, a person in Mildura
can purchase and hold water entitlements from the Goulburn,
Murrumbidgee and Murray systems and that entitlements from each
system are administered by the jurisdiction in which they were initially
created, and retain all of the rights, responsibilities and risks associated
with the source system. This ensures that entitlement holders from a
particular system, irrespective of where the entitlement is now utilised,
still receive the correct level of reliability. Tagging applies to high and
low-reliability water shares. This minimises third party impacts of
the water trading. The tagging system is fairer than the pre-existing
exchange-rates model, especially in light of the expected impacts of
climate change.
The review of this limit will consider whether other mechanisms are
minimising the risks of trade this rule was introduced to address.
The risk of stranded assets is now addressed through the creation
of delivery shares (as a result of ‘unbundling’ – see Chapter 2) and
termination fees. Delivery shares, separate from water shares, provide
an entitlement to have water delivered to land in an irrigation district.
The cost of running the irrigation distribution system is tied to delivery
shares. Therefore, if water shares are sold, entitlement-holders still
have an obligation to meet the running costs of the distribution system
even if the water is delivered and used elsewhere. Individuals have the
choice of continuing to meet these costs, selling their delivery share
or surrendering it. Surrendering a delivery share incurs a termination
fee. This termination fee may be waived by the water corporation if the
irrigation infrastructure is being reconfigured.
Are there other mechanisms that could be used to deal with the
third party impacts of water trade, which include stranded assets
and social change?
How much water can be traded
Another key rule introduced in 1996 to minimise the risk of ‘stranded
assets’ is a limit to the amount of water that can be permanently traded
out of an area within a given irrigation season. The rule is also intended
to ensure that the rate of social change resulting from the movement of
water out of a district is occurring at an acceptable level.
The limit to the amount of trade out of an area within a given season
was raised from two per cent to four per cent in 2006 as a requirement
of the NWI, following concerns that the original two per cent limit was
suppressing trade and limiting the effectiveness of the market.
Data on water trade shows that the two per cent rule did limit trade
on occasion, once in the 1998/99 season with trade out of the
Torrumbarry system and again in the 2002/03 season, which was a
very dry year. Since 2002/03 the limit was reached by at least three
64
CHAPTER 4
4
Who can trade water
The vast majority of trade in northern Victoria is by individual water
users. Urban water corporations and the environment have both
participated in a small way on the water market. The use of the water
market will be increasingly important to urban water corporations and
the environment in the future.
Urban water corporations in northern Victoria already participate in
the water market on occasion to address water shortfalls and to sell
to rural users. The Government ensures that this is only done as part
of a balanced approach to managing supply and demand through
conservation and efficiency, use of alternative sources and trade.
This balanced approach aims to be practicable and cost-effective
for customers, as outlined in the water supply-demand strategies
prepared by each urban water corporation.
The Government's preferred approach to increasing the environmental
water reserve is to invest in water savings in the distribution system
(see the “Modernising the distribution system” section of this chapter),
as this enables water to be allocated to the environment with no impact
on existing entitlement holders. However, in systems where there is
limited scope to do this, the Government may purchase water for the
environment where this is the most efficient and appropriate means of
recovering water70.
Currently, trading of environmental allocations is allowed in some
systems only when it is clear that, in that year, the environment doesn’t
need that water. In the recent drought, such opportunities have
been limited. A different approach might involve regularly buying and
selling water to achieve environmental objectives. For example, the
environmental manager could enter the market during dry periods to
manage environmental emergencies or to sell environmental water
once environmental risk has been managed. In wetter years, the
environmental manager could buy seasonal allocations to top-up
environmental water supplies to flood wetlands for a bird breeding
event, increasing the likelihood of achieving environmental objectives.
Issues and risks include:
•
The proportion of the EWR held as a tradeable entitlement.
•
The ability to carryover environmental water from year to year.
•
Financing requirements.
•
The need to monitor and report on the effectiveness of the market
to generate environmental outcomes.
•
Community acceptance.
The environmental manager would need to have a high level of
capability and be free to operate without fear or favour to maximise
environmental outcomes.
Recently, the Murray-Darling Basin Commission conducted a pilot
environmental water purchase program through the Living Murray
Initiative. Up to 20 GL of water was purchased for the environment,
mainly from outside Victoria. The results of this pilot program will be
used to inform further decisions on the use of the water market for
the environment.
The water market works best when there are many buyers and sellers.
However, there is the risk it can be distorted (ie. changes to the price
of water or other impacts on other traders) when a single large trader
enters the market. The Government itself has the potential to distort the
market unless rules and regulations prevent this.
Appropriate guiding principles would need to be developed if it was
determined that Government needed to enter the market on behalf of
the environment. These would include principles about transparency,
accountability and the minimisation of third party impacts. Such
principles should also apply to interstate bodies that may enter the
Victorian water market, including the Murray-Darling Basin Commission
and Commonwealth Government.
What should the guiding principles be if the Government needed to
enter the water market (on behalf of the environment)?
Options other than the Government using the open water market
could also be further explored. For example, Goulburn-Murray Water
could target the purchase of entitlements in parts of the distribution
channel that are being reconfigured. These entitlements could then be
used by the environment or urban water corporations. Alternatively,
these entitlements could be retired to improve reliability (see “Improving
the management and allocation of water resources” section of this
chapter). This approach avoids impacts on the open water market.
Water use licences could be used to stop water being traded back
into areas not suited to irrigation (eg. salinity-prone areas). It should
be noted that the water use licences would be surrendered only after
the reconfiguration process. They would not be used as a tool for
mandatory reconfiguration.
CHAPTER 4
65
4
Trading water separately from land
The NWI requires that water entitlements be separated from land.
This means a person can own water without owning land. These
arrangements were put into place in Victoria through ‘unbundling’
(see Chapter 2). In response to community concern that water market
speculators could purchase too many water shares and manipulate the
price of water, the Government introduced a 10 per cent limit on the
amount of water shares that can be held by non-landholders.
In New South Wales, water was separated from land in 2003. There
is no evidence that this has resulted in speculators buying water to
manipulate water markets. It is too early to tell what will happen in
Victoria; however it appears likely that concerns about speculators
are unwarranted.
Many managed investment schemes (MISs), a trigger for the rule, are
bound by agreements that require that water shares will not leave the
land on which these schemes are located, thereby ensuring that the
shares will not be transferred out of the area.
In addition, if there is a benefit to owning water separately from land,
then when the 10 per cent limit is reached, these water shares will
become more valuable. It could be argued that this value should be
open to all existing water share owners and not be limited to the
10 per cent who got in first.
What is your view on the 10 per cent limit to the total amount of
water shares that can be held by non-landholders?
New types of trading transcations
Unbundling has provided further opportunities to enhance water
markets. To complement the trade of water shares and seasonal
allocations, new options are available such as leasing and hedging.
Leasing refers to a limited term transfer of water, typically multi-year,
rather than just seasonal or permanent. Leasing options can already be
arranged on a case-by-case basis (through contracts). A hedge is an
investment that is taken out specifically to reduce or eliminate risk. For
example, one individual could pay a yearly fee to another individual. In
return they could receive the other’s allocation, but only under certain
conditions (eg. when allocations are below 60 per cent).
Leasing and/or hedging options could provide more flexibility for people
and the environment to manage the risk of reduced water availability
within and between years. The Government could introduce rules and
regulations to facilitate easier and broader adoption of both of these
options. For example, template contracts could be made available so
that individuals did not have to develop their own.
Should options to enable leasing and hedging to be taken up more
broadly be explored? If so what options would be most desirable?
What other types of transactions could be explored?
Interstate water trading
The expansion of interstate trade is a requirement of the NWI. Further
facilitation of interstate trade brings opportunities for Victorian users to
access water from interstate, but also the risk of water moving
66
CHAPTER 4
permanently out of Victoria. Victorian entitlements have relatively high
reliability and may be sought by interstate buyers in preference to
interstate entitlements. These buyers compete with Victorian buyers
but also add value for Victorian sellers.
The pool of water that can be accessed by Victorian water users has
increased significantly since the introduction of interstate trade. Victoria
has established relatively high-value industries. As the water market
results in water moving from low to high-value uses, Victoria is well
placed to maximise the opportunities provided by interstate trade.
Continuing to increase the value of Victoria’s industries will ensure this
continues to be the case.
What additional options could be implemented for Victorian water
users to maximise the opportunities provided by interstate trade?
Integrity of trading systems
A recent development in information management and disclosure
is the establishment of a new register of water entitlements in July
2007. This water register maintains information on the ownership and
transfers of entitlements and allocations, and accounts for annual water
allocations to entitlement-holders. It protects the integrity of water
shares in the same way that the land register does for land titles. The
register provides a unique accounting system which will be crucial for
managing water resources and keeping track of the water market.
It also:
•
Streamlines entitlement registration and trading, reducing market
transaction costs.
•
Enhances investor and public confidence in water entitlements,
allocations and trades, including water provided for the
environment.
•
Facilitates the operation of interstate water markets.
•
Provides reliable information for water planning decisions.
Summary
Many rules and regulations associated with the water market could be
amended and streamlined. The challenge is to ensure the water market
can operate efficiently to allow effective reallocation and maximise the
benefits to buyers and sellers, while minimising third party impacts. The
key discussion questions related to water trading are:
•
What is your view on raising the four per cent limit on the amount
of water shares traded out of an area in an irrigation season?
Should the review of the rule take place sooner than 2009?
•
Are there other mechanisms that could be used to deal with the
third party impacts of water trade such as stranded assets and
social change?
•
What should the guiding principles be if the Government were
to enter the water market on behalf of the environment?
•
What is your view on the 10 per cent limit to the total amount
of water shares that can be held by non-landholders?
•
Should options to enable leasing and hedging to be taken up more
broadly be explored? If so what options would be most desirable?
•
Are there other types of transactions that could be explored?
•
What additional options could be implemented for Victorian water
users to maximise the opportunities provided by interstate trade?
4
Improving the management and allocation of water resources
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
Individual
System
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Outline and key challenges
Water management and allocation arrangements can be modified to improve reliability of supply for any water user or to benefit the environment.
Changes could be made to the reserve policy or individuals could be allowed to manage their own reserves through carryover provisions.
Adjustments could be made to rebalance between consumptive and environmental use or between different types of entitlements. The key
challenge is ensuring that water management and allocation arrangements maximise the benefits for community members and accurately reflect
community values.
The Victorian Government manages the arrangements (or framework)
for the allocation of water resources across the State (see Chapter 2
for more detail). In doing this, it aims to find the right balance between
providing a reliable water supply for economic, environmental and
social values.
The reliability of supply is measured in terms of the probability of full
seasonal allocations assuming existing allocation and management
arrangements. Two important measures are (a) the number of years
out of 100 in which we could expect to have a full seasonal allocation
and (b) an indication of the lowest allocations, including the possibility
of years with zero allocations. Chapter 3 demonstrates how these
measures of reliability of supply could change markedly due to climate
change and other factors.
In trying to improve the reliability of a water share, which is more
important: a) increasing the number of years with full allocations or
b) reducing the number of years with very low or zero allocations?
Why?
With reliable entitlements (and reasonable seasonal allocation levels),
the water market effectively reallocates water between users during dry
periods through the willing buying and selling of entitlements. However,
when seasonal allocations are very low, the market is less able to
do this. Recent experience shows that the water market has been
effective in reallocating water and enabling individuals and businesses
to manage risk. However, there are concerns that the market may fail in
years with lower allocations. For example, there may be too few sellers
(due to reduced water availability) and too few buyers (due to increased
prices) for the market to work efficiently. Ensuring sufficient seasonal
allocations to enable the market to operate effectively will be a priority
in managing future water scarcity.
The recent drought has also highlighted the significant volumes of
water required to cover river and distribution system losses before a
seasonal allocation can be made. These losses are estimated to be
in the order of 1,300 to 1,400 GL every year from rivers and irrigation
systems in northern Victoria. A priority in managing scarcity will be
reducing these losses. The modernisation of distribution systems will
help to reduce the 800-900 GL of irrigation system losses.
Many options are available to change the management and allocation
of water resources and therefore the reliability of supply. Possible
changes include the type of entitlements held, the way allocations are
made and the sharing of water between users and the environment.
Further modelling is required to identify these options and understand
the implications.
Some options may help to increase flexibility and choice for individuals
and the environment. Increasing an individual’s control over their
water supplies improves their ability to manage through, and recover
from, dry periods in the way best suited to their business. Likewise,
greater control over environmental entitlements could improve the
environment’s ability to manage through and recover from dry periods,
particularly in priority areas.
Dryland farming, Maldon
CHAPTER 4
67
4
Progress to date
Some major changes have recently been made to water entitlements
and the allocation framework. Chapter 2 outlined the ‘unbundling’
of water entitlements (in July 2007), into three separate, individually
tradeable entitlements – a high-reliability water share, a delivery
share and a water use licence (see page 25). In addition, it describes
the conversion of ‘sales’ water into fully tradeable ‘low-reliability’
entitlements. The environment now has a legal right to water – the
environmental water reserve (see page 28).
In order to allow irrigators greater flexibility in how and when their water
was used during the extremely dry conditions of 2006/07, they were
allowed to carryover up to 30 per cent of their allocation to the 2007/08
season. The maximum allocation an entitlement-holder can receive
in 2007/08 is 100 per cent (ie. their allocation plus carryover cannot
exceed 100 per cent).
Having sufficient seasonal allocations to enable the market to work
is a key priority in updating allocation policies and entitlements. The
challenge in improving reliability is that it is effectively a trade-off
between the number of years with full seasonal allocations and the
severity of the lowest seasonal allocations. Avoiding this trade-off is
possible only by reducing entitlements (including the losses to deliver
entitlements). Five areas where adjustments could be made are
discussed below. All of these areas relate to the following questions.
What changes could be made to existing water shares to best meet
the needs of different water users?
Should a minimum level of reliability be set for water shares (eg. no
less than 60 per cent allocations for high-reliability water shares)?
If so, what should the minimum level be? Which of the options
(or combination of options) listed on page 70 should be used
to improve reliability? What financial cost or reduction in water
entitlement would you be prepared to forgo in order to put this in
place?
Changing the seasonal allocation policy (communal reserve)
Victoria’s seasonal allocation policy is relatively conservative. The
following hierarchy applies when allocating water within a season:
68
1
Water is first set aside to fill the irrigation channels and cover river
and distribution losses (from seepage and evaporation).
2
Allocations are made for high-reliability water shares.
3
Water is set aside in a communal reserve to ensure the following
season’s high-reliability water shares can be fully allocated.
4
Allocations are made for low-reliability water shares for the
current season.
CHAPTER 4
Victoria could try to improve allocations in very dry years by increasing
the communal reserve but this would lower the seasonal allocations
in normal or wet years. Increasing the communal reserve would be
unnecessary if there were good inflows in the following year, resulting
in ‘pain with no gain’. Increased reserves also mean storages are kept
more full, increasing the risk of spills from reservoirs.
What is your view on options that would change the communal
reserve to decrease the risk of very low or zero seasonal allocations
in dry years?
Alternatively, reducing the communal reserve would enable higher
allocations for low-reliability water shares within a given season.
However this would occur at the expense of having more years with
very low or zero allocations for high-reliability water shares. Other risks
associated with this option would include the potential breaching of the
Murray-Darling Basin Cap and a reduction in the environmental water
reserve (due to reduced spills) in the following year.
What is your view on options that would change the communal
reserve to increase the allocations for low-reliability entitlements?
Reliability could also be improved by reducing the volume of
entitlement to be supplied within a given year. For example, if long-term
water availability was reduced by 20 per cent, each 1 GL of entitlement
could be reduced to 0.8 GL to maintain reliability at current levels.
Alternatively, the Government could purchase and retire a portion of
entitlements so that the same volume of water was shared between
fewer users, so maintaining reliability at current levels.
Would you be willing to give up some of your entitlement to improve
its reliability?
Allowing individual reserves (carryover)
Enabling individual entitlement holders to carryover part of their
allocation for use in the following season effectively allows them to
manage their own reserves. Individuals would be allowed more control
to choose the most appropriate level of reserve for their business. In
low allocation years, carryover is advantageous as it provides water at
the start of the season and can also increase the total volume available
in that season. This is particularly important to horticulturalists, whose
crops must avoid stress at specific times (like fruit set and bud set) to
avoid crop failure. The water to be carried over could be sourced from
their own entitlement or purchased on the water market. Carryover
water can also be used for the environment to ensure survival flows
during droughts, or to store low reliability environmental water to
opportunistically create wetland flooding.
4
Some concerns have been raised regarding the potential impact of
permanent carryover on the volume of water in the communal pool.
Without carryover, if water is allocated but not used then it goes into
the communal pool from which seasonal allocations are made in the
following season. However, if this unused water can be carried over,
while affording a private benefit to individuals, it could reduce the
volume of the communal pool and lead to lower seasonal allocations
the following season. The volume of carryover would have to be
relatively large to create this impact.
A review of the carryover provisions has resulted in irrigators being
able to carryover their unused water at the end of the 2007/08 season
under the same rules that applied in 2006/07. Approximately 130 GL
of water (valued at $120 million) was carried over in northern Victoria
in 2006/07, assisting irrigators to manage in the face of record low
seasonal allocations. Carryover will continue as a drought contingency
until allocations reach 80 per cent on either the Murray or Goulburn
systems, at which time a full review will occur.
To what extent should individuals be allowed to manage their own
reserves?
Rebalancing between types of entitlements
Consideration could be given to rebalancing between the reliability
of low and high-reliability water shares (ie. improving the reliability of
one at the expense of the other). This could be done in several ways.
The Government could purchase and retire water shares. Reducing
the amount of high-reliability shares held would improve the reliability
of both low and high-reliability water shares. Less water would be
required to reach full high-reliability seasonal allocations, enabling
low-reliability seasonal allocations to be made earlier within a season.
Alternatively, reducing the amount of low-reliability water shares held
could improve low-reliability seasonal allocations (because water would
be shared between fewer users) or it could be used to increase the
reserves held for high-reliability water shares.
Rebalancing between different types of water shares could provide
more certainty to entitlement-holders in the face of reduced water
availability; however, any changes would need to consider the equity of
costs and benefits in the community. It may not be wise to compromise
Victoria’s high-reliability water shares, given their value.
What is your view on options to rebalance between high- and lowreliability water shares?
The balance of water for consumptive use and the environment
could also be adjusted. This is further explored in the “Progressing
environmental management” section of this chapter.
Changing policies to manage losses
While an individual can purchase additional water shares, this does
not guarantee delivery to the property. Delivery depends on having
sufficient water to operate channels, which becomes an issue in very
dry years. Options to better manage losses are important. There are
several ways to better control losses and improve reliability of supply for
users and the environment.
A current approach used to reduce losses in very dry years is to
adjust the length of the irrigation season. For example, the length of
the irrigation season was shortened by two months in 2006/07 and
2007/08 to reduce losses and therefore increase allocations early in
the season. There could be more certainty for users by starting with a
shortened season and lengthening it (rather than visa versa). As inflows
to reservoirs improved, they would be used to progressively increase
allocations and lengthen the irrigation season.
What is your view on adjusting the length of the irrigation season to
improve initial seasonal allocations?
Another option would be to create an additional reserve to cover
losses required to fill the channels and ensure delivery of water even
with zero allocations to allow delivery of carryover water. The reserve
for losses could be specified to make explicit the priority of supply at
low allocations. Options include prioritising supply on larger trunks and
carriers and deliberately excluding delivery to smaller, more distant
parts of the distribution system. Alternatively, at low allocations, a
hierarchy of use could be used similar to those put in place when rights
are qualified during drought.
These options could help to guarantee delivery at very low allocations,
reducing the risk of zero allocations. In establishing this reserve,
consideration would need to be given to where the water would come
from and how it would be funded.
Should the reserve explicitly cover distribution losses? If so, where
could this water be sourced and how should it be funded?
In severe years with very low seasonal allocation levels (eg. less than
five per cent), allocations could be deferred until the following year
specifically to avoid losses from the distribution system during delivery
(ie. zero in that year but add to an improved allocation in the following
year). However, this could impact on some water users where even a
small seasonal allocation helps to manage through drought and some
allocation is needed to keep trees and vines alive. This could also
impact on the environment as many wetlands and rivers are dependent
on distribution losses for water.
What is your view on options to defer allocations at very low levels
to save distribution losses and improve allocations in the following
year?
CHAPTER 4
69
4
Summary
The key challenge in improving reliability is balancing the number
of years with full seasonal allocations and the severity of the lowest
seasonal allocations. The discussion in this section highlights that any
adjustment in any of the four areas is closely inter-related to the other
three. Careful consideration of allocation arrangements as a whole is
required. While any changes can have a substantial benefit, the costs,
financial and otherwise, need to be carefully considered. The key
discussion questions relating to water management and allocation are:
•
In trying to improve the reliability of a water share, which is more
important: a) increasing the number of years with 100 per cent
allocations or b) reducing the number of years with very low or zero
allocations? Why?
•
What changes could be made to existing water shares to best
meet the needs of different water users?
•
Should a minimum level of reliability be set for water shares (eg. no
less than 60 per cent allocations for high-reliability water shares)?
If so, what should the minimum level be? What is your view on
using some of the following options (or combination of options) to
achieve this:
-
Changing the communal reserve to decrease the risk of very
low or zero seasonal allocations in dry years.
-
Changing the communal reserve to increase the allocations for
low-reliability entitlements.
-
Individuals reducing the volume of their water share to improve
its reliability.
-
The Government purchasing and retiring entitlements to
improve reliability. If you agree with this, how should it be
funded?
-
Allowing individuals to manage their own reserves through
permanent ‘carryover’.
-
Rebalancing between high- and low-reliability water shares to
improve the reliability of one at the expense of the other.
-
Adjusting the length of the irrigation season in the future to
improve initial seasonal allocations.
-
Setting aside an additional water reserve to explicitly cover
distribution losses. If you agree with this, where could this
water be sourced and how should it be funded?
-
Deferring allocations at very low levels to save distribution
losses to improve allocations in the following year?
Fruit picker, Goulburn Valley
70
CHAPTER 4
4
Modernising the distribution system
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
✓
✓
✓
Individual
System
✓
Irrigation modernisation is the process to rationalise and improve the efficiency of outdated irrigation systems while upgrading and investing in its
future. The need for our irrigated agricultural industries to be internationally competitive demands that the irrigation infrastructure be upgraded to:
•
Enable provision of the water delivery services required by 21st century farm operations.
•
Be managed in a cost effective manner.
•
Improve water delivery efficiency.
Modernising the distribution system increases efficiency and can generate substantial water savings (up to 450 GL in the Goulburn-Murray
irrigation district alone) which can be provided to rural or urban water users or the environment. Modernisation provides the community with
another means to prepare for the uncertainty of climate change and reduced water availability.
Northern Victoria has thousands of kilometres of rivers, channels and
pipelines, that transport water to irrigators and stock and domestic
customers. However, much of this infrastructure has become old and
outdated, doesn’t deliver water efficiently and is expensive to maintain
and manage. Around 30 per cent of water – more than 800 GL on
average annually – is lost from the Murray and Goulburn irrigation
systems due to system inefficiencies. These losses equate to around
one-quarter of Lake Eildon’s capacity.
Drought, concern over climate change impacts and farm adjustment
with water trading out of some areas, has also highlighted that the
current delivery system is not sustainable.
The irrigation system needs to be modernised so that water can be
efficiently delivered to where it is required in the future, at the service
levels required by farmers so that they can continue to compete on
world markets. Irrigation modernisation will:
•
Enable more efficient on-farm water use through a more
responsive water ordering system - farmers will be able to order
water when they need it rather than waiting for their water order
to be processed.
•
Provide a proactive and progressive approach to rationalisation
of our current delivery system, providing certainty for irrigators.
•
Improve the delivery system from about 70 per cent efficiency
to 85 per cent efficiency and allow these efficiency gains to be
used for commercially productive and environmental purposes,
underpinning future growth and confidence in the region.
The Victorian Government will invest $1 billion in the Food Bowl
Modernisation Project to modernise irrigation infrastructure and
improve water delivery management and irrigation services. This
will include some lining, upgrading and automation of channels,
construction of pipelines and metering upgrades across the Goulburn
and Murray systems which, in combination with system operation
changes, will improve service levels to irrigators and aims to save up
to 225 GL of water by 2012. These savings will be shared between
irrigators, environmental flows and urban use.
Significant system efficiency improvements will be made possible
by transforming a ‘manually’ operated system to a fully automated
delivery system measuring water flows accurately via a real time
communications network.
Irrigation modernisation will have strong communication and
engagement elements to ensure that the resultant irrigation system is
a shared Government and community vision, similar to work that has
begun in the Shepparton, Pyramid Boort and Torrumbarry irrigation
districts. Work in these districts is focused on asset management
reviews and reconfiguration plans, which include a detailed consultation
process with local landholders on future rationalisation of supply
infrastructure. This work provides an excellent basis for advancing the
Food Bowl Modernisation Project.
CHAPTER 4
71
4
Upgrading ageing infrastructure has seen significant water savings
Modernisation planning and implementation will result in the redesign
of irrigation systems, based on consultation with irrigators regarding the
future of their business and the service delivery they require. Irrigation
infrastructure that can be rationalised or retired, such as small channels
or pods, will be identified as part of this process.
The modernisation of irrigation distribution systems also provides
more opportunity for greater farm water use efficiency. Maximising the
benefits of modernisation or on-farm efficiency, requires implementing
both in a coordinated way. This will provide a total system approach
to improving efficiency and productivity in the irrigation sector. See the
“Conservation and efficiency for all water users and the environment”
section of this chapter for more detail about how this will be done.
The Victorian Government’s Food Bowl Modernisation Project has
been guided by a Northern Region community-based Steering
Committee comprised of irrigators, environmentalists, farmers and
representatives of local government, water corporations and business.
The committee submitted its report to Government in November 2007,
after consulting widely with the community and stakeholders.
The Victorian Government has responded to the Food Bowl
Modernisation Steering Committee’s Final Report. Key
recommendations adopted include:
72
•
Modernisation of trunks and carriers to be undertaken first.
•
Melbourne’s Bulk Entitlement from the savings will be capped at
75 GL per year.
•
Melbourne Water and the Victorian Government cannot enter the
market to purchase water.
•
Water savings will be distributed evenly across the Goulburn
Murray Irrigation District and allocated to irrigators as high
reliability shares.
CHAPTER 4
The Government has also announced as part of its response,
the creation of a new state-owned entity, the Northern Victoria
Infrastructure Renewal Project (NVIP) to deliver this landmark project.
Northern Victoria Infrastructure Renewal Project will work closely with
Goulburn-Murray Water, irrigators and other stakeholders to optimise
the full benefits for the region.
It is important for key decisions to be made as early as possible
to enable planning of the project and its delivery within the tight
timeframes that have been set. However, if broader policy or regulation
gaps require attention, the Government will address these through the
Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy as appropriate.
For more information, including fact sheets, on the Victorian
Government’s Food Bowl Modernisation Project visit
www.ourwater.vic.gov.au.
Summary
The modernisation of irrigation distribution systems provides an
opportunity for improved levels of service for customers, improved
water use efficiency and savings (particularly in dry years) and greater
certainty for future investment. The benefits of irrigation modernisation
will be maximised if the Government and community work together to
create a shared vision for a modernised irrigation system.
4
Conservation and efficiency for all users and the environment
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
Individual
System
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Water conservation and efficiency measures are among the most cost-effective and sustainable options for addressing water scarcity.
By improving on-farm water use efficiency, the resulting water savings can be used to improve farm productivity or sold for a profit on the water
market. The modernisation of the distribution system creates much more opportunity for improved efficiency on-farm and the challenge lies in
finding an appropriate way to align these processes to maximise the benefits of both.
Although urban water use is only a small proportion of total use in the Northern Region, it is the responsibility of all individuals to use water
efficiently. Reducing demand for water will be a key response in addressing shortfalls arising from reduced water availability.
With climate change, there will be an even greater need to make more efficient use of available environmental water. A range of management
options exist to maximise the use and benefits of environmental water including targeted watering sites, en route watering and complementary
works.
Description and key considerations
Water conservation (ie. using less water) and efficiency (ie. maximising
the benefits of the water used) are two of the most cost-effective and
sustainable options for addressing water scarcity. The efficient use of
water is relevant to rural and urban users as well as to the environment.
There are many options to save water and use it more efficiently.
Improving on-farm water use efficiency (WUE)
The modernisation of the distribution system creates greater
opportunities for improved on-farm efficiency. The farm benefits from
system modernisation include:
•
The supply of water ‘on-demand’, providing greater flexibility in
irrigation management.
•
Reduced labour requirements through automating farm supply
points.
•
Enabling the adoption of best practice irrigation methods through
interaction with on-farm automation equipment and consistent flow
rates onto farms.
To maximise the benefits of system modernisation and on-farm
efficiency, these two processes must be aligned.
By investing in on-farm efficiencies, irrigators can generate water
savings that can then be used on-farm to improve productivity, boost
their individual supply or generate income through selling any excess
water on the market. Labour savings and lifestyle improvements can
also be made. Improved irrigation efficiency also reduces off-site salinity
and nutrient impacts associated with run-off. Although many irrigators
have already made significant efforts to improve on-farm water use
efficiency, modernisation will provide additional opportunities.
Many landholders are working to maximise the use of available water
resources by applying water efficiently, at a time and volume that meets
the needs of crops and ensures the sustainability of production levels.
Automated irrigation systems are being adopted across the Northern
Region with substantial increases in water use efficiency and farm
productivity.
An on-farm WUE project (nearing completion) will establish a data
framework to better understand seven key performance indicators
that can be used to assess the on-farm WUE of irrigated agriculture
in Victoria. With further work, the framework can improve our
understanding of opportunities to improve farm WUE. It can also
provide data to monitor changes and trends in crop water use, and the
capacity to set state-wide targets for farm WUE.
Investment in on-farm efficiencies can be costly for some landholders.
Most landowners can afford to do works only on part of their
property at one time and works are typically spread over a period of
years. To assist, the Government invests in a range of incentive and
extension programs to help encourage on-farm efficiency because
the community also benefits. An example is reducing the salinity and
nutrient impacts on our waterways and aquifers.
How can the salinity management program be adapted to take
into account increased irrigation efficiencies and increased water
scarcity due to the possible future impacts of climate change?
CHAPTER 4
73
4
The Water Smart Farms Initiative, which was introduced in 2003/04,
has recently expanded from a four year, $15 million initiative funded
by the Victorian Water Trust and Our Water Our Future to $25 million
over eight years. Since the initiative began, funded works are estimated
to have achieved water savings for irrigators of 8.5 GL. It is estimated
these works have also prevented 28,000 kilograms of phosphorus
entering waterways. Incentives cover whole farm plans, reuse systems,
upgrades to farm irrigation systems and groundwater pumping and are
provided by local catchment management authorities.
Whole farm planning has been implemented successfully in northern
Victoria to encourage land use change at a property scale to reduce
the impact of irrigation on the environment and to maximise on-farm
water efficiency and productivity. An important element of supply
system modernisation will be the opportunity to rationalise farm supply
points (outlets) to improve efficiency, because these often have high
water losses associated with them and are expensive to maintain.
Whole farm planning could be a key tool to help farmers redevelop
their farm layout as a result of outlet rationalisation and also to take
advantage of the opportunities associated with system modernisation.
It can also provide the long-term business and investment planning
needed to underpin implementation of the whole farm plan and future
viability of the farm, driving water use efficiency. This is how system
modernisation through the Food Bowl Modernisation Project and onfarm efficiency can be aligned on-ground.
In areas across the Riverine Plains that contribute high salt loads to
the River Murray, consideration should be given to achieving multiple
outcomes. High salinity impact zones can be identified and when
water shares are traded out, water use licences on this land could be
cancelled. Similar to the system established in the Sunraysia irrigation
areas, investors wishing to develop this land would be required to meet
the full cost to offset salinity impacts of the development.
What is your view on extending the salinity zones, already in place in
Sunraysia, across northern Victoria?
What other methods could be used to maximise on-farm water
efficiency benefits associated with the modernisation of the
distribution system?
Other factors influence the adoption of water-efficient technologies
on farms. For example, on larger farms, a single outlet connected
directly to main channels may enable greater control of water use,
simplified farm automation and improved water use efficiency. In
order to maximise the benefits of system and farm modernisation, it
is imperative that the needs of irrigators now and into the future are
understood and that different levels of service are provided to meet the
different needs and customer profiles.
For farms in areas where supply is likely to change or cease, exit
and adjustment strategies will be required to assist in the transition.
Mechanisms to facilitate land amalgamation or repackaging could be
considered. This could help farmers wishing to retire and also those
who want to continue irrigating by repackaging properties into viable
farming units.
What exit or adjustment strategies need to be developed to assist
farmers in areas where supply is likely to change or cease?
74
CHAPTER 4
Paddle steamer Emmylou, Echuca (Photography by Holger Leue)
4
Water conservation for homes and businesses
Drought response planning
Urban water corporations adopt a balanced approach to managing
supply and demand through conservation and efficiency, use of
alternative sources and trade. This approach aims to be practicable
and cost-effective for customers, as outlined in the water supplydemand strategies prepared by each urban water corporation. It is also
important that a sensible approach is adopted given that urban water
use accounts for less than five per cent of total use in the Northern
Region.
Water restrictions are implemented in accordance with drought
response plans prepared by urban water corporations. Given the
climatic conditions experienced in recent years and the reality of
climate change, many of these plans require updating in terms of
trigger points for implementing restrictions and a more comprehensive
assessment of emergency contingency actions. The Government will
continue to work with the water corporations to complete this work.
Would you be prepared to pay more on your water bill for your
water corporation to invest in more conservation and recycling
measures, and why? If so, how much more?
Water conservation targets
The Government is strongly committed to ensuring water conservation
measures are implemented by households and industries throughout
the state. Implementing water conservation measures around the
home has been shown to be a cost-effective and energy efficient way
to save water.
Non-residential use, made up of industry, commercial/institutional
buildings and open spaces such as parks and gardens, accounts for
one-third of urban water use in the Northern Region (see Chapter 3).
Water conservation by industries and businesses is being supported
by the Government through the State-wide implementation of the
Pathways to Sustainability Program, which requires all non-residential
customers who consume more than 10 ML (ie. 0.01 GL) of drinking
water per year to complete a water management action plan (a
‘WaterMAP’), with an indicative target of 10 per cent improvement in
water efficiency.
The current drought conditions have increased awareness of the need
for water conservation in urban areas. Associated behavioural change
has already contributed to a reduction in average per capita water use
since the 1990s. To drive the adoption of appropriate conservation
measures, each urban water corporation has established reduction
targets (documented in water supply-demand strategies) ranging
between 15 to 22 per cent by 2055. This differs from the targets set
for Melbourne, Geelong, Ballarat and West Gippsland through the
Central Region Sustainable Water Strategy, which aim for a 25 per
cent per capita reduction by 2015, increasing to 30 per cent by 2020
(compared with the average 1990s use). It is encouraging to note that
in 2007, the 30 per cent target was reached in Melbourne.
Urban water corporations will continue to work with home-owners
and industry to encourage adoption of water conservation practices.
They will also improve their data and understanding of the impacts of
different actions and monitor the achievement of targets.
Water restrictions are instituted only during dry years and are not a
replacement for long-term water conservation practices. However,
long-term water conservation actions can impact on the effectiveness
of restrictions as a tool for drought management. In the Central Region
Sustainable Water Strategy (Action 5.13), the Government committed
to investigating whether improved water conservation reduces the
effectiveness of water restrictions during drought periods. This research
could be extended to the Northern Region.
Efficient use of environmental water
With increasing water scarcity, there will be a greater need for the
efficient use of available environmental water. This will be possible
through the use of built structures to let water into, and hold in,
floodplain areas and wetlands that cannot otherwise access this
water during dry years. While these types of works do not allow us to
reproduce the benefits of large floods, they maximise the environmental
outcomes of the available water in targeted areas.
This approach is already being implemented, with flow regulators being
built in several areas on the Murray floodplain to enable watering at
lower river heights than under natural conditions and to enable water
to be held longer on the floodplains. For example, the Hattah Lakes
were watered in 2005/06 and 2006/07 by using regulators together
with large pumps to pump water from the River Murray. The regulators
enable us to reproduce most of the benefits of large floods but by
using considerably less water and at lower river levels.
Some environmental water can be used multiple times along the river.
For example, flows released down the Goulburn River can be used
again at Gunbower Forest and flows returning to the river can be used
again at another downstream site. For this reason it is very important to
have accurate measurement and accounting.
A key priority will be to investigate more of these types of opportunities.
However, it must be recognised that there can be environmental risks
associated with some of these works. For example, the proposal for
structures to enhance watering of the Chowilla floodplain off the River
Murray in South Australia will enhance river red gum and wetland
watering, but may have adverse impacts for native fish and salinity
levels. Therefore, these interventions will require considerable thought
and planning and explicit knowledge of any environmental trade-offs.
They can require significant structural works and budget to implement,
and risk mitigation programs and monitoring of outcomes must be
undertaken.
CHAPTER 4
75
4
What other options are available to improve the efficient use of
environmental water through the construction of works?
In some rivers systems it has been possible to meet environmental
objectives in a river while delivering water to farms. This is achieved
by directing water through a river rather than a channel so that as the
water is delivered from the reservoir to the farm it confers environmental
benefits. This has occurred at no cost or loss to water users. For
example, water normally transferred down the Goulburn to Sunraysia
is re-routed via the Western Waranga Channel and lower Campaspe
during periods of very low flows. This has addressed water quality
issues and reduced the risk of fish deaths in the lower Campaspe.
What other opportunities are there to better integrate delivery of
consumptive water with the needs of a river?
Environmental flows are only one aspect of river health – other aspects
include protecting or restoring habitat and water quality. To maximise
the benefits of environmental water and to ensure we achieve the
overall environmental health outcomes for rivers, floodplains and
wetlands, it is important to continue complementary instream and
streamside works. Priorities for these works are outlined in regional river
health strategies.
As catchment management authorities revise these strategies, the
potential implications of reduced water availability will be included and
proposed works will be more closely aligned with environmental water
management priorities. The aim is to improve the resilience of river
systems to survive through dry periods and enable recovery in normal
to wet years.
Another factor that warrants more consideration is the removal of
redundant infrastructure, such as weirs, wherever possible. This
will help reconnect river reaches to improve resilience and recovery
potential by providing pathways for fish recolonisation.
Summary
Water conservation and efficiency is the responsibility of all community
members – individuals at home, work and on the farm, as well as
environmental water managers. Water use efficiency can be one of
the most cost-effective and sustainable options for addressing water
scarcity. The key discussion questions relating to conservation and
efficiency are:
•
How can the salinity management program be adapted to take
into account increased irrigation efficiencies and increased water
scarcity due to the possible future impacts of climate change?
•
What other methods could be used to maximise the on-farm water
use efficiency benefits associated with the modernisation of the
distribution system?
•
What exit or adjustment strategies need to be developed to assist
farmers in areas where supply is likely to change or cease?
•
What is your view on extending the salinity zones, similar to those
already in place in Sunraysia, across northern Victoria?
•
Would you be prepared to pay more on your water bill for your
water corporation to invest in more conservation and recycling
measures, and why? If so, how much more?
•
What other options are available to improve the efficient use of
environmental water through the construction of works?
•
What other opportunities are there to better integrate delivery of
consumptive water with the needs of a river?
Shamrock Hotel, Bendigo
76
CHAPTER 4
4
Progressing environmental management
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
✓
Individual
System
✓
The approach used to manage the State’s rivers, wetlands and floodplains needs to continue to evolve to ensure we can achieve the best
environmental outcomes with reduced water availability. It is likely this will require environmental managers to become much more active and
innovative. Key aspects will be protecting priority areas, including drought refuges, and ensuring sufficient water to provide survival flows.
Preventing damage from other management actions will also be important.
Description
To date, the Victorian Government and catchment management
authorities have focused on:
•
Protecting priority areas of the highest community value from
any decline in condition (considering environmental, social and
economic values).
•
Maintaining the condition of ecologically healthy rivers.
•
Achieving an overall improvement in the condition of the remaining
rivers.
•
Preventing damage from future management activities.
This integrated approach is based on clear management objectives
identified with the community through regional river health strategies.
It uses a strong base of technical knowledge, including a good
understanding of the importance of various flow components for the
condition of environmental assets.
This approach may need to be improved to best manage the State’s
rivers in the face of reduced water availability. It will still be necessary
to protect priority areas which are of the highest community value.
However, in light of the expected increase in the frequency and
duration of drought, key drought refuges will also need to become
priorities – ensuring key assets survive dry years and have the capacity
to recover in wet years.
More active management is likely to be necessary, and as for all water
users, improved efficiency in water use is imperative to ensure the
benefits of the environmental water reserve (EWR) are maximised.
Likewise, the delivery of water for consumptive uses can also be
adapted to provide additional environmental benefit without impacting
on users. Increasing the EWR and ensuring a good balance of high
and low-reliability water shares will also be important. Monitoring the
effectiveness of the EWR in achieving the objectives will allow the
management approach to be adapted and improved over time.
Depending on the severity of climate change, at some point it
may be necessary for the community to make trade-offs between
environmental functions or assets. This may lead to a formal
amendment of management objectives. It is likely that this would be
linked to the statutory 15-year review of water resources. Objectives
and priorities during drought years will also be revised if required
through environmental drought response plans prepared by catchment
management authorities.
Lake Catani, Mt Buffalo
CHAPTER 4
77
4
Increase the environmental water reserve
Protect priority areas
While it will be important to utilise the existing EWR more efficiently,
the reserve itself will need to be refined and increased to meet
environmental needs in regulated systems. This is initially being done
through the ‘First Step’ of the Living Murray Initiative (see Chapter
2). The Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy will inform any
further action on the River Murray (ie. a Second Step) from a Victorian
perspective.
Priority areas along the River Murray have been identified as ‘icon
sites’ through the Living Murray Initiative (see Chapter 2), and plans
to manage each of these areas have been developed, including
environmental watering plans.
Within Victoria, catchment management authorities set priorities
for river management and restoration through regional river health
strategies. These are based on the community values of each river and
include an examination of the environmental, social (such as recreation)
and economic values.
In the Victorian tributaries to the River Murray, the Ovens River has
been identified as a particularly high value river system. It is one of only
two large rivers in Victoria (together with the Mitchell River) in good,
relatively intact condition throughout their entire river systems. These
rivers are managed to protect these values while recognising their
importance to regional communities.
As catchment management authorities revise regional river health
strategies in the future, the potential implications of reduced water
availability will be included. All key drought refuge sites will need to be
identified and included as priorities for management (where they aren’t
already) and proposed habitat and water quality works will be more
strongly aligned with environmental water management priorities. The
aim is to improve the resilience of river systems to survive through dry
periods and enable recovery in normal to wet years.
Refuges which enable the environment to recover from drought will
become priority areas for management: What other areas should
become priorities?
Smarter use of the existing environmental water reserve
With increasing water scarcity, there will be a greater need for the
efficient use of available environmental water and environmental
managers will need to become more active. For example, built
structures can let water into, and hold it in, floodplain areas and
wetlands that cannot otherwise access this water from natural rivers
and sources. Opportunities for using the existing EWR more efficiently
are outlined in the “Conservation and efficiency for all water users and
the environment” section of this chapter.
Where the environment has an entitlement and an allocation of water
to use, particularly in a dry year, it is important that the community
understands that the environmental water manager has the same
right to use that water as an irrigator with the equivalent entitlement.
Importantly, the environmental water manager has an obligation to use
that water to meet the agreed environmental objectives endorsed by
the Minister for the Environment and Climate Change.
78
CHAPTER 4
What information is necessary to develop a ‘Second Step’ of the
Living Murray Initiative?
Increase the reserve through water savings or the water market
To date the Government's preferred approach to increasing the EWR
is to invest in water savings in the distribution system (such as through
the Food Bowl Modernisation Project) as this enables the allocation
of water to the environment with no impact on existing entitlement
holders. However, the Government may purchase water for the
environment where this is the most efficient and appropriate means
of recovering water71. The benefits and risks of using the market to
increase the EWR are outlined in the “Using the water market” section
of this chapter.
Access alternative sources
Another option for increasing the EWR is to access alternative water
sources, although this resource is very limited within northern Victoria,
as detailed in the “New and alternative sources of water” section of this
chapter.
Securing a mix of high and low-reliability water shares
It will be important to secure a portion of high-reliability water in each
system for the environment. The need for a mix of high and lowreliability water shares for the environment is similar to the needs of
an irrigator. The environment requires enough high-reliability water to
keep key refuge areas going through extended dry periods (similar to
horticulturists needing water to maintain their crops). In wetter years,
the environment can utilise low-reliability water to opportunistically
‘piggyback’ on natural high flows to provide river flushes and wetland
watering. As is the case for irrigators, operating rules allowing
carryover, rebalancing entitlement types or converting entitlements
from one reliability to another could enable the environment to balance
its mix of water shares to better meet requirements in light of reduced
water availability.
It will be necessary to continue to monitor the effectiveness of the EWR
in achieving environmental objectives. In this way, our understanding
of environmental needs will improve and management of the EWR can
adapt as appropriate.
4
Water donations
Water can be provided for the environment through private donations
of water shares or seasonal allocations. Donations provide an
opportunity for irrigators and other water users to be directly involved
in environmental watering. Donations can be facilitated by nongovernment organisations. For example, in South Australia, Waterfind
Environment Fund is receiving donations of water for the environment
(see www.waterfind.org.au).
Case study: Donations to save stressed and dying
River Red Gums
Irrigators in the Mallee region donated large sums of water to
the environment in 2005 (1.3GL) and 2006 (5.6 GL), largely as a
result of irrigators’ concern for their environment. In addition to
community support, one of the key drivers was the decision by
water corporations to waive transfer fees associated with donations
of allocations, ensuring that donations could be made with no
cost to the water users. The donations were used to supplement
the emergency River Red Gum watering package. Donated water
delivered environmental benefits to stressed River Red Gums
and wetlands around Mildura and provided an opportunity for the
community to be involved in the process.
One of the reasons that donations have been made in the past in
Victoria is that water was not able to be carried over for use in the
next irrigation season. Irrigators were able to donate it at the end
of the season with no cost to their personal water supplies in the
future. With carryover now introduced on a permanent basis (see the
“Improving the management and allocation of water resources” section
of this chapter) it is likely that additional incentives will be needed to
encourage donations of water to the environment. The Government is
investigating a range of incentives for water users to donate water to
the environment, including:
•
Tax deductibility of water donations.
•
Payment of transfer fees.
•
Payment of annual fees associated with holding water shares.
As caretakers of river health, all catchment management authorities will
be able to receive donations of water on behalf of the environment, and
incentives will be provided on a catchment-specific basis, depending
on the environmental values of the sites receiving the donated water.
What other incentives could be investigated to encourage
individuals to donate water to the environment?
More recently, the Commonwealth Government’s National Plan for
Water Security commits to a review and possible reduction of the
Cap on extractions from the Murray-Darling system. If this was to
occur so that the proportion of water available for consumptive use
was reduced, the EWR would be increased. This may help to address
the inequity of impacts of climate change on environmental water
compared to consumptive water. The Cap was not originally intended
to drive water use down but rather to stop water use from increasing. If
the level of the Cap was reduced, appropriate measures (such as those
described above) would still need to be identified to move water from
consumptive use to the environment.
Within Victoria, the Water Act 1989 requires an assessment of water
resources at 15-year intervals. This assessment, due in 2020, will
determine if there has been a decline in water resources and whether
this has fallen disproportionately on the environment and water users.
It will also determine if river health is deteriorating for flow reasons.
If either is the case, expert advice would be sought for Government
consideration on appropriate corrective actions.
Managing environmental risks in an integrated system
The water supply and drainage system in the Northern Region is a
highly integrated system of natural rivers and wetlands together with
man-made channels, pipes, dams and weirs. Changes to system
efficiency and operating rules offer opportunities for users and the
environment. However, these changes can also pose risks because
natural rivers and wetlands are so highly embedded in the supply and
drainage system. For example, in some cases, system losses afford
significant environmental benefit for rivers and wetlands where they
serve a function as a supply carrier and the reduction of these losses
or disconnection of these wetlands will affect the environmental values.
Likewise, increasing or decreasing the amount of drainage water
received by a wetland or river could place it at risk. Potential benefits
and risks to rivers and wetlands from changes to system efficiency and
operating rules vary between each river and wetland.
The trade of water from upstream to downstream indirectly results in
increased environmental flows. This can have significant environmental
benefits. However, as most water use occurs in the summer months,
it can also result in environmental damage due to unnaturally high
summer flows (eg. the Goulburn system). The impacts of any changes
to trading rules need to be considered to ensure protection of the
environment.
A systematic approach is required to assess the potential benefits and
risks to rivers and wetlands from changes to system efficiency and
operating rules for supply and drainage at an individual and regional
scale.
Managing unregulated rivers
Reviewing the balance between consumptive use and the environment
The Murray-Darling Basin Commission’s audit of water use found
in 1995 that further increasing the proportion of water diverted for
consumptive use would pose a significant risk to river and wetland
health and to the reliability of supply for users (see Chapter 2). It
recommended that the interim Cap on extractions may need to be
revised.
Most of the responses in this Discussion Paper for the environment
are suited to regulated systems. There are fewer options available for
managing the EWR in unregulated rivers. The licensed extraction of
water during summer can be a key risk in unregulated systems if this
exacerbates periods of low flow. Options for improved management
include caps on allocations, rules around extraction times (moving
summer extractions to winter extractions), and implementing rosters or
bans on extractions during droughts.
CHAPTER 4
79
4
Existing management rules
Existing management rules for unregulated rivers include:
•
A prohibition on issuing new summer licences.
•
Regulation of new winter licences through sustainable diversion
limits (SDLs) to ensure sustainable use.
•
Trading rules to address over-allocation, requiring any permanent
trade in all-year (summer) licences to include:
•
i.
a reduction in licence volume of 20 per cent, and
ii.
trade to downstream users only.
Metering of all existing licences greater than 10 ML (ie. 0.01 GL)
and metering all new licences.
State-wide management rules for managing water extraction in
unregulated rivers are being prepared. When completed, they will
formalise the existing rules and establish permissible consumptive
volumes (PCVs) to limit the total water allocation within a catchment.
Streamflow management plans
In highly stressed systems, streamflow management plans are
prepared. Such plans outline key objectives and actions required to
minimise the impact of extraction, primarily through management
conditions on licences. Priority systems scheduled for the development
of streamflow management plans in the Northern Region are the Kiewa
River, Seven Creeks, King Parrot Creek and Yea River. The priority
and scheduling of these plans will be revised to take into account the
potential implications of reduced water availability associated with
climate change.
In Our Water Our Future, the Government committed to investing with
diverters to introduce streamflow management plans. An investment
program has recently been piloted in several small catchments in the
Yarra basin. Diverters competitively tendered for contracts to improve
environmental flows by altering conditions on their licences. The
results of this pilot will be used to determine the best way to assist in
implementing other streamflow management plans across the State.
Managing ‘sleeper’ licences
Many unregulated systems have a significant number of unused
(‘sleeper’) licences. These licences have been retained and paid for by
a landholder for a number of years. When these licences are not used,
the water remains in the river, providing water for other users and the
environment.
Altering objectives in light of significant future water scarcity
Given the potentially significant impacts of reduced water availability
to the existing EWR for many rivers, wetlands and floodplains across
northern Victoria, it must be acknowledged that we may not be able
to maintain all of the current values. The responses outlined above
will help to meet environmental objectives in a water-scarce context.
However, if it becomes clear that current management objectives are
not realistic, they must be acknowledged and reviewed.
Unfortunately, significant environmental, social and economic costs
are likely to be incurred in making such a decision and care must be
taken not to make this decision prematurely. We need to track actual
water availability against forecast predictions to confirm what the status
of water availability is, and whether objectives should be changed. It
is proposed to review environmental management objectives if the
statutory 15-year review of water resources indicates that there has
been a change.
Summary
There are many options to be considered in improving the
management of the region’s rivers, wetlands and floodplains in light of
the potential reduction in water availability. The key challenges through
these conditions are to identify future risks of a more ‘piped’ supply and
drainage system, to explore opportunities for enhancing management
in unregulated rivers and to be transparent in reviewing values and
objectives for managing rivers in light of climate change scenarios.
The environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of these
options must be carefully considered to ensure community values
can be protected as much as possible. The key discussion questions
relating to environmental management are:
•
Should refuges that enable the environment to recover from
drought become priority areas for management? What other areas
should become priorities?
•
What information is necessary to develop a ‘Second Step’ of the
Living Murray Initiative?
•
What other incentives could be investigated to encourage
individuals to donate water to the environment?
•
What options should be explored to manage sleeper licences to
minimise the future risks to other water users and the environment?
These licences could be activated in the future. Increased extractions
as a result of activation of sleeper licences can have significant impacts
on the reliability of supply of other water users in the system, increasing
the number of years when licence holders are placed on rosters and
restrictions. This is likely to be exacerbated under climate change
scenarios.
What options should be explored to manage sleeper licences to
minimise the future risks to other water users and the environment?
The Murray Floodplain (Photography by Alison Pouliot)
80
CHAPTER 4
4
Water pricing
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
✓
✓
✓
Individual
System
✓
The National Water Initiative and Our Water Our Future focus on ‘pricing for sustainability’ to safeguard our limited water resources, encourage
more careful and efficient use and ensure the full cost recovery of sustainably managing and delivering water resources. At the same time, the
Government recognises that price setting must be fairly and independently managed, and vulnerable groups in the community must be protected
when prices rise.
Description and progress
Key elements of the Our Water Our Future pricing reforms were:
The price of water is a critical part of water reforms throughout Victoria
and the rest of the country. The National Water Initiative (NWI) has a
focus on implementing best practice water pricing and institutional
arrangements that:
•
Structuring water prices to reward water conservation and
encourage efficient use of alternative, more sustainable, sources of
supply.
•
Ensuring prices recover the cost of delivering the full range of water
services.
•
Protecting the interests of customers by appointing the Essential
Services Commission (ESC) as the economic regulator of the entire
water industry.
•
Introducing revised concession arrangements with increased
benefits and less complexity.
•
Promote economically efficient and sustainable use of:
a) water resources,
b) water infrastructure assets, and
c) government resources devoted to the management of water.
•
Ensure sufficient revenue streams to allow efficient delivery of the
required services.
•
Facilitate the efficient functioning of water markets, including interjurisdictional water markets, in both rural and urban settings.
•
Give effect to the principle of user-pays and achieve pricing
transparency in respect of water storage and delivery in irrigation
systems and cost recovery for water planning and management.
•
Avoid perverse or unintended pricing outcomes.
•
Provide appropriate mechanisms for the release of unallocated
water72.
Our Water Our Future established the pricing framework to achieve
these outcomes and Victoria has largely implemented the NWI
requirements.
In addition, the Our Water Our Future pricing reforms established a
requirement for water corporations to pay environmental contributions
to fund initiatives that seek to promote the sustainable management of
water and to address adverse water-related environmental impacts.
Under the first stage of the environmental contribution, urban
corporations were required to pay an environmental contribution
equivalent to five per cent of their existing revenues. Rural water
corporations were required to pay environmental contributions
equivalent to two per cent of their existing revenues. These
requirements are likely to continue through the next stage of the
environmental contributions, which will be determined in accordance
with the requirements of the Water Industry Act 1994, and will begin
on 1 July 2008.
Since 2004, other changes to pricing arrangements include the
unbundling of rural water tariffs to reflect the unbundling of water rights
and address concerns about stranded assets and the introduction of
termination fees (discussed previously in the “Water trading” section of
this chapter).
The Goldfields
CHAPTER 4
81
4
Rural pricing structures
Pricing structures will continue to play an important role in encouraging
water conservation in the urban sector.
Rural pricing proposals are also being reviewed as part of the Essential
Services Commission’s price review process. While there may be some
moderate changes to pricing structures, the proposals are largely
consistent with current pricing structures established following the
unbundling of water tariffs.
There is also an opportunity to consider what role pricing structures
could play in improving the sustainable management of water in the
rural sector. Pricing structures could be reviewed in light of the move to
modernise the irrigation system in Northern Victoria and could be used
to facilitate reconfiguration of inefficient delivery infrastructure.
Urban pricing structures
The Government’s pricing framework requires urban corporations, in
consultation with customers, to examine and further develop pricing
structures that encourage sustainable use.
In line with this requirement, regional urban water corporations
have recently submitted pricing proposals to the Essential Services
Commission as part of its price review process to set new prices
for five years beginning on 1 July 2008. These proposals include
corporations’ proposed changes to pricing structures to drive
sustainable use including measures such as rising block tariffs, where a
higher price per kilolitre applies above a specified level of consumption,
or proposals to increase the proportion of volumetric to fixed charges.
The Essential Services Commission’s public review of these proposals
will provide customers and other stakeholders with the opportunity to
provide feedback on each corporation’s proposed pricing structures.
The Essential Services Commission will consider this feedback before
making a draft decision on prices in March 2008 and a final decision in
June 2008.
Rural water corporations have already begun to develop different water
pricing methods for unique systems. For example, Woorinen and
Normanville have been assessed as requiring different levels of service
and have different water pricing as a consequence. Woorinen has a
recently refurbished piped supply system to service horticultural needs
whereas Normanville has a dedicated domestic and stock system.
Recent work for the Goulburn-Murray Water area shows the different
types of industries and their total numbers, water use and gross value
added product (see Table 4.2). This demonstrates a high diversity
of customers and needs, with real potential for tailoring the supply
systems to better suit these.
What should be taken into account when developing options for
introducing different prices for different levels of service delivered by
rural supply systems in the Northern Region?
In addition to the review of regional corporations’ pricing proposals, the
Government has asked the Essential Services Commission to report
on a range of pricing structure issues, including:
Differential pricing may also assist in the rollout of the Food Bowl
Modernisation Project, encouraging customers to take up the new
services and tailoring them to meet their needs.
•
Increasing reliance on volumetric charges rather than fixed charges
for water consumption.
•
Combining volumetric charging for water and sewerage services.
•
Increasing the share of costs borne by non-residential customers.
In light of the move to modernise the irrigation system, it may also be
appropriate to review current pricing structures to identify and consider
whether these structures should change to better reflect the services
provided by the modernised system.
Further information on the Essential Services Commission’s review of
regional corporations’ pricing proposals and pricing structure, including
how customers can contribute, can be accessed at
www.esc.vic.gov.au.
82
In future, rural water corporations will have an opportunity to have
different service requirements, reflected in water pricing. This may be
a step forward from the current ‘postage-stamp’ pricing approach,
where all customers in a given area are assumed to require the same
level of service and are charged the same price for water.
CHAPTER 4
Are there other pricing structures that could be considered following
the modernisation of the irrigation distribution system?
4
Table 4.2 Summary of customers in irrigation areas within Goulburn-Murray Water boundaries73
Area and
No. of
industry
businesses
% of businesses Water delivered
(GL)
% of water
Gross value-
% of gross value
delivered
added product
added product
($million)
Dairy
Horticulture
Greenfield
Mixed
Specialist
Small users
Residual
opportunistic
Rural residential
1,000
540
20
200
200
1,000
500
9%
5%
0.2%
2%
2%
9%
5%
800
280
250
300
10
85
100
43%
15%
16%
13%
1%
4%
5%
1,200
701
855
125
Unknown
6
25
41%
24%
29%
4%
Unknown
0.2%
1%
7,500
68%
45
2%
-
-
Total
10,960
100%
1,870
100%
Pricing structures could also be used to encourage reconfiguration of
inefficient or costly infrastructure.
For example, the flat rate charge for each irrigation outlet could be
increased, while access fees (based on the amount of water used)
could be reduced. This may encourage irrigators to reduce the number
of outlets on their property, leading to a reduction in infrastructure and
maintenance costs and savings on water bills. This was introduced as
part of the Pyramid-Boort Future Management Strategy from 2007/08.
A benchmark was set for an average of 0.1 GL (ie.100 ML) used per
outlet and the pricing is structured so that customers using more
than 0.1 GL per outlet pay less than they did previously. Customers
using less than 0.1 GL per outlet (ie. where the infrastructure is being
used less efficiently) will pay more than they did previously. It may be
appropriate to extend this pricing structure to other irrigation areas.
What issues would need to be considered before adopting the
Pyramid-Boort option of increasing the fee for additional outlets to
encourage reconfiguration in other irrigation areas throughout the
Northern Region?
100%
Summary
There are opportunities, particularly in rural areas, for water corporation
services and tariff structures to be adapted to better meet the needs of
customers. Any changes should encourage more efficient use of water
resources, while ensuring that vulnerable groups in the community are
protected if prices rise. The key discussion questions relating to pricing
are:
•
What should be taken into account when developing options for
introducing different prices for different levels of service delivered by
rural supply systems in the Northern Region?
•
Are there other pricing structures that could be considered
following the modernisation of the irrigation distribution system?
•
What issues would need to be considered before adopting the
Pyramid-Boort option of increasing the fee for additional outlets to
encourage reconfiguration in other irrigation areas throughout the
Northern Region?
•
Are there any other options to change pricing structures to
encourage reconfiguration of inefficient or costly delivery
infrastructure?
Are there any other options to change pricing structures to
encourage reconfiguration of inefficient or costly delivery
infrastructure?
CHAPTER 4
83
4
Expanding the Water Grid
Rural users
Urban users
✓
✓
Environment
Individual
System
✓
The Northern Region is a highly interconnected water system of rivers, wetlands, channels and pipes. The benefits of interconnections between
systems include the movement of water to highest value, added security for connected communities and the efficient use of environmental water.
Key challenges in the progression of other interconnections include the minimising of downstream impacts on all users and the environment and
ensuring the continuation of a range of complementary measures to reduce water demand by all users.
Northern Victoria is already highly interconnected and an important
part of Victoria’s Water Grid – the network of rivers, channels and
pipes linking Victoria’s major water systems – that enables water to be
moved when and where it is needed most.
The benefits of interconnections between systems include:
•
Allowing water to move to higher value uses.
•
Increasing the security of water supplies by diversifying the sources
of water available for communities connected by the Water Grid.
•
Enabling water to be traded more readily, by making it easier to
transfer water to where it is most needed and valued.
•
Providing more opportunity to manage environmental risks across
water systems and make the most efficient use of environmental
water.
Expansion of the Water Grid allows for these benefits, which is not only
essential in Victoria, but also across the broader Murray-Darling Basin.
Progress to date
Over time, built infrastructure such as channels, pipes, dams and weirs
has been added to the region’s natural infrastructure of rivers, wetlands
and floodplains. This has helped to better meet the needs of urban
and rural water users. This highly integrated system continues to be
improved with further connections between supply systems. Figure 4.3
shows the existing infrastructure, together with projects underway or
under investigation.
Several interconnections are already operating or have been committed
to further connect urban supply systems to the Water Grid. For
example, the $280 million Goldfields Superpipe, a major initiative to
connect the Bendigo and Ballarat supply systems to the Goulburn
system, is under construction. The section of this pipeline (shown as
* on Figure 4.3) that connects the Waranga Western Channel to the
existing pipeline from Lake Eppalock to Bendigo’s Sandhurst Reservoir,
is now complete.
84
CHAPTER 4
The Goldfields Superpipe will enable Bendigo and Ballarat to purchase
water from willing sellers in the Goulburn system. The transfer of water
will secure supplies for Ballarat and Bendigo for the next 50 years,
ensuring secure supplies in the face of climate change and population
growth. It will have the capacity to deliver up to 20 GL a year to
Bendigo and up to 18 GL of water a year to Ballarat. The project has
been fast tracked so that Bendigo received additional water supplies
by the end of 2007, and Ballarat will be connected by mid-2008.
The Sugarloaf Pipeline is a 70 kilometre pipeline that will link Melbourne
to the Goulburn River. From 2010, it will transfer one-third of the
water savings obtained through the first stage of the Food Bowl
Modernisation Project to Melbourne.
Moving forward
The Government is investigating the feasibility of building a GoulburnMurray interconnector, which would enable water to bypass the
Barmah Choke. The Barmah Choke is a narrow section of the River
Murray near the town of Barmah. The Choke limits the volume of
water that can be moved along the river to supply peak demands
downstream of the Choke. This impacts on irrigation and urban uses
downstream as well as on water trade and is exacerbated during
drought.
A Murray-Goulburn interconnector would allow water from the Murray
Valley irrigation district to be used within the Goulburn system. It would
enable the interconnection of the Murray-Darling Basin systems: the
Goulburn system (1,900 GL), the Victorian Murray system (1,600
GL) and the New South Wales Murray system (2,000 GL). Key
considerations include ensuring that its operation would have no
adverse environmental impact on the iconic Barmah-Millewa forest and
the connecting river systems, and that it would not compromise the
activities of downstream users through changed operating rules.
4
Figure 4.3 Interconnections within the Northern Region
Another small interconnection (2.5 km) being explored is from the
Waranga Western Channel to the Campaspe Irrigation District, via the
Campaspe no. 2 Channel. This would enable access to supplies in the
Goulburn system, where a much larger entitlement is available to be
bought and sold.
There are a range of proposals to further connect urban supply
systems to the northern Victoria Water Grid. Goulburn Valley Water is
proposing a pipeline and ancillary works to supply Broadford from the
Goulburn River. If the project goes ahead, it will be built by 2010 and
will supply an extra 0.5 GL a year to Broadford. In 2008, Coliban Water
will begin to build a pipeline from Bendigo to Bridgewater/Inglewood
to reduce seepage and evaporation losses from Bridgewater service
basins and the water treatment process. North East Water is also
planning to build a pipeline from Wangaratta to Glenrowan (0.1 GL
per year) to allow decommissioning of a water treatment plant, and a
pipeline from Barnawartha to Chiltern (0.4 GL per year) as a back-up
supply.
Key considerations
Any changes in operating rules associated with further connecting
supply systems should attempt to improve, or at least maintain,
the condition of the environment and have no negative impact on
downstream users.
There may be concern that further expansion of the Water Grid could
pave the way for water supplies to move to urban use, negatively
impacting on irrigation production. However, this impact is likely to
be minimal given the small proportion of water (less than five per
cent) used by the urban sector in the Northern Region. As part of an
integrated approach to securing supplies, urban water corporations
will not be relying on the purchase and transfer of entitlements. It will
be necessary for them to implement conservation programs to reduce
their demand, and they will be encouraged to invest in recycling
opportunities wherever practicable.
Summary
Interconnecting supply systems provides greater flexibility to ensure
water can be supplied where and when it is needed, and to ensure that
water can move from low to high value uses. There are many options
at a local and regional scale to further develop Victoria’s Water Grid.
These proposals should consider any impacts on other water users
and the environment.
CHAPTER 4
85
4
New and alternative sources of water
Rural users
Urban users
Environment
Individual
System
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Overview and key challenges
There is much community discussion about the need for accessing ‘new water’ by upgrading or building new dams. However, new dams do
not generate new water but rather take water from downstream irrigators and seriously impact on the health of already stressed rivers. Under
the Murray-Darling Basin Cap, any increased consumptive harvesting would need to be offset through equivalent reductions in other parts of the
Basin.
Another source of new water is groundwater, which may assist during drought periods but recharge of aquifers must be sustainable in the long
term. In other areas, groundwater use is limited by high salinity levels. Both groundwater and alternative sources, such as recycled water, could
help meet local needs. However, both sources are already heavily used and together represent only about 10 per cent of the available water
resource in the Northern Region. Additional use of these water sources will not be sufficient to supplement the expected significant decrease in
surface water availability associated with climate change.
Surface water and increased storage capacity
Groundwater
Many large dams have been built in Victoria over the past 150 years to
supply water for towns, industry and irrigation. Some 21 storages of 10
GL or more have been built in the Northern Region, totalling more than
12,000 GL of storage capacity.
Groundwater is used for stock and domestic purposes throughout
the Northern Region and supports a range of groundwater-dependent
ecosystems. Importantly, groundwater resources can be an effective
contingency for drought response as significant volumes can be
provided in the short term, if the time between droughts allows
sufficient recharge to ensure groundwater levels remain stable (see
Chapter 3). This recharge is critical to ensuring there are no negative
impacts on nearby groundwater users and groundwater-dependent
ecosystems (such as wetlands).
The past 10 years of drought have seen the levels of these reservoirs
drop. This reveals that there is a significant risk in relying almost solely
on water supplied from rivers and reservoirs. It is expected that climate
change will significantly reduce the volume of run-off available to store
in reservoirs.
The Government acknowledges that some members of the community
have suggested that new dams should be built in northern Victoria.
New dams are not the solution to reduced water availability. The
Government does not support the construction of new on-stream
storages for the following reasons:
a)
New dams do not create new water. They take water from rivers
and downstream irrigators.
b) The amount of water that can be diverted from the region’s rivers
(to be stored in reservoirs) is determined by the Murray-Darling
Basin Cap (see Chapter 2). Under this Cap, any increased
consumptive harvesting associated with upgraded or new dams
would need to be offset through equivalent reductions in other
parts of the Basin.
c)
The most cost-effective and reliable storages have already been
built. It would take large investments to create new dams.
d) New dams would seriously impact on the health of rivers and
wetlands, many of which are already stressed.
e)
86
Expanding the Water Grid (interconnecting supply systems)
reduces the need for increased storage capacity, by improving the
movement of water to where and when it is needed.
CHAPTER 4
In some areas, there may be limited opportunities to further utilise
groundwater resources on a more ongoing or permanent basis. In
exploring these opportunities, consideration must be given to the longterm recharge rates to ensure groundwater levels remain stable (see
Chapter 3). In other areas, groundwater levels are lowered by pumping
to reduce the impacts of salinity. In these cases, the quality of the
groundwater is generally not suitable for use, although in some cases
the quality can be improved when mixed with high quality surface
water.
The Government has committed to developing and implementing an
improved policy framework for groundwater management in Victoria.
The aim of groundwater reform is to improve our understanding of
groundwater, by updating maps, records and models detailing the
occurrence and usage of groundwater. This will assist management
planning, and improve our understanding of issues such as
groundwater interaction with surface systems, land use impacts
and future impacts of climate change. This will involve extending the
allocation framework, streamlining planning and licensing processes
and trading options for groundwater. The groundwater reform process
will inform the Draft Strategy.
4
Alternative sources of water
Alternative sources include irrigation drainage water, recycled water
and stormwater. Chapter 2 outlines how these sources are used in the
Northern Region. In addition, household greywater can be stored and
treated for non-drinking purposes around the home.
Using alternative sources that are ‘fit for purpose’ (that is, of an
appropriate quality for its intended use) can help to reduce our reliance
on water from rivers and reservoirs. In light of the expected scarcity
of traditional water sources as a result of climate change, further
opportunities to utilise alternative sources should continue to be
explored by water corporations. These should be implemented where
cost-effective and practicable. While 100 per cent of recycled water
from many wastewater treatment plants is already being reused, high
value uses of alternative sources should be encouraged over low
value uses.
When considering alternative supply sources, a key objective of the
Government is to ensure that there are no adverse environmental or
public health effects.
Summary
There is a significant risk in relying on an increase in the number of
storages to provide all our water needs. The Northern Region's current
storages are in the most cost effective and reliable areas and any new
large dams would require large investment, take water from rivers
and downstream users and not guarantee water availability. Other
sources of water will contribute to meeting regional needs, including
groundwater, recycled household water, irrigation drainage and
stormwater.
Case study: Upgrade of the Bendigo Water
Reclamation Plant
Coliban Water has recently completed a project to pump high
quality recycled water from the Bendigo Water Reclamation Plant
(at Epsom) to Spring Gully Reservoir to enhance future security of
supply for the Bendigo area.
The project will substitute 4 GL of potable water demand with
recycled water every year for use in public gardens and sporting
facilities, irrigation, and potential environmental flows in the
Campaspe River.
Woodland Grove, Wodonga
Another alternative source is irrigation drainage water. However, as
farms become more efficient to cope with reduced water availability, the
amount of drainage water discharged from farms is likely to decrease.
While drainage water is currently reused on an opportunistic basis
by some irrigators through individual agreements (the Government
encourages this for salinity management purposes), the volume will be
reduced and it will become a less reliable resource in future.
Greywater is household water from showers, dishwashers and washing
machines. Greywater systems can range from low-cost pipe diverters
for watering the garden to advanced greywater treatment systems
that could provide water for toilet flushing and the laundry. Advanced
greywater treatment systems can be costly and it may be more costeffective to treat the greywater at wastewater treatment plants for
reuse locally.
CHAPTER 4
87
5
Having your say
This Discussion Paper aims to inform the Northern Region community on water
resource management, and invites input into how water resources can be planned,
managed and delivered for the future.
Submissions can be guided by, but not restricted to, the questions set out in Chapter 4. Some general
questions which may also help to guide your submission include:
• Considering the information presented in this Discussion Paper, how would you like to see the Government
plan for the future?
• Are there any additional options that the Northern Region should be looking at in order to deal with
the challenges presented?
• What does a successful future look like in the Northern Region – what is the most important action we could
all take to secure the region’s future?
There is no set structure for submissions. They may range from a
short letter outlining your views to a much more substantial document
covering a range of issues. Submissions can be made in electronic
or printed format. The electronic version should be a Microsoft Word
Document (.doc) or other text document (.txt, .rft).
All tracking changes, editing marks, hidden text and internal links
should be removed from submissions before sending them to DSE.
Large logos, decorative graphics or photos should be removed or kept
to a minimum in order to keep the file sizes as small as possible.
You need to know
• The information you provide in your submission, or any other
response, will be used by the Department of Sustainability and
Environment only in the development of this Sustainable Water
Strategy. However it may be disclosed to review panels and other
relevant agencies as part of the overall consultation process.
• All submissions will be treated as public documents and will also
be published on the internet for public access.
Please make your submission by 5pm on 17th March 2008
by post or email to:
• All addresses, phone numbers and email details will be removed
before submissions are published on the internet. Formal
requests for confidentiality will be honoured; however Freedom of
Information access requirements will apply to submissions treated
as confidential.
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Attention: Sustainable Water Strategies branch, Office of Water
PO Box 500
East Melbourne VIC 3002
• If you wish to access information in your submission once it
is lodged with the Department you may make a request by
contacting the Administrative Support Officer of the Sustainable
Water Strategies branch at the above address.
How to make a submission
Email: [email protected]
(if emailing please supply address details)
88
CHAPTER 5
5
Maryborough Railway Station
Next steps
After consideration of all submissions, the Government will develop
a draft Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy, due for release
in mid-2008. There will be a further opportunity to comment on this
Draft Strategy. A final Sustainable Water Strategy for the region will be
released in early 2009.
Further information
You can get more information about the Northern Region Sustainable
Water Strategy from the Department of Sustainability and
Environment’s customer service centre on 136 186 or visit the website
at www.dse.vic.gov.au
Information regarding local water resource planning, including water
supply demand strategies, is available directly from water corporations:
Goulburn-Murray Water
(03) 5833 5500
www.g-mwater.com.au
Lower Murray Water
(03) 5051 3400
www.srwa.org.au
Coliban Water
1300 363 200
www.coliban.com.au
(03) 5832 0400
www.gvwater.vic.gov.au
(03) 5320 3100
www.chw.net.au
North East Water
1300 361 622
www.nerwa.vic.gov.au
First Mildura Irrigation Trust (FMIT)
(03) 5023 8315
www.fmit.com.au
Information regarding regional river health strategies is available from
catchment management authorities:
Mallee Catchment Management Authority
(03) 5051 4377
www.malleecma.vic.gov.au
North Central Catchment Management Authority
(03) 5448 7124
www.nccma.vic.gov.au
Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority
(03) 5820 1100
www.gbcma.vic.gov.au
North East Catchment Management Authority
(02) 6043 7600
www.necma.vic.gov.au
Information regarding planning and management in the Murray-Darling
Basin is available from:
Murray Darling Basin Commission
(02) 6279 0100
www.mdbc.gov.au
CHAPTER 5
89
A
Appendix 1: Water resource
planning in Victoria
The following figure demonstrates the major water resource planning tools used in Victoria.
Water Resources
Our Water Our Future & Next Stage of the Government’s plan
15 year resource assessments
Sustainable water strategies
Streamflow management plans
Groundwater management plans
90
APPENDIX 1
Environment
Consumptive
Regional catchment strategies
Regional river health strategies
Regional management plans
Drought response plans
Environmental flow studies
Annual watering plans
Water supply-demand strategies
Water plans
Corporate plans
Drought response plans
Project business cases
Appendix 2:
Historical reliability of water shares
A2
Modelling of our water resources has increased our understanding
of reliability of supply, and these models have continued to be refined
over time. Figures A2.1 and A2.2 show how our understanding of
reliability has changed over time for each the major regulated systems
in the Northern Region.
2) Pre-unbundling:
The four major stages of modelling are:
The reliability of supply at 1 July 2007 following the unbundling
of water rights (see Chapter 2), assuming current use of entitlements.
1) Bulk entitlements (BE):
The reliability of supply when bulk entitlements were first developed for:
- Murray River: 1999
- Loddon River: 2005
- Campaspe River: 2000
- Goulburn River: 1995
- Broken River: 2004.
The reliability of supply at 30 June 2007, including additional
years of data and minor refinements compared to Stage 1.
3) Post-unbundling:
4) Full utilisation of entitlements:
The reliability of supply at 1 July 2007 following the unbundling of
water rights, assuming full use of entitlements (see Chapter 2). This
represents the base case scenario used in Chapter 3 and Appendix 2.
The full use of entitlements actually assumes 95 per cent use
on average. The effect of full use on reliability varies from system
to system, and depends mainly on the volume of high-reliability
entitlements that are not currently fully used.
APPENDIX 2
91
A
Appendix 2:
Figure A2.1
River System
Murray
Loddon
Campaspe
Goulburn
Broken
92
APPENDIX 2
Scenarios
Post unbundling
Bulk Entitlement
Pre unbundling
Post unbundling
– when struck
(June 30th 2007)
(July 1st 2007)
No. of years with
100% allocations
97 out of 100
98 out of 100
99 out of 100
99 out of 100
Lowest allocation
60%
73%
95%
88%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
95 out of 100
94 out of 100
95 out of 100
95 out of 100
Lowest allocation
53%
60%
58%
47%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
99 out of 100
99 out of 100
99 out of 100
98 out of 100
Lowest allocation
100%
71%
72%
53%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
97 out of 100
97 out of 100
97 out of 100
97 out of 100
Lowest allocation
75%
74%
64%
57%
No. of years with
0% allocations
-
-
-
-
No. of years with
100% allocations
80 out of 100
90 out of 100
90 out of 100
N/A
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
N/A
No. of years with
0% allocations
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
<5 out of 100
N/A
Indicator
Full utilisation
(July 1st 2007)
A2
Reliability curve (High-reliability):
All Scenarios
APPENDIX 2
93
A
Appendix 2:
Figure A2.2
River System
Murray
Loddon1
Campaspe3
Goulburn
Broken2
1)
2)
3)
94
Scenarios
Indicator
Bulk Entitlement
Pre unbundling
Post unbundling
Post unbundling - full
– when struck
(June 30th 2007)
(July 1st 2007)
utilisation (July 1st 2007)
No. of years with
100% allocations
61 out of 100
67 out of 100
66 out of 100
39 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
14 out of 100
15 out of 100
17 out of 100
36 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
40 out of 100
46 out of 100
44 out of 100
27 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
29 out of 100
24 out of 100
21 out of 100
21 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
73 out of 100
67 out of 100
81 out of 100
75 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
9 out of 100
12 out of 100
5 out of 100
9 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
57 out of 100
47 out of 100
44 out of 100
27 out of 100
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
0%
No. of years with
0% allocations
13 out of 100
19 out of 100
20 out of 100
20 out of 100
No. of years with
100% allocations
66 out of 100
86 out of 100
85 out of 100
N/A
Lowest allocation
0%
0%
0%
N/A
No. of years with
0% allocations
20 out of 100
9 out of 100
9 out of 100
N/A
Maximum sales/low-reliability water share allocation pre unbundling is 90% of water right in the Loddon system
Maximum sales/low-reliability water share allocation pre unbundling is 70% of water right in the Broken system
Maximum sales/low-reliability water share allocation pre unbundling is 120% of water right in the Campaspe system
APPENDIX 2
A2
Reliability curve (Low-reliability):
All Scenarios
APPENDIX 2
95
A
Appendix 3 - Impact of future water availability
scenarios on reliability of supply and environmental
flows in Northern Region river systems
Impact of climate change on the major
systems in the Northern Region
The future water availability scenarios used within this Discussion
Paper include:
•
Base case – long-term average, based on the historic
record from 1891
•
Scenario A – based on the CSIRO low climate change predictions
•
Scenario B – based on the CSIRO medium
climate change predictions
•
Scenario C – based on the CSIRO high climate change predictions
•
Scenario D – based on a continuation of the low inflows
of the past 10 years (ie. average reduction in streamflows
over the past 10 years).
This Discussion Paper examines only Scenarios B and D in close
detail. By looking at Scenario D we can develop a good understanding
of the impacts of the past 10 years and be prepared for the ‘worst
case’ scenario. However, the ‘worst case scenario’ may or may not
eventuate, so the Discussion Paper also looks at an intermediate
scenario in detail (Scenario B) and compares these to the current
situation (base case). In this way, we can be prepared for a range
of possible futures.
Forecasts of the future water availability scenarios are presented for
the Murray, Goulburn, Loddon, Campaspe, Broken and Ovens
systems. Forecasts for the Kiewa system are not available. The
modelling accounts for the ‘unbundling’ of water entitlements (see
Chapter 2), trade to July 2007 in the Goulburn and Murray systems,
and all Government announcements for the Living Murray Initiative and
the Snowy River to July 2007. It also assumes full use of entitlements
in all major regulated systems (Murray, Goulburn, Loddon and
Campaspe) and current use in the Broken system.
Goulburn System
By 2055, water availability in the Goulburn system could be reduced
by 7 per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as 43
per cent under a high climate change scenario (see Figure A3.1). If the
past 10 years of low inflows continued, it would equal an immediate
reduction of 38 per cent, compared with the long-term average.
Figure A3.1 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Goulburn system over 50 years
(compared with the long-term average)
96
APPENDIX 3
A3
The following figures show the impact of these reductions on seasonal
allocations for high- and low-reliability water shares for the Goulburn
system. The blue bars represent the allocations for each year of
allocations that would have been made with Scenario B water availability
(Figures A3.2 and A3.3) – medium climate change) and Scenario D water
availability (Figures A3.4 and A3.5 – continuation of past 10 years). See
Chapter 3, Figures 3.11 and 3.12 for additional detail.
Figure A3.2 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
Figure A3.3 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
APPENDIX 3
97
A
flows in major regulated river systems
Figure A3.4 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
Figure A3.5 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Goulburn
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Goulburn system
98
APPENDIX 3
A3
Under medium climate change or a continuation of the past 10 years,
water availability for consumptive use in the Goulburn system could be
reduced by 15 per cent by 2055 or an immediate reduction of 23 per
cent (see Figure A3.6 and A3.7). However the impact can vary
quite substantially from year to year.
Figure A3.6 Scenario B (at 2055)*- Annual diversions for the Goulburn system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Goulburn system
Figure A3.7 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Goulburn system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Goulburn system
APPENDIX 3
99
A
water availability for environmental flows in the Goulburn system could
be reduced by 39 per cent by 2055 or an immediate reduction of 55
per cent (see Figure A3.8 and A3.9). However the impact
can vary quite substantially from year to year.
Figure A3.8 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Environmental flows for the Goulburn system (flow to Murray at McCoys Bridge)
*Forecast impact of medium climate change on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Goulburn system
Figure A3.9 Scenario D (impact from now)*- Environmental flows for the Goulburn system (flow to Murray at McCoys Bridge)
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Goulburn system
100
APPENDIX 3
A3
Broken System
By 2055, water availability in the Broken system could be reduced by
7 per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as 51 per
cent under a high climate change scenario (see Figure A3.10).
If the past 10 years of low inflows continued, it would equal
an immediate reduction of 48 per cent, compared with the
long-term average.
Figure A3.10 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Broken system over 50 years
allocations for the high- and low-reliability water shares for the Broken
allocations that would have been made with Scenario B water availability
(Figures A3.11 and A3.12 – medium climate change) and Scenario D
water availability (Figures A3.13 and A3.14 – continuation of past 10
years). See Chapter 3, Figures 3.11 and 3.12 for additional detail.
Figure A3.11 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Broken system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Broken system
APPENDIX 3
101
A
Figure A3.12 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Broken system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Broken system
Figure A3.13 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Broken system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Broken system
102
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.14 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Broken system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Broken system
water availability for consumptive use in the Broken system could be
reduced by two per cent by 2055 or an immediate reduction of seven
per cent (see Figure A3.15 and A3.16). However the impact
Figure A3.15 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Annual diversions for the Broken system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Broken system
APPENDIX 3
103
A
Figure A3.16 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Broken system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Broken system
water availability for environmental flows in the Broken system could be
cent (see Figures A3.17 and A3.18). However the impact
Figure A3.17 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Environmental flows for the Broken system (Broken system flow at Orrvale)
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Broken system
104
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.18 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Environmental flows for the Broken system (Broken system flow at Orrvale)
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Broken system.
APPENDIX 3
105
A
Loddon System
By 2055, water availability in the Loddon system could be reduced by
10 per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as 58
per cent under a high climate change scenario (see Figure A3.19).
If the past 10 years of low inflows continued, it would equal
an immediate reduction of 72 per cent, compared with the
long-term average.
Figure A3.19 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Loddon system over 50 years
allocations for the high- and low-reliability water shares for the Loddon
the historic record (base case scenario). The red dots represent
the allocations that would have been made with Scenario B water
availability (Figures A3.20 and A3.21 – medium climate change) and
Scenario D (Figures A3.22 and A3.23 – continuation of past 10 years).
See Chapter 3, Figures 3.11 and 3.12 for additional detail.
Figure A3.20 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
106
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.21 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
Figure A3.22 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of low inflows of the past 10 years in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
APPENDIX 3
107
A
Figure A3.23 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Loddon
*Forecast impact of a continuation of low inflows of the past 10 years in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Loddon system
water availability for consumptive use in the Loddon system could be
cent (see Figures A3.24 and A3.25). However the impact
Figure A3.24 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Annual diversion for the Loddon system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Loddon system
108
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.25 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Loddon system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Loddon system
water availability for environmental flows in the Loddon system could
per cent (see Figures A3.26 and A3.27). However the impact
Figure A3.26 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Environmental flows for the Loddon system (flow downstream of Loddon Weir)
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Loddon system
APPENDIX 3
109
A
Figure A3.27 Scenario D (impact from now)*- Environmental flows for the Loddon system (flow downstream of Loddon Weir)
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Loddon system
110
APPENDIX 3
A3
Campaspe System
By 2055, water availability in the Campaspe system could be reduced
by 9 per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as 54
per cent under a high climate change scenario (see Figure A3.28). If the
Figures 3.29 to 3.32 show the impact of these reductions on
seasonal allocations for the high- and low-reliability water shares for
the Campaspe system. The blue bars represent the allocations for
each year of the historic record (base case scenario). The red dots
represent the allocations that would have been made with Scenario
B water availability (see Figures A3.29 and A3.30 – medium climate
change) and Scenario D water availability (Figures A3.31 and A3.32
– continuation of past 10 years). See Chapter 3, Figures 3.11 and
3.12 for additional detail.
Figure A3.28 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Campaspe system over 50 years
APPENDIX 3
111
A
Figure A3.29 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
Figure A3.30 Scenario B (at 2055)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
112
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.31 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of high-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for high-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
Figure A3.32 Scenario D (impact from now)* – February allocation of low-reliability water shares on the Campaspe
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on allocations for low-reliability water shares on the Campaspe system
APPENDIX 3
113
A
water availability for consumptive use in the Campaspe system could
per cent (see Figures A3.33 and A3.34). However the impact
Figure A3.33 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Annual diversion for the Campaspe system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Campaspe system
Figure A3.34 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Campaspe system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared to the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Campaspe system
114
APPENDIX 3
A3
water availability for environmental flows in the Campaspe system
could be reduced by 48 per cent by 2055 or an immediate reduction of
84 per cent (see Figures A3.35 and A3.36). However the impact
Figure A3.35 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Environmental flows for the Campaspe system (flow at Echuca – Murray confluence)
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Campaspe system
Figure A3.36 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Environmental flows for the Campaspe system (flow at Echuca – Murray confluence)
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Campaspe system
APPENDIX 3
115
A
Ovens System
By 2055, water availability in the Ovens system could be reduced by
6 per cent under a low climate change scenario, or as much as 41 per
cent under a high climate change scenario (see Figure A3.37). If the
water availability for consumptive use in the Ovens system could be
reduced by 1.5 per cent by 2055 or there could be an immediate
reduction of 2.1 per cent (see Figures A3.38 and A3.39). However
the impact can vary quite substantially from year to year.
Figure A3.37 Scenarios A to D – Potential reduction in total inflows for the Ovens system over 50 years
116
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.38 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Annual diversion for the Ovens system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Ovens system
Figure A3.39 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Ovens system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Ovens system
APPENDIX 3
117
A
water availability for environmental flows in the Ovens system could
be reduced by 22 per cent by 2055, or there could be an immediate
reduction of 31 per cent (see Figures A3.40 and A3.41). However the
impact can vary quite substantially from year to year.
Figure A3.40 Scenario B (at 2055)* - Environmental flows for the Ovens system (flow upstream from Lake Mulwala)
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Ovens system
118
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.41 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Environmental flows for the Ovens system (flow upstream from Lake Mulwala)
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for environmental flows in the Ovens system
APPENDIX 3
119
A
Murray System
Chapter 3 contains data showing the forecast impacts of future water
availability scenarios on reliability of supply and environmental flows in
the Murray system. Figures A3.42 and A3.43 show the forecast impact
on water available for consumptive use.
water availability for consumptive use in the Murray system could be
reduced by six per cent by 2055 or an immediate reduction of 10 per
cent. However the impact can vary quite substantially from year to year.
The blue bars represent the allocations for each year of the historic
record (base case scenario). The red dots represent the allocations
that would have been made with Scenario B water availability
(Figure A3.42 – medium climate change) and Scenario D water
availability (Figure A3.43 – continuation of past 10 years).
Figure A3.42 Scenario B (at 2055)*- Annual diversions for the Murray system
*Forecast impact of medium climate change in 2055 (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Murray system
120
APPENDIX 3
A3
Figure A3.43 Scenario D (impact from now)* - Annual diversions for the Murray system
*Forecast impact of a continuation of the low inflows of the past 10 years (compared with the long-term average) on the availability of water for consumptive use in the Murray system
APPENDIX 3
121
A
Appendix 4: Impact of future water
availability scenarios on urban supplies
Table A4.1 shows how urban systems could be impacted by climate
change under Scenario B (medium climate change) and Scenario D (a
continuation of low inflow of the past 10 years), and how much water
will be provided by urban water supply demand strategy actions to
address supply shortfalls.
Deficits are highlighted in red or dark peach. They indicate that
from this particular year in the given system and scenario, a higher
frequency of water restrictions or a higher level of water restrictions will
be necessary to ensure security of supply, even if water supply demand
actions are implemented. It does not indicate that a system will run out
of water.
Table A4.1 Scenarios B and D – surplus or deficit in water availability for urban systems and major actions being
undertaken by water corporations
Year
Surplus or deficit
Surplus or deficit in
in water availability
water availability (GL)
(GL) under Scenario
under Scenario B- medium
D – continuation of low
climate change
inflows of the past 10 years
(assumes implementation
of WSDS actions)
of WSDS actions)
Water provided by WSDS
actions (GL)
Major action being taken
to meet supply deficit
North East Water
Murray River urban supply system - includes Bellbridge, Corryong, Tallangatta, Wahgunyah, Walwa, Wodonga and Yarrawonga
Average yield: 11.898 GL/year
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.040
-4.721
1.841
-3.081
1.327
-3.056
0.339
-2.830
Unrestricted annual demand:10.622 GL/year
Pipeline from Barnawartha
0
to Chiltern. Purchase of
3.291
water entitlements on the
6.369
market.
9.293
Ovens/King River urban supply system* - includes Bundalong, Glenrowan, Moyhu, Oxley, Springhurst, Wangaratta and Whitfield
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.014
-0.069
1.152
1.002
1.526
0.934
0.811
0.672
Unrestricted annual demand: 5.198 GL/year
Pipeline from Wangaratta
0.011
to Glenrowan. Purchase of
1.196
1.609
market.
1.716
Upper Ovens River urban supply system - includes Bright, Harrietville and Myrtleford
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.177
-0.555
0.723
0.313
0.416
0.061
0.003
-0.111
Unrestricted annual demand: 1.876 GL/year
Construction of Bright/
0
Porepunkah off-stream
1.080
storage.
1.201
1.342
Broken River urban supply system - includes Benalla
2006
2015
2030
2055
Unrestricted demand: 1.817 GL/year
-0.124
-0.915
0
1.309
0.569
1.794
0.695
0.096
1.879
0.049
-0.263
2.000
Diversion from Broken
River, purchase of water
entitlements on the
market.
*Figures not available for Upper Murray, Kiewa and Dartmouth urban supply systems.
122
APPENDIX 4
A4
Year
Surplus or deficit
(GL) under Scenario
climate change
of WSDS actions)
of WSDS actions)
actions (GL)
Maryborough urban supply system – including Adelaide Lead, Bet Bet, Carisbrook, Havelock, Talbot, and surrounding communities
2006
2015
2030
-0.010
0.900
0.300
1.370
0.550
1.630
1.290
0.630
1.680
2055
1.020
0.690
1.690
Commission a new
groundwater supply,
purchase of additional water
entitlements on the market,
and use of fit-for-purpose
recycled water.
Daylesford urban supply system – including Hepburn Springs, Musk, Sailors Hill and Shepherds Flat
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.060
-0.280
0
0.280
0.090
0.370
0.480
0.350
0.670
0.320
0.320
0.670
Use of groundwater supply
following licence approval.
Clunes urban supply system – including some outlying properties
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.070
-0.040
0
0.190
0.090
0.120
0.140
0.080
0.120
0.040
0.404
0.120
Purchase of additional
groundwater licence volume.
Waubra urban supply system – including some outlying properties
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.062
0.032
0.003
0.059
0.033
0.003
0.052
0.034
0.003
0.032
0.032
0.003
Leakage prevention.
Lexton urban supply system – including some outlying properties
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.014
0.001
0.000
0.016
0.005
0.003
0.042
0.034
0.033
0.031
0.031
0.033
Leakage prevention
(commited option), and
investigate groundwater
(future option).
Dean urban supply system – including some outlying properties
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.011
0.002
0.000
0.021
0.013
0.001
0.018
0.013
0.001
0.013
0.013
0.002
Leakage prevention.
APPENDIX 4
123
A
Year
availability scenarios on urban supplies
Surplus or deficit
(GL) under Scenario
climate change
of WSDS actions)
of WSDS actions)
actions (GL)
Coliban Water
Coliban urban supply system – including Bendigo, Castlemaine, Heathcote, Kyneton
2006
2015
2030
-1.000
-22.000
0
31.000
8.500
36.000
23.400
4.000
36.000
2055
8.000
-4.000
36.000
Construction of the
Colbinabbin to Bendigo
section of the Goldfields
Superpipe.Construction of
the Epsom – Spring Gully
Recycled Water Project.
Murray River urban supply system – includes Cohuna, Echuca, Gunbower and Leitchville
2006
2015
2030
2055
Unrestricted demand: -6.1 GL/year
0
0
0
4.500
1.500
5.000
3.000
0
5.000
4.500
2.000
10.000
Purchase of additional water
entitlements on the market.
Goulburn River urban supply system – includes Boort, Pyramid Hill, Rochester and other smaller communities
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.300
0
0
0.500
0.100
0.400
0.800
0.400
1.000
0.300
-0.100
1.000
Loddon River urban supply system – includes Bridgewater, Dunolly, Inglewood and other smaller communities
2006
2015
2030
2055
Unrestricted demand: 0.61GL/year
0.200
-0.300
0
0.350
-0.100
0.200
0.400
0
0.300
0.460
0.200
0.500
System interconnections for
Bridgewater and Inglewood
to Bendigo.
Campaspe River urban supply system – includes Axedale and Goornong
2006
2015
2030
2055
0
0
0
0.100
0
0.100
0
0
0.100
0
0
0.100
Groundwater supply system – includes Elmore and Trentham
Average yield: 0.47 GL/year.
2006
2015
2030
2055
124
APPENDIX 4
0
0
0
0.100
-0.100
0
0.150
0
0.100
0
0
0.100
A4
Year
Surplus or deficit
(GL) under Scenario
climate change
of WSDS actions)
of WSDS actions)
actions (GL)
Goulburn–Broken River urban supply system – includes Mooroopna, Nagambie, Seymour and Shepparton
2006
2015
2030
2055
12.000
-0.300
0
8.800
-2.100
0.400
4.600
-4.400
1.700
0
-5.300
6.500
Water conservation.
market.
Murray River urban supply system – includes Barmah
2006
2015
2030
2055
0.700
-0.600
0
0
-0.700
0.300
0
-0.400
1.100
0
-0.100
2.300
Water conservation.
market.
Sunday Creek urban supply system – includes Broadford and Kilmore
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.010
Not calculated
0
0
Not calculated
0.500
1.600
Not calculated
2.700
0.400
Not calculated
2.600
Water conservation.
Construction of the Goulburn
River to Broadford pipeline.
Delatite River urban supply system – includes Mansfield
2006
2015
2030
2055
-0.300
Not calculated
0
0.100
Not calculated
0.600
0.400
Not calculated
1.100
0
Not calculated
1.000
Water conservation.
Construction of an off-stream
raw water storage.
Lower Murray Water
Lower Murray Water urban supply system – includes all communities from Koondrook to Mildura
2006
2015
2030
2055
1.800
-1.600
3.600
1.100
6.500
2.300
1.100
10.500
0.800
2.000
17.800
1.200
APPENDIX 4
125
A
availability scenarios on environmental
shortfalls and flooding events
Table A5.1 shows the change in environmental shortfalls for priority river reaches in the region (see the “Over-allocation” section of Chapter 2)
under a range of future water availability scenarios.
Figure A5.1 Estimated amount of water required to meet environmental flow recommendations for major rivers in the
Northern Region
River system and reach
Base case
flows required to meet
Additional environmen- Additional environmen- Additional environmen-
recommendations
tal flows needed to
(average GL/yr)1
meet recommendations meet recommendations meet recommendations
(average GL)
Goulburn River Loch Garry to Muray2
Scenario D
Scenario B
Total environmental
(average GL/yr)
(average GL/yr)
137.1-199.63
21.1 - 71.8
36.6 - 119.9
49.7 - 153.7
9.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
20.2
8.8
13.9
18.2
74.9
13.3
28.9
53.7
13.3
6.6
8.9
10.2
17.8
2.3
3.9
10.0
Lower Broken Creek
Ovens River
Broken River Casey’s weir to Goulburn4
Campaspe River above Lake Eppalock5
Campaspe River Campaspe syphon to Murray5
Loddon River Tullaroop Reservoir to Lannecoorie6
Loddon River - below Loddon weir6
Notes:
1. Estimates have been calculated based on full use of consumptive entitlements and current operating and water harvesting rules including trade to date
2. Estimates for the Goulburn River are based on results for the years 1976 – 1999 inclusive. Estimates for the Goulburn River are provided for both the provision of minimum and maximum recommendations
(i.e. an annual flood of between 15,000 ML/day – 60,000 ML/day plus summer low flows of 610 ML/day).
3. The total environmental flows required to meet the recommendations for the Goulburn are based in part on inflows to Eildon, thus the volume will vary under each of the scenarios. The estimate shown
applies to the base case.
4. Averages for the Broken River are based on results for the years 1973 – 1997 inclusive.
5. Averages for the Campaspe River are based on results for the years 1892 – 2004 inclusive.
6. Averages for the Loddon River are based on results for the years 1976 – 1999 inclusive.
126
APPENDIX 5
A5
Figure A5.2 forecasts the frequency of floods at the Living Murray ‘icon
sites’ under a range of future water availability scenarios. These are
compared against the frequency of floods under current conditions
(ie. base case scenario) and natural conditions (ie. flows occurring
from 1891-1990 assuming no diversions for consumptive use). Only
ecologically significant floods which target key environmental objectives
are shown.
Colonial waterbirds, like egrets, herons and spoonbills, live for about
15 years. They need long floods across the floodplain to breed
successfully. For the population to survive, they need to breed
successfully at least once in their life, though two or three times is
better. As shown in Table A5.2, the period of time between effective
floods in the Barmah Forest under Scenarios B and D is 16 to 33
years. It is likely that these periods are too long for the birds to breed
within their lifespan and as a result the birds can be expected to
permanently leave these areas. Whether they can migrate to other
parts of Australia to breed depends on climate conditions elsewhere,
the size of resident populations in those areas, and the habits of the
species (some species remain loyal to a site).
The Murray Cod is an iconic fish species found along the Murray. While
not dependant on floods for spawning, the survival of young is greatly
enhanced following a long flood. To ensure ongoing maintenance of a
good Cod population, the minimum time between floods is 10 years,
though five to six is better. As an example, Table A5.2 shows the period
of time between effective floods in the Barmah Forest under Scenarios
B and D is 17 to 33 years. This will mean a very low rate of survival of
young Cod and hence a gradual loss of the populations.
The impact of reduced flooding on river red gums is discussed in the
“Impacts on the environment” section of Chapter 3.
Table A5.2 Changes to the frequency of significant flood events at Living Murray ‘icon sites’ under a range of water availability scenarios
Living Murray
Icon Site
Barmah
Effective flood event
to meet ecological
objectives
Minimum four month flood
(either >500 GL/month (AugNov) OR
>500 GL/month (Sep-Nov)
and >400 GL per month in
Dec) to target:
• Medium level flooding
• River red gums
• Moira grass
• Wetlands
• Anabranches
• Bird breeding
One month flood at >760
GL/month to target river red
gums forest
Gunbower
Two month flood at >556
GL/month to target:
• Anabranches
• Fringing river red gums
• Wetlands
One month at >900 GL/
month to target:
• River red gums forest
• Minimal black box
One month at >1,200 GL/
month to target:
• River red gums forest
• Black box forest
Indicator of flood
frequency
No. of years when flood
event occurs
Longest no. of years
between flood events
Natural
(No. of years
out of 101 years)
Base Case
(No. of years
out of 115 years)
Scenario B
Med Climate
Change
(No. of years out
of 115 years)
Scenario D
Continuation of
past 10 years low
inflows
(No. of years out of
115 years)
51
24
9
7
5,4,3
21,14,11
26,21,17
33,30,26
No. of years when flood
event occurs
between flood events
event occurs
79
45
17
15
2,2,2
11,10,6
22,10,13
22,20,14
92
52
32
19
2,1,1
10,8,5
1,11,9
13
80
44
22
11
2,2,2
11,11,9
13,12,11
22,20,16
62
28
10
6
4,4,3
12,11,9
37,22,16
38,26,17
event occurs
event occurs
APPENDIX 5
127
A
availability scenarios on environmental
shortfalls and flooding events
Table A5.2 (Continued) Changes to the frequency of significant flood events at Living Murray ‘icon sites’ under a range of water availability
scenarios
Living Murray
Icon Site
Hattah
Effective flood event
to meet ecological
objectives
Indicator of flood
frequency
Two months at >1,116 GL/
month to target:
• Lakes filled
• Small lignum
event occurs
month to target:
event occurs
• 60% of river red gum forest
• 60% of lignum
• 30% of black box
event occurs
month to target most river red
Lindsay Wallpolla
128
APPENDIX 5
gum and black box
Three months at >1,200
event occurs
GL/month to target:
• Anabranches
• Wetlands
Two months at >1,800 GL/
month to target:
• 50% of river red gums area
• 50% of lignum
event occurs
month to target:
• 80% of river red gums area
• 90% of lignum
event occurs
Natural
(No. of years out
of 101 years)
Base Case F405
(No. of years out
of 115 years)
Scenario B
Med Climate
Change
(No. of years out
of 115 years)
Scenario D
Continuation of
past 10 years low
inflows
(No. years out of
115 years)
59
38
22
6
5,4,3
11,11,9
12,12,12
26,24,17
69
30
10
4
4,3,3
12,11,11
22,20,17
38,30,26
49
119
6
3
5,5,5
20,12,11
26,24,17
38,31,17
84
18
4
2
2,2,2
22,20,14
38,30,26
49,38,26
61
11
2
1
5,5,4
23,22,16
49,38,26
65,49
38
5
1
0
11,7,7
37,30,26
65,49
115
A5
Icon site: Lindsay and Wallpolla Islands
APPENDIX 5
129
G
Glossary
Adaptive management Systematic process of continually improving
management policies and practices. This is done by learning from the
outcomes of operational programs, employing management programs
that are designed to compare selected policies and practices, and
evaluating alternatives about how the system is managed.
Afforestation The establishment of a forest by artificial methods, such
as planting and direct seeding, on land where a forest would not have
grown naturally.
Aquifer A rock, gravel or sand layer that holds water and through
which water can move.
Barmah Choke A natural geographical constriction of the Murray
River near the town of Barmah. The choke restricts the delivery of
irrigation and environmental water and there are plans to bypass the
choke to alleviate channel capacity constraints to enable more effective
delivery of water.
Baseflows The component of streamflow supplied by groundwater
discharge.
Bulk Entitlement (BE) The right to water held by water corporations
and other authorities defined in the Water Act 1989. The BE defines the
amount of water that an authority is entitled to from a river or storage,
and may include the rate at which it may be taken and the reliability of
the entitlement.
Carryover Allows entitlement holders like domestic and stock
customers, irrigators, urban water corporations and the environment
the ability to take unused water allocated or purchased from a current
season to the following season.
Catchment An area of land where run-off from rainfall goes into one
river system.
Catchment management authorities (CMAs) Catchment
Drainage water By-product of the distribution of irrigation water. Use
is licensed.
Drought response plan Used by urban water corporations
to manage water shortages and ensure compliance with water
restrictions.
EC units/level EC stands for electrical conductivity and is a measure
used to indicate the salinity levels in water.
Effluent Treated sewage that flows out of a sewage treatment plant.
Environmental flow regime The timing, frequency, duration and
magnitude of flows for the environment.
Environmental water reserve The share of water resources set
aside to maintain the environmental values of a water system.
EPA Victoria Environment Protection Authority Victoria.
EWR See environmental water reserve.
Floodplain Lands which are subject to overflow during floods. Often
valuable for their ecological assets.
Freshes The first seasonal ‘flush’ of water through a waterway.
Gigalitre (GL) One billion (1,000,000,000) litres.
Greywater Household water which has not been contaminated by
toilet discharge. Typically includes water from bathtubs, dishwashing
machines and clothes washing machines.
Groundwater All subsurface water, generally occupying the pores and
crevices of rock and soil.
management authorities are the government authorities established to
manage river health, regional and catchment planning, and waterway,
floodplain, salinity and water quality management.
Groundwater management area (GMA) Discrete area where
groundwater resources of a suitable quality for irrigation, commercial or
domestic and stock use are available or are expected to be available.
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation.
Groundwater management plans Created for water supply
Delivery share An entitlement to have water delivered to land in an
irrigation district and a share of the available water flow in a delivery
system. It is linked to land and stays with the property if the water share
is traded away.
Desalination Removing salt from water sources – normally for
drinking purposes.
130
Distribution losses Occur as a result of distributing irrigation
water. Causes include evaporation, seepage and leaks in irrigation
infrastructure.
GLOSSARY
protection areas that have been or are proposed to be proclaimed
under the Water Act 1989 to ensure equitable and sustainable use of
groundwater.
High-reliability water share Legally recognised, secure entitlement
to a defined share of water.
Low-reliability water share Legally recognised, secure entitlement
to a defined share of water. Available after there is enough water for
high-reliability water share allocations and reserves. Previously known
as sales water.
G
Megalitre (ML) One million (1,000,000) litres.
Permanent trade Transfer of a water share.
PCV or permissible consumptive volume The volume of water
permitted to be allocated in discrete groundwater management areas.
Previously called permissible annual volumes (PAVs).
Recycled water Water derived from sewerage systems or industry
processes that is treated to a standard appropriate for its intended use.
Regulated systems Systems where the flow of the river is regulated
through the operation of large dams or weirs.
Reliability of supply Represents the frequency with which water that
has been allocated under a water access entitlement is expected to be
able to be supplied in full.
Reservoir Natural or artificial dam or lake used for the storage and
regulation of water.
Residential use Water use in private housing.
River basin The land into which a river and its tributaries drain.
Run-off Precipitation or rainfall which flows from a catchment into
streams, lakes, rivers or reservoirs.
Salinity The total amount of water-soluble salts present in the soil or in
a stream.
Sewage Wastewater produced from household and industry.
Sewerage The pipes and plant that collect, remove, treat and dispose
of liquid urban waste.
Stormwater Runoff from urban areas.
Temporary trade Transfer of a seasonal allocation.
Termination fee One off payment made by a landowner as a
Unregulated system A river system where no major dams or weir
structures have been built to assist in the supply or extraction of water.
Water allocation The specific volume of water allocated to a water
resource access entitlement in a given season, defined according to
rules established in the relevant water plan.
Water corporations Government organisations charged with
supplying water to towns and cities across Victoria, for urban, industrial
and commercial use. They administer the diversion of water from
waterways and the extraction of groundwater. Formerly known as
water authorities.
Water market Market in which the trade of permanent and temporary
water is allowed under certain conditions.
Water plans Outline the services water corporations will deliver over a
three year regulatory period and the prices that they will charge.
Water right Previously rights to water held by irrigators. As a result
of ‘unbundling’, these have now been separated into a water share,
delivery share and water use licence.
Water share A water share is a legally recognised, secure share of
the water available to be taken from a water system. It can be traded
permanently or leased.
Water supply protection area (WSPA) An area declared under the
Water Act to protect the groundwater and/or surface water resources
in the area. Once an area has been declared, a water management
plan is prepared.
Water use licence Authorises the use of water on land for irrigation.
Wetlands Inland, standing, shallow bodies of water, which may be
permanent or temporary, fresh or saline.
Yield The quantity of water that a storage or aquifer produces.
condition of surrender of a delivery share.
Triple-bottom-line (TBL) Integrated assessment of environmental,
social and economic outcomes.
Unbundling Introduced on the 1st July 2007. Separated the
traditional entitlements of water rights in districts and take and use
licences on waterways into a water share, delivery share and a wateruse licence.
Unincorporated groundwater areas Areas with limited
groundwater resources which are not defined as groundwater
management areas and do not have a defined permissible
consumptive volume.
GLOSSARY
131
N
End Notes
1
Jones, R.N and Durack, P.J 2005, Estimating the Impacts
of Climate Change on Victoria’s Runoff using a Hydrological
Sensitivity Model. CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Melbourne.
2
Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Resource
Allocation Models, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
3
4
Allocation Models, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne
5
Department of Sustainability and Environment 2004, Victoria in
Future 2004, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
6
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2007, Census 2007, ABS, Canberra.
7
Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, State Water
Report 2005-2006, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
8
Council of Australian Governments’ Meeting 2004,
Intergovernmental agreement on a National Water Initiative,
Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
9
Murray Water Entitlement Committee 1997, Sharing the Murray,
Murray Darling Basin Commission, Canberra.
10 Murray Water Entitlement Committee 1997, Sharing the Murray,
11 Murray Water Entitlement Committee 1997, Sharing the Murray,
12 Murray Darling Basin Commission 2007, Review of Cap
Implementation 2005/06- report of the Independent Audit Group,
23 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006, Agricultural Commodities,
Australia, 2004-05, cat. no. 7121.0, A BS, Canberra.
24 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006, Water Account, Australia,
2004-05, cat. no. 4610.0, ABS, Canberra.
25 Urban Water Corporations 2005-06 Annual Reports.
26 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2006, Central
Region Sustainable Water Strategy, State Government of Victoria,
Melbourne.
27 Goulburn Valley Water 2007, Water Supply Demand Strategy
2007, GVW, Shepparton.
28 Urban Water Corporations 2005-06 Annual Reports.
29 Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology 2002,
Independent Report of the Expert Reference Panel on
Environmental Flows and Water Quality Requirements for the
River Murray System, Australian Government Publishing Service,
Canberra.
30 Department of Sustainability and Environment- Water Entitlements
and Strategies Division 2007, unpublished data.
31 Sinclair Knight Merz 2006, Environmental flow determination for
the Upper Ovens River, SKM, Melbourne.
32 Plantations North East Incorporated, n.d., Investment opportunities
in Victoria’s North East. accessed October 15, 2007 from
www.plantationsnortheast.com.au.
13 Murray-Darling Basin Commission, The Cap, accessed October
15, 2007, from http://www.mdbc.gov.au/nrm/the_cap.
33 CSIRO 2007, Afforestation in a catchment context: Understanding
the impacts on water yield and salinity, Australian Government
Publishing Service, Canberra.
14 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2002, Healthy
Rivers, Healthy Communities & Regional Growth: Victorian River
Health Strategy, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
34 CSIRO 2007, Afforestation in a catchment context: Understanding
the impacts on water yield and salinity, Australian Government
Publishing Service, Canberra.
15 URS 2007, The Economic Value of the Benefits Provided by
Victorian Rivers, URS, Melbourne.
35 Sinclair Knight Merz 2006, Derivation of current and natural flows in
the Campaspe River 2006, SKM, Melbourne.
16 Mildura District Houseboat Operators Association 2007,
unpublished data.
36 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2006, Central
Region Sustainable Water Strategy, State Government of Victoria,
Melbourne.
17 URS 2007, The Economic Value of the Benefits Provided by
Victorian Rivers, URS, Melbourne.
37 Murray-Darling Basin Commission n.d., Risks to Shared Water
Resources, accessed October 15, 2007, from www.mdbc.gov.au.
18 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2004, An Index
Of Stream Condition: The Second Benchmark of Victorian River
Condition, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
38 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Fireweb:
Prescribed burning activities, accessed December 14, 2007.
19 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Resource
39 Murray-Darling Basin Commission n.d., Water Quality, accessed
October 15, 2007, from www.mdbc.gov.au/water_issues/water_
quality.
20 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, State Water
132
END NOTES
40 Productivity Commission 1991, Industry Commission: Australian
Dairy Industry, Report No. 14, Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra.
N
41 Murray Darling Basin Commission 2007, Murray Darling Basin
Salinity Management Strategy Implementation Report 2005-06,
42 Murray Darling Basin Commission 2007, Murray Darling Basin
Salinity Management Strategy Implementation Report 2005-06,
43 Victorian Auditor-General’s Office Victoria 2001, Managing
Victoria’s growing salinity problem, State Government of Victoria,
Melbourne.
62 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Draft
Sustainable Irrigation Strategy (unpublished), State Government of
Victoria, Melbourne.
44 Bureau of Meteorology n.d. Australian Rainfall Maps, accessed
October 15, 2007 from www.bom.gov.au.
45 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Our Water
Our Future - The Next Stage of the Government’s Plan, Victorian
Government.
46 Murray-Darling Basin Commission Annual Report 2005-06, Murray
Darling Basin Commission, 2006.
47 Goulburn-Murray Water 2007, Final seasonal allocations 2006-07,
g-mwater.com.au , accessed 1 November, 2007.
48 Goulburn-Murray Water 2007, Allocations updates announced,
g-mwater.com.au, accessed 15 January, 2008.
50 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, Fourth
Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, United Nations.
51 National Water Commission 2005, Australian Water Resources
2005, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
52 Jones, R.N and Durack, P.J 2005, Estimating the Impacts
65 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Water Trading
in Northern Victoria - Appendices, State Government of Victoria,
Melbourne.
Melbourne.
Melbourne.
68 Department of Sustainability and Environment 2007, Draft
Sustainable Irrigation Strategy (unpublished), State Government of
Victoria, Melbourne.
69 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 2006, A
regime for the calculation and implementation of exit, access and
termination fees charged by irrigation water delivery businesses in
the southern Murray–Darling Basin, ACCC, Canberra.
Our Future, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
Our Future, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
72 Council of Australian Governments’ Meeting 2004,
Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative,
Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
73 Food Bowl Modernisation Project Steering Committee 2007, Food
Bowl Modernisation Project Steering Committee Draft Report for
Public Comment, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
END NOTES
133
N
134
NOTES
NOTES
135
N
136
NOTES
Published by the Victorian Government
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Melbourne, January 2008
Also published on www.dse.vic.gov.au
This publication is copyright. No part may
be reproduced by any process except in
accordance with the provisions of the Copyright
Act 1968
Authorised by Hon. Tim Holding MP, Minister for
Water
ISBN 978-1-74208-236-3
Printed by Stream Solutions 3/157 Spring Street,
Melbourne 3000 on 100 per cent recycled paper.
© State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability
and Environment 2008
Disclaimer:
This publication may be of assistance to you
but the State of Victoria and its employees
do not guarantee that the publication is without
flaws of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your
particular purposes and therefore disclaims all
liability for any error, loss or consequence which
may arise from you relying on any information
in this publication.
For more information please call 136 186
or visit www.dse.vic.gov.au

Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy discussion paper

Transcription

Similar documents

VWTH Spring 2012 Newsletter - Victoria Women`s Transition House

Hopkins Street Masterplan

50 cent - Oak Grove College

The Legacy of Southern California-Born, LA

Arthur Murray History - Arthur Murray Grande Ballroom of Greenwich

Panel 1 - Public Space

An open letter to Jim Ratcliffe, Ineos` owner

Bankless Channel

Awesome Aquifers - Groundwater Foundation

article PDF