Sunday, November 8, 2009

MP criticises interstate water loss

Adrian Pederick makes a good point in this article. I am very interested why the sudden reluctance in getting on with this job across the whole basin.
I was interested recently that Professor Mike Young almost defended the Federal Minister on this point when in fact it was statistics from his publications that actually got me a bit fired up on this topic in the first place. My photographic trips continue to show a lack of decisive action to stop evaporation and wastage.
Any water saved for the system actually will allow each of the stakeholders a better chance at sharing in the improved management off the resource. The sort of "well it is going to happen response" from the Federal Minister really is not good enough. This issue is urgent so get on with it. Apart from anything else it is a good infrastructure project.
At the AMCHAM luncheon recently Minister Wong referred to the reversing the Clarence River Project. That is not what any of the projects have suggested. They are purley flood mitigation programs when the Pumps can be turned on only when the River is in flood. The project I have seen had Hydro Electricity built in to assist in offsetting the cost. Again our Eastern Seaboard is in massive flood and damage and if we only pumped during these periods the problems on the other side of the range would be fixed.
Minister Pederick how do we get some action?


Murfomurf said...

I reckon to pump through a hydro tunnel just like the original Snowy Scheme only a river with bigger flows further from the mountain. Gotta get people to stop growing rice and rely on Thailand, too. Need drylands grains and high protein grains amongst those to feed the world- especially if we slow down animal crops to conserve the riverbanks. A national farmers minimum income would help tide people over so they can keep the farm until its profitable again. Perhaps the state might give farmers kids good education and accommodation in larger centres in return for sticking on the land. We need broader social welfare nets to encourage continuance of enterprise in hard times. It's your tame commie talking!

Peter McFarlane said...

Environmental water may "seep" in NSW, but it evaporates in huge volumes from the lower lakes in SA. is that a better use of environmental water?

JimBob51 said...

The hundreds of miles of open channels throughout the Riverina - Goulbourn Valley and Sunraysia, the use of flood irrigation creates massive evaporation. The completely unnatural change of flow using about 2500kms of levees and dams which cause floods of communities is just part of a complete mismanagement of this resource. However, it must also be acknowledged without dams and locks the whole system is little better than an intermittent creek. There would be virtually no economy along any of the River without the man made intervention.All I ask is a fair management program that creates a balance to all. We could just return to the days of sheep and beef when Sir Sidney Kidman drove his stock from the Channel country down the 'long paddock' following the flood. The days when Paddle Boats lost there way as the River became undefined and they ran aground there way to remain as monuments miles from the main stream.

Sally Rose said...

Hi Jim

I am currently working on behalf of the Productivity Commission as the Blog Moderator at This blog closes this Friday 26/2/10 at 5pm EST time. It is the last chance to give feedback on the Commission's Draft Report into Market Mechanisms for Recovering Water in the Murray Darling Basin. I would be delighted if you took the time to log in and share your thoughts on the 7 key reccomendations and findings highlighted. I would also be very grateful if you were to post a link to it on your blog , as I am sure many of your subscribers and readers would also have a valuable conytribution to make. I can email you some more info. If you can take a moment to get in touch I'd really appreciate it. Many Thanks, Sally Rose, Global Access Partners, 02 8303 2430,