News 
 State News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Upstream farmers call for Lower Lakes inquiry 

Upstream farmers call for Lower Lakes inquiry

27 Aug, 2011 03:00 AM
AN inquiry into the management of the Lower Lakes would bring about a more rational debate on the Murray Darling Basin Plan, New South Wales farmers claim.

The NSW Farmers Association has welcomed further delays to the Basin Plan’s release and has called for an independent inquiry into South Australia’s Lower Lakes.

The association’s water spokesman John Ward said the inquiry was only fair given the reductions to water entitlements last year’s Basin Plan guide asked of upstream farmers.

“In the Guide there was a considerable requirement to maintain the Lakes in their present forms,” Mr Ward said.

“One of the costs of that to us would have been up to a 40 per cent reduction to our entitlements and when you look at those sorts of figures you start to think we have not asked enough questions about the Lower Lakes.”

Mr Ward, a farmer from NSW’s Riverina region, said the association supported a Windsor Inquiry-style investigation into management options for the lakes, which could include millions of dollars worth of compensation for Lake Albert and Alexandrina farmers and communities if changes were to be made.

He said using the lakes as a barometer for Basin health was not realistic in years of extreme drought, such as those recently experienced.

“The idea that the Lower Lakes can guarantee flows is pie in the sky stuff,” Mr Ward said.

“If there’s a drought then everyone dries up.”

Mr Ward said even if it took another 10 years to formulate the Basin Plan it would be worthwhile if it resulted in effective water reform.

Lower Murray Irrigation Association chairman Richard Reedy said the renewed focus on the Lower Lakes was disappointing.

“It’s just an exercise in nit-picking,” Mr Reedy said.

“It’s obvious that New South Wales and Victoria just want to be as difficult as possible.

“I certainly hope whatever is put forward (by the MDBA) is based on good science and not science that is being manipulated for political reasons.”

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Reference Mr Reedy's comments, two sayings come to mind. First, "me thinks he doth protest too much!"

Second, "a case of the pot calling the kettle black"

One can understand the focus on the Lower Lakes being disappointing-they nearly got away with it!

Posted by Bim Joyd, 29/08/2011 1:38:58 PM, on Stock Journal
In my original plan we were to build a new LOCK 0 near the Swanport Bridge and connect any new pipelines to the Murray Bridge pump station. New pipelines have since been built around the Lower Lakes with the Tailem Bend pump station supplying the potable water and the new irrigation pipeline from the new pump station at Jervois. The new plan now is to build Lock 0 below these pump stations and Wellington this will then protect Adelaide's water supply with hte new pool of 0.75m above sea level from Lock 0 back to Lock 1 and eliminating the old pool level of 0.75m from Goolwa Barrage to Lock 1.
Posted by Sean, 29/08/2011 2:26:42 PM, on Stock Journal
Bravo commonsense at last. Let us hope and pray for the good of this country that politicians will listen before it is too late for our economy and human sustainability along the basin.
Posted by Chris, 29/08/2011 2:54:45 PM, on Stock Journal
it is dissappointing to constantly see all the missinformation about the lakes.

With regard to lower lakes and Murray mouth, i would love to see Jennifer Marohasy tell me how a tidal area that varies by 1-2m which bears the brunt of the southern ocean winds would stay open for much time at all if there is no water flow. the articles i have read say the mouth has only been closed for more than 6mths 3 times in european history. There are some very latge grazing enterprises on the lakes that have been viable for a hundred years because the river flowed to the sea 98% of the time.


Posted by lakeMan, 29/08/2011 9:47:36 PM, on Stock Journal
Of course mr Reedy is disappointed, South Australia gets the greatest benefit at everybody elses cost with the least spent on infrastructure. Also as far as I can see this whole thing is a political stunt with the "good science" being simply a means to attain a forgone conclusion. It is disgisting to watch unfold.
Posted by john, 30/08/2011 7:05:11 AM, on Stock Journal
Mr Reedy can join the 4 SA MP's ,who wrote in The Land recently, as the 5th whinger.

My response to them was to stop whinging get of your butts and fight hard to get PIPES UNDER THE DUNES to replace fresh water with sea water using tidal pressures to do the pumping.

It has been proven as a concept at Westlake, a suburb of Adelaide.

For an in depth explanation go to the MDBA website under feedback and look at the submission by Ian Mott.

Ian explains that fresh river water is most inefficient in its action. Sea water is plentiful, cheap and can do a far better job for the mouth AND COORONG

Posted by Don Woods, 31/08/2011 7:14:38 PM, on Stock Journal

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

Advertisement



Stock Journal







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...