CONTROVERSIAL South East drains have divided rural communities for more than a decade.
But a political stoush is brewing as State Government moves to levy landholders for the cost of maintaining the 2500-kilometre network.
Farmers have already contributed $17 million to the recently-completed Upper South East Dryland Salinity and Flood Management Program.
And while State Government has budgeted $5.4m for maintenance in 2011-12, it wants SE landholders to raise revenue for future maintenance.
The results of the $73.3 million program - funded by the federal and state governments and a levy on landholders - are clearly evident with formerly waterlogged and saline country now growing productive perennial pastures in a real engineerig feat.
But any proposed levy on landholders faces stiff opposition from the Liberal Party and Family First. They consider the significant environmental benefits derived from the drains a public benefit for the whole State, with 42.6 gigalitres of water released to the Coorong through a Reflows project between July, 2009, and June 2011, and another 60gL into the region's wetlands.
The Department of Water's USEDSFMP leader Andrew Johnson said the project had been a great success. Soil salinity levels in some areas had dropped from 10,000 EC to 20,000 EC down to 500 EC or less within a season of the drains' construction.
"We have seen the carrying capacity going from between 0.5 dry sheep equivalent a hectare and 2DSE/ha on salt-affected land, to properties now being able to carry 7DSE/ha to 12 DSE/ha after the drains," he said.
"We are looking at a fivefold to tenfold increase in production, depending on the level of effort by landholders."
Mr Johnson said it was now time to move into an operating and maintenance phase and integrate the Lower SE drains into one operational organisation.
The government contributed $2.1m to the operation of the Drainage Board which oversees the Lower SE drains. The additional $5.4m had been provided by the government for 2011-12 to start the establishment of an integrated management regime.
Fencing along the drains was expected to last for a considerable period of time, but some of the Upper SE drains - in place for up to 14 years - were in need of maintenance.
"Some drains have considerable erosion and need to be cleaned out and vegetation is starting to regrow into the corridor," Mr Johnson said.
"With any system where the water is saline, the gates on the regulators will eventually need replacing."
Only minimal capital upgrades or replacement had been undertaken in recent years on the Lower SE drains, which had been in place since the 1960s and 1970s.
There were now "a couple of hundred" bridges which needed either significant maintenance work or replacement.
"When you look at the whole system, it covers 2500km of drains and in the order of 2500 structures which stretch from Eight Mile Creek to the Coorong," Mr Johnson said.
"Many of these structures have had only operational maintenance over the past 30 years and the board has not got the resources to undertake significant stabilisation or other works without ongoing additional funding.".
Mr Johnson said the government had proposed a levy under the draft SEDSOM legislation, which would enable a cost-sharing between the government and beneficiaries of the system.
Deputy Opposition Leader and Shadow Water Security Minister Mitch Williams said the proposed levy was "another tax on the people of the SE" and that he was vehemently opposed to it.
He said the first drain had been dug in the mid-1800s for transport purposes, with much of the SE under as much as two metres of water. The network of drains still had "a very important role" in transport.
In the past decade, the design of the drains in the Upper SE scheme had moved from their original agronomic focus to a strong environment focus, so it was appropriate their maintenance cost should now be shared by all the State's taxpayers.
Mr Williams said SE residents also deserved ongoing funding for their drains in exchange for their significant contribution to the State's economy. Previous governments had recognised it was not possible to have an equitable levy.
*Full report in Stock Journal, August 18 issue, 2011.
Email a friend