News 
 State News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Show no impact or there'll be no Goulburn pipe, says CMA 

Show no impact or there'll be no Goulburn pipe, says CMA

27/05/2008 1:50:00 PM
MELBOURNE Water will not be granted a licence to construct works to extract 75 gigalitres a year of water from the Goulburn River unless it can satisfy the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority it won’t damage the river to do so.

CMA chief executive Bill O’Kane said Melbourne Water would have to demonstrate it could take water without any negative impact on the river to be granted an extraction licence.

“If they can’t demonstrate that, it won’t happen,” he said.

The State Government is planning the 70-km pipe connecting the Goulburn River and Melbourne’s Sugarloaf Reservoir to take delivery of its one third share of the 225GL a year anticipated savings from the $1bn first stage upgrade of the Goulburn Murray irrigation district.

The Government has pledged $600m to the project and a further $300m from Melbourne Water in return for 75GL a year to help shore up Melbourne’s water security.

To deliver the full 75GL, the pipe capacity of 300ML-day would require the water authority to take water on around 250 of the 273 days of the traditional irrigation season.

Melbourne Water had claimed the extraction would be only 3-6pc of irrigation season flows of 5000-10,000ML/day and would lead to at most a five centimetre drop in the river, with negligible environmental impact.

But Anti pipe campaigners Plug the Pipe have pointed out that flows had only been above 5000ML/day for around a quarter of the last three irrigation seasons and that there had been days during the shoulder season when the pipeline’s daily capacity of 300 megalitres a day was equivalent to the entire river flow.

But Mr O’Kane said it was wrong to suggest the pipe would take 100pc of flows as this would never be allowed to happen.

He said like any other diverter Melbourne Water would have to order water and it would be released from Eildon on top of the existing river flow.

“It will be harder to extract 300ML from 300-500ML/day flows than from 5,000ML/day,” he said. “But there are higher flows in the winter and spring.”

Mr O’Kane said the CMA had licensing responsibility and factors it would be looking for were, among others, impact on flows and fish..

He said there were already river users taking similar volumes without negative impact.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Mr Kane's atributed comments that curent diversions have had no impact on the Goulburn River are demonstrably false.

The mid Goulburn (below Eildon) has suffered in laymans terms a "complete collapse" of the native fishery since 1982 when environmental provision under Goulburn River BE were first presented as "protecting the health of the river for generations to come".

The GBCMA was an early promotor of the "deal" and remarkably silent on the lack of environmental safeguards pre the announcement of the Commonwealth "calling in the project" under the EPBC Act and the belated announcement of the PIA and its reprenhensible hamstringing of the public and the panel by refusing to consider the impacts of the diversion of environmental provisions.

The Goulburn River is heavilly committed, and infalls have been insufficient with current demand to allow Eildon to recover.

Even fully recovered Eildon provides only a single years security.

Changes to increase the western diversions from the Goulburn have led to the annual pumping of Waranga Basin and the annual lowering of the Goulburn Weir.

This has had a catastrophic impact on migrating species which are enduced to travel into oblivian along with eastern and western diversions.

Current minimum flow protection proved inedaquate following the mass fish deaths of Commonwealth protected species below Goulburn Weir which led the the EPA recommending further entitlement for the Goulburn River.

The Brumby government has given its first priority to Melbourne for the utilisation of savings previously promised for the Living Murray and the Goulburn River.

In my view an unnecessary and hasty act of barstardry

Regards Murray

Posted by Murray Maccullochella on 27/05/2008 5:04:40 PM

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

01 Jul 09 | The ridiculous ironies and double standards of both politicians and the media were on show for all to see with the ‘utegate’ scandal, online editor Michael Thomson writes, but he says no-one is the better for it.
Ray White Rural
 
Olssons supplement  competition
 
Rural Business Awards
 
S&L Subscriptions
 
Horse Deals Australia
 
Rural Bookshop


 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...