Water Resources Division
DPIWE
GPO Box 44
Hobart 7001
Attention: Christina Jackson
Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council Submission
Re: Draft Policy Guidelines to Assess Applications
for New Water Allocations from Watercourses
The Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council (TFIC) is the peak representative body for all Tasmanian licenced commercial fishermen, marine farmers and seafood processors.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Policy Guidelines. This submission is made to DPIWE on behalf of our stakeholders, to demonstrate the vitally important role that the estuarine and near coastal environments play in the Tasmanian commercial fishing and aquaculture industries.
It is appropriate to use the period for public and ongoing industry consultation to capitalise on the substantial industry energy that has been invested into the process so far.
Attached, please find the TFIC submission.
Yours faithfully,
Ralph Mitchell
Executive Officer
TFIC Comment on Draft Policy Guidelines to
Assess Applications for
New Water Allocations from Watercourses
Introduction
The Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council (TFIC) represents the best interests of all licenced commercial fishermen, marine farmers and seafood processors in Tasmania.
Many of our members have significant investment in the industry and rely totally on water resources for their income. Australia-wide, 70% of marine species exploited commercially and recreationally are reliant on estuarine and near coastal environments at some time during their life cycle. Non-commercial species within these ecosystems also form part of the food chain that supports the exploited species, but many of the benefits of these ecosystems are relatively unknown and are difficult to quantify. The responsible maintenance of these ecosystems is of vital importance to the environment as a whole, and to the fishing industry in Tasmania.
Healthy estuaries and river systems mean healthy fisheries and marine farms. Mindful of this fact, it is important to emphasise the vital role that responsible catchment and fresh water resource management plays in an industry that returns millions of dollars annually to the Tasmanian economy, along with employment that sustains many Tasmanian families and communities.
Marine farming is an enormous industry in Tasmania, both employing many hundreds of people and supporting hundreds of businesses, suppliers and service providers statewide.
The environment, commercial fishing and the marine farming industries are the end users of catchment water resources. Consistent, adequate high quality water flows are vital to sustain ecosystem processes and industries that are demonstrably living from the profit of these ecosystems rather than from the capital. Any threat to fresh water quality and quantity flowing into the marine environment is a threat to these industries that are vital to the Tasmanian economy.
In order to represent the best interests of our members, comment is made on the Draft Policy Guidelines to Assess Applications for New Water Allocations from Watercourses.
Despite the various documents and water management initiatives sounding as if appropriate management measures are either planned or in hand for this vital resource, TFIC harbours serious concerns about the process. TFIC questions both the relevance and currency of the catchment water data/information available to the decision-making process, as well as the commitment and the resources of regulators to achieve the best possible outcomes from this process.
It seems appropriate (in an age of environmental enlightenment and awareness) that the issue of responsible water management should not only include controls, but also embrace a philosophy that gives encouragement and incentives for greater efficiencies in water usage rather than the extension of allocations to accommodate old and outdated technologies.
Comment
Intent of the Guidelines (1)
- "The Water Management Act 1999 requires consideration of the impact on existing users and the environment when assessing dam permit or water licence applications. Under section 8(2) the Minister, when making a decision, which is based wholly or partly on an assessment of the quantity of water available from a resource, must take into account:
- The needs of the ecosystems that depend on that water resource for water; and
- Any effect the decision may have on the commercial operations of majors users of water from that resource." (Page 1)
- "To date, there has been limited assessment of a catchment's capacity to support increasing numbers of dams and water extractions in winter." (Background; Page i: para 1)
This statement in the opening paragraph (on page i) raises serious concerns. With the recognised 'limited assessment' coupled with demonstrable evidence of the substantial numbers of illegal/unlicenced dams (as well as unquantified water extraction by land-based industries and users) how can fair and sustainable water allocation possibly be achieved?
TFIC questions how this process is taking into account the best common good from the use of this fugitive and finite resource? The question of water quality is also of vital importance, yet seems strangely absent from this process.
TFIC vigorously differs with the policy/guidelines not being applicable to allocations or applications within hydro-electric districts. This is inappropriate, allowing Hydro Tasmania to remain aloof from all policy decisions in what is purported to be a state-wide water management process.
There appear to be no legitimate explanations as to why Hydro Tasmania is exempt, thereby effectively clouding what should be a clear and transparent process.
Hydro Tasmania should have to operate under the same guidelines as all other commercial entities that use fresh water resources.
- "The limits should consider the flows to protect existing users and environmental values in a catchment, including estuaries and wetlands." (Background; Page i: para 3)
If policy guidelines are to become policy, then the word "should" in the above quote is soft and totally inappropriate as it can lead to various interpretations of the statement. 'The limits must consider the flows…' is both prescriptive and unambiguous and therefore more appropriate.
The values must be prioritised, where (for example) marginal land on the east coast may be relatively unproductive with minimal returns to the community compared with established marine farming along with commercial and recreational fishing. To consider water allocation in any other way would appear to be going against the State objectives espoused in the Introduction of the Tasmanian Natural Resource Management Framework.
- "Estimate total available yields for selected catchments using the best available stream gauging information". (Background; Page i: para 4)
TFIC seriously questions the 'best available stream gauging information'. Many riverine and estuarine systems have not had accurate monitoring for many years in Tasmania, with some ephemeral systems (especially on the east coast) demonstrating such intermittent water flows that accurate measurements and monitoring in the short term is irrelevant.
Other factors that can bias and affect these readings over time do not appear to be taken into account either. An example could be an area that is clearfelled one year and established as a single species plantation the next. Over subsequent years, the water soaked up by the plantation is significant yet unmeasured, with a corresponding reduction of water flowing downstream within the catchment. This loss is not from irrigation or spraying, but from the demand placed on the water by the trees and therefore unaccounted for. Other more obvious biases to the data would come during dry periods, from dams and irrigation systems where excess water that could return to the streams and rivers is evaporated and is lost during the same period that has greater demand for the resource.
A major concern that regards total available yields in selected catchments is that there have been numerous scientific predictions of increasingly warmer and drier conditions for Tasmania.
If this proves to be the case, what provision is being made in water allocation policy to accommodate predicted lower rainfall statewide and the elevated losses from environmental conditions that will create higher evaporation rates of both captured water and that used in irrigation?
This would obviously be coupled to an increased demand for water at the same time as the resource diminishes. These are vital factors that must be included in any model used for water allocation, using a precautionary approach as this is an area of obvious scientific uncertainty.
Commencement (3)
- "These guidelines will apply to all new water licence and dam applications (including the enlargement of existing dams) made after November 2002."
- "…investment in dam development enables farmers to plan for dry years, which means that some dams may be built that capture more than this amount." (Background; Page ii: para 4)
Dams are obviously an important tool for drought protection, but some dams are a two-edged sword, taking more water over time than they are able to store. They can be wasteful, as evaporation can remove up to a third of the stored water over time, leaving dissolved solids in the remaining water.
Principles (4): Management
- "Dam permits should not be granted prior to evidence being presented that appropriate water allocation is available to fill the dam." (Page 2)
Of major concern is the number of unlicenced and illegal dams in Tasmania. If regulators are actually taking water management and allocation seriously instead of only paying lip service to previous State and Federal Agreements and policies, then those illegal structures must be included in the yield estimations. To do that, the dams should be identified, inspected, then either approved/licenced or breached permanently. Regulators of the Water Management Act should be able to apply heavy penalties to anyone building illegal dams, or illegally taking catchment water (after a specific time period that would include a public awareness campaign).
To clarify these comments the Little Swanport catchment area provides an eloquent example. As at March 2002, Water Management authorities stated that there were 18 dams in the catchment area, with another 11 proposed. Close examination of 1:25,000 maps (to 1992) showed 1158 dams in the catchment area. A recent helicopter survey within a seven kilometre radius of Little Swanport estuary found another 56 dams constructed since the maps were published.
Part of the decision-making process for water allocation has to take into account dam numbers, types and volume. How can the value of the water be accurately assessed and allocations made when there is absolutely no way of knowing how much water is being retained and drained off illegally upstream?
Dam construction may appear to be a viable option for water storage, but is this taking into account the best possible use of this water? What are the best returns to the community from this use or wastage?
To give these questions some perspective, at present there is a proposal for three upstream dams to be constructed in the Little Swanport catchment area. These will hold 1280 megalitres.
The townships of Orford, Triabunna, Swansea, Coles Bay and Bicheno use a total of only 911 megalitres annually, so these proposals represent a huge amount of water.
These proposed dams will create <1 job but threaten 18 jobs in the Little Swanport estuary if water flows through the oyster farms and hatchery are reduced. This puts at risk an ecosystem that supports a $25.5 million industry! These claims are easily quantified and as such allow a different view of upstream water storage that can not and will not give such returns to the community.
Incentives for innovation and efficiency?
There should also be incentives for land-based industries to be innovative, exploring the use of better systems than the dams that can have such obvious side effects and the high volume irrigation techniques that can also carry agricultural chemicals such as pesticides and nutrients back into the streams and rivers.
As a constructive example, aquifer recharging is gaining prominence in Australia. This is where some of the rainfall runoff is redirected into groundwater systems, then reclaimed via pumping during dry spells. Although it is recognised that this is not always practicable and can be dependent on geological formations, the advantages of this system are numerous. One advantage is the zero evaporation rate, another the cleansing ability of an aquifer. E coli bacteria and other unwanted microbiological organisms are eradicated in most aquifer systems in a number of weeks.
Principles (4): Management
- "Management of water allocations should be responsive to monitoring and improvements in knowledge." (Page 2)
- "The estimated total available water yields are determined on a seasonal basis and provide a preliminary estimate of development potential." (Background; Page ii: para 5)
TFIC has to question how total available water yields can be determined if the opening statements in the draft policy guidelines are correct. These clearly indicate that there has been "…limited assessment of a catchments capacity to support increasing numbers of dams and water extractions in winter." (Background; Page i: para 1).
Page (i) goes on to say that… "Detailed studies are needed to determine the sustainable limit for each catchment" (para 5).
Does this actually say that there is insufficient data available for this decision-making process?
The questions posed here are:
- If there is an unquantified amount of water available, along with unspecified catchment requirements and illegal usage, then how can there be an accurate estimation of the resource to be allocated?
- Where are the current studies that can clearly prove in a scientific manner what the environmental ecosystem water requirements are in the lower catchment estuarine areas?
- How can these figures be determined on a seasonal basis, when on the east coast in particular, few years rainfall are similar to any previous years, with climate change slowly having an impact?
- How are the needs prioritised?
Estuaries and near-coastal environments on Tasmania's northern and eastern coasts must be highly prioritised, as they have the same (or greater) importance as any highly productive agricultural lands. In recognised priority areas there is an added factor to be considered, a very important factor that appears to be missing in this entire draft policy guideline paper. Water quality.
Priority area water allocations need to ensure that the water is measured in both quantity and quality, with development of marginal land for agriculture being considered in terms of impacts on down stream ecosystem functions and processes. An example of the inequality already within the system is where marine farmers are forced to pay significant amounts of money to continually test and monitor water quality downstream because of negative impacts on the water by other users upstream. This is a situation where upstream users appear to be immune from full responsibility for their use of this fugitive resource despite their activities creating a cost an imposition on high value production downstream.
In addition to the question of quality, national principles for water management demand good science, economic analysis, best available information, and predictive modeling, which would (by necessity) include forecast climate change factors.
Principles (4): Water Availability
This policy is to assess applications for new water allocations.
TFIC seriously questions:
- Where is the substantiated current data used to base these allocations on?
- Is this data/information accurate?
- Has it been peer reviewed and verified as current and appropriate?
- Have all areas needing more data been identified, with resources allocated to this data collection?
Principles (4): Information Needs
"Research is needed on water availability, water use and environmental flow requirements…"
TFIC has to question:
- What resources (human, financial, technology, equipment etc) are actually budgeted for and available to be used for a full data collection and monitoring program?
- Are the right questions being asked through a full stakeholder involvement in the process?
- Will this research give answers to the best common use of the water resources?
The answers to these questions (through an open and transparent process that does not cave in to stakeholder pressure or vested interests) will be proof of the regulator(s) genuine commitment to produce the stated outcomes from this process.
Principles (4): Information Needs
"Identify freshwater and estuarine ecosystem values that will be impacted by water resource development."
It is vital that any information gathered for these parameters considers and compares the economic and social values that are represented by demonstrated sustainable usage of freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. Those industries that rely on the environmental flows have multi-million dollar investments at stake, can demonstrate high volume returns to the community and must not be threatened by poor management of upstream water usage. This concern for competing water demands is a mandate passed down to State regulators from international agreements.
"Towards Earth Summit 2002 Environment Briefing No. 1
7. Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)
Since the Mar del Plata conference (1977) IWRM has been advocated widely as the most sustainable means to incorporate the multiple competing and conflicting uses of water resources. Governments are to develop and implement National Sustainable Development Strategies (NSSDs) by 2005. NSSDs should clearly include integrated plans, at the watershed level, for sustainable water resource use and management. Local participation, cross-border collaboration over shared water courses, and coordination with strategies for land use management are also vital elements of IWRM. All of which require adequate provision for financial, technical and human support, along with political will (UNGASS 1998)."
TFIC Recommendations
- In many areas, water quality is of major importance. TFIC recommends that any effect on water quality be taken into account in any new allocation of water.
- There is an obvious lack of up-to-date water quality and flow data available for many Tasmanian waterways and estuarine systems. This is clearly scientific uncertainty and will remain so until monitoring regimes and data collection equipment is made available for these important ecosystems. TFIC recommends that in the interim, any water allocation (that must be made), is made with the precautionary principle clearly in mind.
- It is also very clear that water allocation is not the only issue. TFIC recommends that greater efficiency of the usage of this finite water resource must not only be encouraged but also form a vital part of the policy for water management.
- TFIC recommends that incentives must be created for the use and development of innovative techniques that reduce the demand for water. This should be coupled with demonstrable maintenance of water flows and the quality of water vital for downstream ecosystem processes and industries.
- As an indicator that regulators are seriously committed to this process, TFIC recommends that all illegal dams be identified. These should be inspected at the owner's expense, with the owner having to demonstrate valid justification for retaining this illegal take of water. The dams should then be assessed, then either approved/licenced or breached/filled permanently, again at the owners expense. Regulators of the Water Management Act should be able to apply heavy penalties to anyone building illegal dams, or taking catchment water illegally after a specific amnesty period.
- Before any new water allocation takes place, TFIC recommends that there should be quantifiable peer reviewed data available for all catchment areas and systems. This data must be current and it must take into account the various types of estuarine processes, especially ephemeral systems such as those on the East Coast.
- Before new water allocations takes place, TFIC recommends that there be research undertaken to determine the best common good gained by the exploitation of this finite resource. This process should be aimed at determining the best return to the community and the effect of any allocation on water quality.
- Despite the fact that Hydro Tasmania districts remain exempt, TFIC strongly recommends that these bodies of water and waterways be included within these guidelines for water allocation. While there is no obvious need for this exemption, changes and innovations in power generation over time may reveal that some of this water can be put to a better use than driving turbines.
- TFIC recommends that regulators demonstrate their commitment to this process by making public the timeframe, budget and resources that have been made available for this process.