With Australian PM & Liberal MP Scott Morrison and the tail wagging the NSW Government dog, Deputy Premier & Nationals MLA John Barilaro, both backing the proposed Mole River dam it appears that yet another poorly conceived and badly placed dam will be built

 

Dam valley: The Mole River looking upstream from Ringtree and Braeside' to Alister, where more than 800 ha of productive land and native vegetation is proposed to be flooded by the dam.
Photo: Bruce Norris in Tenterfield Star

On 12 August 2020 the NSW Legislative Council Portfolio Committee No. 7 – Planning And Environment self-referred the Inquiry into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dams and other water infrastructure in NSW.

This inquiry looked into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dam and mass water storage projects proposed by Water NSW including Wyangala, Mole River and Dungowan Dam projects, the Macquarie River reregulating storage project, the Menindee Lakes Water Savings Project and the Western Weirs project.

Water NSW undertook a feasibility study of the Mole River in 2017 which stated that none of the dam proposals for this river were financially viable at the time.

In 2019 the Morrison Government gave its support for a 100,000 megalitre Mole River dam which it saw as not just supplying Tenterfireld Shire with water but also sending water to south-east Queensland.

This begs the question of where the bulk of the water would be coming from given the Mole River catchment annual rainfall was less than 600mm in 13 of the last 18 years (2019) and, as Professor Quentin Grafton, water economist, ANU and UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance tells us, at 600mm or less annual precipitation a dam will not fill.

Tenterfield Shire Council has long made it clear that it sees a potential relationship between a Mole River dam and water from the Clarence River catchment - viewing interbasin water transfer from Upper Clarence River tributaries (in particular the Maryland River) to the proposed dam site as desirable additional water storage which would allow for water diversion into the border rivers system for the benefit of Murray Darling Basin irrigators and/or the establishment of a hydro electric scheme with the shire.

Northern Rivers readers might also recall that the Mole River has a long history of arsenic contamination.

ResearchGate, December 2001:

Mining and processing of arsenopyrite ore at the Mole River mine in the 1920–1930s resulted in abandoned mine workings, waste dumps and an arsenic oxide treatment plant. Weathering of waste material (2.6–26.6 wt% As) leads to the formation of water soluble, As-bearing mineral salts (pharmacolite, arsenolite, krautite) and sulfates which affect surface waters after rainfall events. Highly contaminated soils, covering about 12 ha at the mine, have extreme As (mean 0.93 wt%) and elevated Fe, Ag, Cu, Pb, Sb and Zn values compared with background soils (mean 8 ppm As). Regionally contaminated soils have a mean As content of 55 ppm and the contaminated area is estimated to be 60 km2. The soils have acquired their metal enrichments by hydromorphic dispersion from the dissolution of As-rich particulates, erosion of As-rich particulates from the dumps, and atmospheric fall-out from processing plant emissions. Stream sediments within a radius of 2 km of the mine display metal enrichments (62 ppm to 27.5 wt% As) compared with the mean background of 23 ppm As. This enrichment has been caused by erosion and collapse of waste-dump material into local creeks, seepages and ephemeral surface runoff, and erosion and transportation of contaminated soil into the local drainage system. Water samples from a mine shaft and waste-dump seepages have the lowest pH (4.1) and highest As values (up to 13.9 mg/L), and contain algal blooms of Klebsormidium sp. The variable flow regime of the Mole River causes dilution of As-rich drainage waters to background values (mean 0.0086 mg/L As) within 2.5 km downstream. Bioaccumulation of As and phytotoxicity to lower plants has been observed in the mine area….

By the time the current Mole River Dam scoping report had been completed the Mole River Dam project had been declared Critical State Significant Infrastructure (CSSI) under Division 5.2 of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

As a CSSI the project may be carried out without obtaining development consent under Part 4 of the EP&A Act.

CLARENCE RIVER CATCHMENT 2020: a culturally, economically, environmentally & socially harmful number of mining applications are in the process of getting the nod from the NSW Berejiklian Coalition Government

Caring for the Clarence from Nathan Oldfield on Vimeo.

In late September 2020 Clarence Valley Council endorsed a submission to the NSW Berejiklian Government’s Inquiry into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dams and other water infrastructure in NSW, reiterating its opposition (for the fifth time since establishing its policy in 2006) to any diversion of the Clarence River.

Of particular concern to council and the wider valley community is the yet to be completed Mole River dam in Tenterfield shire which has previously been mooted as a holding dam for the diversion of Clarence River catchment water elsewhere by Clarence water first being sent into the Upper Mole River.

Also in September the Clarence Catchment Alliance held an informal public picnic, meeting and open discussion on the riverbank at Lawrence, to talk about mining developments in the Clarence Valley. Discussions focussed on future copper and cobalt mining in the mountains of the Upper Clarence Valley.

Early October 2020 brought news that the Berejiklian Government had backed Corazon Mining Limited, granting a reimbursement of “50 per cent of per-metre drilling costs, up to a maximum of $200,000”, as part of its New Frontiers Cooperative Drilling scheme. Corazon will drill exploration holes around Mount Gilmore (at Gordonbrook Hill 25km northwest of Grafton), “targeting ‘battery metals’ in Australia”, its ‘RIU Resurgence Conference’ document states. “Early stage exploration [is at] play, major upside potential; high-grade copper and cobalt from drilling and rock chips; large surface anomalies in a new region (20km+ strike),” the document states.

That brings to three the number of companies currently undertaking exploration mining in the Clarence Valley. 

Castillo Copper in Cangai is the most progressed. Corazon is on Mt Gilmore in Coombadjha and The Sons of Bavaria are in Ewingar, according to the CLARENCE CATCHMENT ALLIANCE.

Given that the number of exploration licenses applied for or granted in the Clarence River catchment area have grown rapidly in 2020, the level of concern for the headwaters of so many rivers and creeks in also rising in Clarence Valley communities.

 IMAGE: Clarence Catchment Alliance

Needless to say the NSW Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis, former surveyor, property developer and operations manager with a Qld resources/mining consultancy firm, thinks this map is just fine and dandy - nothing to see hear, move along.

BACKGROUND

Clarence Valley Council submission to Inquiry into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dams and other water infrastructure in NSW, dated 22 September 2020 at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/69147/0046%20Clarence%20Valley%20Council.pdf

Ms. Debrah Novak (Clarence Valley councillor) submission to Inquiry into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dams and other water infrastructure in NSW, dated 21 September 2020 at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/69148/0047%20Ms%20Debrah%20Novak.pdf

Clarence Environment Centre submission to Inquiry into the rationale for, and impacts of, new dams and other water infrastructure in NSW, dated 12 September 2020 at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/69075/0008%20Clarence%20Environment%20Centre.pdf

Morrison Government accidentally tells us more than it intended about its future plans for more dams?

Eighteen pages of 'talking points' compiled by the Prime Minister's Office were accidentally released to Australian journalists on Monday 14 October 2019.

These talking points predictably blame Labor in a look-over-there-not here manner, continue Scott Morrison's personal war on the poor and vulnerable and refuse to look climate change in the eye.

Interestingly for folks in the NSW Northern Rivers region, these points confirm federal government support for abandoning certain federal/state provisions contained in legislation covering water, environment and biodiversity when it comes to building new dams.

The document also lets the cat of the bag when it reveals a wider purpose behind building a Mole River dam in Tenterfield Shire.

Google Earth snapshot of a section of the Mole River, NSW

The current proposal according the PMO is for a 100,000 megalites dam (basically the size of Karangi Dam in Coffs Habour LGA) which Morrison & Co see as assisting not just Tenterfield Shire but also as potentially useful to southern Queensland (See P.4). Morrison expects this dam to be 'shovel ready' two years from now, in 2021.

Water NSW released an Upper Mole River Dam fact sheet at the same time those errant talking points escaped inot the wild. This has the proposed Mole River dam as between 100 and 200 gigalites (ie., between 100,000 to 200,000 megalitres) and costing est. $355 billion. However, Water NSW does not see this proposed dam being 'shovel ready' until 2024 with dam construction completed sometime between 2026 and 2028.

Morrison's 100,000 megalitre dam would be ample to supply the needs of a NSW shire whose total population is yet to reach 7,000 residents, but is perhaps not entirely adequate to cover the needs of local irrigators into a future which is rapidly heating up and drying out.

So why would this such dam be thought capable of supplying water to southern Queensland and where would the potential additional 100,000 come from?

Water NSW data shows that Mole River catchment annual rainfall was less than 600mm in 13 of the last 18 years and, as Professor Quentin Grafton, water economist, ANU and UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance tells us, at 600mm or less annual precipitation a dam will not fill.

Perhaps the Mole River dam is only meant as a water storage staging post as much of the water capacity is intended to travel elsewhere?

Perhaps Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Minister for Water Resources David Littleproud are paving the way for a raid on a headwater tributary, the Maryland River, or on the Upper Clarence River itself - in order to forever pipe bulk water to Littleproud's electorate of Maranoa in southern Queensland?

Two local governments in Littleproud's electorate are lobbying hard for permission to pipe Clarence River water to their areas and, after all the Mole River is approximately 79kms as the crow flies from the headwaters of the Clarence River as well as less than 57kms in a direct line from Stanthorpe in Maranoa.

Coalition talking points by Max Koslowski on Scribd