Cartoons of the Week

Cathy Wilcox

John Shakespeare

And the tale of Rous County Council decision making under new pro-dam majority continues......

Echo, 21 February 2022: 

During last week’s Rous County Council (RCC) meeting, Cr Big Rob spoke of contact he had with Professor Stuart White regarding the proposed Dunoon Dam. 

 Professor White is the Director of the Institute for Sustainable Futures at UTS in Sydney where he leads a team of researchers who create change towards sustainable futures through independent, project-based research. 

 With over twenty years experience in sustainability research, Professor White’s work focuses on achieving sustainability outcomes at least cost for a range of government, industry and community clients across Australia and internationally. 

The Echo spoke to Professor White who made a late video submission to Rous that missed the deadline. A representative of Rous said it was too late to be screened in public access and was ‘forwarded to all Councillors on the morning of the Council meeting for their info’. The rep also mistakingly thought the video was a submission from the Northern Rivers Water Alliance who already had a space in Public Access. 

Rous County Council meeting 

During the meeting Cr Rob did not give Councillors all of the information he received from Professor White. 

At the meeting, Cr Rob said: ‘I circulated an email overnight relating to the experts that have been relied on – Professor Stuart White for example. You know, his position was the cost and when I made inquiries with Professor White, he finally agreed that yes, that dam should be considered. So if you take the cost out of it, then his position [is] all options on the table, the dam must be considered because that is one of the options.’ 

The Echo asked Professor White about his conversation with Cr Rob because Cr Rob’s comments seemed to be at odds with the information Professor White has been giving other interested parties. 

‘I have not spoken to Cr Big Rob,’ said Professor White. ‘I only had email correspondence. 

‘My position on the Dunoon Dam is clear and I’ve been public about it: it is too expensive, too risky, not useful for the purpose it is intended for, and not needed within the planning horizon. This is before considering the environmental and Aboriginal heritage risks.’ 

Time to rule out dam 

Professor White said that this does not mean the Dunoon Dam, or any supply option should not be considered and investigated alongside other options. ‘It is just that under any reasonable analysis it would be rejected. The proponents have already had a chance to make their case, at great public expense, and my view is that this case has not been made, so it is now reasonable to rule the Dunoon Dam option out.’ 

‘My understanding of the decision by Rous last year was to reject it primarily due to the Aboriginal heritage considerations, which are of course very important and remain very important.’ 

The Echo does not know if any Rous Councillors saw this submission before they voted 6 to 2 to put the dam back on the table.  [my yellow highlighting]

BACKGROUND

NORTH COAST VOICES, FRIDAY, 18 FEBRUARY 2022 

Rous County Council and that Dunoon Dam proposal now risen from the dead

Rous County Council and that Dunoon Dam proposal now risen from the dead

 

In 2014 Rous County Council (RCC) adopted its Future Water Strategy which recommended detailed investigations to assess the suitability of increased use of groundwater as a new water source, and if groundwater was not suitable, investigate complementary options such as water reuse and desalination.

After completion of this investigation Rous produced the original Future Water Project 2060 which did not prioritise groundwater use, reuse of already available water or building a desalination plant/s.

Instead it chose another option – the 50 gigalitre Dunoon Dam, with the concept design indicating an initial capital cost of approx. $220 million.

“In considering options for the future, Rous County Council conducted extensive assessments to weigh up environment, social and economic impacts. The result of these assessments indicate the Dunoon Dam is the preferred long-term water supply option when compared to demand management and water conservation, groundwater sources and water re-use”.

It is worth noting that the proposed Dunoon Dam would be the second dam on Rocky Creek thus further fragmenting this watercourse. The first water storage is Rocky Creek Dam which will continue to operate if the Dunoon Dam was built. Rocky Creek Dam does not have an outlet structure so it does not provide releases for downstream flows. [NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, 2020]

By 2020 this incredibly flawed second dam plan still relied on the widely discredited ‘offset’ scheme as a workaround for the widespread level of environmental destruction, significant biodiversity & species local population loss and, for the drowning of land sacred to the Widjabul Wia-bal People and the desecration of highly significant cultural sites.

Rous authorized preliminary investigation of the Dunoon Dam project in mid-2020 allocating a $100,000 operating budget.

However, the Widjabul Wia-bal, local residents in Lismore Shire and many people in the three other shires within Rous County Council (Byron, Ballina & Richmond Valley) remained concerned with Rous’ choice – the Future Water Project 2060 Public Exhibition Outcomes revealed that 90% of the 1,298 submissions received by 9 September 2020 expressed concerns about the Dunoon Dam proposal.

In March 2021 Rous was reconsidering its earlier Dunoon Dam decision and by 21 July it had voted 5 to 3 to remove the Dunoon Dam from its Future Water Project 2060. At that time a second public exhibition from 1 April to 24 May 2021, this time of the revised Future Water Project 2060, was put in place which resulted in an RCC digital file of supporting submissions 1,754 pages long and confirmed that voiced public opinion was still against building the Dunoon Dam.

By 16 December 2021 Rous County Council had authorised “the General Manager to cease all work on the Dunoon Dam and provide a report on the orderly exit from Dunoon Dam as an option in the future water project, including revocation of zoning entitlements and disposal of land held for the purpose of the proposed Dunoon Dam”.

There the matter should have rested, but after the December 2021 local government elections there was a changing of the guard at Rous Water and six of the eight current sitting RCC councillors are pro-dam.

This led to the unedifying sight on 16 February 2022, of Rous County Council by a vote of 6 to 2 vote reinserting the Dunoon Dam proposal into the revised Future Water Project 2060. No genuine forewarning of what that first RCC meeting of 2022 would contain, no prior consultation with Widjabul Wia-ba elders on the Item 12.1 motion, no community consultation.

The community scrambled to respond. So on the day RCC did hear objections to Item 12.1 from Hugh Nicholson, a previous Chair of Rous Country Council and Friends of the Koala representative Ros Irwin.

A young Widjabul Wia-ba woman, Skye Roberts, addressed the councillors as a “custodian” of the land. She spoke with conviction, determination and, clearly informed all present that: the proposed dam was sited within the large tract of land between three ancient mountains and that land was “sacred land” to all the Widjabul Wia-ba; this included Channon Gorge, the waters that ran through it and the wider dam site; the stone burial mounds which would be submerged by dam waters were part of the circle of cultural connection between land and people; men’s places & women’s places were on land to be flooded; and that land connects to living culture.

The message she carried for her grandmother and mother fell on predominately deaf ears and it was ‘ugly Australia’ which voted the dam back into future planning on that Wednesday in February.

Rous County Council already has before it the Ainsworth Heritage “Dunoon Dam: Preliminary Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment for Rous Water, May 2013” which can be read in digital form or downloaded from:

https://issuu.com/jwtpublishing/docs/ainsworth-heritage-preliminary-cultural-heritage-i.

It also has before it the SMEC “Dunoon Dam Terrestrial Ecology Impact Assessment, Prepared for Rous Water November 2011”. An assessment of which can be found at:

https://waternorthernrivers.org/ecological-impact/

For a brief summary of some of the technical flaws in the Dunoon Dam preliminary investigation:

Dunoon Dam: 4 Risks & Considerations by Water Expert Professor Stuart White - Feb 2022

 

Two days remaining to comment on Clarence Valley Council's "Draft Water Restriction Policy - Version 5"

Clarence Valley Council - On Exhibition

Water Restrictions V5 (draft)

Outlines the triggers that we use to introduce or revoke water restrictions.

Purpose

To introduce or revoke water restrictions on the use of reticulated water in the Clarence Valley as required in accordance with the triggers nominated in the procedures and in compliance with relevant Acts.

This policy applies to all properties using water supplied by Council’s water supply infrastructure. The policy does not apply to the use of water from sources that are not part of Council’s water supply infrastructure such as farm dams, watercourses, bores, and rainwater tanks on properties that have no connection to Council’s water supply.

The Draft Water Restrictions policy is available here.

Council welcomes submissions to this policy. Submit online by 11:00 pm on Friday 25 June 2021 by clicking on the Make a Submission button below.

https://www.clarence.nsw.gov.au/cp_themes/metro/make-a-submission.asp

Alternatively, comments can be made in writing to the General Manager, Clarence Valley Council, Locked Bag 23, Grafton, NSW 2460 and clearly marked “Draft Water Restrictions Policy".

For further information about the draft policy, please contact Chris Hellyer, Environmental Officer, Education; Water Efficiency < Christopher.Hellyer@clarence.nsw.gov.au >.

NOTE: A major change in Water Restrictions V5 is that the trigger for imposition of Level 1,2, 3 & 4 water restrictions will no longer be the volume of water remaining in the Shannon Creek Dam, but the combined water volume in Shannon Creek and Karangi dams. This in effect will allow water extraction (without accompanying Level 1 water use restrictions) to continue after Shannon Creek Dam water levels have fallen below the current trigger point of 80% of this dam's water storage capacity.

On 17 June 2021 Shannon Creek Dam was 84% full and Karangi Dam was 99.2% full. This means that Permanent Water Conservation Measures are in place for the Clarence Valley -  the use of sprinklers and unattended hoses is banned permanently between the hours of 9am and 4pm every day when evaporation is at its highest. However, there are no restrictions on handheld hoses or micro-sprays and drippers/sub-surface irrigation.

Given that Coffs Harbour City LGA contributes little to water storage in Karangi Dam (water supplied by Orara & Nymboida Rivers & Shannon Creek Dam) and nothing to storage in the Shannon Creek Dam (water supplied by Nymboida River) and, with no backfeed to Clarence Valley LGA according to Karangi Dam's daily data, it will be the higher water use of Coffs Harbour, with an est. resident population 33 per cent larger than Clarence Valley's population, which will all but guarantee that a return to Level 1 restrictions will likely occur before Spring arrives - even though the entire north-east region of NSW is now drought free and expecting more rain.

However it is not just the size of Coffs Harbor City's population which makes its water extraction levels potentially problematic. It's the fact that the resident population does not live in the Clarence River catchment area which leads to widespread misunderstanding of: (i) the boundaries of the actual catchment area; (ii) the highly variable nature of rivers within the system; the actual volume of freshwater flows; and (iii) the point at which the 394km long Clarence River itself - from its rising near Rivertree to its emptying into the sea at the tidal estuary mouth - starts to become saline and increasingly unfit for human and animal consumption as well as unfit to use for irrigation. That point is approximately at the end of the first 286km of its journey to the ocean. The combined average annual flow from the freshwater tributaries as this flow enters the Clarence River tidal pool appears to be in the vicinity of 3,072,884ML, which is perhaps a better indicator than the annual water exchange that occurs between the ocean and the estuary.

Clarence Valley residents will recognise these basic misunderstandings in this quote on Coffs Harbour City Council's website:

“Regardless of whether the water supplying Coffs Harbour City Council residents comes from the Orara River or the Nymboida River, our water all comes from the same catchment.

The mighty Clarence River catchment is 22,716km2 in size, making it the one of the biggest river systems on the east coast of Australia.

The Clarence River catchment headwaters are found around Dorrigo to the south, near Glen Innes in the west, the NSW/QLD border near Woodenbong in the north and along the Richmond Range to the south of Whiporie out to the coast where the Clarence River empties into the Pacific Ocean at Yamba. It is estimated that the average annual flow of water in the Clarence River at Yamba is 5 billion litres.”

Elders and Widjabul Wia-bal people: ‘We are tired of being ‘consulted’ and then ignored. Enough is enough.’

 

Echo NetDaily, 14 December 2020:

Widjabul Wia-bal traditional owners of the area between Dunoon and the Channon have told Rous County Council not to follow Rio Tinto with the destructive Dunoon Dam.

They have told the General Manager of Rous County Council, Phil Rudd, that they will not accept the building of the proposed dam, which would inundate ancient burial sites and extensive evidence of occupation in the past and in recent times.

John Roberts, a Senior Elder of the Widjabul Wia-bal said, ‘I was one of the stakeholders consulted in 2011 about the impact of the Dunoon Dam on cultural heritage.

‘In the 2011 Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment prepared for Rous, we stakeholders said with one voice that no level of disturbance was acceptable to us. We still say that. Nothing has changed. There is no need for another study. Our opinion has not changed.

‘Our cultural heritage is a direct connection to our ancestors. We have been here for thousands of years. These sites provide us with a link to our traditions, our land and our living heritage. They allow us to educate our young ones in their history.’

Unanimous decision

A unanimous decision of Elders and Widjabul Wia-bal people was given to the Rous County Council General Manager last Tuesday, December 8th.

The group insisted that Rous abandon plans for the Dunoon Dam.

‘So many of our cultural sites have been destroyed. To destroy more is unacceptable to the traditional owners,’ said Mr Roberts.

‘We are tired of being ‘consulted’ and then ignored. Enough is enough.’

The Widjabul Wia-bal collective insisted that Rous County Council no longer deals with individuals. They said in future Rous must consult with the whole stakeholder group.

Rous have agreed to provide all correspondence between Rous and the Widjabul Wia-bal representatives since the dam was first mooted in 1995……

Rous County Council, meanwhile, have issued a statement saying they will table their plan to future-proof the region’s water supply at their next ordinary meeting, on 16 December 2020.

Channon Gorge, threatened by proposed Dunoon Dam. Photo David Lowe.

The statement said, ‘The combination of solutions set out by the Future Water Project 2060 include:

• Utilisation of the Marom Creek Water Treatment Plant for the increased use of groundwater from the Alstonville area.

• Further detailed investigations into the viability of the proposed Dunoon Dam.

• Ongoing water conservation and demand management.

• Pioneering investigations into water reuse.

‘Councillors will carefully consider the plan in light of the outcome of a 10-week public exhibition of the Future Water Project 2060. Council acknowledges the community’s concerns and aspirations and greatly appreciates the time invested by those who made a submission.’

Rous have asked people who wish to find out more about the Future Water Project 2060 to please visit www.rous.nsw.gov.au/futurewater.

Dunoon local Jill Hawthorn responded on social media by saying, ‘When the experts say we need back up options for dry times coming – and 30% of our water system should be not rain dependent. This means we need to look seriously at water reuse and solar powered desalination – can you hear your community Rous?

Quite rightly NSW Government refuses request not to release environmental flow waters into Shannon Creek - Clarence Valley & Coffs Harbour City councils expected to honour their undertakings

 

Shannon Creek Dam
IMAGE: Clarence Valley Council

The Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2020: 

North Coast local council areas will be forced back onto Level One water restrictions after the State Government refused a request from Clarence Valley and Coffs Harbour councils to keep more than two billion litres of water in the Shannon Creek Dam. 

Clarence Valley Council water cycle manager Greg Mashiah said a one-time exemption to the NSW Government’s license agreement had been requested, however, a verbal response had now been received declining the request. 

“Under our transparent extraction licence we need to release all the water that flows down the Shannon Creek into the dam,” he said. “This mimics the natural flow of the creek – the volume of water flowing into the dam must equal the volume flowing out.” Mr Mashiah said the water that came into the dam from Shannon Creek during the February flood had not yet been released. “We are currently waiting for written advice from the NSW Government with instructions on how they want the release to take place,” he said.

New South Wales 2020: the problem of water greed & outright theft

The Sydney Morning Herald, 21 September 2020:

The rapid growth of blueberry and other intensive farming in northern NSW has prompted a crackdown on illegal water use and sparked concerns about pollution in rivers and in the state's first marine conservation area.

The Natural Resources Access Regulator found 28 of 31 farms it inspected around the Coffs Harbour region in the first two stages of the clampdown were allegedly non-compliant with water laws.

The regulator said in the five years prior to the start of the campaign, agencies received more than 130 reports of alleged breaches in the region. "This potentially indicated a high level of non-compliance," a spokeswoman for the regulator said.

For the first two phases, the regulator ordered 13 farms to reduce the capacity of dams among 25 directions. Other actions include 20 penalty notices, with more likely after a third stage of investigations last month.

The problems stem in part from the conversion of banana farms to blueberries, raspberries and cucumbers, among other products, in the past two decades. Farms with set water licences have been subdivided, with new owners apparently adding bores, pumps and even dams on the smaller plots.

Water quality, too, has been compromised as the more intensive crops increase the use of fertilisers, pesticides and other chemicals. That's prompted the Coffs Harbour City Council to commission multiple studies by researchers from the Southern Cross University, among others.

One report found levels of nitrogen soared after rains as fertiliser from farms washed into rivers, reaching 695 times that of drier conditions.

"These [nitrogen oxide] loads were amongst the highest reported for catchments on the east coast of Australia, and similar to loads in rivers throughout China, Europe and India with strong agricultural or urban influences," the 2018 study found.

Shane White, one of the Southern Cross University researchers, said the Coffs region is prone to short, heavy rain bursts. Soils in the hilly area are typically shallow and sit on a clay base that limits the absorption of water, leading to significant run-off….

Breaches of NSW water laws have also been found in the Northern Rivers area in 2020 to date - 1 direction notice and 2 penalty notices have been issued to Clarence Valley LGA landowners, 2 direction notices to Ballina LGA landowners, 3 penalty notices to Byron Bay LGA landowners, 3 penalty notices to Lismore LGA landowners and 1 direction notice and 3 penalty notices for Tweed LGA landowners.