Dracula Rising and David Hicks {video}

Taking water for irrigation from the Murray-Darling Basin [poll]

The Essential Report for 25 October 2010 had this result on the subject of water extraction in the Murray-Darling Basin:

Click on image to enlarge

47% agreed that “strong action must be taken to restore the health of the Murray Darling river system even if it means some job losses or other economic impact “ while 31% agreed more with the statement “protecting the economic well being of local communities and jobs must be the first priority”.
A majority of Labor (52%) and Greens voters (74%) agreed that “strong action must be taken to restore the health of the Murray Darling river system even if it means some job losses or other economic impact” while Liberal/National voters were split (42%/42)%.

# The survey was conducted online from 19th October to 24th October 2010 and is based on 1,002 respondents.

Oi, Nick! How many rivers will you kill?

A Clarence Valley Protest wonders about Nick Xenophon’s maths abilities, attention to detail and motives:

Sunday, 24 October 2010

Exactly how many coastal rivers systems would Senator Xenophon like to lay waste?

South Australians Senator Nick Xenophon and Family First Legislative Council Member Robert Brokenshire are calling for the Gillard Government and Federal Parliament to look at damming and diverting the Clarence River across the Great Divide and into the Murray Darling river systems.

Xenophon appears to believe that the total volume of additional annual environmental flow (which the Murray Darling Basin Authority has identified as being required to stop the Basin rivers and wetlands irreversibly failing) can be found through interbasin water transfer.

Brokenshire envisions water diversion on a similar scale to the Snowy Mountains Scheme which ruined the iconic Snowy River.

Both men clearly have the Clarence River in their sights.

In 2004 a South Australian state government water diversion investigation decided on the basis very limited data that the average annual discharge for the Clarence River system is 3,700,000 ML/year and the 2007 SMEC desktop study gave a very optimistic top annual freshwater figure of 100,000 ML/year allegedly available for diversion [www.waterproofingadelaide.sa.gov.au,March 2004,"Water Proofing Adelaide: Large Scale Water Supply Schemes",information sheet,pp.3-4 and Australian Parliament,Senate 2007,RRAT Committee, Inquiry into Options for additional water supplies for South East Queensland,Report].

While according to The Clarence Environment Centre; the Lilydale gauge readings (which provide the most accurate flow figures available) indicate that water discharge into the sea is less than two million megalitres per year on average [Submission No. 214,May 2007].

Senator Xenophon mentions a water volume of 4,000 GL/year as the diversion level required to ‘save’ the Murray Darling Basin:

Going in to bat for farmers in the basin, he said diverting 4000 gigalitres annually into the river system would alleviate the need for irrigation cuts and secure environmental flows.

Now 4,000 gigalitres is 4,000,000 megalitres – so at first glance Xenophon is either supporting future zero flow in the Clarence River and its inevitable death or he has more than one coastal catchment in mind.

So how many rivers would Senator Xenophon like to lay waste in order to satisfy the greed of Murray Darling Basin irrigators?

The water madness continues.....

Reported in The Daily Examiner on October 23 2010:

THE grab for Clarence water continues in political circles with South Australian independent Senator Nick Xenophon calling for the Murray Darling Basin Authority to examine the viability of diverting the river.
Senator Xenophon was joined by Family First Legislative Council Member Robert Brokenshire in pushing for diversion as a solution to irrigation problems in the Murray Darling Basin.
With the massive social impacts to communities in the basin and the enormous cost of water buybacks estimated at $6 billion, plus an agricultural production loss of between $1 billion and $2 billion, Senator Xenophon said diversion was becoming a financially attractive proposition.
Going in to bat for farmers in the basin, he said diverting 4000 gigalitres annually into the river system would alleviate the need for irrigation cuts and secure environmental flows.
Mr Brokenshire said the Clarence River scheme could deliver the same amount of water to the Murray Darling system as utilised by the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric scheme, by building a 25km network of tunnels across the Great Dividing Range.
This week, Senator Xenophon asked independent New England MP Tony Windsor, the head of the inquiry into the social impact of irrigation allocation cuts in the Murray Darling, to look at alternate water sources for farmers in the basin.