South Australian LGA Water Security Hall of Shame
It isn't only Alexandrina Council in South Australia which doesn't seem to understand that it would be environmental vandalism of the worst sort to attempt to cure a desperate lack of water security in one inland catchment area ie., the Murray Darling Basin, by placing a relatively healthy coastal catchment at risk by diverting part of its freshwater flow which sustains both a growing population base, significant primary industry and a large, productive estuary system and wetlands.
There are other local governments which appear to be hitching their star to an impossible dream with clearly no understanding of either geography or hydrology, particularly when it comes to Coorong District Council's idea that damming the headwaters of the Clarence River would actually result in high water volumes comparable to the Snowy Mountain Scheme.
In the Clarence Valley locals are well aware that these headwaters are often so sparse that it is almost possible to leap the flow in a single bound.
What is also most noticeable is that these councils are all singing from the same song sheet.
Here is the beginning of the 2009 Water Security Hall of Shame:
Victor Harbour Council:
16. MOTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Moved: Cr P Chigwidden Seconded: Cr P Lewis
That Council forward a letter to the Secretary of the Murray Darling Association (MDA) Region 6 Committee in support of the following recommendations:
1. That the MDA Conference expresses its dismay at the outcome of the deliberations regarding the final results of the inter-government agreement on the governance of the Basin andcalls upon the Federal Government to intervene and take overthe governance arrangements and to create a truly independent Murray Darling Basin Authority; and
2. That the MDA Conference call for the Federal Government to re-examine the question of the Clarence River Diversion Studyrelative to water flows through the Murray Darling System.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
11120/2 Cr Bormann moved that Council support Region 6 of the Murray Darling Association in putting forward the Notice of Motion to its National Conference calling for the Federal Government to re-examine the question of the Clarence River Diversion Study, relative to water flows through the Murray Darling River System.
Seconded Cr Burgess.
CARRIED
Councillor Wright moves;
"That The Coorong District Council, through Region 6 of the Murray Darling Association, request that the new Murray Darling Basin Authority ask the Federal Government to re-examine the Clarence River Diversion Proposal relative to water flows through the Murray Darling River System.
Cr. Peter Wright
Process
The request would proceed via a Notice of Motion to be presented at the 2009 Annual General Meeting of the Murray Darling Association.
Explanation
This proposed diversion of the Clarence River was first discussed in the 1930's. More recently, the Fraser Liberal Government allocated $4 million to fund a feasibility study into the scheme. This was subsequently discontinued by the Hawke Labor Government.
The proposal, if feasible, would involve the construction of a head water dam on the Clarence River, with a 22km tunnel under the Gibralta Ranges in Northern NSW. This tunnel would emerge on the Murray Darling Basin side of the Ranges and feed into the Beardy River, then the McIntyre River and ultimately, into the Basin. The Gibralta Ranges are situated in one of the highest rainfall areas in Australia. The Clarence River is like most east coast rivers in that it is very short, with a high volume discharge into the sea during high volume events.
Benefits of the scheme include:
• The capacity of the dams would have a storage ability approaching that of the Snowy Mountains Scheme.
• The capacity of head water storage would provide flood control to the Clarence Valley.
• The diversion would only require 24% of the total maximum storage volume to provide similar volumes of water to the Basin as the Snowy Mountains Scheme.
• No pumping of water is required – the entire scheme would be gravity-fed.
• The generation of hydroelectricity is another major benefit.
This Notice of Motion is not a request to build the scheme, but to revisit it in the context of recent climatic events and over-allocations in the Murray Darling Basin.
Cr. Peter Wright
NOTICE OF MOTION
081/09
Moved Cr. Wright Sec. Cr. Bland that The Coorong District Council, through Region 6 of the Murray Darling Association, request that the new Murray Darling Basin Authority ask theFederal Government to re-examine the Clarence River Diversion Proposal relative to water flows through the Murray Darling River System.
CARRIED
804 MOTIONS ON NOTICE
804.1 CR BOB ENGLAND – REGION 6 MDA – CLARENCE RIVER DIVERSION STUDY (SF316)
I, Councillor Bob England having complied with the requirements of Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000, hereby give Notice of the following motion to be submitted at the meeting of the Council of theRural City of Murray Bridge to be held on 14 April, 2009 at 7 pm.
I will move:
That Rural City of Murray Bridge note that Region 6 of the Murray Darling Association intends moving a resolution along the following lines at the September AGM of the MDA:
That Region 6 calls on the Murray Darling Association to urge the Federal Government to re-examine the Clarence River Diversion.
Cr England moved
That Rural City of Murray Bridge note that Region 6 of the Murray Darling Association intends moving a resolution along the following lines at the September AGM of the MDA:
That Region 6 calls on the Murray Darling Association to urge the Federal Government to re-examine the Clarence River Diversion Study relative to water flows through the Murray Darling River system.
Seconded by Cr Schubert and CARRIED
