Uncertain future for Qld Murray-Darling irrigation

THE future for irrigation in the Queensland Murray-Darling catchments becomes more uncertain as the Basin planning process continues.
The new chair for the Murray Darling Basin Authority, Craig Knowles, seems to be taking a hard line to deliver a balanced Basin Plan in consultation with communities.
But the Authority Board and staff have a mammoth task ahead of them if the draft plan will be released before the deadline of no later than July orAugust this year.
Mr Knowles will find it difficult in this limited time period to restore confidence that an effective but practical Basin Plan can be prepared in consultation with irrigation communities.
QFF’s submission to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority was highly critical of the flawed planning process conducted by the Authority to develop the Guide to the Basin Plan released in October last year.
QFF has continued to call for the Authority to explain and justify environmental water needs at a catchment level to the irrigation communities within each catchment.
This is a priority step to give irrigation, business and local government sectors within the catchments some certainty going forward in the planning process. These stakeholders also need to be confident that the magnitude of the changes required to meet environmental water needs is supported by credible science.
The new Authority Chairman has announced the formation of two technical teams to ‘write’ and ‘review’ the draft Plan.
How these teams will work with the current Board and staff of the Authority is unclear but it is a concern that both of the teams lack experience in planning in the northern basin.
The Guide failed to address key issues in the Northern Basin and this should not be repeated in the preparation of the draft Plan.
Another significant issue for northern basin irrigation communities are the opportunities that are available to assist individuals and communities to mitigate negative impacts of the final plan.
In comparison to the southern basin, progress has been limited with either buy-back or water infrastructure programsin the Queensland catchments.
Entitlement purchases secured as at January 31 in the Queensland Murray-Darling was 6,832ML,compared to over 956,000ML across the Basin.
Rural entitlement holders are concerned about the roll out of the program and particularly whether unsupplemented entitlement holders will have sufficient opportunity to sell if they desire to do so.
The first round of the Healthy Headwaters on-farm program is being progressed with approval for applications that could save over 15,000ML at a cost in excess of $36 million.
If all projects proceed this will be significant investment in irrigation improvement for Queensland catchments and half of the saved water will go to the Commonwealth Government for environmental purposes.
These are the key points that QFF and local irrigator groups told to the House of Representatives Inquiry, chaired by Tony Windsor, in St George on Tuesday.
Tony Windsor has already given notice of ‘interim findings’ from his southern visits including the lack of a strategic approach to purchase of entitlements and the tax impacts on grants for on farm water use efficiency projects.
Queensland irrigators support these issues but highlighted to the Inquiry that progress needs to be made on implementing water buy back and on farm water recovery.
Irrigators are seeking a reaffirmation of commitments during the election and assurance that these voluntary programs would recover the water required to achieve sustainable diversion limits.
QFF is calling on the Commonwealth Government to make further improvements to water purchasing and water infrastructure programs by allowing irrigation industry and communities to drive the investigations needed to plan and implement the programs in priority areas.
Community groupings need some scope to examine alternatives such as using water purchases to encourage on-farm infrastructure investment and coordinated assessments of the feasibility of a range of other investment options.
Policy also must be clarified to allow voluntary programs to adjust for interception and groundwater targets.
Irrigation communities must be able to engage meaningfully and participate in the development of solutions that meet local needs.
However, it will not be feasible to implement improved water recovery programs unless the Authority can consult effectively with Basin communities to deliver a Basin Plan that justifies environmental water needs and sets achievable targets for water recovery in priority areas.