Background to the Lower Balonne Water Debate 

 

The Queensland Government issued licenses to Lower Balonne irrigators telling them to use them, or lose them.  Irrigators invested huge amounts of their own private funds to develop the necessary water infrastructure along the Lower Balonne, but without any compensation the Government is moving to take water away from those irrigators.

 

1970’s to early 1990’s – Development

 

While irrigation had been underway along the Lower Balonne in the 70’s and 80’s, primarily through Government schemes, it was the 1990’s when private development really began to flourish, with the Queensland Government encouraging the growth by issuing licenses for water harvesting that locked farmers into development.

 

The licenses were issued with clause 1.001 under the Schedule of Terms for Water Harvesting License: The licensee shall install the work for which the license is granted within two (2) years from the date of grant of license. Basically farmers were told to use it, or lose it.

 

Late 1990’s – Government Reneges

 

After granting irrigators access to the water on the condition that the farmers used their own private funds to develop the water infrastructure, the Queensland Government then decided (Smartrivers does not agree) that they had over-allocated the resource and sought to take some of the water back.  Basically making irrigators pay for the perceived sins of the Government.

 

The Queensland Government was also looking to change the way it manages and allocates water resources in the future due to its commitments under the:

·         Council of Australian Governments’ (COAG) Water Resource Policies

·         National Competition Policy (NCP) agreements

·         Murray Darling Basin Agreement

·         Inter-Governmental Agreement on the Environment

·         National Principles on the Provision of Water for Ecosystems

 

Mid 2000 – Draft WAMP

 

The Queensland Government released a Draft Water Allocation and Management Plan for the Condamine-Balonne Basin.  The draft, outlining three scenarios for cutbacks in water allocations to re-distribute the water to the environment, was released without any socio-economic impact assessment studies having been undertaken.

 

Late 2000 – Flawed Science

 

Dr Lee Benson, on behalf of irrigators identified serious errors in the science and methodologies used by Queensland Government scientists to determine the need for reductions in water allocation and the level of those reductions.  The report was presented to the Minister.

 

The towns of St George and Dirranbandi on the Lower Balonne were to be the hardest hit by the loss of water and moved to protect their community from the devastating economic and social effects, by uniting under the banner of Smartrivers.

 

 

Local funds were raised to commission Price Waterhouse Coopers to undertake a Socio-Economic Impact Assessment of the Condamine Balonne WAMP which found: a sharp, unplanned reduction in irrigated agriculture would have an immediate and substantial impact on general economic activity within the Balonne region (and) any decline in on-farm activity will create a significant downturn in the regional economy.  These impacts will include the marginalisation of on and off-farm businesses, employment losses and a resulting reduction in population.

 

At the same time Smartrivers also commissioned Sinclair Knight Merz to commence the most comprehensive survey program of the regions waterways.  The survey found that irrigation alone could not be blamed for any changes to the ecological health of the river system and that in fact: in conclusion, the results of this survey do not support the often voiced opinion that the waterways of the Lower Balonne are severely degraded (and) the regional picture is one of favourable similarity to nearby catchments, some which are relatively unaffected by water resource developments. 

 

2001 –  The Impact

 

The threat of massive water restrictions raised through the draft WAMP and the subsequent moratorium on water infrastructure development saw the communities of St George and Dirranbandi stagnate.  Over the previous five years the populations in both towns swelled as the harnessing of water created opportunities for employment and young contractors took on big debts to have a go.  But with the work stopping, unemployment and bankruptcy became a major problem in the community.

 

Mid 2001 – The Court Case

 

The David and Goliath battle between the Lower Balonne communities and the Queensland Government now began in earnest as irrigators tested their theory that the Government was using incorrect and unsubstantiated economic and ecological information to justify a reduction in water allocations.

 

Anchorage Farming took the Queensland Department of Natural Resources to court, appealing against the reliability of the hydrological and ecological science the Department was using to reject an application to amalgamate a license.  The Departmental science being used in this individual case was the same science being used to develop the draft WAMP.

 

The cross-examination of Government scientists confirmed that indeed the Government science was flawed.

 

DNR&M’s answer to this clear message was to publish a glossy brochure, endorsed by the Minister, which tried to cover-up the seriousness of the result.

 

Mid 2002 – Secret Plans

 

As the Department regrouped to still try and push ahead with its argument that too much water was being extracted from the Lower Balonne, a secret deal came to light that rocked the Lower Balonne community to its very foundations.  The Queensland Government was planning to compulsorily acquire the largest irrigation operation in the region, Cubbie Station at Dirranbandi, to return its water allocation to the environment.

 

The community, which relies on the wealth and employment generated by the large locally owned operation, was in uproar and a series of public meetings were held.  It was at the final meeting that Premier Peter Beattie conceded that the issue of science needed to be resolved and appointed eminent freshwater ecologist Professor Peter Cullen to head-up a review of the science underpinning the assessment of the ecological condition of the Lower Balonne.

 

January 2003 – The Cullen Report

 

The review has confirmed what the Lower Balonne irrigators have been saying; the Lower Balonne River system is NOT currently degraded.

 

January 2003 & Beyond – The Way Forward

 

Due to the fact that the Lower Balonne is a relatively healthy waterway there is no longer the need for immediate drastic action, there is no immediate need to cutback water allocations.  Government, irrigators and the community now have time to work together to ensure the continued health of the river.

 

To put in place sustainable plans for the future, sound science must be generated to underpin the decision making process.  Monitoring programs must be implemented and time taken to evaluate the outcome of studies such as the Murray Darling Basin Commission’s four year study into the health of the Narran Lakes.

 

A few years is not very many in the life of a river, to ensure that we get it right and maintain the river’s health in the future.

 

However, if the Queensland Government continues to ignore the need for sound science and continues its dogmatic approach to slashing irrigators’ water access, or sound science down the track proves there is a need to reduce water usage, then quite clearly compensation will have to be paid to irrigators and the wider Lower Balonne community.