Murray Darling Basin

Entirely predictably, the Murray Darling river system is toxic with effluent again, host to masses of poisonous cyanobacteria. As the Weekly Times reports, "WATER will be switched off to hundreds of farmers and town residents in the Mallee this week as the Murray River blue-green algae emergency worsens. The toxic outbreak now involves almost 500km of the Murray River and has claimed reservoirs, rivers, wetlands and parts of Victoria’s two biggest irrigation districts. Taps were turned off to towns and farms in parts of the southern Mallee late Friday when the algal bloom reached key Wimmera Mallee pipeline pumps near Swan Hill, catching most residents unaware. Experts said a record autumn heatwave, with temperatures soaring above 40C in northwest Victoria this week, was expected to grow the algal bloom until it choked almost all of the Murray River along the NSW-­Victoria border within weeks."[1] But these problems have been known for so long now, it seems foolish to believe that we can hope for any resolution that would keep the vast Australian desert from claiming on our only major inland river system. Certainly we should not meddle with the northern river systems, but unfortunately our psychopathic leaders have already started.

People have asked me to republish a letter written in 1937 about this very problem. I have done so below, but if you really want to understand the horror of this phenomenon, get hold of a copy of Rodney Barker's tale of a scientist trying to blow the whistle on the pfisteria infestation on the Mississipi in the mid 1990s and probably still today. There and here it is the product of too much fertiliser and effluent going into too little water. This is among the best pieces of science writing I have ever read. The life-forms that toxic algae take and their ability to affect the nervous systems of animals large and small - notably humans and baby humans - outdoes the monster from the Black Lagoon and is very very real and very little recognised.

Russell Grimwade urges National Awakening in 1937 - but we are sleeping even more deeply today

Letter to the editor of the Argus Newspaper, 6 February 1937: Sir. - Your leading article "Nature Takes Revenge" in the Issue of Saturday is a valuable history of man's expansion to the outer continents from Europe. It states the basic laws under which man is allowed by Nature to add to his wealth and comfort. It also states the inevitable disaster that follows the contravention of these laws. The final sentence leaves the way open for constructive action in a manner which impels me to contribute a suggestion for the urgent consideration of my fellow Australians.

This isolated continent is the most recent of the earth's land masses to suffer the occupancy of civilised man. It is undeniable that in the century and a half that we and our antecedents have been here we have made a success of it - if success be measured by material and social progress. It is also undeniable that we have a duty to leave our
successors as good or a better land than we have enjoyed. If we do not learn by the mistakes that time is now revealing in other countries we are falling in our trust. The repeated stories of floods and disaster that come to us from .America are clear evidence of the errors of the systems of occupation of a few centuries ago. Are we yet taking action
to avoid those mistakes?

There is ample evidence that we are not.

Erosion, flood, and soil drift are three terrors alone that we are beginning to experience in the same way as other countries of comparatively recent settlement. To avoid these disasters, are we taking all the action possible that trained men recommend?

It is a sad fact that we are not.

There has been a remarkable growth this century in the universal education of our people in regard to the value and functions of trees and forests. But it is incomplete, and has not yet led to the necessary political action to safeguard the future.

Do Australians realise what uncontrolled settlement has done to their great river, the Murray?

Ninety years ago 51 per cent of its annual flow came down in winter months and 49 per cent in summer. Today 76 per cent is winter flow and 24 per cent, summer.

This is a unique illustration of the regulating value of forest-clad watersheds. Do Australians know that, since the Burrinjuck dam was finished, 12,000,000 cubic feet of silt has accumulated in it? Do the taxpayers who have built the Hume weir realise that only half its watershed is under control, and that the other half, in private ownership, may be cleared and burnt as cleanly as its owners wish, and that such operations must inevitably hasten the silting up of the huge lake, so that perhaps in 100 years it will not exist and cannot be remade? Do Australians realise that settlement in all States has taken place, and is still taking place, under Lands departments which dominate the trained officers of the Forests departments?

Do Australians realise that the chief product of their forests is not the lovely timber that they yield, but water and its regulation, which is the factor limiting the immediate population and future prosperity of their continent? ? Is it known that each year trained forest officers make an analysis of the causes of the fires that occur in our forests, and
that each year they report that more than half of them are caused deliberately? It is known by every interested party that for a few thousand pounds collected each year by Lands departments, holders of grazing licences or their agents, or their delayed-action candles, cause fires that burn out mountain sides of perfect watershed in return for precarious grazing for a few head of cattle.

Do Australians mind? Do they wish to save these appalling yearly losses and attain a balance that will prolong the future indefinitely in progress, prosperity, and peace from flood, fire, and denudation? If they do wish these things, much can be done to that end, but it must be done in the next few years. In a few more years it will be too late.

The first thing to be done is political. Let each State that wishes to ensure its future place all its Crown lands under the absolute control of its Forests Department. Let the forest officers of the State-men who are trained in the great fundamental science of forestry be the only authority who shall say what is to go on in those areas, and who shall enter them.

If tourists, graziers, settlers, or even Lands Department officers want access to those areas, let it be only with the approval of the Minister for Forests on the recommendation of
his experts.

This is the obvious first step to avoid the appalling mistakes that other countries have made and this country is still making. Such a step is above the factions of party politics, and far above the feelings and jealousies of departmental officers. It is no censure on Lands departments that the administration of Crown lands should be removed from their control. It is an archaism that they should so remain.

When Lands departments were given control of Crown lands the great science of forestry had not formulated the laws that govern the fundamental requirements of modern national life. For example, the urban consumption of water has Increased tenfold a head in the last 100 years, and cities are larger, and likely to become larger and even more extravagant. It is only by the application of the principles of sound forestry that supplies of the necessary volume will be available to the population this country may be called upon to sustain. It is no shame upon Lands Department officers that they have not the expert knowledge to provide these requirements. It is not their job.

It is shame upon us that we allow, by an inverted system of administration, the experts to be subservient to the layman. Should this change be wrought by public clamour or far-seeing governmental action, I believe that within 10 years the fire-loss alone would be so reduced that the people of our country would be encouraged to feel that the awful damage of the past was being reclaimed, and that Australia was doing something to reclaim the unrelenting desert creep that threatens us today.

Russell Grimwade, 6 February 1937.

NOTES

The introduction to this article cited from Chris McLennan, "Water crisis worsens as Murray River blue-green algae spreads," Weekly Times
March 8, 2016

Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) – independent authority or rubber stamp?

Over the last decade, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and its predecessor the Murray-Darling Basin Commission have been hamstrung by the National Water Initiative, which is promoting the privatisation of Australia's water: to the joy of speculators and the dismay of those who understand the need to promote wise and sustainable use of the nation's water.

MDBA – independent authority or rubber stamp?

News that neither the Federal Environment Minister nor the new Chair of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority are willing to endorse current members of the MDBA board will come as no surprise to many Australians, according to a statement released by public water rights and environmental advocacy group, Fair Water Use (Australia):

“The Federal Government has clearly been backed into a corner by the partisan and occasionally outrageous behaviour of those who view water as a private commodity rather than an invaluable common resource which must be managed carefully for all Australians.

There is little doubt that the pressure tactics of maverick sections of the irrigation lobby, and corporate players increasingly investing in Australian water, have already precipitated the resignations of the previous Chair and one board member, both possessing a wealth of experience in environmental matters - and it is highly likely that more resignations will follow.

Over the last decade, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and its predecessor the Murray-Darling Basin Commission have been hamstrung by the National Water Initiative, which is promoting the privatisation of Australia's water: to the joy of speculators and the dismay of those who understand the need to promote wise and sustainable use of the nation's water.

There are serious concerns that we are witnessing the final stages of the shameful rebadging of the Authority from guardian of the Murray-Darling to a mere rubber stamp for politically expedient, cynical policies which will only promote continuation of the overexploitation of the nation’s most vital river system.

It is entirely unacceptable that Australians have been deprived of their democratic right to determine whether this country’s water is protected as a common good or treated as a commodity to be traded on global financial markets.”

Source: Media Release from Fair Water Use, 7th March 2011

ScienceDaily (Oct. 1, 2010) — The world's rivers, the single largest renewable water resource for humans and a crucible of aquatic biodiversity, are in a crisis of ominous proportions, according to a new global analysis.

The report, published Sept. 30 in the journal Nature, is the first to simultaneously account for the effects of such things as pollution, dam building, agricultural runoff, the conversion of wetlands and the introduction of exotic species on the health of the world's rivers.

The resulting portrait of the global riverine environment, according to the scientists who conducted the analysis, is grim. It reveals that nearly 80 percent of the world's human population lives in areas where river waters are highly threatened posing a major threat to human water security and resulting in aquatic environments where thousands of species of plants and animals are at risk of extinction.

"Rivers around the world really are in a crisis state," says Peter B. McIntyre, a senior author of the new study and a professor of zoology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison's Center for Limnology.

The Nature report was authored by an international team co-led by Charles J. Vörösmarty of the City University of New York, an expert on global water resources, and McIntyre, an expert on freshwater biodiversity.

Examining the influence of numerous types of threats to water quality and aquatic life across all of the world's river systems, the study is the first to explicitly assess both human water security and biodiversity in parallel. Fresh water is widely regarded as the world's most essential natural resource, underpinning human life and economic development as well as the existence of countless organisms ranging from microscopic life to fish, amphibians, birds and terrestrial animals of all kinds.

Over many millennia, humans have exerted an increasingly pervasive influence on fresh water resources. Rivers, in particular, have attracted humans and have been altered through damming, irrigation and other agricultural and engineering practices since the advent of civilization. In recent times, chemical pollution, burgeoning human populations, and the accidental as well as purposeful global redistribution of plants, fish, and other animal species have had far-reaching effects on rivers and their aquatic inhabitants.

"Flowing rivers represent the largest single renewable water resource for humans," notes Vörösmarty. "What we've discovered is that when you map out these many sources of threat, you see a fully global syndrome of river degradation."

What jumps out, say McIntyre and Vörösmarty, is that rivers in different parts of the world are subject to similar types of stresses, such things as agricultural intensification, industrial development, river habitat modification and other factors. Compounding the problem is that some of the negative influences on rivers arrive in indirect ways. Mercury pollution, for example, is a byproduct of electricity generation at coal-fired power plants and pollutes surface water via the atmosphere.

"We find a real stew of chemicals flowing through our waterways," explains Vörösmarty, noting that the study represents a state-of-the-art summary, yet was unable to account for such things as threats from mining, the growing number of pharmaceuticals found in surface water and the synergistic effects of all the stresses affecting rivers.

"And what we're doing is treating the symptoms of a larger problem," Vörösmarty explains. "We know it is far more cost effective to protect these water systems in the first place. So the current emphasis on treating the symptoms rather than the underlying causes makes little sense from a water security standpoint or a biodiversity standpoint, or for that matter an economic standpoint."

Among the startling conclusions of the study is that rivers in the developed world, including much of the United States and Western Europe, are under severe threat despite decades of attention to pollution control and investments in environmental protection. Huge investments in water technology and treatment reduce threats to humans, but mainly in developed nations, and leave biodiversity in both developed and developing countries under high levels of threat, according to the new report.

"What made our jaws drop is that some of the highest threat levels in the world are in the United States and Europe," says McIntyre, who began work on the project as a Smith Fellow at the University of Michigan. "Americans tend to think water pollution problems are pretty well under control, but we still face enormous challenges."

The hard lessons learned by the developed world, says McIntyre, can help governments and planners in other parts of the world avoid making the same mistakes and experiment with new strategies for promoting water security and protecting biodiversity. Instead of investing billions of dollars in expensive remediation technologies, strategies such as protecting watersheds, for example, can reduce the costs of drinking water treatment, preserve floodplains for flood protection and enhance rural livelihoods.

Rivers of the world least at risk are those where human populations are smallest. Rivers in arctic regions and relatively inaccessible areas of the tropics appear to be in the best health.

The analysis used data sets on river stressors around the world. Built into state-of-the-art computer models, the data yield maps that integrate all of the individual stressors into aggregate indices of threat. The same strategy and data, say Vörösmarty and McIntyre, can be used by governments worldwide to assess river health and improve approaches to protecting human and biodiversity interests.

"We've created a systematic framework to look at the human water security and biodiversity domains on an equal footing," Vörösmarty says. "We can now begin presenting different options to decision makers to create environmental blueprints for the future."

The work underpinning the study was funded by the Earth System Science Partnership, an international scientific consortium that supports research on global environmental change; the Bonn-based Global Water System Project, an interdisciplinary research effort to articulate human-water interactions; and the freshwater BIODIVERSITAS project of Paris-based DIVERSITAS, an international collaborative whose mission includes providing accurate scientific information related to issues of biodiversity. The work was also supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Global Environmental Facility, and the Society for Conservation Biology's Smith Fellowship Program.

In addition to McIntyre and Vörösmarty, authors of the Nature report include Mark Gessner of the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science & Technology; David Dudgeon of the University of Hong Kong; Alex Prusevich and Stanley Glidden of the University of New Hampshire; Pamela Green of the City University of New York; Stuart Bunn of Griffith University, Australia; Caroline Sullivan of Southern Cross University, Australia; Cathy Reidy Liermann of the University of Washington; and Peter Davies of the University of Western Australia.

Originally published on-line in Science Daily.The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by University of Wisconsin-Madison. The original article was written by Terry Devitt. See also: Murray Darling Basin plan must not become a political football, Fair Water Use

Remember the lesson of the great Newfoundland cod fisheries. Rudyard Kipling’s Captains Courageous gives a description of fish so plentiful that the waters seethed with them. In 1977 Canada tried to stop the reduction of the cod stocks by declaring 320 kilometers off Newfoundland off limits to foreign factory ships. The local industry flourished, bringing prosperity to Newfoundland. In the 1980s marine biologists warned that the future was threatened by the heavy fishing and recommended an annual target of 125,000 tonnes of cod. But the community outcry about the economic and social damage made the government set the target at 235,000 tonnes. Stocks fell below a sustainable level and in June 1992 one of the richest natural resources was closed down. 30,000 jobs were lost and Newfoundland fell into rapid economic decline.

Millions of people depend on Murray River health

The lesson for the health of the Murray River is clear. (See Peter Goodwin’s letter in the AGE, October 2010)
Millions of us depend upon this river. We cannot repeat the mistake of Newfoundland when scientists warn us of consequences of letting it die.

We are doing some silly things.

Is water wasted that is not directly used now by the people? Is it wasted if it keeps the river alive for our future use, if it floods the plains where the red gums grow, or keeps alive the swamps, which the migrating birds, and other wildlife depend upon? This is a question, which must be answered by us all now, for the sake of the future.

Four States of Australia squabble over what water there is – Queensland, where much of the water originates, New South Wales and Victoria which have the problem of whether to keep the trees of the flood plains alive, and South Australia, where the river used to flow into the sea, and is now struggling to keep the lakes and estuary alive, as well as the capital of Adelaide.

Water waste by irrigators and country towns is now greatly reduced by more enlightened practices, but some areas are more progressive than others. It is still not worked out which crops are best suited to different areas, especially with water-hungry cotton and rice. Other crops such as dried fruit would prosper more if they could compete with Middle Eastern imports, which have low labor costs but a high real cost in freight, which adds to carbon emissions and fuel loss.

There are some crops necessary for feeding our population, which it would be wiser to grow to some extent at least, in our fertile Murray River Basin, than rely entirely on imports. Water is a scarce commodity the most of the world, and we use the water overseas for our imported food too.

Private ownership of water is disastrous for this country

A great waste of the Murray River is the private ownership of water. This means that government must pay private interests for water to use in the public interest. Originally far-seeing legislators in Victoria decreed that all water belonged to the state, which gave irrigators and others the rights to use it. Unfortunately this right has become a right to own it. Not only irrigators but financial interests have now got a source of income that costs the Murray River and the State dearly. A title system for the use of water similar to land ownership would be disastrous for this dry country.

Farmers and States trading rights to use water on an annual basis is one thing. To have titles to private ownership of water is reckless.

Water ownership would inevitably accumulate into the hands of a few. There would be no legal way to prevent foreign ownership. Greedy people have their eyes on water ownership globally, as with growing population pressures it becomes the most valuable commodity on earth. The pressure on governments from these private interests may be great, and must be resisted.

Governments selling our life-blood away are treasonous

There is such a thing as treason, and selling away our life-blood is one of them. Although distribution can be allowed through private companies, and private interests assist in infrastructure, the living water itself must remain inalienably in public ownership, and subject to public control. Free trade agreements must never have a legal chance to include water.

North South Pipeline is a really stupid waste

The stupidest waste of the Murray River is the North-South Pipeline of Victoria, built by the Victorian government to keep the Melbourne electorates happy, takes water down south for Melbourne, which otherwise would flow down the Goulburn River to the Murray River and associated irrigators.

Australian Aboriginals did it much better than we do

The aboriginal inhabitants for 40,000 years lived sustainably on the banks of the river, and harvested its wildlife without extinction, keeping their population within the bounds of existing technology, droughts and floods.

National public water rights and environmental advocacy group Fair Water Use is encouragedby the broad recommendations made in the guide to the draft Basin Plan released earlier today by the Murray Darling Basin Authority, but is concerned that Federal and State parliamentarians will use the forthcoming consultation period to justify softening of the Plan for short term electoral advantage, rather than to promote the long term interests of the river system and its communities.

The group’s national coordinator, Ian Douglas, commented this afternoon, "The progressive degradation of the Murray-Darling cannot be resolved without significant impact upon those who were previously encouraged by successive governments to overexploit the waters of the nation’s most vital rivers."

Fair Water Use believes that Australian governments must shoulder much of the blame for the crisis, as a result of a raft of inept policies, including the hyper-allocation of Murray-Darling water, the COAG decision of 1994 to develop a national "water industry" and the promotion of agribusiness-based managed investment schemes.

"Basin communities have themselves been exploited by Federal and State administrations and the pro-market lobby and have every right to feel aggrieved", Dr Douglas added.

A politically fudged and compromised Basin Plan will be no friend to those who seek to make responsible use of Murray-Darling water. The Murray-Darling Basin Authority must be allowed to develop its Basin Plan free from pressure from those who fail to grasp, or choose to ignore, the profound, long term, economic, social and environmental implications of a degraded Murray-Darling river system.

"Governments must now devise concerted regional development initiatives, to enable Basin communities to transition to a sustainable future," Dr Douglas concluded.

See also: Murray Darling Basin plan must not become a political football

Comments yesterday from Tony Burke, Federal Minister with responsibility for water, appear to infringe upon the statutory independence of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, according to environmental and public water rights advocacy group, Fair Water Use.

Comments yesterday from Tony Burke, Federal Minister with responsibility for water, appear to infringe upon the statutory independence of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, according to environmental and public water rights advocacy group, Fair Water Use.

Commenting on the long-awaited Basin Plan being drafted by the Authority, Mr Burke indicated that he was worried that the Plan may not be considering the “knock-on” impacts, upon regional businesses, of reduced diversions from the Murray-Darling river system.

There can be little doubt that the Authority is all too well aware of the full, regional implications of an effective Basin Plan. However, as acknowledged by its Chair, the Authority is required to place the health of the river system above all other concerns – and for sound reasons.

The Authority knows that it cannot rely on unpredictable flooding rains to maintain the river system. Unless outflows from the Murray mouth are significantly increased year on year, the nation’s most vital rivers will continue to degrade as a result of salinisation and increased toxin load.

However, the Minister’s comments can only place extreme pressure on the Authority to dilute its recommendations and thereby compromise the future of the river system and all who depend upon it.

The Federal Government is to be lauded for moving to address the endemic mismanagement of the Murray-Darling. However, the long term interests of Basin communities will be best served by carefully designed regional development initiatives - not by a timid and ineffective Basin Plan.

Search for another food bowl:

The National Water Initiative, agreed in 2004 by the Council of Australian Governments, provided a national blueprint for water reform. The National Water Initiative recognised that, as the reality of changing water resource security in the south is better understood, there would be a need to consider the potential for other parts of Australia, such as the north, to support future land and water development.

One element of the plan was to establish the Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce to address its enquiries to the key surface and groundwater systems within the Timor Sea and Gulf of Carpentaria drainage divisions and the North East Coast drainage division north of Cairns. 

The Taskforce concluded that developing Northern Australia as an integrated, sustainable region was a complex policy challenge.

On paper at least, the figures are indeed astonishing: some one billion litres of rain dumps on northern Australia each year. Could the north satisfy not only Australia's rapidly growing population, but also the future needs of our Asian and South Pacific neighbours?

It seems not. Or at least not to that degree according to a three-year Federal Government study into the sustainable development of northern Australia. It also points to the damage that high rainfall can do, stripping away top soil, leaving the ground infertile.

The Top End is governed by its two seasons - the wet season from November to April when it's a deluge, and the dry, when the taps are off. The north still has that powerful hold over people's imagination.

Projects such as the Green Hills dam on the Gilbert River near Georgetown, a dam on the Flinders River at Hughenden, and other water storage facilities researched for the Flinders at Richmond and Julia Creek and along the Norman River have proved to be pipe dreams for those western communities.

The CSIRO water study, presented to the taskforce last year, found there was not enough water to irrigate large swaths of land in the north without doing major damage to the rivers and the surrounding environment.

The taskforce recommended no new dams, but advocated a mosaic of small-scale irrigation systems "that have carefully combined arable land with available water".

In other words, for all the southern Murray-Darling Basin’s problems with record drought and the threat of a drying, warming climate, the Northern Australia Land and Water Task Force report found that northern Australia has only limited potential for expanding irrigated agriculture and horticulture – between 20,000 and 40,000 hectares, compared to about 1.4 million hectares in the Murray-Darling Basin.

Northern Australia’s rich biodiversity and strong Indigenous cultures are world renowned and should form the basis for sustainable economic development across the region.....There can be a strong economic and conservation future for northern Australia, but it will lie in the development of industries that are well suited to the region, such as tourism and good management of fisheries and land, says Don Henry, ACF executive director.

ACF believes a sustainable future, particularly for Indigenous communities, lies in increased opportunities in these industries.

The Murray-Darling Basin

The Murray-Darling Basin covers 1,061,469 square kilometres or approximately one-seventh (14%) of the total area of Australia (7,692,024 square kilometres).
It is the lifeblood for eastern Australia, stretching 1,061,469 square kilometres through Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. The three main river systems that make up the Murray-Darling Basin include the Darling River, the Murrumbidgee River, the Lachlan River and Billabong Creek; and the Murray River itself.

It contains over 40% of all Australian farms, which produce wool, cotton, wheat, sheep, cattle, dairy produce, rice, oil-seed, wine, fruit and vegetables for both domestic and overseas markets. As Australia's most important agricultural region, the Basin produces one third of Australia's food supply and supports over a third of Australia's total gross value of agricultural production.

The Basin's most valuable resource is water.

The Murray-Darling Basin is home to a large number of different plants and animals.
About the Murray River
It has at least 35 endangered species of birds, 16 species of endangered mammals and over 35 different native fish species. Unfortunately, 20 species of mammals have already become extinct.

The Murray-Darling Basin is one of the richest sources of Indigenous archaeological and heritage sites in Australia. There are many hundreds of significant Indigenous sites along
the River. They include scarred trees, burial sites, campsites, canoe trees, hidden sites and earth sites.

Almost the entire Basin had been explored and occupied by Europeans within 50 years of the crossing of the Great Dividing Range. The development of a European way of life resulted in unintentional degradation of many of the Basin’s natural resources. This lack of knowledge about soil, climate, and geology of the Murray-Darling Basin has led to serious environmental problems including salinity, rising water tables and excessive vegetation clearances.

A 2001 report:

Forty per cent of the river length assessed was impaired, having lost a significant number of aquatic macroinvertebrates expected to occur there.

Ten per cent of river length was found to be severely impaired, having lost at least 50 per cent of the types of aquatic macroinvertebrates expected to occur there.

More than 95 per cent of the river length assessed in the Murray-Darling Basin had an environmental condition that was degraded, and 30 per cent was substantially modified from the original condition.

Native vegetation is currently being threatened by rising salinity (salt) levels; human-made changes to flooding and drying areas; and careless campers, boaters and land-developers. Nevertheless, with climate change threatening to make matters worse, finding a solution to the water crisis is becoming more urgent.

Salinity
Close to half of Australia's saline seepage is located in Murray-Darling Basin, especially the Lower Murray-Darling.
Three processes greatly increase the rate of salinisation: land clearing, erection of river structures, and irrigation.

Land Degradation
The main forms of land degradation are:

Last month, Fair Water Use contacted the Chairman of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Mr Mike Taylor, urging him to clarify the priorities of the Authority.

It appears that the advice was heeded.

In a statement received yesterday (11th January), Mr Taylor has affirmed that the Authority is legally obliged to place the health of the river system ahead of all other considerations.

This news should be applauded loudly. It is now generally understood that if the ecological decline of the Basin is not reversed, a bleak future awaits all who wish to utilise its waters.

Australians now seek confirmation that the MDBA is walking-the-walk: A highly significant first step would be for it to do all possible to ensure that the entire system reaps the environmental benefits of the inundations that have blessed much of its northern headwaters.

If Mr Taylor feels he is unable to achieve such an outcome, then the Commonwealth must be encouraged to invoke urgent legislation to enable him to do so - now and in the future. Failing that, the Authority should be put out to pasture, as was its predecessor, and a new, entirely independent body established; one invested with the powers to enable it to truly act as the guardian of the Murray-Darling.

Should a declaration of a state of emergency be able to facilitate these changes, then the Federal Government should be aware that resistance to such a move has collapsed in recent months: it could well be a very sound and defining decision in this election year.

See also: "Canberra must deliver on promised audit of private water storages" of 7 Jan 10.

Tired of waiting?

Fair Water Use is urging supporters to participate in its national campaign, which in-part calls for the declaration of a State of Emergency with respect to the Murray-Darling Basin and for the Commonwealth to assume control of its management via a truly independent and appropriately empowered national authority.

The Federal Government has the constitutional powers to do so.

We are hopeful that, should Mr Rudd receive sufficient numbers of post-bags full of letters demanding that he move on this issue, even if he cannot grasp the scale of the crisis, he will at least understand that it would be a sound political decision.

Please take a moment to print off and sign the letter to the PM which can be downloaded at http://www.fairwateruse.com.au/images/stories/pdfs/the%20hon%20kevin%20rudd%20mp.pdf, or via our home page, and post or fax (02-6273-4100) it to Canberra.

Cows have to give birth to a calf every year in order to produce milk. Mother cows are known to have highly developed maternal instincts and can bellow for days for their stolen babies! The killing of bobby calves, usually at 5 days old as unwanted by-products of the dairy industry, is one aspect that shows it is not a benign industry. We kill over one million new-born calves each year. In Australia, legal means of destroying these unviable calves on farm includes bludgeoning calf skulls with a hammer or shooting them in the head with a rifle or a mechanical bolt. Vealers are raised in crates to be anaemic, for white flesh.

The dairy industry is a high water consumer, and must take a lot of responsibility for the demise of the Murray-Darling food basin! We are also heavy exporters of dairy products. How sustainable is our dairy industry?

Methane emissions from dairy cattle contribute around 30% of all agricultural emissions that total an 18% contribution from agriculture, due mainly to livestock.

According to ABS, in 2005-06, the agricultural commodities that used the most water in the Murray Darling Basin (MDB) were dairy farming - 1,287 GL or 17% and pasture for other livestock - 1,284 GL or 17%, much of this for dairy cattle. In 2005-06, the dairy industry accounted for 39% of the total irrigated area of pasture in the MDB.

About 45% of Australian milk is exported (2007/2008), mainly as milk powders, cheese and butter.

European style diary products can be replaced by more humane and sustainable plant-based ones such as soy, rice and oat milks.

Dairy products have naturally high levels of saturated fat which raises blood cholesterol and will increase vascular disease risk in many people. The traditional cuisines of many countries are dairy-free. Australia's Western-style diseases can be attributed to the amounts of animal-saturated fats we consume, including that found in dairy products.

The amount of water used to make a litre of milk is between 320 and 1000 litres. Soymilk requires about half the amount water of dairy milk. Soymilk is high in protein without the water consumption, the environmental impact of livestock, without the deaths of calves and cruelty to cows, and is healthier!

www.rspca.org.au/campaign/dairyindustry.asp
www.dairycruelty.com.au