News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Murray chief warns of patchy science 

Murray chief warns of patchy science

26 May, 2009 06:21 AM
CHANGES to the Murray-Darling river system would be based on incomplete and "very patchy" environmental science, the man charged with designing the Federal Government's new "basin plan" says.

Murray-Darling Basin Authority executive director Les Roberts said tight political deadlines imposed on the basin plan meant "large slabs" of the river system would remain unmapped by credible environmental science.

The basin plan, central to the Commonwealth's $12.9 billion Murray River takeover, will set extraction limits and new arrangements for water management. The draft plan will be released in June next year.

A year of consultation will follow before the plan is enacted in mid-2011, and Mr Roberts said those time frames would ensure "plenty of uncertainty" in the planning and knowledge available.

"It needs to be done in the blink of an eyelid, we have a political commitment for the basin plan to be made in 2011," he said.

"The timing to prepare the proposed basin plan essentially means there is no capacity for further research or new work in developing the plan. We have to rely on what is already available."

Speaking at a water debate in Melbourne yesterday, Mr Roberts said plenty of research was available on economic and social factors, but much less on environmental factors.

"In terms of environmental information, it is very patchy … there are large slabs of the basin where there is very limited information," he said. "I have to be absolutely clear about this; there'll be plenty of uncertainty."

Mr Roberts said most of the environmental science available was focused on high-profile assets such as Victoria's Barmah Forest.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size



RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Australian industry and the community have been ripped-off by the government agencies responsible for the MDB. Firstly, they used flawed salinity science to dehydrate the soil water with salt drains and groundwater with pumping. Secondly, they stopped using the innovation resource mapping science provided by private companies and consequently lost significant intelligence from about 2000 regarding the hydrology and soil processes of the Basin. The soft social and economic science approach of Land and Water Australia (LWA) and the MDBC failed agriculture and ultimately the health of the Basin and the wellbeing of the Basin's rural community. It is not to late for Mr Roberts to engage with private industry scientists for gaps in the environmental science.
Posted by Mangiri, 27/05/2009 8:01:28 AM
This is yet another reason why we should not have bureaucrats in charge of any systems which have a direct impact on the ability of business within the MDB to do any planning. To suggest the 'science will be incomplete due to tight political timeframes' is insulting. Bloody well work harder, utilise past science, stand upon the shoulders of those who came before you. Make some decisions, be prepared to make mistakes, just don't repeat them, if the good doctor expects that the additional time will aid in getting it perfect, it won't. My experience with this system would suggest that our understanding will never be perfect, It is in constant flux. Accept this and GET ON WITH IT.
Posted by sam j, 27/05/2009 9:36:45 AM
Totally agree with the previous comments, one of the main problems is the disconnection between science, agencies and farmers. There could be much quicker science if farmers and science worked more closely together. Agency people have little regard for farmer input but expect us to bend over backwards to facilitate sometimes the most inappropriate projects eg wetting wetlands that are normally dry in a drought. We can only hope that one day we will get some champions within out policy makers that can recognize the importance of people in this dicipline.
Posted by concerned, 30/05/2009 9:51:42 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
24 May, 2009
22 May, 2009
21 May, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you believe human activity is the cause of climate change?

Yes
(43.6%)

No
(48%)

Undecided
(8.4%)

Total Votes: 1138
Poll Date: 24 May, 2009

Most popular articles

Ray White Rural IRRIGATION CONFERENCE 2010
 
Rural Bookshop
 
NQR Facebook
 
NQR Twitter


 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...