Ocean acidification leaving fish in the dark

 environment, waterways/wetlands
Jan 302014
 

The ConversationOriginal story by James Whitmore, The Conversation

Increasing carbon dioxide in the world’s oceans could hamper fishes' eyesight, slowing their reaction times and leaving them vulnerable to predators or unable to hunt, new research has shown.
Now you see me… Ocean acidification is making things blurry for fish. Photo: Flickr/Mr. T in DC

Now you see me… Ocean acidification is making things blurry for fish. Photo: Flickr/Mr. T in DC

Experts say it adds to the existing evidence that ocean acidification will be bad for marine ecosystems and possibly fisheries.

Ocean acidification is one of the effects of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide by burning fossil fuels, which is also increasing global temperatures.

CO2, when absorbed by seawater, is converted to carbonic acid. Since the industrial revolution, ocean pH has decreased by 0.1, corresponding to a 30% increase in ocean acidity.

Previous studies have confirmed that acidification can have a wide variety of impacts on ocean life, including damaging shells and corals and interfering with fishes' sense of smell, with the polar regions particularly vulnerable. Acidification is also known to effect neurotransmitters in fish brains.

The new study, in the Journal of Experimental Biology, shows that increasing CO2 has a direct impact on fish eyes.

The researchers measured the impact of acidification on fish eyes by subjecting damselfish to different amounts of dissolved CO2 and lights flickering at different speeds.

All animals, including humans, can see lights flickering — up to a point. Above a certain speed, flickering lights appear constant. The speed at which flickering light becomes constant varies among species.

The researchers found that at high levels of CO2 fish had trouble resolving high-speed flashes.

Weng-Sun Chung, PhD candidate at University of Queensland and an author on the study, said that although there was no direct evidence that fish have slower reaction times with more CO2, the study suggested such effects are likely.

Many fish are dependent on quick reaction times to hunt for food, or escape form predators. If fish are unable to see fast-moving predators or prey, they would be unable to react. Instead, the fish would just see a blur.

Fish that could better cope with higher CO2 would have an advantage over fish with slower reaction times, which could disrupt ecosystems, Chung said.

Winners and losers

Professor Ivan Nagelkerken, an ocean acidification researcher at University of Adelaide, said the study adds to the picture of ocean acidification and its impact on marine life.

“There are a very wide range of impacts of acidification. Most are related to the different senses that fish use.”

“We know ocean acidification has a negative effect on the auditory capabilities of fish, and that it interrupts their olfactory capabilities, for example failing to smell optimal habitat and predators. Research has also shown that it effects visual perception.”

Professor Nagelkerken said research also shows competition between species may be altered.

“Some fish may get bolder and more aggressive thanks to ocean acidification, and other fishes not. So if you put two species together you will see a shift in aggressiveness and dominance.”

Wider ranging impacts might include changes to marine fisheries, and a decline in biodiversity “in favour of more generalist species that can cope with more variable environments”.

But Professor Nagelkerken warned it was too early to predict winners and losers.

“We’re very far from understanding all of it because there are so many different ecosystems and species.”

The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Launch of the first online Global Freshwater Biodiversity Atlas

 waterways/wetlands
Jan 292014
 

Original story at Wetlands International

A new online Atlas of freshwater biodiversity presenting spatial information and species distribution patterns was launched today. The Atlas is an output of BioFresh, an EU-funded project supported by Wetlands International that is putting together the widely dispersed information about life in our rivers and lakes, to better understand, manage and protect our freshwaters for generations to come.

Key freshwater biodiversity information will improve policy-making

Freshwaters are incredibly diverse habitats: they cover less than 1% of the Earth’s surface yet are home to 35% of all vertebrate species! Sadly freshwater life is declining at an alarming rate faster than any other component of global biodiversity.

A challenge for policy is how to integrate protection of freshwater life and the ecosystem services it provides with real and pressing demands on freshwater resources from the energy, food and sanitation sectors.

This new Atlas is a response from freshwater scientists to this policy challenge. It provides policy-makers, water managers and scientists with an online, open-access and interactive gateway to key geographical information and spatial data on freshwater biodiversity across a range of scales. The Atlas is a resource for better, evidenced-based decision making relating to water policy, science and management.

How it works - interactive map features

The online Atlas adopts a book-like structure allowing easy browsing through its four thematic chapters, on: I) Patterns of freshwater biodiversity; 2) Freshwater resources and ecosystems; 3) Pressures on freshwater systems; and 4) Conservation and management. Each map is accompanied by a short article with further contextual background information. The interactive map interface allows the user to switch between the maps easily, navigate and zoom within maps, and view additional information for each map feature. Unlike a conventional printed atlas this online Atlas can be constantly expanded and updated as new maps and data become available.

It is edited by a pan-European group of freshwater science and conservation experts from 12 research institutes and is supported by a number of the key international partner organisations active in the field of freshwater biodiversity research and conservation, namely the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Global Water System Project (GWSP), Conservation International (CI), Wetlands International, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

Atlas pages to explore

Enter the Atlas via the BioFresh platform: http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu
Explore the contents: http://atlas.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/index.php/explore
Interactive map interface: http://atlas.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/index.php/maps
How to contribute: http://atlas.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/index.php/contribute

Links

BioFresh information platform: http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu
Global Freshwater Biodiversity Atlas: http://atlas.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu

Bio robots make a splash in the Indian Ocean

 environment, waterways/wetlands
Jan 292014
 

CSIROMedia release from CSIRO 

The Indian Ocean contains vast fisheries and mineral resources that are of strategic importance to both Australia and India. It also plays a direct role in driving the climates of its surrounding regions – home to more than 16 per cent of the world's population.
The deployment of an Argo float into the ocean. Photo: CSIRO

The deployment of an Argo float into the ocean. Photo: CSIRO

An infographic on how data is collected from an Argo float. Image: CSIRO

An infographic on how data is collected from an Argo float. Image: CSIRO

The new 'Bio Argo' floats, to be launched in mid 2014, will enhance the already successful Argo float technology to measure large-scale changes in the chemistry and biology of marine ecosystems below the Indian Ocean's surface.

The Argo floats are a network of 3600 free-floating sensors, operating in open ocean areas that provide real-time data on ocean temperature and salinity.

The 'Bio Argo' floats will include additional sensors for dissolved oxygen, nitrate, chlorophyll, dissolved organic matter, and particle scattering. They will target specific gaps in our understanding of Indian Ocean ecosystems of immediate concern to India and Australia, such as the Bay of Bengal and the waters of north Western Australia.

CSIRO's Dr Nick Hardman-Mountford said the pilot project, led by CSIRO in collaboration with the Indian National Institute of Oceanography (CSIR-NIO) and the Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services, will improve our understanding of cause and effect in the Indian Ocean's climate and ecosystems.

We expect the technology being utilised in this project to provide new insights into biogeochemistry of the Indian Ocean." Dr Wajih Naqvi

"By studying the Indian Ocean in this detail, we can investigate the origin and impact of marine heatwaves like the one that devastated the coral reefs and fisheries off north Western Australian in 2011 – and improve our prediction of them in the future," Dr Hardman-Mountford said.

CSIR-NIO Director, Dr Wajih Naqvi, said the novel technological innovation will give researchers from both countries a new understanding of the Indian Ocean.

"We expect the technology being utilised in this project to provide new insights into the biogeochemistry of the Indian Ocean and how it is being impacted by human activities," Dr Naqvi said.

The proposed advances in ocean observation, ecosystem understanding and resources management, which will benefit the entire Indian Ocean Rim, can only occur through collaboration between India and Australia.

Dr Nick D'Adamo, Head of the Perth Programme Office supporting UNESCO's Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) – a partner in the project – praised the collaborative nature of the project.

"By combining the research capabilities of India and Australia we will see an improved ability to predict and prepare for global climate change, as well as better conservation of marine biodiversity," Dr D'Adamo said.

The $1 million project was funded in part by the Australian Government under the Australia-India Strategic Research Fund.

Gallery: Brisbane’s 1974 floods, 40 years on

 community, Interest, waterways/wetlands
Jan 272014
 

ABC NewsOriginal story at ABC News

Four decades on, take a look back at photos of the devastating floods that swamped Brisbane on the Australia Day weekend in 1974.

Fourteen people died, at least 6,700 homes were inundated and there was $980 million ($8.1 billion in 2014 terms) of damage after the swollen Brisbane river surged through the city on Sunday January 27.

The flooding came after near-record rainfall over the wet summer, which was topped off by torrential falls from January 23, caused by Tropical Cyclone Wanda.

Between January 24 and 29, central Brisbane alone received an enormous 650 millimetres of rain.

The army and the fire brigade were called into action, even helping to repair the Pauls milk factory in South Brisbane, where waters reached six feet.

City underwater

 

Riding out the disaster

 

Days of soaking

 

Landmarks inundated

 

Enoggera Dam swamped

 

Boats replace cars

 

Newspaper coverage

 

University flooded

 

Tennyson power station

 

Milk factory goes under

 

Cleaning up

Irrigators group backs Commonwealth buy-back plan

 community, environment, government, waterways/wetlands
Jan 272014
 

ABC NewsOriginal story by Gavin Coote, ABC News

A local irrigators' group has come out in support of a buy-back scheme on the Murray-Darling Basin.
Irrigation in the Murray-Darling basin. A farmer walking past a mobile irrigation boom on a dying oat crop in the Murray-Darling river basin outside Moulamein, August 24, 2007. Photo: Tim Wimborne/Reuters

Irrigation in the Murray-Darling basin. A farmer walking past a mobile irrigation boom on a dying oat crop in the Murray-Darling river basin outside Moulamein, August 24, 2007. Photo: Tim Wimborne/Reuters

Yesterday the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder announced it would temporarily sell water in the Gwydir valley in northern NSW.

This would mean some of the Commonwealth's annual allocations of water will be available for sale, a decision which has been backed by the NSW Irrigators Council and the Murray Darling Basin Authority.

But the sale's angered environmentalists, and Greens Environment spokeswoman, Lee Rhiannon, says the policy will come at the cost of the environment.

Citrus grower and South West Water Users chairman Alan White says while the sale won't impact those outside the Gwydir, it's a step in the right direction.

"It's a good decision, they haven't got any local use for the water [in the Gwydir], it'd be criminal if they wasted it," he said.

"Why not sell it and use the proceeds for other environmental water purposes either in the Gwydir or someone else in the valley?"

Irrigator recalls 'successful' water trading system on Murray

Mr White says the "naive" opposition expressed by some environmentalists fails to recognise how Australian wetlands run their natural course.

"The Murray Wetlands Group is a very good example of where this system's worked well in the Murray previously," he said.

"A long time ago before this environmental watering regime became popular they started doing a lot of good work, and they acquired some water licences as a consequence of some water savings at Moira Lake, which is on the Murray River.

"Some years it simply didn't make sense for them to use the water in Moira Lake, they didn't have another use for it. If they didn't have a use for it, they would routinely sell the water, bank the proceeds and spend money to fix things the next year.

Mr White describes the idea of a market-based approach as "an eminently logical, sensible system".

"The reaction against it from some environmental groups really just displays absolute ignorance of how wetland ecosystems operate in Australia," he said.

Mr White says it's a natural cycle for rivers to go through a drying phase following wet periods.

The New South Wales Irrigators' Council says the benefits of a water sale could potentially spread beyond the Gwydir valley.

Economic policy analyst Stephanie Schulte says the Commonwealth will be able to buy water in other parts of the Murray Darling with the money raised from its Gwydir sale.

She says this will be of large benefit to irrigators in the areas affected.

"The sale of environmental water in the Gwydir will make further allocation available in that particular valley," she said.

"But of course the proceeds from that transaction will then be used for purchases of water somewhere else in the basin so it could have impacts for other water users in other parts of the basin as well."

Bull sharks are swarming in the Brisbane and Bremer Rivers

 community, government, waterways/wetlands
Jan 262014
 

Original story by , Queensland Times

BULL sharks are swarming in the Brisbane and Bremer rivers and Cr Paul Tully has warned residents using the waterways to be wary.
JUST A PUP: North Ipswich resident Shannan Landy with the young bull shark he caught at Mt Crosby Weir on Sunday night.

JUST A PUP: North Ipswich resident Shannan Landy with the young bull shark he caught at Mt Crosby Weir on Sunday night.

The QT has received reports of increased numbers of sharks being seen and caught in the rivers, with fishermen regularly pulling them out.

Cr Tully has also been receiving similar feedback and urged boaties and those using the river to exercise caution.

He said children paddling in the water, or assisting their parents putting a boat or jet ski into the river, were most at risk.

"There are regular reports of bull sharks being caught in the Brisbane and Bremer rivers," Cr Tully said.

"It is a warning to parents to be very, very careful.

"The bull sharks are around and there have been fatalities on the Gold Coast.

"It is probably only a matter of time before there could be a fatality.

"They have been seen up as far as Colleges Crossing and one regular fisherman reckons they are teeming in the Brisbane River.

"I asked him how many and he said, 'Imagine if you kicked a bull ants' nest and they just swarmed everywhere'.

"His impression was that bull sharks are just swarming on the bottom of the river.

"It is a timely reminder. It is summer and with people out on the river, putting out boats and fishing...just don't dangle your feet. Be very careful."

The QT accompanied Cr Tully to the Goodna boat ramp to try and pull a shark out for ourselves using a live catfish and a favourite rod of Cr Tully's that he hadn't used since the 2011 flood.

But the tide, the wind, the time of the day and the 40-degree heat on Tuesday were against us.

"But we'll catch one.

"It might take a couple of days," Cr Tully said.

"Dusk and dawn is when we might hit the jackpot."

North Ipswich resident Shannan Landy did land a young bull shark near the Mt Crosby Weir on Sunday night.

He caught the shark using live mullet as bait.

"The little ones put up a good fight too," he said.

"There are a lot of little ones around but I am sure there are some of the big mothers around.

"There must be something out there laying the pups.

"The one I caught was about half-a-metre long but I have caught them up to a metre long in the Brisbane River.

"The bigger ones I have caught down towards the junction of the Bremer and Brisbane River and down at Kookaburra Park."

Mr Landy said he had heard of bull sharks of 1.2m being caught up at Mt Crosby.

"I think there have always been lots of them," he said.

"It is just that people are becoming more aware of it now.

"Guys are out there chasing bass. They catch the bass and bring them in and, the next thing you know, the shark comes up and sees it as an easy meal...and they are hooked onto a shark. A lot of people aren't targeting sharks but they are ending up catching them."

Green groups dump on Great Barrier Reef dredge spoils

 community, environment, government, waterways/wetlands
Jan 252014
 

Original story by Graham Lloyd, The Australian

THE heads of Australia's main environment groups who claim to represent 1.48 million members have signed a joint letter urging the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to reject a plan to dump dredge spoils from expansion of the Abbott Point Coal terminal within the marine park.

Environment groups said a decision to approve dumping would be "a fundamental breach of the duties and office" of reef authority chairman Russell Reichelt.

Federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt has approved the capital dredging program but a decision on whether or not to approve the dumping in Great Barrier Reef waters was deferred by the reef authority until next week.

Conservation groups claim the final site for dumping has not been agreed to and that no decision should be made until the outcome of an independent inquiry into the Gladstone Harbour dredging and port expansion is known.

Mr Hunt said he would announce the terms of reference for an independent commission of inquiry into Gladstone next week.

That probe will not investigate the Abbott Point expansion, which is more than 600km north.

The inquiry into the management, regulation and implementation of the Gladstone expansion as part of the $35 billion Curtis Island LNG export project has been taken up by a broader environmental campaign to restrict industrial development and shipping near the Great Barrier Reef.

Yesterday's joint letter was signed by the heads of WWF-Australia, the Australian Marine Conservation Society, Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Get UP! and Humane Society International-Australia. It called on the reef authority to refuse a dredge dumping permit for North Queensland Bulk Port Corp's Abbot Point dredging program.

"The overall health of the Great Barrier Reef, particularly in the southern two-thirds of the region, has declined significantly," the letter says. "Key habitats such as coral reefs and seagrass meadows are in serious decline and populations of threatened species, like turtles and dugongs, are continuing to dwindle.

"A primary driver in this decline has been poor water quality and we are extremely concerned that further pressure through dredging and dumping in the reef's waters will only exacerbate the situation."

A spokeswoman for the reef authority said the January 31 deadline still stood. She said the authority had no comment on the letter.

The environment groups say they do not believe strict conditions placed on the dredging project by Mr Hunt will be sufficient.

"We reject the proposition that action to reduce sediment by 150 per cent can or will be undertaken in the anything like the same timeframe as the proposed dredging and dumping," they said.

The state's peak resources sector body, the Queensland Resources Council, has said it was confident the reef would make its decision "based on facts and science, rather than 'slacktivist' campaigns using social media".

The council chief executive Michael Roche said he was confident "the science that shows more than 30 years of port development has not been harmful to the Great Barrier Reef will prevail".

Pacific oysters unexplained deaths in NSW

 community, fisheries, government, waterways/wetlands
Jan 242014
 
Close-up of a man holding a Pacific oyster, Port Stephens. Photo: Ben Millington ABC

Close-up of a man holding a Pacific oyster, Port Stephens. Photo: Ben Millington ABC

Original story by David Claughton, ABC Rural

Scientists in NSW have one card left to play to identify the cause of massive oyster deaths in Port Stephens.

A mysterious illness is wiping out the Pacific oysters, while leaving the smaller Sydney Rock variety growing unharmed.

Port Stephens is the second biggest production area in NSW.

There are about 60 growers and Pacific oysters make up 25 per cent of the production there.

Ian Lyall, from the NSW Department of Fisheries, says scientists at Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute have been looking for a cause since oysters starting dying 12 months ago, but haven't found any signs of disease.

"The final thing we can do is what's called a transmission trial, set up to exclude a transmissible agent and that could take a few months."

Mr Lyall says pollution could be the other cause of oyster deaths.

"Researchers are working closely with the NSW Food Authority to analyse water quality and the Environmental Protection Agency to look at pollution, but we have not come across a single agent or group of agents that are causing these mortalities."

He says growers are very upset.

"This is a very valuable crop and the loss of income is really impacting on the growers who focus on Pacific oysters."

There is some assistance available, but the State Government has encouraged growers to diversify into different species and sources of income, saying that it can't continue to help after a series of disastrous disease outbreaks and weather events in recent years.

Growers in Wallis Lake, the state's biggest oyster production area, have stopped taking oysters from Port Stephens to limit the spread of whatever is affecting them.

Growers on the South Coast are unaffected.

Australian endangered species: Tasmanian galaxiids

 Australian native freshwater species, threatened species, waterways/wetlands
Jan 232014
 

The ConversationOriginal story by Scott Hardie, University of Tasmania at The Conversation

While the rivers of northern Australia and the Murray-Darling Basin are renowned for their iconic, large-sized, fish species such as Murray Cod and Barramundi, the temperate inland waterways of Tasmania are home to numerous “minnow-type” fishes.

About as big as they get: a female Golden Galaxias. Photo: Scott Hardie

About as big as they get: a female Golden Galaxias. Photo: Scott Hardie

Many of these species belong to the family Galaxiidae. In fact, the island state is a hot-spot for “galaxiid” diversity with 16 species (including 11 endemics). Galaxiids dominate the freshwater fish fauna of Tasmania (making up 64% of native fish species). While they don’t provide much sport for anglers, they are important components of its iconic freshwater ecosystems. These include glacial lakes such as Lake St Clair, the deepest lake in Australia, and the wild west coast rivers such as the Franklin.

The life cycle and habitats of galaxiid fishes vary, with both migratory “diadromous” and non-migratory species. Some species use either strategy depending where they live.

In Tasmania, migratory species typically inhabit streams as adults and move to the lower reaches of rivers and estuaries to breed in late autumn. They scatter a few thousand eggs over aquatic vegetation or rocks in the shallows. Their larvae grow in estuarine and near-shore marine areas and migrate back into freshwater as schools of juveniles, known as whitebait.

Non-migratory species complete their life cycles in lakes and lagoons, and typically produce fewer eggs (hundreds not thousands). Like overly-protective parents, non-migratory Paragalaxias species carefully attach adhesive eggs to the undersides of rocks along lake shorelines and guard them for up to a month until they hatch. The larvae of some non-migratory species live in open water until they are big enough to require refuge from predators, after which they seek shelter amongst rocks and aquatic plants.

While some Tasmanian galaxiids can live for up to 10 years, most live to less than three years. All endemic galaxiids to Tasmania have limited distributions. This along with habitat alterations and their relatively low fecundity, short life-span, small-size and inability to coexist with introduced fish has led to the demise of several species.

Brown trout are a significant threat to Tasmania’s galaxiids. Photo: Scott Hardie

Brown trout are a significant threat to Tasmania’s galaxiids. Photo: Scott Hardie

Status

Ten of the endemic Tasmanian galaxiid fishes are listed under Tasmanian legislation and nine are listed by the Commonwealth.

According to Commonwealth listings, the Arthurs Paragalaxias (Paragalaxias mesotes), Clarence Galaxias (Galaxias johnstoni), Golden Galaxias (Galaxias auratus) and Swan Galaxias (Galaxias fontanus) are Endangered. The Pedder Galaxias (Galaxias pedderensis) is Extinct in the Wild.

The distributions of these species are highly restricted and some are contracting. Their populations are also fragmented.

For example, the Arthurs Paragalaxias occurred naturally in two lakes in the central highlands, but since about the mid-1990s this has declined to one lake.

The Swan Galaxias has several highly fragmented populations in headwaters of the South Esk Basin and Swan River. These are thought to be remnants of a much larger natural range.

The Pedder Galaxias is lucky to still exist: its sole natural population in the impounded Lake Pedder has gone, but the species persists in two translocated populations in south-west Tasmania.

Threats

The threats faced by the five most imperilled Tasmanian galaxiids are, unfortunately, the same threats faced by the whole group.

Introduced fish species, especially the aggressive Brown Trout, threaten all of these fishes. They have been implicated in further restricting the distributions of the Clarence Galaxias and Swan Galaxias, and causing the decline of the Pedder Galaxias.

Altering water levels in lakes for hydro-power or water supply purposes can impact breeding of the non-migratory species. It can even dewater their incubating eggs, and degrade their preferred habitat along the shore. This threatens species such as Arthurs Paragalaxias and Golden Galaxias, and likely contributed to the decline of the Pedder Galaxias.

The eggs of galaxiids can be dewatered when water levels fall. Photo: Kevin Macfarlane

The eggs of galaxiids can be dewatered when water levels fall. Photo: Kevin Macfarlane

Climate change will probably add to the galaxiid’s woes, with projections suggesting water running into lakes will decline.

Strategy

Fortunately, several strategies are in place to help conserve the Tasmanian galaxiids. Action under recovery plans has included population monitoring and translocation. In fact translocation saved the Pedder Galaxias from extinction.

Recent research into the ecology of several galaxiid species and impacts of changing water levels has provided a basis for managing lake water. Proactive manipulation of water levels has also been used to assist breeding of Golden Galaxias during droughts.

Keeping trout out of some waterways will be crucial for the survival of Tasmanian galaxiids. Fishery Management Plans for recreational trout fishers promote the importance of maintaining trout-free waterways.

Falling water levels leave less habitat for fish. Climate change could make things worse. Photo: Scott Hardie

Falling water levels leave less habitat for fish. Climate change could make things worse. Photo: Scott Hardie

Conclusion

The Tasmanian galaxiids highlight the plight of many small and endemic fish in Australia — it’s not fishing that’s the problem, but many other human activities that threaten the fishes and their habitats.

Recent work by scientists and fishery and lake managers has led to the recovery of some species and protection of others. Continuing to advance scientific understanding and refine management prescriptions will safeguard threatened galaxiid populations as their circumstances change.

The Conversation is running a series on Australian endangered species. See it here.

Scott Hardie receives funding from the Tasmanian State Government and Hydro Tasmania. He works for DPIPWE and also as a private consultant. He is affiliated with the University of Tasmania.The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Murray River water sales: better for farmers and the environment

 community, environment, government, waterways/wetlands
Jan 212014
 

Original story by Michael Stewardson, University of Melbourne at The Conversation

Selling water back to farmers could work out for the Murray River too. Photo: Flickr/Tourism.Victoria

Selling water back to farmers could work out for the Murray River too. Photo: Flickr/Tourism.Victoria

 

The Commonwealth Government’s decision to sell up to 10 billion litres of its water allocation in the Murray-Darling Basin back to farmers could prove to be a win-win for irrigators and the river.

On the surface the decision seems to make no sense. The government bought the rights to water from farmers in the first place to restore the health of the river, why would it sell them back?

But the new decision reflects the variability of water supply and prices.

What water is the government selling?

The Commonwealth currently holds registered entitlements of just over 1,700 gigalitres, including 109 gigalitres in the Gwydir Valley where the proposed sale has been announced. Since 2009, the government has used these entitlements to allow extra water to flow through the river system, maintaining and restoring its health.

The decision to sell water back to farmers does not affect the government’s entitlement to water, which gives it the right to either use the water that is allocated to them, to carry it over for use in future years, or to trade it on the water market. This it will keep and with it, the right to use the allocation in full next year and the year after.

Instead, the government will sell part of its annual allocation of water. As of 31 December 2013, the Commonwealth had a total annual water allocation across the Murray-Darling Basin of close to 1,400 gigalitres. The annual allocation is made against the water entitlements purchased by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder. The proposed 10-gigalitre sale by the Commonwealth is less than 1% of this total.

Has the government bought too much water?

If we were talking about land bought for a national park, and then sold a few years later, then this would indeed be strange.

But unlike having a title to land, the amount of water allocated under a water entitlement varies from year to year. Irrigators know this well and plan for variable water allocations from year to year.

In dry years, when less water is allocated to title holders, water is traded from willing sellers who can do without for a year to those who need the water to keep permanent plants alive and the water price will increase. The National Water Commission estimates that water trade increased Australia’s gross domestic product by A$220 million in 2008–09 through reallocation of water used in agriculture.

The government is simply doing the same thing. The Water Act, which established the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, also allows the government to trade its water if either (1) the water is not required and cannot be carried over to the following year; or (2) the proceeds from the sale are used to purchase water entitlements that are more effective in achieving the commonwealth’s environmental objectives.

This matches the logic that an irrigator might use in deciding whether or not to sell a water allocation. The irrigator will sell if the water can’t be used and can’t be carried over to the next year. Alternatively, the irrigator will sell if the proceeds can be used to purchase water at a different time or in a different catchment if this offers greater potential for the farm business.

Better for everyone

For some time the Commonwealth government has been reflecting on the question of actively trading environmental water. It released a discussion paper last year and received feedback from irrigators and others.

One of the irrigators' main concerns is that the Commonwealth’s water holding is very large, so any trade has the potential to affect water price. Given that the Commonwealth’s future trading behaviour is uncertain, so are any fluctuations in price. This makes it harder for irrigation businesses that rely on water trade to make decisions.

The other side of this is that the sale of environmental water allocations will only occur if irrigators see benefit in using the allocation they are purchasing. A trade will only occur if there is mutual benefit for both the environment and the farmer.

On this basis, one would hope that some trade of environmental water will see benefits for irrigators. Indeed, trade will overcome one of the most challenging aspects of water governance in Australia: achieving an optimum allocation of water between environmental and agricultural water use.

If we seek to place an impermeable divide between these two uses, labeling each drop of water as either for the environment or for farmers, then we have missed a huge opportunity. The same drop of water can deliver benefits for both environment and farmers and the best outcomes for regional communities will be achieved with arrangements that allow flexibility in the way water is allocated and delivered so that it can be used to find these win-wins.

Like all things in water management, it won’t be a panacea and there will no doubt be problems, but it is likely to be a step forward for productive use of water in the Murray-Darling Basin.

Michael Stewardson sits on the Commonwealth Environmental Water Scientific Advisory Panel. He leads an ARC Linkage Project that receives partner funding from the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office (CEWO) and is contracted to develop and implement a component of the CEWO's environmental monitoring and evaluation program.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries