Change is coming to the Basin, it's the how that counts

Brian Ramsay

October 13, 2010

Opinion

Comments 5

Click to play video

Return to video

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Video will begin in 5 seconds.

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Murray-Darling negative impact

Ian Verrender discusses the negative impact of the Murray-Darling Basin water cutbacks.

Change is not easy for many people and radical challenge can be downright scary if you are at the receiving end. Some of the initial public responses to the Guide to the Basin Plan are very critical. This is to be expected. As 19th century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said: "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

The Murray Darling Basin Authority says that the guide has been crafted with the best available science in Australia, along with national and international critical review. The guide says 3000 to 4000 gigalitres of water will need to be re-directed from economic use to achieve the environmental requirements of the Basin. Many catchments and communities would be affected.

The results of technical analysis may be difficult to grasp, but there needs to be a level of faith from the community in the scientific process. If these findings are as fatally flawed as some claim, it would indeed say something sad about the state of Australian science. It is really the only basis for making informed management decisions from an environmental perspective. However, the science cannot be exact and hence the authority's proposal to balance environmental imperatives with community and economic needs.

The real issue is not should major change in water allocation occur, but how can it be implemented in a way that is workable for people living in the community. A survey of 500 Basin residents, conducted for Inovact Consulting in June, confirmed that the Basin community supports change to water management. In fact, 80 per cent of people in the Murray-Darling Basin agreed that water allocations should change so enough water is available for the natural environment.

The survey also found that the need for change to water management is urgent, with 50 per cent of people living in the Basin believing that changes to water allocation should already be under way.

People living in the Basin have the opportunity to engage in the public consultation on this water plan and raise the profile of the social and economic issues associated with the proposed changes.

The better that community views are understood by decision-makers, the better the prospects are for workable solutions emerging. Also, the more likely that momentum will be created to act on the consensus supported by science that there is an unsustainable environmental situation in the Basin. This can only be achieved if people and decision makers are connected and have a level of mutual understanding, something that needs to be developed over the coming months.

It may be tempting to disengage from participating in the hard decisions ahead, but the alternative is to hope that others get engaged and find solutions that are then implemented. American actress/comedian Lily Tomlin got it right when she said that: "I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realised I was somebody."

Brian Ramsay is managing director of Canberra company Inovact Consulting. The company launched Basin Pulse in August, which aims to support reform by better connecting people and decision makers in the Murray-Darling Basin.

5 comments

-The Murray Darling Basin Authority says that the guide has been crafted with the best available science in Australia, along with national and international critical review.-
Its funny isnt it that the best science and economic modeling have not gone hand in hand in this report. In fact they were told not to include a socio / economic report . Here again we have a change or procedure that needs doing but has been let down by not thinking the whole procedure through.From what I understand the authors wanted to embrace a lot more of the changes required but but were told it wasn't in there ambit.
As for saying that 50% to 80% of a survey wanted change , it would be interesting if you surveyed them again to find if these are the sort of changes they wanted.

Commenter

steelerudd

Location

coolie

Date and time

October 13, 2010, 5:48PM
SAVE THE SYDNEY BASIN. We can save the Sydney Basin if we cut Sydney's livelihood by 32 to 43% after a period of "consultation". Lancove, Parramatta and Georges River systems could be restored. Mangroves, the building blocks for healthy intertidal marine systems,could be extended and restablished along these shores. Some foreshore land buy backs may be necessary but are achieveable. Stormwater could be retained and treated. Heavy metals and poisonious dioxin chemicals removed. The restotarion of the Port Jackson acquamarine needs to be and can be restored if we act now. All this can be achieved by reducing the livelihoods of Sydney region by a mere 32 to 43%. The Murrumbidgee, Murray and Darling Basin areas are happy to accept these cuts. I am sure the communities in the Sydney Basin are also happy to make these essential adjustments. Aren't they?

Commenter

Alan Draper

Date and time

October 14, 2010, 10:39AM
Alan Draper - October 14, 2010, 11:39AM
Precisely, Alan. I am sure that the residents of these areas would readily forego a third or more of their income for such a scheme. It is, after all, only fair to parallel the same level of contribution through income loss as those in the Murray-Darling basin... It is, after all, an essential environmental need.

Commenter

Colin

Location

Sydney

Date and time

October 14, 2010, 11:48AM
People who can't change when circumstances change become ossified.
Why not stuff up the M and D completely then all residents have to leave.
If the guide is adopted some can say.
What is the better alternative.
Any fool can work that out.

Commenter

having fun

Location

Sydney

Date and time

October 14, 2010, 1:59PM
Do you people in Sydney know what has been going on along the Murray Darling for the past 100 years or don't you care?
The so-called irrigators steal billions of litres of water and irrigate even while it is raining.
They grow crops they cannot sustain and as soon as the prices fall they destroy good food instead of giving it to people to eat.
A few years ago the SA riverland had a glut of oranges, they destroyed most of it because the price was too low.
Too bad that the food was good.
About the same time egg farmers were destroying millions of eggs and hens because the prices were too low.
The price picked up but 9 million kids per year die of hunger. Those eggs should have been used in high protein biscuits but the bastards smashed the lot.
Australia wastes over $5 billion worth of food per annum, let's all stop listening to the whiney farmers and learn the truth.
I grew up in a farming district, I know what I am talking about.

Commenter

Marilyn

Date and time

October 14, 2010, 1:59PM