Here we go again ... another ratbag!

The title of this post is the exact wording of the opening sentence of an email sent by one Clarence Valley resident earlier today, alerting me to the fact that at least some of those irrigators (unhappy with the latest manifestation of the Draft Murray Darling Basin Plan) have turned their greedy eyes and intransigent hearts towards the Clarence River catchment once more.

…managing director of South Australian citrus and dairy company Nippy's, Jeff Knispel,……. Mr Knispel advocated considering the social and economic benefits of building a hydro electricity dam at the head of northern NSW's Clarence River and dropping the water into the western-flowing river system, feeding the Darling River.

Apparently the resounding “No!” communities in the Clarence catchment have been shouting for decades to every move to dam and divert freshwater to the inevitable detriment of the local economy, agriculture, industry, visual amenity, cultural significance, water sustainability/security and biodiversity is still falling on the deaf ears of faraway irrigators who believe they have a God-given right to rape and plunder Australia’s most vital natural resource.

Well, my patience is long worn out and, Nippy’s Fruit Juices Pty Ltd, Nippy’s All Seasons Pty Ltd, Knispel Bros Pty Ltd and Nippy's Waikerie Producers Pty Ltd can confidently predict that none of their product will ever be purchased by me or mine.
That, Mr. Jeff Knispel is Natually as good as it gets.

It's more pipelines, bigger dams and inter-basin water transfers

The Inquiry into the impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in Regional Australia is being offered a wide range of options to ensure sustainable Murray-Darling Basin river systems.

Few of which admit to any need to limit current water consumption by reducing diversion caps and, some follow that tired old route of more pipelines, bigger dams and inter-basin water transfers.

Here are a few examples.

One option put forward by Wakool Shire Council in its submission:

Look at alternative supply for productive use – i.e.pipeline from river systems to high value use.

Another viewpoint from Lodden Shire Council:

The Authority should also consider the construction of environmental dams in key sites to store significant volumes of water devoted purely to environmental benefits. The cost of such infrastructure projects could be borne by all Australians or at least by those who will receive a direct benefit from the health of the Murray Darling Basin.

Carrathool Shire Council offered this:

New infrastructure projects, including additional and/or expanded water storages……….

Harvesting and redirecting surplus water resources from northern Australia.

While Hay Shire Council complained:

There is no possibility of any harvesting of additional water for the environment by the construction of additional dams or further investigation of diversion schemes. Such water would be harvested in wet periods such as we are now experiencing to be used in providing environmental flows as required in drier seasons. Why as a country are we not investigating this alternative?

Leeton Shire Council put forward these 'solutions':

Harvesting and re-directing surplus water resources form northern Australia and the eastern seaboard in Queensland and New South Wales;………

New infrastructure projects, including additional and /or expanded water storages, for example a new storage at Wellington in South Australia, or expansion of storages such as Lake Buffalo and Lake William Hovell in north east Victoria.

The Citizens Electoral Council informed the Inquiry that:

The proposed Clarence River Scheme would add upwards of 1,000 Gl/y of reliable flows into the Murray‐Darling Basin, which would transform the Basin's productive power.

Citizens Electoral Council's Clarence River proposal filed under rubbish

The Daily Examiner on 22 December 2010 recounts efforts by that LaRouche-inspired, climate change denialist, fringe political party, the Citizens Electoral Council of Australia, to further their conspiracy theories and support of the water raiders:

AN IMPROMPTU visit by members of the radical, right-wing political party, The Citizens Electoral Council (CEC), to Clarence MP Steve Cansdell's office last Thursday resulted in the former boxer coming out swinging in defence of the Clarence River.

Mr Cansdell said his “fight” lasted only five minutes before the campaigners were asked to leave. He said the two women conned their way into his office under false pretences, claiming they wanted to talk about flood mitigation of the Clarence.

“They started talking about world order and conspiracy theories and I said if you don't want to talk about anything local, I'm not interested,” he said.

The women went on to ask Mr Cansdell about his views on the management proposals for the Murray Darling Basin, and whether he supported the diversion of the Clarence to revive the Murray River system.

“There is no way I would support diverting the Clarence River and if that's what you want to talk about you are wasting your time,” he told the women.....

When the CEC members visited The Daily Examiner's Grafton office, a journalist listened to their theories and filed their leaflets in the bin when they left.

Bravo, Clarence Environment Centre and Valley Watch!

To date there have been only eighty-seven submissions to the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Inquiry into the impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in Regional Australia.

Ever mindful of the reported remarks of various vested interests and those of the Inquiry's Chair, the Clarence Valley community responded.

Clarence Environment Centre (CEC) made one of the earliest submissions pointing out valid reasons why the Clarence River catchment was not for the raiding.
The complete CEC 33 page submission in PDF file can be viewed and downloaded here.

Valley Watch also made a succinct formal submission which is found here.

I have to say that these submissions were part of only a handful which attempted reasoned argument supported by data. Most submissions simply registered opposition to the Murray Darling Basin Plan on the basis of emotion and supposition.

Unfortunately it would appear that at least twenty-seven of the eighty-seven submissions supported the idea of investigating interbasin water transfers and/or new dams, although only four of these made specific mention of possible water diversion from the Clarence River and/or NSW coastal rivers generally.

What was evident in the bulk of these submissions is that many of those individuals who live in the Murray-Darling Basin would apparently rather kill off that river system entirely before they will concede one litre of the water entitlements they currently possess.

Fringe parties still making hay with Clarence water diversion talk

August and November 2010 sees political opportunism continue.........

# The following is on the website of the fledgling political party the Citizens Electoral Council of Australia:

Newly elected National Party MP for Riverina, Michael McCormack, described the plan as "a guide to depopulate inland Australia". Although this was said in passing, it reflected our material, and was the most truthful thing any Federal MP has said about the implications of the plan. He also asked what effect this is having on our kids, as they hear their parents talk about the meaning of the plan……………………..

What we lead with in one meeting, we find is raised more in questions at the subsequent meeting, ie repealing the Water Act, or the Wentworth Group. Circles discuss it, and raise it at the next one. An Italian farmer talked about the Clarence River scheme, and had our leaflet from Griffith on him when he asked the question.

The LYM spoke to a Hay councillor who recognised the CEC, and was very responsive on water projects, the Clarence and Bradfield, saying we should’ve done this a long time ago. All of the MDB Fraud DVDs were distributed, to a very good response.

* Michael McCormack is on the parliamentary committee currently inquiring into the regional social/economic impacts of the proposed Murray Darling Basin Plan and probably looking at interbasin water transfer.

# The Agmates website indicates that another fringe political party Climate Sceptics Party of Australia is also out in the Basin stirring up support for interbasin water transfer:

Climate Sceptics candidates Steve Davies (Barker) and Leon and Nathan Ashby (Senate) will tour Murray river towns early next week explaining their policy on water.

The party believes there is plenty of water in Australia and it would not support a water buy back policy for the River Murray but rather support diverting water from Northern Australian rivers as the solution for extra water to SA. It would be a vastly improved Bradfield scheme something proposed over 70 years ago by the designer of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, John Bradfield. Lead Senate candidate Leon Ashby says "Rivers such as the Clarence, Tully, Herbert, Burdekin, and Flinders in northern Australia have vast amounts flow into the sea during floods.
These floods could be diverted to flow to many places inland including down as far as Murray Bridge via gravity fed pipelines and channels."

# The Murray Darling Basin Authority is noting this discussion:

The Authority heard:
•That the MDBA should consider the need for extra dams.
•That the Lake Mejum scheme should be reconsidered as an option for storing water for irrigation.
•Support for building the Clarence river scheme.
•That the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Scheme being built to generate power but also for irrigation and to look after the environment – it was straight forward, why are we moving away from this?
•There is a need for real works and measures to water the environment.
•Concern that vast amounts of water are lost to evaporation.