Kate Smith is studying a Bachelor of Agriculture and a Bachelor of Laws at UNE. Kate has placed second in the AgriEducate Essay Competition in the Economics, Commerce, Business category. The title of her essay is ‘Australian agriculture and the constraints of water law in the Murray Darling Basin’. For her win she took home $200!

The prize winning essay critiques some of the many amendments made to the Murray Darling Basin plan, since its inception, which support the relaxation of water trading, sustainable diversion limits and buy-back mechanisms.  She discusses the impacts these amendments have had on communities, government expenditure and the Basin’s health.

Kate questions whether the buy-back schemes have achieved their aim, which was ‘to restore and improve flow rates and ecological health of the Basin.’

She cites a study which found that ‘Basin flow rates have instead decreased since the commencement of the Plan.[1] For example, in 2019 the Wentworth Group found that flow rates and ecological restoration targets were not being met despite $8.5 billion in buy backs being spent on 2016 gigalitres in the Wilcannia and Chowilla regions.[2]’

Kate found that buy backs have contributed to declining amounts of water being available to farmers and rural communities, especially during drought.[3] She states that the federal government was aware of this, and as a result provided subsidies for farmers who were willing to improve their on-farm water use efficiency. This formed part of the 2012 Murray Darling Basin Plan.

Kate explains that because this initiative focused on improving on-farm water use efficiency and not improving Basin flow rates, that many drought-stricken communities still suffered. ‘… In 2014, a 1500 gigalitre cap was placed on government buy backs to help alleviate the impacts that low flow rates and the drought had on these communities.[4] However, this meant that less water could be purchased by governments to maintain sustainable flow rates.’

The Murray-Darling Basin Plan sets sustainable diversion limits (SDL), which state how much water can be used in the Basin, while leaving enough water for the environment. The limits aim to ensure that there is sufficient water to maintain the environmental health of the Basin, by limiting the amount of water that can be extracted from it, while considering the social and economic impacts of water recovery.

Kate mentions that ‘The capping of buy backs and the SDL Adjustment Mechanism has received criticism from experts who claim these have contributed to key events such as the Menindee Fish Kills of 2018.[5] While environmental outcomes have been at the forefront of many Basin plan reviews including the South Australian Royal Commission, parts of the Basin are still experiencing low flows, agricultural run-off problems, and blue-green algae contamination.[6] Drought and the over-extraction and diverging of water has contributed to salinity and secondary salinity problems which must now be continually managed under the Basin Plan.[7] It has also adversely impacted many ecosystems within the Basin and their biota such as birds, frogs and, fish species.[8]

Kate also discusses the ‘controversy over the Commonwealth buying both large and corporately owned properties for their water rights, above of their true valuation. Such purchases have been critiqued for the mis-spending of tax payer dollars but also their insignificant contributions to restoring environmental flows and basin health.’

She cites the purchase of Kia Ora and Clyde Farms in Queensland.[9] ‘Despite the Commonwealth now owning the floodwater rights, there have been problems regarding whether this water can be legally stored on property, or whether it can be returned to natural water bodies to improve environmental flows.’

Kate concludes by stating: ‘Regulatory measures must be able to able to properly regulate and monitor flow rates in both times of drought and when extreme flooding and rainfall events occur to prevent water wastage and impacts to ecosystems and communities. Developing the current water management strategies to optimise flow rates and the purchasing of more reliable and accessible water resources, might minimise the impacts of poorly regulated extraction and trading schemes across the Basin.’

[1] Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, Water Flows in the Murray-Darling Basin: Observed versus expected Summary Report February 2019, 2019, 7-8. 

[2] Ibid.

[3] Anna Vidlot, ‘Farming under the Basin Plan in the Riverina: irrigators face the future’, ABC News (online at 28 June 2017) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2017-06-28/farming-in-the-riverina-life-under-the-basin-plan/8650288>. 

[4] Department of Environment, Water Recovery Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin, 2014, 18. 

[5] Nick Kilvert, ‘Drought, climate change and mismanagement: what experts think causes the death of a million Menindee fish’, ABC News (online at 16 January 2019) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-01-16/what-caused-menindee-fish-kill-drought-water-mismanagement/10716080>. 

[6] Sarah Tomevska, ‘Darling River water quality declines with 10 000 native fish found dead from blue green algae bloom’, ABC News (online at 20 December 2018) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-20/ten-thousand-fish-dead-as-darling-river-water-quality-worsens/10635730>. 

[7] Marc Leblanc et al, ‘A review of historic and future hydrological changes in the Murray-Darling Basin’ (2012) 8)-81(2012) Global and Planetary Change, 226-236, 228.

[8] Kerrylee Rogers and Timothy J Ralph, Floodplain Wetland Biota in the Murray-Darling Basin Water and Habitat Requirements. CSIRO Publishing, 2010) 19. 

[9] Matthew Cranston, ‘Macquarie’s Lawson looks at $130 Eastern Agriculture buy’ The Australian Financial Review (online at 25 June 2017) <https://www.afr.com/property/macquaries-lawson-looks-at-130-eastern-agriculture-buy-20170623-gwxfzo>.