Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 130 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

In terms of the case the ACT Government should put forward, I will speak, firstly, about the Snowy River. By way of background, the issues paper prepared for the Snowy water inquiry says:

Most of the Rivers within the Inquiry area have been significantly modified by the aqueducts, weirs, tunnels and dams of the Snowy Scheme. Immediately below each diversion point virtually all natural flow in the river has ceased although small quantities are released for stock and domestic uses from the Jindabyne, Tantangara and Eucumbene Dams ...

The paper goes on to say that the underlying task for the inquiry is to establish the extent to which these compounding impacts can be reduced and the extent to which the environmental outcomes desired by the community can be achieved.

The Snowy River receives only one per cent of the original flow released from Jindabyne Dam. This has resulted in much of the river being reduced to a trickle, with virtually no water along much of its course. For many years there have been voices of protest and concern about this situation from farmers, fishermen and environmentalists. The environmental condition of the Snowy River below Jindabyne Dam was assessed in November 1995 by an expert panel to determine the major impacts of the Snowy Mountains scheme on the river. The panel comprised members of the local community, research organisations and government departments. The review concluded that the amount of water released from Jindabyne Dam is insufficient for healthy ecosystem function.

The impacts of flow regulation on the Snowy River include: Shrinkage of the river channel; invasion of the channel by European willows and other weeds; loss of the natural flood patterns which, before damming, maintained channel features such as pools - in many ways the Snowy's ecology now more closely resembles a lake than a river; loss of natural seasonal flows, which would normally stimulate reproduction of fish and aquatic insects; degradation of river habitat, causing decreased populations of native fish and aquatic insects; and poor water quality, siltation and salination.

Mr Speaker, the expert panel recommended a minimum environmental flow of 330 gigalitres a year, compared with flows at Jindabyne of 1,150 gigalitres a year before damming. This recommended minimum equates to 28 per cent of the original flow. An additional allocation of 10 to 15 per cent should be set aside for increased environmental flows in the future if this is demonstrated by further studies to be necessary. The expert panel has also argued for seasonal variation in flows. I stress that it is very important that water for environmental flow in the Snowy does not come from environmental flow allocations for other rivers, for example, the Murray or Murrumbidgee.

I turn now to the Murrumbidgee River and other rivers. While the ACT Government should argue for the inquiry to consider the provision of environmental flow for all rivers and streams affected by the Snowy Mountains scheme, this inquiry does offer an excellent opportunity to take a strong stand about the need for improved environmental flows

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .