Proposed Basin Plan consultation report

Knowledge and information

149.Issue

Submissions suggested a need for further peer-reviews of the science underpinning the proposed Basin Plan.

RESPONSE

MDBA strongly supports peer review as an important element in developing evidence-based policy. Peer review was used in developing the proposed Basin Plan, for example the CSIRO-led report Science Review of the Estimation of an Environmentally Sustainable Level of Take for the Murray-Darling Basin³⁷. In all, some seventeen peer reviews were undertaken in developing the proposed Basin Plan itself, as well as a number of peer reviews undertaken in 2010³⁸.

The peer reviews undertaken supported the integration of environmental, economic and social science into policy within the proposed Basin Plan and confirmed that the best available science was used. They also made recommendations for future directions in research activity. MDBA will use this work to guide its ongoing investment in targeted research to increase understanding of the social, economic and environmental interactions that underpin a healthy working Basin.

150.Issue

Some submissions were optimistic about opportunities from new knowledge, suggesting that the Basin Plan should be flexible and allow scope for change, particularly in respect to less-understood variables such as the effects of climate change. Other submissions were concerned with the limitations on the knowledge base used by MDBA.

RESPONSE

MDBA considers the current knowledge base that was used to develop the proposed Basin Plan is the best currently available but agrees that it is essential to keep improving our understanding of the Basin’s hydrology, ecology, and social and economic system. For example, after reviewing the hydrologic indicator site approach underpinning the surface water SDLs in the proposed Basin Plan, CSIRO concluded that, given the knowledge derived from more than 30 years of Australian water research, and in the context of an adaptive management framework being adopted for the implementation of the Basin Plan, there is sufficient scientific knowledge to make an informed decision on an ecologically sustainable level of take. CSIRO also made suggestions about how knowledge could be improved. MDBA intends to implement these suggestions over the next few years to ensure that new knowledge is integral to the ongoing implementation of the Basin Plan, including the 2015 review.

151.Issue

Submissions suggested there needs to be a process to incorporate new data into the modelling for the Basin Plan regularly, that the Basin Plan was a starting point only, and that it needed to be flexible enough to allow real-time changes in approach and methodology, for example issues around climate change.

RESPONSE

MDBA agrees with the need for a flexible approach to water planning, and the ability to incorporate new knowledge as it becomes available. This need for flexibility must also be balanced by the need to provide stable conditions around water access for those investing in and using the resource. In this context, MDBA considers that the proposed Basin Plan strikes the right balance – in addition to the proposed 2015 SDL review, the Plan itself contains a five-yearly evaluation cycle and must be reviewed on a cycle of five to 10 years.

152.Issue

Submissions recommended that MDBA prepare local valley-level technical summaries which would help to address the communication at a local level regarding technical components of the Plan.

RESPONSE

MDBA is committed to providing information on the work underpinning the Basin Pan at the valley scale. MDBA is aware of the diversity and complexity of the Basin and concerns expressed when only Basin-wide analyses are available. 

To meet this need, a significant amount of local valley-level technical information is contained in the reports used to determine the proposed ESLT.  In particular, the following parts of two key reports provide valley by valley descriptions of the hydrologic modelling and environmental outcomes work behind the Basin Plan proposals:

• 
  Part 9 of the report: The proposed ‘environmentally sustainable level of take’ for surface water of the Murray–Darling Basin: Method and Outcomes³⁹
  
• 
  Part 5 of the report: Hydrologic modelling to inform the proposed Basin Plan: Methods and results⁴⁰
  

MDBA will continue to work with Basin states and communities to provide information its work in a way that is both useful and relevant. 

153.Issue

Submissions suggested that more research, development and extension be performed to offset lost production due to water purchases, and that it would be necessary to produce food and fibre with less water. This investment would assist irrigators to adjust to a future with less water.

RESPONSE

MDBA agrees that further potential exists to increase production by improvement in water-use efficiency or by improving the ‘non-water’ parts of the production cycle, and that this should be investigated as a high priority. This issue is beyond the scope of MDBA’s current responsibilities, however, MDBA is recommending that governments support communities as the Basin Plan is implemented in a way that acknowledges the social and economic effects of water reforms and expands future economic development opportunities.

MDBA notes that the Australian Government already provides matching funding to many rural research and development corporations to support productivity improvements in agricultural industries.

154.Issue

Submissions requested that data regarding environmental targets and water quality be made publicly available in an accessible and timely fashion. In addition, submitters asked that MDBA release all reports and information on which the Basin Plan was based to allow all stakeholders time to analyse and comment.

RESPONSE

MDBA has made available all information on which the proposed Basin Plan is based, with the main reports posted on the website as supporting documents to the proposed Basin Plan and many further reports available via the Basin Plan Knowledge and Information Directory⁴¹.