Peel Inlet and Harvey Estuary System Management Strategy ...

EPA Report on the Peel-Harvey Progress and Compliance Report, 2003
“The ERC notes the recent formation of a Natural Resource Management Council to
provide advice to the Minister for Environment and Heritage, on natural resource
matters. A major reason for the formation of that Council is to dovetail into and secure
funding under the Commonwealth Government's new National Action plan on Salinity
and Water Quality (NAP) and Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) funding arrangements.”
The ERC report recognises that the EPA has a direct and irrefutable interest in the
environmental consequences of setting targets to achieve ecological outcomes and
maintain key ecological processes in the long term as well as being responsible for
providing “over-arching” environmental advice to government. The ERC report also
recognises the central and over-arching role of the EPA by stating:
“The overview and scientific investigations coordination role taken by the EPA in
defining the management solutions to the Peel-Harvey estuary problems has been the
most successful approach to integrated catchment management planning in WA, to date,
and ensured an open and transparent approach to setting the environmental objectives.
It would be appropriate for the EPA to once again clearly take on the focus of
coordination of integrated research and investigation for catchment-scale environmental
problems and coordination of long-term monitoring requirements for measuring and
demonstrating environmental change. The EPA is already recognised by the public as
having the primary role in protection and maintenance of ecosystem processes and in
long-term custodial responsibility for the environment.” (ERC, point 15 in Section 5.2).
Shortly, to be able to access Commonwealth funding for implementation of NRM plans,
WA will have to develop plans that meet accreditation requirements. NRM plans will
have to be developed to satisfy the Commonwealth’s requirements (as a minimum) but
clearly will also need to take full account of the local environmental conditions and
requirements. This is in accordance with the national Water Quality Management
Strategy (NWQMS) approach of proposing guidelines but recognising that the way is
open to argue for different guideline levels where appropriate to the local environmental
conditions. The ERC Report states that the Commonwealth has set down the minimum
requirements for NRM plans (see ERC report section 13.2) and these include:
• the environmental values (EVs) of the surface and aquifer receiving waters - the
EVs of the plan may be considered ‘interim’, but must be consistent with the
National Water Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS). The basis and criteria for
setting EVs, including the level of protection for “aquatic ecosystems”, should be set
out - preferably in tabular form;
• water quality issues and associated pollutants that threaten those EVs - the
pollutants may be in addition to those matters for which regional targets must be set,
ie surface water salinity, suspended sediment/solids and nutrients (see NAP Standards
and Targets Framework);
• water quality targets, based on the Environment Australia document Water Quality
Targets: A Handbook and the Water Quality Guidelines (especially for additional
matters), consistent with the NAP Standards and Targets Framework. Trade-offs
24