Dealing with salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys - Department of Water

More documents

Recommendations

Info

with Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys Conference Dealing Prospects and Practical Options Processes, INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE • Make existing information for salinity management more available. Information packages should relate to land capability (ie what goes where). Scientific papers should be distilled in a simpler form. • Need to simplify scientific information and increase extension of relevant information • Better incorporation of NRM information within Farming Systems development • Gap analysis for Research and Development required. Salinity R&D ‘drivers’ need to be identified. Specialised R&D teams with local community input proposed. • Develop a comprehensive ‘knowledge-information framework’ • Too many people are ‘defending a belief’ rather than absorbing new information • We often assume that some-one else knows more that we do. Sometimes we need to act on the knowledge that we have – and step into the unknown!! SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY ACTION • Strengthen catchment groups and enable them to formulate plans • Identify ways to engage all members of the catchment/community • How do we make Integrated Catchment Management really work? • Regional NRM groups to be more pro-active in supporting community effort (not just being a funds management body) • Need to re-structure arrangements for Community Landcare Groups and Agency Support • Need to identify and value state and local “Assets” (landscape and infrastructural) then assess “Asset Viability” considering the risk of salinity. Communities should be assisted with decisions about the protection of these assets • Encourage and develop local skills to protect wheatbelt assets • Provide resources to employ people who can empower local communities, develop local community capacity and develop local community Visions based on future directions NEW THINKING – NEW ENTERPRISE • Initiate an integrated group from the worlds of finance, business, service organisations (not necessarily those currently involved in salinity and NRM) to brainstorm new ideas to revitalize country towns. New people with new ideas should be encouraged (such as from people who attended the conference, eg from the Perth ‘City Vision’) • Engage expertise in ‘Marketing’ to assist with development of new enterprises. Link ‘marketing’ with ‘new industry passion’. • Australia is a leading nation in the third major global trading block! • How does ‘Triple Bottom Line’ accounting affect rural communities? Industries need to account for environmental impacts/benefits.
with Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys Conference Dealing Prospects and Practical Options Processes, • Need to identify and publicise sets of community “Values and Beliefs” • Develop dialogue with new innovative groups (eg the Liebe group, WANTFA, Saltland Pasture Group and others) • Problems and the solutions required are at catchment/regional scale but the main focus is still at the farm-scale • “Franchise Model” – all farms are franchised businesses to the large ‘agricultural corporation’ – there are 10,000 members, gross annual income of $5billion – salinity is said to cost about $80m each year!! What action should the corporation take? Options, targets?? • What is a ‘viable community’? Which towns should be retained? How important is distance and isolation? What is the minimum social structure required? • Topic - the Wheatbelt should be seen as an asset – how best to value and utilise the asset? • Topic – who to get the ‘next generation’ to adopt the current ‘Shared Vision’? • Topic – the extent to which landholders/agriculture should be responsible for their actions (ie salinity as a result of agricultural land use) • Avoid “Shared Nostalgia” when setting visions. INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT (DRAINAGE ISSUES) • ‘Shared Vision’ should be more specific about regional drainage systems (the views of proponents for regional drainage strategies were not adequately ‘shared’). There should be landscapes that move water! • New Drainage Advisory Committee should develop “Regional Drainage Systems” with appropriate assessment procedures (including through EPA) • Manage water, not salinity. • Protocols and criteria required for information and communication within communities about drainage. Targets should be set. • Protocols for inter-agency approach to drainage required. • All paleo-drainage systems should be assessed for salinity risk and their capacity to be effectively drained. • Demonstrate implementation of major drainage works as urgent action to reduce wider effects of salinity. This should be followed by integrated catchment works to reduce the cause of salinity. • It is important to manage water within catchment. New initiatives/enterprises required to utilise excess water in situ (including discharge water from drains and pumps) • Need to spend more time making engineering solutions work rather than proving that they don’t. • The C. Y. O’Connor pipeline to take freshwater inland provides a ‘model’ for what can be achieved by engineering options to “take salt out – it is all down-hill!)
Page 1 and 2:
Foreword Dealing with Salinity in W
Page 3 and 4:
1Day one: Monday 30th July. Field t
Page 5 and 6:
Papers Dealing with Salinity in Whe
Page 7 and 8:
Ali and Coles biggest challenges fa
Page 9 and 10:
Ali and Coles erosion, maintenance
Page 11 and 12:
Ali and Coles expected under these
Page 13 and 14:
Ali and Coles Coles, N.A. & Ali, M.
Page 15 and 16:
Commander, Schoknecht, Verboom and
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
APPRECIATING AND CREATING OUR HISTO
Page 43 and 44:
services. The Government responded
Page 45 and 46:
WHEATBELT VALLEYS IN DIFFICULTIES T
Page 47 and 48:
argue that they were really abnorma
Page 49 and 50:
1990s, the wheatbelt valleys in par
Page 51 and 52:
REFERENCES Agstats (1997). Agricult
Page 53 and 54:
George and Coleman two to four fold
Page 55 and 56:
George and Coleman surface, the vas
Page 57 and 58:
George and Coleman for example in t
Page 59 and 60:
George and Coleman current trends c
Page 61 and 62:
George and Coleman While not as div
Page 63 and 64:
George and Coleman SPECIES Table 5:
Page 65 and 66:
George and Coleman advantages of so
Page 67 and 68:
George and Coleman this volume). In
Page 69 and 70:
George and Coleman Venture Economy
Page 71 and 72:
George and Coleman Lawrence, C. (19
Page 73 and 74:
Hatton and Ruprecht WATCHING THE RI
Page 75 and 76:
Since the mid 1970s annual rainfall
Page 77 and 78:
Effect of clearing on runoff The ot
Page 79 and 80:
Salinity Monthly streamflow (ML) 10
Page 81 and 82:
The ratio of the salt outputs to in
Page 83 and 84:
- 11 - Hatton and Ruprecht Table 4:
Page 85 and 86:
THE FUTURE In looking at the future
Page 87 and 88:
McFarlane, D.J., George, R.J. & Far
Page 89 and 90:
Keighery, Halse and McKenzie Terres
Page 91 and 92:
Keighery, Halse and McKenzie Wetlan
Page 93 and 94:
Keighery, Halse and McKenzie specie
Page 95 and 96:
Keighery, Halse and McKenzie enviro
Page 97 and 98:
Lloyd number of legal cases pending
Page 99 and 100:
Lloyd 0 -500 -1000 -1500 -2000 -250
Page 101 and 102:
Lloyd Table 3. Sheep grazing days i
Page 103 and 104:
Lloyd Hectares project to provide w
Page 105 and 106:
INTRODUCTION The Lake Chinocup Catc
Page 107 and 108:
agriculture) in various stages, the
Page 109 and 110:
- 3,477 ha of remnant vegetation or
Page 111 and 112:
Scientists talk of up to 30% of the
Page 113 and 114:
6320000 6300000 6280000 6260000 624
Page 115 and 116:
Although the waterlogged area under
Page 117 and 118:
eliminates drainage through the nex
Page 119 and 120:
REFERENCES Dawes, W.R., Stauffacher
Page 121 and 122:
Pannell ECONOMICS, SOCIETY AND ENVI
Page 123 and 124: Pannell • the area of land protec
Page 125 and 126: Pannell Proposals to construct majo
Page 127 and 128: Pannell been conducted for the Cent
Page 129 and 130: Pannell investments in long-term la
Page 131 and 132: Pannell Pannell, D.J. (2001). Dryla
Page 133 and 134: Porter, Bartle and Cooper Table 1:
Page 139 and 140: Porter, Bartle and Cooper operation
Page 141 and 142: Porter, Bartle and Cooper Increase
Page 145 and 146: Porter, Bartle and Cooper support i
Page 147 and 148: Porter, Bartle and Cooper that is a
Page 149 and 150: CASE STUDY - TOOLIBIN LAKE AND CATC
Page 151 and 152: • The distribution, storage and m
Page 153 and 154: Secondly, there is a set of practic
Page 155 and 156: within three categories: relationsh
Page 157 and 158: CONCLUSIONS Actions to protect and
Page 159 and 160: FIELD TOUR LOCATIONS FIELD TOUR NOT
Page 161 and 162: COLES FARM “Avon River Basin Over
Page 163 and 164: Conference Outcomes Dealing with Sa
Page 165 and 166: with Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys:
Page 167 and 168: with Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys
Page 173: with Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys
Page 197 and 198: Photo Gallery 2 Dealing with Salini
Page 199 and 200: APPENDIX 1 BACKGROUND HYDROLOGY AND
Page 201 and 202: WHEATBELT HYDROLOGY Flow in the Yil
Page 203 and 204: Flow (ML) STREAM SALINITY Salt Rive
Page 205 and 206: APPENDIX 2 WATER MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
Page 207 and 208: APPENDIX 3 MANAGING WATER AND SALIN
Page 209 and 210: SUMMARY- TIMELINE OF RECENT SIGNIFI
Page 211 and 212: RECENT HISTORY OF WATER AND SALINIT
Page 213 and 214: Figure 1. Hydrological cross-sectio
Page 215: Depth (m) 316 315 314 313 312 311 M
Page 218 and 219: FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS AND MANAGEME
show all

Dealing with salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys - Department of Water

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?