|
|
       |
 |
 |
    |  |
 |
|
Environment Forest Ecosystems Forest Industries Forest Management Forest Products Greenhouse Gases NAFI Submissions Policy and Politics Renewable Energy Sustainability |
| |
Public Consultation on Water Property RightsIntroductionAchieving sustainable water management is a key consideration for all water users that needs to be covered by a comprehensive, transparent and consistent water property rights system. The Commonwealth’s position paper on this matter, including the proposed principles to be used as a national benchmark for implementing water property rights in the States and Territories, is a welcome contribution to the debate on how those rights should be designed. Of particular concern to the forest and timber industry has been the lack of consistency in the approaches being suggested, so far, for assigning water property rights across all landuses and tenures. That inconsistency in approaches may impede the water property rights regimes from delivering the most efficient and effective use of Australia’s water resources. A system that covers all landusesWhile a major focus of the position paper is on irrigators’ rights, urban supply and environmental allocations, there is a need to consider the processes for delivering an equitable allocation of water resources to dryland agriculture and changes in landuse as well. It is therefore essential that the water property rights system to be adopted can support the rights of existing water users while being able to accommodate the water requirements of emerging industries. Some of the Commonwealth’s key objectives, including the sustainable use of our natural resources and restoring Australia’s degraded landscapes, are placing further pressure on the development of a suitable water property rights system. From a water resources perspective, the national guidelines should simultaneously meet these objectives and the demands of industry. At the present time, landholders may have existing water rights and allocations identified in catchment or other water management plans, even though there are serious concerns about the over-allocation of those resources. In many cases, landholders may have a water holding or similar licence that is only exercised on a limited number of occasions. Alternatively, there are cases where landholder access to water resources is not metered or their use is immeasurable. A great deal of uncertainty may therefore surround the true utilisation state of our water resources, which may be over-allocated at the same time as being under utilised, except in the most extreme climatic conditions. It is becoming increasingly important to allocate sufficient water to the environment in order to maintain the biodiversity and the ‘sink’ capacity of the nation’s water supplies. At the same time, there is a need to balance the existing needs of farmers and urban communities, incorporate future changes in the country’s weather patterns in response to climate change, while providing sufficient water allocations to support new investment in either emerging rural industries or activities associated with repairing the environment. Revegetation and adaptation to climate change will impose both positive and negative constraints on the quantity and quality of water available to all users. For example, it is anticipated that some 5-10 million hectares of tree crops will be established to halt the salinisation and degradation of Australia’s rural landscapes. Such a significant revegetation effort may impact on water flows in the low to medium rainfall zones and therefore requires a most effective targeting of tree planting to ensure the greatest environmental benefit while minimising the impact on catchment water yields. Although a substantial amount of research is still required to understand the complex nature of Australia’s hydrological systems, the forest and timber industry is concerned at the approach being considered for addressing water rights and access within some jurisdictions. In order to maintain the rights of existing users, one option proposed for managing water resources includes the application of specific rights and allocations for changes in landuse from conventional dryland farming to plantation forestry. In this particular case, new rules are being considered for afforested land in an area that is heavily dependent on irrigated cropping and dryland agriculture. What is of importance for ensuring the sustainable use of our limited water resources is that all landuses are considered in defining a system of water allocations and property rights. In the area where plantation forestry has been the only landuse placed under a specific set of regulations, it is interesting to note that the water tables of the region were falling well before the increase in plantation establishment rates started. From an industry perspective, targeting landuse change as a means of regulating water access and allocations across catchments should not be acceptable practices in the design of an equitable and efficient water property rights scheme. The forest and timber industry believes that the most effective property rights system can only be achieved by balancing the availability of water resources amongst all landholders and uses – not just landuse change. Options for reforming the water property rights systemThe forest and timber industry recognises that the traditional water rights and allocations should be adequately recognised, as outlined in the principles for a national benchmark. However, there needs to be a consistent approach for assisting landholders in moving from the existing matrix of allocations to a new set of allocations that takes into account environmental needs, the requirements of emerging industries, other government objectives and the potential impacts of climate change. Within that process, the system should be flexible enough to support changes in landuse and land management that can deliver a more efficient use of the allocated water volumes. In the example outlined above for plantation forestry, the process under consideration would place restrictions on the area of tree planting permitted in each landuse zone, rather than allowing the industry to access a specified volume of water. From a forestry perspective, this removes the potential for delivering the most efficient use of available water, where industry could respond through changes in species and/or plantation management regimes, albeit at some cost to investors. The impact on investor confidence of this sort of approach has been quite dramatic. An equitable system of water rights, which applies to all landuses concurrently as the basis for making water allocation decisions, is therefore required. The South African approach has been to allocate water to the environment and then determine how the remaining water resources would be allocated to various uses, based on a balance of the economic, social and environmental outcomes associated with the use of those resources. This approach is known as a Strategic Environmental Assessment process for underpinning the water property rights system in that country. While this approach has not been used for allocating water resources in Australia, it has been applied to the Southeast Fisheries Management Area for determining the sustainable catches around the southeast corner of the Australian mainland. ConclusionThe forest and timber industry supports the broad direction outlined in the principles for developing a national benchmark for facilitating the implementation of transparent and consistent water property rights regime in each of the States and Territories. Many of the issues relating to entitlements and resource allocation are covered in the ‘Water Property Rights’ report to COAG from the Water CEO’s Group. However, our key concern is that while it is important to consider the rights of existing landholders and water users, it is essential that a single approach is adopted for all uses, even those arising from landuse change and allocations to the environment. While this approach may require those hold existing rights or allocations to be compensated for a change in those rights, the financial cost should not impede the development of regimes that lead to the most effective, efficient and equitable use of the country’s water resources. |
|
 |
      |
|
|
|
| Site development by Rendrag Networks, Canberra - Graphic design by Swell Design Group, Canberra | |