COORONG

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (12:32): I move:

That this house calls on the state government to act promptly to save the internationally significant Coorong from environmental disaster.

I am aware that the government wants to amend this motion. I say at the outset that I am not implying that the government has not been doing anything, or previous governments have not done anything: I am trying to highlight the very urgent situation we now face in relation to the Coorong. I recently visited the Coorong just to see what is or is not happening. I make the point that, superficially, it looks okay. There is plenty of water generally in the Coorong. We know there is not much water in Lake Albert, but water is being pumped in to prevent the acceleration of the acid sulphate soil. However, in relation to the Coorong, at first glance it looks as though everything is fine.

The Coorong, as we know, is covered under national park legislation. Much of the area that is known as the Coorong is declared national park, covering approximately 46,800 hectares. Some parts are still privately owned, and I am aware of a project to have some of the privately owned part of the Coorong dedicated as a memorial park in the name of Colin Thiele, but that is a matter for another day.

The Coorong is a complex interaction of water from a number of sources including sea water, the River Murray, rainfall and groundwater. It comprises a large saline to hyper-saline water body with also fresh water soakages and a number of ephemeral saline lakes.

The Coorong has even today come in for significant comment from people who would be regarded as experts. I do not think that we need to labour the point about the state of the Coorong but I want to quote from some of the experts, one of whom is Professor David Paton, a professor at Adelaide University, who is highly respected for his work, particularly in relation to the study of birds in South Australia. On 10 February this year in an article in the Sunday Mail he said: 'The Coorong is dying while governments squabble.'

As I said, he is not the only one making those comments. A wetland ecologist working with the South Australian environment department, Paul Wainright, was quoted on the ABC in 2007 (it does not give an exact day; it gives the web detail) as saying:

Over the past couple of years, we've been seeing smaller flocks, 10,000 and 20,000, and in 2006 we had a flock of 100,000 birds...

He was commenting on what has been happening to bird numbers in the area. In an article by Cara Jenkin in The Advertiser of 28 February this year, Dr Mike Geddes, an ecology and evolutionary biologist based at the University of Adelaide, said:

Salinity in the Coorong is now four times that of sea water, more than double the salt level recorded 20 years ago. The lack of fresh river flow, summer evaporation and ongoing inflows from the sea has pushed the salinity of the Coorong higher each year since the early 1980s. The salt levels are affecting the growth of water species such as plankton and ruppia, a type of water plant, which can make the surface of the water appear green.

He said that the Coorong should be only slightly saltier than sea water, in which salt is measured at about 35 parts per thousand. He went on to talk about some of the environmental issues confronting the Coorong.

Another expert (and there are many who have made comments about the Coorong) is Dr Peter Gell, who is one of Australia's leading Murray River ecologists. On 12 March this year, an article was published in The Weekly Times (which is a paper I strongly recommend to members if they want to know what is happening with water issues in south-eastern Australia). The article stated:

...it is time to rethink the future of South Australia's Coorong and the river's lower lakes. Ecologist Peter Gell said forecasts on the impact of climate change causing rising sea levels and major declines in Murray River flows raised real questions about trying to revive the Coorong and lakes Alexandrina and Albert. 'It becomes a philosophical question on deciding at what point do we give up and say reviving the natural system is unviable,' Dr Gell said. 'For the Coorong I think we have to look at putting in Lakes Entrance-style channels opening up the southern lagoon and Murray Mouth to the sea.'

He went on to raise issues relating to the world heritage listing of the Coorong under what is called the Ramsar wetland provisions, and its being an area of wetlands of world significance.

Today I received a copy of the Flinders Journal from Flinders University (and I would encourage members to read it: I am sure they all get it). In an article prepared by Peter Gill, Dr Simon Benger, a researcher at Flinders University, said:

The ecosystem of one of South Australia's iconic waterways, the Coorong, is on the verge of collapse as a lack of fresh water pushes salinity to deadly levels...Dr Benger says the impacts of climate change are compounding more than a century of mismanagement of Murray Darling Basin water resources and, without a major injection of water, the outlook for the Coorong and the Lower Lakes of Alexandrina and Albert is bleak.

It goes on:

Collapsing ecological systems, acid-sulphate soils, declining water quality, loss of livelihoods, shrinking lakes and the demise of local communities are but a few of the many problems impacting the Coorong and Lower Lakes region.

Dr Benger, who is based in the School of Geography, Population and Environmental Management at Flinders, stated:

Researchers in our cluster have documented accelerated species loss throughout the Coorong, with many species of fish, aquatic vegetation and macroinvertebrates disappearing completely from the system or now restricted to smaller areas near the Murray Mouth.

Dr Benger said rising salinity levels in the lakes—up to four times accepted maximum levels for Adelaide drinking water—were thought to be behind emerging problems such as the spread of polychaeate worms which build large calcareous mounds wherever colonies become established. Larger creatures such as crabs and turtles are being overwhelmed by the weight of worm formations on their shells and are dying in large numbers.

He also goes on to talk about the significance of the Coorong as a wetland of international importance, as I indicated earlier, under the Ramsar Convention.

We have a problem in relation to the Coorong. What can we do about it? I am not suggesting for a moment that nothing is happening down there. I think the Minister for Water Security is in a very difficult position, as is the federal minister, Penny Wong, in relation to the whole Murray system, and climate change. I think the South Australian Minister for Water Security is between a rock and a hard place. The Chaffey electorate is suffering greatly because of lack of water flow in the Murray-Darling system and trying, at the same time, to deal with a tight water situation throughout the state.

Ultimately, what will save the Coorong—as it will in relation to the Murray-Darling—is significant, sustained rainfall. I think we kid ourselves if we think that there is any other measure which is likely to deliver what is really needed: that is for the river system in the Coorong to get a major flushing of fresh water as a result of heavy, sustained rains upstream, as well as in the Coorong itself.

However, there are suggestions that have been made—and I do not profess for a moment to be an expert in this field—and I am sure the minister here and the federal minister are well aware of some of them. Some of these suggestions included making a channel to the sea, particularly to relieve some of the hypersaline water situation which occurs in the southern part of the Coorong. The cost of that would be significant. I have not seen any detailed costings, although other members may have, and perhaps the minister may be able to enlighten us. However, I am sure that would cost a lot. It is a similar principle to what happens in West Lakes on a smaller scale, where a pipe is used to bring in fresh seawater. As I indicated, the current salinity levels in the southern part of the Coorong are four or more times that of seawater outside of the system.

That is one consideration that could be looked at and would require, no doubt, federal money to help bring about a solution. That does not save the lakes (Lake Alexandrina and Lake Albert) but it could help the southern part of the Coorong. Another suggestion put to me, which I discussed with a member from the Upper South-East Drainage Board, was channelling some of the fresh water from the South-East into the Coorong, or making sure that more of it gets into the Coorong. However, as that officer told me, much of the water in the Upper South-East is itself somewhat saline, so if you wanted water with a lower salinity I guess you would have to draw it from further down in the South-East. Once again, the cost of that would be significant. They seem to be two feasible, but costly, suggestions that have been put forward by people who know more about the engineering aspects and the water situation in the South-East than I do.

I do not think anyone would argue about the seriousness of the situation there; the question is: what we can do? If those solutions are practicable they will require significant money, and my plea to federal minister Penny Wong is that the federal government come onboard. If they are to be done, work needs to start as soon as possible. Clearly, it has to be planned and engineered, and it has to be feasible. As I indicated, I do not have the expertise to say whether or not they are feasible or cost effective, but we cannot just sit back and allow the Coorong to continue to deteriorate.

I hope we get significant and sustained rains for the sake of the irrigators along the Murray-Darling system and ultimately also for the benefit of those around the lakes, with some spin-off for the Coorong. However, my plea is that we need action. I am sure the two ministers are well aware of the need for action; I just hope the federal government will come to the party with some money.

Time expired.

Mr HANNA (Mitchell) (12:47): I rise to speak briefly in support of the motion. The member for Fisher is absolutely right to raise the issue of the Coorong; things are getting desperate and we do not have another 12 months to save it. We hardly need to be reminded that the Coorong is a Ramsar site—that is, an internationally recognised site of environmental significance—but it is literally dying. The marine life in the Coorong is dying as we speak, and it will soon be irreversible; we will soon lose forever the possibility of recovering the bird, fish and plant life that has existed in the Coorong Lakes for thousands of years.

It needs a desperately urgent approach. To her credit, the minister herself has acknowledged the urgency of the situation, but we need to act within the next few months. Unless there is a package forthcoming from this government or from the ministerial meeting on 3 July we will see the death of the Coorong; it will become nothing more than barren sand dunes with perhaps pools of water.

It may be that there is an engineering solution that we need to adopt, maybe there needs to be a channel or a pipe cut through to allow water to get into the Coorong; otherwise we will be faced with that sort of environmental disaster. I leave my remarks there, and simply wish to add that sense of urgency to the debate.

The Hon. L. STEVENS (Little Para) (12:49): I move to amend the motion, as follows:

After the words 'That this house' insert 'recognises the state government's efforts to protect and manage the internationally significant Coorong'.

An honourable member interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Koutsantonis): Order!

The Hon. L. STEVENS: When one reads the original motion by the member for Fisher, in spite of his concerns in relation to the Coorong, one could ask if only it was as simple as that motion tends to suggest. Of course, this problem has been decades in coming. It involves four state jurisdictions and the commonwealth, numerous stakeholders with their own competing agendas and, quite frankly, the only serious effort from the commonwealth has just commenced with the Rudd government in office for less than a year. So, to even suggest that the South Australian government on its own could act to save the Coorong really is naive in the extreme.

However, the South Australian government has been working hard to address the problems that are being faced by the Coorong and the Lower Lakes sites. I would like to put on the record some of the things that have happened. The Coorong and the Lower Lakes, as everyone knows, are suffering from long-term drought conditions that have been exacerbated by land use change and over allocation of water within the catchment. As I have just mentioned, we are now seeing the end result of these things that have occurred over many years.

In recent times, the current minister for the environment wrote to the former commonwealth minister for the environment on 24 August 2006, advising of the serious deterioration of the Coorong and Lower Lakes. On 13 December 2006, the commonwealth minister (a signatory to the Ramsar Convention) wrote to the Secretary General of the Ramsar Convention notifying of a change in the ecological character of the site.

Current lake levels are the lowest on record and salinity in the southern lagoon of the Coorong is four times that of sea water. The aquatic ecological condition will continue to deteriorate subject to these water quality and quantity parameters. Distribution and coverage of the aquatic riparian plant has declined significantly. That plant plays an important role as habitat structure and food source for many of the Coorong inhabitants and migratory visitors.

The Lower Lakes barrage fishways have not operated since March 2007 as no fish movement has been able to occur between the estuary lakes and river. This connectivity between water bodies is important to many species for completion of life cycles. In addition, no significant barrage discharge has occurred since 2005.

The Murray Mouth estuarine zone is becoming marine in character and no salinity gradient exists; however, the open Murray Mouth maintains tidal freshening and mud flat inundation and exposure within the estuary and parts of the northern lagoon of the Coorong.

The Coorong and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert Ramsar Management Plan of 2000 guides the management of the site and work is under way to review that plan with the guidance of the Coorong and Lower Lakes Ramsar Task Force. It should be noted that the site is one of few Ramsar sites with an overseeing body like this. The Coorong National Park Management Plan is also under review.

The Water Security Task Force has a key leadership role in the government's negotiations and actions in regard to drought in the Murray-Darling Basin and it has investigated planning and acting upon monitoring and research to provide solutions to threatening processes and issues. These include the decision on Wellington weir, the management of acid sulphate soils, native fish trans-location and potential water flow scenarios for the river and lakes.

The Murray-Darling Basin Commission and the South Australian government have continued to find and manage the dredging of the Murray Mouth. This activity retains a healthy ecosystem within the Murray Mouth estuary and with the northern lagoon of the Coorong through maintenance of tidal signature.

The commonwealth and state governments are working together to re-establish historical flow paths with the South-East of South Australia. This will lead to water course flows entering the southern lagoon of the Coorong at Salt Creek. In wetter years significant benefits will accrue to the Coorong—again, in wetter years. Unfortunately, the drought shows no sign of abating at this point.

Extensive environmental monitoring takes place throughout the Coorong and Lower Lakes in order to implement strategies contained in the Coorong National Park Management Plan, the Ramsar Plan and the Lower Murray icon site plan. The data feeds back into the environmental management programs for the Coorong and the Lower Lakes. Post-drought issues include the ability to operate the lakes for barrage release. There will be competing basin-wide demands to refill storages across the Murray Darling Basin. We are already seeing that. Significant volumes of River Murray water will be required to refill lakes to full supply levels.

In the meantime, the state government has put in a short-term intervention, with pumping from Lake Alexandrina into Lake Albert to protect ecological collapse. The River Murray environmental manager is advocating for greater inflows to the Lower Lakes, the Coorong and the Murray Mouth icon site, and for the establishment of end-of-system water targets. Ultimately, the solution will require all jurisdictions to participate in the development of a basin plan pursuant to the Water Act 2007 to ensure that water allocation is sustainable within the catchment to ensure the long-term viability of both upstream river reaches and downstream wetland habitat.

The Natural Resources Committee is looking at this issue at the moment. We have just completed a field trip to parts of the Murray-Murrumbidgee section of the basin where we looked at the river in relation in relation to Mildura, Deniliquin, Griffith and a number of other areas around that part of the river. It is just so clear that we cannot wait; we need to do something quickly. We need to do as much as we can, as fast as we can, recognising, of course, that this is the end result of decades of inaction right across the country and in all those jurisdictions.

It is pleasing that the Minister for Water Security and the Premier recognise the urgency of this. We will be pushing these matters forward at the next COAG meeting, which I understand is in a few weeks' time. Clearly, something has to happen. But, most of all, people right across all of those jurisdictions have to take seriously the fact that this is a real tragedy for the environment, the economy and for the health of Australia's major river, the River Murray.

We can only hope that that action will occur, because we know that at the end of the line the Coorong and the Lower Lakes are in their death throes. I commend the efforts of the state government. I ask it to continue those efforts strenuously. Every one of us needs to take whatever action we can as individuals to encourage all jurisdictions to take the action that is required.

Time expired.

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (12:58): In recognising that time is very limited, I will in a moment seek to continue my remarks. The member just made a very cogent argument not to support her own amendment when she said, 'We cannot wait; we have to do something quickly.' I thought that that is what the original motion states. The original motion states:

That this house calls on the state government to act promptly to save the internationally significant Coorong from environmental disaster.

That is what the member just said: 'We cannot wait; we have to do something quickly.' She went on to say, 'Clearly, something has to happen.' That is what the member just said.

The member has moved an amendment to say 'that this house recognises the state government's efforts to protect and manage the internationally significant Coorong'. She then goes on to say, 'Clearly, something must happen.' What were the efforts? What have been the efforts that this house is going to recognise under the amendment moved by the member? Give me a break.

Debate adjourned.

[Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00]