NSW Water Quality and River Flow Objectives About the Objectives Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water   Select from the scrolling list, statewide map or catchment list Select a catchment Barwon-Darling and Far Western Bega River Bellinger River Border Rivers Brunswick River Camden Haven and Hastings River Castlereagh River Clarence River Clyde River and Jervis Bay Cooks River Georges River Gosford and Northern Beaches Lagoons Gwydir River Hacking River Hawkesbury-Nepean River Hunter River Karuah River and Great Lakes Lachlan River Illawarra Lake Macquarie and Tuggerah Lakes Macleay River Macquarie-Bogan River Manning River Moruya River Murray River Murrumbidgee River and Lake George Nambucca River Namoi River Richmond River Shoalhaven River Sydney Harbour and Parramatta River Towamba and Genoa River Tuross River Tweed River Williams River

Hunter River
Community comment on the objectives

| Contents | Background | Consultation | Objectives | WQOs | RFOs | Glossary | Bibliography | Map | At a Glance |

• Overview
• Water quality and value of the water resource
• River flows
• Major issues
• Existing programs

Overview

Two community discussion meetings were held in the Hunter catchment-at Muswellbrook on 3 March and at Maitland on 10 March 1998. More than 160 people attended these meetings. Eighteen written submissions were received. The issues raised and comments made will be considered by the local river management committee when developing management plans.

Water quality and value of the water resource

People in the Hunter catchment said that they regarded the health of river ecosystems as very important; as was water that looked clean and pleasant. The most important uses of water in the catchment were for irrigation, homestead water supply, industrial supply, and for watering livestock. Swimming was the major desired instream use of water. The relative importance of the environmental values and uses, however, was felt to vary from place to place.

Some people felt that good quality water was not natural for the catchment and, therefore, should not be sought. Most people, however, wanted at least the same-if not better-Water quality than at present. In particular, they commented that the Water quality was poor at times of no flow, or when affected by releases from the bottom of dams or mines. Some people felt that there were actions that would improve the health of the river system, such as restricting livestock access to creeks, and protecting or restoring banks and riparian vegetation (to limit erosion). Others were concerned that providing off-river watering points, fencing and controlling weeds would be expensive.

The effects of mining-both in discharging to the river system, and in mining under the waterways-on both surface and groundwater flows were also of some concern.

Most support was received for the option that would give water of the highest quality; that is, water that would meet basic environmental needs and advanced human uses-for example, for primary contact recreation (swimming), drinking water (after some treatment), and irrigation with low-salinity water.

The option receiving the next greatest level of support (less than half the support for the previous option) was for Water quality that would meet basic environmental needs (including support for aquatic ecosystems) and basic human needs-for secondary contact recreation (boating), watering livestock and irrigation with medium-salinity water. Those who supported this option did so in the belief that to achieve the goal of the highest quality would require significant improvement of existing water quality.

River flows

In the unregulated subcatchments of the Hunter River catchment, people were concerned about possible restrictions on access to water when the creeks and rivers were flowing little or not at all, and about the cost of any changes.

There was some support for assistance to enable landholders to develop water storages (so they could take and store water at times of high flows to use at times of low flows) or to enable provision of alternatives (such as wastewater reuse). Several water user groups mentioned the possibility of locally implemented sharing of water in dry times. People felt that conditions of access to water (including restrictions) should be developed locally; and that access should be equitable-that is, apply to both upstream and downstream users, and to all water users, both rural and urban.

The community felt that the costs of change should be spread throughout the community, rather than targeted at any one group. People also wanted the impact of increasing riparian use of water as a result of subdivision (particularly along Wollombi Brook) to be considered. Better management of the river system, including monitoring and enforcement, was also seen as necessary. Water users in the lower catchment were concerned about potential flooding; and about the increase in salinity if flows were reduced. People interested in fishing were very concerned about wetlands and barriers in the estuary; and about former estuarine areas now blocked by levees and floodgates.

The community was most concerned about the flow regime at times of little or no flow. People recognised that fairly long periods of little flow were natural for the river. They also recognised the importance of:

• high flows
• protecting groundwater, especially as flow is often through the sandy bed of the creeks and rivers
• the effects of instream structures such as weirs
• variability in flows
• protecting the estuary.

River flow objectives that received most mention were those aimed at protecting pools and low flows, followed by those protecting high flows, maintaining or restoring natural flow variability, protecting groundwater, and reducing the effects of weirs and other structures. Other objectives received some recognition, but mostly in relation to the regulated sections of the river. The objective of maintaining estuarine processes and habitats was regarded as a priority for the estuary.

People sought more information on how to protect river health; on the relationships between Water quality and flow; about natural flow patterns and groundwater status, and how these have changed; and about the types of habitats needed by water-dependent animals. People also wanted to know that land and water restoration measures would be cost-effective.

Major issues

The process of developing the objectives has identified major issues that needed action to achieve a healthy and viable Hunter River catchment. Comments on some of these are included in Section 3, in the supporting information for the recommended objectives. The major issues were:

• Landholders in the unregulated sections of river system wanted assistance (tax rebates or subsidies) to reduce their use of water in times of no or little flow by means such as developing off-river storages, increasing the efficiency of water use and reusing wastewater. It was recognised that intensive development of off-river storages or farm dams would, however, decrease runoff and increase water extraction from higher flows, thus depleting small rises in the river.
• The extent of loss of native vegetation cover over a long period has resulted in land degradation leading to sedimentation of streams and wetlands, increased turbidity in waters, rising watertables and increased salinity levels in waters (the soil in parts of the catchment being naturally saline). Degraded riparian vegetation is also linked with this issue.
• Uncontrolled livestock access to streams has increased erosion of river banks, leading to increased turbidity in the water and higher loads of nutrients and pathogens-directly from the stock, and in runoff from the land.
• Instream structures (e.g. levees, floodgates and weirs) are affecting Water quality and threatening the survival, or blocking the passage, of native fish-especially around the estuary and associated nationally and internationally significant wetlands, such as Hexham Swamp and Kooragang Island.
• Systems identified as being in poor health needed to be rehabilitated, and waterways in conservation areas with high conservation values need protection. For example, most rivers leading into the Goulburn River were identified in Stressed Rivers Assessment Report (DLWC 1998d) as being stressed-mostly from the amount of water extracted during low flows, but also by loss of riparian vegetation and by other environmental problems. This report identified the Allyn River and the Hunter Estuary, in addition to creeks within national parks, as having high conservation values. The Aquifer Risk Assessment Report (DLWC 1998a) has identified aquifers at risk from pollution or over-extraction.
• In general, runoff from land or waterside activities has the most impact on Water quality in the Hunter River catchment. However, point-source pollutant loads entering waters-such as from sewage treatment plants at, for example Cessnock, and from mines-also affect water quality. These are being dealt with through pollution reduction programs on licences and, for saline discharges from mines and the power stations, through the EPA's Hunter Salinity Trading Scheme.
• The salinity of the water in certain areas (such as tributaries of the Goulburn River and Dart Brook and tributaries), and at times of low flow, exceeds recommended guidelines for irrigation of medium-sensitive crops. Salt-sensitive crops could be damaged by irrigation with such water.

Existing programs

Some of these priority issues are already receiving considerable attention and resources. Under the Urban Stormwater Management Program, Newcastle has received $91,000 and Muswellbrook is to receive $110,000. The Hunter Salinity Trading Scheme, which applies to major industries (notably mines and power generators) has reduced the median salinity in the Hunter River by 15% to date. Most discharge from Upper Hunter sewage treatment plants is now being reused. There are several Landcare and community monitoring programs in the Glenbawn Dam area and the Paterson and Allyn rivers and Wollombi Brook areas. Monitoring programs are conducted by the Department of Land and Water Conservation, the Hunter Water Corporation, and the Hunter Catchment Management Trust.

Where management plans and programs such as these are already underway, they should be acknowledged and, where possible, incorporated into the river management plan.

This page was published 1 May 2006