A micro case study of the legal and administrative arrangements for river health in the Kangaroo River (NSW)

2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (11) ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Mooney ◽  
D. Farrier

Kangaroo Valley is a drinking water supply catchment for Kangaroo Valley village, parts of the Southern Highlands and Sydney. It is also a popular recreation area both for swimming and canoeing. Land use has traditionally been dominated by dairy farming but there has been significant and continuing development of land for hobby farms and rural residential subdivision. Dairy industry restructuring has affected the viability of some farms in the Valley and created additional pressure for subdivision. River health is a function of flows, water quality, riparian vegetation, geomorphology and aquatic habitat and riverine biota. River flows in the Kangaroo River are affected by water extraction and storage for urban water supply and extraction by commercial irrigators and riparian land holders which have a significant impact at low flows. Current water quality often does not meet ANZECC Guidelines for primary contact and recreation and the river is a poor source of raw drinking water. Key sources of contaminants are wastewater runoff from agriculture, and poorly performing on-site sewage management systems. Riparian vegetation, which is critical to the maintenance of in-stream ecosystems suffers from uncontrolled stock access and weed infestation. The management of land use and resulting diffuse pollution sources is critical to the long term health of the river. The Healthy Rivers Commission of New South Wales Independent Inquiry into the Shoalhaven River System Final Report July, 1999 found that the longer term protection of the health of the Kangaroo River is contingent upon achievement of patterns of land use that have regard to land capability and also to the capability of the river to withstand the impacts of inappropriate or poorly managed land uses. This micro case study of Kangaroo Valley examines the complex legal and administrative arrangements with particular reference to the management of diffuse pollution for river health. In the past, diffuse pollution has fallen through the gaps in legislation and its administration. Although water pollution legislation is broad enough to embrace diffuse pollution, in practice the Environment Protection Authority has focused on regulating point sources. Water legislation has traditionally been concerned with issues of water quantity rather than water quality. Legislation which allows agency intervention in relation to land degradation has grown from soil conservation roots, neglecting the flow-on effects upon water quality. Under the land use planning system existing land uses are protected from new regulatory requirements. A number of recent developments in NSW law and its administration have set the scene for addressing this past neglect. Water planning provisions in the Water Management Act 2000 have the potential to enable community based Water Management Committees to move away from a narrow focus on water quantity to the broader issues of river health, including water quality. Improved management of on-site sewage management systems is expected as a result of the Local Government (Approvals) Amendment (Sewage Management Regulation) 1998. A draft Regional Environmental Plan prepared for the Sydney Catchment Authority aims to improve the assessment of new development in terms of its impact on drinking water quality. It also moves away from an exclusive concern with controlling new development towards grappling with existing uses. Proposed amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as detailed in the White Paper, Plan First (2001) include the integration of imperatives derived from catchment strategies and water management plans into local land use plans.

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Cherchi ◽  
Mohammad Badruzzaman ◽  
Joan Oppenheimer ◽  
Matthew Gordon ◽  
Simon Bunn ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Miller ◽  
B. Whitehill ◽  
D. Deere

This paper comments on the strengths and weaknesses of different methodologies for risk assessment, appropriate for utilisation by Australian Water Utilities in risk assessment for drinking water source protection areas. It is intended that a suggested methodology be recommended as a national approach to catchment risk assessment. Catchment risk management is a process for setting priorities for protecting drinking water quality in source water areas. It is structured through a series of steps for identifying water quality hazards, assessing the threat posed, and prioritizing actions to address the threat. Water management organisations around Australia are at various stages of developing programs for catchment risk management. While much conceptual work has been done on the individual components of catchment risk management, work on these components has not previously been combined to form a management tool for source water protection. A key driver for this project has been the requirements of the National Health and Medical Research Council Framework for the Management of Drinking Water Quality (DWQMF) included in the draft 2002 Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG). The Framework outlines a quality management system of steps for the Australian water industry to follow with checks and balances to ensure water quality is protected from catchment to tap. Key steps in the Framework that relate to this project are as follows: Element 2 Assessment of the Drinking Water Supply System• Water Supply System analysis• Review of Water Quality Data• Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Element 3 Preventive Measures for Drinking Water Quality Management• Preventive Measures and Multiple Barriers• Critical Control Points This paper provides an evaluation of the following risk assessment techniques: Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP); World Health Organisation Water Safety Plans; Australian Standard AS 4360; and The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines – Drinking Water Quality Management Framework. These methods were selected for assessment in this report as they provided coverage of the different approaches being used across Australia by water utilities of varying: scale of water management organisation; types of water supply system management; and land use and activity-based risks in the catchment area of the source. Initially, different risk assessment methodologies were identified and reviewed. Then examples of applications of those methods were assessed, based on several key water utilities across Australia and overseas. Strengths and weaknesses of each approach were identified. In general there seems some general grouping of types of approaches into those that: cover the full catchment-to-tap drinking water system; cover just the catchment area of the source and do not recognise downstream barriers or processes; use water quality data or land use risks as a key driving component; and are based primarily on the hazard whilst others are based on a hazardous event. It is considered that an initial process of screening water quality data is very valuable in determining key water quality issues and guiding the risk assessment, and to the overall understanding of the catchment and water source area, allowing consistency with the intentions behind the ADWG DWQM Framework. As such, it is suggested that the recommended national risk assessment approach has two key introductory steps: initial screening of key issues via water quality data, and land use or activity scenario and event-based HACCP-style risk assessment. In addition, the importance of recognising the roles that uncertainty and bias plays in risk assessments was highlighted. As such it was deemed necessary to develop and integrate uncertainty guidelines for information used in the risk assessment process. A hybrid risk assessment methodology was developed, based on the HACCP approach, but with some key additions and modifications to make it applicable to varying catchment risks, water supply operation needs and environmental management processes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 609 ◽  
pp. 724-734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Fierro ◽  
Carlos Bertrán ◽  
Jaime Tapia ◽  
Enrique Hauenstein ◽  
Fernando Peña-Cortés ◽  
...  

AMBIO ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 1154-1168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunsmaa Batbayar ◽  
Martin Pfeiffer ◽  
Martin Kappas ◽  
Daniel Karthe

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nematollah Jafarzadeh ◽  
Maryam Ravanbakhsh ◽  
Kambis Ahmadi Angali ◽  
Ahmad Zare Javid ◽  
Darioush Ranjbar Vakil Abadi ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 184 (9) ◽  
pp. 5343-5361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gajanan Kisan Khadse ◽  
Moromi D. Kalita ◽  
Pawan K. Labhsetwar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document