Murray Darling Basin plan can ‘legally remove’ third of environmental flows critical for Lower Lakes and Coorong

NEARLY a third of the environmental flows scientists say are critical to the health of the Lower Lakes and Coorong could be legally wiped out but if the Murray Darling Basin plan is implemented “in full”.

Rich birdlife on the Coorong ... nearly a third of the environmental flows scientists say are critical to the health of the Lower Lakes and Coorong could be legally wiped out if the Murray Darling Basin Plan is implemented “in full”.

• Expert water wars warning: ‘Kiss the Coorong goodbye’
• In-depth: How the water wars truce broke down
• Another spray for SA Water Minister Ian Hunter
• Anger over plan to cut 70 billion litres from Basin plan
• Premier vows to fight against Murray Darling cuts

NEARLY a third of the environmental flows scientists say are critical to the health of the Lower Lakes and Coorong could be legally wiped out but the Federal Government insists Murray Darling Basin plan will be implemented “in full”.

The Advertiser can reveal that the Murray Darling Basin Plan legally allows for flow across the basin to go as low as 2100 billion litres — 1100 billion litres less than what scientists maintain is the “bare minimum” needed to keep the system healthy.

The 2100 billion litre target can be allowed as long as other ways are found to sensure the health of the system.

SA Premier Jay Weatherill has threatened to launch a taxpayer-funded attack on the Federal Government over any further cuts to allocations after The Advertiser revealed on Tuesday that the Murray Darling Basin Authority has proposed slashing 70 billion litres from the original 2750 billion litre target.

Premier Jay Weatherill has threatened to launch a taxpayer-funded attack on the Federal Government over any further cuts to allocations.

The reduction would come from targets in the north of the basin to help communities in southern Queensland and southern NSW and has the support of Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce.

While conservationists agree that the full 3200 billion litres — at least — are needed, National Irrigators’ Council chief executive Tom Chesson said the plan’s success should be judged on actual outcomes rather than litres.

For example, he said, if the plan is to increase native fish stocks by 25 per cent, then that’s what it should be measured on.

“It’s now just a pissing contest about the numbers not the outcomes,” he said.

“The problem in South Australia is that locally this is being used as a smokescreen for domestic issues.”

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull insisted the plan would be delivered “in full and on time”.

“I think it was Mark Twain who said whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over … it is always contentious,” he said.

“The reality is that what we have to do is to find the solutions, the mechanisms that enable us to return water to the environment in a way that does not disadvantage basin communities.”

State Water Minister Ian Hunter said Mr Chesson was “ignoring the science”.

“The science says 3200 gigalitres is the bare minimum to sustain the river into the future,” he said.

On Wednesday morning, Liberal Senator Anne Ruston — who lives in the Riverland — said she would meet with Mr Hunter.

“I think that we’ve had a bit of fanfare and a bit of hot air running around about this subject,” she said.

“The important thing is for us to just sit down and discuss how we are actually going to deliver this plan in full for the benefit of all our states.”

The Australian Conservation Foundation says there are “no jobs on a dead river”.