Water recovery and infrastructure
In 2015–16 irrigation farmers and their communities benefited from large scale investment under the Basin Plan to upgrade and modernise water infrastructure both on-farm and off-farm. As shown in Figure 9, the majority of expenditure on water recovery in 2015 and 2016 occurred through infrastructure efficiencies, rather than water purchases.
In addition to water recovery, the modernisation of the irrigation networks and on-farm irrigation infrastructure also contributes to long-term sustainability by:
- enabling existing irrigation farmers to adopt more efficient irrigation and farming practices, leading to significantly greater productivity and diversification in cropping opportunities.
- positioning irrigation networks for future investment in new crops and with new technologies.
Case study
Community-level social and economic analysis
The social and economic analysis undertaken as part of the Northern Basin Review was developed at a community level. It is the first time such detailed information has been compiled for individual communities.
Changes in irrigated production and employment were the key factors used to describe effects from recovering water for each community. This analysis was supplemented by studies on the benefits that recovered water might present for floodplain graziers and Aboriginal people.
To estimate the effects of water recovery in the 21 communities examined, it was necessary to identify all the different changes affecting each community. To do this, the MDBA held extensive consultations with town and farm businesses, individuals, community groups, industry organisations, and governments. This enabled the MDBA to assess the consequences of water recovery within the context of other factors affecting each community.
The work highlighted that the effects of recovering water for the environment differ from community to community. They can be influenced by changes in the volume, location or type of entitlements recovered, and whether the recovery is through infrastructure investment or purchase, as well as timing and pace of recovery.
Overall, the analysis concluded there would be around 650 fewer jobs under the current Basin Plan in the most affected northern communities, but also found that other factors have already contributed to 1,400 fewer jobs in these communities over the past 15 years. This led to the proposal to reduce the northern Basin recovery target and thereby lessen the Basin Plan impacts by around 200 jobs.
Overall, the study showed that in communities where there is less reliance on irrigation, the effects were difficult to distinguish from other drivers of change. However, in some smaller, irrigation-dependent communities the effects are more noticeable, even against the backdrop of the other changes affecting those communities.
While the social and economic analysis was initially undertaken to inform the Authority's review of the sustainable diversion limits for the northern Basin, it has started to have broader benefits. For example, the information that has been generated can assist communities to understand and respond to the multiple pressures they face.
The insights gained from this approach to social and economic assessments is now helping shape the approach to similar work elsewhere in the Basin and will contribute to the 2017 evaluation of Basin Plan implementation.
Off-farm irrigation networks
In 2015–16 the modernisation of irrigation networks across the Basin continued with upgrades, installation of automated systems and reconfiguration and replacement of existing open channels with pipelines. Demand for the new funding round for off-farm upgrades was strong. As one example, the Australian Government committed funding to off-farm projects, investing $250 million in the Private Irrigation Infrastructure Operators Program in southern NSW. Projects in this program include enhancements to the Hay and Goodnight irrigation districts, to upgrade outdated, inefficient and ineffective systems. More detail on these projects can be found on the website of the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources.
The Goulburn–Murray Connections Project Stage 2 in Victoria is the largest network modernisation project under the Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program. When the project is completed in around 2020, the Australian Government will have invested almost $1 billion in it.
Across the Basin over 10,000 individual irrigators are benefitting from these improvements to water delivery systems. These benefits include more efficient water delivery to the farm and in-field applications leading to flow on benefits to farmers through better use of available water, better crop production and ultimately, increased farmer revenue.
One example of network upgrades benefitting farmers is the Trangie-Nevertire upgrade in the Macquarie Valley of NSW, which helps farmers to continue irrigating in periods of low allocation.
Figure 9: Australian Government water recovery in 2015–2016 focused on infrastructure projects*
*Notes:
- The purchase and infrastructure expenditure corresponds to settlement and infrastructure milestone payment dates and therefore do not align with the reported water volumes for that financial year.
- Infrastructure expenditure includes all SRWUIP expenditure in the Murray–Darling Basin and SA River Murray Sustainability Program funding ($120 million efficiency and purchase component). Note that some infrastructure expenditure relates to projects that do not recover gap bridging water.
- Water Smart Australia water recovery of 2.4 GL has been excluded as it is not possible to identify the portion of project funding that achieved this recovery.
Case study
Trangie–Nevertire Irrigation Scheme — network modernisation
The modernisation of the Trangie-Nevertire Irrigation Scheme, implemented from 2011–2015, has been hailed as a success, returning almost 30 GL of water to the environment and giving an ageing irrigation scheme a viable future.
Background
The Trangie-Nevertire Irrigation Scheme in the Macquarie Valley, NSW, has been operating since 1971. At its peak it had over 66 members irrigating 17,000 hectares on over 100 properties. Up until 2002–03 allocations had averaged 90%, but dropped to around 10% through the millennium drought. The scheme's ageing infrastructure had transmission losses that meant that in times of low allocation no water could reach farms. By 2009, network members agreed that the long-term viability of the scheme was at risk and they applied for Australian Government funding to modernise and rationalise the network.
The project
The modernisation project aimed to generate water savings by reducing water loss through seepage and evaporation in the scheme. The Australian Government invested $115 million over four years, from 2011 to 2015, to complete works including:
- reducing the open channel length by 97 km, and modernising the remaining 143 kms by reshaping and relining the channels
- installing a 230 km piped stock and domestic scheme delivering water to 102 properties
- upgrading on-farm irrigation infrastructure on 20 farms, including installing new sprinkler technology, water storages, metering, and moisture and water monitoring equipment
- decommissioning channels to 18 properties, which received assistance to transition from irrigation to grazing and dryland farming.
Outcomes
Overall, the project provided 30 GL (or 40% of the original water entitlements) to the Australian Government as environmental water for the Macquarie catchment.
The upgrade significantly reduced water losses and improved water delivery efficiency by nearly half (from around 65–93%). Previously, at least 20 GL had been necessary to begin to operate the irrigation network, and after the project pumping of water could begin with just 4 GL. This means farmers are now able to irrigate crops in low allocation years where it was not possible before. Additional water will be also be available for crops despite the reduction in water entitlements, as irrigators have retained a share of the water savings and delivery efficiency has significantly improved. By reducing the risks around water availability, the project has created opportunities for additional crop production, which improves the profitability and sustainability of farm businesses.
View the full final project report, released in 2016, from the Trangie-Nevertire Board.
On-farm infrastructure programs
On-farm infrastructure programs also improve the capacity of irrigators and their communities to adjust to the complex array of challenges they face. More than 2,000 projects across the Basin are helping individual farmers modernise and improve their on-farm water use efficiency. These programs fund a diverse range of works, including development of more efficient and automated irrigation layouts, upgrading and reconfiguring on-farm storages and irrigation delivery systems — thereby improving productivity and freeing up additional water to expand production or sell on the open market.
During 2015–16 a further funding round of the Australian Government's Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program were contracted through a number of programs in each state of the Basin, including:
- On Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program which in 2015–16 committed more than $82 million to new on-ground works. The total program investment under this program is $553 million.
- Queensland Healthy Headwaters Water Use Efficiency rounds 9 and 10 brought the total funding under this program to $110 million.
- Sustaining the Basin: Irrigated Farm Modernisation program (NSW) delivered $3.4 million in 2015–16, bringing total expenditure to nearly $69 million.
Figure 10: Irrigator perceptions of infrastructure improvements measured through the Regional Wellbeing Survey
Benefits and results from modernisation process
With almost half the off-farm and on-farm infrastructure upgrade projects now complete, irrigators are beginning to report on the benefits of these changes for their business operations and on their wellbeing more generally. For example, the University of Canberra's Regional Wellbeing Survey collects information from people throughout rural and regional Australia, including irrigation farmers in the Basin. In 2015, 833 irrigators living in the Basin provided responses to questions about off-farm and on-farm infrastructure improvements in the Regional Wellbeing Survey.
The views of irrigators about the effects of off-farm works were mixed, noting that the irrigation network modernisation works were not completed at the time of the survey.
The results nevertheless provided a number of insights into irrigator perceptions of infrastructure improvements, which Figure 10 shows that irrigator perceptions were largely positive or neutral but with some perceptions that there had been a negative impact on costs of water delivery. It is expected that the preliminary results from the 2016 Regional Wellbeing Survey due in March of 2017 will shed more light on the reasons for increased costs of water delivery in some regions.
In relation to on-farm programs, the Regional Wellbeing Survey results showed that over half of grant recipients upgraded 60% or more of their irrigated area, compared with only 28% of irrigators who upgraded without the benefit of a Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program grant. In addition:
- 70% of grant recipients reported they used local contractors to undertake the upgrade work
- 86% reported that the modernisation had a positive impact on their farm enterprise overall and 79% reported a positive impact on farm productivity
- 55% of grant recipients reported increased flexibility of production following the upgrades
- 26% of grant recipients reported they had increased the area they irrigated following the upgrades (compared with 12% for farms that had not invested in their irrigation efficiency), and 36% reported they had found new markets for their farm produce.
Over the last three years the MDBA has conducted in-depth interviews with over 100 farmers in the southern Basin about the changes they have experienced since the introduction of water reforms associated with the Basin Plan. In these interviews most farmers receiving government support for their infrastructure upgrades reported that their business had experienced a net increase in productivity after the upgrade, as the program arrangements allowed farmers to keep a proportion of the water savings. Other benefits cited included changes in work practices that improve work–life balance and allow greater control over farming operations, improved business opportunities such as crop diversification and multiple cropping, and the ability to irrigate with lower announced allocations. For more information about water programs associated with the Basin Plan, visit agriculture.gov.au/water/mdb/programmes.
Irrigator's perspective of the infrastructure upgrade program
For many irrigators, these upgrades made a critical difference to the viability of their enterprises. For example, an irrigator in the South Australian Riverland who grows a mixture of crops, including wine grapes, on their family farm, describes the benefits gained from participating in Australian Government infrastructure upgrade programs.
'It [the infrastructure upgrade programs] has put me in a position now, and my family, that we can continue to farm with some potential of making a decent profit. I've been in Round 1 and Round 3 of the 3IP [Australian Government-funded program]. I put all of the money back into the property. It went towards purchasing a property, and a brand new irrigation system—all drip, all variable speed drives with pumps. I've now used funding from the third round of the 3IP to install state-of-the-art controllers.
So basically the 3IP Project allowed me to do this redevelopment, increase my production area and introduce water saving technologies that I would otherwise not be able to afford.
Without the 3IP funding, I'd have to put up with the old system. Essentially because of the irrigation upgrades, I've doubled my production area. It has also allowed me to shift away from wine grapes and put in a higher value crop. The 3IP has allowed me to think positively rather than just go from one year to the next, hoping that we don't have a water crisis.'
Wine grape producer, South Australia, Riverland
Key sources for our socio-economic evaluation
Northern Basin Review: the MDBA used a new modelling approach to distinguish between the likely effects of the Basin Plan and long-term trends in communities. This work was constantly checked and reworked with community input as part of the process.
Regional and industry profiles: the MDBA is drawing on existing data to develop an understanding of the economic and socio-demographic changes occurring in the Basin over the long term, and more recently due to the Basin Plan.
University of Canberra Wellbeing Survey: the MDBA continues to use the University of Canberra's Regional Wellbeing Survey to gain insights into what is happening in Basin communities. The survey collects information from people throughout rural and regional Australia, including irrigation farmers in the Murray–Darling Basin.
ABARES Farm Survey: ABARES has been conducting annual surveys of irrigators in the Murray–Darling Basin since 2006–07.
MDBA face-to-face interviews: from 2014–16 the MDBA undertook 120 in-depth interviews with Basin farmers and community members. These interviews revealed many insights about how people were managing change in the Basin, and the information has informed a number of case studies in this report.