Macquarie River - Orange Water Pipeline

I object to the proposal to build a pipeline to take water from the upper Macquarie River to the Suma Park water storage dam. The environment needs this water to support the biodiversity of the river and adjacent habitats. The overall environmental damage that the project will cause is unacceptable.

The amount of water to be taken is not sustainable it will severely affect endangered fish species. I really can not understand the expectations on the natural world to keep supplying with little regard to it's ability to maintain such high demands. It will disrupt fish passage and degrade important habitat values.

this would have to be 1 of the biggest jokes ive ever heard of, I have lived most of my life at hill-end,nsw 2850, and the only time you see water in the river is when it rains, the rest of the time it is just flowing like a little creek,most of the year all you find in the river up stream is water holes, unless its been raining ,.IF the council go ahead with this plan, we will loose all the Murray cod, red-fin,yellow belly's and not to mention the numinous turtles that live in the river,,.what is the AUSTRALIAN government and local governments thinking of, dont you guys think you STUFF the country up enough as it is

I object to the proposal, on many issues
Enviromentally it will be damaging to the river, destroy standsof Box trees (many varities) Erosion over the whole site leave a huge strip of country denuded of large tress for years to come.
Need, there are many ways council can save water but will not listen to simple suggestions that are practical. Mass installation of tanks Raise the wall of Suma park Dam use water after it has been through the sewer treatment works for gardens and outside washing toilet flushing( take mine to court and get our water back.
Practicallity NIL Cost per litre to pump not practical at all Dam to small to make the scheme work in time of drought Maintenance of equipment ongoing in times when not required All other systems will lay idle bores pumps pipes will deteriate There are other options available that would be of benifit to other council areas not just self centred on Orange Blayney,Cabonne Councils are just two
Data the data used is just calculations not actual figures there is no gauging stations below Suma Park Dam to get exact figures of the flow in and out of the dam in rain periods, we went into the drought period with 1dam half full because of councils inability to repair it and then in the middle of the drought pumped it emty into the creek to repair the dam, the figures used for water comsumtion are based on an artificial population period as at the time we had construction staff at both the new Hospital & Cadie Mine in town these have now left
Overall the rate payers of orange who already have the third highest rates in the state could not afford the exorbinet costs to run this scheme on top of the extra garbage rates to be imposed by council and the Electricity costs

I object to the Pipeline as the river has a high biodiversity and is a unique and special area.

This river reach is one of only three places left in Australia with a thriving population of the nationally endangered Trout Cod .

There are many better ways for Orange, the Central West region and the mining industry to secure a sustainable water supply.

Please find a more sustainable and environmentally friendly way to solve the issues.

Kind regards
Sean Corrigan

Thank you for the opportunity to lodge an objection to the lack of creativity demonstrated in the EA in the proposed location of the Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline in the environs of Oaky Lane and perhaps in other places along its route.
I understand that the pipeline may not be laid under the surface of Oaky Lane because of the damage that may be caused to endangered box gum woodland and the cost of mandated environmental offsets.
I submit that a more creative and environmentally appropriate approach would be to locate the pipeline under Oaky Lane and allow natural regrowth (or planting) of box gum trees within the proposed easements.
I submit there are a number of reasons that the EA's proposed location of the pipeline is a non creative approach to an environmental issue.
I submit that adequate assessment of all ramifications of the pipeline being place under Oaky Lane, when balanced against the creation of a box gum woodland in the proposed easements along Oaky Lane, would conclude that placing the pipeline under the lane would provide the optimum outcome that might be achieved.
My rationale for this conclusion is as follows.
1. Over the thirty two years I have managed my 292 HA rural property adjacent to Oaky Lane I have selectively allowed regrowth of eucalypts for their environmental benefit to my property.
2. I have also poisoned much eucalypt regrowth including along my 1.2 kilometre boundary with Oaky Lane.
3. The EA gives due attention to the need to control the potential spread of weeds created by the pipeline. If one accepts the principle that a weed is any plant growing where it is not wanted then by the EA's criteria regrowth box gum trees within proposed easements are defined as weeds.
4. The EA's guidelines regarding vegetation that can be planted by landowners on the easement post installation of the pipeline sets limits on the potential size of trees that can be planted. This stipulation therefore prevents landowners from planting native box trees on the easement through their property.
5. Thus the EA gives no consideration to future regrowth of native box trees along the easements and by its criteria for vegetation size on the easement landowners will be mandated to poison regrowth native box trees.
6. My experience with eucalypt regrowth on my property would suggest that if box gum regrowth were allow along the proposed easement that within the fifty year life of the pipeline the easement would have a significant cover of established box gum trees - reviewers of the EA are welcome to inspect regrowth on my property.
7. Re potential damage to Oaky Lane:
7.1 Oaky Lane has been in existence for around 140 years. It was once a major transport route as part of the original western highway which ran from Bathurst to Wellington via the Ophir Goldfields. It was the main route from the Long Point Area to Orange until a road was constructed through the Mullion Range State Forest to Mullion Creek in the late 1960's.
7.2 The first three kilometres of Oaky Lane south from its junction with Long Point Road have extensively graded with gutters, in places deep gutters adjacent to old growth box gum trees. There are also numerous drainage channels graded to facilitate runoff from the lane.
7.3 The lane was not fenced off from stock for most of its length until after I bought my property in 1979.
7.4 None of these activities appear to have negatively impacted box gum trees in the lane.
7.5 Potentially the most damaging impact to box gum trees along Oaky Lane will be the mistletoe that is beginning to appear on trees along the lane.
8. I suspect that the major future damage to be caused to Oaky Lane and hence box gum trees by construction of the pipeline will be that caused by the need to upgrade the road to allow access to the large vehicles that will be used for its construction and the increased use of the lane by council maintenance workers and the general public following its upgrade.

Thank you for the opportunity to lodge an objection to the Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline traversing my property.
I object to the pipeline traversing my property because I found no consideration in the EA of the potential impact of wombat burrows on the pipeline trench.
I believe there is potential for wombat burrows to allow ingress of water to the pipeline trench from the time it is completed to some indeterminate period into the future.
I believe that ingress of water to the pipeline trench in hilly country where there are highly dispersible soils is a recipe for significant environmental degradation.
Measures to prevent wombats negatively impacting the pipeline trench may negatively impact the survival of other native species as there is a vegetation corridor through my property used by native animals for travel from the Mullion Range State Forest to bushland adjacent to the Macquarie River.
I am not surprised that there is no consideration of the impact of wombat burrows on the pipeline because I could find no reference to wombats in the EA.
I have owned and managed my property (L 4 DP586403) since September 1979. My property boundary fronts Long Point Road and Oaky Lane. The proposed pipeline will traverse approximately 1.2 kilometres of my property parallel to Oaky Lane . Wombat diggings started appearing on my property about six years ago and are now present at number of locations.

I am a fourth generation Macquarie river user,and beleive that the application of a pipeline to serve the city of Orange as a' Drought releif connection' is unfounded and ill conceived The river historically is reduced to a series of water holes in times of drought, thus producing no viable water for the city. Alternative water supplies are available and already implemented by local council. Environmentaly disastrous consequenes can occour to vunerable and endangered species at low river flows.
I object to any water being taken from the river without credible scientific evidence that there will be no compromise to the existing riverine enviroment.

To Whom It May Concern.
I would like to lodge my objection on behalf of the Bathurst community, in regards to the proposed Macquarie River Pipeline project for several reasons
: Firstly the question needs to be asked as to has the proposed $47 million pipeline project explored all possible options for the community. It is understood that raising the dam wall at Suma Park or water at Browns Creek, or Lake Rowlands may be better options.
secondly, what security is given to ensure that Bathurst will not have to release additional water into the Macquarie River to feed the pipeline. Whilst Bathurst has invested in water security by raising the Ben Chifley dam wall in the year 2000, the growth and expansion of the city will mean other water measures need to be taken into the future.er
Thirdly, what are the real impacts on the Macquarie River environmentally by taking this water out? Will it create another debacle such as we have with the Murray/ Darling system?
Yours Sincerely
Cr Warren Aubin
Bathusrt Regional Counciln

I object to this project for the reasons outlined below-

1.The pipeline is not justified because it has been designed to supply an artificially high water demand. The proposal is based on `unrestricted' average personal daily water use that is much higher than recent usage in Orange.
2.The upper Macquarie River is significant habitat for the nationally endangered Trout Cod. Other threatened fish species found in this river reach include Murray Cod, Silver Perch and Catfish.
3.The proposed extraction of water from upper Macquarie River at low flows will disrupt fish passage and degrade important habitat values.
4.The pipeline route will destroy good condition roadside vegetation that provides important wildlife corridors and habitat in a highly cleared landscape.
5.The pipeline route with associated access road and power line will cause disturbance to highly unstable soil structures in very steep terrain, threatening landslides into the river.
6.A regional water supply solution, that services more than the needs of Orange, needs to be developed using state and federal grant monies in an ecologically sustainable manner.

Thankyou.

I object to the findings of the Environmental Assessment and justification for the Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline Project, and fully endorse the submission from the Orange and Regional Water Security Alliance and its objections to the Environmental Assessment.

The findings of the EA must be viewed as seriously flawed when the assessment has been completed and reported on a pipeline route for the final critical 5 kilometres of route to a pumping site which has since been rejected by the proponents, and an alternative route and pump site has not been submitted for assessment or public comment.

On these grounds alone the EA should be rejected.

The impact of the final 5 km of the current pipeline route and pump site on the flora and fauna as reported in the EA acknowledges the potential impact on threatened and endanged flora communities and aquatic species, but understates the impact and their value. Such impacts cannot be mitigated against or offsetted despite claims by the proponents.

The EA should be rejected on environmental grounds.

The Project is incorrectly justified by the proponents using underestimated actual and potential secure water yield from existing sources and viable alternatives of expanded stormwater harvesting and bores, and inflated unrestricted water demand for both residential and industrial use.

The EA should be rejected on the grounds that the Project's water security assessment is inaccurate and does not justify the Project as currently proposed.

The Project's operating rules which indicate extraction of 12 ML/day down to river flow rate of 38ML/day seriously underestimates the impact of extractions occurring at such low river flow rates on aquatic fauna. Furthermore the stated intent to pump water into the main storage facility, Suma Park Dam, up to and maintaining a level of 90% capacity, does not allow for the capture of significant rainfall runoff into the Dam which occurs evn under low rainfall events.

The proposed operating rules are seriously flawed and will impact on the aquatic environment of the river, and the more economically viable storage of Suma Park Dam's normal inflows, and are justifiable grounds for rejection of the Project.

As an Orange City Councillor, my views are widely supported by the Orange Community who believe that there are alternative strategies to secure Orange's future water supplies than the Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline Proect.

Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline Project - Orange Drought Relief Connection

I make the following submissions in relation to the Macquarie River Pipeline Project.

It is my submission that the project be assessed and determined on its merits, and not on the perceived economic or political interests of other communities which have not suffered the debilitating effects of water shortages in the manner that Orange has.

It is noted that the submission of the Member for Dubbo dated 15 October 2012, states that he "does not favour the adoption of a water supply enhancement proposal that facilitates the growth and expansion of the city of Orange at the expense of other communities" and also that the pipeline "should not be considered if construction will lead to the detriment of surrounding districts by stunting or stymieing their potential for growth and expansion".

It is submitted that the argument that construction of the pipeline will somehow stymie the growth of other communities, including Dubbo's, is not supported by any objective evidence.

In the case of Dubbo, there is a significant body of water between it and the proposed pipeline, being Burrendong Dam, which provides water security for that city. It is submitted that Dubbo would not be impacted by the proposed pipeline or any other water security project in Orange.

It is noted that the submission of the Member for Bathurst dated 15 October 2012 states that "consideration needs to be given to ensure that Bathurst is not placed in an untenable situation whereby future growth can't proceed because of the growth of Orange and the Macquarie River Pipeline Project".

It is submitted that any suggestion that construction of the pipeline will place Bathurst in an untenable situation whereby future growth can't proceed is similarly not supported by any objective evidence.

Bathurst, which is upstream of the proposed pipeline, already possesses a significant dam and was virtually unaffected by water shortages during the recent drought.

Conclusion

The proposed pipeline should be assessed and determined on its merits. What is clear is that there is no evidence to suggest it would have any detrimental economic impacts on neighbouring cities.

It is submitted that the assessment of the proposed drought relief connection for Orange should be made free of perceived external economic and political considerations.

It is further submitted that regional economic growth is not a zero sum game whereby growth in one community has to occur at the expense of another.

The reality is that strong economic growth in any community in the Central West benefits the whole region.

We are all regional Australians and the great communities of the west need to be supporting each other for the benefit of all who are lucky enough to live in this region.

Andrew Gee MP
Member for Orange
15 October 2012

As attached.

See attached.

As attached.

As attached.

As attached.

See attached.

As attached.

As attached.