Ñ 1

Inquiry

into Rural Drainage in Victoria

North Central CMA Submission

December 2012

Ñ 2

Executive Summary This submission from the North Central Catchment Management Authority (CMA) to the Parliamentary Inquiry into Rural Drainage in Victoria is divided into two key components:

1. A background to the role of the North Central CMA in rural drainage management (and a summary of rural drainage management in the North Central region);

2. Responses to each of the items of the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference and recommendations for improvement.

Catchment Management Authorities were established in Victoria in 1997. CMAs have powers under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Vic) and the Water Act 1989 (Vic). Many CMAs, including the North Central CMA, upon their formation took over the roles and responsibilities of former river and/or drainage improvement trusts. Given this role, this Inquiry is of strong relevance to the North Central CMA and we draw on our drainage and waterway management experience to offer recommendations to the Environment and Natural Resources Committee for consideration. Following is a summary of our recommendations.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Funding for the management of regional drains (and waterways) be resolved through a beneficiary pays model;

Recommendation 2: Catchment Management Authorities, subject to appropriate resourcing, are confirmed as the responsible authority for the management of regional drains (not including gazetted irrigation areas);

Recommendation 3: Private (or community surface) drains remain the responsibility of the private landowner on which the drain is located;

Recommendation 4: Catchment Management Authorities are given the enforcement powers to compel private landowners to maintain their private drains which are either relied upon by other landowners or have the potential to adversely affect other landowners;

Recommendation 5: New regional drains should not be constructed, unless the drain can be demonstrated to improve the condition of the environment or ameliorate against the impacts of previous works;

Recommendation 6: That the Victorian Government consider the relative merits of the options

presented in this paper, in relation to TOR 5.

Ñ 3

Recommendation 7: Rural drainage management is incorporated into the Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy; and

Recommendation 8: North Central CMA recommends that greater responsibility be placed on the owners of infrastructure to have a program to upgrade assets in key locations where known drainage issues occur.

Ñ 4

1. Background 1.1 Function of Catchment Management Authorities Catchment Management Authorities were established in Victoria in 1997. CMAs have powers under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Vic) and the Water Act 1989 (Vic). Among many other drivers, one of the key reasons for the establishment of CMAs was to consolidate the existing river improvement trusts1 and fill a ‘whole of government’ gap in relation to waterway, drainage and floodplain management. CMAs powers in relation to the scope of the Parliamentary Inquiry into Rural Drainage Management in Victoria relate specifically to these regional drainage management and waterway management powers under the Water Act 1989 (Vic). Additional detail is included in the Statement of Obligations (SoO) for CMAs. It is important to note that many of the CMA Water Act powers are ‘enabling’ in their nature and many are subject to available funding from the Victorian (and Australian) governments.

1.2 Overview of rural drainage in the North Central region Rural drainage management in the North Central region (excluding irrigation drainage) is inextricably linked with waterway and floodplain management. All regional drains in the North Central region are major waterways that have been modified and maintained to prevent nuisance flooding and the water-logging of land. Drainage management is a subset of waterway management, with the exception being that the sole purpose of drainage management is to convey flow to facilitate land use. Over the years as the adverse impacts of managing waterways as drains has become evident, i.e. decline in water quality, reduction in native fish populations and decline in waterbird habitat, a more holistic approach to waterway management has developed. This has involved the re-snagging of waterways, rehabilitation of riparian corridors and the reconnection of waterways to wetlands for example.

1.3 Current arrangements for rural drainage management in the North Central region The management of rural drains is currently based on the following categories - regional drains and private drains. Regional drains within the North Central region are major waterways that have been modified. Modification or enhancement has typically involved widening, deepening and, prior to the 1980s, straightening of the waterways. Maintenance of these modified waterways also involved de-snagging, removal of native vegetation such as lignum and cumbungi and follow up weed removal and desilting.

1 Recommendation 18 of the Eighth Report of the Parliamentary Public Bodies Review Committee

Ñ 5

In the case of the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust, as described later, all of the regional drains are major waterways such as Bullock Creek, Loddon River, Seven Months Creek and Calivil Creek. Private drains are smaller depressions which drain an individual’s property or a number of properties before discharging to one of the major waterways/regional drains. These private drains are called community surface drains in the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust district and the ownership and maintenance is the responsibility of the landowner on which the drain is located.

1.4 Former drainage schemes North Central CMA has two former schemes within its region that provided, to varying degrees, rural drainage management. North Central CMA upon its formation took over the roles and responsibilities of the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust and the Avoca River Improvement Trust. Activities of both of these former Trusts included management of waterways/drains and associated assets to enhance drainage and mitigate flooding. The Bullock Creek Improvement Trust (BCIT) was constituted in 1970 to preserve and restore streams within its constituted district to the condition which existed prior to the introduction of irrigation, in order to enhance drainage and mitigate flooding. The Bullock Creek drainage system is located within the Tragowel Plains region. During the late 1950s and 1960s poor surface drainage and inefficient irrigation contributed to high groundwater levels and significant salinity impacts. To mitigate the impact of salinity from poor drainage and restore the ‘natural flow regime’, the BCIT constructed a network of shallow drains during the 1970s to 1990s. The drainage network consists of some 340km of regional drains (waterways), which support some 650km of community surface (private) drains. Figure 1 is a map of the BCIT regional drainage system. Maintenance activities undertaken by BCIT to improve drainage and mitigate against flooding included clearing the regional drains of cumbungi, cleaning of silt deposited in the drains and de-snagging of the regional drains. In executing our role, North Central CMA operates with initiative funding provided by the Victorian and Australian government investment programs and its activities are led by government policy. North Central CMA has been unable to attract any funding to undertake routine maintenance to the BCIT drainage network.

The Avoca River Improvement Trust was established in 1966 and whilst it does not have any formal drains a number of other associated works were constructed to facilitate improved drainage, mitigate against nuisance flooding, prevent erosion, assist irrigation and provide local amenity. These works include in-stream concrete structures and floodways. Similar to the Bullock Creek River Improvement Trust, regular maintenance activities such as weed control and de-snagging of waterways were undertaken.

Ñ 6

Figure 1 – Map of Bullock Creek River Improvement Trust regional drainage system

Ñ 7

1.5 Regional Strategy for Rural Drainage Management North Central CMA developed a Regional Strategy for Rural Drainage Management in 1999. The purpose of the regional strategy was to:

• set out objectives for rural drainage management;

• provide a decision making framework for a formal planning approval process to apply to proposed rural drainage activities including clarifying roles and responsibilities of the key stakeholders;

• provide regional design principles and standards to apply to rural drainage activities; and,

• to identify specific measures / studies which need to be undertaken for the future implementation of the strategy.

The strategy outlined ten priority rural drainage zones within the North Central region. These zones included:

• Salisbury/Powlett Plains;

• Richardson River/Callawadda;

• Runnymede;

• Bradshaws Swamp/Homebush Creek;

• Borung Plains;

• Tylden Landcare Group area;

• Nine Mile Creek/Marmal Creek;

• Long Swamp/Moolort;

• Five Mile Creek/Woodend; and,

• Coghills Creek/Learmonth and Smeaton area. Since the development of this strategy North Central CMA has been involved in the development of Rural Drainage Management Plans for the Salisbury/Powlett Plains and the Runnymede area. These plans identified works and activities to address the drainage issues within each of the areas. The responsibilities for works and activities were shared between local council and the North Central CMA. However since this time, North Central CMA has been unable to attract funding to progress the further development of management plans or to undertake the previously identified works and activities.

1.6 Approval for new rural drainage works North Central CMA is a referral authority under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic). Any new works within an identified flood prone area require a planning permit. This is an effective process that enables North Central CMA to assess any new works to ensure that there is no adverse impact on neighbouring properties and the environment. North Central CMA has not received any new applications for the construction of new drains for at least the past five years. This can be attributed to the extended dry period prior to 2010.

Ñ 8

2. TOR (1) The historical basis for the establishment and operation of former drainage schemes including management arrangements

As outlined previously there are two former schemes within the North Central region, the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust and Avoca River Improvement Trust. These two former schemes from an overall perspective were effective in improving drainage and minimising the impacts of flooding. Activities in both schemes were funded from a beneficiary pays system. Landowners paid in the order of 1-2 cents in the capital improved value of their land. The rate that landowners contributed varied from year to year and was based on an annual works program that was established by the respective Trusts. In 1984, as part of the development of the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust Master Plan, the following key recommendations were made:

• The Trust boundary be extended (in effect tripling the size of the Trust district); and,

• A differential rating scheme be implemented to ensure that the bulk of the rate burden is carried by those landowners who derive the most benefit from the works.

Since North Central CMA took on responsibility for the former River Improvement Trusts little to no maintenance has been undertaken on the regional drains and waterways to facilitate improved drainage and mitigate against nuisance flooding. North Central CMA is of the opinion that it is best placed to undertake the role of regional drainage management however it requires additional funding and associated resources to adequately perform this role. In section 6 of this submission, North Central CMA outlines potential options for obtaining additional funding to undertake this role, however in summary North Central CMA recommends that a beneficiary pays model be established.

Recommendation

Recommendation 1: Funding for the management of regional drains (and waterways) be resolved through a beneficiary pays model;

Ñ 9

3. TOR (2) The status of rural drainage across Victoria, including effectiveness, regulation, ownership, responsibility and maintenance on both public and private land

3.1 Effectiveness of rural drainage Rural drainage issues are not expressed evenly across the geography of the North Central region. Generally issues are limited to the lower floodplain areas of the Campaspe, Loddon, Avoca and Avon-Richardson Rivers. This is typically due to the flat topography of these lower floodplains. The effectiveness of the existing regional drainage network is currently low due to the lack of maintenance and investment since the inception of the CMAs. The extended dry period prior to spring 2010 meant that this lack of maintenance in the existing regional drainage network has not been a problem, however during the 2010-11 floods and again in summer 2012, a number of issues have arisen with the existing drainage network. Whilst the regional drainage network would not have lessened the magnitude of flooding, North Central CMA has received a number of complaints from the community that the severity of the flooding could have been reduced by enabling floodwaters to drain away more quickly. Following the flood events of January 2011, North Central CMA was able to secure Natural Disaster Relief funding from the Department of Treasury and Finance to repair flood damage to the regional drains. This one-off funding will enable North Central CMA to repair a significant length (but not all) of the regional drains to a good standard in 2013. As not all the regional drains were damaged there will still remain a number of drains in poor condition.

3.2 Ownership and management responsibility

There is general acceptance in the North Central region that regional drains are the responsibility of the CMA and that private drains are the responsibility of the owner of the land on which the drain is located. North Central CMA currently has sufficient powers under the Water Act 1989 to undertake maintenance on these regional drains and land tenure has not proven to be a barrier to works.

The above arrangement has worked (with a few exceptions to be discussed later) and it is recommended that these arrangements for ownership and management be confirmed, i.e. subject to adequate resourcing being provided, CMAs are confirmed as responsible for the ownership and management of regional drains and private landowners are responsible for smaller private drains (or community surface drains) located on their property.

Ñ 10

3.3 Regulation of rural drainage In the case of private or community surface drains, the maintenance by private landowners has proven to be effective however there have been a number of instances in which the CMA has received complaints from landowners claiming that their neighbour has not maintained their drain or in some instances blocked the drain. This has in turn led to the upstream landowner experiencing flooding and/or ponding of water that is unable to drain away. CMAs have the ability to enforce works that have been undertaken within regional drains, however North Central CMA is not aware that any authority has the ability to require landowners to maintain private drains.

The planning permit process can manage new works and ensure that they are undertaken appropriately however in many circumstances works are undertaken but not picked up for many years (sometimes 10 or more years). At present the only avenue open to landowners to address this is for neighbour to take action against neighbour.

North Central CMA recommends that an authority be given the powers to compel a landowner to maintain or undertake rectification works to their private drain if it has the potential to affect a neighbouring property. North Central CMA would be prepared to undertake this role provided it receives the necessary funding.

Recommendations

Recommendation 2: Catchment Management Authorities, subject to appropriate resourcing, are confirmed as the responsible authority for the management of regional drains (not including gazetted irrigation areas);

Recommendation 3: Private (or community surface) drains remain the responsibility of the private landowner on which the drain is located; and

Recommendation 4: Catchment Management Authorities are given the enforcement powers to compel private landowners to maintain their private drains which are either relied upon by other landowners or have the potential to adversely affect other landowners.

Ñ 11

4. TOR (3) The benefits of rural drainage for both productive land and environment together with community expectations for rural drainage programs

Overall, through the early settlement of land in the North Central region, significant changes occurred to alter the natural flow regime of waterway systems. This was particularly prevalent in the Bullock Creek system, which prior to early settlement consisted of shallow open watercourses fringed with black box and lignum. During flood times water spilled out of the watercourses and ponded in adjacent depressions and wetlands, encouraging the growth of native vegetation and providing habitat and feeding grounds for waterbirds and terrestrial wildlife.

As a result of early settlement, dams were built and land was irrigated both of which caused substantial changes to the flow regime of the Bullock Creek waterway system. Prior to the formation of the Bullock Creek Improvement Trust, siltation and weed growth severely affected the drainage capacity of the system. This resulted in flooding and waterlogging of farms and the death through saline waterlogging of a substantial number of black box trees and associated vegetation. This in turn resulted in smaller farm incomes, reduced populations of birds and animals and diminished aesthetic quality of waterways.2

North Central CMA acknowledges that drainage associated with irrigation is outside the scope of this inquiry, however the regional drains in the Bullock Creek system are separate to the irrigation drains which are managed by Goulburn-Murray Water.

The benefits of the existing rural drainage schemes as evidenced in the Bullock Creek system are summarised as:

• Productive land – reduction in salinity by preventing waterlogging of land and causing ground water levels to artificially rise.

• Environment - mitigating against the impacts of early settlement and restoring the natural water cycle.

• Community - improving the visual amenity of the region through the re-establishment of riparian corridors.

For at least the past 10 years, requests to North Central CMA have been limited to the maintenance of the existing waterway and drainage network. North Central CMA has not been approached by landowners to develop new rural drainage schemes.

In summary, North Central CMA believes that the existing drainage systems are important to retain, however there is limited need for the creation of new rural drainage scheme districts within the North Central region.

Recommendations

Nil 2 Willing and Partners Pty Ltd “Bullock Creek Improvement Trust – Master Plan Study”, 1984

Ñ 12

5. TOR (4) The impacts of rural drainage, including on other landholders and the environment including waterways, wetlands, flora, fauna and water quality

Past practices associated with the settlement of land such as the straightening and deepening of waterways, clearing of vegetation, construction of levees, disconnection and draining of wetlands, and altering the natural flow regime have all had a significant negative impact on the environment within the North Central region. As the negative impacts of these past practices became evident, management practices evolved. In reality, management practices continue to evolve to take into account the best available information. There have been substantial changes in drainage management since the 1960s. Previously, in urban areas waterways were either piped or concrete lined, and in rural areas waterways were excavated and straightened. Now consideration is given to the total water cycle and restoring waterways as much as practicable to their natural condition. This change in management commenced to take hold in the 1980s and has continued to evolve since this time. North Central CMA constantly receives requests from landowners across the region to undertake maintenance on drains and waterways to improve drainage and prevent the perceived risk of flooding. North Central CMA has undertaken a range of actions to better understand and respond to the communities’ concerns regarding the perceived risk of native vegetation and woody debris within drains and waterways. These actions have included:

• the management of instream vegetation in the Loddon River from the Loddon Weir to Kerang;

• the trial management of lignum on the lower catchment floodplains; and,

• the management of timber accumulations in the lower Avoca River downstream of Charlton.

General observations following the above investigation and action are as follows:

• channel clearing is generally only effective for small and moderate flooding; and,

• there is a threshold channel blockage limit below which there is only a negligible impact of the in-stream obstruction on stream flow.

In summary, the majority of requests received by landowners are not justified, however there have been a number of situations under which action may be justified but North Central CMA has had limited funding to undertake such activities. This is particularly relevant to the former Avoca River Improvement Trust district. The Avoca River downstream of Glenloth is a perched river system and if it is unable to flow, stormwater overtops the banks of the river and flows through neighbouring properties. This was evidenced in August 2010, prior to the flood events of September 2010 and January 2011. Whilst the woody debris had minimal impact on the peak levels in the waterway, it kept

Ñ 13

the river levels high and without its removal, water from the creek would have continued to flow through neighbouring cropped land. In this instance, North Central CMA intervened and removed the blockage(s) which caused the water level to drop sufficiently to halt the flow of water across the neighbouring properties. This intervention was undertaken in such a way to address the immediate threat but without compromising the overall health of the waterway.

In summary, due to the potential adverse impacts to the environment, North Central CMA does not support the construction of new regional drains, unless the drain can be demonstrated to improve the condition of the environment or ameliorate against the impacts of previous development. In addition, North Central CMA believes additional funding for both waterways and drainage management is important to enable the CMA to respond to the needs of the community and undertake maintenance where warranted. Options for addressing this funding issue are outlined in Section 6.

Recommendation Recommendation 5: New regional drains should not be constructed, unless the drain can be

demonstrated to improve the condition of the environment or ameliorate against the impacts of previous works;

Ñ 14

6. TOR (5) Options for improved rural drainage management across Victoria, including regulation, institutional and funding arrangements, operation, responsibility and maintenance on both public and private land

As outlined previously in this submission the primary issue with rural drainage management in the North Central region is the CMAs inability to attract funding to undertake activities to meet the needs of the community without compromising the environment. North Central CMA is supportive of action being undertaken to resolve long-standing issues relating to rural drainage management. North Central CMA does not have a fixed position in this matter other than it recommends that funding come from a beneficiary pays model. The following options are provided for consideration, options three and four promote the beneficiary pays model:

Option One: No action

What’s involved: Government takes no action to resolve this matter in terms of defining accountabilities and providing funding to undertake drainage maintenance or improvement works.

Benefits: This option would be of little to no cost to the government.

Disadvantages: Regional drains will continue to deteriorate and usable arable land will continue to degrade, while the frequency of flooding in rural areas is likely to increase, and landowners will not derive the current level of protection afforded by the drainage system. Complaints received from landowners will continue to increase.

General comment: This option is not recommended by North Central CMA, currently the unresolved responsibilities and ambiguity has led to angst in the community, loss of trust and respect of government authorities, and landowner disputes – for not maintaining “their stretch of drain”.

Option Two: Government takes responsibility for all rural regional drains

What’s involved: Government would take on responsibility for all rural regional drains including providing funding to undertake maintenance and capital improvement works.

Benefits: Clarity of ownership and ongoing maintenance responsibilities.

Disadvantages: This option would create further dependency on the government and the government would be unlikely to deliver on the expectations of the community.

General comment: This option is not desirable.

Ñ 15

Option Three: Reinstate historic drainage scheme and create new drainage scheme districts

What’s involved: CMAs are confirmed as being responsible for undertaking ongoing management of rural regional drains. Drainage schemes are established to cover the former River Improvement Trust districts and new drainage scheme areas. A tariff is set on all benefitting landowners. Government would provide funding to CMAs to develop schemes until such time that the tariff is established.

Benefits: Clarity of ownership and ongoing maintenance responsibilities. A sustainable funding model for ongoing maintenance. Previous work and research has been undertaken by Goulburn-Murray Water and the former River Improvement Trusts that can be utilised in establishing an appropriate tariff.

Disadvantages: Reinstatement of the historic drainage schemes and the creation of new drainage scheme districts would be appropriate to undertake the maintenance of the assets of the former River Improvement Trusts, however does not resolve the greater catchment wide issue of managing waterways to address drainage and floodplain issues. In addition, significant work is required in establishing a rating system for new and existing drainage schemes and may take some time to establish as it would require the agreement of an appointed committee. North Central CMA has previously endeavoured to implement a tariff for the Bullock Creek system with Goulburn-Murray Water’s Pyramid Boort Water Services Committee (now called the Loddon Valley Water Services Committee) but was opposed. Funding would need to be provided by the government to the CMA to cover the labour and associated costs in establishing the schemes until such time that a tariff can be agreed and charged to benefitting landowners.

General comment: This option would address the issues associated with rural regional drainage in established scheme areas however would not address the greater issues of waterway and drainage management across the entire North Central region. North Central CMA’s experience is that the establishment of a tariff on a defined area which requires the agreement of an appointed committee is difficult to achieve and may take many years of dedicated resources to resolve.

Option Four: Catchment-wide waterway and drainage management tariff

What’s involved: A tariff (levy) is placed on all properties catchment-wide for the purposes of waterway and drainage management.

Benefits: This would simplify the management of issues across the entire region associated with drainage and waterway management. This option is also on the basis of beneficiary pays. Whilst some landowners will receive a greater level of benefit all landowners within the catchment contribute to the drainage problem and will derive benefit from improved waterway management.

North Central CMA suggests that the Melbourne Water model for management be considered across the state. Melbourne Water has a drainage tariff on all properties within the region and has the ability to raise special charges for those areas that receive a higher level of service. An example of one of these special charge areas is the Koo Wee Rup and Longwarry Flood Protection District. All landowners within the Bunyip River and Lang Lang River catchments contribute a drainage rate, with the landowners within the Koo Wee Rup Swamp district paying a higher rate as they derive the greatest benefit.

If CMAs are given the ability to charge a tariff on all properties then they can be held accountable for the level of service that they provide to the community without compromising the health of the catchment and waterways they protect.

Ñ 16

North Central CMA is not suggesting that it undertakes all works on behalf of landowners. Within the North Central region there is a strong community group network consisting of Landcare groups and ‘Friends of’ groups. Landcare originated in the north central region in the 1980s. The Landcare network is extremely important for assisting and empowering landowners to improve the health of the catchment and waterways. However, North Central CMA believes that with the tariff model it can better support landowners wishing to undertaking their own works yet have the capacity to assist with major works where required which are outside the ability of the average community group.

A catchment-wide tariff will also enable the North Central CMA to implement other recommendations from the previous Inquiry including contributing to the upgrade of an improved flood warning network.

Disadvantages: A catchment-wide tariff is against current government policy and amendments would be required to the Water Act 1989 to enable CMAs to collect this tariff.

General comment: North Central CMA recommends that this option be considered further as it is a practical, achievable and equitable way to raise the necessary funds to undertake maintenance of both regional drains and waterways. In summary, CMAs are well positioned to operate and maintain regional drains. As outlined previously, North Central CMA is prepared to retain management responsibility for rural regional drainage provided it:

• obtains the necessary funding to undertake this role; and

• obtains the necessary powers to enforce the management of private drains.

Recommendation Recommendation 6: That the Victorian Government consider the relative merits of the options

presented in this paper, in relation to TOR 5.

Ñ 17

7. TOR (6) The Committee’s report on the Inquiry into flood mitigation infrastructure in Victoria

The ENRC Parliamentary Committee made a number of recommendations to improve the management of flood mitigation infrastructure and improved waterway management. North Central CMA supports all of the recommendations made by the Committee. In particular, the Committee’s recommendation for a beneficiary pays model for both flood mitigation infrastructure and waterway management. North Central CMA recommends that drainage management be coupled with waterway management and both issues be addressed through the beneficiary pays model. North Central CMA is aware that the Victorian government will be reviewing its Victorian Flood Strategy. As the issue of rural drainage management is closely linked with floodplain management, North Central CMA recommends that rural drainage management be incorporated into this strategy. This would eliminate the need for a separate strategy to be developed at both the state and regional levels, reducing the burden on CMAs and cost to ratepayers. Another issue that arose during the previous inquiry into flood mitigation infrastructure was the impact of unintended levees, as outlined in Section 4.15 of the committee’s report. Infrastructure such as roads, railway lines and channels have the potential to move water away from its natural path. This impact is also particularly relevant for drainage management. The inadequate size of culverts underneath infrastructure in many situations is a limiting factor in the effective functioning of rural regional drains. The cost associated with increasing the size of culverts is prohibitive and has resulted in past projects not progressing through to implementation. Currently there is no onus on the owners of infrastructure to upgrade an existing culvert or road works if it has been identified that the capacity of the culverts is inadequate. North Central CMA recognises that agencies, VicRoads in particular, when constructing new major infrastructure engages with other authorities to ensure that new infrastructure is designed to best practice. However, North Central CMA recommends that greater responsibility be placed on the owners of infrastructure to have a program to upgrade assets in key locations where known drainage issues occur.

Recommendations Recommendation 7: Rural drainage management is incorporated into the Victorian Floodplain

Management Strategy. Recommendation 8: North Central CMA recommends that greater responsibility be placed on the

owners of infrastructure to have a program to upgrade assets in key locations where known drainage issues occur.