RSS Feed
April 13th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda More than 60 scientists from universities across Australia have slammed the Murray-Darling Basin draft plan, saying it lacks transparency and fails to take climate change into account.
In a joint statement released on Friday, the scientists said the plan’s proposal to return 2750 gigalitres of water to the river system each year may not be enough to meet the targets necessary to protect key natural assets and ecosystem functions.
They said more details were needed on what targets would be met or not met by different water recovery scenarios.
“This is really the centrepiece of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and, unfortunately, there is a general lack of transparency about what other volumes of water might or might not achieve,” Professor Richard Kingsford from the University of New South Wales said in a statement.
In another “serious shortcoming”, the scientists said the plan fails to include climate change provisions.
“The 2750 GL water recovery scenario is based on modelled historical inflows and climatic data, but human-induced climate change affects Australian environments, including rivers, and the outcomes of the Basin Plan,” the scientists said.
“Climate change science… has been ignored in the proposed plan.”
They have also urged the government to take into account groundwater access when considering the basin’s water management, saying plans to increase allocation of the underground source to about 2600 GL/year could undermine recovery efforts of surface water.
“Groundwater and surface water resources should be managed together, given that groundwater often underpins surface water flows.”
The comments comes as public consultation on the proposed plan closes on Monday.
In a final recommendation, the scientists said that while the plan was concerned mainly with water management it should also be looking at other threats.
“Water is a prerequisite rather than a complete remedy for recovery of rivers and wetlands,” they said.
“Other threats, for example, include barriers to fish movements, impacts of land use, invasive species, deteriorating water quality and floodplain development.
“These require co-ordinated action and compliance by the states.”
Posted in 
Tags: 
