Year: 2010 Week: 30 Date: 29 Jul 2010
25 posts
• Page 1 of 1
by phlip » 28 Jul 2010
Eildon is up by 0.79% to reach 31.81% this week. The rise is less than the average for this time of year - 87.1% of the median rise.
The indicies are mostly pretty small movements this week. Against ATA, the lake is up by 0.03% to 52.38%. The L5A is the exception - it is down 1.62% to be 151.83%. Against last year, the lake is down 0.12% to 15.64% higher. It rose by 0.05% against 1983 levels to be 2.23% higher, and it rose by the same amount against 2007 levels to be 14.87% higher.
The physical lake level also rose, by 42 cm to be 23.69 metres below full.
Overall, the lake level remains 43rd out of 56 years - still 1.48% lower than 2001 levels, but catching up. It needs to get ahead in the next 3 weeks really.
The sad news of the week is a bit of milestone I have been watching for a while now. This is the 500th weekly report in a row where Eildon is below half full. 500 weeks in a row below 50%! The last time a report was above 50% was Boxing Day in 2000. That ended a run of 7 weeks when the lake was above 50%, and then you have to go back another 149 weeks to 3rd January 1998 to the last time it was above 50%. So - in 656 weeks (close enough to 13 years) we have only 7 reports above 50%. Let's hope we break through the 50% barrier this year and stop this terrible run of low lake levels.
The indicies are mostly pretty small movements this week. Against ATA, the lake is up by 0.03% to 52.38%. The L5A is the exception - it is down 1.62% to be 151.83%. Against last year, the lake is down 0.12% to 15.64% higher. It rose by 0.05% against 1983 levels to be 2.23% higher, and it rose by the same amount against 2007 levels to be 14.87% higher.
The physical lake level also rose, by 42 cm to be 23.69 metres below full.
Overall, the lake level remains 43rd out of 56 years - still 1.48% lower than 2001 levels, but catching up. It needs to get ahead in the next 3 weeks really.
The sad news of the week is a bit of milestone I have been watching for a while now. This is the 500th weekly report in a row where Eildon is below half full. 500 weeks in a row below 50%! The last time a report was above 50% was Boxing Day in 2000. That ended a run of 7 weeks when the lake was above 50%, and then you have to go back another 149 weeks to 3rd January 1998 to the last time it was above 50%. So - in 656 weeks (close enough to 13 years) we have only 7 reports above 50%. Let's hope we break through the 50% barrier this year and stop this terrible run of low lake levels.
- phlip
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 799
- Joined: 09 Oct 2006
- Location: Augustine Heights, Queensland
by Lisa&Brad » 29 Jul 2010
Hey Phlip, thanks for yr report, was hoping for a bit more of a rise, but still, a small rise is better than no rise 
- i think yr comments on the long run of low lake levels really hits home - but I do think this is the year we will see 50% +. It was interesting to read 'the terrible plight of our beloved lake' which you posted almost exactly a year ago - and hope you're feeling a little more optimistic a year on ... 
- i think yr comments on the long run of low lake levels really hits home - but I do think this is the year we will see 50% +. It was interesting to read 'the terrible plight of our beloved lake' which you posted almost exactly a year ago - and hope you're feeling a little more optimistic a year on ... - Lisa&Brad
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 133
- Joined: 08 Sep 2009
- Location: Croydon Hills & Bonnie Doon
by phlip » 29 Jul 2010
In a way I am feeling more optimistic, because the lake has more water in it. But I don't think GM-Water can claim any credit for the additional water; it has just rained more this year. Meanwhile, the only serious management decision has been to sell off another entitlement to water out of Eildon to Melbourne Water, which is negative. The bottom line issue - where is the management of this magnificent water resouce?
I want to see a water conservation policy! Such a policy would say something like; the sum of all outflows for the next 10 years will be a maximum of 5% (of capacity) less than the total inflow. In addition, ALL allocations would be affected by the same proportion; that is if farmers can only gain 20% of their allocation for irrigation, then Melbourne can only have 20% of its allocation as well. The only exception is essential supply - like towns that are totally dependant upon Eildon water, where they would receive a guaranteed allocation once they were on maximum water restrictions. It might exist somewhere, but I have not yet seen any management strategy to rebuild Eildon.
Such a strategy would result in the lake returning to the top half of its capacity instead of remaining stuck in the bottom half - as it has for the vast majority of the last 13 years. Imagine if it was bobbling around between 60% and 90% instead of 10% and 40% as it has lately. Firstly - all of the non-water supply businesses surrounding the lake, including tourism, would be assured of a future and could plan accordingly. Secondly - if we did have a very serious drought year, we would have the reserves there to dip into and provide some guarantee of supply. Thirdly, we would never again see a return to <25% which was simply an abuse of the water resource.
In this respect - management of Eildon as a precious resource is at least as important in the wet years as it is in the dry years! And we ought to be just as vocal in ensuring good management happens.
...finishes rant, sits down.
I want to see a water conservation policy! Such a policy would say something like; the sum of all outflows for the next 10 years will be a maximum of 5% (of capacity) less than the total inflow. In addition, ALL allocations would be affected by the same proportion; that is if farmers can only gain 20% of their allocation for irrigation, then Melbourne can only have 20% of its allocation as well. The only exception is essential supply - like towns that are totally dependant upon Eildon water, where they would receive a guaranteed allocation once they were on maximum water restrictions. It might exist somewhere, but I have not yet seen any management strategy to rebuild Eildon.
Such a strategy would result in the lake returning to the top half of its capacity instead of remaining stuck in the bottom half - as it has for the vast majority of the last 13 years. Imagine if it was bobbling around between 60% and 90% instead of 10% and 40% as it has lately. Firstly - all of the non-water supply businesses surrounding the lake, including tourism, would be assured of a future and could plan accordingly. Secondly - if we did have a very serious drought year, we would have the reserves there to dip into and provide some guarantee of supply. Thirdly, we would never again see a return to <25% which was simply an abuse of the water resource.
In this respect - management of Eildon as a precious resource is at least as important in the wet years as it is in the dry years! And we ought to be just as vocal in ensuring good management happens.
...finishes rant, sits down.
- phlip
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 799
- Joined: 09 Oct 2006
- Location: Augustine Heights, Queensland
by boo » 29 Jul 2010
Less not forget that the water going to Melbourne comes from water saved from the irrigation upgrade in the Goulbuen Valley. It is not lost water out of Eildon but saved water out of Eildon.
The goulburn Valley irrigation system was in despereate need of repair & was never going to get the 10 billion dollars for repair if it was not for the pipe to Melbourne.
In reality the pipe to Mebourne has left extra water in Eildon as the water savings are greater than the amount of water going to Melbourne.
The goulburn Valley irrigation system was in despereate need of repair & was never going to get the 10 billion dollars for repair if it was not for the pipe to Melbourne.
In reality the pipe to Mebourne has left extra water in Eildon as the water savings are greater than the amount of water going to Melbourne.
- boo
- Lake Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 11 Feb 2010
- Location: Shepparton/Taylor Bay
by phlip » 29 Jul 2010
That is true if (and only if) there is water being delivered to irrigators. In dry years, like the last 13 in a row, irrigators have not received a full allocation, and therefore the projected savings of water are similarly reduced. My complaint always has been that just because it is dry and there are no savings of water made, it does not stop Melbourne taking their "right".
Why not link the allocation to Melbourne to the allocation to irrigators? The reason is that Melbourne actually only needs the water in years when it is dry and so linking the allocations would make the pipe worthless.
Why not link the allocation to Melbourne to the allocation to irrigators? The reason is that Melbourne actually only needs the water in years when it is dry and so linking the allocations would make the pipe worthless.
- phlip
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 799
- Joined: 09 Oct 2006
- Location: Augustine Heights, Queensland
how will that make Brumby look 
by boo » 29 Jul 2010
You are partly correct in what you are sugesting but the water savings are not proportional to the allocation given to irrigators.
Much of the savings are in the channels that deliver the water.These channels are full of water regardless of allacation to irrigators. All the channels in the Goulburn Irrigation system have been filled even in the very low allocation years.
The channels have plenty of leaks & poor flow control. All this is now being fixed keeping more water in Eildon.When driving around the Shepparton area (This is where I live)there is plenty of good work being done on the irrigation system
It would be intersting to find out how much water is used to fill the channel irrigation system, as the channels are emptied every May & filled again in spring.
I like your idea of the alocation to irrigators being 95% of the previous years inflow, but GM Water have the mentality of if there is water to sell lets sell it.
Much of the savings are in the channels that deliver the water.These channels are full of water regardless of allacation to irrigators. All the channels in the Goulburn Irrigation system have been filled even in the very low allocation years.
The channels have plenty of leaks & poor flow control. All this is now being fixed keeping more water in Eildon.When driving around the Shepparton area (This is where I live)there is plenty of good work being done on the irrigation system
It would be intersting to find out how much water is used to fill the channel irrigation system, as the channels are emptied every May & filled again in spring.
I like your idea of the alocation to irrigators being 95% of the previous years inflow, but GM Water have the mentality of if there is water to sell lets sell it.
- boo
- Lake Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 11 Feb 2010
- Location: Shepparton/Taylor Bay
by phlip » 29 Jul 2010
I must say I am really pleased that the irrigation channels are being improved, and fully support this happening. I wonder if improving the channels is going to result in water savings, or just a more accurate delivery of water to the irrigators. Neither is a bad outcome of course, but only one actually frees water up to go to Melbourne (or retain in the lake!).
I also note - with a degree of cynicism, that the pipe is working and water is being taken, but the work around Shep on the channels is far from done. Pity the water was not saved before it was spent.
I also note - with a degree of cynicism, that the pipe is working and water is being taken, but the work around Shep on the channels is far from done. Pity the water was not saved before it was spent.
- phlip
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 799
- Joined: 09 Oct 2006
- Location: Augustine Heights, Queensland
by mark » 29 Jul 2010
Now Eildon storage is to be included in the Melbourne reserve total there is probably no going back
The govt spin has been saved this year by the rain - at least they have something to pipe - 16 billion litres so far with another 60 billion to go
Amazingly - no-one in Melbourne seems concerned about water restrictions any more and have gotten used to them - 3AW ran a poll last week and 70% said they didnt want restriction lifted
I live in Camberwell with a holiday house in Bonnie Doon - no gardens around my part of Camberwell have been impacted!
Unfortunately the govt doesnt care about the region or the enviroment - it is all about the percieved votes in Melbourne
The apathy of Mansfield people also amazes me - there is never anything in the local paper about the pipe and it was left to the Yea people to carry the fight - in the end it is Mansfield tourism that will suffer
The govt spin has been saved this year by the rain - at least they have something to pipe - 16 billion litres so far with another 60 billion to go
Amazingly - no-one in Melbourne seems concerned about water restrictions any more and have gotten used to them - 3AW ran a poll last week and 70% said they didnt want restriction lifted
I live in Camberwell with a holiday house in Bonnie Doon - no gardens around my part of Camberwell have been impacted!
Unfortunately the govt doesnt care about the region or the enviroment - it is all about the percieved votes in Melbourne
The apathy of Mansfield people also amazes me - there is never anything in the local paper about the pipe and it was left to the Yea people to carry the fight - in the end it is Mansfield tourism that will suffer
- mark
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 42
- Joined: 26 Oct 2006
- Location: camberwell and bonnie doon
by carpking » 29 Jul 2010
Great news the lake is rising,fingers crossed for over 50% this year.Lets not all forget Eildon's water is also supplying Ballarat aswell.This government is always praising itself for it's water plans but without all the rain last year our reservoirs would still be critically low.As i have mentioned before Lake Eildon was designed to supply irrigation water to the food bowl of the Goulburn Valley,not water to Melbourne,Bendigo & Ballarat.One day someone will wake up & realise that dams should have been built on the Mitchell river & other rivers before they considered pipelines & costly desalination.The government has gone green to the extreme & we'll all pay for it.
- carpking
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 20
- Joined: 14 Dec 2008
by oozz77 » 29 Jul 2010
`Hi Boo and welcome,
I have inlaws who run 3 orchards in Shepparton and when I first visited there 3 years ago, I really nearly crapped myself when I first saw the size of the "channels" that deliver the water around "all" the properties!!!! They are "ENORMOUS"!!
Most of them are as wide as the upper yarra river and the volume of water they must hold and carry must be incredible!!
Now that was 3 years ago during the worst possible drought years imaginable and now, a full 3 years later, not one of these channels on their properties or the surrounding ones I drive around had any pipe works completed or happening at all!!!!
They may have started somewhere, but I haven't seen any widespread work done at all!
I'm not disputing what you say, but from what I have seen, it would take them another 10 years to complete!!!
So in one way I just cannot at this stage give any creadence to the Governments suggestion that they have saved any where near the water they are perporting to! It's just not possible!!!
Maybe once "all" the pipeing is finished in full, then possibly, but the leakage and evaporation from these "huge" channels in the meantime continues and must be incredible!!
Every one is just so lucky that for once we have had a very reasonable spring/summer/autumn rainfall total and now hope that the winter falls continue.
I have inlaws who run 3 orchards in Shepparton and when I first visited there 3 years ago, I really nearly crapped myself when I first saw the size of the "channels" that deliver the water around "all" the properties!!!! They are "ENORMOUS"!!
Most of them are as wide as the upper yarra river and the volume of water they must hold and carry must be incredible!!
Now that was 3 years ago during the worst possible drought years imaginable and now, a full 3 years later, not one of these channels on their properties or the surrounding ones I drive around had any pipe works completed or happening at all!!!!
They may have started somewhere, but I haven't seen any widespread work done at all!
I'm not disputing what you say, but from what I have seen, it would take them another 10 years to complete!!!
So in one way I just cannot at this stage give any creadence to the Governments suggestion that they have saved any where near the water they are perporting to! It's just not possible!!!
Maybe once "all" the pipeing is finished in full, then possibly, but the leakage and evaporation from these "huge" channels in the meantime continues and must be incredible!!
Every one is just so lucky that for once we have had a very reasonable spring/summer/autumn rainfall total and now hope that the winter falls continue.
- oozz77
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 161
- Joined: 14 Oct 2006
by gozza » 30 Jul 2010
I've done a lot of fishing in the irrigation channels all over G/M system and there's one thing I`m 100% sure of from my experience - there`s NO CHANCE, ZERO POSSIBILLITY that the incompetants who run this state are going to complete the channel upgrades in anything less than a decade (or two). The scale of this is on-par with the snowy-hydro project. I bet they just thought it up as an election stunt without ever going into any detail. The irrigation system in Victoria was built over many decades. I dont know the exact size, but it`s certainly HUNDREDs of kms, and it will take at least a decade to upgrade/repair something so enourmous.
On a REALLY bright note, La-Nina appears to have come back. The past 1/2 year saw a mild El-Nino appear (for South Eastern Australia, El-Nino = low rainfall, LaNina = good rainfall), but La-Nina has come back strongly recently :
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/30/f ... akes-hold/
The good rains till a few months ago were probably linked to a mild La-Nina in 2009, then early this year we went into a mild El-Nino which is possibly why the past few months have been below average rainfall. But now that we`re going back into strong La-Nina, hopefully this will see good rains in spring !
Go LaNina !!
On a REALLY bright note, La-Nina appears to have come back. The past 1/2 year saw a mild El-Nino appear (for South Eastern Australia, El-Nino = low rainfall, LaNina = good rainfall), but La-Nina has come back strongly recently :
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/30/f ... akes-hold/
The good rains till a few months ago were probably linked to a mild La-Nina in 2009, then early this year we went into a mild El-Nino which is possibly why the past few months have been below average rainfall. But now that we`re going back into strong La-Nina, hopefully this will see good rains in spring !
Go LaNina !!
- gozza
- Lake Veteran
- Posts: 63
- Joined: 01 Apr 2007
- Location: North East Melbourne
by oozz77 » 30 Jul 2010
Well said gozza,
As in mypost just before yours, in the 3 years of travelling to the shepparton orchards, I have seen NO work on the massive channels so your point of 10 years agrees with mine!! I also believed it to be a short term election stunt when it was originally announced but that being said, maybe by the end of the 10 years we may see some savings but not on the scale they were proposing!!!
As in mypost just before yours, in the 3 years of travelling to the shepparton orchards, I have seen NO work on the massive channels so your point of 10 years agrees with mine!! I also believed it to be a short term election stunt when it was originally announced but that being said, maybe by the end of the 10 years we may see some savings but not on the scale they were proposing!!!
- oozz77
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 161
- Joined: 14 Oct 2006
by Glenga » 31 Jul 2010
The government built there pipe first because thats all they are interested in there not concerned about the channels if they were then the would have upgraded them first to prove how much water that they will save witch will be absolutuly zero. Anyone that believes it will save water must be a Labour voter, by the time they finish there so called channel upgrade works (lining it with plastic) they will have to start again because it will have started deteriorating at the other end.
The pipe was simply built first a Metro vote getter.
I predict the lake will not even get to 40% this year and will never again reach 50% whilst that pipe is there, we dont want Melbournes gardens dieing do we ?
Don`t worry about us that live on the lake that had to cart water to our (Mansfield) town water supply a few years ago while Melb. had very low water restictions.. But lets make sure Melb dont have such low restictions ever again bugger the coutnry voters there aint enough of them to worry about.Glenn from Mansfield / Goughs Bay for the past 28 years. Thats all folks
The pipe was simply built first a Metro vote getter.
I predict the lake will not even get to 40% this year and will never again reach 50% whilst that pipe is there, we dont want Melbournes gardens dieing do we ?
Don`t worry about us that live on the lake that had to cart water to our (Mansfield) town water supply a few years ago while Melb. had very low water restictions.. But lets make sure Melb dont have such low restictions ever again bugger the coutnry voters there aint enough of them to worry about.Glenn from Mansfield / Goughs Bay for the past 28 years. Thats all folks
- Glenga
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 29 Jul 2010
- Location: Goughs Bay
by oozz77 » 31 Jul 2010
Hi Glenn, your post, mine and others shows how emotive and sceptical this this Government has made us toward their grand plan of "water saving measures" one of which was saving billions of litres by piping these channels!!!
It just shows how very little "average Joe" would know about these works and even I for one, know little about the how this water will be saved and where is the proof and studies of these forecast results!!
Whilst I would believe that if "all" the channels were replaced throughout Victoria then surely some savings would be made from less evaporation and leakage, but how much and at what cost and if these channels have served us well for a hundred years then why are they an issue now!! If we had had "average" rain in the last 10 years would they still be talking about piping them?
And from your post, you seem to suggest that some of these works involve only plastic lining of channels!! Then if that were the case then this excercise is even more ridiculous and less credible for saving water!!!! A huge pipe in each channel yes, but lining is plain stupid!
From another point though given the last 10 year drought, to be fair, I believe that piping water from Eildon to Bendigo, Ballart and surrounding towns was almost inevitable and a neccessity which their growing populations and the fact that neither city have surrounding forests/water catchment areas.
However, piping it to Melbourne is just robbing Peter to pay Paul!!! The governments have known for 20 years that our Dams for Melbourne would not be enough to sustain our needs yet they did zero and when the last 10 years drought hit, they panicked!! They did re-open Tarago (which they never should have closed), proposed and are builing the Desal Plant (whether you enviromentally agree or not -just had to happen given the last 10 years), but the Nth-Sth pipe is just not feasable and was just a vote winning excersise!!!
So much should have and could have been done years ago but wasn't and now, even to this day, all any of us can do to make a difference is pray that it rains!!!!
It just shows how very little "average Joe" would know about these works and even I for one, know little about the how this water will be saved and where is the proof and studies of these forecast results!!
Whilst I would believe that if "all" the channels were replaced throughout Victoria then surely some savings would be made from less evaporation and leakage, but how much and at what cost and if these channels have served us well for a hundred years then why are they an issue now!! If we had had "average" rain in the last 10 years would they still be talking about piping them?
And from your post, you seem to suggest that some of these works involve only plastic lining of channels!! Then if that were the case then this excercise is even more ridiculous and less credible for saving water!!!! A huge pipe in each channel yes, but lining is plain stupid!
From another point though given the last 10 year drought, to be fair, I believe that piping water from Eildon to Bendigo, Ballart and surrounding towns was almost inevitable and a neccessity which their growing populations and the fact that neither city have surrounding forests/water catchment areas.
However, piping it to Melbourne is just robbing Peter to pay Paul!!! The governments have known for 20 years that our Dams for Melbourne would not be enough to sustain our needs yet they did zero and when the last 10 years drought hit, they panicked!! They did re-open Tarago (which they never should have closed), proposed and are builing the Desal Plant (whether you enviromentally agree or not -just had to happen given the last 10 years), but the Nth-Sth pipe is just not feasable and was just a vote winning excersise!!!
So much should have and could have been done years ago but wasn't and now, even to this day, all any of us can do to make a difference is pray that it rains!!!!
- oozz77
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 161
- Joined: 14 Oct 2006
by Steve » 31 Jul 2010
Guys
Love this discussion. One this is sure, we all have a strong passion for OUR lake! One thing to keep ourselves focused: the channel lining works does not SAVE water. The water that "leaked" from the channels was never lost, it added to the environmental contribution to our rivers. By lining the Channels we are merely reducing the long standing contribution of irrigation losses to our river flow and keeping this water to send to Melbourne via the pipeline.
Steve
Love this discussion. One this is sure, we all have a strong passion for OUR lake! One thing to keep ourselves focused: the channel lining works does not SAVE water. The water that "leaked" from the channels was never lost, it added to the environmental contribution to our rivers. By lining the Channels we are merely reducing the long standing contribution of irrigation losses to our river flow and keeping this water to send to Melbourne via the pipeline.
Steve
- Steve
- Lake Veteran
- Posts: 82
- Joined: 09 Oct 2008
by tainted » 31 Jul 2010
With the Nth-Sth pipe I love the sweetener for the fire services, stand pipes to obtain water as required. One major problem with this lies in the fact that during major fires the power grid is swtched off in the effected areas, no power means no pwer to the pumps on the pipeline, no operating pumps means no water, these standpipes become just useless pieces of metal.
An example to this was my time in the '97 Dandy Ranges fires, the power was turned off and we were at the bottom of a hill and out of water. Even using gravity and the water left in the mains it took nearly 20 mins to get 2,000lt water into our truck. Something that took on ave' around 1-1/2 to 2 mins.
Tim
An example to this was my time in the '97 Dandy Ranges fires, the power was turned off and we were at the bottom of a hill and out of water. Even using gravity and the water left in the mains it took nearly 20 mins to get 2,000lt water into our truck. Something that took on ave' around 1-1/2 to 2 mins.
Tim
neither here or neither there
- tainted
- Lake Veteran
- Posts: 62
- Joined: 17 Nov 2006
- Location: Shepparton / Jamieson
by boo » 01 Aug 2010
Wow any mention of the pipeline gets the post count up,all good healthy discution. Not much support for the pipe to Melbourne, I might have to get John Brumby to log a comment to get someone to agree with me that the pipe line does have some positives. I will still stay positive in the beliefe that the upgrade of a decrepit irrigation system can only be a good thing. The fact that it is a 100 year old system is exactly why it requires an upgrade.
The bottom line is the only thing that will fix our wonderfull lake is rain.
Good to see over night rain at Mt Buller (Over 40mm in last couple of days).
Go 50%
The bottom line is the only thing that will fix our wonderfull lake is rain.
Good to see over night rain at Mt Buller (Over 40mm in last couple of days).
Go 50%
- boo
- Lake Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 11 Feb 2010
- Location: Shepparton/Taylor Bay
by Glenga » 01 Aug 2010
Hi there Boo ur right the pipeline sure gets a fewposts. And im glad (and i hope that your right) that the channel lineing does save billions of litres of water "BUT" Please explain why they didnt do these water saving works before they done the pipeline and started taking water that they had not saved but where taking from the fruit and veg growers in Shepperton ????? Cheers Glenn
Cheers Glenn - Glenga
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 29 Jul 2010
- Location: Goughs Bay
by oozz77 » 01 Aug 2010
Hi Boo,
Most of us here agree that it is a good thing, it was just the politics and timing of it that wasn't!! These works should have been done progressively over the last 20 years if Governments were really serious about conservation and not just timely "vote catching"!!
There is no way in hell that savings of any magnitude at all will be made that allows them to "redirect" this "savings" to Melbourne!! Send water to Bendigo ,Ballarat and surrounding towns, yes, but they Governments should have planned for Melbournes shortages decades ago!!!
And yes, the only thing that will make any short term difference is rain and plenty of it!!
I will still stay positive in the beliefe that the upgrade of a decrepit irrigation system can only be a good thing. The fact that it is a 100 year old system is exactly why it requires an upgrade.
The bottom line is the only thing that will fix our wonderfull lake is rain.
Most of us here agree that it is a good thing, it was just the politics and timing of it that wasn't!! These works should have been done progressively over the last 20 years if Governments were really serious about conservation and not just timely "vote catching"!!
There is no way in hell that savings of any magnitude at all will be made that allows them to "redirect" this "savings" to Melbourne!! Send water to Bendigo ,Ballarat and surrounding towns, yes, but they Governments should have planned for Melbournes shortages decades ago!!!
And yes, the only thing that will make any short term difference is rain and plenty of it!!
- oozz77
- Lake Legend
- Posts: 161
- Joined: 14 Oct 2006
by mark » 01 Aug 2010
It still amazes me that all bar one of the comments this week are from people with holiday houses / houseboats on the lake and not from locals - who in the end will be the big losers if the lake stays the way it is
I still remember the years in the 90's when you used to struggle to be able to park your car near a boat ramp in Goughs Bay and there were about 6 of them in the water! Now you are lucky if there are more than 20 cars at the one ramp. The caravan park in Bonnie Dooon has not had water for about 10 years!
Personally - I dont have an issue with Eildon water going to Ballarat and Bendigo - they actually need it whereas Melbourne doesn't - the Labor pollies seems to be the only people who think otherwise
Apart from rain - the only other hope is a change of state government as the Libs have stated that they wont use the pipe. I would think there is also a chance that if Abbott gets in they will cut the funding for the irrigation upgrade - I think it is actually being funded Federally rather than by the Vic govt
I still remember the years in the 90's when you used to struggle to be able to park your car near a boat ramp in Goughs Bay and there were about 6 of them in the water! Now you are lucky if there are more than 20 cars at the one ramp. The caravan park in Bonnie Dooon has not had water for about 10 years!
Personally - I dont have an issue with Eildon water going to Ballarat and Bendigo - they actually need it whereas Melbourne doesn't - the Labor pollies seems to be the only people who think otherwise
Apart from rain - the only other hope is a change of state government as the Libs have stated that they wont use the pipe. I would think there is also a chance that if Abbott gets in they will cut the funding for the irrigation upgrade - I think it is actually being funded Federally rather than by the Vic govt
- mark
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 42
- Joined: 26 Oct 2006
- Location: camberwell and bonnie doon
by mark » 01 Aug 2010
writing my last post jogged my memory!
The Vic govt never had the funding to do both the pipeline and the irrigation upgrade so they requested Federal assistance for the irrigation upgrade!
BUT before they had the Federal funding approved they started the pipe - in theory the pipe could have been built without the irrigation upgrade even happening if the funding had been knocked back by the federal govt.
As it turned out the funding was rejected by the Libs in the senate the first time around but was subsequently approved in a second vote but by the time it was approved the pipe was 3/4 finished
Shows how committed the vic govt was to the pipe rather than the irrigation upgrade!
The Vic govt never had the funding to do both the pipeline and the irrigation upgrade so they requested Federal assistance for the irrigation upgrade!
BUT before they had the Federal funding approved they started the pipe - in theory the pipe could have been built without the irrigation upgrade even happening if the funding had been knocked back by the federal govt.
As it turned out the funding was rejected by the Libs in the senate the first time around but was subsequently approved in a second vote but by the time it was approved the pipe was 3/4 finished
Shows how committed the vic govt was to the pipe rather than the irrigation upgrade!
- mark
- Lake Regular
- Posts: 42
- Joined: 26 Oct 2006
- Location: camberwell and bonnie doon
by gozza » 01 Aug 2010
There will never be any major irrigation channel works done. That was always a con. The proof is the fact that none has started to date. As far as I have seen, there is no serious "upgrade" work being done to upgrade any of the major irrigation channels, anywhere. Someone please correct me ????
There is some tinering around the edge, like this :
http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/new ... 88497.aspx
But that is actually REDUCING water allocations !
This is how Brumby plans on saving a lot of the water - by devostating entire irrigation regions by building infrastracture that limits access to water and forcing people out. It`s the tried and true socialist way - deliberately create a crisis (the water crisis) and then exploit it to push your agenda (less water, less farming, less water usage, etc)
Also, I think we are well overdue for good rains. It statistically MUST happen within the next few years. If this winter/autumn sees really good rainfalls then Eildon might get close to 60% full, and Brumby will jump infront of the cameras and take credit for saving us from doom with his genius plans. Curse his wretched soul.
Even if we just get average rainfall, we will still get close to 50%, and Brumby will still claim the credit.
Great rain last 2 days ! 2 days into August and Buller has already had 1/3 of it's August average rainfall !
There is some tinering around the edge, like this :
http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/new ... 88497.aspx
But that is actually REDUCING water allocations !
This is how Brumby plans on saving a lot of the water - by devostating entire irrigation regions by building infrastracture that limits access to water and forcing people out. It`s the tried and true socialist way - deliberately create a crisis (the water crisis) and then exploit it to push your agenda (less water, less farming, less water usage, etc)
Also, I think we are well overdue for good rains. It statistically MUST happen within the next few years. If this winter/autumn sees really good rainfalls then Eildon might get close to 60% full, and Brumby will jump infront of the cameras and take credit for saving us from doom with his genius plans. Curse his wretched soul.
Even if we just get average rainfall, we will still get close to 50%, and Brumby will still claim the credit.
Great rain last 2 days ! 2 days into August and Buller has already had 1/3 of it's August average rainfall !
- gozza
- Lake Veteran
- Posts: 63
- Joined: 01 Apr 2007
- Location: North East Melbourne
25 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Weekly Storage Levels
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 1 guest