out 2010-09-24 lower murray darling cma annual report 2009
TRANSCRIPT
Lower Murray Darling CMA
Annual Report 2009-2010
Working with communities towards a healthy and productive catchment
100 copies printed on recycled paper Total costs printing $7,793.50 This report is available through the LMD CMA website www.lmd.cma.nsw.gov.au Available on CD ROM by request Written by Lesley Palmer; case studies compiled by Susan Walla with input from CMA team members. Published by the Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority ISBN 978-1-74263-087-8
29 October 2010 The Hon Frank Sartor, MP Member of the Legislative Assembly Member for Rockdale Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer) Level 35 Governor Macquarie Tower 1 Farrer Place SYDNEY NSW 2000
LOWER MURRAY DARLING CMA ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2009-2010
Dear Minister,
We have great pleasure in presenting the Annual Report for the Lower Murray Darling
Catchment Management Authority (LMD CMA). This Report covers the period from 1 July
2009 to the end of that financial year, 30 June 2010.
This report has been prepared in accordance with section 17(2) of the Catchment
Management Authorities Act 2003, the Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984 and
Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Regulation 2010, for submission to Parliament.
Yours sincerely,
Mark King Barrie MacMillan Patty Byrnes Chairperson Board Member Board Member Lower Murray Darling CMA Lower Murray Darling CMA Lower Murray Darling CMA
ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT
In October 2003 the NSW Premier announced the NSW natural resource management reform
package based primarily on the recommendations of the Native Vegetation Reform
Implementation Group. A key component of the reform package was the establishment of
thirteen Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) within NSW. These Authorities were
formally established on 23 January 2004 with the introduction of the Catchment Management
Authorities Act 2003.
In accordance with section 17(2) of the Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003, this
document is the 2009 – 2010 Annual Report, which is the sixth annual report produced since
the establishment of the Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority.
This report was produced in-house by the Lower Murray Darling CMA, printed externally.
This report is available through the LMD CMA website www.lmd.cma.nsw.gov.au
1
Contents CMA Contacts ............................................................................................................................2 The Chair’s Statement 2009-2010 ............................................................................................3 General Manager’s Statement 2009-2010................................................................................4 Establishing Catchment Management Authorities ................................................................5 The Role of Catchment Management Authorities ..................................................................7 Our Objectives ...........................................................................................................................9 CMA Governance Structure................................................................................................... 13 Target Achievement ............................................................................................................... 19 Management and Activities ................................................................................................... 41 Summary of CMA Operations................................................................................................ 43 Grants to Community Groups............................................................................................... 50 CMA Investment Performance .............................................................................................. 50 LMD CMA Promotions............................................................................................................ 51 Natural Resources Commission (NRC)................................................................................ 55 Case Studies ........................................................................................................................... 57 Payment of Accounts............................................................................................................. 73 CMA Budget Allocations........................................................................................................ 75 Risk Management ................................................................................................................... 79 Financial Report ..................................................................................................................... 89 Statement by Board Members............................................................................................... 90 Independent Audit Report ..................................................................................................... 91 Appendix 1: Staff Statistics................................................................................................. 115 Appendix 2: NSW Government Action Plan for Women .................................................. 115 Appendix 3: Personnel Policies and Practices ................................................................. 115 Appendix 4: Performance and Remuneration of Executive Officer ................................ 116 Appendix 5: Occupational Health and Safety.................................................................... 116 Appendix 6: Waste Reduction............................................................................................. 116 Appendix 7: Freedom of Information ................................................................................. 116 Appendix 8: Privacy Management ...................................................................................... 116 Compliance Index................................................................................................................. 117 Compliance Index (Alphabetical Listing) ........................................................................... 118 Figure 1: Map of CMAs in NSW ..............................................................................................5 Figure 2: Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Area of Operation .........6 Figure 3: Ecological Cultural Knowledge Projects ................................................................18 Figure 4: Regional Outcomes Community Values ................................................................19 Figure 5: Key Water Management Areas ..............................................................................20 Figure 6: Riverine Health.......................................................................................................21 Figure 7: Riverine Health Management Target R1 ...............................................................23 Figure 8: Riverine Health Management Target R6 ...............................................................24 Figure 9: Target Achievements Regional Outcomes & Riverine Health 2004 – 2010 ..........26 Figure 10: Salinity Management Target S1............................................................................28 Figure 11: Salinity Catchment Target.....................................................................................29 Figure 12: Salinity Management Target S2 Irrigation areas...................................................30 Figure 13: Management Target Achievement Salinity and Vegetation 2004-2009................32 Figure 14: Vegetation Catchment Target ...............................................................................33 Figure 15: Management Target V2 Conservation Reserves 2004-2010 ...............................34 Figure 16: Vegetation Management Target V3 2009-2010....................................................35 Figure 17: Vegetation Management Target V3 2004-2010....................................................36 Figure 18: Soil Catchment Target ..........................................................................................37 Figure 19: Management Target Achievement Soil 2004-2009...............................................38 Figure 20: LMD CMA Organisation Chart at 30 June 2010 ...................................................42 Figure 21: 2009/10 Investment Strategy by Source of Funds................................................44 Figure 22: 2009/10 Investment by Management Units ..........................................................44 Figure 23: 2008/2009 Investment by Source of Funds ..........................................................45 Figure 24: 2008/09 Investment by Management Unit ............................................................45 Figure 25: 2007/2008 Investment by Source of Funds ..........................................................46 Figure 26: 2007/08 Investment by Management Unit ............................................................46 Figure 27: 2004/2007 Investment by Source of Funds ..........................................................47 Figure 28: 2004/2007 Investment by Management Unit ........................................................47
Contents
2
Figure 29: Record of face to face meetings with community members in LMD catchment. ..52 Figure 30: Total Investment Expenditure 2009-2010 .............................................................75 Figure 31: New Project Budget 2009-2010 to State Plan Targets .........................................76 Figure 32: New 2009-2010 Projects by Source of Funds ......................................................77
Table 1: Relationship between National, State and Catchment Targets at June 2009/201011 Table 2: Board Member Portfolio Activities ...........................................................................16 Table 3: LMD CMA Current Committees...............................................................................17 Table 4: Investment Sources and Investor Preference .........................................................43 Table 5: 2009-2010 Investment Program projects ................................................................48 Table 6: Summary of Investment Program Milestones and Achievements 2009-2010 ........49 Table 7: List of Case Studies ................................................................................................57 Table 8: Aged analysis at the end of each quarter................................................................73 Table 9: Accounts paid on time within each quarter .............................................................73 Table 10: Investment Funds in 2009-2010.............................................................................75 Table 11: New Project Budget 2009-2010 .............................................................................76 Table 12: Activities funded by other programs 2009-2010.....................................................77 Table 13: Risks relating to compliance with Parliamentary Acts and Regulations.................83 Table 14: General Risks and Associated Management Actions ............................................85 Table 15: Typical Risks relating to Individual Catchment Targets .........................................86 Table 16: Summary of staff employed by Lower Murray Darling CMA at 30 June 2010 .....115 Table 17: The number of women on LMD CMA Board and staff as at 30 June 2010 .........115
Acronyms CFOC/C4C Caring for Our Country
CA NSW Catchment Action New South Wales
CAP Catchment Action Plan
CMA Catchment Management Authority
DECCW Department of Environment Climate Change and Water
Commerce Department of Commerce
JADE Japan Australia Dust Experiment
LMD Lower Murray Darling
LWMP Land and Water Management Plan
MDBA Murray Darling Basin Authority
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
NAP National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality
NHT Natural Heritage Trust
NLP National Landcare Program
NRC Natural Resource Commission
NVAT Native Vegetation Assessment Tool
NVRIG Native Vegetation Reform Implementation Group
PADAC PVPs, Agreements, Data And Customer Service
PVP Property Vegetation Plans
WoNS Weeds of National Significance
CMA Contacts Principal Office
LOWER MURRAY DARLING CMA
32 Enterprise Way BURONGA NSW 2739
Tel: 03 5021 9460 Fax: 03 5021 1308
Web: www.lmd.cma.nsw.gov.au
Hours: 8.30am to 4.30pm Monday to Friday
Broken Hill Office (Enquiries only)
183 Argent Street BROKEN HILL NSW 2880
Tel: 08 8082 3200 Fax:08 8080 3201
Hours: 8.30am to 4.30pm Monday to Friday (On SA time - 30 mins behind NSW)
3
The Chair’s Statement 2009-2010
Holding true to our record of achievement I am once again very
pleased to report another successful year, delivering on milestones
for the Australian Government under the for Caring For Our Country
Program; completing excellent work in river and riparian areas under
Catchment Action NSW together with monitoring of progress toward
achievement of targets.
With excellent rainfall the catchment is showing good recovery in
most rangeland areas and offering the opportunity for good cereal
crops, although Mother Nature is also posing the challenge of a grasshopper plague. We
have seen flood flows into the Menindee Lakes with Lake Cawndilla filling for the first time
since 2001, the Darling River running high enough for numerous wetlands to be inundated
for the first time in years. Work on wetland and floodplains undertaken by the LMD CMA
were put to the test and it was gratifying to see water flow to, and from, areas that have been
re-connected to the river system or had structures improved to assist flows.
In 2009-10 vegetation agreements were signed for Landscape Scale Conservation on
132,870ha; Improved Land management practices on 38,605ha for grazing, 8,470ha for
cropping, Mitigating Threats to Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area on 54,883ha.
In 2009-2010 we have seen two Board members retire - Stan Dineen a foundation member
of the CMA has decided to spend more time at home and Trish Palmer who has completed a
shorter term of appointment bringing a breath of fresh air and viewpoint to the Board. Both
will be missed. In June 2010 two new Board members were announced - Tom Hynes and
Paula Doran both from the Broken Hill area, both of whom offer unique skills and expertise
over the next three years.
During the year we have also said farewell to Paul Dixon the inaugural General Manager and
wish him well. Lesley Palmer was appointed as General Manager, and has worked with the
CMA since its inception as Manager Corporate Support. She has experience in sustainable
agriculture, natural resource management and business management.
The CMA is now 6 years into implementing the Catchment Action Plan, a number of our
targets have been achieved and we are looking toward the challenge and satisfaction of
reviewing the Catchment Action Plan and its Targets. To this end we will be undertaking a
number of community meetings in 2010-2011 to seek community input into the decision
making process of these Targets.
Regards
Mark King, Chair
4
General Manager’s Statement 2009-2010 The 2009-2010 financial year has seen a period of change in
the Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
the most significant of which was the departure of Paul Dixon
who had been General Manager since the inception of the
CMA to December 2009. The CMA has also seen changes in
the management staff in both the program and corporate
support areas of the organisation. There has been a strong
commitment to organisational change and I would like to
congratulate all the staff, who have embraced this opportunity
by contributing time and enthusiasm to achieving positive outcomes, while continuing to
deliver natural resource management investment to the Lower Murray Darling community.
The CMA has delivered excellent results under the Caring for Our Country Program and
NSW Catchment Action, case studies on some of the projects are contained in this report.
Approval has also been received from the Caring for Our Country Program for 2011-2013.
A highlight of the year was the halving of timeframes to complete Property Vegetation Plan
assessments and issue agreements to landholders, with a major reduction in the backlog of
cases for assessment. Following recruitment of additional staff I am hopeful that further
reductions in waiting times can be achieved.
A record number of new project proposals and funding applications have been issued with
some success such as the Regional Landcare Facilitator, and others still pending, the
prospects look good for further increases in investment in the catchment. Overall there has
been an increase in the number of staff although the workload remains high.
The success of the CMA is also linked to the continuing support of the community. A
second community survey was undertaken at the end of the financial year, which illustrated
areas for improvement in communicating the results to the community and the actions
being undertaken to deal with issues; this information is now on the CMA website
www.lmd.cma.nsw.gov.au. The CMA has achieved a number or the targets listed in the
Catchment Action Plan while other targets need to be amended based on information
collected over the past six years of monitoring and implementation. Board members and
staff will be undertaking a round of community forums in the new financial year to seek
community input on future directions as the formal review for the Catchment Action Plan
and Targets approaches.
Lesley Palmer,
General Manager
5
Establishing Catchment Management Authorities The New South Wales State Government established 13 Catchment Management
Authorities (CMAs) to ensure that regional communities have a significant say in how natural
resources are managed in their catchments. See map below of the area covered by each
CMA in NSW.
Figure 1: Map of CMAs in NSW
The CMAs are locally driven organisations with a Board that reports directly to the NSW
Minister for Climate Change and the Environment. These statutory bodies, established
under the Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003 (CMA Act), coordinate Natural
Resource Management in each catchment. They are responsible for involving regional
communities in management of the NRM issues facing their region and provide the primary
means for the delivery of funding from the NSW and Commonwealth Governments to help
land managers improve and restore the natural resources of the State.
Each CMA Board consists of a Chairperson and up to six Board members, who together
provide a range of experience, skills and knowledge in areas such as primary production,
cultural heritage, biodiversity conservation, business administration and governance. Each
CMA also has a General Manager and a small team of professional and administrative staff.
The CMAs work in partnership with the community, Local Government, State Government,
government agencies, industry and individuals.
Establishing C
atchment M
anagement A
uthorities
6
Figure 2: Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Area of Operation Catchment Facts
Area 6.3 million hectares
Population ~30,000 (2006-2007 Census)
95% of catchment retained native vegetation
Extensive areas of private conservation reserve (over 115,000ha reserved in perpetuity)
Irrigation – approx 25,200ha
Average property size is 17,400ha
Dryland cropping 101 properties covering 116,000ha actively cropped, of 228,000ha approved; Lakebed cropping 27,000ha
Over 500,000ha floodplain and wetlands
598km of Murray River
530km of Darling River
460km of Great Darling Anabranch
Menindee Lakes 46,300 ha, with a capacity of 1,750,000 megalitres
Lake Victoria 11,300ha with a storage capacity of 677,000 megalitres
Six National Parks/ Reserves – Mungo, White Cliffs, Tarawi, Kinchega, Kemendoc and Nearie Lake
Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area
Tribal country of the Barkindji, Mutthi Mutthi, Yitha Yitha, Ngyiampaa and Maraura peoples
7
The Role of Catchment Management Authorities Catchment Management Authorities were established to engage regional communities in the key
Natural Resource Management issues facing their catchments. They are the primary vehicle for
the delivery of incentive programs funded by both the State and Commonwealth Governments to
achieve restoration and improvements in the natural resources of the State.
The specific functions of CMAs as described in section 15 of the Catchment Management
Authorities Act 2003 are:
to develop Catchment Action Plans (CAPs) and to give effect to any such approved plans through annual implementation programs;
to provide loans, grants, subsidies or other financial assistance for the purposes of the catchment activities it is authorised to fund;
to enter contracts or do any work for the purposes of the catchment activities it is authorised to carry out;
to assist landholders to further the objectives of its Catchment Action Plan (including providing information about native vegetation);
to provide educational and training courses and materials in connection with Natural Resource Management; and
to exercise any other function relating to Natural Resource Management as is prescribed by the regulations.
More broadly the responsibilities of the CMAs can be described as:
Plans:
integration of existing catchment, water, native vegetation and other Natural Resource Management plans into a Catchment Action Plans (CAP); and
manage community involvement in preparation of water sharing and groundwater plans.
On ground works:
on-ground works – e.g. river rehabilitation, native vegetation management, salinity programs and projects; and
Section 10 projects (Soil Conservation Act 1938).
Community education and support:
provision of advice and support to stakeholders and community;
Aboriginal consultation on CAPs, natural resource programs and investment strategies;
provision of community education and capacity building; and
technical advice on vegetation management, soil and land management, riparian management and other natural resource management issues.
Investment:
implementation of CAPs;
development of investment strategies; and
native vegetation management fund;
approved caring For Our Country and NSW Catchment Action programs;
Section 10 programs (Soil Conservation Act 1938); and
The R
ole of Catchm
ent Managem
ent Authorities
8
delivery of incentives through Property Vegetation Plans (PVPs) and other mechanisms.
Property Vegetation Plans/vegetation consent:
certify PVPs for establishing continuing uses and delivery of incentive payments; and
assessment of all vegetation consents under the Native Vegetation Act 2003 including PVPs for land clearing consents.
Corporate Shared Services
Corporate shared services to all 13 CMAs (including financial management, human resources,
accommodation, legal services, information technology and fleet management) were provided by the
Department of Commerce and Department of Environment, Climate Change & Water.
Walls of China Mungo National Park
Lake Cawndilla (part of Menindee Lakes) filling for the first time since 2001 (photo taken June 2010)
9
Our Objectives
The Core Business of the LMD CMA is to provide Natural Resource Management within the
Catchment through close liaison with landholders and communities to foster sustainable land
management activities. The LMD CMA has created a Core Value culture of “respect for our
communities and the environment” as well as endorsing the following philosophy as a
“golden thread” to guide the work of all CMA activities:
“Working with communities towards a healthy and productive catchment”
At a strategic level, the Objectives of the LMD CMA are laid out in the Catchment Management
Authorities Act (2003), as described in previous sections of this Annual Report. The CMA is
basically guided by the activities identified in the Catchment Action Plan (CAP), which
recognises the need for NRM action, by responding to pressures that are of Local, Regional,
State, National and International significance. The CAP is the culmination of several years of
effort and planning activities based upon current information, community input and best science
available.
During 2009-2010 the LMD CMA implemented activities that delivered Natural Resource
Management outcomes that contributed to the Catchment Action Plan and the NSW State Plan
Targets (see Table 1).
NSW State Plan
The Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority supports the delivery of the NSW
State Plan Priority E4 - Better environmental outcomes for native vegetation, biodiversity, land,
rivers and coastal water waterways contributing to targets for Biodiversity, Water, Land and
community.
The LMD CMA invests in 9 of the thirteen State Plan Targets under E4, shown in italics on the
following page.
Our O
bjectives
10
Priority E4:
Better outcomes for native vegetation, biodiversity, land, rivers, and coastal waterways. A healthy environment
provides the basis for our primary industries, tourism and recreational activities. It also provides the habitat for
our unique flora and fauna.
The solutions to our natural resource problems are mostly well known and are being implemented. The
challenge is to target our resources to the activities and places with the greatest potential for improvement,
and to make the most of the knowledge and experience of local communities.
Targets
Biodiversity
1. By 2015 there is an increase in native vegetation extent and an improvement in native vegetation condition.
2. By 2015 there is an increase in the number of sustainable populations of a range of native fauna species.
3. By 2015 there is an increase in the recovery of threatened species, populations and ecological communities.
4. By 2015 there is a reduction in the impact of invasive species.
Water
5. By 2015 there is an improvement in the condition of riverine ecosystems.
6. By 2015 there is an improvement in the ability of groundwater systems to support groundwater dependent ecosystems and designated beneficial uses
7. By 2015 there is no decline in the condition of marine waters and ecosystems
8. By 2015 there is an improvement in the condition of important wetlands, and the extent of those wetlands is maintained.
9. By 2015 there is an improvement in the condition of estuaries and coastal lake ecosystems.
Land
10. By 2015 there is an improvement in soil condition.
11. By 2015 there is an increase in the area of land that is managed within its capability.
Community
12. Natural resource decisions contribute to improving or maintaining economic sustainability and social well-being
13. There is an increase in the capacity of natural resource managers to contribute to regionally relevant natural resource management.
The State Plan targets specifically applicable to LMD CMA are E4.1, E4.2, E4.3, E4.4, E4.5, E4.8, E4.10,
E4.12 & E4.13.
The relationship between the Australian Government, State Government and LMD CMA Targets is shown in
Table 1.
11
Table 1: Relationship between National, State and Catchment Targets at June 2009/2010
AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT - CARING FOR OUR COUNTRY
STATE-WIDE TARGETS LMD CMA TARGET AREAS
Biodiversity and natural icons
Mitigating Threats to World Heritage Areas
Increasing native habitat (including reducing the impact of rabbits and weeds)
Sustainable farming practices
Landscape Scale Conservation
Improved land management practices (grazing)
Improved land management practice (cropping)
Biodiversity
1. By 2015 there is an increase in native vegetation extent and an improvement in native vegetation condition.
2. By 2015 there is an increase in the number of sustainable populations of a range of native fauna species.
3. By 2015 there is an increase in recovery of Threatened species, populations, and ecological communities.
4. By 2015 there is a decrease in the impact of invasive species.
Vegetation
Levels of disturbance and fragmentation minimised (V1)
Support conservation reserves as a landuse, improve biodiversity (V2)
Improve extent, condition, and dynamics of native vegetation and habitat (V3)
Reduce impact of invasive species and feral carnivorous species (V3)
Implement Aquatic Threatened Species Recovery Plan actions (R6)
Under the Caring For Our Country program no critical aquatic habitats are identified in the Lower Murray Darling Catchment
Water
5. By 2015 there is an improvement in condition of riverine ecosystems.
6. By 2015 there is an improvement in the ability of groundwater systems to support groundwater dependent ecosystems and designated beneficial uses. [Not applicable LMD]
7. By 2015 there is no decline in the condition of marine waters and ecosystems. [Not applicable LMD]
8. By 2015 there is an improvement in condition of important wetlands, and the extent to which those wetlands are maintained.
9. By 2015 there is an improvement in condition of estuaries and coastal lake systems.
Riverine Health
Nett improvement in riverine health, improve native fish species, abundance & biomass ratios (RCT)
Re-establish fish passage in rivers and wetlands (R1)
Re-instate wetting & drying regimes to priority wetlands (R2)
Floodplain management and re-instate connectivity (R3)
Reduced urban drainage (R4)
Implement priority Aquatic Habitat Rehabilitation (R6)
Salinity
Reduce dryland cropping impact on groundwater recharge (S1)
Reduce irrigation impact on river systems (S2, S3)
12
AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT - CARING FOR OUR COUNTRY
STATE-WIDE TARGETS LMD CMA TARGET AREAS
Maximise efficiency of saline groundwater interception schemes (S4)
End of valley & within valley salinity monitoring (S6)
Sustainable farming practices
Improved land management practices (grazing)
Improved land management practice (cropping)
Land
10. By 2015 there is an improvement in soil condition.
11. By 2015 there is an increase in the area of land managed within its capability. [Not applicable LMD]
Soil
Reduce soil erosion in dryland cropping and grazing environments (So1)
Improve soil condition in cropping areas (So2)
Improve use of best management practices for Mallee soils (So4)
Achievement of 40% groundcover (So5)
Sustainable farming practices
Improving skills and knowledge of land managers
Community values, knowledge and engagement
Increasing community knowledge and skills.
Increasing participation in natural resource management
Engaging Indigenous communities
Utilising traditional cultural knowledge
Community
12. Natural Resource decisions contribute to improving or maintaining economic sustainability and social well being.
13. There is an improvement in the capability of natural resource managers to contribute regionally relevant management.
Community
Landuse agreements between Traditional Tribal Groups and natural resource users (CVRO)
Increased community interest, understanding and acceptance of the unique indigenous and cultural heritage of the catchment (CVRO)
Building community capacity, education and training (CVRO)
Improved understanding and uptake of NRM and sustainable land management (CVRO)
Inclusion of the contribution of youth, women, and knowledge base of senior community members
Integration of environmental, economic, cultural, and social aspects of the CAP for community benefits (CVRO)
13
CMA Governance Structure
The LMD CMA Governance Structure consists of seven Board Members (including the
Chairperson), and the General Manager.
Of the 13 CMAs in NSW, LMD CMA is the fourth largest by area and during 2008-09 we
employed a total of 14.5 Equivalent Full Time (EFT) recurrent funded staff and 11.5 temporary
funded staff. The Catchment covers 6.3 million hectares (1 permanent officer per 450,000 ha).
The qualifications of LMD CMA Board members are outlined in the following pages.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Board 2009-2010
Mark King (Chair)
Gary Doyle
Howard Jones
Patty Byrnes
Barrie MacMillan
Paula Doran Appointed 25/4/10
Tom Hynes Appointed 25/4/10 Members retired 24/04/09
Stan Dineen Trish Palmer
CM
A G
overnance Structure
14
LMD CMA Senior Management Team
Paul Dixon General Manager
To 31/12/2009
Lesley Palmer General Manager Appointed 17/5/10
Acting Program Managers
Graeme McIntosh Kelly Fyfe
Acting Manager Corporate Support
Joanne McLachlan
Board Member Profiles
MARK KING
CMA Chairperson (11/02/2004 to 30/06/2011) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings)
Mark is from Pomona and operates a horticulture and wine business.
He is a councillor of Wentworth Shire Council and an active community member involved in promoting local and regional initiatives.
Mark was the Chair of the previous Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Board. Committees: Wentworth Shire Council Australian Dried Fruits Assoc (ADFA) (Chair) Darling River Water Savings Project (Member) Natural Resource Advisory Council (Member) PATTY BYRNES
CMA Member (05/05/2004 to 24/04/2013) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings)
Patty is a member of a family business and lives on Wamberra Station.
She was a member of the previous Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Board.
Patty is very active in Natural Resource Management and enjoys showing and promoting 10,989 ha of private conservation reserves on Wamberra Station. The conservation reserves were established under the Southern Mallee Guidelines.
Committees: Rural Women’s Network Rural Women’s Council (member); Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee (Member); Pooncarie Field Day Inc. (Promotions Officer and Vice Chair);
STAN DINEEN – retired 24/4/10
CMA Member (05/05/2004 to 24/04/2010) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings)
Stan was a member of the previous Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Board and its predecessor, the previous Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Committee (from 1993).
Stan has lived in Broken Hill since 1953, giving him much insight to the water supply and quality issues facing an inland city.
Committees: Darling River Water Savings Project (Member) Member of several Local Government Committees. GARY DOYLE
CMA Member (05/05/2004 to 24/10/2011) (attended 5/6 CMA Board meetings)
Gary is part of a family business that runs the properties “Petro” and “Montarna” with a combined area of 39,000 ha (of which about 9500 ha is cropped mostly on a 2 year rotation). He also manages a 16,000 ha private conservation reserve.
Gary was the inaugural President of Mallee Sustainable Farming, serving for 6 years and is a member of the Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee.
He spent many years shearing and running shearing teams as Regional Manager for Grazcos shearing company (Western Division).
Committees: South West Land Management Group (Chair) Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee (Member)
15
HOWARD JONES
CMA Member (05/05/2004 to 24/10/2011) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings)
Howard’s main occupation is as a viticulturist and he has an extensive understanding and knowledge of the irrigation industry.
After spending much of his leisure time either on or near the water, Howard has witnessed the degradation of many wetland and floodplain systems. The decline of these ecosystems prompted Howard to become a pro-active community member and take an interest in the future management of wetlands and floodplains.
Committees: NSW Murray Wetlands Working Group (Chair) Hattah Lakes Icon Site Group (Member) Lindsay River & Wallpolla Icon Site Group (Member) Murray Darling Wetlands Ltd (Chair). Chowilla Community Reference Group (Member). TRISH PALMER – retired 24/4/10
CMA Member (24/10/08 to 24/04/2010) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings)
Trish is a member of a family run organic Dorper sheep and Shorthorn cattle business at “Overnewton Station” since 1978. She has also worked in the education of young children. Trish’s sense of community can be seen in her community service in the Darnick area as well as providing fundraising and social events for drought relief, education and medical organisations. Committees: None at this time. BARRIE MACMILLAN CMA Member (24/10/08 to 24/04/2013) (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings) Barrie is a CPA and prior to retirement, was a Divisional Manager with the Mildura Co-operative Fruit Company Ltd with over 30 years of service who has also been involved with a number of Natural Resource Management organisations including Living Murray Community Reference Group (MDBC), Mallee CMA (Board member) and two water authorities as a Board member. In the 1960s he operated a dried fruit property. Committees: None at this time. TOM HYNES
CMA Member (25/4/10 to 24/4/2013) (late announcement, nil attendance) Tom is a former engineering and finance manager with Pasminco Broken Hill Mine. Since that time he has run his own valuation business and worked for legal firms. A former member of
the Broken Hill Water Board (1992 to 2000) and the Far West Regional Development Board (2003 to 2005). Tom has financial qualifications and experience in engineering, business and law. Committees: None at this time.
PAULA DORAN
CMA Member (25/4/10 to 24/4/2013) (late announcement, nil attendance)
Paula Doran currently runs a sheep/cattle property west of Broken Hill with her husband, and has a long history in reporting/media within rural Australia. A former editor of the Barrier Miner newspaper, and a rural reporter with the ABC, she has covered the length and breadth of the country and its issues. Committees: None at this time.
CMA Managers
PAUL DIXON
General Manager contract ended 31/12/2009 (attended 2/6 CMA Board meetings) Paul was born in Hull – Yorkshire, UK. He has over 26 years project and senior management experience, having worked internationally on major projects in Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Singapore & Hong Kong, plus 5.5 years in Local Government in Australia.
Qualifications of Senior Officer MBA, BSc (Hons), Chartered Engineer, MAICD, MIET, MIRSE LESLEY PALMER
General Manager appointed 17/5/2010
Acting General Manager from 2 November 2009 (attended 6/6 CMA Board meetings) Lesley has experience working in the corporate sector in production planning for Ingham Enterprises, tertiary and community adult education, natural resource management in the Murray Catchment, owned and operated a successful horticultural property. Lesley has nine years experience as a senior manager in the Lower Murray Darling Catchment including six years as Manager Corporate Support with responsibility for business systems, finance, Investment Programs, audit and CAP development.
Qualifications of Senior Officer MBA (Deakin Uni)), MSust.Agr. (Uni Syd), Grad.Dip.Sust.Agr. (UNE), BSc.Agr. (Uni Syd).
16
LMD CMA Board Member Portfolios
In order to ensure that roles and responsibilities are clear and to maximise the skills base of the
organisation and Board members, LMD CMA has elected to adopt a Board Member Portfolio system
(underpinned by a policy) which assigns specific NRM areas of responsibility to Board members
supported by the small team of professional CMA staff. Table 2 illustrates the Board membership of
established Portfolios.
Table 2: Board Member Portfolio Activities
The Board Member Portfolio system provides a framework for focussed attention and clarity of roles,
by defining Primary and Secondary Board members. Each person in the portfolio is elected based
on their skills and experience to represent CMA as the Portfolio spokesperson and lead point of
contact on specific NRM issues.
At a more detailed or project level, a range of formal CMA Board delegated Committees are
established. The Committees have Board-adopted Terms of Reference to provide delegated powers
and a clear framework for progressing specific projects, citing the NSW State-wide standard as a
quality system framework within which it operates. See Table 3 for LMD CMA Committees operating
in April 2010; Primary Portfolio Board members are Chairs of the Committee. The announcement of
the appointment of the new Board members did not allow portfolios be re-assigned after June 2010.
17
Table 3: LMD CMA Current Committees
Committee Role
PVP and Projects Committee
Commenced 14/10/2005
Oversee the preparation, evaluation and implementation of activities including: Rangeland Incentive Strategy works, Native Vegetation Act projects and Development Applications.
Aboriginal Engagement Committee
Commenced 11/8/2008
Act as a review and advisory body to the LMD CMA Board to consider and make recommendations to the Board as required on indigenous engagement activities.
Water and Salinity Projects Committee
Committee Commenced 8/2/2006
Oversee the preparation, evaluation and implementation of all CMA Water and Salinity project works as identified in LMD CMA Investment Programs as well as other water & salinity initiatives undertaken by LMD CMA.
Think Tank Project Committee
Commenced 8/2/2006
Convene, develop, and consider innovative Natural Resource Management (NRM) projects, which may be outside of the current approved Investment Strategy initiatives, but may be worthy of further LMD CMA Board consideration.
Gol Gol Lake & Swamp Committee
Commenced 12/10/2005
In abeyance
Board and senior staff at Scotia Sanctuary
18
Figure 3: Ecological Cultural Knowledge Projects
19
Target Achievement The LMD CMA Catchment Action Plan was approved in January 2008. Within the CAP, the LMD
CMA has identified 10-year Catchment and Management Targets, against which CMA performance
will be gauged in future years, these targets comprise: Regional Outcomes Community Values,
Riverine Health, Salinity, Vegetation (surrogate for Biodiversity) and Soil. These targets are used
for the purpose of this 2009-2010 Annual Report (see Figures 4 to 17), including action taken on
status of activities to achieve these targets.
Catchment and Management Targets
As the CAP provides strategic 10 year targets, these will form the basis of ongoing planning and
investment by the LMD CMA.
Figure 4: Regional Outcomes Community Values
REGIONAL OUTCOMES – COMMUNITY VALUES CATCHMENT TARGET
ACTION TAKEN
TARGET - An additional 20 individual natural resource agreements1 between natural resource users and Traditional Tribal groups2 by 2015.
1 As of 30/6/02 26 individual properties (319,313ha) covered by natural resource agreements (Support Document 4)
2 Barkindji, Mutthi Mutthi, Yitha Yitha, Ngyiampaa, Maraura plus any others where identified
2004 – 2010 Eleven agreements covering 346,390ha.
Nine agreements achieved during 2003 – 2004.
2004-2010 4 Ecological Cultural Knowledge projects complete – Mutthi Mutthi, Barkindji (north of Pooncarie, Maraura/Barkindji and Nygiampaa.
See Figure 3.
TARGET ACHIEVED
20
Figure 5: Key Water Management Areas
21
Figure 6: Riverine Health
RIVERINE HEALTH CATCHMENT TARGET ACTION TAKEN
TARGET - An identifiable net improvement in riverine health across the Lower Murray Darling Catchment by 2015. This will be determined by:-
an improvement in the native to introduced fish ratio (55% improvement in species ratio, 25% improvement in abundance ratio, 25% improvement in biomass ratio);
a 20% reduction in the number of days subject to blue green algal alerts1; and
the reinstatement of more natural flow patterns as modelled in each of five river management zones. 1 Blue green algal alerts - Using medium and high alerts gives good statistical information, increases the strength of the analysis and therefore the information derived from the analysis. It allows the changes from the medium to high level to be assessed and assists in determination of whether a situation is declining. It also increases the accuracy, sensitivity, and reliability of analysis with no additional sample data needs.
Note: LMD CMA did not undertake an analysis of monitored blue green algae data in 2009/10. This data is collected by the NSW Office of Water on behalf of the Murray Darling Basin Authority.
In 2010, only one site (3%) exceeded the CAP target for all three ‘nativeness’ ratios. Nativeness ratios improved at 15 sites (45%), remained stable at seven sites (21%), declined at seven sites (21%) and deteriorated substantially at four sites (12%).
The CAP target of a 55% improvement in the native:alien species ratio was not met in any catchment management zone in 2010. Since 2004, alien species have been expanding in distribution within the CMA area while the distribution of native fish has declined.
The CAP target of a 25% improvement in the native:alien abundance ratio was exceeded in the Darling River in 2010, probably as a direct result of extensive recruitment and colonisation of species; a response triggered by significant inflows from the upper Darling catchment between January and April. There were also increases in the native : alien abundance ratio in the lower Murray River zone and declines or no change in the other zones. Despite native abundance doubling since 2004, the abundance of alien fishes has roughly trebled, so the overall catchment-wide trend was for no significant change in the native:alien abundance ratio within the CMA area.
The CAP target of a 25% improvement in the native:alien biomass ratio was exceeded in both the upper and lower Murray River management zones in 2010 and did not decline in all other zones. The biomass of native fishes has remained stable but the biomass of alien species has declined.
All the fish species collected in previous years were also collected in 2010, however for the first time since the monitoring program commenced, two additional species were also collected; dwarf flat-headed gudgeon and spangled perch.
These data suggest that the management actions implemented to June 2010 have not been sufficient to result in progress towards the three Lower Murray Darling CMA CAP
22
RIVERINE HEALTH CATCHMENT TARGET ACTION TAKEN
targets for fish community ‘nativeness’, at a level where the CAP targets will be met by 2015.
Hydrology (assessed on 2008/09
data)
LMD Hydrology Index (LMD HDI) scores for 2008/09 indicate that flows in the Darling River and the Murray River below Wentworth have been most impacted by regulation and diversion as was the case in 2007/08.
The LMD HDI also indicates that during 2008/09 flows at all three sites on the Darling Anabranch were found to be completely natural (compared to one site in 2007/08) , while Darling River at Menindee Weir 32 and Darling River at Burtundy were the most removed from natural flow conditions (however both sites improved slightly compared to 2007/08).
Figure 5 Key Water Management areas.
Troy Muster – Fish Monitoring
23
Figure 7: Riverine Health Management Target R1
24
Figure 8: Riverine Health Management Target R6
25
RIVERINE HEALTH MANAGEMENT TARGETS ACTION TAKEN
R 1. Manage, modify, or remove river and lake regulating structures1 in order to minimise stratification, improve water quality, and facilitate fish passage by 2015.
1 Murray River Weirs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15; Darling River Weir 32, Pooncarie and Burtundy Weirs; Darling Anabranch, Menindee Lakes system and Frenchmans Creek.
Total achievement upstream fish movement along 521km of the lower Darling River. See Figure 7.
R 2. Re-instate more natural wetting/drying processes within priority areas of the Lower Murray Darling Catchment including the Euston Lakes2, parts of the Menindee Lakes System3, Thegoa Lagoon, and Great Darling Anabranch wetlands by 2015.
2 Lake Benanee, Dry Lake, and Lake Caringay 3 Lake Cawndilla
2004-10 Total of 1,968ha achieved (unchanged from 2009)
R 3. Develop one Floodplain Management Plan for four river management zones4 of the catchment, and implement actions for one zone, by 2015.
4 Darling River, Great Darling Anabranch, Murray River above Wentworth, and Murray River below Wentworth.
10km of stream bank rehabilitated
Land management 2004-10 14,152ha riparian native vegetation protected by fencing; and 433km enhanced/rehabilitated. (unchanged from 2009)
R 4. Reduce the level of discharge of major urban stormwater and irrigation drainage outfalls that discharge directly to the river, improve the content of the discharge through treatment prior to discharge by 2015.
Construction of 2 Gross PollutantTraps and detention basin by Broken Hill City Council for urban stormwater management.
2004-10 Total of 22 GPTs achieved
R 5. Manage flows in five river zones of the Murray and Lower Darling Rivers5 to achieve more natural flow patterns6 by 2015.
5 Menindee Lakes, Darling River, Great Darling Anabranch, Murray River above Wentworth, and Murray River below Wentworth.
6 More natural flow patterns are measured on four parameters – volume, variability, seasonality, and connectivity, based on comparing natural and current flow patterns.
Flow management under direction of MDBC.
The on-going drought has significantly impacted on river flows.
R 6. Priority areas for targeted rehabilitation of fish
habitats identified, as mapped in 2004, and action plans developed and implementation commenced in 40% of priority areas by 2015. Threatened species listed under part 7a of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (as at 2002) Endangered species - Trout Cod, Murray Hardyhead, River Snail (Notapala sp.); Vulnerable species - Silver Perch, Southern Pygmy Perch, Macquarie Perch; Endangered populations - Purple Spotted Gudgeon, Olive Perchlet; Endangered Ecological Communities - Lower Murray River Drainage and Lower Darling River Drainage.
One fish habitat study completed, 8km of river works for threatened aquatic species, fish monitoring undertaken.
There are seven reaches that have been identified as priorities in the LMD catchment.
Completed plans - Lelma to Burtundy Reach (39km); Pomona Reach (28km); Carina Bend Reach (30km).
2004-10 Implementation of actions at 42.9% of priority sites, see Figure 9
26
Figure 9: Target Achievements Regional Outcomes & Riverine Health 2004 – 2010
TTG Natural Resource Agreements to 2015
0
5
10
15
20
25
Target Achievement
No.
land
use
agre
emen
ts
R1 Water Regulating Structures to 2015
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Target Achievement
km fi
sh m
ovem
ent
R2 Lake Wetting/Drying Processes to 2015
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Target Achievement
Ha
wet
land
re-
conn
ecte
d
R3 Floodplain Management to 2015
0
100
200
300
400
500
Target Achievement
Km
str
eam
bank
reh
abilit
atio
n
R4 Discharge to River to 2015
0
5
10
15
20
25
Target Achievement
No.
Gro
ss P
ollu
tant
Tra
ps
R6 Rehabilitate Fish Habitat to 2015
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Target Achievement
% p
riorit
y pl
ans
impl
emen
ted
27
Time series of photographs at Morton Boolka, which links Lake Cawndilla (view on left) and Lake Menindee (view on right) at Menindee, taken at the same location
By row – November 2001, October 2002,
July 2006, May 2009
28
Figure 10: Salinity Management Target S1
29
Figure 11: Salinity Catchment Target
SALINITY CATCHMENT TARGET ACTION TAKEN
TARGET - To maintain the year 2000, 95th percentile1,salt
concentration of 463 EC at Lock 6 over the duration of the
plan, with variations due to climatic conditions, external
salt contributions excepted*.
*** Future modelling and data analysis will refine these values
1 95th percentile means that salinity concentration, measured as electrical conductivity, do not exceed 463 EC, 95% of the time.
Based on 2008/09 data - Murray River Lock 6 - Measured salinity levels indicate 321 µS/cm 95% of the time (target met), modelled data (MSM-BIGMOD indicated 1022 µS/cm 95% of the time (target not met). The model makes adjustments for flow rate, volume and regulated system.
A full assessment is best undertaken when sufficient time has elapsed to ensure scientific rigour (5-10 years).
SALINITY MANAGEMENT TARGETS ACTION TAKEN
S1 No net increase in the risk of land and river salinisation due to the effect of dryland cropping, between 2002 and 2015.
As determined by measuring soil moisture, deep drainage, watertable levels and crop management decisions.
The indicator to assess this target in 2009/10 was stored soil water at a depth of 2 and 6 metres. Increase in water indicates rain water has made its way past the root zone of crops and pastures or capillary rise from a water table below 6 metres has occurred. Both of these scenarios represent an increased risk of salinisation.
The 2009/10 data indicated the amount of stored soil water increased at 50% more sites than there was a decrease; reflecting recent rainfall. Overall, the risk of salinisation has decreased from 2000 to 2010, with a greater proportion of sites having a value of stored water equal to or drier than recorded in 2010. Notwithstanding the higher rainfall in 2009/10, the low rainfall conditions between 2006 and 2009 have reduced the risk of salinisation and on this basis the target will be met by 2015.
Dryland cropping area shown in Figure 10.
30
Figure 12: Salinity Management Target S2 Irrigation areas
31
SALINITY MANAGEMENT TARGETS ACTION TAKEN
S2 Implement effective on-farm irrigation management practices in 90% of farms by the year 2015 to minimise drainage and groundwater accessions.
2009/10 – 51 landholders took up incentives for Irrigation Best Management Practices on 396.2 ha. In addition 37 landholders completed training. 2002/09
A total of 89.4% or 720 of 805 irrigators (farms) on over 36,547ha have implemented improved irrigation practices. Irrigated areas Figure 12.
S3 Minimise economic impact of high river salinity through no increase in the time that water users are exposed to more than 800 EC by 2015.
As measured by daily average exceedence of 800 EC threshold for drinking and horticultural purposes.
The Darling River has experienced variable EC levels at times exceeding 800EC, due to drought and lack of flows.
S4 Maximise efficiency of existing saline groundwater interception schemes1 by 2006 and construct two new salt interception schemes2 by 2015. 1 Two salt interception schemes currently in operation have the capacity to improve operational efficiency.
2 The Sunraysia Salt Interception Scheme is in development by the MDBC, a fourth salt interception scheme is under investigation.
All pre-construction studies and investigations and detailed costing complete. Estimated cost $4.4M.
Works unable to progress due to lack of funds.
S5 Implement or develop two innovative enterprises for management or use of saline water by 2015.
Currently no direct CMA funding for this target.
S6 Within Valley Salinity Targets - benchmarks to assess impacts on catchment assets
1. Menindee - Maintain annual EC of <1500 99% of the time at Lake Wetherell and Lake Pamamaroo and 80% of the time in Lake Menindee and Lake Cawndilla, (including dry periods). .
2. Darling River - In summer, maintain annual river salt concentrations of <800 EC 99% of the time and <400 EC 80% of the time; and in winter, maintain annual river salt concentrations of <800 EC 80% of the time and <400 EC 50% of the time, measured at Burtundy.
3. Murray River - Maintain annual river salt concentrations of <800 EC 95% of the time and 400 EC 80% of the time, measured at Euston.
4. Murray River - Maintain annual river salt concentrations of <800 EC 95% of the time and 400 EC 50% of the time, measured at Lock 9.
5. Great Darling Anabranch - Provide stock and domestic supply (of current or better reliability) with annual EC of <1000 95% of the time. Ensure annual EC of <1500 80% of the time during environmental flow period, measured downstream of Lake Cawndilla outlet, Packers Crossing, Wycot, Bulpunga and Oakbank.
Based on modelled data for 2008/09, a. Of 15 salinity targets, 12 were met
and 3 were not. b. Simulation of salinity levels under
current conditions was relatively good.
c. Darling River salinity levels were generally underestimated by model.
d. Murray River salinity levels were generally overestimated by the model.
Based on measured data for 2008/09, e. 14 targets were met and only one
was not.
32
Figure 13: Management Target Achievement Salinity and Vegetation 2004-2009
S2 On-farm Irrigation Management to 2015
10
3 0
5 0
7 0
9 0
110
Target Achievement
% o
f far
ms
irrig
atio
n B
MP
S4 Saline Groundw ater Interception to 2015
0
1
2
3
Target Achievement
N0.
SIS
site
s up
grad
ed
V1 Retention of Pre-clearing Vegetation to 2015
0
2 0
4 0
6 0
8 0
10 0
12 0
Target Achievement
% p
recl
earin
g na
tive
veg.
ext
ent
V2 Conservation Reserves to 2015
150,000
180,000
210,000
Target Achievement
Ha
Res
erve
s
33
Figure 14: Vegetation Catchment Target
VEGETATION CATCHMENT TARGET ACTION TAKEN
TARGET - A measurable improvement in the condition of
native vegetation communities by 2015, as measured by
key indicators1 at 90% of sites in the catchment, with
retention of at least 80% of the pre-clearing extent of each
native vegetation community, incorporating an increase in
the area actively managed2 for conservation3.
1 Key Indicators of Condition
2 Actively managed means that the primary objective for the site should be to maintain and improve its biodiversity and ecosystem functions. Note: it does not necessarily imply ‘locking up’. Different vegetation types may require grazing management or ecological burning to maintain their integrity.
3 A comprehensive biodiversity survey was carried out in the LMD 1998 – 2000 (Val, et al. 2001), this data was analysed and modelled (Foster, 2002). The management implications from these investigations were published in 2002.
2009/10 Fifty Ecosystem Function Analysis sites monitored in all major vegetation communities.
The vegetation communities in reserves achieving the target at June 2010 are: Deep sand Mallee: 31.23% Bimble Box: 30% Mallee Mosiac: 21.84% Mixed Shrubland: 25.18%
Based on Benson vegetation community classes, there are 32 communities which are greater than 20% cleared.
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TARGETS ACTION TAKEN
V1 Retain a minimum of 80% of the pre-clearing extent of each vegetation community in the LMD catchment.
ACHIEVED.
V2 Increase by 171,000 hectares the area of permanent conservation reserves in the catchment by 2015, as a contribution towards achieving the permanent reservation of 20% of each vegetation community (pre-clearing extent) by 2054.
2009/10 – 56,807ha conservation reserves established.
2004/10 – 194,600ha conservation reserves established. See Figure 15.
Achieved 113.8% of target.
V3 Improve the condition of each vegetation community at 90% of sites by the year 2015 as measured by the key indicators.
2009/10 167,006ha Landscape Scale Conservation and Improved land management Grazing.
See Figure 16.
2004/2010 – 2,065,593ha Improved vegetation condition. See Figure 17.
2009/10 - Carnivorous pest control 242,000ha.
2004/10 Carnivorous pest control 1,084,473ha. Total pest animal control on 2,344,838ha.
34
Figure 15: Management Target V2 Conservation Reserves 2004-2010
35
Figure 16: Vegetation Management Target V3 2009-2010
36
Figure 17: Vegetation Management Target V3 2004-2010
37
Figure 18: Soil Catchment Target
SOIL CATCHMENT TARGET ACTION TAKEN
TARGET - To achieve soil erosion levels of less than 50% of
the 1999 benchmark by 2015.
This soil target is monitored by three indicators:
- modelled data of the catchment area eroding,
- dust concentration, and
- a road side survey in cropping areas.
The most recent modelled data reported on was from 2008/09. For the whole catchment, modelling results indicate that for this period, seven out of 12 months met the target. Riverine plains with low tree covers were the major sources of erosion.
Off-site impacts assessed by hours of dust at nine DustWatch sites indicated that all sites exceeded the target. The extended drought has made it very difficult to maintain groundcover and combined with inappropriate land management in the minority of areas is the primary cause of the dust. The road side survey target of 89% in cropping areas, was not achieved, with only 79% of sites showing negligible signs of erosion in autumn 2010 (after correction for rainfall). However, there has been a major improvement noticed since autumn 2009, which will be captured in next year’s results.
Climate conditions prompting annual pasture growth and tillage of fallows limited the ability to achieve the target. However, use of chemical fallowing at autumn was the highest ever achieved (34%). With the marked improvement in both stubble and pasture sites achieving the target and the prospect of average crops this winter, it is likely the target will be met in 2011.
Figure 10 shows the mixed farming (cropping) area.
38
Figure 19: Management Target Achievement Soil 2004-2009
So1 Ameliorate Soil Erosion to 2015
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Target Achievement
No.
land
hold
ers
So2 Soil Condition to 2015
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Target Achievement
No.
Lan
dhol
ders
So3 Sandhill Cropping Retirement
0500
100015002000250030003500400045005000
Target Achievement
Tot
al H
ecta
res
Reh
abi
litat
ed
So4 Manage Total Grazing Pressure to 2015
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Target Achievement
No.
Pro
pert
y V
eg. P
lans
NB – Progress of activities against Target So3 Satellite imagery indicates that the area of eroding sand hills is substantially reduced (which may be due to adoption of BMP for cropping) and investment in this target has currently ceased.
39
SOIL MANAGEMENT TARGETS ACTION TAKEN
So1 To increase the number of farmers using conservation and phase farming techniques from 50 to 80 by the year 2015.
2004 – 10 a total of 30 farmers adopted conservation farming practices.
2009/10 Five incentives for conservation farming were agreed for an area of 8,470ha.
2007/10 Total 10 conservation farming incentives for cropping area of 89,463ha
So2 For cultivation, to have an additional 30 landholders (through grazing and soil management training) adopting the erosion protection standard of 50% dry aggregation greater than 1mm in diameter or 50% cover of vegetation (or a combination of both) until sowing by 2015.
2004-10 Total of 20 achieved.
The percentage of landholders achieving the erosion protection standards increased this year. The percentage of landholders surveyed that achieved the erosion protection standard has increased from 3% in autumn 2009 to 50% in autumn 2010 and the number of sites has increased from 23% in autumn 2009 to 62% in autumn 2010.
The monitoring has highlighted that although many land managers are adopting the right practices, the outcome of greater cover and less soil erosion is not being realised in some cases due to some management choices and climate. Overall the data suggests the target is likely to be achieved by 2015.
So3 Promote the retirement from cropping and rehabilitation of 5,000 hectares of eroding sandhills by 2015.
2008/10 62 hectares of planned 500ha achieved.
Satellite imagery indicates that the area of eroding sand hills is substantially reduced (which may be due to adoption of BMP forcropping) investment in this target has currently ceased.
So4 Fifty landholders to use the Property Vegetation Planning(PVP) tool to reduce total grazing pressure through various grazing strategies including; managing grazing management according to landscape/vegetation, identifying areas for total grazing pressure management, early de-stocking and resting areas for rehabilitation by 2015.
21 agreements were signed in the 09/10 year.
2004/10 Total PVP agreements to reduce total grazing pressure 329.
40
So5 To increase the area to over 80% of the catchment achieving ground cover levels that avoids wind and water erosion (i.e. minimum level of 40% cover) by 2015.
The ongoing drought has had a massive impact on the catchment in terms of groundcover with less than 80% of the catchment achieving the 40% groundcover target level.
This target was almost achieved in 2009-10 (as indicated from the reference and roadside sites assessed) with 66% of sites having greater than 50% groundcover in autumn 2010. Due to the assessment methodology this year, there may have been some unaccounted for groundcover levels of 40-50%, indicating the progress towards this target may be higher.
Sustainable Cropping Tour 2009
41
Management and Activities The LMD CMA undertakes a range of Natural Resource Management activities relating to
operation for the CMA as a government agency and service provider to the community.
Activities include development of NRM targets based on good science and data that are
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timebound (SMART), identification of
actions required to achieve the targets and Investment Strategies to fund implementation.
LMD CMA chooses to retain only a few core projects such as Communication, Education
and Training while putting the majority of non agency and local government projects out
to tender on the competitive market. Both direct and open quotes and tenders are used
in accordance with Government Procurement Guidelines.
Internal progress reviews include the use of monthly progress reports for all projects,
Action Agreement Records, electronic and paper record management systems. Internal
checks for quality assurance are undertaken with regular staff and unit meetings. Project
meetings are convened to ensure timely and consistent program management. OH&S
meetings are convened to review safe operating procedures for all staff and especially
those working in remote locations.
The NSW Statewide Standard plays a key role as a framework for implementing all CMA
activities, as it sets a quality system against which our operational activities are
independently audited.
External performance reviews include the delivery of Caring For Our Country Milestone
Reports including Monitoring, Evaluation Reporting and Improvement (MERI) twice per
year, Caring For Our Country Financial Reports twice per year; Investment Program
Reports, Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) of progress toward achievement of
Catchment and Management Targets.
The LMD CMA operates approximately 1 recurrent staff member per 450,000 ha and
therefore operating efficiency is paramount. The organisational structure is shown in
Figure 20. The CMA has been successful in implementing all projects proposed under
the 2004–2009 Investment Strategies, some variations have been undertaken to
accommodate new information and ensure target delivery is maximised.
Managem
ent and Activities
42
Figure 20: LMD CMA Organisation Chart at 30 June 2010
43
Summary of CMA Operations Lower Murray Darling Catchment Action Plan
The Lower Murray Darling Catchment Action Plan (CAP) is a 10 year strategic Plan
which provides a strong framework for community and government investment in Natural
Resource Management (NRM) within the Lower Murray Darling Catchment.
The development of the CAP was built on the culmination of 10 years of catchment
management activity and action plan development and implementation by the community.
The CAP provides investors and partners with the opportunity to understand and quantify
the basis of NRM investments in CMA activities.
The funding of CMA NRM activities as identified in the CAP is made through the
Investment Strategy (IS), Investment Program (IP) and external sources where available,
providing NRM outcomes that are to be achieved in short and long-term timeframes.
The CMA is undertaking a range of NRM activities that will deliver the targets for Regional
Outcomes - Community Values; Riverine Health; Salinity; and Vegetation (as a surrogate
for biodiversity). Currently the CMA is developing new Community Values and Regional
Outcomes Catchment and Management Targets which are out for consultation, with new
Biodiversity, Soil and Salinity Catchment and Management Targets in development.
Table 4 illustrates some of the sources of funds and investor preference of the outputs/
outcomes that the funding organisation is seeking to achieve.
Table 4: Investment Sources and Investor Preference
SOURCE OF FUNDS INVESTOR PREFERENCE
Caring For Our Country (Australian Government)
National Reserve System; Biodiversity & Natural Icons; Coastal Environmental and Critical Aquatic Habitats; Sustainable farm practices; Community skills, knowledge and engagement.
NSW Catchment Action Delivery of State Plan Priority E4 Better outcomes for native vegetation, biodiversity, land, rivers and coastal waterways
Complementary and Opportunity funding
Includes activity specific funding e.g. Defeating the Weeds Menace; agency funding eg. DPI Fish Re-stocking and Habitat Grants; industry funding e.g. Bundaberg Bush Fund, Origin Energy, MDBA.
The Australian Government Caring for Our Country program requires the Investment Strategy
to allocate funds on a ratio of 70% on-ground work; 15% capacity building; 10% research and
monitoring; and 5% planning. The NSW State Government requires the Investment Strategy
to allocate funds on a ratio of 80% on-ground works; 15% coordination and support and 5%
monitoring, evaluation and reporting.
Sum
mary of C
MA
Operations
Sum
mary of C
MA
Operations
44
2009 – 2010 Investment Strategy
Figure 21: 2009/10 Investment Strategy by Source of Funds
2009 - 10 Investment by Source of Funds
Caring for OurCountry
NSW CatchmentAction
Figure 22: 2009/10 Investment by Management Units
2009 - 10 Investment by Management Units
Riverine
Mixed Farming
Rangelands
Whole of Catchment
45
2008 – 2009 Investment Strategy
Figure 23: 2008/2009 Investment by Source of Funds
2008 - 09 Investment by Source of Funds
Caring for Our Country
NSW CatchmentAction
Land & WaterManagement Plan
Figure 24: 2008/09 Investment by Management Unit
2008 - 09 Investment by Management Units
Riverine
Mixed Farming
Rangelands
Whole of Catchment
2008 - 09 Investment by Management Unit Riverine $544,356Mixed Farming $292,050Rangelands $1,167,540Whole of Catchment $1,107,054
TOTAL $3,111,000
46
2007 – 2008 Investment Strategy
Figure 25: 2007/2008 Investment by Source of Funds
2007 - 08 Investment Strategy by Source of Funds
National Action Plan
Natural Heritage Trust
Land & WaterManagement Plan
2007 - 08 Investment by Source of Funds National Action Plan $1,421,182Natural Heritage Trust $469,070Land & Water Management Plan $46,845
TOTAL $1,937,097
Figure 26: 2007/08 Investment by Management Unit
2007 - 08 Investment by Management Unit
Riverine
Mixed Farming
Rangelands
Whole of Catchment
2007 - 08 Investment by Management Unit Riverine $1,125,977Mixed Farming $222,750Rangelands $469,070Whole of Catchment $119,300
TOTAL $1,937,097
47
2004 – 2007 Investment Strategy
Figure 27: 2004/2007 Investment by Source of Funds
2004 - 2007 Investment Strategy by Source of Funds
National Action Plan
Natural Heritage Trust
State SustainabilityFund
Land & WaterManagement Plan
Figure 28: 2004/2007 Investment by Management Unit
2004 - 2007 Investment by Management Unit
Riverine
Mixed Farming
Rangelands
Whole of Catchment
48
Projects by source of funds and State Plan Targets are shown in Table 5.
Table 5: 2009-2010 Investment Program projects
State Plan
Target
Project Source of Funds
E4.1 Rangeland Management & Biodiversity - improvement in biodiversity and condition of native vegetation condition via incentives for Total Grazing Pressure; Conservation Reserves; Priority Vegetation Reserves; Sustainable Grazing Management; Traditional Cultural Knowledge Project; and Monitoring
CFOC
E4.2 Increase native fauna populations – carnivorous pest control
CFOC
E4.3 Aquatic Threatened Species – fish habitat plan and works, fish monitoring
CA
E4.5 Irrigation Best Management Practice - improve water use efficiency, reduce drainage
CA
E4.5 Monitoring Salinity and Hydrology CA
E4.5 River Frontage Works – improve riverine condition works program, landuse guidelines
CA
E4.5 Complete construction of Weir 32 Fish Passage CA
E4.10 Soil Crop Recharge –support adoption of conservation farming practices, incentives for machinery conversion; monitoring erosion risk, wind erosion and deep drainage
CFOC
E4.12, 4.13
Communication Education & Training – support for NRM groups, training programs, catchment conference, community forums, Aboriginal community engagement; Youth forums, education activities, field days.
CFOC
A summary of the Investment Program achievements delivered during 2008-2009 is shown in Table
6, items in blue are Caring For Our Country deliverables which may accumulate over 2009-2010 and
2010-2011 for full delivery.
49
Table 6: Summary of Investment Program Milestones and Achievements 2009-2010
State Plan Target Milestone Amount Achievement
E4.1 Landscape Scale Conservation 6,200ha
15 landholders
132,870ha
19 landholders
Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area
70,000 ha
5 agreements
54,883ha
11 agreements
Improve land management practices - grazing
30,000ha
20 landholders
38,605ha
20 landholders
E4.2 Carnivorous pest wild dog control 7,000 ha 242,000 ha
E4.3 Aquatic Threatened Species - 1 Habitat work costing plus fish habitat works
1 report
2.5 km
1 report
9 km
E4.4 Eradication of Bitou Bush – Menindee; Mixed cactus control
123,913ha
E4.5 Weir 32 Fish passage complete complete complete
River Frontage works 4km 6.75km
Irrigation BMPs including training 65 landholders 88 l/holders 396 ha
Monitoring Hydrology and Salinity 1 report 1 report
E4.8 None undertaken in 2009-10
E4.10 Conservation farming machinery conversion incentive
5 conversions 5000 ha
7 conversions 8,470 ha
Dustwatch, wind erosion risk and BMP Reports
1 reports 1 reports
Improve land management practices - cropping
10 landholders 10 landholders
E4.12 Indigenous land managers forums 12 people 4 people
Aboriginal Community forum 20 people 27 people
Ecological Cultural Knowledge project 1 report 1 report
E4.13 3 Youth forums and projects 60 students 68 students
3 Community forums 45 people 103 people
Capacity building workshop, field days 120 people 267 people
Landholders visit industry leaders 60 people 61 people
MERI Plan 1 plan 1 plan
Community Survey 50 people 278 contacts
Support community groups 5 groups 8 groups
50
Factors affecting achievement of operational objectives are primarily
1. climate impacts of the on-going drought,
2. the re-structure of government departments impacting on contract implementation and support to the CMA as staff roles, function and location may change.
Grants to Community Groups Wentworth Rural Women’s Gathering Group Inc. $10,000
CMA Investment Performance
At 30 June 2010 the LMD CMA held $4,835,459 in Hourglass Investment Facilities.
CMA Consultants Engaged
Between 1 July 2009 and 30 June 2010 the Lower Murray Darling CMA did not engage any
consultants.
AgFair Display, Marilyn Harvey, Andrew Schweitzer, Kelly Fyfe, Lesley Palmer
51
LMD CMA Promotions
The LMD CMA has a range of mediums for communicating with natural resource managers in the
catchment; these include fact sheets, media releases, a website, newsletters, short courses,
Board members and staff attending various Landcare and industry meetings. Face to face
meetings including farm visits are also undertaken; the record since inception is shown in Figure
25, properties marked with a red outline indicates at least one face to face meeting with the
landholder has taken place. The LMD CMA has participated in 94 capacity building/awareness
raising events and publications including field days, forums and community. During the year over
78 written products have been produced comprising newsletters, brochures, media releases,
posters and other publications.
Publications
2009 Annual Report
All NSW CMA 5-year Achievement Report
Lower Murray Darling CMA E-News and e-Bulletins (distribution via email & post)
Media Releases/articles (89 items)
Education & Training Information Sheets - updated
CMA Desktop Calendar
A series of project Fact Sheets - updated
Rangelands Incentive Strategy - updated
Lower Murray Darling CMA website: www.lmd.cma.nsw.gov.au
Technical Reports
Aquatic Threatened Species – Pomona Reach Implement Fish Habitat Stage 2
Aquatic Threatened Species – Carina Bend Fish Habitat Management Plan
Aquatic Threatened Species Fish Monitoring
Ecological Cultural Knowledge - Ngiyampaa
Ecosystem Function Analysis – compilation of four years monitoring
Hydrology and Salinity Target Monitoring Report
Impacts of Tractor Exhaust CO2 injection on wheat growth and yield in SW NSW
Irrigation Recording and Evaluation System
Mixed Cactus Treatment
Monitoring Effectiveness of Reserves
River Frontage Action Strategy – Rehabilitation Works Stage 2
Sustainable Cropping Management
Sustainable Cropping Management Monitoring
The Darling Anabranch Adaptive Management Monitoring Program
Wentworth Reach Riparian Rehabilitation
Wetland Connectivity
CM
A P
romotions
52
Figure 29: Record of face to face meetings with community members in LMD catchment.
Face to face visits to properties marked in red outline; venue locations in pink circles
53
Customer Response
During 2009-2010 the LMD CMA embarked on a round of five community forums attended by 207
people with another 50 Aboriginal people who attended their forum in December 2009. The forums
provided the opportunity for land managers to provide feedback to the CMA and table issues
relevant to their areas and farming systems.
The 2010-2011 Investment Program was developed considering the responses from land managers
who attended the community forums and continues to deliver the high percentage of on-ground
works and incentive programs sought by the Community.
A good response was received to all the incentives advertised by the CMA, with record numbers and
some outstanding achievements recorded in the Rangeland Incentives.
The CMA will be undertaking a round of community forums in the new financial year to seek
community input on future directions as the review for the Catchment Action Plan and Targets
approaches.
The CMA also commissioned a second Community Survey to be undertaken. The majority of
respondents stated a preference for communication via email, yet a significant number of emails
addresses were no longer operational, despite CMA staff thoroughly checking our contact database
and even ringing people to check details during the year. If you have not been receiving emails from
the CMA, or have changed your internet service provider, please send your new email address to the
office to ensure delivery of e-news and funding opportunities.
The highlights comprised –
65% of those surveyed were aware of the services offered by the CMA; the top four services being training, monitoring, forums and Landcare.
Of the people who had visited the website, more than 89% found it useful, an increase from last Survey.
82% of respondents had received communications from LMD CMA with the majority being happy to receive information via electronic media.
66% of respondents had contact with the CMA during the previous 12 months, mainly through training and community forums, with other items including Wentworth Show and emails.
75% of respondents were aware of incentives and training. Of those who replied yes, more than half had attended or taken up incentives, of those who had not participated, the reasons given were lack of time or incentives not applicable to them and training not in a convenient location.
Of the respondents who had participated in incentives or training, 91% rated the activity as excellent or just below excellent – an increase from last Survey.
The biggest issues facing the Catchment identified by the community were weed control, feral pests and a lack of flow in the river – very different responses from last Survey.
54
55
Natural Resources Commission (NRC)
The Natural Resources Commission (NRC) was established by the Natural Resources
Commission Act 2003 with a broad function of providing the NSW Government with
independent advice on a range of natural resource management issues.
The NRC's core functions are to:
recommend state-wide standards and targets for natural resource management,
review and recommend the approval of Catchment Action Plans prepared by 13
Catchment Management Authorities across NSW, and
audit Catchment Management Authorities' implementation of these plans and
their effectiveness in achieving state-wide standards and targets.
The NSW Standard for Quality Natural Resource Management is a set of seven inter-
related components that define the characteristics of quality NRM practice. These
characteristics are expressed as Required Outcomes which CMAs and other natural
resource managers are expected to meet in order to be effective.
These Required Outcomes provide consistent reference points to help organisations and
individuals evaluate and improve their decision-making and management approaches at
all institutional scales (from national to property scale) and through all phases of the
adaptive management cycle (plan-implement-audit-respond).
The Standard is a management standard rather than a technical standard – that is, it sets
criteria for quality practice, but does not define strict steps to be followed or detailed
specifications that must be adhered to. The Lower Murray Darling Catchment
Management Authority has established governance arrangements, business systems and
strategies to define the steps it will take and specifications it will meet to ensure it
operates in compliance with the Standard. For example, Risk Management (using the
ISO31000:2009) plays a key role in all CMA activities, to evaluate, assess and mitigate
CMA Risks, which is just one component of the standard.
Natural R
esources Com
mission
56
Adrian Wells, Coomealla High School Youth Forum Coomealla High School Youth Forum
Menindee Youth Forum – technology in action Menindee Youth Forum
Broken Hill Youth Forum – Gross Pollutant Traps Broken Hill Youth Forum – Lakes Tour
57
Case Studies The following pages provide several Case Studies of Projects undertaken by LMD CMA.
Table 7: List of Case Studies
Case Study Activity State Target
Funding
1. Youth Forums E4.13 CFOC
2. SA Lower Lakes Study Tour E4.13 CFOC
3. River Frontage Works E4.5 NSW Catchment Action
4. Ecological Cultural Knowledge (Ngiyampaa)
E4.12 CFOC
5. Junee NSW Rural Women’s Gathering E4.13 CFOC
6. Weir 32 (multi year project complete in 2009/10)
E4.5 NSW Catchment Action/NAP
7. Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area E4.1 CFOC
8. Fish Habitat Management Plan - Pomona Reach
E4.5 NSW Catchment Action
9. Ecosystem Function Analysis E4.1 CFOC
10. Monitoring Effectiveness of Management Actions on Reserves
E4.1 CFOC
11. Weed Control (WoNS) E4.4 CFOC /CMA
12. Wetland Rehabilitation - Balcatherine E4.8 NSW Catchment Action
13. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) E4.13 CFOC /CMA
Case S
tudies
58
Case study 1 – Youth Forums
The productive partnership between the LMD CMA and the Murray Darling Association (MDA)
continued in 2009-2010 to provide student forums and tours for natural resource management
education activities across the Catchment. These activities continue to provide dialogue and
engagement between the LMD CMA and school students to get young people thinking about the
environment in which they live and managing the Catchment’s natural resources. The outcomes from
the youth forums will be developed into presentations by the students to celebrate and report on the
forums to the LMD CMA Board and the respective councils.
Menindee - Year 10 students from Ivanhoe, Wilcannia and Menindee participated in a forum through
a video link and Smartboards, the first time this technology has been used by the LMD CMA for a
student forum. As well as the usual presentations and workshop activities, the day included a tour
for the Menindee students to view and discuss the Darling River and Menindee Lakes operations
with community, LMD CMA and State Water staff.
Broken Hill – Forty-three students from Years 11 and 12 Broken Hill High School and Willyama High
School participated in a two-day student forum. The students visited various sites including Country
Energy’s new water treatment plant; the Mulga Creek wetlands; water detention basins; the Broken
Hill City Council’s waterwise gardens; the Darling River; Menindee Lakes; and the Central Darling
Shire’s Waste to Act exhibition. At the sites, they discussed floodplains, river health, water
management, water quality, managing rangeland groundcover, native and alien fish, recent
floodwaters, vegetation, and recycling.
Student projects - In past years, workshops and tours have asked students to identify projects that
schools might undertake to improve the Catchment at the local level. In 2009, the LMD CMA
responded to this concept and allocated funds to high schools willing to identify, manage, complete
and report on a specific natural resource management project. An important aim is to ensure that
projects have long-lasting benefits for both schools and their communities.
Menindee Central School will use the funding to enhance and expand the current Earth Sciences
program with science equipment, pH and water monitoring kits, microscopes, rock kits, reference
books, and excursion resource and support material. This will help to embed the Earth Sciences
studies into the school program, improving access and learning across the Wilvandee Access
Program.
Broken Hill High School students will research and undertake a fish breeding program to put native
fish into the new Broken Hill Mulga Creek Wetlands. The project has the potential to involve
hydroponics using waste aquarium water.
“Everyone can do their part (even if very small) for the environment that can amount to something larger and positive”
Broken Hill High School student.
59
Case study 2 – SA Lower Lakes Study Tour
A group of community members undertook a study tour of the RAMSAR wetlands of the Lower
Lakes and Coorong in South Australia, to see the Mouth of the Murray and clarify questions of the
environmentally concerned residents.
The Murray River, Australia’s largest river system, starts its journey from Mt Kosciusko in NSW to
meet the sea at the Murray Mouth near Goolwa in South Australia. Sustaining important ecological
communities, the Murray River provides water to over 3 million people (including Adelaide) and more
than 40% of Australia’s agricultural production.
Members of the tour group initially had to place an Expression of Interest and financial deposit to
receive one of the limited places on the tour. With assistance from the Primary Industries &
Resources SA and SA Department for Environment and Heritage, the tour program covered many
aspects of the Lower Lakes and of great interest was to hear how the Coorong and its inhabitants
have seen the dramatic changes. The natural system in the Coorong relied on tidal flushes with river
water flowing from Lake Alexandrina into the western end of the Coorong, fresh water flowing
underground from the south east of South Australia, and rainfall.
It was evident that irrigators have become more efficient users of their limited water allocations.
Traditional crops have been changed for those that can use less water. Gurra Downs Date Palm
Plantation is trialling use of high salinity irrigation water as a potential alternative crop, although high
labour costs make production expensive.
Local Council Mayors and politicians were extremely happy to share their local knowledge with the
tour group to entice further discussion about the water situation and a way forward. There were
opportunities to speak with the local dairy and other industries along the way. From wine grape
growers, who now also harvest horseradish, to the Milang Turtle Rescue (where local school
students are diligently saving the turtles from tubeworm infestations) as well as a magnificent water
tour of the Coorong National Park and Murray Mouth, the tour participants had gained a more
appreciative view of the condition of the other end of the Murray River system.
Tauwitchere Barrage – sea level higher than Lake Alexandrina
Tour group
60
Case study 3 – River Frontage Action Works
The Lower Murray Darling River Frontage Action Strategy (RFAS) was developed in 2008 to provide
a framework for the sustainable management of river frontages on the Murray River, Darling River
and Great Darling Anabranch. The strategy contains recommended management actions aimed at
protecting, maintaining and improving riparian values and improving community awareness of key
threats to river frontages.
Two demonstration sites were selected to implement on-ground works; these sites were the Willow
Bend Caravan Park and Neilpo Station. On-ground works were implemented along approximately
4.1km and 11.3ha of river frontage including willow removal, river frontage fencing, river bank
protection works, revegetation, and the installation of off-stream stock watering points, interpretive
signage, and a bird hide.
A “Best Management Practice” (BMP) guideline for urban development on river frontages was also
finalised as part of this project. These voluntary guidelines outline strategies that people can use to
minimise damage to river frontages when undertaking an urban development, such as:
Implementation of specific actions from the LMD RFAS through the establishment of river
frontage demonstration sites. These river frontage works/activities will assist in the
management of river frontages of the Murray and Lower Darling Rivers; and Great Darling
Anabranch to protect and enhance their environmental, social, economic and cultural values.
Improved community awareness of frontage value as an asset and associated key threats.
Participation by community members in specific on-ground activities.
The RFAS was developed with input from stakeholders, community members and relevant
government agencies. The implementation of on-ground works required the cooperation and
agreement of landholders and community groups. The Aboriginal community was also consulted
regarding the management of cultural heritage impacts during the implementation of on-ground
works. A demonstration field day was held at the Willow Bend Caravan Park which was attended by
stakeholders and community members.
Educational Sign at Willow Bend Caravan Park
Bird Hide at Willow Bend Caravan Park
61
Case study 4 – Ecological Cultural Knowledge - Nyigampaa
LMD CMA has previously completed three projects in cultural knowledge within the Catchment for
Mutthi Mutthi and Yitha Yitha, Maraura, and Barkindji (south of Pooncarie) people recording the
cultural biodiversity and language of their country.
This project continued that work for the Ngiyampaa people in the north east region of the LMD
Catchment and captured cultural knowledge on the culturally significant vegetation and its traditional
uses and recorded known names of plants in the Ngiyampaa language.
A booklet and DVD were produced, containing information and stories on traditional uses and names
of culturally significant vegetation in the Catchment that the Ngiyampaa people were comfortable
sharing with the greater community.
Outcomes from this project included:
learning and sharing ecological cultural knowledge and understanding of country in partnership with the Ngiyampaa people
assisting in rekindling the spiritual connections that these Aboriginal people have with country by recording the information as a resource for future generations
recording the traditional knowledge of local vegetation and language
providing the local Aboriginal community opportunities to become more actively involved in natural resource management processes with government and other entities
LMD CMA will be working with the Barkindji people in the area north of Pooncarie in 2010-2011, on a
fifth cultural knowledge project to continue the Catchment-wide engagement and recording of
ecological cultural knowledge for future generations.
Einadia nutans
Pittosporum angustifolium
62
Case study 5 – Junee NSW Rural Women’s Gathering
The NSW Rural Women’s Gatherings enable rural women to access information on services,
resources and assistance available and provide a chance for women to learn from listening to
speakers and participating in workshops. The Women’s Gatherings also contribute to raising the
profile of rural women and highlight important issues through wide media coverage.
For the 17th annual event, the LMD CMA gave 34 Catchment ladies the opportunity to attend the
Junee Rural Women’s Gathering in October 2009 “Making Tracks to Junee” by partially subsidising
the costs. Unlike last year’s Coonamble trip consisting of 24 hours travelling, this trip from
Wentworth to Junee was a total round trip of 1,130 kms and 12 hours travelling.
Spirits were high as the coach headed off in the early hours of the morning, collecting ladies along
the way including one lady who had travelled down from Broken Hill to participate in the enthusiasm
and congeniality of the group.
A strong message resounded throughout the Women’s Gathering – stand up and count yourself as a
woman with a voice. This message of female empowerment from RWN State Advisory Committee
Chair, Ms Nerida Cullen, was delivered at the opening ceremony urging women to get involved in
whatever they can. As more women become “movers and shakers”, the State will benefit as women
continue to serve as important role models to younger generations.
Demand was high for workshops which allowed participants to learn new skills and find out more
about interests they had never pursued.
At the closing ceremony of the Junee event, the 2010 Wentworth Committee President, Mrs Dianne
Pollard was presented with the candle traditionally lit at each Gathering to be blown out by the
current Gathering committee members. It will be lit once again on 29 October 2010 to mark the
opening of the Wentworth Gathering.
The “18th Coming of Age” NSW Rural Women’s Gathering will be held in Wentworth by the banks of
the Darling River, 29-31 October 2010. The LMD CMA has proudly sponsored and provided seed
funding to the 2010 Group for their organisation of the event.
Richard Sheldrake with some of the 2010 Wentworth Committee
63
Case study 6 –Weir 32
Weir 32 is located on the Darling River, constructed in 1958 using sheet piling and rock fill, it
provides a pumping pool for the Menindee town water supply and irrigation crops, it is owned and
managed by the State Water Corporation. The weir is located approximately 6 km downstream of
the township of Menindee and 39 km downstream of Menindee Main Weir.
The LMD CMA Fish Passage Feasibility Study and Recommendation Report 2004 identified that
Weir 32 has a significant impact on fish passage and prevents the upstream migration of fish for a
significant period and could prevent the successful completion of essential lifecycle processes, such
as spawning, for several species of migrating native fish. The report recommended the construction
of a vertical-slot fish passage at Weir 32, consisting of a concrete channel with vertical baffles
creating a series of cells. The baffle arrangement has been carefully designed to minimise the
speed and turbulence of water flow so that fish can swim up the channel. Construction commenced
during July 2009 and was completed during December 2009.
The Weir 32 fishway project has involved significant consultation with the local community and
landholders. In particular there has been extensive consultation with State Water and the Aboriginal
community. To ensure that potential impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage were minimised
members of the local Aboriginal community were involved in a cultural heritage assessment of the
construction site with an archaeologist prior to construction and were present on site during
construction as cultural heritage monitors.
The Weir 32 fish passage complements other LMD CMA fish passage projects at Burtundy Weir and
Pooncarie Weir on the Lower Darling River downstream of Weir 32. All major barriers to fish passage
along 521km of the Darling River from the junction of the Darling and Murray Rivers to Menindee
Main Weir will be modified.
During construction
Completion
64
Case study 7 – Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area
The Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area (WLWHA) covers 240,000ha of semi-arid landscape and
contains a system of ancient lakes formed over the last two million years, most of which are fringed
by a crescent shaped dune or lunette. It comprises dried saline lake bed plains vegetated with
saltbush communities, fringing sand dunes and woodlands with grassy under-storey.
Aborigines lived on the shores of the lakes for at least 50,000 years, and the remains of a 40,000
year old female (Mungo Woman) were found in the dunes of Lake Mungo, which is believed to be
the oldest ritual cremation site in the world.
Less than one quarter (58,846ha) of the WLWHA is included in Mungo National Park, the remaining
181,154ha of the WLWHA comprises eleven pastoral leasehold properties. The owners and
managers of these properties are responsible for protecting the World Heritage Values which
include:
The lake basins, lunettes, connecting channels and inter-lake areas; and
Archaeological sites, including campsites, middens, fireplaces, quarries, knapping floors and burials.
Using Caring For Our Country funds allocated for Managing World Heritage Areas, LMD CMA was
able to work with the landholders on a range of projects to further protect the fragile landscapes in
this World Heritage area which was identified as primarily at risk of vegetation cover and soil erosion.
Projects undertaken included:
A new set of stockyards established to remove the need to muster stock through 1,565 hectares of Willandra Creek flood out area between Lakes Leaghur and Mungo and to reduce stock impact on the north western shoreline of Lake Mungo.
Two new water points to reduce stock and grazing impact on the bed and lunette of a small unnamed lake west of Lake Mungo.
A new fence to prevent stock traffic over a 10.5 kilometre section of the Lake Garnpung lunette.
Upgrading of fencing and waterpoints and installation of goat traps to assist with reducing grazing pressure and thus erosion on 30,000 hectares of lakebeds of Lakes Garnpang and Mulurulu.
Mungo colour strata
Mungo National Park – camp oven
65
Case study 8 – Fish Habitat Management Plan – Pomona Reach
The Fish Habitat Management Plan Priority Reaches Project was developed in 2007-2008 and
provides a prioritised list of reaches and recommended work to improve native fish habitat
particularly for Aquatic Threatened Species.
In 2009-2010 work was undertaken for fish habitat improvement/rehabilitation within a 39km reach of
the Lower Darling River near Pomona.
The work was undertaken across six properties on 4.3ha of land and along 2.4km of riverbank
between November 2009 and May 2010. Activities included the removal of willow trees using cut
and treat method so that river bank disturbance was minimised, mechanical removal, river frontage
fencing to remove stock access to the river bank, coupled with the installation of off-stream stock
watering points and re-vegetation work where necessary.
During the two years of Fish Habitat Management Plan Priority Reaches, implementation works have
been undertaken on 9.8ha and along 4.8km of riverbank across 10 properties.
Works have included the removal of 91 willow trees, the erection of 3.3km of river frontage fencing,
the installation of 9 off-stream stock watering points and revegetation with 930 native tubestock.
Landholders who have been involved in the program are reporting significantly increased catches of
Golden Perch in the areas where the willows have been removed.
Pomona Reach Willow Removal
66
Case study 9 – Ecosystem Function Analysis
The Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority has established 107 sites across the
Catchment to determine change in resource condition and to measure progress towards the
vegetation targets in the Catchment Action Plan. This vegetation condition monitoring Ecosystem
Function Analysis (EFA) has been conducted since 2006.
The 107 monitoring sites are spread across the Catchment in areas of different land use within
vegetation communities as follows:
27 11 7 23 5
Belah / Rosewood Woodland Black Box Woodland Chenopod Mallee Chenopod Shrubland Cypress Woodland
11 13 3 7
Deep Sand Mallee East West Dune Mallee Lignum Shrubland Red Gum Forest / Woodland
In 2009-2010, after examining 3 years of data, the number of sites was reduced to 50 representative
sites that would still give statistically viable data; the report would then collate all four years of data.
Ecosystem Function Analysis Monitoring gathers data on
Habitat condition - tree, shrub and ground cover, logs, hollows and regeneration of overstorey.
Vegetation dynamics - species richness and abundance.
Landscape Function Analysis (LFA) - soil, water and nutrient assessment.
A brief description of each parameter follows:
Native plant species richness: the total number of species found on the site.
Tree density: the total trees per hectare (regardless of species).
Length of fallen timber: metres of log per ha.
Number of tree hollows: the number of trees with hollows (not the total number of hollows).
Cover of ground layer plants: percentage cover over the site.
Cover of litter: percentage cover over the site.
Cover of cryptogamic crust: percentage cover over the site. Cryptogams are the living organisms which keep the soil surface intact, such as mosses, lichen and bryophytes.
Landscape Function Analysis indices:
Stability index: an indication of the ability of the soil to withstand erosive forces and to recover after disturbance.
Infiltration/run-off index: an indication of the amount of infiltration during rainfall events. A high value indicates a large portion of the water would enter the soil rather than leaving the site as run-off.
Nutrient cycling index: an indication of how efficiently organic matter is cycled back into the soil, increasing soil organic content and fertility.
Frequency: the number of plots (of a possible 10) the species was recorded in. This is an indication of how common or infrequent the species may be across the site.
Landholders were provided with their own individual results, with each parameter that was
monitored, given a score. They were also provided with a comparison of this score across the whole
67
Catchment’s results (for sites located within the same vegetation community). Only Catchment-wide
comparisons (not identifiable) were provided to each individual landholder. Project information is
used to make assessments across the Catchment and not comparisons between properties.
Results from the project:
The four years of survey have been conducted during an extended period of below average rainfall
within the Catchment. To date, the monitoring undertaken in this study has detected little change
that can be directly described as improvements or decline in condition at monitoring sites throughout
the Catchment. For most vegetation types, species richness, cover of ground layer plants and
cryptogamic crust were all highest in the Spring 2007 assessment period. The most likely
explanation for this is the significant rainfall events in the first half of 2007, which resulted in a flush
of annual and ephemeral species growth which were still present at the time of the Spring 2007
surveys.
While comparison of site condition over the duration of the study between years was complicated by
climatic variability, monitoring annually between 2006 and 2009-2010 has allowed an improved
understanding of the potential range in site condition through seasonal differences. The four years
of data provides a more accurate benchmark of site condition that may then be compared with future
assessments.
The project report makes a range of recommendations relating to ongoing monitoring, data
management, analysis, and landholder communication. It recommends that whilst the annual
collection of data has been valuable for establishing a benchmark, a reduced frequency of
monitoring into the future may be suitable for adequately capturing change in the parameters
measured. It also recommended refinements to the monitoring methods and LMD CMA has since
undertaken a review of the methodology and made adjustments accordingly, for implementation into
the 2010-2011 EFA monitoring project.
EFA Groundcover Mallee EFA Groundcover
68
Case study 10 – Monitoring Effectiveness of Reserves
This project looked at the changes in vegetation condition in response to the change in land use (eg.
removal of grazing by domestic livestock).
The project will aid in evaluating investments, in the form of incentives provided, to remove grazing
from priority areas to protect biodiversity values. This has resulted in improvements to vegetation
condition and also provided an opportunity to gather additional information on the habitat
requirements of protected and threatened species.
Across two stations, Wampo and Joulni, 12 sites (six at each) were monitored, with a total of 285
pitfall captures achieved. Reptile species dominated, which may have been due to the warmer than
average temperatures at the time of trapping (November 2009).
As well as the pitfall surveys (to detect the type and abundance of both ground-dwelling mammals
and reptiles), activities carried out at each site included bird surveys (to detect the type and
abundance of birds), dung counts (domestic and feral) and assessment of vegetation condition.
A Blind Snake (Ramphotyphlops wiedii) was captured which, although not a threatened species, may
be the first known capture of this species in the LMD Catchment. Eighty bird species were also
recorded, including two threatened species: Chestnut Quail-Thrush and Pink Cockatoo.
LMD CMA would like to thank participating landholders for allowing the monitoring to be undertaken
on their properties. We look forward to continuing to work with the community in projects such as
this, to evaluate the success of investment at a Catchment scale.
Pitfall Trapping – Common Dunnart
Pitfall Trapping – Desert Skinks
69
Case study 11 – Weed Control (WoNS)
In 2009-2010 the LMD CMA continued supporting weed control within the Catchment with the
assistance of local landholders as part of a collaborative effort to eradicate two Weeds of National
Significance (WoNS).
In the Menindee area, north of the Catchment, Bitou Bush grew along the shore of the lakes and
dunes from Sunset Strip to the Menindee Caravan Park with plants ranging from tiny to very large,
almost tree size bushes.
An area of approximately 245ha of land was treated by physically removing the plants as the lakes
are a source of drinking water. The physical removal of plants ensured the preservation of cultural
heritage that is very significant around the Menindee Lakes as large intrusive machines could have
caused damage. Aboriginal monitors were employed to monitor the removal process.
As part of the monitoring process, GPS locations were recorded for all plants, ensuring the areas can
be readily found during a follow up program. By removing the whole plant, potential spread of these
weeds when the lakes refill, has been enormously reduced.
Weed control work has been undertaken on Devil’s Rope cactus (Cylindropuntia spp) and other
mixed cactus species on roadsides and properties. Landholders have reported infestations and as a
result of the work additional sites have been identified and treated.
In this year’s program there were 18 properties involved, with 15 as follow-ups from the previous
year’s treatment program and three new properties. Plants removed were in 22 large patches (a
large patch covers an area greater than 1000m2), 11 medium patches (a medium patch is 100 - 1000
m2), 26 small patches (a small patch is less than 100m2) and 5 single plants.
Bitou Bush Devil’s Rope Cactus
70
Case study 12 – Wetland Rehabilitation – Balcatherine Wetland
The wetland rehabilitation works at Balcatherine Station were completed in 2008-2009. However,
with the flood waters coming down the Darling River in 2009-2010 the success of the work in
improving wetland health by removing or modifying structures that blocked water flow and fish
movement to wetlands was greatly enhanced.
Structural works were undertaken in conjunction with landholders at seven wetlands on the Darling
River and one wetland on the Murray River. These works included earthworks and the installation of
culverts and regulators (see example below at Balcatherine Wetland). To ensure the protection of
Aboriginal cultural heritage, the Aboriginal community were also involved in the assessment of sites
prior to construction and the monitoring of earthworks during construction.
Following the completion of works, it was a matter of waiting for a high flow event to test the
effectiveness of the works. This opportunity presented itself with floods in the north of the Murray-
Darling Basin resulting in high flows in the Lower Darling River from January to March 2010. These
flows resulted in water entering six of the seven wetlands on the Darling River where structural works
were undertaken during the Wetland rehabilitation project, resulting in significant environmental
benefits to these wetlands. With Menindee Lakes nearing capacity, high flows in the Lower Darling
are again likely in the coming months which may again result in water entering these wetlands.
Further inflows to these wetlands will build on the benefits already gained from earlier inflows and
result in further improvements in wetland health.
Before (above), inflows 8/2/10 (below) After (above), inflows 8/2/10 (below)
71
Case study 13 – Geographical Information Systems (GIS)
Not so long ago spatial information was limited to just a few Geographical Information System (GIS)
specialists and to the occasional recreational enthusiast. Nowadays, however, spatial information is
available to all via mediums such as the internet and GPS. Many people now use a multitude of
readily available tools such as Google Earth, Google Maps, NASA World Wind, NSW Spatial
Information Exchange (SiX), while in-car navigation and various other GPS tools are now available
as an off-the-shelf consumer product. All these tools, in one way or another, help us to make
informed decisions which effectively make our lives a little more streamlined.
Large organisations and Government agencies have relied on spatial information for decision making
for over two decades now. Increasingly, the demand for spatial information has grown exponentially
over that period.
The LMD CMA receives spatial information from various sources on a regular basis, and also
creates and captures a reasonable amount of its own data. Managing spatial data is critical to the
needs of the CMA as staff rely heavily on it for decision making, with many layers of spatial data may
be used to deliver a decisive outcome. Whether the data was created or captured yesterday or ten
years ago, it is important to know the quality of the data. Without knowing the quality of data, poor
and very costly decisions can be made and for this reason the LMD CMA enforces a very high
spatial information standard.
There are many issues to consider when acquiring spatial data e.g. origin, history, projection, logical
consistency, completeness, and positional and attribute accuracy. For example, a GPS unit can be
purchased for as little as $20 or as much as $90,000! Why the difference? Simply the lower cost
units are built for gadget type functions such as those found in your mobile phone, digital camera or
in your car and the higher cost units are designed for surveyors who require accuracy that may come
down to the centimetre. The CMA uses a quality ‘mapping grade’ GPS unit designed specifically for
GIS which delivers a positional accuracy of around half a metre (0.5m).
In all, there are four grades of GPS that is, gadget grade, recreational grade, mapping grade, and
survey grade. Whilst the respective grades are seemingly self explanatory, many users still tend to
overlook mapping grade in lieu of recreational grade. Generally this observable fact is driven by
initial cost; typically, the cost difference between a recreational and mapping grade GPS can be as
much as $14,000. The cost saving is sacrificed for positional accuracy which can be as much as 100
metres and even much more in some worst case scenarios, this is despite some claims that
recreational grade GPS units have an accuracy of 5 – 10 metres. The reason for this can be found
in the use of the words “in ideal conditions”, which effectively mean you must be in a clear and open
space which is unaffected by atmospheric and ionospheric conditions and adverse GPS satellite
geometry. Therefore, in unfavourable conditions positional accuracy becomes a bit of a lottery.
A quality mapping grade receiver overcomes these conditions and consistently delivers sub-metre
accurate positions.
72
Hand held GPS device in use
73
Payment of Accounts Quarterly Schedule of Accounts Payable
Table 8: Aged analysis at the end of each quarter
Quarter Current (ie within due
date) $
Less than 30 days overdue
$
Between 30 and 60 days
overdue $
Between 60 and 90 days
overdue $
More than 90 days overdue
$ September Quarter
203,906 0 0 0 0
December Quarter
0 0 0 931 0
March Quarter
30,500 9,369 0 0 0
June Quarter
47,726 0 0 0 0
Table 9: Accounts paid on time within each quarter
Total Accounts Paid on Time Quarter Target % Actual % $
Total Amount Paid $
September Quarter
90 93 307,968 330,185
December Quarter
90 96 1,075,784 1,389,399
March Quarter
90 89 641,962 782,442
June Quarter
90 94 2,013,143 2,112,442
Notes on Tables 8 and 9: The percentage of accounts paid on time is based on SAP
Payment Analysis Report, which compares vendor masterfile payment terms, invoice
document date and payment document date to determine if payment was made on time, and
if not, how many days it was late. The dollar value is the actual dollar value of the
documents in each column (ie paid on time, not paid on time), so the percentage is based on
documents, not dollar value.
Comments: Initiatives to improve payment performance include:
Tightened controls to ensure correct data entry of payment terms and invoice dates in SAP.
Prioritise vouchers as they are received in Financial Operations so invoices due for payment first get processed first.
Use of extra resources, to ensure smooth workflow during peak periods.
Improved compliance with the tax system by vendors and Departmental staff.
Penalty Interest Paid: There was no penalty interest paid during financial year 2009/10.
Payment by Corporate Card: Subject to meeting Departmental requirements, eligible staff
members are issued with corporate cards to facilitate travel, accommodation and limited
purchases.
Paym
ent of Accounts
74
The Department’s corporate card policies represent best practice in accordance with Treasury
and the Auditor General’s guidelines. The Corporate Card Guidelines/Procedures satisfy the
requirements of the Revised Treasurer’s Directions TD 205.01-205.08 and was based on the
NSW Treasury Review of Credit Card Use Best Practice Guide (TPP 99-2). Corporate card
expenditures are monitored for compliance with guidelines on a transaction basis and usage
was considered to comply with best practice guidelines.
The Department incurred no late payment fees as a result of corporate card usage.
75
CMA Budget Allocations.
Recurrent Budget
The LMD CMA received an operational budget of $2,220,000 for 2009–2010.
Investment Strategy
In the 2009-2010 financial year the LMD CMA expended total investment funds of $3,503,558
as shown in Table 10 and Figure 30 below.
Table 10: Investment Funds in 2009-2010
LMD CMA AMOUNT $
Caring For Our Country F10 $1,843,000
NSW Catchment Action $1,620,557
TOTAL FUNDS EXPENDED $3,463,557
Figure 30: Total Investment Expenditure 2009-2010
2009 - 2010Investment Expenditure by Source of Funds
$-
$250,000
$500,000
$750,000
$1,000,000
$1,250,000
$1,500,000
$1,750,000
$2,000,000
CFoC CA
Funding received for new projects in 2009-2010 is shown in Table 11 below; this information is
shown by allocation to the State Plan Targets as a graph in Figure 31.
Figure 32 shows the new 2009-2010 funding by the projects delivered.
CM
A B
udgets
76
Table 11: New Project Budget 2009-2010
State Plan
Target
Project Source of
Funds
Value
E4.1 Rangeland Management & Biodiversity CFOC $1,067,960
E4.2 Increase native fauna populations CFOC $7,700
E4.3 Aquatic Threatened Species CA $247,500
E4.10 Soil Crop Recharge CFOC $208,639
E4.5 Lower Murray Irrigation BMP CA $198,000
E4.5 Monitoring Salinity and Hydrology CA $93,000
E4.5 River Frontage Action Strategy CA $379,500
E4.5 Weir 32 fish passage CA $702,557
E4.12; E4.13
Communication Education & Training CFOC $558,701
TOTAL $3,463,557
Figure 31: New Project Budget 2009-2010 to State Plan Targets
2009/2010 Source of Funds by State Targets
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
E4.1 E4.2 E4.3 E4.5 E4.10 E4.12 E4.13
State Targets
Val
ue C4C
CA NSW
77
Figure 32: New 2009-2010 Projects by Source of Funds
New 2009/2010 Projects by Source of Funds
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
Range
land
Mgt
& B
iodi
vers
ity
Carniv
orou
s pes
t con
trol
Aquat
ic Thr
eate
ned
Specie
s
Soil C
rop
Recha
rge
Indi
geno
us P
roje
cts
Irrig
atio
n BM
P
Mon
itorin
g
River F
ront
age
Action
Stra
tegy
Weir
32 F
ish P
assa
ge
MERI P
lan
Comm
unicat
ion E
duca
tion &
Tra
ining
C4C
CA NSW
Other Investments
In a strategic role, LMD CMA also acts as a conduit for additional government investment from other
programs.
The LMD CMA also seeks opportunity funding to leverage funding from other sources to allow
additional projects to proceed that may complement LMD CMA targets (see Table 12 below).
Table 12: Activities funded by other programs 2009-2010
ACTIVITY SOURCE OF FUNDS Amount
Barkindji Elders Council Support
Murray Darling Basin Commission/Authority
$12,700
Regional Landcare Facilitator
Caring for Our Country $150,000
Total $162,700
78
Lower Weir 32
Mid Weir 32
Upper Weir 32
79
Risk Management The LMD CMA has adopted the Australian Standard for Risk Management
(ISO31000:2009) for identifying and assessing risks, based on likelihood and
consequence. In addition to the Australian Standard, the LMD CMA follows the guidelines
and activities as listed in Section 3 of the Standard for Quality Natural Resource
Management.
The LMD CMA has commenced work on a Risk Register, with the aim of identifying and
effectively managing all relevant risks.
The CMA has established the following business systems to ensure it meets this required
outcome:
Adopted a Risk Management Policy and Project Development system Requires staff to analyse risks when selecting and prioritising investments and developing projects.
Risk assessment system Ensures that all risks that could hinder achievement of objectives are considered in all CMA strategic planning activities including the CAP, Investment Program, and projects. Risks include environmental risks, factors that could impact on achievement of CAP targets, and potential flow on effects of CMA activities.
Operational risk assessment methodology Provides detailed methodology for operational risks (e.g. governance, finance, HR – consistent with ISO31000:2009)
Public Authorities (Financial Assessment) 1987 Assessment completed 2007 score 5/5, reviewed 2010, score 5/5 low risk.
Training Formal training of 2 senior staff in Risk Management.
Priority actions to improve compliance with this element of the Standard include LMD CMA
to implement Risk Strategies in accordance with the adopted policy. The Risk Management
Attestation is shown on the following pages.
Risk and mitigating actions relating to compliance to Parliamentary Acts and Regulations
are listed in Table 13.
At project level, risk assessments are carried out to identify and implement management
actions to mitigate risks or implement lowest cost options. Risk management is an integral
activity in all CMA activities. See Table 14.
LMD CMA considered risks that apply to the achievement of targets in order to develop
management strategies to mitigate these risks. See Table 15.
At an individual target level, more specific risks and actions are considered, detailed in
Table 16 (extract from the Catchment Action Plan).
Risk M
anagement
80
81
82
83
Table 13: Risks relating to compliance with Parliamentary Acts and Regulations
ACT or REGULATION MAIN RISK
ACTIONS TO MITIGATE RISK
Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000
That the health and safety of staff, contractors and customers is compromised.
Staff trained in OH&S policies and procedures. OH&S committee meets on a regular basis to address OH&S issues. OH&S first item for discussion at all staff meetings.
Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003
That the annual Investment Program is undertaken without Ministerial approval.
Board and management ensure that approval is granted before any catchment activity is undertaken. Internal approval process and independent checking process in place.
Native Vegetation Act 2003
That the LMD CMA or a representative authorises vegetation clearing in contravention of the requirements of the Act.
Board, management, and staff are trained in the requirements of the Act, specifically in the development of PVPs which are a clearing approval under the terms of the Act.
Internal approval process and independent checking process in place.
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974
That in the process of undertaking remediation works the LMD CMA or an authorised representative injures or kills protected flora and/or fauna.
The GM holds a scientific licence which enables the picking of native plants for identification, the collection of seeds excluding those listed in the Act, and the harming, trapping, and releasing of fauna.
The GM is able to delegate these powers to others within the LMD CMA.
That cultural material is disturbed, removed or destroyed by contractors or land managers at LMD CMA worksites.
Engagement of Aboriginal Elders and community regarding projects that may impact on traditional Aboriginal sites.
Use of site monitors at construction sites identified as potentially culturally significant, site monitors have received appropriate OH&S training.
LMD CMA employs a catchment Officer (Aboriginal Communities) to provide advice and guidance to exercise due diligence.
Native Vegetation Regulation 2005
That the preparation of PVPs does not fall within the guidelines as stipulated by the Regulation.
Staff who prepare PVPs are accredited and receive approved training and updates from DECCW to ensure they remain aware of their responsibilities.
84
ACT or REGULATION MAIN RISK
ACTIONS TO MITIGATE RISK
Public Finance and Audit Act 1983
That the keeping of accounts and the expenditure of funds does not fall within the guidelines as stipulated in the Act.
Management and administration staff are aware of the reporting requirements under the Act. Yearly audit of accounts is undertaken by an independent authority.
Public Finance and Audit Regulation 2005
That the preparation of financial statements does not fall within the guidelines as stipulated by the Regulation.
Management and administration staff is aware of the reporting requirements under the Regulation, and ensure that all funds are accounted for at all times.
Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2002
That employment conditions at the LMD CMA do not meet that the required standards as set by the Act.
Management are aware of legislative responsibilities under the Act and ensure that all employees have access to appropriate material outlining rights and responsibilities.
Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984
That the organisation fails to submit an Annual Report as per the requirements of the Act.
Board and management are aware of the statutory requirements associated with reporting.
Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Regulation 2000
That the Annual Report submitted under the requirements of the Act does not contain the required information as stipulated under the Regulation.
Draft report is reviewed by management and the Board to ensure that all required information is contained therein.
Soil Conservation Act 1938
That remediation works funded by the LMD CMA breach the requirements of the Act and thereby cause the LMD CMA to become liable for prosecution.
Staff understand the requirements of the Act and each agreement contains clauses indemnifying the LMD CMA from any legal action arising from unauthorised works undertaken by the landholders.
Water Management Act 2000
That remediation works funded by the LMD CMA breach the requirements of the Act and thereby cause the LMD CMA to become liable for prosecution.
Staff understands the requirements of the Act and each agreement contains clauses indemnifying the LMD CMA from any legal action arising from unauthorised works undertaken by the landholders.
OVERALL Ignorance of the LMD CMA's responsibilities under all relevant legislation may result in accidental breaches.
Adherence to the actions to negate risk should ensure that accidental breaches do not occur; in addition there will be an annual review of LMD CMA actions to ensure compliance.
85
Table 14: General Risks and Associated Management Actions
GENERAL RISK RELATING TO
TARGETS
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS TO MITIGATE RISKS
Target set too low - achieved quickly, well within time frame
Realistic targets developed using trend analysis of data to give prediction of no action scenario.
Target set too high - unachievable
Technical teams and Board review to determine the feasibility of target achievement. For all targets except land use agreements, a period of at least five years implementation is required before statistically valid evaluation can be undertaken to determine progress.
Insufficient investment to achieve target
Programs are costed on an activity basis using current prices or based on previous quotes/tenders, or best information available. Capital works projects contain a contingency percentage to allow for unforeseen variations. The Investment Strategy offers a comprehensive list of activities that can be adapted to suit the funding provided by government. With overall reduction in funding, this has meant a careful prioritisation process has been necessary to maintain on-ground investment and streamline monitoring to achieve best value for investment.
Risks to target delivery where action by other parties is required
Consultation with key parties – DPI, DWE and DECCW - has been maintained throughout CAP development, and contracts for delivery of activities have been agreed and signed. Close supervision of contract works and notification of concerns to senior management aim to ensure that works are completed as required.
Inability to monitor/evaluate target achievement - 5% limitation on investment
LMD CMA used needs assessment, identification of current monitoring and gap analysis to determine funds required to undertake adequate monitoring evaluation.
By leveraging off current investment the CMA is able to monitor and evaluate activities (within the 5% investment limit) to determine achievement of targets.
Inability to monitor/ evaluate target achievement - lack of agency commitment
Close supervision of contract works and notification of concerns to senior management aims to ensure that information is available from agencies when required.
Inability to monitor/ evaluate target achievement - lack of agency capacity
Strategic commitment as a whole of government approach is sought to ensure this risk is minimised within the context of effective operation of agencies. With on-going restructuring of government agencies, this risk continues to be active and is monitored closely by CMA.
Formal contracts mitigate the risk of agencies abandoning their commitment. These formal contracts are more legally binding than the former MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) which had loose arrangements that could be terminated with little recourse to CMA.
Lack of LMD CMA resources - budget constraints to recurrent staff numbers
On-going issue as LMD CMA has only 14.5 recurrent staff, while the Catchment at 6.3 million hectares in area, is one of the largest in NSW. The limitations of this are acknowledged and the CMA has to prioritise activities accordingly, including outsourcing.
86
Table 15: Typical Risks relating to Individual Catchment Targets
CATCHMENT TARGET RISKS MANAGEMENT MITIGATING ACTIONS
Community Values Catchment Target
Landuse agreements not achieved
Development and use of Indigenous Engagement Strategy
Employment of a Catchment Officer (Aboriginal Communities) as an interface between CMA and Indigenous communities
Development of MoUs with Elders
Monitoring program supported by the LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Riverine Health Catchment Target
Flow management not achieved, weir pool effect continues or worsens
High risk of blue-green algae outbreaks - impacts on drinking water supply and health of communities
Dialogue with adjoining CMAs and MDBA on weir pool manipulation on funding opportunities
Risks are managed by MDBA
Re-instatement of wetlands and floodplain wetting/drying cycles
Monitoring program supported by the LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Continued decline in native species and aquatic biodiversity
Re-instatement of fish passages on major rivers/wetlands
Habitat rehabilitation
Implementation of Aquatic Threatened Species Fish Habitat Management Plans
Monitoring program supported by the LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Salinity Catchment Target
No action scenario predicts a rise of 8-10% or 45uS/cm in 10 years
Five key areas of salinity contribution identified for action (irrigation, dryland cropping, irrigation drainage, saline industries and saline groundwater interception schemes)
Monitoring program supported by the LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Vegetation Catchment Target
Clearing achieved within agreed target
Monitoring program supported by LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Use of PVP tool to identify achievement
Reserve target not achieved Aim for 20% of each vegetation community in conservation reserves by the use of incentives
Monitoring program supported by LMD CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Condition deterioration Improved management of natural resources via land managers, supported by incentives, education and training
LMD Drought Guidelines developed and implemented
Monitoring by Ecosystem Function Analysis Monitoring program supported by CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
Soil Catchment Target
Failure to achieve soil erosion target
Promotion of best management practices for Mallee soils to reduce wind erosion and improve soil condition.
Monitoring of Ecosystem Function Analysis program supported by CMA through Investment Strategy funds to identify achievement of targets
87
Bidding a Fond Farewell to Stan Dineen
A Warm Thank You and Goodbye to Trish Palmer
Lower Murray Darling CMA and Lachlan CMA Cross Border Meeting at Mungo Lodge
88
Annual Report Assessment Overview of
Financial Performance 2009-2010
The Board monitors the financial performance of the CMA on a regular basis to ensure
that Investment and operating expenditure was kept within acceptable targets and limits.
Total revenue has decreased with changes in funding to $6.232M, with total expenses
$6.229M. LMD CMA equity has increased slightly from $5.098M in 2009 to $5.101M in
2010.
In line with Treasury requirements the LMD CMA will reduce equity over the coming three
years to a working capital amount of approximately $0.5M by investing in primarily on-
ground capital works programs.
Interest income in was $267,000 down from $616,000 in 2009, this was due to reduced
income and decreases in interest rates.
The LMD CMA is in a sound financial position, with funds held in TCorp Hourglass
Investment Facilities.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
89
Financial Statements
For the financial year ended 30 June 2010 Financial Report Contents Statement by Board Members 90 Independent Audit Report 91 - 92 Statement of Comprehensive Income 93 Statement of Changes in Equity 94 Statement of Financial Position 95 Statement of Cash Flows 96 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements 97 - 114
CM
A F
inancial Statem
ents
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
90
Statement by Board Members
Certificate under Section 41 C (1B) and (1C) of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983
Pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, we declare that in our opinion: (a) The accompanying financial report exhibits a true and fair view of the financial position of
the Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority as at 30 June 2010, and transactions for the year ended.
(b) The financial report has been prepared in accordance with:
The applicable Australian Accounting Standards, which include Australian Accounting Interpretations and other mandatory professional reporting requirements; and
The requirements of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, the Public Finance and Audit Regulation 2010 and the Treasurer’s Directions.
(c) There are no circumstances which would render any particulars included in the financial
report to be misleading or inaccurate. For and on behalf of the Board
Mark King Barrie MacMillan Patty Byrnes Chairman Board Member Board Member Dated: 24 September 2010
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
91
Independent Audit Report
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
92
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
93
Start of audited financial statements Statement of comprehensive income for the year ended 30 June 2010
NOTE
Actual 2010 $’000
Actual 2009 $’000
Revenue
Revenue 3 5,765 8,708
Other income 4 467 1,117
Total revenue 6,232 9,825
Expenses
Personnel services expenses 5 1,856 2,250
Other operating expenses 5 2,983 6,065
Depreciation & amortisation 5 26 21
Grants & subsidies 5 1,363 3,270
Total expenses 6,228 11,606
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) FOR THE YEAR 4 (1,781)
Other comprehensive income for the year - -
TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME FOR THE YEAR
4 (1,781)
The above statement of comprehensive income is to be read in conjunction with the attached notes.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
94
Statement of changes in equity for the year ended 30 June 2010
NOTE
Accumulated Funds $’000
Total
$’000
Balance as at 1 July 2009 5,098 5,098
Surplus for the year 4 4
Other comprehensive income - -
Balance as at 30 June 2010 5,102 5,102
Balance as at 1 July 2008 6,879 6,879
(Deficit) for the year (1,781) (1,781)
Other comprehensive income - -
Balance as at 30 June 2009 5,098 5,098
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
95
Statement of financial position as at 30 June 2010
NOTE Actual 2010 $’000
Actual 2009 $’000
ASSETS
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents 6 5,058 4,771
Receivables 7 218 509
Total current assets 5,276 5,280
Non-current assets
Land and buildings 8 47 49
Leasehold Improvement 8 24 -
Plant & Equipment 8 127 140
Total non-current assets 198 189
Total assets 5,474 5,469
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities
Payables 9 196 132
Provisions 10 150 238
Total Current Liabilities 346 370
Non-current liabilities
Provisions 10 26 1
Total non-current liabilities 26 1
Total liabilities 372 371
Net assets 5,102 5,098
EQUITY
Retained surplus 5,102 5,098
Total equity 5,102 5,098
The above statement of financial position is to be read in conjunction with the attached notes.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority
96
Statement of cash flows for the year ended 30 June 2010
NOTE Actual 2010 $’000
Actual 2009 $’000
Cash flows from operating activities
Receipts from customers & government 6,617 9,955
Payments to suppliers (5,224) (10,691)
1,393 (736)
Grants and subsidies paid (1,363) (3,270)
Interest received 267 616
Net cash flows from operating activities 11 297 (3,390)
Cash flows from investing activities
Purchases of property, plant and equipment (10) (24)
Net cash flows from investing activities (10) (24)
Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 287 (3,414)
Opening cash and cash equivalents 4,771 8,185
Closing cash and cash equivalents 6 5,058 4,771
The above statement of cash flows is to be read in conjunction with the attached notes.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
97
NOTE 1 - REPORTING ENTITY The Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority (the Authority) was established pursuant to the Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003. The objects of the Act are:
(a) to establish Authorities for the purpose of devolving operational, investment and decision-making natural resource functions to catchment levels;
(b) to provide for proper natural resource planning at a catchment level; (c) to ensure that decisions about natural resources take into account appropriate catchment
issues; (d) to require decisions taken at a catchment level to take into account State-wide standards
and to involve the Natural Resources Commission in catchment planning where appropriate;
(e) to involve communities in each catchment in decision making and to make best use of catchment knowledge and expertise;
(f) to ensure the proper management of natural resources in the social, economic and environmental interests of the State;
(g) to apply sound scientific knowledge to achieve a fully functioning and productive landscape; and
(h) to provide a framework for financial assistance and incentives to landholders in connection with natural resource management.
The Authority is a Statutory Body and a separate reporting entity. There are no other entities under its control. The reporting entity is consolidated as part of the NSW Total State Sector Accounts. The Authority is a not-for-profit entity (as profit is not its principal objective) and it has no cash- generating units. These financial statements have been authorised for issue by the Board of the Authority on 24th September 2010 NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The following significant policies have been adopted in the preparation and presentation of the financial statements: (a) Basis of preparation
The Authority’s financial statements are a general purpose financial statement which have been prepared in accordance with:
The applicable Australian Accounting Standards, which include Australian Accounting Interpretations;
The requirements of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983 and Regulation. Property, plant and equipment, assets (or disposal groups) held for sale and financial assets at ‘fair value through profit or loss’ and available for sale are measured at fair value. Other financial report items are prepared in accordance with the historical cost convention. All amounts are rounded to the nearest one thousand dollars and are expressed in Australian currency. (b) Statement of compliance
The financial statements and notes comply with the Australian Accounting Standards, which include Australian Accounting Interpretations.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
98
(c) Significant accounting judgements, estimates and assumptions
(i) Significant accounting judgement
In the preparation of the financial statements, management is required to make judgements, estimates and assumptions about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. The estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis of making the judgements. Actual results may vary from these estimates. Key judgements are disclosed as part of accounting policies notes.
(ii) Significant accounting estimates and assumptions
The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognised in the period in which the estimate is revised if the revision affects only that period, or in the period of the revision and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. Judgements made by management in the application of the Australian Accounting Standards that have significant effects on the financial statements and estimates, with a significant risk of material adjustments in the next year are disclosed, where applicable, in the relevant notes to the financial statements.
(d) Revenue recognition
Revenue is measured at the fair value of the consideration or contribution received or receivable. Additional comments regarding the accounting policies for the recognition of revenue are discussed below:
(i) Contributions from Government and other bodies are generally recognised as income when
the agency obtains control over the assets comprising the contributions. Control over contributions is normally obtained upon the receipt of cash.
(ii) Sale of Goods: Revenue from the sale of goods is recognised as revenue when the agency
transfers the significant risks and rewards of ownership of the assets. (iii) Rendering of Services: Revenue is recognised when the service is provided or by reference
to the stage of completion (based on labour hours incurred to date). (iv) Investment Income: Interest revenue is recognised using the effective interest method as
set out in AASB 139 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement. (v) Rental Revenue: Rental revenue is recognised in accordance with AASB 117 Leases on a
straight-line basis over the lease term.
(e) Insurance The Authority’s activities are insured through the NSW Treasury Managed Fund scheme of self insurance for Government agencies. The expense (premium) is determined by the Fund Manager based on past experience and the insurance coverage is reviewed periodically to ensure that it is adequate.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
99
(f) Accounting for the Goods and Services Tax (GST)
Revenues, expenses and assets are recognised net of the amount of GST, except that:
The amount of GST incurred by the Authority as a purchaser that is not recoverable
from the Australian Taxation Office is recognised as part of the cost of acquisition of an asset or as part of an item of expense.
Receivables and payables are stated with the amount of GST included. The net amount of GST recoverable from or payable to the Australian Taxation Office is included as part of receivables and payables. Cash flows are included in the statement of cash flows on a gross basis. However, the GST components of cash flows arising from investing and financing activities which is recoverable from, or payable to, the Australian Taxation Office are classified as operating cash flows.
(g) Acquisition of assets
The cost method of accounting is used for the initial recording of all acquisitions of assets controlled by the Authority. Cost is the amount of cash or cash equivalents paid or the fair value of the other consideration given to acquire the asset at the time of its acquisition or construction or, where applicable, the amount attributed to the asset when initially recognised in accordance with the specific requirements of other Australian Accounting Standards. Assets acquired at no cost, or for nominal consideration, are initially recognised as assets and revenues at their fair value at the date of acquisition. Fair value is the amount for which an asset could be exchanged between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction. Where payment for an asset is deferred beyond normal credit terms, its cost is the cash price equivalent, i.e. deferred payment amount is effectively discounted at an asset-specific rate.
(h) Capitalisation thresholds
Property, plant and equipment and intangible assets costing $5,000 and above individually (or forming part of a network costing more than $5,000) are capitalised. All amounts below $5,000 are expensed to profit and loss as incurred.
(i) Revaluation of property, plant and equipment
Physical non-current assets are valued in accordance with the "Valuation of Physical Non-Current Assets at Fair Value” Policy and Guidelines Paper (TPP 07-01). This policy adopts fair value in accordance with AASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment and AASB 140 Investment Property.
Property, plant and equipment is measured on an existing use basis, where there are no feasible alternative uses in the existing natural, legal, financial and socio-political environment. However, in the limited circumstances where there are feasible alternative uses, assets are valued at their higher and best use.
Fair value of property, plant and equipment is determined based on the best available market evidence, including current market selling price for the same or similar assets. Where there is no available market evidence, the asset’s fair value is measured at its market buying price, the best indicator of which is depreciated replacement cost. The Authority revalues each class of property, plant and equipment at least every five years or with sufficient regularity to ensure that the carrying amount of each asset in the class does not differ materially from its fair value at reporting date.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
100
Non-specialised assets with short useful lives are measured at depreciated historical cost, as a surrogate for fair value. When revaluing non-current assets by reference to current prices for assets newer than those being revalued (adjusted to reflect the present condition of the assets), the gross amount and the related accumulated depreciation are separately restated. For other assets, any balances of accumulated depreciation at the revaluation date in respect of those assets are credited to the asset accounts to which they relate. The net assets accounts are then increased or decreased by the revaluation increments or decrements. Revaluation increments are credited directly to the asset revaluation reserve, except that, to the extent that an increment reverses a revaluation decrement in respect of that class of asset previously recognised as an expense in the surplus/deficit, the increment is recognised immediately as revenue in the surplus/deficit. Revaluation decrements are recognised immediately as expenses in the surplus/deficit, except that, to the extent that a credit balance exists in the asset revaluation reserve in respect of the same class of asset, they are debited directly to the asset revaluation reserve. As a not-for-profit entity, revaluation increments and decrements are offset against one another within a class of non-current assets but not otherwise. Where an asset that has previously been revalued is disposed of, any balance remaining in the asset revaluation reserve in respect of that asset is transferred to accumulated funds.
(j) Impairment of property, plant and equipment
As a not-for-profit entity with no cash-generating units, the Authority is effectively exempt for AASB 136 Impairment of assets and impairment testing. This is because AASB 136 modifies the recoverable amount test to the higher of fair value less costs to sell and depreciated replacement cost. This means that, for an asset already measured at fair value, impairment can only arise if selling costs are material. Selling costs are regarded as immaterial.
(k) Depreciation of property and amortisation, plant and equipment
Depreciation is provided for on a straight line basis for all depreciable assets, as detailed below, so as to write off the depreciable amount of each asset as it is consumed over its useful life to the Authority. All material separately identifiable components of assets are depreciated over their shorter useful lives. Estimates of remaining useful lives are made on a regular basis for all assets, with annual reassessments for major items. Land is not a depreciable asset. The following depreciation rates were applied :-
2010 2009 Buildings 4.0% 3.03% Infrastructure 10.0% 10% Leasehold Improvements Life of lease agreement - Plant and equipment: Computer equipment Motor vehicle Other plant and equipment
25.0% 20.0% 6.67% - 25%
25% 15% - 25% 6.67% - 25%
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
101
(l) Major inspection costs
When each major inspection is performed, the labour cost of performing inspections for faults is recognised in the carrying amount of an asset as a replacement of a part, if the recognition criteria are satisfied. (m) Restoration costs
The estimated cost of dismantling and removing an asset and restoring the site is included in the cost of an asset, to the extent it is recognised as a liability.
(n) Maintenance
The day-to-day servicing or maintenance costs are charged as expenses as incurred, except where they relate to the replacement of a part or component of an asset, in which case the costs are capitalised and depreciated. (o) Investments
Investments are initially recognised at fair value plus, in the case of investments not at fair value through profit or loss, transactions costs. The Authority determines the classification of its financial assets after initial recognition and, when allowed and appropriate, re-evaluates this at each financial year end.
Fair value through profit or loss - The Hour-Glass Investment Facilities are designated at fair value through profit or loss using the second leg of the fair value option i.e. these financial assets are managed and their performance is evaluated on a fair value basis. In accordance with the Authority’s risk management strategy, information about these assets is provided internally on that basis to the Authority’s key management personnel. Designation at fair value through profit or loss is consistent with the Authority’s risk management policy. The movement in the fair value of the Hour-Glass Investment facilities incorporates distributions received as well as unrealised movements in fair value and is reported in the line item ‘investment revenue’.
(p) Impairment of financial assets
All financial assets, except those measured at fair value through profit and loss, are subject to an annual review for impairment. An allowance for impairment is established when there is objective evidence that the Authority will not be able to collect all amounts due. For financial assets carried at amortised cost, the amount of the allowance is the difference between the asset’s carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows, discounted at the effective interest rate. The amount of the impairment loss is recognised in the surplus/(deficit) for the year. Any reversal of impairment losses are reversed through surplus/(deficit) for the year, where there is objective evidence, except reversals of impairment losses on an investment in an equity instrument classified as “available for sale” must be made through the reserve. Reversals of impairment losses of financial assets carried at amortised cost cannot result in a carrying amount that exceeds what the carrying amount would have been had there not been an impairment loss.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
102
(q) Derecognition of financial assets and financial liabilities
A financial asset is derecognised when the contractual rights to the cash flows from the financial assets expire; or if the Authority transfers the financial asset:
Where substantially all the risks and rewards have been transferred or; Where the Authority has not transferred substantially all the risks and rewards, but has
not retained control.
Where the Authority has neither transferred nor retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership or transferred control, the asset is recognised to the extent of the Authority’s continuing involvement in the asset, and an associated liability for amounts it may have to pay. (r) Other assets
Other assets are recognised on a cost basis. (s) Receivables
Receivables are non-derivative financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. These financial assets are recognised initially at fair value, usually based on the transaction cost or face value. Subsequent measurement is at amortised cost using the effective interest method, less an allowance for any impairment of receivables. Any changes are accounted for in the Statement of comprehensive income when impaired, derecognised or through the amortisation process. Short term receivables with no stated interest rate are measured at the original invoice amount where the effect of discounting is immaterial. (t) Liabilities
(i) Payables
These amounts represent liabilities for goods and services provided to the Authority and other amounts. Payables are recognised initially at fair value, usually based on the transaction cost or face value. Subsequent measurement is at amortised cost using the effective interest method. Short-term payables with no stated interest rate are measured at the original invoice amount where the effect of discounting is immaterial.
(ii) Personnel Services
(a) Personnel services
The Authority does not employ staff but utilises the personnel services of Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW). The costs of personnel services in respect of wages and salaries, superannuation, annual leave, long service leave, and for sick leave are recognised when it is probable that settlement will be required and they are capable of being measured reliably. Provision made in respect of benefits expected to be settled within 12 months are measured at their nominal values using the remuneration rate expected to apply at the time of settlement.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
103
Provisions made in respect of employee benefits which are not expected to settle within 12 months are measured at the present value of the estimated future cash outflows to be made by the Authority in respect of services provided by employees up to reporting date. The outstanding amounts of payroll tax, workers compensation insurance premium and fringe benefits tax, which are consequential to employment are recognised as liabilities and expenses when the benefits to which they relate have been recognised. Unused non-vesting sick leave does not give rise to a liability as it is not considered probable that sick leave taken in the future will be greater than the benefits accrued in the future. (b) Defined contribution plans Contribution to a defined contribution funds, such as Basic Benefit and First State Super, are expensed when incurred. It is calculated as a percentage of the employees’ salary. In 2008/09 and 2009/10, 9% was contributed. (c) Long service leave and defined benefits superannuation
The Authority has no liability for long service leave and defined benefit superannuation. Personnel services are acquired from the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water and the liability of these items has been assumed by the Crown Entity.
(iii) Provision for restoration of leased premises
A provision for restoring leased premises has been recognised.
(u) Assistance provided by other organisations free of charge
The maintenance of the Authority’s accounting records and provision of corporate services (excluding IT services) were provided by the Department of Services, Technology and Administration and the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water free of charge under the provisions of the Corporate Services Service Level Agreement. Some agreed services were provided by “ServiceFirst” on a cost recovery basis. In addition, other organisations including community groups provide in kind assistance free of charge. The Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water and the Department of Services, Technology and Administration cannot reliably estimate the fair value of these services to individual Authorities.
(v) Comparative information
Except where an Australian Accounting Standard permits or requires otherwise, comparative information is disclosed in respect of the previous period for all amounts reported in the financial statements. (w) New Australian accounting standards issue In the current year the Authority has adopted all of the new and revised Standards and Interpretations issued by the AASB that are relevant to the operations and effective for the current reporting period. Details of the impact of the adoption of these new accounting standards are set out in the individual accounting policies notes in the financial statements. Certain new accounting standards and interpretations have been published that are not mandatory for 30 June 2010 reporting period. In accordance with the NSW Treasury mandate (TC 10/08), the Authority did not early adopt any of these accounting standards and interpretations that are not yet effective:
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
104
AASB 2009-5 (January 2010) arising from annual improvements project
AASB 2009-8 (January 2010) regarding share based payments transactions
AASB 2009-9 (January 2010) regarding additional exemptions for first time adoption
AASB 2009-10 (February 2010) regarding classification of rights issue
AASB 9 and AASB 2009-11 (January 2013) regarding financial instruments. (This Standard may be applied to annual reporting periods ending on or after 31 December 2009 that begin before 1 January 2013 provided AASB 9 is also applied for the same period.)
AASB 124 and AASB 2009-12 (January 2011) regarding related party disclosures
Interpretation 19 and AASB 2009-13 (July 2010) regarding extinguishing financial liability with equity instruments
AASB 2009-14 (January 2011) regarding prepayments of a minimum funding requirement
AASB 2010-1 (July 2010) regarding AASB 7 comparatives for first time adopters.
AASB 2010-2 and AASB 1053 (July 2013) regarding application of Tiers of Australian Accounting Standards
AASB 2010-4 (January 2011) arising from further amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from annual improvements project
It is considered that the impact of these new standards and interpretations in future years will have no material impact on the financial statements of the Authority.
NOTE 3 – REVENUE
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Contributions received from:
Joint State/Commonwealth contributions (i) 3,464 5,965
Operating grant funding 2,131 2,104
Other contributions (ii) 170 639
5,765 8,708
(i) Contributions were received from the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water towards achieving pre-negotiated natural resources management outcomes.
(ii) Other contributions were received for specific agreed works towards achieving natural resources management outcomes.
NOTE 4 - OTHER INCOME 2010
$’000 2009
$’000
Interest 267 616
Liability assumed by the Crown 60 57
Other 140 444
467 1,117
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
105
NOTE 5 - EXPENSES
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Personnel services expenses
Salaries and wages (including recreation leave) 1,543 1,921
Staff on-costs 313 329
1,856 2,250
Other operating expenses
Auditors remuneration (i) 12 15
Board Member’s remuneration (ii) 165 161
Board Member’s and Committees costs 97 53
Contractors 224 301
Fees for services 1,873 4,740
Insurance 6 8
Accommodation and related expenses 222 290
Stores, materials and minor equipment 115 139
Plant/vehicle expenses 83 131
Travel 94 112
Advertising 51 48
Other 41 67
2,983 6,065
Depreciation and amortisation 26 21
Grants and subsidies 1,363 3,270
Total 6,228 11,606
(i) Audit fee to The Audit Office of New South Wales for audit of financial statement. The
auditors received no other benefits. (ii) Board members received no other benefits.
NOTE 6 - CURRENT ASSETS – CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 2010
$’000 2009
$’000
Current assets – Cash and Cash equivalents
Cash at bank and on hand 223 387
NSW Treasury Corporation – HourGlass cash facility 4,835 4,384
5,058 4,771
Also refer to Note 14
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
106
NOTE 7 - CURRENT ASSETS - RECEIVABLES
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Accounts receivable 98 55
Goods & Services Tax recoverable 112 446
Accrued income 8 8
218 509
No debts were written off during the year (2009 - $nil). Also refer to Note 14.
NOTE 8 - NON-CURRENT ASSETS – PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Land &
Buildings
$’000
Leasehold
Improvement
$’000
Plant &
Equipment
$’000
Total
$’000
At 1 July 2009
Gross carrying amount 55 - 195 250
Accumulated depreciation and amortisation (6) - (55) (61)
Net carrying amount 49 - 140 189
At 30 June 2010
Gross carrying amount 55 25 205 285
Accumulated depreciation and amortisation (8) (1) (78) (87)
Net carrying amount 47 24 127 198
Reconciliation
A reconciliation of the carrying amount of each class of property, plant and equipment at the beginning and end of the current reporting year is set out below.
Year ended 30 June 2010 Land &
Buildings
$’000
Leasehold
Improvement
$’000
Plant &
Equipment
$’000
Total
$’000
Net carrying amount at start of year 49 - 140 189
Additions - 25 10 35
Depreciation and amortisation expense (2) (1) (23) (26)
Net carrying amount at end of year 47 24 127 198
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
107
Land &
Buildings
$’000
Infrastructure
$‘000
Leasehold
Improvement
$’000
Plant &
Equipment
$’000
Total
$’000
At 1 July 2008
Gross carrying amount 55 5 - 171 231
Accumulated depreciation (4) (1) - (36) (41)
Net carrying amount 51 4 - 135 190
At 30 June 2009
Gross carrying amount 55 - - 195 250
Accumulated depreciation (6) - - (55) (61)
Net carrying amount 49 - - 140 189
Reconciliation
A reconciliation of the carrying amount of each class of property, plant and equipment at the beginning and end of the current reporting year is set out below.
Year ended 30 June 2009
Land &
Buildings
$’000
Infrastructure
$‘000
Leasehold
Improvement
$’000
Plant &
Equipment
$’000
Total
$’000
Net carrying amount at start of year
51 4 - 135 190
Additions - - - 24 24
Disposals - (4) - - (4)
Depreciation expense (2) - - (19) (21)
Net carrying amount at end of year
49 - - 140 189
NOTE 9 - CURRENT LIABILITIES - PAYABLES
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Accrued personnel services 20 18
Creditors 38 14
Accruals 91 93
Other 47 7
196 132
Also refer to Note 14. All payables are expected to be paid in the next 12 months.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
108
NOTE 10 - CURRENT/NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES – PROVISIONS
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Personnel services provision 122 193
On-costs 29 46
Personnel services provisions and related on-costs 151 239
Restoration of lease premises 25 -
Total provisions 176 239
Provisions – current 150 238
Provisions – non current 26 1
176 239
All current provisions are expected to be settled within the next 12 months
NOTE 11 - NOTES TO THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT
Cash
For the purpose of the Statement of cash flows, cash includes cash on hand, in banks and investments in NSW Treasury Corporation Hour Glass facilities.
Cash at the end of the financial year as shown in the Statement of cash flows is reconciled to the Statement of financial position in Note 6.
Reconciliation of surplus / (deficit) for the year to net cash flows from operating activities.
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
Surplus/(deficit) for the year 4 (1,781)
Depreciation 26 21
Net loss on sale of non-current assets - 4
Decrease / (Increase) in receivables 291 (144)
(Decrease) in payables and provisions (24) (1,490)
Net cash flows from operating activities 297 (3,390)
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
109
NOTE 12- COMMITMENTS FOR EXPENDITURE
2010 $’000
2009 $’000
(a) Other expenditure commitments
Not later than one year 402 930
Later than one year and not later than 5 years - -
Later than 5 years - -
Total 402 930
The commitments above include GST of $36,544 (2009: $84,506) expected to be recoverable from the Australian Taxation Office.
2010
$’000 2009
$’000
(b) Operating lease commitments
Aggregate operating lease commitments for office accommodation, motor vehicles and computer equipment. Contracted but not provided for at balance date, payable:
Not later than one year 165 52
Later than one year and not later than 5 years 119 115
Later than 5 years - -
Total 284 167
The commitments above include GST of $25,814 (2009: $15,137) expected to be recoverable from the Australian Taxation Office.
(c) Finance lease payable commitments
The Authority did not have any finance lease payable commitments at balance date. (2009: $Nil). NOTE 13 - CONTINGENT LIABILITIES/ASSETS The Authority is not aware of any material contingent liability (2009- $nil). Apart from the amounts disclosed in Note 12, there are no known contingent assets at balance date.
NOTE 14 - FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS The Authority’s principal financial instruments are outlined below. These financial instruments arise directly from the Authority’s operations or are required to finance the Authority’s operations. The Authority does not enter into or trade financial instruments, including derivative financial instruments, for speculative purposes. The Authority’s main risks arising from financial instruments are outlined below, together with the Authority’s objectives, policies and processes for measuring and managing risk. Further quantitative and qualitative disclosures are included throughout this financial statement. The Authority’s Board has overall responsibility for the establishment and oversight of risk management and reviews and agrees policies for managing each of these risks. Risk management policies are established to identify and analyse the risks faced by the Authority, to set risk limits and controls and to monitor risks. Compliance with policies is reviewed by the Authority’s Board on a continuous basis.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
110
a) Financial instrument categories
Financial Assets
Note Category Carrying Amount
Carrying Amount
Class: 2010 2009
$’000 $’000
Cash and cash equivalents
6 N/A 5,058 4,771
Receivables1 7 Loans and receivables (at amortised cost)
98 55
Financial Liabilities
Note Category Carrying Amount
Carrying Amount
Class: 2010 2009
$’000 $’000
Payables2 9 Financial liabilities measured at amortised cost
196 132
Notes 1. Excludes statutory receivables and prepayments (i.e. not within scope of AASB 7). 2. Excludes statutory payables and unearned revenue (i.e. not within scope of AASB 7).
b) Credit risk
Credit risk arises when there is the possibility of the Authority’s debtors defaulting on their contractual obligations, resulting in a financial loss to the Authority. The maximum exposure to credit risk is generally represented by the carrying amount of the financial assets (net of any allowance for impairment).
Credit risk arises from the financial assets of the Authority, including cash, receivables and Authority deposits. No collateral is held by the Authority. The Authority has not granted any financial guarantees.
Credit risk associated with the Authority’s financial assets, other than receivables, is managed through the selection of counterparties and establishment of minimum credit rating standards. Authority’s deposits held with NSW TCorp are guaranteed by the State.
(i) Cash and cash equivalents
Cash comprises cash on hand, in banks and investment with the NSW Treasury Corporation Hour-Glass facilities. The TCorp Hour Glass cash facility is discussed in para (f) below.
(ii) Receivables - trade debtors
All trade debtors are recognised as amounts receivable at balance date. Collectibility of trade debtors is reviewed on an ongoing basis. Procedures as established in the Treasurer’s Directions are followed to recover outstanding amounts, including letters of demand. Debts which are known to be uncollectible are written off. An allowance for impairment is raised when there is objective evidence that the entity will not be able to collect all amounts due. This evidence includes past experience, and current and expected changes in economic conditions and debtor credit ratings. No interest is earned on trade debtors.
The Authority is not materially exposed to concentrations of credit risk to a single trade debtor or group of debtors. Based on past experience, debtors that are not past due (2010: $34,918; 2009: $37,057) and not less than 1 month past due (2010: $55,000; 2009: $13,327) are not
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
111
considered impaired and together these represent 92% of the total trade debtors (2009:91%). Most of the Authority’s debtors have a good credit rating. There are no debtors which are currently not past due or impaired whose terms have been renegotiated.
The credit risk is the carrying amount (net of any allowance for impairment). The carrying amount approximates net fair value. Sales are made on 30 day terms. No interest is earned on trade debtors.
Total 1,2 ($’000)
Past due but not impaired ($’000) 1,2
Considered impaired ($’000) 1,2
2010
< 3 months overdue
55
55
-
3 months – 6 months overdue - - -
> 6 months overdue 8 8 -
2009
< 3 months overdue 14 14 -
3 months – 6 months overdue 4 4 -
> 6 months overdue - - -
1. Each column in the table reports ‘gross receivables’; 2. The ageing analysis excludes statutory receivables, as these are not within the scope of AASB7 and excludes receivables that are not past due and not ‘impaired’. Therefore, the total will not reconcile to the receivables total recognised in the statement of financial position.
iii) Other financial assets The Authority has placed funds on deposit with TCorp, which has been rated “AAA” by Standard and Poor’s. These deposits are similar to money market or bank deposits and can be placed “at call” or for a fixed term. For fixed term deposits, the interest rate payable by TCorp is negotiated initially and is fixed for the term of the deposit, while interest rate on at call deposits can vary. Deposits at 30 June 2010 were earning an average interest rate of 4.51% (2008/09: 3.03%), while over the period the average interest rate was 3.63% (2008/09:4.57%). c) Liquidity risk
Liquidity risk is the risk that the Authority will be unable to meet its payment obligations when they fall due. The Authority continuously manages risk through monitoring future cash flows and maturities planning to ensure adequate holding of high quality liquid assets. The objective is to maintain a balance between continuity of funding and expenditure. During the current and prior years, there were no defaults or breaches on any payables. No assets have been pledged as collateral. The Authority’s exposure to liquidity risk is deemed insignificant based on prior periods’ data and current assessment of risk. The liabilities are recognised for amounts due to be paid in the future for goods or services received, whether or not invoiced. Amounts owing to suppliers (which are unsecured) are settled in accordance with the policy set out in Treasurer’s Direction 219.01. If trade terms are not specified, payment is made no later than the end of the month following the month in which an invoice or a statement is received. Treasurer’s Direction 219.01 allows the Minister to award interest for late payment. The rate of interest applied during the year was nil% (2009 : Nil%). The table below summarises the maturity profile of the Authority’s financial liabilities, together with the interest rate exposure.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
112
Interest Rate Exposure Maturity Dates
2010
Weighted Average Effective Int. Rate
Nominal Amount
Fixed Interest rate
Variable Interest rate < 1 year 1-5 years > 5 years
Payables: $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
Accrued salaries, wages and on-costs
N/A 48 - - 48 - -
Creditors
N/A 38 - - 38 - -
86 - - 86 - -
2009
Payables: Accrued salaries, wages and on-costs
N/A 63 - - 63 - -
Creditors
N/A 14 - - 14 - - 77 - - 77 - -
d) Market risk
Market risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market prices. The Authority’s exposures to market risk are primarily through price risks associated with the movement in the unit price of the Hour Glass Investment facilities. The Authority does not have any borrowings. The Authority has no exposure to foreign currency risk and does not enter into commodity contracts. The effect on profit and equity due to a reasonably possible change in risk variable is outlined in the information below, for interest rate risk and other price risk. A reasonably possible change in risk variable has been determined after taking into account the economic environment in which the Authority operates and the time frame for the assessment (i.e. until the end of the next annual reporting period). The sensitivity analysis is based on risk exposures in existence at the balance sheet date. The analysis is performed on the same basis for 2009. The analysis assumes that all other variables remain constant.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
113
e) Interest rate risk
As the Authority has no interest bearing liabilities its exposure to interest rate risk is minimal. The Authority does not account for any fixed rate financial instruments at fair value through profit or loss or as available for sale. Therefore for these financial instruments a change in interest rates would not affect profit or loss or equity. A reasonably possible change of +/- 1% is used, consistent with current trends in interest rates. The basis will be reviewed annually and amended where there is a structural change in the level of interest rate volatility. The Authority’s exposure to interest rate risk is set out below.
$’000
Carrying amount
-1% +1%
Profit Equity Profit Equity
2010 Financial assets Cash and cash equivalents
5,058 (51) (51) 51 51
Receivables 218 (2) (2) 2 2 Financial liabilities Payables 196 2 2 (2) (2)
2009 Financial assets Cash and cash equivalents
4,771 (48) (48) 48 48
Receivables 509 (5) (5) 5 5 Financial liabilities Payables 132 1 1 (1) (1)
f) Other price risk
Exposure to ‘other price risk’ primarily arises through the investment in the TCorp Hour Glass Investment facilities, which are held for strategic rather than trading purposes. The Authority has no direct equity investments. The Authority holds units in the following Hour-Glass investment trusts:
Facility Investment Sectors Investment Horizon 2010 2009
$'000 $'000 Cash Facility
Cash, Money market instruments Up to 2 years 4,835 4,384
The unit price of each facility is equal to the total fair value of net assets held by the facility divided by the total number of units on issue for that facility. Unit prices are calculated and published daily. NSW TCorp as trustee for each of the above facility is required to act in the best interest of the unit holders and to administer the trusts in accordance with the trust deeds. As trustee, TCorp has appointed external managers to manage the performance and risks of each facility in accordance with a mandate agreed by the parties. However, TCorp, acts as manager for part of the Cash Facility. A significant portion of the administration of the facilities is outsourced to an external custodian.
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Notes to and forming part of the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010
114
The Authority uses Level 2 hierarchy for the Hour Glass Investment Cash Facility as the prices are observable, however, no active market exists for the facilities as they are only accessible to government agencies. Investment in the Hour Glass facilities limits Authority’s exposure to risk, as it allows diversification across a pool of funds, with different investment horizons and a mix of investments. NSW TCorp provides sensitivity analysis information for each of the facilities, using historically based volatility information collected over a ten-year period, quoted at two standard deviations (i.e., 95% probability). The TCorp Hour Glass Investment facilities are designated at fair value through profit or loss and therefore any change in unit price impacts directly on profit (rather than equity). A reasonably possible change is based on the percentage change in unit price (as advised by TCorp) multiplied by the redemption value as at 30 June each year for each facility (balance from Hour-Glass statement).
Impact on profit/loss
2010 2009
Change in unit price $'000 $'000
Hour Glass Investment Cash Facility +1% 48 44
-1% (48) (44) g) Fair value
Financial instruments are generally recognised at cost, with the exception of the TCorp Hour Glass facilities, which are measured at fair value. As discussed, the value of the Hour Glass Investments is based on Authority’s share of the value of the underlying assets of the facility, based on the market value. All of the Hour Glass facilities are valued using ‘redemption’ pricing. The amortised cost of financial instruments recognised in the statement of financial position approximates the fair value, because of the short-term nature of many of the financial instruments.
NOTE 15 - AFTER BALANCE DATE EVENTS There are no significant events subsequent to balance date.
End of audited financial statements
115
LOWER MURRAY DARLING CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
Appendix 1: Staff Statistics
Table 16: Summary of staff employed by Lower Murray Darling CMA at 30 June 2010
CATEGORY 30/6/05 30/6/06 30/6/07 30/6/08 30/6/09 30/6/10
Recurrent funded 14.0 14.0* 14.5* 14.5* 14.5* 14.5*
Temporary 3.5 7.5 7.5 9* 11.5* 8.1
TOTAL 17.5 21.5 22 23.5 26 22.6
* Includes Indigenous Staff Members
Appendix 2: NSW Government Action Plan for Women
The NSW Government is strongly committed to a whole of government approach to the
principles of equity, access, rights and participation for women. The government continues
to build on achievements to remove obstacles to women’s full participation in society. This
recognises that in some areas of social, political and economic life, women have different
experiences and needs than men. The NSW Government Action Plan provides a
mechanism for leadership and management of coordinated strategies across government
agencies.
The Catchment Management Authorities are committed to the aims and objectives of the
NSW Government Action Plan for Women.
Table 17: The number of women on LMD CMA Board and staff as at 30 June 2010
CMA POSITION TOTAL NUMBER OF WOMEN % OF WOMEN
CMA Chairs 1 0 0%
CMA Members 6 2 30%
TOTAL 7 2 28.6%
Staff 22.6 15 66.4%
Appendix 3: Personnel Policies and Practices
The Department of Environment Climate Change and Water (DECCW) is the host employer
for the CMAs. DECCW’s personnel policies and practices extend in coverage to all CMAs.
These policies and practices include:
Industrial relations
Equal Employment Opportunity
Disability Plans
Multicultural Policies and Services Plan
Occupational Health and Safety.
Appendices
116
Appendix 4: Performance and Remuneration of Executive Officer
It is a requirement of legislation that the performance and remuneration of the CMA General Manager are
reported. As at the 30 June 2010 General Manager details for the LMD CMA as outlined below:
Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority Name: Lesley Palmer Position: General Manager Date Appointed: 17 May 2010 Remuneration (base salary) $133,318 Performance Review: June 2010
Appendix 5: Occupational Health and Safety
The LMD CMA has an OH&S Committee comprising representatives from work units and a management
representative. Training was arranged for remote area first aid and OH&S General Induction for construction
sites (White card). DECCW procedure and standards are used in conjunction with the LMD CMA Remote
Area Safety Management Plan (revised 2010). Four wheel drive vehicle training is provided to all staff that
operate in remote areas.
Appendix 6: Waste Reduction
The LMD CMA implements the governments Waste Reduction and Purchasing Policy by reducing generation
of waste, recycling products where possible (resource recovery), using recycled material. WRAPP reporting
completed. LMD CMA deposits all paper, plastics, glass and cans in recycling bins and uses recycled laser
printer cartridges.
Appendix 7: Freedom of Information
No requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act have been received by the LMD CMA. Note
from the 1st July 2010 the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 will apply.
Appendix 8: Privacy Management
There were no requests for access to documents, no applications for an internal review and no complaints
under the Privacy and Personal Information Act 1998. As required under the Privacy Act, the CMA operates
under the DECCW Privacy Management Plan governing the collection, retention, accuracy, use and
disclosure of personal information, including rights of access and correction.
117
Compliance Index Section/clause name Page
Letter of submission Covering letter
Application for Extension NA
Charter 5
CMA Objectives 9
Contacts (Access) 2
Management and structure (Governance) 13
Management and structure - Committees 17
Management and structure - Organisational chart 42
Summary and review of CMA operations 43
Grants to Community Groups 50
Legal change NA
Economic or other factors NA
Management and activities 41
Research and development NA
Human resources 115 Appendix 1
Consultants 50
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 115 Appendix 3
Disability Plan 115 Appendix 3
Land Disposal NA
Promotion 51
Consumer/Customer Response 53
Guarantee of Service NA
Payment of Accounts/ Time for Payment of Accounts 73
Risk management 79
Disclosure of Controlled Entities NA
Disclosure of Subsidiaries NA
Multicultural Policies and Services Plan 115 Appendix 3
NSW Action Plan for Women 115 Appendix 2
Occupational Health and Safety 116 Appendix 5
Waste Reduction 116 Appendix 6
CMA Budgets 89
Financial Statements 89
Identification of Audited Financial Statements 93
Inclusion of Unaudited Financial Statements NA
Additional matters for Inclusion in Annual Reports Inside front cover
Investment performance 50
Liability management performance NA
Exemptions NA
Executive Officers (General Manager) 116 Appendix 4
Freedom of Information 116 Appendix 7
Implementation of Price Determination NA
Privacy Management 116 Appendix 8
Heritage Management NA
Departures from Subordinate Legislation NA
Government Energy Policy NA
Electronic service delivery NA
Credit card certification NA
Requirements arising from employment arrangements NA
Com
pliance Index
118
Compliance Index (Alphabetical Listing) Section/clause name Page
Additional matters for Inclusion in Annual Reports Inside front cover
Application for Extension NA
Charter 5
CMA Budgets 89
CMA Objectives 9
Consultants 50
Consumer/Customer Response 53
Contacts (Access) 2
Credit card certification NA
Departures from Subordinate Legislation NA
Disability Plan 115 Appendix 3
Disclosure of Controlled Entities NA
Disclosure of Subsidiaries NA
Economic or other factors NA
Electronic service delivery NA
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 115 Appendix 3
Executive Officers (General Manager) 116 Appendix 4
Exemptions NA
Financial Statements 89
Freedom of Information 116 Appendix 7
Government Energy Policy NA
Grants to Community Groups 50
Guarantee of Service NA
Heritage Management NA
Human resources 115 Appendix 1
Identification of Audited Financial Statements 93
Implementation of Price Determination NA
Inclusion of Unaudited Financial Statements NA
Investment performance 50
Land Disposal NA
Legal change NA
Letter of submission Covering letter
Liability management performance NA
Management and activities 41
Management and structure - Committees 17
Management and structure - Organisational chart 42
Management and structure (Governance) 13
Multicultural Policies and Services Plan 115 Appendix 3
NSW Action Plan for Women 115 Appendix 2
Occupational Health and Safety 116 Appendix 5
Payment of Accounts/ Time for Payment of Accounts 73
Privacy Management 116 Appendix 8
Promotion 51
Requirements arising from employment arrangements NA
Research and development NA
Risk management 79
Summary and review of CMA operations 43
Waste Reduction 116 Appendix 6