As a Community Consultation Working Group member (CWG) on Tweeds Water Options, I commend the councillors who supported the moratorium of 20 years on Byrrill Creek Dam. It’s the right decision for biodiversity and environment reasons as well as economic costs.
The vast majority of CWG members requested an Independent Review to review: Firstly, the justifications for the need for additional water supply by 2036, particularly popul-ation growth, and water consumption figures … on which this whole debate of the dams rests. Secondly, the need to evaluate the potential for additional water saving measures such as stormwater harvesting, recycled water and mandatory rainwater tanks, before committing to the raising of Clarrie Hall Dam.
An Independent Review of the Council’s Integrated Water Management Cycle is already in process right now, to examine these issues, and the draft will be completed by the end of the year. Council decisions on the dams should rightly include the findings in this review.
There is overwhelming support by the Tweed community to address our water issues, firstly by implementing extensive water saving in new developments (such as Cobaki and Kings Forest). Two thousand, two hundred signatures on Petitions to council asked for this, the majority of submissions to council on Water Augmentation asked for this, the CWG group did, the farmers supported dual reticulation, but to no avail, nor action by councillors or council water staff.
In Sydney, Rouse Hill Urban Recycled water scheme has reduced demand for drinking water by 40 per cent and Olympic Park WRAMS Scheme has reduced demand by 50 per cent. Why is the Tweed not doing so and why is the choice of a dam the council’s only solution? With an impasse on the Clarrie Hall dam again, it’s high time for the Tweed council to embrace sustainable solutions for our future.
Joanna Gardner
Uki
