This document summarizes an article from the Australian Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology's journal. The article discusses challenges with governing groundwater in Australia. It notes that groundwater is the least understood of water sources. Pressures on groundwater have increased due to greater demand from agriculture, mining, and other industries. The governance of groundwater in Australia is described as a "work in progress" that could be improved. The article argues for better measuring, monitoring, and integrated management of this important resource to balance needs of production, environment, and society.

1. VOLUME 27 / NUMBER 2 / NOV 2015 / RRP $35
2/15
THE AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (AIAST)
AGRICULTURAL
SCIENCE
PEER-REVIEWED RESEARCH AND
NEWS IN AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT.
>> AIA AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION
INQUIRY SUBMISSION
>> AGRONOMISTS USE OF PGR – A
SURVEY
>> A CROP PRODUCTIVITY
RESEARCH PROTOCOL FOR LONG
WALL MINING
>> CROP NUTRIENT PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
>> SOLVING OUR GROUNDWATER
PROBLEMS
>> REPORT OF 9th INTERNATIONAL
WHEAT CONFERENCE
>> REDUCING GHG EMISSIONS AT
THE FARM LEVEL
>> DIVISIONS EVENTS’ REPORTS
FEATURED ARTICLES

2. 5150
CONTRIBUTEDARTICLES
POLITICS
The political nature of emissions reduction and climate
change can cause scepticism for some producers. A
producer who was initially not willing to undertake a GHG
calculation, felt that we were collecting the data as a means
to blame agriculture for Australia’s emissions. However,
after attending a workshop and once the purpose of our
project was explained and the link between emissions
intensity and productivity was defined the farmer was
convinced of the practical purpose of the calculation.
This cements the need for distilling general industry-
wide information as when it is in this form it can easily be
misinterpreted.
Figure 2 - Field day focussed on feed management at case study farm
‘Cranston’. The full case study is available online at: www.rmcg.com.au
CONCLUSION
The flexibility of the ERP process that considers the
individual producers’ business structure, goals and needs
allows extension officers greater influence when engaging
with producers. Each producer will have his or her own
opinions when it comes to emissions reduction. By tailoring
advice to suit their farm, assumptions from general industry-
wide information can be managed.
The link between emissions and productivity is strong
enough that producers can see the relevance of reducing
emissions in the context of their own farm. Existing industry
tools (including GHG calculators and calculations of
emissions intensity) and tools developed by the ‘Tas
Farming Futures’ team (e.g. NUE calculator and the ERP
process) has enabled the project team, to deliver specific
and targeted farm information. These tools create a legacy
and can be applied by others beyond the life of the project.
REFERENCES
1
Getting the balance right – managing protein and energy
ratios in feed for reduced livestock emissions: Andrew
Beven, ‘Cranston’, found at: http://www.rmcg.com.au/
media/Projects/CC/Beven%20livestock%20case%20
study%20May15.pdf
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The ‘Tas Farming Futures’ project is funded by the
Australian Government.
CONTRIBUTEDARTICLES
DEEP AND MISUNDERSTOOD:
CAN WE SOLVE THE
UNDERLYING PROBLEMS
WITH OUR GROUNDWATER?
Dr Turlough Guerin
Dr Turlough Guerin
Ph. 0439 011 434
turlough.guerin@hotmail.com
Turlough Guerin BScAgr(Hons) PhD MAIA, is a non-
executive Director and Environmental Manager with
over 15 years board level experience in community
engagement, primary industry, sustainable transport,
and heavy industry. Board highlights include the Ag
Institute Australia, the Climate Alliance Limited and Orica’s
Community Participation Review Committee. He has worked
for a range of Blue Chip companies including Rio Tinto,
Shell and First Solar, is a member of the National Safety
Council of Australia, the Australian Institute of Company
Directors and is an Associate Fellow of Australian Institute
of Management. For the past 2 years he has managed
planning approvals and compliance on the construction of
Australia’s largest solar farms at Nyngan and Broken Hill,
Central West NSW.
At a time when labels can be more influential than
legislation, and perceptions more potent than policies, are
we doing enough of the right things to look after this vital
element of our civil society? It could be the way we view this
resource that is part of the problem.
INTRODUCTION
As deliberations over the governance of water continues
at the national level in Australia, the fate of the most
vulnerable of our water sources remains buried deep in
the machinations of “reform in progress”. In the wake of
Australia’s coal seam gas boom, the rise of people power
through social media and the divestment movement, and
Australia’s mandate to increase agricultural and resource
productivity, the relative paucity of practical governance
stands in stark contrast to the importance this hidden
resource plays in society. Out of sight, out of mind couldn’t
be more relevant. Australia will need to better regulate and
manage this resource so that national priorities (the triple
bottom line, social, environmental and economic objectives)
can be achieved. Efforts will need to be coordinated, cost
effective, and streamlined. The crux of the matter is to
share it fairly: for production, agricultural and environmental
purposes, while also providing amenity for the many
Australians who rely on it for life-sustaining, recreational and
other societal purposes.
Water Security is a Real Risk. The fundamental necessities
for a civil society can be distilled to this: a reliable source
of energy, access to good quality food and a plentiful
supply of clean drinking water. Stop any one of these and
unrest will inevitably result. Perhaps the most obvious
factor in disrupting this balance is the effects of a changing
climate. Given water’s critical role, how a nation governs
and manages its groundwater resources is linked to
that nation’s security and welfare. For this and so many
reasons, stewardship of our groundwater must remain a
priority particularly in Australia where we are already prone
to droughts and the vagaries of climate extremes and
therefore water availability.
So what are the governance issues that should be of
concern to directors and company officers whose activities,
services or products could contribute to its impairment? Is
the overarching governance of this natural asset currently
effective? This article argues why effective governance
should be at the centre of keeping this precious natural
resource in good order, avoiding over-drawing and keeping
it clean for future generations.
In my view, the challenges of governing groundwater are
three-fold. Firstly that it is the least understood of the water
sources. Secondly, pressures on maintaining its quality
and usage rates have risen dramatically in recent times,
requiring a new level of governance. Thirdly, its overall
governance (and opportunity for its greater integration)
could be described as a “work-in-progress” at best. Facing
and tackling these issues will be important for a water-
secure future.
GROUNDWATER IS THE LEAST UNDERSTOOD
OF THE WATER SOURCES
As an agricultural scientist by training, I am curious to
know why and how a production system breaks down,
and equally, how we fix it. This requires the investment
of measurement and assessment. But with groundwater,
there are many divergent views and inconsistencies to
the point I suspect it has become “all too hard”. There are
many reasons for this. Groundwater is a finite resource. It
is replenished when surface water seeps into aquifers or
when recharged from surrounding aquifers. This process
of replenishment is called recharge. Aquifers become
depleted if groundwater extraction rates exceed recharge
rates (from surface water and surrounding aquifers). Aquifer
depletion affects communities, agriculture and the industries
that rely on groundwater supplies. Overdrawn reserves can
also affect the environment. For example, by reducing river
flows that depend on flows from shallow groundwater, or by
drying out ecosystems such as some wetlands that depend
on groundwater to maintain water levels. The aquifers that
feed rivers and wetlands are usually shallow or “watertable”
aquifers and watertable heights in these aquifers are
variable, driven by climate more than any other factor.
Measuring and assessing risks. But herein lies part of the
challenge: knowing which systems are more vulnerable than
others. Therefore understanding the basic processes as

3. 5352
CONTRIBUTEDARTICLES
well as the factors that can affect its quantity (availability)
and quality, its interplay between agriculture and extractive
industries, is of vital importance in its management. The
current methods of risk assessment do not appear to
be working such as the frameworks provided by state
governments which put emphasis on ecological risk
assessment (see for example NSW at www.water.nsw.gov.
au). I suspect they are designed to address the technical,
and not the more complex and nuanced factors that define
social, environmental and financial attributes, and they
tend to address localised issues. Not a criticism per se
but it does represent a problem if we want to address the
management of the resource nationally.
Models are helping and are getting better. A groundwater
model represents an approximation of an underground
system. Groundwater models are, by definition, a
simplification of the more complex reality, and have limited
effectiveness for supporting the regulatory and management
processes. Their effectiveness depends on the data
put in. This is expensive, and by and large, is driven by
corporate interests for compliance reasons, or for their own
requirements. While this all helps contribute to understanding
and protecting the resource, it is far from an integrated
approach and limits a holistic understanding of its condition.
PRESSURES ON MAINTAINING THE QUALITY
AND USAGE RATES HAVE RISEN DRAMATICALLY
Groundwater is estimated to make up 98 per cent of the
earth’s available fresh water. In Australia, groundwater is
used throughout large areas of the country including the
outback, where it is the only reliable source of water. Many
Indigenous communities, mining operations and remote
pastoral properties rely solely on it. Aquifers are a source
of water for drinking, irrigation, stock supply, bottling and
many other uses, accounting for over 30% of Australia’s
total water consumption. As industrial, resource (extractive
industries) and agricultural development in Australia
increases, so too does the demand for groundwater. In
some parts of the country, the current rate of groundwater
extraction is depleting the resource faster than it is being
recharged. To illustrate the magnitude of potential negative
effects, groundwater extractions in the Murray Darling Basin
increased by around 50% over a recent two year period
because drought reduced the availability of surface water
(www.mdba.gov.au).
GOVERNANCE OF GROUNDWATER IS A “WORK-
IN-PROGRESS” AT BEST
What are the implications of all this for corporate
governance? Understanding the regulatory regime and its
elements, relative to the business you are in, which I refer
to as governance in its broadest sense, is a good starting
point. There are numerous mechanisms in place that all
aim to govern groundwater use and its protection from both
contamination and over-extraction. One of these (which is
emerging as more of a constraint, not from a data-driven
perspective, but equally has an important role), is the social
license to operate (or SLO). It is not to be misunderstood as
it has the power to completely change priorities on how we
manage this resource.
The role of the government has been in setting policy as
it relates to quality and usage, including the governance
of markets (for it). Ongoing reform is happening at all
levels (of government), but it is particularly evident at the
Commonwealth level. The Council of Australian Governments
(COAG) has had a water reform agenda. Even though the
National Water Commission has recently been disbanded,
the reform is taking a new shape and groundwater will be
part of that. With much of the funding for our groundwater
initiatives coming from the Commonwealth, and that source
being under pressure to meet the needs of an increasing
range of stakeholders, the further reductions are concerning.
I think it is reasonable to say that the Commonwealth’s role in
its reform is a work in progress at best.
CONCLUSIONS
As the Former Army Deputy Chief of Staff and Governor
General of Australia, Michael Jeffery, reported recently in
The Australian, it is concerning that “about half of our water
is lost by evaporation”. But there are no surprises here
when you consider our water management infrastructure
is European-centric in design yet built in the world’s driest
inhabited country. But this only reinforces the concerns
raised here about groundwater. It is a critical resource for
now and into the future and should be governed with that
level of priority.
CONTRIBUTEDARTICLES
Michael Jeffery rightly argues that we need better water
efficiency, more recycling of urban water and underground
storage. Specifically he challenges us:
A further way to manage our water is through the use
of underground dams — also known as water banking
or managed aquifer recharge — where excess water is
pumped into a convenient aquifer in the wet season, then
pumped up again for agricultural use or to water a city in the
dry. Storing our water underground, where it can’t evaporate
and is naturally cleansed, is a thoroughly Australian solution
to a classically Australian problem. Let’s do more of it. By
storing more water in our landscapes and soils, and in
aquifers beneath our farms and cities, by recycling and
wise conjunctive management of all water sources, we
can ensure a water-safe future in a world becoming less
water-­secure by the day. The knowledge embodied in this
“blue revolution” will become one of our greatest exports
— potentially worth billions — as well as our humanitarian
contribution to nations facing acute water scarcity.
These are ideas – which in essence are examples of
what managed aquifer recharge is about - are core to the
concerns raised here on groundwater governance. It is
true groundwater initiatives are being pursued already
with varied levels of adoption and success. But with the
staggering rates of change in water demands, stresses
on ecosystems as well as human requirements in some
areas (e.g., Broken Hill in NSW) and the need for Australia
to boost its agricultural productivity and to enable a more
sustainable extractive industry, the need for bringing
the regulatory system and all appropriate governance
processes into alignment is now surely a priority.
As with so many interdependent systems, we have to be
careful not to over simplify the extent of the challenge. Most
of the groundwater in Australia is of a low quality (high salt
concentrations) and we have to be very careful putting high
quality rainwater into lower quality aquifers.
Can the application of technology and innovation help solve
our groundwater problems? Most definitely, it needs to be
part of the solution, and I think Australia is well up to the
challenge. Not being able to see it is not a reason to let it
slip through the cracks as a national priority.
FURTHER INFORMATION
State Governments and Industry Sectors
■■ As with most environmental issues, it is the State EPAs
that have the “teeth” to regulate water usage and
quality through legislation and licences. States have
groundwater management areas that are restricted
in their use and quality maintained by groundwater
management plans. It is not unusual for state EPAs
to issue notices or prosecutions on companies that
illegally extract water without licence (or beyond their
licences) and require clean-up programs to remediate
groundwater that has been demonstrated to become
contaminated as a result of corporate business activity.
Also companies will undertake testing though for their
own benefit driven usually by corporate transactions
to demonstrate due diligence prior to acquisition or
divestment (see also under Company Level below).
■■ NSW Government has a serious investment in
monitoring, understanding, regulating and sharing
information on groundwater with more than 5000 bores
in its network. Here, approximately 11% of all water used
comes from groundwater sources. It is used for drinking
water, irrigation, watering stock, and domestic and
industrial purposes. For more than 200 towns in NSW,
groundwater is the principal source of water supply. An
estimated 13% of the groundwater used in NSW goes to
domestic and stock purposes meaning that it is critical
that quality and quantity of this resource is maintained.
■■ In terms of the extractive industries, coal seam gas
(CSG) activity has been regulated at a state level. It is
the states that establish moratoria on CSG activity and
this is part of the process of protecting our resources.
CSG in NSW has been reviewed extensively and a
report published by the State’s Chief Scientist providing
a science-based view of the risks and challenges for
the industry. Although the depths from which coal seam
gas is extracted are generally relatively remote from
surface water processes, the potential impacts on flows
in surface streams and rivers are of great community
interest, as well as interaction between aquifers which
has long been subject to debate in the heavy industry
and extractive industries.
■■ Innovation and technology has always had a role in
environmental management and collaboration is an
important way to drive this and be sure to visit the
Australian Water Association’s website.