❓ A WA parliamentary question probes state and federal funding for Regional Catchment Councils, project outcomes, and specific concerns regarding the Avon Catchment Council's handling of salinity reclamation and the Yilgarn Lakes project. The answer provides funding details and explains limitations in accessing project-specific information due to the councils' independence.
AnsweredQoN 1427Legislative Assembly
Asked
23 August 2006
Member
Portfolio
Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Minister to the Regional Catchment Councils of Western Australia and ask -
(1) How much funding has been provided to the Regional Catchment Councils of Western Australia from the State Government over the life of the Councils?
(2) How much funding has been provided to the Regional Catchment Councils of Western Australia from the Federal Government over the life of the Councils?
(3) How many projects have been successfully implemented and provided positive environmental outcomes for farmers? Please name them.
(4) How many major salinity reclamation projects have been undertaken by the Avon Catchment Council in the past 5 years?
(a) Of these projects, how much of the total project funding has been spent on consultants from State Government agencies;
(b) how much of the total funding has been spent on feasibility studies;
(c) how much funding made it on the ground in the form of physical delivery by way of construction of the projects; and
(d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
(5) Recently, Federal funding has been made available for the Yilgarn Lakes project to be auspiced by the Avon Catchment Council. Why is it that the farmer group, that should benefit from this project, have withdrawn their support for the project being handled by the Avon Catchment Council?
(6) Why is it that highly expensive feasibility studies are undertaken instead of Engineer’s Reports to access and implement salinity reclamation projects?
(1) How much funding has been provided to the Regional Catchment Councils of Western Australia from the State Government over the life of the Councils?
(2) How much funding has been provided to the Regional Catchment Councils of Western Australia from the Federal Government over the life of the Councils?
(3) How many projects have been successfully implemented and provided positive environmental outcomes for farmers? Please name them.
(4) How many major salinity reclamation projects have been undertaken by the Avon Catchment Council in the past 5 years?
(a) Of these projects, how much of the total project funding has been spent on consultants from State Government agencies;
(b) how much of the total funding has been spent on feasibility studies;
(c) how much funding made it on the ground in the form of physical delivery by way of construction of the projects; and
(d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
(5) Recently, Federal funding has been made available for the Yilgarn Lakes project to be auspiced by the Avon Catchment Council. Why is it that the farmer group, that should benefit from this project, have withdrawn their support for the project being handled by the Avon Catchment Council?
(6) Why is it that highly expensive feasibility studies are undertaken instead of Engineer’s Reports to access and implement salinity reclamation projects?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
25 October 2006
Responded by
Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt
Response time
63 days
(b) how much of the total funding has been spent on feasibility studies; (c) how much funding made it on the ground in the form of physical delivery by way of construction of the projects; and (d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
(c) how much funding made it on the ground in the form of physical delivery by way of construction of the projects; and (d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
(d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
The Bilateral Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia for the Implementation of the Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality was signed on the 11 September 2003. Under this agreement, both Governments are committed to jointly investing $158M each in natural resource management and function within the institutional and statutory frameworks that operate in Western Australia. The implementation of both bilateral agreements is through the regional delivery model and undertaken by the six regional NRM groups. The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The implementation of both bilateral agreements is through the regional delivery model and undertaken by the six regional NRM groups. The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(c) how much funding made it on the ground in the form of physical delivery by way of construction of the projects; and (d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
(d) specifically, how many projects have been successfully completed, with positive environmental impacts, returning arable land to farmers? Please name them.
The Bilateral Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia for the Implementation of the Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality was signed on the 11 September 2003. Under this agreement, both Governments are committed to jointly investing $158M each in natural resource management and function within the institutional and statutory frameworks that operate in Western Australia. The implementation of both bilateral agreements is through the regional delivery model and undertaken by the six regional NRM groups. The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The implementation of both bilateral agreements is through the regional delivery model and undertaken by the six regional NRM groups. The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The six regional NRM groups are incorporated bodies independent of Government. As such, Government is not privy to some of the information requested by the member. The information presented is based on the current funding round of NHT and NAP which commenced on the 17 December 2002 and the 11 September 2003 respectively. (1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(1) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the State Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $60, 774, 857. The State's contribution under the NHT bilateral agreement is in-kind in recognition of the State contributing over $250M per year or around 80% overall expenditure in NRM in WA through State agencies. (2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(2) Under the bilateral agreement for NAP, the Australian Government's expenditure as of the 27 September 2006 was $52, 682, 982. For NHT, their contribution was $92, 322, 846. The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The Australian Government has an additional national program called the National Landcare Program (NLP) which is aimed at increasing the profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of Australian primary industries. The State accesses these funds through a competitive bid, and the Australian Government direct funds the successful regional NRM group. The State is not required to match these funds. From 2002/2003 to 2003/04, the Australian Government has contributed $11, 882, 182. (3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(3) The five NAP regional NRM groups have contracted over 320 NAP projects aimed at achieving resource condition targets identified in their regional strategies. Most of these projects have been in place for less than one year and are not due to be completed until June 2008. It is too early to measure tangible outcomes in most projects. Changing resource condition is a long term process and in many cases positive environmental outcomes will not be evident for many years. In the meantime, monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers including farmers. A copy of the ACC's Investment Plan 2 that has been signed off by the Australian Government and State Government Ministers for Environment and Agriculture is tabled for your information. Further information can be provided if the member has any further questions about a particular project. (4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(4) The Avon Catchment Council (ACC) has been in receipt of funding from the NAP since July 2005. All ACC projects commenced in November/December 2005 and are continuing. Please see project summary attached for project details and achievements to date. (a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(a) No funding is spent on consultants from State Government Departments. State Government Departments have competitively tendered to deliver ACC projects and in some cases have been successful in delivering projects in their entirety, including all on ground components. The capacity to deliver large scale asset based regional projects was accurately identified through the ACC tender process and consulting organisations, NGOs, Local Government and State Government have all had a level of success in tendering to deliver ACC projects. The attached project summary provides information on delivery organisations. (b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(b) No feasibility studies have been funded by the ACC to date. (c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(c) The ACC has invested: * 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* 2005/06 51% of funds in on ground activities, 13% on development of management plans, 28% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 8% in Capacity Building. * 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* 2006-2008 59% of funds in on ground activities, 12% on development of management plans, 15% in Resource Assessment to determine the magnitude of issues and 14% in Capacity Building. * This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
* This allocation is consistent with full lifecycle planning of projects and reflects the need to both increasingly carry out on ground work over the life of the projects and to also ensure adequate planning and community capacity is in place to ensure project actions are carried out by a range of stakeholders, including individual farmers. (d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(d) The ACC has been functioning with funding from NAP (and NHT) since July 2005. However, due to the time associated with carrying out a competitive tendering process, ACC projects generally commenced in November/December 2005. The majority of these projects are scoped for 3 years and hence have been functioning for a period of less than 12 months. Due to the magnitude of the salinity problem in the Avon and resource condition change being a long term process, environmental improvements may require some time before becoming evident. It also needs to be appreciated that the Avon is also implementing an asset based approach (both built and natural environments) as described in bilateral agreements, which makes it extremely difficult to provide direct individual benefits to farmers for salinity mitigation. Monitoring is being undertaken to assess the environmental impacts arising from the projects for all land managers. The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
The asterixed projects listed in Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005, have direct salinity management outcomes and seek to involve farmers in their delivery. The projects listed in this table are only from the ACC's investment plan 1. Further investment in salinity management will occur through the implementation of the ACC's investment plan 2, which was endorsed by Australian and State Government Ministers for Agriculture and Environment in September 2006. Attachment 2: Salinity Outcomes, outlines all salinity projects in the ACC and outlines specifically what salinity outcomes and salinity management techniques are being used in each project, the funding source and funding amount for each project. (5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(5) Yilgarn Salinity Engineering Design Plan Project was initiated by the Australian Government, and is managed by the Avon Catchment Council in partnership with the Wheatbelt Channel Management Group (WCMG). This approach is consistent with the regional delivery framework adopted nationally for the NAP and NHT. The Wheatbelt Channel Management Group, which represents the farmers in the project area, is a key partner with the Avon Catchment Council in the project. The Minister is aware of the concerns the WCMG have. (6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
(6) Engineer's reports are just one component of a feasibility study for a salinity project. Many other aspects of a salinity project also need to be considered including biophysical impacts especially on receiving water bodies, legal and governance requirements, cost sharing arrangements etc. It is prudent for feasibility studies to be conducted to minimise risk and optimise outcomes prior to the investment of millions of dollars of public and private funds. Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachments: Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachment 1: ACC Project Summaries May 2005 (Tabled Paper Number 2143) Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Attachment 2: ACC Salinity Outcomes (Tabled Paper Number 2144)
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.