Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

Stage 4 on hold as ACTEW opens the flood gates

By Ntp - 19 June 2007 41

The CT reports that the planned Stage 4 water restrictions are now on hold.

IBN reports that despite this hold on increased restrictions the Govt is still talking tough (although we didn’t see much in the way of money for contingency plans in the recent budget).

At the same time as this IBN informs us ACTEW “is preparing to release 2 gigalitres of dam water to carry out routine maintenance.” In the article the Opposition leader Bill Stefaniak makes the apparently sensible suggestion that “it would seem smarter to save the water by allowing normal usage over 20 days to lower the water level and then do the maintenance.”

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
41 Responses to
Stage 4 on hold as ACTEW opens the flood gates
VYBerlinaV8 now_with 3:27 pm 19 Jun 07

If they seriously open the tap and let 2 gigalitres flow downstream for convenience sake, I will never bother trying to conserve water again. In the 80’s we weren’t allowed water tanks so we had to buy the govt’s, now they want us to skimp while they flush the river!

Screw them.

Ingeegoodbee 3:18 pm 19 Jun 07

Sandbars built up in dry times and washed away during floods – I guess that’s why, when the flow of the river is regulated by a dam, it’s necessary to introduce flushing flows that mimmick the floods that would normally flush away silt.

justbands 3:15 pm 19 Jun 07

> Our rivers coped for thousands of years without someone managing the silt for them. Sandbars built up in dry times and washed away during floods.

Errr..there were no dams then, or even hundreds of thousands of people using the water. Most of our rivers never flood “naturally” anymore.

mojo filter 3:09 pm 19 Jun 07

Our rivers coped for thousands of years without someone managing the silt for them. Sandbars built up in dry times and washed away during floods.

Mr_Shab 3:02 pm 19 Jun 07

Not a bad idea Ralph – but where is the money for dredging going to come from? Higher water prices? Special levies?

BTW – Isn’t Iraq supposed to be a capitalist utopia, what with it’s shiny new constitution (okay – I’m being facetious now. You don’t need to start ranting about the requirement of rule of law for free markets to work). I’m in no hurry to take off and live in Hugo’s little tinpot fiefdom, but I don’t accept that taking all the restraints off the invisible hand is necessarily going to result in a better world.

Ahem. Back on topic. Umm – now, I’m no expert…but surely reducing the amount of environmental flow will concurently reduce the amount of silt flowing down the rivers. Besides which, won’t slow-moving water carry less particulates?

Like I said – I’m no expert. Anyone got an explanation?

Ralph 2:45 pm 19 Jun 07

Why do they think they need to flush this river silt anyway?? As far as I’m away it is good for gardens and building materials. Put out a tender and get some company to dredge it out.

Yes Shab, North Korea, Cuba, Venezeula……….all fine places.

justbands 2:35 pm 19 Jun 07

I love how we’re all experts in how to solve the water crisis. It’s always “All we need to do is x” or “If we only did y, everything would be fine”. I don’t believe for a second that it’s that easy an issue to solve, although obviously I’m not as informed as you of you. 😉

Mr_Shab 2:29 pm 19 Jun 07

That’s pretty poor PR by actew. “Routine maintinence” is way too nebulous a statement for people not to get incredibly suspicious about.

And yes Ralph. Socialists are solely responsible for all that is wrong with the world. They also eat babies.

mojo filter 2:26 pm 19 Jun 07

2 gigalitres is a drop in the ocean that has been let out of the dams in the last 5 years. The average annual discharge (excluding water required for our water supply) has been 25 gigalitres but the required environmental flow is only 8 gigalitres. And they don’t count the outflow from the Lower Molonglo treatment plant which provides 35 gigalitres a year of treated effluent that is higher quality than the water flowing into the ACT.

Our water supply problem would not exist at all if a simple change was made to the ACT legislation to allow the Lower Molonglo outflows to be counted as environmental flows and the idiots at ACTEW stopped dumping additional water from our dams.

Spectra 2:14 pm 19 Jun 07

If it’s the same release I was reading about the other day, it’s from either Bendora or Corin, and will be subsequently re-caught by one of the dams a bit further downstream. But of course where politics is involved you don’t let little details like “we’re not throwing away the water – it’ll still be in our dams” get in the way of bashing the other party.

Ralph 1:39 pm 19 Jun 07

Never mind all the rain that’s been washed down the river recently…..

Ingeegoodbee 1:30 pm 19 Jun 07

I heard somewhere that the ‘routine maintenance’ they speak of is actually what’s called a ‘flushing flow’ mandated under the licensing arrangements for the storage – it involves rapidly dumping a hit of water downstream to combat fine sediment/silt build-up in the river.

Ralph 1:20 pm 19 Jun 07

It is because they are a bunch of socialists. Expect it on a national level with Krudd.

Thumper 1:07 pm 19 Jun 07

Does anyone get the feeling that the government is happy to keeps laying restrictions on people?

Even if there is plenty of water?

Ralph 1:01 pm 19 Jun 07

The dam levels have started going up over the past few days.

So they want to let this water out so that they can do maintenance? What if it keeps going up?Then let all of that water out too?

What a bunch of arse clowns.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site