The NSW Government are in the process of introducing "Water Sharing plans" across the state. Based on the ABC 's reporting it seems that the plans have been met with some controversy.
Irrigators await water charge decision (20/5/2010)
About 50 Peel Valley irrigators last night attended their first meeting since the Peel Valley Water Sharing Plan was gazetted. Under the new agreement, which comes into force on July 1, irrigators must make do with only 6.2 gigalitres of water. They are also waiting nervously on a recommendation from the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, which will see charges for bulk water rise dramatically. Laurie Pengilly, from the Peel Valley Water Users Association, says water users could be paying more than three times their current rate.
(See also Draft water plan anger sparks talks - 6/11/2009, Call for amended water sharing plans-19/2/2010, and Irrigators hope for future water plan 'reassessment - 23/4/2010).
One aspect of the plans that the ABC does not appear to have reported on is the results of climate modelling contained in the NSW Office of Water's Background document titled "Draft Water Sharing Plan Greater Metropolitan Region unregulated river water sources." dated May 2010. From page 11...
Climate change and variability
The NSW Office of Water has forecast rainfall and runoff across NSW using 15 global climate models for the IPCC SRES A1B climate scenario. The A1B climate scenario indicates a global temperature in 2030 that is 0.90C higher than the global temperature in 1990. For the Greater Metropolitan Region the worst case forecast is a 5-10 per cent reduction in mean annual rainfall by 2030, while the best case is a 5-10 per cent increase in mean annual rainfall. 7 of 15 models predict that mean annual rainfall would decrease by between 2 and 10 per cent, while 8/15 models predict that rainfall would increase by between 2 and 10 per cent by 2030. The worst case prediction for mean summer rainfall is a reduction of between 5 and 10 per cent, while the best case prediction is an increase by between 10 and 20 per cent. 13/15 models predict that summer annual rainfall would increase by between 2 and 20 per cent, while 2/15 models predict a decrease of between 2 and 10 per cent. Worst case winter rainfall is a reduction of between 10 and 20 per cent, while the best case prediction is an increase of between 2 and 10 per cent. 7/15 models predict that annual winter rainfall for the region shall fall by between 2 and 20 per cent, while 8/15 models predict an increase in annual winter rainfall of between 2 and 10 per cent. The Office of Water has recently configured a hydrology model for the Hawkesbury-Nepean River to estimate variation in flows and frequency and duration of licensed access to flows due to water sharing rules. On completion of the hydrology modelling required for the plan, the Office intends to commence modelling the effects of the above rainfall forecasts on flows and water user access across the plan area.
Based on these modelling results the NSW Office of Water could have saved some money and flipped coin or rolled a dice for the same result. No wonder the ABC didn't cover the results - the headline"Climate model results no better than a magic 8 ball" certainly doesn't fit in with the ABC's Groupthink position on climate change.
Update: We provide the following correspondence between ABC and ANW:
From ABC Received 8 September, 2010:
Thank you for your email.
On review, Audience and Consumer Affairs is satisfied that ABC News reported the Water
Sharing Plan on a newsworthy basis and in keeping with 5.2.2(f) of the ABC Editorial
Policies. News reported the release of the plans and sought reaction from those
affected.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments are noted. For your reference, the
ABC's Code of Practice is available online at:http://www.abc.net.au/corp/
Yours sincerely
Audience & Consumer Affairs
ANW replied 8/9/2010:
ABC Audience and consumer affairs appear to have mis-understood the complaint. I agree
that the Water Sharing Plan was newsworthy. The complaint outlined lack of questioning
on the part of the ABC such that important information regarding the need for the plan
(ie failure of climate models to provide a degree of certainty over future rainfall
either more or less) was not covered. Are you suggesting that the ABC did not find
problems with the models newsworthy?
ABC responded 6 October 2010
Thank you for your email. I apologise for the delay in responding.
I do not believe I have misunderstood your complaint; the story in question highlighted newsworthy elements of the Water Sharing Plan and I am satisfied that this was in accordance with 5.2.2 (f) of the Editorial Policies. It noted that the new agreement was shortly to be introduced and included comment from those most affected; the irrigators.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments are noted.
Yours sincerely
Audience and Consumer Affairs
ANC replied 6 October 2010
Thankyou for your reply. I remain unsatisfied with it and in accordance with ABC's complaints process I request you forward it on the ABC Complaints Review Executive for further deliberation. The complaint outlined lack of questioning on the part of the ABC News. Why didn't ABC News provide coverage of the climate modelling results of the NSW Office of Water that show half the models predict more rain, and half predict less rain? Are you suggesting that the ABC NEWS did not find problems with the models newsworthy?
ABC provided this reply October 6, 2010
ANC reply 6 October 2010
Update: We provide the following correspondence between ABC and ANW:
From ABC Received 8 September, 2010:
Thank you for your email.
On review, Audience and Consumer Affairs is satisfied that ABC News reported the Water
Sharing Plan on a newsworthy basis and in keeping with 5.2.2(f) of the ABC Editorial
Policies. News reported the release of the plans and sought reaction from those
affected.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments are noted. For your reference, the
ABC's Code of Practice is available online at:http://www.abc.net.au/corp/
Yours sincerely
Audience & Consumer Affairs
ANW replied 8/9/2010:
ABC Audience and consumer affairs appear to have mis-understood the complaint. I agree
that the Water Sharing Plan was newsworthy. The complaint outlined lack of questioning
on the part of the ABC such that important information regarding the need for the plan
(ie failure of climate models to provide a degree of certainty over future rainfall
either more or less) was not covered. Are you suggesting that the ABC did not find
problems with the models newsworthy?
ABC responded 6 October 2010
Thank you for your email. I apologise for the delay in responding.
I do not believe I have misunderstood your complaint; the story in question highlighted newsworthy elements of the Water Sharing Plan and I am satisfied that this was in accordance with 5.2.2 (f) of the Editorial Policies. It noted that the new agreement was shortly to be introduced and included comment from those most affected; the irrigators.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments are noted.
Yours sincerely
Audience and Consumer Affairs
ANC replied 6 October 2010
Thankyou for your reply. I remain unsatisfied with it and in accordance with ABC's complaints process I request you forward it on the ABC Complaints Review Executive for further deliberation. The complaint outlined lack of questioning on the part of the ABC News. Why didn't ABC News provide coverage of the climate modelling results of the NSW Office of Water that show half the models predict more rain, and half predict less rain? Are you suggesting that the ABC NEWS did not find problems with the models newsworthy?
ABC provided this reply October 6, 2010
Thank you for your email.
To clarify, in the context of a short news online story which focussed on the introduction of the new agreement and the concerns of the irrigators, it was not necessary for the item to include reference to the climate models you cite to meet the requirements of 5.2.2(f).
If you would still like your complaint referred to the Complaints Review Executive, I would be happy to do so.
Yours sincerely
Audience and Consumer Affairs
Audience and Consumer Affairs
ANC reply 6 October 2010
The concerns of irrigators were the subject of a number of ABC news reports, not just "a short news online story". The omission of important newsworthy points such as the failure of climate models needs to be seen in this broader context, and as such this news should have been part of ABC News' coverage of the issue. In this sense the ABC has also failed to achieve balance in its reporting.
In light of this, please pass this on to ABC CRE for further consideration.
We await ABC CRE's response.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep to the topic. Abusive comments and bad language are simply not tolerated. Note that your comment may take a little while to appear.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.