THERE’S no doubting that fifth generation Cressy farmer Oliver Scott Young and his forebears have had to put up with some impositions on their property.
The building of Poatina Road virtually through the middle of the original farm, the Poatina power scheme tailrace cutting another path they need to navigate and then Hydro Tasmania transmission towers erected across the paddocks limiting where they can put irrigation.
Now a move by Tasmanian Irrigation to build a dam on the property to regulate water flow and provide more irrigation to neighbouring farmers is proving a step too far. The proposed site for the dam will take a 21ha chunk out of the farm’s main 470ha block and require the main centre pivot to be removed and a second united commissioned both to be replaced at great expense by half circle centre pivots.
“While we’re lucky to be able to directly access the irrigation scheme, it doesn’t seem fair that we lose 30ha of productive, irrigated land to build a dam that is of no benefit to us but gives other farmers more water,” Mr Scott Young said.
“If there was no other way it would be a different discussion, but instead of putting the dam here on the western end of the tailrace it could go further along near the regulation pond they already have which is three times the size of what TI is proposing to put on here.
“They don’t want it, we don’t want it, but their needs seem to come before ours their main argument being they would have a half a million dollar cost in pumping the water up a 30m elevation which might sound like a lot but spread out over the 25,500 megalitres that’s only $20 a megalitre to pass on to the end user.”
Tasmanian Labor leader Rebecca White and primary industries spokeswoman Janie Finlay recently met with Mr Scott Young to hear his concerns. They were critical of the land acquisition and the “outdated compensation processes”.
“Mr Scott-Young is just one producer impacted by the government’s inability to contemporise its legislation and see that government business enterprises work together with our farmers,” Ms White said.
Mr Scott Young said that TI had approached him with the preferred design for the scheme, a single pipeline which would provide 13,000 megalitres of water to service the area.
“Then they sold 20,000 megalitres of water and came back with the second design for the dam and we said no thank you. After arguing with their valuation, which didn’t even include the impact on the whole farm, they offered us $2 million for the acquisition.
“But this farm has been chipped into so much by government agencies already we feel we shouldn’t have to give up our irrigated land so others can have irrigation when there’s a large dam three times the size just 4km down the road which could meet the needs and they don’t want to use it and they’re re- fusing to entertain the idea.”
Ms Finlay said Tasmanian Irrigation should not only be more sympathetic to farmers affected by their irrigation schemes but also take steps to be more transparent and make information publicly available to all Tasmanians.
“With schemes yet to be built in the Northern Midlands, a re- design of the Tamar scheme pending and the extension of the South East irrigation scheme on the books, Tasmanians deserve to know about the options being dis- cussed,” she said.