Surface water and groundwater interaction

Australian states and territories have traditionally managed surface water and groundwater resources as independent systems. This has led to overallocation of resources and adverse environmental impacts. NWI and other initiatives demonstrate the increasing recognition of the connectivity between surface water and groundwater systems and the need to plan and manage accordingly.

Mound springs are an obvious expression of surface-groundwater interaction
Springs are an obvious expression of surface-groundwater interaction

Because of the current structures of most state and territory departments, questions regarding connectivity are generally answered from a surface water perspective and then from a groundwater perspective, which reflects a lack of joint management.

Only a small number of surface water management plans consider groundwater as part of their resource management process. The majority do not take groundwater into consideration directly and rely on groundwater management plans to consider surface water allocations and environmental water requirements. There are some exceptions, with more recent area and regional management plans across the country taking a more inclusive approach to surface water and groundwater interactions.

For groundwater management plans, the most common approach is to rely on statewide policy to ensure that surface water is considered. Only recently written plans include more comprehensive and specific controls for groundwater and surface water interactions in the day-to-day licensing, management and operation of the resource.

NWI objective of recognising connectivity

The National Water Initiative (NWI) has set a specific objective of recognising the connectivity between surface and groundwater resources' and the need to manage these connected systems as a single resource. Objective X (10) of the National Water Commission Act 2004 , and the Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative (NWI) specifically address the need for more integrated management of surface water and groundwater resources.

Under the NWI, states and territories are required to identify systems that have close interaction of surface water and groundwater and to establish integrated annual accounts for these systems.

From a groundwater perspective, groundwater management plans generally include allowances for surface water through streamflow interactions (river baseflow). In many cases, this as far as the assessment goes. In a minority of groundwater management units the management plans detail more specific groundwater surface water interaction management actions and environmental water requirements, such as in groundwater dependent ecosystems. In other cases, statewide licensing regulations dictate that bore interference assessments on other users (including surface waters) must be undertaken prior to the granting of new groundwater extraction licenses.

Further information on the technical and policy aspects of groundwater surface water interaction and conjunctive management can be found at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) and Natural Heritage Trust websites.

The Connected Water website has been developed by BRS to progress a coordinated approach to managing surface and groundwater resources in Australia. It is intended to provide an up-to-date resource for water managers, policy makers and catchment management groups.

Summary assessment

Of the surface water management plans that take groundwater into account only four (within the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales and South Australia) include groundwater as part of the environmental water requirements with direct allowances given. All others include groundwater indirectly.

There are many water management areas in which surface water and groundwater are not managed as an integrated resource. This is primarily because the connection between the resources is either unknown and has not been assessed, or because there is minimal connection between the resources, or because there is no consideration of the interconnection within the plan. The Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council Cap is an example of where a surface water cap on diversions has been in place for a number of years, but where the integrity of the cap is compromised through there not being an equivalent cap on groundwater extractions across the basin.

The extent to which surface water and groundwater were planned and managed together in draft and final water management plans was identified as part of the Level 1 Assessment. It was found that 14 of 63 of these surface water management plans in 2004-05 considered groundwater in their development, while 78 of 120 of these groundwater management plans considered surface water. Eight surface water management areas had combined final surface water and groundwater plans in 2004-05. This suggested surface water planning and management less commonly considered groundwater, than groundwater management planning, and lack of knowledge of connectivity and separate management of systems across state borders can be a barrier to integrated management.

Barriers to integrated management

One of the barriers to managing the resource conjunctively has been that groundwater unit boundaries sometimes cross traditional surface water catchments, so it is difficult to define the actual area to be designated for management. In other areas there is no connection because the groundwaters are deep (e.g. most of the Great Artesian Basin , except the recharge areas at the eastern and northern margins) or surface water is non-existent (e.g. Central Australia ).

The variation across the country has meant each jurisdiction has developed its own policies and management practices to deal with groundwater and surface water interactions. It has generally only been where the resource is highly developed that impacts of extraction from groundwater on surface water( and vice versa) have been noted, and management plans changed to take this into account. Integrated management of groundwater and surface water also requires a detailed understanding of the degree of connectivity between the two resources. Only limited technical information on the degree of connectivity between groundwater and surface water is available across Australia and more detailed on-ground assessments of connectivity need to be completed to improve the level of integrated management of groundwater and surface water resources nationally.

There are many surface water management areas and groundwater management units in which surface water and groundwater are not managed as an integrated resource. This is primarily because the connection between the resources is either unknown and has not been assessed, or because there is minimal connection between the resources, or because there is no consideration of the interconnection within the plan. The Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council Cap is an example of where a surface water cap on diversions has been in place for a number of years, but where the integrity of the cap is compromised through there not being an equivalent cap on groundwater extractions across the basin.

There are 17 groundwater management units where groundwater and surface water resources are managed under combined plans. These are in New South Wales (seven), Queensland (four), the Northern Territory (four) and South Australia (two). Apart from these 17 units, the resource is managed separately in most of Australia (including these states named above), except for some areas that have recently had plans updated or are currently being reviewed.

Summary comments on surface water / groundwater interaction are provided for all water management areas on the Regional water resources assessments page under the management tabs.    

Below are summary comments for each state and territory:

Australian Capital Territory

All groundwater in the Australian Capital Territory is managed in conjunction with surface water through the use of combined surface water and groundwater management plans for short-term and long-term interaction.

New South Wales

In New South Wales , new water sharing plans that integrate surface water and groundwater came into effect on July 2006. They are based on policy changes for inland waters that were implemented in 2003.

Northern Territory

The Northern Territory manages four groundwater management units in a conjunctive manner (with an additional one in progress). In all cases, this is accomplished through using a combined surface water and groundwater management plan for short-term and long-term impacts. In addition, there are two groundwater management units (Mereenie Sandstone Alice Water Control District and Ti Tree) that are assumed to have minimal connection. Elsewhere in the Northern Territory , there is no conjunctive management because the connectivity is unknown.

Queensland

Queensland manages water resources conjunctively for those areas under finalised water resource plans (covering 27 per cent of water resource plan areas).

South Australia

There are two groundwater management units (water management areas) in South Australia where groundwater and surface water resources are managed under combined plans (Barossa and Clare valleys). In the Eastern and Western Mount Lofty Ranges , which are subject to notice of intentions to prescribe, all the water resources, surface water and groundwater will be managed under combined water allocation plans.

Tasmania

In Tasmania , the Water Management Act 1999 allows for integrated management of surface water and groundwater resources. Groundwater management provisions are included in surface water management plans as appropriate.

Victoria

The Victorian Government is undertaking a statewide project to better understand the interaction between groundwater systems, surface water systems and groundwater dependent ecosystems. Assessments of the connectivity of surface water and groundwater have been undertaken for approximately 50 per cent (32 of 62) of the groundwater management units across Victoria .

Western Australia

In Western Australia , the Collie Group and Collie Nakina aquifers in the Collie groundwater management unit and the Carnarvon Superficial aquifer in the Carnarvon groundwater management unit are managed in conjunction with surface water. For the Collie Group aquifer, this is achieved using separate surface water and groundwater management plans that allow for short-term and long-term impacts. For the Collie Nakina aquifer this is done through implementation of the strategy agreed in 1999 for water resources management in the Collie basin. The Carnarvon groundwater management unit uses a combined surface water and groundwater management plan that allows for short-term and long-term impacts.

Your location:
Last Updated 22/08/2007