The politics of water in Australia is taking center stage in the water world as disgruntled farmers and local community’s voice concern about proposed water cut policies that adversely affect their livelihood.

Forty percent of Australia’s national farm and $15 billion in agricultural products hangs in the balance as officials debate the future of water in the Great Artesian Basin.

In Australia, development in industries such as agriculture, horticulture and farming is contingent upon water supply from the GAB.   The water supply being disputed currently honors pastoral leases and supplies local communities with water. Recently, locals were forced to cut water consumption by ten percent. Additional revisions to the Water Act suggest still further cuts to these pastoral areas.

The Great Artesian Basin (GAB) is the world’s largest and deepest artesian basin. The GAB provides Australians with the only reliable water resource across the continent. Questions about the future of farming, environmental sustainability and biodiversity in Australia are raised as negotiations about water allocation and access in Australia is considered. Proposed water cuts in Australia grab the attention of the local and international community as the outcome will set a precedent in water management for Australia.

Farmers and indigenous communities rely on the precious water supply of the GAB for survival. Cut backs to the natural resource will directly impact their ability to self-sustain and generate revenue. Will mining companies be allowed to tax water resources without oversight? Or, will stipulations of the Water Act apply to these operations as they do to other local groups?

Resistance from farmers and local community members was evident at a meeting hosted by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority at the end of October. Mining companies have expressed interest in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia where five percent of water from the GAB is found on the southeastern corner of the territory.

Farmers, irrigators and indigenous communities will suffer grave socio-economic consequences as a result of the water issue in Australia. Residents make their living from the land which is no doubt reliant on effective and efficient water resources.

If water extracted from the GAB by mining companies is allowed under different stipulations than local communities, small enterprises that generate revenue for smaller populations will diminish.

The income obtained from these mining ventures will not flow back into the local communities but will be dispersed amongst larger corporations that may not invest in environmental sustainability, infrastructural development and respect for biodiversity. The implications of these water allocations will have short and long term effects

Access to adequate water supply ensures commerce and livelihood for Australians. If this access is prohibited, local enterprise will decline. Legislators assure compromised communities that future mining projects will be held accountable to water standards that are most sustainable. Only time will tell if this assurance proves true.