Menindee Lakes Review Faces Local Doubts as Water Levels Fall
Menindee Lakes is heading into a hot summer with little inflow expected, leaving residents worried about worsening water quality, another fish kill and the lakes drying out. A review of the system’s operating rules is underway, but locals question whether it’ll produce changes that protect the lakes while giving the community more certainty.
Darryn Clifton, a Sunset Strip resident and former vice-president of the Darling River Action Group, found about 100,000 dead fish at Lake Menindee in February. The scale of that discovery gives the current concerns a recent, local reference point. Clifton says the river needs sustained attention to recover, rather than decisions made only when conditions become urgent.
Without fresh inflows, Clifton says, water quality declines and can create conditions for further fish kills when the weather changes. He blames a mix of water extraction by northern basin irrigators, South Australia’s priority for water and decisions by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder to release water. Those are Clifton’s criticisms; the review will have to weigh competing demands across a connected river system. For residents, the practical question is whether the rules can help keep enough water in the lakes to limit deterioration during dry periods.
Darryn Clifton hopes the review brings positive change for the lakes and community of Menindee, but is not optimistic. (ABC Broken Hill: Coquohalla Connor)
“We are the meat in the sandwich,” Clifton said. Menindee Lakes, he added, has historically been the first of the basin’s three major storages to be drawn down. He expects the review to bring change, but doubts residents will be satisfied with the outcome. That skepticism reflects a problem of trust as well as water management: when a storage is repeatedly exposed to competing claims, a revised rulebook has to show how local impacts will count in practice.
New operating rules under review
The lakes lie about 117 kilometres south of Broken Hill and connect the Upper and Lower Darling rivers. Together, they can hold three-and-a-half times the volume of Sydney Harbour. Their size makes them a major storage in the basin, while their connection to the river means decisions about filling and releases affect conditions beyond the lakes themselves.
The operating rules have changed little since the 1960s, when the system was developed as water storage shared by New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. The basin and its water demands have since become the subject of competing priorities, but the review’s task is specific: consider whether the rules governing this storage still serve the needs being put to it. Longstanding arrangements can provide continuity; they can also leave difficult trade-offs embedded in how water is allocated and released.
An aerial view of the upper lakes, where irrigators want permanent access to water. (ABC Broken Hill: Soofia Tariq)
The Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) is reviewing how the lakes are managed. Last month, control returned to the NSW government, making the lakes a NSW-only resource after levels fell below 28 per cent of capacity and water restrictions were imposed in the Darling River’s Northern Basin. That shift changes who controls the storage in the current conditions; it doesn’t resolve the underlying question of how water should be shared when levels fall.
The MDBA has received about 160 public submissions. Senior director of river modernisation Joe Davis said they showed agreement on many issues, alongside differing views about priorities: balancing environmental outcomes with water security, and deciding whether changes should focus on infrastructure, operating rules or broader basin reform. Those distinctions matter. Infrastructure can affect how water is stored and moved, while rules shape decisions about access and releases; broader reform reaches beyond the lakes’ immediate operation.
The lakes support a range of wildlife, with locals hoping future decisions ensure their survival. (ABC News: Bill Ormonde)
Water security shapes growers’ concerns
For Menindee grape grower Steve Howse, uncertain water access threatens crops that can take more than two years to produce fruit. “Without a secure water source we really are taking a bit of a gamble,” he said, adding that establishing vines is expensive. The timing makes water planning central to the crop: growers must commit resources well before they can see the return from new vines.
Howse says making water available in the top two lakes could give growers two years of security. His proposal puts the storage question in practical terms for businesses that need time to establish a crop. It also sits alongside the environmental concerns raised by residents, because a plan for dependable access has to account for the condition of the lakes and the river system.
Steve Howse at his property on the Darling River in March 2020. (ABC Rural: Saskia Mabin)
He also worries that proposals focused on protecting fish habitat miss a basic requirement: “We’re not going to have fish habitat if we have no water.” It’s a concise challenge to plans that treat environmental protection and water availability as separate problems. Without water, habitat cannot persist; with water in storage, decisions about its allocation still determine who and what benefits.
Steve Howse says he is worried about the longevity of his crops. (ABC Broken Hill: Lily McCure)
What the review must resolve
There’s a real tension here: residents want water quality and wildlife protected, while growers need dependable access to plan crops that take years to establish. The public submissions suggest these priorities overlap in some areas, but Davis also described clear disagreement about where reform should focus. A revised set of rules will be judged by whether it explains how those competing needs are handled when water is scarce.
(And this is the part most people overlook.) A review can identify options and set out trade-offs, but its value to Menindee will depend on whether the eventual arrangements make those choices clear to the people living and working beside the lakes. This is more significant than it looks: operating rules shape the conditions under which later decisions are made, even though no rule can remove the pressure created by low inflows.
The MDBA is expected to publish draft options for community review before the end of the year, followed by a final report next year. Residents will be watching whether those options address both the condition of the lakes and the water security on which local livelihoods depend. If you’re working in this space, the test will be whether the proposals explain how storage, releases and competing needs fit together. For Menindee, the summer arrives before that process is complete.
