Water Quality

Last week I had a phone call from Don Randall's office to tell me Don had finally secured an acknowledgement from the Minister for Water, Hon. Bill Marion MLA, that there are major issues surrounding the quality of water in the Preston Beach area.

This was exciting news as in the past all our efforts to bring the Water Corporation to task over water quality have ended in nothing more than letters of dismissal or at best various versions of 'the run around' with well recognised 'spin' being cited to appease the masses.

So, Don's advice that the Minister had phoned him in Canberra and confirmed that their investigations had found that the water quality is of very poor standard and in some cases does not meet health requirements was very well received.  At last, I thought we have progress.

He went on to say the Minister had ordered the Department to undertake more detailed reports and to determine a plan of action to address the situation!

It's probably important at this point to say that the Preston Beach Progress Association and many private individuals have been lobbying for better water for over 10 years.  In all this time whilst official testing has shown that salt content is at times way above the World Health Standard of >500mg/L, private testing has recorded salts as high as <900 mg/L.  The 'spin' from the Department has always maintained that whilst this is aesthetically poor and doesn't taste the best, they continued to maintain it would not harm our health.

Why am I so disappointed then when I read the Ministers letter to Don? 

Click on image to enlarge

We should admire Don's tenacity on this issue, however, reading the official response, I feel we have

made no further progress. As soon as the Water Corporation are challenged on this matter, they revert to the old 'spin' and we get the exact same response as usual; "I acknowledge that the water quality is at the limit of Australian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines (ADWG) in terms of taste and hardness. While this is not ideal, please be assured that the water meets all health parameters and does not pose a health risk."

The ADWG used in this instance are the guidelines set down in 1996 because the Water Corporation are licenced to use these guidelines, even though they are well outdated.

I located the Preston Beach Drinking Water Protection Plan (PBWPP) - Report No. 57 April 2006 online. Some of the facts discovered in this report confirm the that the water hardness levels at Preston Beach are well and truly off the scale.  Not simply "at the limit" of acceptable standards.

Here are some of the facts;

• Water is extracted from three bores, 1/85 and 2/85 commissioned in 1985 and located within the town, and 1/98 located on Johnson Road
• Bore 1/98 provides the majority of drinking water to the townsite, whilst 1/85 and 2/85 are used as backup or standby. 
• Salinity at 1/98 averages 550mg/L total dissolved salts (hardness)
• 1/85 and 2/85 average 1000-1079 mg/L and 838-972 mg/L respectively since monitoring began in 1985. The National Health & Medical Research Council states water hardness above 500 mg/L will result in severe scaling
• Generally health related chemicals are below the ADWG except for Boron which averaged .41 mg/L (ADWG 0.3 mg/L)
• Boron toxicity has resulted in testicular atrophy in tests using mice and rat
• A range of non-health related chemicals exceeded ADWG
• Iron is present in high levels and this affects taste.  This is countered by the addition of Calgon and filtering.
• Water hardness exceeded guidelines across the board
• Turbidity also exceeded guidelines
• Aluminium exceeded guidelines at bore 1/98 where concentrations reached 0.39 mg/L (ADWG .2 mg/L)

I was also concerned to read in the PBWPP that the chemical herbicide Atrazine is used in the management of the pine plantation in the area around bore 1/98.  The water table sits at 16 metres and there is concern about the possible leaching of chemicals into the water table.  Protection Strategies have been put in place following the report and protection zones established but it still gives rise for concern when our water is extracted from an uncontained aquifer.

Getting back to the Ministers letter, I cite the above as good reason to be offended by the assumption that all we are concerned about is the 'aesthetic quality' of Preston Beach water. On a positive note it is good that he recognises that the 2020 timeline for connection to the Stirling Trunk Main is not satisfactory but I see nothing in this correspondence to indicate a positive early outcome.