Lower Fitzroy River Groundwater Review Fitzroy River... · 8.4 Groundwater dependence of water-related ecosystems 95 8.5 Regional groundwater resource investigation 95 8.6 Technical

Lower Fitzroy River Groundwater Review

A report prepared for Department of Water W.A.

FINAL Version

15 May 2015

1 Lower Fitzroy River Groundwater Review

15 May 2015

How to cite this report:

Harrington, G.A. and Harrington, N.M. (2015). Lower Fitzroy River Groundwater

Review. A report prepared by Innovative Groundwater Solutions for Department of

Water, 15 May 2015.

Disclaimer

This report is solely for the use of Department of Water WA (DoW) and may not

contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or for other uses. Any

reliance on this report by third parties shall be at such parties’ sole risk.

The information in this report is considered to be accurate with respect to

information provided by DoW at the time of investigation. IGS has used the

methodology and sources of information outlined within this report and has made

no independent verification of this information beyond the agreed scope of works.

IGS assumes no responsibility for any inaccuracies or omissions. No indications were

found during our investigations that the information provided to IGS was false.

Innovative Groundwater Solutions Pty Ltd.

3 Cockle Court, Middleton SA 5213

Phone: 0458 636 988

ABN: 17 164 365 495 ACN: 164 365 495

Web: www.innovativegroundwater.com.au

Email: [email protected]

http://www.innovativegroundwater.com.au/


15 May 2015

Executive Summary

Water for Food is a Royalties for Regions initiative that aims to lift agricultural

productivity and encourage capital investment in the agricultural sector in a number

of regions across Western Australia. In the West Kimberley region, the lower Fitzroy

River valley is seen as a priority area where water resources can be developed to

support pastoral diversification.

This report presents the findings of a review into the groundwater resources of the

region, beginning with a synthesis of the results of recent hydrogeological, ecological

and cultural investigations. In short, these studies have confirmed the ecological

significance of the Fitzroy River and the strong ties that local Aboriginal people have

with the river and its floodplain for cultural and heritage purposes. The nature of

surface water – groundwater interactions in the catchment is extremely complex, and

there is insufficient knowledge of the potential ecological response to altered

hydrological regimes. This applies to surface water levels and flows, as well as

groundwater levels and fluxes.

The level of existing knowledge for the different aquifer systems in the lower Fitzroy

River valley is generally poor as there have been no previous catchment-scale

investigations that have collected and assimilated consistent hydrogeological data.

However, isolated knowledge of aquifer thicknesses, bore yields, groundwater

quality and monitoring records does exist around water supplies for towns such as

Fitzroy Crossing and Camballin, and Aboriginal communities. Similar information

and knowledge has also been acquired as part of the exploration and regulatory

processes for mining and unconventional gas activities.

The review has identified the regional Canning Basin aquifers as offering the greatest

opportunities for large scale groundwater development in the lower Fitzroy River

valley; the combined Poole Sandstone and Grant Group aquifers, as well as the

Devonian limestone, are seen as particularly prospective resources. Groundwater in

these aquifers is generally of low-moderate salinity and bore yields are suitable for

sustaining large developments. There are two main advantages of developing the

regional aquifers over the shallow alluvial aquifers that follow the main rivers.

Firstly, they have large volumes of groundwater in storage and can therefore

withstand the effects of short-term climate variability on recharge rates. Secondly,

they will generally be less connected to groundwater-dependent assets of ecological

and cultural significance at the ground surface. However, previous studies in the

region have already shown that this assumption does not always hold, as part of the


15 May 2015

Fitzroy River is thought to be sustained by discharge from the deep Poole Sandstone

during the dry season.

Despite the opportunities offered by the regional aquifers, there are a number of

significant knowledge gaps that need to be addressed in order to give potential

investors confidence of groundwater resource availability, and to enable the

determination of sustainable extraction limits. It must be stressed that the

determination of extraction limits requires considerable hydrogeological process

understanding and stakeholder involvement, and the volume of water that can be

pumped sustainably is only a fraction of the total volume of water in storage.

There is a need to map extents of the main aquifers and their relationships to

adjacent aquitards; to understand and quantify groundwater recharge processes; to

map groundwater flow directions and to estimate residence times. There is also a

need to better define potential constraints. While a lot of the water-dependent

ecological and cultural assets of the region have already been mapped, it is unknown

which of these – besides the Fitzroy River – are groundwater dependent. There is

also limited understanding of environmental water requirements and the potential

changes to ecology that could arise under an altered hydrological regime.

A comprehensive technical work program has been recommended to address the

knowledge gaps that have greatest bearing on future groundwater development

opportunities. This program includes a regional airborne geophysics survey, the

establishment of a meaningful and enduring groundwater monitoring network, a

regional-scale groundwater recharge and flow investigation of the most prospective

aquifers, focused investigations at sites identified for targeted development, and an

assessment of the level of groundwater dependence of known water-related assets. It

is also recommended that the WIN database be updated with the large volume of

historical information on water level monitoring and water quality analyses that

currently reside in technical reports and thus cannot be easily analysed.


15 May 2015

Contents

Executive Summary 2

Contents 4

List of Figures 6

List of Tables 8

1. Introduction 10

1.1 Potential Constraints on Developing Water Resources 10

1.2 Scope and Objectives 14

2. The Fitzroy Catchment 15

2.1 Physical Description and Climate Conditions 15

2.2 Geological and Hydrogeological Setting 16

2.4 Land Use and Cultural Values 21

2.5 Surface Water Hydrology 24

2.5.1 Surface Water Flows 24

2.5.2 Control Structures 26

2.5.3 Surface Water Salinity 27

2.6 Ecology 27

2.7 History of Proposals to Use Water Resources of the Fitzroy River Valley 30

3. Overview of Recent Work 32

3.1 Hydrogeological Investigations 32

Northern Australia Sustainable Yields (2008-09) 32

Fitzroy River integrated ground and surface water hydrology assessment (2008-

11) 33

Surface water – groundwater interactions in the lower Fitzroy River, WA (2008-

11) 34

Regional AEM Survey 36

3.2 Ecological 36

Northern Australia Sustainable Yields (2008-09) 36

Northern Australia Water Futures Assessment (2008-12) 37

Northern Australia Aquatic Ecological Assets Project (2011) 39

3.3 Cultural ties to water resources 40

Indigenous socio-economic values and river flows (2008-10) 41

Comparison of Knowledge Bases 42


15 May 2015

4. Knowledge of the Groundwater Systems 43

4.1 Regional Aquifers 43

4.1.1 Overview 43

4.1.2 Devonian Limestone 47

4.1.3 Fairfield Group 50

4.1.4 Poole Sandstone and Grant Group 51

4.1.5 Noonkanbah Formation 54

4.1.6 Liveringa Group 56

4.1.7 Wallal Sandstone / Erskine Sandstone /Alexander Formation 60

4.2 Alluvial Aquifer 61

Data Availability 61

Groundwater Recharge 62

Groundwater Flow and Discharge 62

Groundwater Residence Times 64

Aquifer Properties 64

Estimated Groundwater Storage 64

Bore Yields and Groundwater Salinities 64

4.3 Surface Water-Groundwater Interactions 65

4.3.1 Regional Context 65

4.3.2 Detailed Understanding for the Lower Fitzroy River 66

4.3.3 Broader-Scale Insights from the AEM Survey 70

4.3.4 Potential Impacts of Future Groundwater Pumping on River Flow 70

5. Existing and Potential Future Groundwater Users 73

5.1 Licensed Allocations 73

5.1.1 Overview 73

5.1.2 Town and Community Water Supplies 75

5.2 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems 75

5.2.1 Identified Ecological Values 75

5.2.2 Groundwater Dependence of Ecological Values 77

5.2.3 Identifying Likely Impacts of Changes in Groundwater Levels to GDEs 78

5.3 Cultural and Heritage Values 79

5.4 Mining and Unconventional Gas 80

6. Development Opportunities and Constraints 83

6.1 Prospective Groundwater Resources 83

Poole Sandstone / Grant Group 83

Devonian Limestone 84


15 May 2015

Alluvial Aquifer 84

6.2 Managed Aquifer Recharge 85

6.3 Targeted Development Areas 86

7. Critical Knowledge Gaps 88

7.1 Knowledge Required to Facilitate Allocation of the Alluvial Aquifer 88

7.2 Knowledge Required for Regional Aquifers 89

7.2.1 To Better Understand Development Opportunities 89

7.2.2 To Better Understand Development Constraints 89

8. Recommendations for work to address knowledge gaps 91

8.1 Update the WIN Database 92

8.2 Regional geophysics survey 92

8.3 Establish a representative monitoring network 93

8.4 Groundwater dependence of water-related ecosystems 95

8.5 Regional groundwater resource investigation 95

8.6 Technical investigations in targeted areas 96

8.7 Modelling tools and assessments 97

9 References 98

Appendix A FitzCAM DRAFT Asset Table 29-10-09 (FitzCAM, 2009). 106

Appendix B Recommended priority areas for an airborne geophysical (AEM)

survey 120

List of Figures

Figure 1 Location of the study area for this review relative to the Fitzroy River

catchment. .............................................................................................................................. 11

Figure 2 Schematic diagram showing the impacts of groundwater pumping on

surface water (from Barlow and Leake, 2012) .................................................................. 13

Figure 3 The Physiographic regions of the Fitzroy catchment (from Lindsay and

Commander, 2005). .............................................................................................................. 15

Figure 4 Long-term annual rainfall at Fitzroy Crossing (from CSIRO, 2009). ............. 16

Figure 5 Location and major tectonic sub-divisions of the Canning Basin (from Mory

and Hocking, 2011) ............................................................................................................... 17


15 May 2015

Figure 6 Geology and hydrogeology of the lower Fitzroy River valley in the Canning

Basin. ...................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 7 Generalised geological section (from Mory and Hocking (2011). .................. 19

Figure 8 Regional hydrogeological sections (from Lindsay and Commander (2005)).

................................................................................................................................................. 21

Figure 9 Aboriginal communities and pastoral stations in the Lower Fitzroy River

valley. ..................................................................................................................................... 22

Figure 10 Approximate positions and names of ‘special places’ along the lower

Fitzroy River, named by Traditional Owners (reproduced from Lawford et al. (1988)

by Storey et al. (2001)). ......................................................................................................... 23

Figure 11 Current mining leases in the study area. ......................................................... 25

Figure 12 Summary of modelled groundwater discharge fluxes into the Fitzroy River,

and a schematic hydrogeological cross-section interpreted from the AEM survey

(from Harrington et al. 2013). ............................................................................................. 35

Figure 13 Example of interpreted AEM depth section ‘12a-12b’ through Mount

Anderson, showing highly contrasting conductivities for different stratigraphic units

(Source: Fitzpatrick et al. 2011). .......................................................................................... 37

Figure 14 Development and loss of pools in the Fitzroy River through three different

dry seasons (from Close et al. 2012). X-axis represents calendar day of the year, and

dashed lines represent wet season discharge at Fitzroy Barrage. ................................. 39

Figure 15 The Bayesian Network developed to integrate expert Gooniyandi

ecological knowledge with western scientific hydrogeological knowledge (from

Liedloff et a., 2013). ............................................................................................................... 42

Figure 16 Groundwater salinity for bores completed in each aquifer, as recorded in

the WIN database. ................................................................................................................ 49

Figure 17 Cross sections through the alluvial aquifer at (a) Willare, (b) Camballin

Barrage and (c) Gogo (from Lindsay and Commander, 2005). Refer to source for

cross-section locations. ......................................................................................................... 63

Figure 18 Longitudinal river water tracer profiles for (a) May 2008 and (b) May 2010

(from Harrington et al. (2011)) Yellow and grey triangles mark the locations of the


15 May 2015

confluence with the Cunningham Anabranch and the nested piezometers on

Noonkanbah Station, respectively. .................................................................................... 67

Figure 19 Surface water sampling locations (A), environmental tracer concentrations

(B and C) and interpreted AEM section along the Fitzroy River (from Harrington et

al., 2013).................................................................................................................................. 69

Figure 20 Interpreted AEM sections from approximately Looma (west) along the

southern boundary of Liveringa Station (from Fitzpatrick et al., 2013). See source for

exact locations. ...................................................................................................................... 71

Figure 21 Stream depletion as a function of continuous pumping time, presented for

different bore set-back distances and different aquifer types (from Turnadge et al.,

2013). ....................................................................................................................................... 72

Figure 22 Distribution of current groundwater and surface water licensed allocations

at 31st March 2015.................................................................................................................. 74

Figure 23 Recommended technical work program to address the hydrogeological

objectives of the Water for Food project in the lower Fitzroy valley. ........................... 91

List of Tables

Table 1 Buru Energy suspended petroleum wells in the Yulleroo and Paradise-

Valhalla area (from Buru Energy, 2013). ........................................................................... 44

Table 2 Formation characteristics and elevations in the Buru Energy petroleum wells

in the Paradise-Valhalla area (Buru Energy, 2013). ......................................................... 44

Table 3 Estimated volume of groundwater storage in the Canning Basin (Laws, 1990

in CSIRO, 2009). .................................................................................................................... 46

Table 4 Range of typical groundwater salinities in the Canning Basin aquifers

(CSIRO, 2009; after Lindsay and Commander, 2005). ..................................................... 46

Table 5 Summary of the groundwater salinity data included in the WIN database. . 47

Table 6 Summary of aquifer property data for the Grant Group and Poole Sandstone.

................................................................................................................................................. 53

Table 7 Summary of bore yield and salinity data for the Poole Sandstone and Grant

Group aquifers. ..................................................................................................................... 55


15 May 2015


15 May 2015

1. Introduction

The water resources of northern Australia are becoming increasingly attractive

supply options for irrigated agriculture to support escalating global food demand

and Australia’s export market. Such development is also seen to be critical for

improving social and economic conditions for the Aboriginal Traditional Owners in

the regions, through providing new and sustainable employment and business

opportunities.

Water for Food is a Royalties for Regions (Government of Western Australia)

initiative that aims to lift agricultural productivity and encourage capital investment

in the agricultural sector in a number of regions across Western Australia. The

Department of Water (DoW) has been funded through Water for Food to deliver a

landscape scale investigation to confirm groundwater availability in the lower

Fitzroy River valley (Figure 1). The objective is to identify where water resources can

be developed to support pastoral diversification.

This requires (a) a synthesis of the recent work to identify the level of understanding

of the various potential water sources in the Fitzroy Valley, (b) identification of

potential development sites based on existing knowledge, and (c) detailed

hydrogeological investigations to define water availability at potential development

sites.

1.1 Potential Constraints on Developing Water Resources

The development of water resources in any region clearly requires an understanding

of how much water is available, taking into account the volume of water in storage

as well as the inputs and outputs of the system. The degree of confidence required

for this understanding generally depends on the level of existing water use and the

risk of undesirable impacts due to future development. However, long-term

management of water resources also requires a detailed understanding of

constraints, including environmental factors and operational requirements. For

groundwater resources these constraints typically include water level or flow

impacts to groundwater-dependent ecosystems (GDEs) and water quality

degradation due to reduced aquifer through-flow or enhanced inter-aquifer leakage.

Figure 1 Location of the study area for this review relative to the Fitzroy River catchment.


15 May 2015

In northern Australia, and particularly around perennial river systems such as the

Fitzroy River, the largest potential constraint to water resource development is

undoubtedly impacts to the ecological (and associated cultural) values of dry season

flows and/or permanent pools. While this constraint may seem obvious for surface

water diversion or extraction, it is often overlooked for groundwater extraction.

Pumping from any groundwater system that is connected to a ‘gaining river’ – that

is, a river into which groundwater is discharging – will have an impact on the level

or flow in the river, as depicted in Figure 2. Initially, groundwater pumping causes

drawdown of the water table locally around the bore. Over time, the drawdown cone

spreads and begins to decrease the rate of groundwater discharge into the river.

Ultimately however, if pumping proceeds long enough for the drawdown cone to

intersect the river, the hydraulic gradient reverses and the river loses water to the

aquifer. This process is called Stream Flow Depletion and there are several existing

tools that can be used to predict the likely impacts for different aquifer geometries

and pumping regimes (see Chapter 5).

While the example of stream flow depletion shown in Figure 2 is for a shallow,

unconfined aquifer, such as the alluvial aquifers in the Fitzroy River valley, the same

process applies to deeper, confined aquifers that are connected to the river.

Therefore, pumping these deeper aquifers also has the potential to reduce the rate of

groundwater discharge to the river, or the persistence of in-stream pools. In addition,

pumping groundwater from aquifers can also cause stream flow depletion from a

‘losing river’ – that is, a river that naturally discharges into the aquifer, providing a

source of recharge. This occurs because the rate of leakage from a losing river

increases as the depth to water table increases, until a depth beyond which the river

and groundwater become completely disconnected (Brunner et al., 2009).

Another potential constraint to developing groundwater resources in northern

Australia is related to the high inter-annual variability of rainfall and therefore

recharge (CSIRO, 2009). This is likely to be most problematic for shallow, alluvial

aquifers as the deeper, regional aquifers have large storage and thus can withstand

the effects of short-term climate variability.


15 May 2015

Figure 2 Schematic diagram showing the impacts of groundwater pumping on surface water (from

Barlow and Leake, 2012)


15 May 2015

1.2 Scope and Objectives

Innovative Groundwater Solutions Pty Ltd. (IGS) was engaged by the Department to

undertake a desktop review of the hydrogeological knowledge of the lower Fitzroy

River region, commencing with the seminal work of Lindsay and Commander

(2005). The study area is from Willare to about 100 km north of Fitzroy Crossing

(Figure 1).

The objectives of the review were to define the current extent of knowledge, identify

areas with potential for development, outline critical gaps in knowledge and provide

recommendations for work to address these gaps. A particular focus was to review

the supply potential for targeted development at Mount Anderson, Fitzroy Crossing,

GoGo Station and Mount Pierre.

This report presents the findings of the desktop review, including

1. Discussion of the aquifers that occur in the Fitzroy Valley, including

connectivity, and whether there are geological or geographical boundaries

that could be used to define management areas;

2. Analysis and discussion of the available information for each aquifer;

3. Analysis and discussion of potential yields and any factors that limit

extraction;

4. Analysis and discussion of any potential risks to groundwater dependent

ecosystems and permanent pools from extraction induced changes in river

hydrology;

5. Recommend a representative monitoring program to improve the

understanding of the system hydrology;

6. A bibliography of all hydrogeological reports, papers and other relevant

sources information included in the review;

7. Identification of critical knowledge gaps in our understanding of the system

hydrogeology;

8. A comprehensive set of recommendations on work required to address item

7; and

9. Comments on the yield potential and supply reliability for targeted

development areas at Mt Anderson, Fitzroy Crossing, GoGo Station and Mt

Pierre.


15 May 2015

2. The Fitzroy Catchment

2.1 Physical Description and Climate Conditions

The Fitzroy River catchment is located in the Kimberley region of northwest WA and

covers an area of almost 94,000 km2 (Figure 1). The catchment can be thought of as

comprising three major physiographic provinces: the Fitzroy Plains, the Fitzroy

Floodplain and Ranges provinces (Beard, 1979, in Lindsay and Commander (2005))

(Figure 3).

Figure 3 The Physiographic regions of the Fitzroy catchment (from Lindsay and Commander, 2005).

The climate in the Fitzroy region is arid to semi-arid, with a historical mean average

annual rainfall of about 560 mm (Figure 4), and mean annual areal potential

evapotranspiration (APET) of 1980 mm (CSIRO, 2009). Rainfall is extremely variable

on an annual basis, with the 10th percentile of annual rainfall being 963 mm/yr and

the 90th percentile being 363 mm/yr, and also extremely seasonal, with 93% occurring

during the wet season (Nov-April), and a very high dry season (May-Oct) APET.


15 May 2015

Figure 4 Long-term annual rainfall at Fitzroy Crossing (from CSIRO, 2009).

The region has high rainfall intensities and there is a strong north-south rainfall

gradient of about 1.8 mm/km, decreasing to the south (CSIRO, 2009). Since APET is

greater than rainfall, and rainfall only exceeds APET for short periods during the wet

months, the Fitzroy region is considered to be water-limited. The region has very

high summer temperatures, with a mean November minimum of 24.2°C, and a

maximum of 40.5°C at Fitzroy Crossing, compared to a July minimum of 10.7°C and

a maximum of 29.6°C.

2.2 Geological and Hydrogeological Setting

The following information is summarised from Lindsay and Commander (2005).

The study area lies mainly within the Fitzroy Trough subdivision of the northern

Canning Basin (Figure 5). The Fitzroy Trough is the most prominent structural

feature in the area, and consists of a north-west trending graben, bounded on the

northeast by the Pinnacle Fault System and to the southwest by the Fenton Fault

system (Crowe and Towner, 1981, in Lindsay and Commander (2005)). The Fitzroy

Trough is in-filled with Devonian to Jurassic sediments, intruded by narrow volcanic

plugs of Mesozoic lamproite (Middleton, 1990, in Lindsay and Commander (2005)).

The sediments themselves consist predominantly of sandstones and shales of

shallow water marine, deltaic and fluvial origin.

The Lennard Shelf occurs to the northeast of the study area (Figure 5), and is an area

of relatively shallow basin in-filled with Devonian reef and other early Palaeozoic

rocks. To the southeast of the Fitzroy Trough is the Barbwire Terrace (Figure 5), a

platform with up to 3,000 m of sediments, with younger Jurassic sediments at the

surface. To the east are the rugged King Leopold Range and Mueller Range, which

are formed by uplifted and exposed igneous and metamorphic rocks (Figure 1).


15 May 2015

Figure 5 Location and major tectonic sub-divisions of the Canning Basin (from Mory and Hocking,

2011)

The oldest rocks outcropping in the study area are the late Devonian reef complexes,

in the northeast (Figure 6 and Figure 7). These are overlain by the late Carboniferous

limestones, siltstones, minor sandstones and shales, collectively known as the

Fairfield Group, which also only outcrop in the northeast of study area (Figure 6).

The Fairfield Group is unconformably overlain by the Grant Group, which is

dominated by sandstones, often with fine-grained facies in the middle (Figure 7). The

Grant Group rocks mainly outcrop in the anticlinal structures and form some of the

ranges, such as the Grant Range near Liveringa, and the St George Ranges southeast

of Noonkanbah (Figure 1 and Figure 6). The Permian Poole Sandstone

unconformably overlies the Grant Group, and is lithologically very similar. The

Poole Sandstone can be observed as a prominent range of hills on top of the Grant

Range, near Liveringa Homestead (Figure 1 and Figure 6). Together, the Poole

Sandstone and Grant Group comprise one of the most significant aquifers in the

region (see Section 4.1.3).

Figure 6 Geology and hydrogeology of the lower Fitzroy River valley in the Canning Basin.


15 May 2015

Figure 7 Generalised geological section (from Mory and Hocking (2011).


15 May 2015

The late Permian Noonkanbah Formation comprises predominantly siltstone and

shale, and therefore acts as an aquitard. It underlies part of the Fitzroy River but it is

poorly exposed at the surface (Lindsay and Commander, 2005) (Figure 6). Most

information on it comes from coal and oil exploration bores.

The Liveringa Group is the next most important aquifer, being up to 900 m thick and

comprising sandstone and siltstone with lenses and minor beds of claystone and

shale. It is the unit that most extensively underlies the Fitzroy River (Figure 6). The

Blina Shale overlies the Liveringa Group and is around 200 m thick. This is overlain

by the Triassic Erskine Sandstone, which ranges in thickness from 30 m in the

Erskine Ranges to 269 m near Derby (Figure 7). It outcrops in a wide area to the east

of Willare (Figure 6). There is a major unconformity between the Erskine Sandstone

and the overlying late Jurassic Wallal Sandstone (Figure 7). The latter outcrops

extensively to the south of Willare and east of Derby and is a laminated pink and

white, very fine to very coarse grained sandstone with minor siltstone, conglomerate

and lignite (Figure 6). The overlying Barbwire and Alexander Formations are similar

in lithology but variable in thickness, with a maximum combined thickness of about

95 m. They consist of sandstone, siltstone and minor conglomerate. The Wallal and

Alexander Formations are considered to be good aquifers.

The Jarlemai Siltstone conformably overlies the Alexander Formation and is overlain

by the Cainozoic sediments of the Warrimbah Conglomerate and the Fitzroy

Alluvium. The former is an approximately 10 m thick layer of cobble and pebble

conglomerate, limited to within about 15 km of the Fitzroy River, and may represent

a previous course of the Fitzroy River. The Fitzroy River alluvium underlies the

floodplain (Figure 6) and is 30 - 40 m thick, comprising a basal sand and gravel

overlain by up to 10 m of silt/clay.

The Permian to Jurassic rocks are all faulted and gently folded, with the most

prominent anticlines forming the Grant and St George Ranges, which trend west-

northwesterly (Figure 1). The Fitzroy River flows around the ranges formed by these

anticlines and the area is further cross cut by numerous north-northwesterly

trending transverse faults, creating a “trellised” drainage system (Crowe and

Towner, 1981; Gibson and Crowe, 1982, in Lindsay and Commander (2005)) (Figure

8). The major aquifers described above underlie the alluvial aquifer and discharge

into it (Figure 8).


15 May 2015

Figure 8 Regional hydrogeological sections (from Lindsay and Commander (2005)).

2.4 Land Use and Cultural Values

Aboriginal people have occupied the Fitzroy Catchment for tens of thousands of

years. The Fitzroy River was probably a focus of population during dry periods, and

acted as a physiographic and cultural divide between desert clans to the south and

clans from the ranges in the north and east (Purcell, 1984; O’Connor, 1995;

McConnell and O’Connor, 1997, in Lindsay and Commander (2005)). Scattered

aboriginal communities occur throughout the area (Figure 9). The largest is at

Noonkanbah, on the edge of the Fitzroy River, with a population of 250. The

continued presence and use of the land by numerous aboriginal people is an

important feature of the Fitzroy catchment (Storey et al., 2001). Permanent pools in

the Fitzroy River system are considered to be “living water” by the traditional

owners and a list of “special places” along the lower river system provided by a

Traditional Owner was detailed in a book ‘Raparapa’ (Lawford et al., 1988). These

places are shown in Figure 10. Storey et al. (2001) describe the cultural value of the

Fitzroy River ecology to the Traditional Owners, as providing sources of food,

medicine, dye, raft-building materials, and Dreamtime stories, as well as triggers for

migration and cultural activities.

Figure 9 Aboriginal communities and pastoral stations in the Lower Fitzroy River valley.

Figure 10 Approximate positions and names of ‘special places’ along the lower Fitzroy River, named by Traditional Owners (reproduced from Lawford et al. (1988) by Storey et

al. (2001)).


15 May 2015

By the 1890s, most of the land in the Fitzroy Catchment was covered by pastoral

leases. High sheep and cattle numbers led to a decrease in vegetation density,

compacted soil and large areas of erosion, especially around the rivers (Lindsay and

Commander, 2005). Reductions in livestock numbers since 1978, establishment of

watering points away from the river and improved fencing are now reducing these

impacts. Figure 9 shows the locations of current pastoral leases in the study area.

Mining is also a significant land use in the Fitzroy Catchment, with a number of

current and pending mining leases scattered across the region (Figure 11). Past,

current and proposed mining activities include coal, lead and zinc, tight gas and

diamonds.

2.5 Surface Water Hydrology

2.5.1 Surface Water Flows

The Fitzroy River has its source in the King Leopold Ranges and flows 733 km to its

discharge point in King Sound on the Timor Sea (Figure 1). The lower reaches of the

Fitzroy River are influenced by tidal activity, with a diurnal range of 8-10 m at

Derby, near the river mouth. During the wet season, the Fitzroy River can be up to 15

km across, and the alluvial sediments cover an area of 32,000 km2. Runoff within the

Fitzroy River catchment is highly variable, being as low as 50 mm/yr on the

permeable sands of the southern plains, and up to around 150 mm/yr in the northern

Ranges areas (Ruprecht and Rodgers, 1998 in Storey et al. (2001) and Lindsay and

Commander (2005)).

River flow is highly seasonal, with flooding occurring in the wet season from

December to March, contracting to pools with very low flows from June to October

(Lindsay and Commander, 2005). The annual discharge at Fitzroy Crossing, as

measured between 1958 and 2014 ranges from 140 GL (1992) to 38,000 GL (1976),

with a mean of about 7,300 GL (DoW, pers. comm. May 2015).

Flows at Noonkanbah are similar. Harrington et al. (2013) report the annual

discharge at Noonkanbah as ranging from about 1,000 GL (2010) to 33,000 GL (2011)

with a mean of about 10,000 GL. However, a more recent analysis of the data by

DoW result in values ranging from 820 GL (2005) and 23,000 GL (2011), with an

average of 76,000 GL (DoW, pers. comm., May 2015).

Figure 11 Current mining leases in the study area.


15 May 2015

Most hydrographic gauging and recording has been focused on flood warning and

the estimation of potential surface water yields (Kimberley Water Resources

Development Office, 1993). At the time of the CSIRO (2009) study, all gauging

stations in the study area had less than 10 years of measured data, with the exception

of the station at Fitzroy Crossing. There was no good low-flow data for Camballin

Floodplain (confidence in the results was poor) and dry season flows were generally

poorly understood for the Fitzroy River. There was better confidence in low- and

high-flow results at Geikie Gorge and in high-flows at Camballin Floodplain.

Harrington et al. (2011) also reviewed the surface water data available for the Fitzroy

River. They found that there were six open (i.e. actively monitored) gauging stations

in the Upper Fitzroy (upstream of Fitzroy Crossing), and seven open gauging

stations in the lower Fitzroy with five on the main river. They provide a map of

gauging stations and a table showing the period/frequency and status of rating

curves. The reliability of flow rating curves had been limited, due to the volume of

flows, the extent and complexity of floodplain flows and the difficulties with

obtaining reliable measurements during major flows. However, a number of reaches

were surveyed in 2008-2010, and new rating curves were developed. This has

resulted in new river flow data recently becoming available, including 23 years

(1992-present) of flow data for the Camballin Barrage (also known as the Fitzroy

Barrage) (DoW, pers. comm., May 2015). An additional four rating curves for parts of

the Fitzroy River Catchment are being reviewed. These are on the Margaret River, Mt

Wynn Creek, Christmas Creek and Watery River (DoW, pers. comm., May 2015).

Even once developed, the rating curves for low-flows on the lower Fitzroy (except at

the Camballin Barrage) are susceptible to annual change due to sand bar migration,

and therefore need to be surveyed and potentially re-gauged every dry season.

2.5.2 Control Structures

The only dam on the Fitzroy River is the Camballin Barrage, located 150 km

upstream of the tidal zone (CSIRO, 2009) (Figure 1). It was built in the 1950s and

opened in 1962 to support large-scale irrigation of rice and other crops. Water was

diverted from the barrage up Uralla Creek to Seventeen Mile Dam (capacity 5 GL).

The irrigation scheme failed and was abandoned in 1983 due to the impacts of wet

season flooding on crops and infrastructure, and a lack of water in the dry season. It

was sold to Liveringa Station in 1995, and water is still diverted down Uralla Creek

to support irrigated fodder crops (CSIRO, 2009). Now, the water travels through a

series of modified pools to the Inkarta irrigation channel, where it supplies several

centre pivots. The offtake from the main Fitzroy River at Uralla Creek has a sill that


15 May 2015

is permanently set at a level that regulates the amount of water diverted and

maintains environmental water requirements for the Fitzroy River.

There are other small weirs on tributaries of the Fitzroy, but no major structures. In

1965, the Geological Survey of Western Australia conducted a geotechnical drilling

survey at Gogo for a proposed dam site (Swarbrick, 1965). The risk of leakage under

the dam and possible failure of the abutments was considered too great for that

project to go ahead.

2.5.3 Surface Water Salinity

Salinity of the Fitzroy River surface waters is not currently measured on a routine

basis. Lindsay and Commander (2005) describe some records being available from

five stations between 1996 and 2005. Wet season salinity levels are less than 250 mg/L

and dry season salinities range up to 900 mg/L (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). In

terms of spatial patterns in salinity, the river is fresh (<500 mg/L) between Fitzroy

Crossing and Noonkanbah, marginal (500-1,000 mg/L) between Noonkanbah and

Myroodah, and fresh from Myroodah to Willare. It is widely understood that the dry

season salinities of the river water reflect groundwater salinities as dry season river

flows are supported by baseflow. The river water salinity often exceeds the desirable

potable water limit of 500 mg/L in the dry season, limiting its use as a potable water

supply.

2.6 Ecology

The majority of the available ecological information on the Fitzroy River Floodplain

originates from a “preliminary assessment of the ecological values within the Fitzroy

River system” carried out by Storey et al. (2001). This project was commissioned by

the then Water and Rivers Commission in light of proposed developments that could

potentially result in regulation or damming of the Fitzroy River. It was the first study

aimed at determining Ecological Water Requirements (EWRs) of the Fitzroy River

and sought to evaluate the potential effects of altering the river flow regime on the

river ecology. The study consisted of (1) an intensive field assessment, carried out at

selected sites, in conjunction with Aboriginal people, during the dry season of

November 2000; (2) a desktop study to collate existing information on the

distribution and structure of riverine, floodplain and estuarine ecological

communities; and (3) an assessment of hydrological data and discharge modelling to

understand the temporal variability of surface water flows and the potential effects

of these flow scenarios on identified ecological values. The majority of the more

recent studies described in the current report, including that of Lindsay and


15 May 2015

Commander (2005), rely heavily on Storey et al. (2001) for information on the

ecological values of the Fitzroy River and the majority of the information provided

below is derived from that study.

Storey et al. (2001) found that the ecological diversity and health of the Fitzroy

riverine ecosystem was good, despite unrestricted stock access. They describe in

some detail the vegetation assemblages of the various botanical regions of the Fitzroy

catchment. The vegetation in the area adjacent the Kimberley Basin had been

described and mapped by Beard (1990), but this predominantly focused on dryland

species. The paucity of information on the river vegetation has been highlighted by

Sutton (1998) and Storey et al. (2001). At the time of the study of Storey et al. (2001),

there had been no detailed botanical survey around the Fitzroy River. They state that

there is little known about the number and distribution of “priority taxa” in the

riparian vegetation of the Fitzroy River.

The wetlands and permanent pools along the Fitzroy Rver support a diverse ecology,

including 35 species of fish and 67 species of waterbird. Of the fish, about 18 species

are Kimberley endemics and at least three are regional endemics (Storey et al., 2001).

The Northern River Shark and Freshwater Sawfish, which are listed as threatened,

are also found in the river (Storey et al., 2001 and Morgan et al., 2005, in CSIRO

(2009)).

Waterbird usage of floodplains, particularly at Camballin, is considered to be

sufficient for Ramsar listing. Storey et al. (2001) summarise the various bird surveys

undertaken within the Fitzroy catchment. At least 67 species of birds have been

recorded on the Camballin floodplain, with 19 of these listed under the Japan-

Australia or China-Australia Migratory Birds Agreements. Total bird numbers

recorded on the Camballin floodplain were 38,553 in May 1986 and 21,840 in March

1988. The Fitzroy River is probably one of the most important habitats in the region

for Magpie goose and Whistling-duck (SA Halse, Dept. CALM, pers. Comm., in

Storey et al. (2001)). In terms of numbers of birds, the Camballin floodplain is of

national importance for Plumed whistling-duck, and of Western Australian

importance for Pacific heron, Great egret, Intermediate egret, Glossy ibis, Magpie

goose and Wood sandpiper. Even in drier years, the floodplain supports more than

20,000 waterbirds, meeting Ramsar criteria. Although the Camballin floodplain has

been the focus of most studies, the floodplain is also extensive to the north of

Noonkanbah, where the major wetlands are Mallallah and Sandhill Swamp. This

area appears to provide similar habitat to the Camballin floodplain, although it has


15 May 2015

been less well studied, and therefore should be considered as potentially important

waterbird habitat (Storey et al., 2001). Other waterbird habitat includes numerous

small wetlands on the floodplain, such as Lake Daley, south of Camballin (Storey et

al., 2001).

Aquatic macroinvertebrates are considered to be particularly good indicators of

ecosystem health. However, Storey et al. (2001) state that there is little known about

the aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna of the Kimberley region in general, and even

less of the Fitzroy River system. This knowledge gap was improved by the

establishment of the Monitoring River Health Initiative (MRHI) in 1993, which

developed a system of models for macroinvertebrate assemblages, known as the

Australian River Assessment Scheme (AusRivAS), to be used to assess and monitor

the ecological health of Australia’s rivers (Smith et al., 1998, 1999; Marchant et al.,

1997). Samples of macroinvertebrates were collected from 188 reference (minimally

disturbed) sites throughout Western Australia between 1994 and 1996. Twenty of

these were in the Kimberley (Kay et al., 1999). In 1997, the First National Assessment

of River Health (FNARH) collected macroinvertebrate data from across Australia to

assess river health using the AusRivAS models. This sampled 14 sites within the

Fitzroy River catchment, which are listed in Storey et al. (2001). This data provided a

basis upon which to compare the Fitzroy River catchment with other catchments in

the Kimberley and Pilbara regions, based upon the number of families recorded.

However, Storey et al. (2001) assert that a more detailed survey conducted at the

species level is required to determine the “distinctiveness” of the Fitzroy River

macroinvertebrate fauna.

In terms of environmental disturbance, the construction of the barrage at Camballin

has had significant environmental impacts due to alteration of natural flows and

Morgan et al. (2005) showed that the Camballin Barrage presents a considerable

barrier to fish migrations; a fishway was subsequently proposed to mitigate this

problem.

The current status of knowledge of the specific ecological values of the Fitzroy River

system, and the understanding of the role of groundwater in sustaining these are

described in Section 5.2.


15 May 2015

2.7 History of Proposals to Use Water Resources of the Fitzroy River

Valley

The water resources of the Fitzroy River catchment (Figure 1) have received

considerable attention since the 1950s as a potential water source to support various

development opportunities (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). The Fitzroy Plan,

prepared by the Public Works Department in 1964, was the earliest formal

documentation of potential dam sites and overview of the irrigation potential of the

Fitzroy Valley (in WAWA, 1993). The focus from the 1950s to 1980s was on the

possibility of damming or diverting surface water for agriculture and hydro-

electricity. The Camballin (or Fitzroy) Barrage (Figure 1) was constructed in the

1950s and opened in 1962 to support a large-scale rice irrigation scheme, and fodder

crops, sorghum, oats and cotton were also trialed (see Section 2.5.2).

Further major interest in the water resources of the Fitzroy River came from Western

Agricultural Industries Pty Ltd (WAI) in the late 1990s (Fitzroy Sub-region working

discussion paper – March 2009). WAI proposed a dam on the Fitzroy at Dimond

Gorge, as well as dams on the Margaret and Leopold Rivers. The proposal was to

irrigate 225,000 ha of land south east of Broome to grow cotton. Strong opposition

from the West Kimberley community to further impoundment of the Fitzroy River or

its tributaries, and to broad scale irrigation of genetically modified cotton led WAI to

abandon the proposal. WAI explored an alternative option to develop off-river

storage and use groundwater. Again, strong opposition to the proposal, particularly

from Traditional Owners who did not grant access for drilling, caused the proposal

to be abandoned. The proposal generated a large amount of community concern

about large scale developments and this continues to be a contentious issue in the

Kimberley (Fitzroy Sub-region working discussion paper – March 2009). There have

been an increasing number of proposals for diversification of pastoral lands in the

Fitzroy Region, including development of small and medium-scale irrigated cattle

fodder, timber plantations, horticultural crops, aquaculture, and small to medium

scale tourism enterprises (Fitzroy Sub-region working discussion paper – March

2009).

Water resources of the Kimberley region have also attracted attention as a potential

water supply for Perth (Allen et al., 1992; Pollard, 1993). An estimate of Allen et al.

(1992) that the Fitzroy alluvium along the 50 km stretch of river valley upstream of

Willare could yield 25 GL/yr, along with yield estimates for underlying Canning

Basin aquifers, led to the conclusion that the Fitzroy valley contained “substantial

reserves of groundwater”. The most recent proposal, ‘Kimberley water for Perth’


15 May 2015

(Appleyard et al., 2006), proposed to transport water from the Fitzroy River via a

canal or pipeline to Perth. An expert panel investigated various transport options

and rejected all based purely on economic feasibility.

The interest in development led to the immediate area around Camballin being

proclaimed a Groundwater Area in 1973 and incorporated into the Canning-

Kimberley Groundwater Area in 1996 (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). The

perceptions of a robust water resource, along with an identified lack of available

information on the groundwater resources of the alluvial aquifer, led to a desktop

study of the potential of the Fitzroy alluvium to supply between 50 and 200 GL/yr of

water (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). Considerable work has been done in recent

years that builds on this work and improves our understanding of the river

hydrology, ecology and cultural ties to water resources, as described in subsequent

chapters.


15 May 2015

3. Overview of Recent Work

As discussed previously, Lindsay and Commander (2005) presented an evaluation of

the water supply potential of the Fitzroy Alluvium. Their report also provided a

synthesis of existing knowledge (at the time) of the regional hydrogeology and

surface water – groundwater interactions. Considerable research has been completed

since the study of Lindsay and Commander (2005), and this chapter outlines the

most significant knowledge acquisition projects in chronological order. Key

outcomes of these projects are summarized in the following sections and technical

details are presented in later chapters of this report.

3.1 Hydrogeological Investigations

Northern Australia Sustainable Yields (2008-09)

The Northern Australia Sustainable Yields (NASY) project was the second in a series

of regional-scale water availability assessments in Australia, led by CSIRO with

significant input from local experts. The geographical extent of the NASY project was

all north-draining catchments from Broome to Cairns. Accordingly, these

assessments were conducted at the drainage basin scale and provided regional

estimates of surface water and groundwater availability under a range of potential

future climate and water resource development scenarios.

For the Fitzroy region, in the Timor Sea Drainage Division, the NASY project

provided an assessment of historical, recent and potential future climate, surface

water availability and groundwater availability (CSIRO, 2009). It also identified key

environmental assets and risks to their future water requirements. To assess

groundwater availability and demand, the project collated contextual groundwater

information including aquifer types, salinities, bore yields and current levels of

allocation, some of which will be repeated in later sections of this report. Generally,

the project found there was insufficient historical groundwater monitoring data and

detailed hydrogeological investigations to make quantitative estimates of

groundwater development potential. The report did however identify some

constraints to development, most notably the potential for depletion of dry season

river flows and permanent pools due to groundwater extraction from adjacent

aquifers.

The project also modelled groundwater recharge rates under historical, recent and

future climate scenarios (Crosbie et al. 2009). Results were reported as recharge

scaling factors relative to simulated recharge under a historical climate scenario. For


15 May 2015

several areas across northern Australia these rates were calibrated to existing field-

based estimates of recharge, however this was not possible for the Fitzroy region due

to a paucity of such data. Under future climate, the majority of the 45 simulated

climate sequences resulted in predictions of an increase in recharge in 2030 relative to

the historical record (1930-2007). There is a predicted increase in temperature and

daily rainfall intensity, leading the modelling results to predict increased recharge

under many future climate scenarios, even some that predicted a reduction in mean

annual rainfall. This modelling assumed current vegetation cover, even though it is

recognized that higher temperatures may result in changes to vegetation, which will

impact recharge.

The NASY project also developed a new, but highly-simplified, numerical

groundwater flow model for the Fitzroy alluvium, based on the conceptual model

presented in Lindsay and Commander (2005) and the MODFLOW model developed

therein. The purpose of the new model, which represented the river as a straight line,

was to provide estimates of exchange fluxes between the river and alluvial aquifer

and between the deeper Canning Basin aquifers and the alluvial aquifer. Due to a

paucity of data, limited knowledge of processes, and the large number of

simplifications and assumptions, the authors suggested the results of the numerical

modelling had high uncertainty. This led to use of an analytical solutions to

undertake hypothetical assessments of potential stream flow depletion and bore

interference due to pumping (see section 4.3.4).

Fitzroy River integrated ground and surface water hydrology assessment (2008-11)

This project was led by the Department of Water with funding provided by National

Water Commission under the Raising National Water Standards (RNWS) program.

The project provided a baseline water resources assessment of the Fitzroy River

floodplain, focusing on surface water – groundwater interactions. It also enabled two

other major projects to run in parallel, providing complementary datasets and

improved knowledge. Both of these parallel projects were led by CSIRO, and are

discussed subsequently.

One of the earliest achievements of the DoW/RNWS project was the construction of

nine shallow monitoring bores (piezometers) in three nested locations near the

Fitzroy River on Noonkanbah Station. Although these bores were only monitored

and sampled during the course of the project, such dedicated monitoring

infrastructure is otherwise rare in the region. Therefore they provide an opportunity

for future monitoring and investigation.


15 May 2015

Another valuable output from the DoW/RNWS project was an independent bore

database, which was developed from multiple sources including the Department’s

WIN and licensing database, field visits to several pastoral stations, and hard copy

reports provided by Kimberley Regional Service Providers (KRSP) (L. Stelfox, pers.

comm. April 2015). In addition, numerous published reports on water supply bores

in aboriginal communities were obtained from the Global Groundwater website.

Despite the collation of some new information in this database, it had not been

incorporated into the WIN database at the time of preparing this report.

Surface water – groundwater interactions in the lower Fitzroy River, WA (2008-11)

A suite of field-based groundwater research projects was initiated in early 2008,

initially to provide a hydrogeological framework for a major Tropical Rivers and

Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) project on indigenous values and river flows (see

section 3.3). A reconnaissance water chemistry sampling campaign was undertaken

by CSIRO – under the auspices of TRaCK – along the Fitzroy River in May 2008

(Doble et al. 2010) to shed light on the spatial variability of groundwater discharge to

the river. In the following year, the same CSIRO project collaborated with the

Department through their DoW/RNWS project to install the nine nested piezometers

on Noonkanbah Station. These bores were designed to allow better characterisation

of the hydrochemistry of the shallow groundwater systems, as well as enable

monitoring of groundwater levels in response to flood flows during the wet season.

The new insights provided by these preliminary investigations led the way for a

CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country Flagship funded project to resample the river in

significantly more detail in May 2010. It also collected and analysed groundwater

samples from regional bores. The final component of this suite of research projects

was a collaborative effort between CSIRO and the DoW/RNWS project to acquire

and interpret an airborne electromagnetic (AEM) survey (summarised below).

The methods, results and interpretations from these surface water – groundwater

investigations are described in detail in Harrington et al. (2011), which is the key

reference used for section 4.3.2 of this report. However the main findings that are

relevant to the current Water for Food project can be summarised as follows. Dry

season river flows and, by inference, the persistence of in-stream pools along the

Fitzroy River are controlled almost entirely by groundwater discharge. The spatial

and temporal variability and mechanisms of groundwater discharge are complex.

While bank storage return flow is likely to be important immediately following high

river flow events, regional groundwater discharge is thought to be responsible for

sustaining flows long into the dry season. In the main river reach studied, which was


15 May 2015

between Jubilee Downs and Liveringa stations, two major groundwater discharge

zones were identified. The first zone is around the confluence with the Cunningham

Anabranch, where river water chemistry and the AEM survey support a conceptual

model of more saline regional groundwater flow in the Liveringa Group on-lapping

the less permeable units of the Liveringa Group and the Noonkanbah Formation and

rising into the river (Figure 12). The second zone is through Noonkanbah Station

upstream of Yungngora Community. Again, river water hydrochemistry and the

AEM survey provided critical information on the mechanism of this discharge, with

the deep Poole Sandstone aquifer being the most probable source of very old, low-

salinity groundwater discharge that enters the river via large geological faults.

Figure 12 Summary of modelled groundwater discharge fluxes into the Fitzroy River, and a

schematic hydrogeological cross-section interpreted from the AEM survey (from Harrington et al.

2013).


15 May 2015

Modelling of river water chemistry indicated that groundwater discharge over the

100 kilometre study reach was about 102 ML/day, comprising about 3.7 ML/day from

the regional aquifers (Harrington et al., 2013). Whilst the regional contribution seems

minor, it accounted for almost 30% of total discharge in some reaches (Figure 12b).

Future groundwater management in the lower Fitzroy River valley needs to protect

the river flows from the start to middle of the dry season, as well as the persistence of

in-stream pools towards the end of the dry season. The series of research projects

outlined above has shown that the nature of surface water-groundwater connectivity

in this region is complex and therefore further knowledge is required to underpin

the sustainable development and meaningful management of both the surface water

and groundwater resources.

Regional AEM Survey

An airborne geophysical survey was conducted in the lower Fitzroy River valley in

October 2010 (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). The survey comprised a total 274 line

kilometres, and flight lines focused mainly along the course of the Fitzroy River

downstream of Fitzroy Crossing to just upstream of Willare (Figure 6). The primary

objectives of the survey were to map the extent and salinity of alluvial aquifers, and

to obtain improved knowledge of the deeper geological structure. The results were

extremely informative, particularly for conceptualising regional groundwater flow

and surface water-groundwater interactions along the river, as highlighted in the

previous project overview and shown by way of example in Figure 13.

3.2 Ecological

Northern Australia Sustainable Yields (2008-09)

The NASY project described in Section 3.1 included an assessment of changes to flow

regimes at shortlisted environmental assets under future climate scenarios. The

shortlisted wetlands were taken from a list of Wetlands of National Significance

(Environment Australia, 2001). The environmental assets that were shortlisted within

the study area of the current project were Camballin Floodplain (Le Lievre Swamp

System) and Geikie Gorge. The other Wetland of National Significance that was

located within the current study area was Tunnel Creek.


15 May 2015

Figure 13 Example of interpreted AEM depth section ‘12a-12b’ through Mount Anderson, showing

highly contrasting conductivities for different stratigraphic units (Source: Fitzpatrick et al. 2011).

Although some predictions were made about the changes to flows at Camballin

Floodplain and Geikie Gorge under future climate, CSIRO (2009) assert that the

ecological water requirements of these assets are yet to be determined and that many

environmental assets depend on triggers as well as flows and duration for

reproduction or migration (i.e. the rate of change of flow). Additionally, some

environmental assets depend on events that occur less frequently than annually.

Northern Australia Water Futures Assessment (2008-12)

The Northern Australia Water Futures Assessment (NAWFA) was a five-year multi-

disciplinary project that developed “an enduring knowledge base” of the water

resources of northern Australia and the associated water requirements of key

ecosystems, community and cultural assets (Close et al., 2012). It synthesized existing

knowledge and incorporated new data and interpretation to identify risks of climate

change and future development on these water-dependent assets. The geographical

extent of NAWFA was the same at that of NASY, although the Fitzroy River

catchment was not one of the 15 focus catchments. The focus was on all types of

aquatic ecological assets. However, in its conclusions, the study emphasizes (a) the

importance of groundwater to northern Australian aquatic ecosystems, through its

dry-season maintenance of baseflow in perennial rivers (e.g. the Daly River, NT), and

permanent refuges on floodplains and river channels of ephemeral systems (e.g. the


15 May 2015

Fitzroy River), and (b) the role of groundwater recharge as ecological triggers in

northern Australia is largely unknown.

Despite the Fitzroy River catchment not being a focus in NAWFA, two new

knowledge projects were undertaken in this region. The first of these used a remote

sensing approach to study the formation, persistence and loss of in-stream pools,

which are obviously important as ecological refugia and have significant cultural

values. The approach used a combination of LiDAR, LandSat and Ikonos data to map

pools as they started to form during the dry season, providing important insights to

the number and size of pools. The same methodology was applied to the Daly River

(NT) and Mitchell River (QLD). Not surprisingly, the authors found that the size of

the preceding wet season had an impact on the rate at which pools formed in the

Fitzroy River (Figure 14). However, the number of pools late in the wet season was

independent of wet season flows, which reemphasizes the importance of

groundwater discharge for maintaining these pools (Close et al., 2012).

The second aspect of NAWFA that provided new knowledge for the Fitzroy River

was the development of a hydrodynamic model to understand the nature and timing

of floodwater connectivity between the main river and up to thirty wetlands. This

study found that the duration of river-wetland connectivity ranges from 1-40 days

per flood, and is mainly a function of topography and distance from the river. The

authors also found a relationship between connectivity and duration of floodplain

inundation (Close et al., 2012).

Despite the Fitzroy not being a focus catchment for the NAWFA project, there were a

number of general findings in terms of the potential impacts on riverine ecological

assemblages due to changes in surface water flows and groundwater levels that

would be applicable to the Fitzroy River.


15 May 2015

Figure 14 Development and loss of pools in the Fitzroy River through three different dry seasons

(from Close et al. 2012). X-axis represents calendar day of the year, and dashed lines represent wet

season discharge at Fitzroy Barrage.

Northern Australia Aquatic Ecological Assets Project (2011)

This project, summarized by Kennard (2011), was also undertaken as part of

NAWFA and was specifically tasked with identifying key aquatic ecological assets in

northern Australia. The three phases of the project were:

Phase 1. Contributions to the Northern Australia Land and Water Science Review

(2009): This assessed the impact of development alternatives on northern Australian

aquatic ecosystems and aquatic biodiversity. Some broad conclusions were that (a)

there is a range of key threats to aquatic ecosystems in northern Australia, including

groundwater extraction for irrigation and domestic / urban uses; (b) environmental

drivers for aquatic ecosystems is a critical knowledge gap; (c) most ecological studies

to date have considered singular pressures on ecosystems, but environmental

problems are often the cumulative effects of multiple stressors, and climate change

should be considered as one of these; (d) there is a lack of detailed knowledge of the

spatial distribution of risks and threats to ecological assets in northern Australian

rivers; and (e) there is an urgent need for scientific field studies that investigate

cause-and-effect relationships, including multiple stressors.


15 May 2015

Phase 2. Broad-scale assessment and prioritization of aquatic ecological assets across

northern Australia: This aimed to identify key aquatic ecological assets in northern

Australia and trialed a draft framework to identify High Conservation Value Aquatic

Ecosystems (HCVAEs). Geodatabases containing aquatic ecosystem mapping,

classifications, all HCVAE attributes, metadata and attribute tables were produced

for the Australian Government (DSEWPaC). Several planning units in the Fitzroy

River Basin were identified as HCVAEs. These planning units included the following

named hydrosystems: Jordan Pool, Lake Alma, Lake Skeleton, Lulika Pool, Minnie

River, Tragedy Pool, Snake Creek, Nine Mile Pool, Six Mile Creek, Loongadda Pool,

Six Mile Pool, Troy’s Lagoon, Mount Wynne Creek, Coogabing Pool, Rocky Hole and

the Fitzroy River itself. As part of the current review, the locations of these

hydrosystems have been transferred to a Google Earth framework to provide an

understanding of their spatial distribution. The planning unit containing Jordan

Pool, Lake Alma, Lake Skeleton, Lulika Pool, Minnie River and the Fitzroy River

itself was listed as a HCVAE of potential national significance. This planning unit is

located just upstream of Willare.

Phase 3. Fine-scale assessment and prioritization of regional aquatic ecosystem

assets: This consisted of a series of workshops across the study area, including the

Kimberley portion of the Timor Sea Drainage Division, to identify Natural Heritage

Values of wetlands in northern Australia. Fine-scale assessments were carried out in

key focal regions or catchments to identify high priority ecological assets and

ecological thresholds. Sixteen high conservation assets were identified in the Fitzroy

Catchment through this process, including mid and upper catchment spring-fed

tributaries and wetlands, large permanent dry season refugia on the Fitzroy main

channel, and floodplain water holes and swamps.

3.3 Cultural ties to water resources

Indigenous people have strong social and cultural ties to the Fitzroy and Margaret

rivers, as well as numerous creeks and billabongs. They have always valued the

rivers for supplying bush foods and medicines, as well as being important cultural

and heritage features of the landscape. More recently, the indigenous people of the

lower Fitzroy River valley recognise the potential of the Fitzroy River and

underlying groundwater resources to support future water-related business and

employment opportunities (Poelina and Perdrisat, 2011).


15 May 2015

Indigenous socio-economic values and river flows (2008-10)

This TRaCK project was undertaken between 2008-2010 in parallel with many of the

other projects synthesized in this chapter. A number of interrelated activities were

undertaken including indigenous aquatic resource use mapping, household surveys

of aquatic resource harvesting and consumption, recording indigenous social stories

and cultural values, and capturing ecological knowledge through the development

of seasonal calendars (Jackson et al., 2011). The project team worked in both the

Fitzroy River and Daly River (NT), however only the outcomes for the Fitzroy

component of the project are reported here. In the Fitzroy catchment, this involved

working with residents from the communities of Bayulu, Bungardi, Darlgunya,

Junjuwa, Ngurtuwarta, Muludja and Noonkanbah. This represented engagement

with Bunuba, Gooniyandi, Walmajarri and Nyikina-Mangala language groups.

River-use mapping revealed that harvesting trips were spread along the rivers, and

that more than 70% of all trips throughout the year were to the main river channel.

The remainder of trips were to creeks and billabongs, most of which tend to dry up

during the dry season. At the height of the wet season, Fitzroy residents tend to

focus on catching Barramundi and Catfish from the river at locations where flooding

creeks run in to the main channel. Across all seasons, the five most commonly

harvested species were Bony Bream, Spangled Perch, Black Bream, Catfish and

Cherabin (freshwater prawn). In all cases, the quantity consumed by each household

was always less than the harvested quantity, reflecting the customary tradition of

sharing catch with other households and communities. Hence, there is a strong social

dependence on species availability.

The economic value of aquatic resource harvesting by indigenous communities is

difficult to estimate as none of the species are currently traded in a market. However,

in the surveyed households the estimated replacement value for the resources

consumed equated to 2.9% of the median household income. This further

emphasizes the need for indigenous communities to maintain a customary economy,

particularly if future water resources development has a detrimental impact on

species availability.

Seasonal calendars are based on indigenous knowledge of plants and animals that

become available and are harvested in different seasons of the year. Seasonal

indicators including temperature, wind direction and river flows, as well as

ecological clues such as flowering or fruiting plants, signal when fishing or hunting

for specific species should commence. Ecological and hydrogeological knowledge of


15 May 2015

expert Gooniyandi Aboriginal language speakers was recorded over an 18 month

period via small meetings on country during hunting, gathering or fishing trips. This

knowledge was collated into a seasonal calendar, relating aquatic species to their

preferred habitats over the annual seasonal climate cycle (Davis et al. 2011).

Comparison of Knowledge Bases

One of the key challenges facing water resources management in northern Australia

is how to incorporate indigenous ecological knowledge, in particular the knowledge

that relates aquatic species availability and condition to hydrological conditions and

habitat. Liedloff et al. (2013) developed a novel approach to integrate the seasonal

eco-hydrological knowledge of a group of expert Gooniyandi Aboriginal language

speakers, as captured in their seasonal calendar, with the hydrogeological

knowledge gained through the suite of projects described in section 3.1 of this report.

Using a Bayesian Network approach, the study found that potential future changes

to the flow regime of the Fitzroy River due to surface water diversion or

groundwater extraction may have significant and variable impact on the ability to

catch different aquatic species (Figure 15). For example, such development may

reduce the ability to catch high value aquatic food species such as Barramundi and

Sawfish toward the end of the dry season, but improve the ability to catch Black

Bream at the start of the dry/cold season.

Figure 15 The Bayesian Network developed to integrate expert Gooniyandi ecological knowledge

with western scientific hydrogeological knowledge (from Liedloff et a., 2013).


15 May 2015

4. Knowledge of the Groundwater Systems

This section summarises the current state of knowledge about the groundwater

systems in the study area.

4.1 Regional Aquifers

4.1.1 Overview

Data Sources

Lindsay and Commander (2005) provide a range of references that comprise a

history of investigations into the regional aquifers of the Canning Basin. The

Noonkanbah Map sheet (Crowe and Towner, 1981) also provides a good reference

for the geology of the region. A recent update to the geological map is a slight change

to the extent of the Liveringa Formation in the vicinity of the Fitzroy River near the

confluence with the Cunningham Anabranch (Harrington et al., 2011).

One of the first regional groundwater surveys in the region consisted of a census of

pastoral bores during the development of the first regional geological map (various

references in Lindsay and Commander (2005)). Other sources of information on the

groundwater system include drilling activities carried out for dam site

investigations, drilling for groundwater supplies at Fitzroy Crossing, Noonkanbah,

and other small communities, and a diamond mine at Ellendale (see Lindsay and

Commander (2005) for references). The regional aquifers are used for the municipal

water supplies at the major centres of Derby, Fitzroy Crossing and Broome, and

drilling at these locations has provided some of useful information on the regional

hydrogeology. The DoW/RNWS project identified over 300 bores in the lower Fitzroy

valley that are used for stock and Aboriginal Community water supplies (DoW,

2012). Several consultants’ reports provide insight to the hydrogeology around these

water supplies and have been used to provide contextual information in the relevant

sections below. Bores are generally shallow and so only penetrate to the tops of

aquifers where they are unconfined, limiting the amount of information available on

the regional aquifers (CSIRO, 2009). There are a number of dedicated monitoring

bores in the study area, as described in the following sections. However, these are

currently not being actively monitored by the DoW. The only long-term monitoring

bores in the region are associated with Broome’s water supply and lie outside the

study area.

More recently, Buru Energy (2013) carried out detailed hydrogeological

investigations in the Yulleroo (approx. 80 km west of Willare) and Valhalla-Asgard


15 May 2015

(see Figure 11) areas. This work included measurements of water levels in four

suspended exploration wells (Table 1) and numerous WIN bores plus the use of

existing data from the WIN database. The petroleum wells penetrate to the Laurel

Formation (Figure 7), but most monitoring bores intersected the Liveringa and

Noonkanbah Formations, with two in the Poole Sandstone and a few wells in the

Blina Shale. Stratigraphic information from geological logs of the suspended

petroleum wells (Table 2) was used to create two dimensional cross sections of the

aquifer. The results of the hydrogeological investigation are presented in Appendix

D-1 of Buru Energy (2013).

Table 1 Buru Energy suspended petroleum wells in the Yulleroo and Paradise-Valhalla area (from

Buru Energy, 2013).

Well Site Easting Northing Existing Well

Total Depth (m)

Month Drilling

Completed

Yulleroo Area

Yulleroo 3 488510 8026425 3,712 June 2012

Yulleroo 4 487081 8028803 3,846 March 2013

Valhalla and Asgard Area

Valhalla North 1 683112 8006105 3,344 Feb 2012

Asgard 1 714726 7981294 3,524 Oct 2012

Table 2 Formation characteristics and elevations in the Buru Energy petroleum wells in the Paradise-

Valhalla area (Buru Energy, 2013).

Formation Dominant

Lithology

Classification Elevation – Base of Formation

(m AHD)

TDS

(mg/L)

Valhalla 2 Valhalla N Asgard 1

Liveringa Carbonate/

shale

Minor aquifer,

aquitard

-84 -196 -171 500-12,400

Noonkanbah Shale Aquiclude -441 -635 -579 550-800

Poole

Sandstone

Sandstone

and shale

Aquifer or

aquitard

-524 -715 -695 300

Grant Group Sandstone Aquifer -1332 -1499 -1240 800-1,000*

Reeves Sandstone Aquifer -1588 -1826 -1606

Anderson Sandstone,

siltstone,

shale

Minor aquifer,

aquitard

-1858 -2105 -1790 70,000-

100,000?

Laurel Limestone,

shale,

siltstone

and

sandstone

Minor aquifer,

aquitard

<-3350 <-3241 <-3,400 70,000-

100,000?

*TDS estimate is derived from from resistivity logs.


15 May 2015

Recharge and Discharge

In a very broad regional sense, the Canning Basin aquifers are thought to be

recharged following extended periods of intense rainfall in the Great Sandy Desert,

to the south of the study area, with this occurring most effectively where the units

sub-crop or outcrop. Locally, rainfall in the Fitzroy region is highly variable and

decreases away from the coast (CSIRO, 2009). Rainfall recharge is therefore thought

to occur less frequently in inland areas of the Fitzroy region than near the coast, and

is likely to only occur following very large rainfall events that result in pooling of

water (to overcome soil moisture deficit). This would probably occur in depressions

or along drainage lines and again be most effective where units subcrop or outcrop

(CSIRO, 2009). Fresher groundwater salinities do occur at shallow depths in the

vicinity of the Fitzroy Alluvium and it is thought that the floodwaters that recharge

the alluvial aquifers may penetrate some of the Canning Basin aquifers (CSIRO,

2009).

The Fitzroy alluvium is likely to be a significant discharge zone for the regional

aquifers (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). Larger scale through-flow and discharge

to the Indian Ocean is also likely.

Aquifer Connectivity and Storage

Most of the aquifers in the study area can be either confined or unconfined,

depending on their location. Both upward and downward leakage is thought to

occur between aquifers, with artesian conditions believed to occur along the coast

(Laws, 1990). Horizontal and vertical gradients between the aquifers and rivers are

likely to be reversed in the wet season compared with the dry season (CSIRO, 2009).

Table 3 summarises the only previous estimate of groundwater storage for the

Canning Basin aquifers.

Groundwater Quality

Groundwater salinities in the Canning Basin aquifers are highly variable, and

dependent on recharge conditions, geology, distance along flow path, etc (Table 4).

Salinities are generally lower where units outcrop or subcrop and where they are

recharged by high river levels (CSIRO, 2009). Groundwater salinity generally

increases with depth (Laws, 1990).


15 May 2015

Table 3 Estimated volume of groundwater storage in the Canning Basin (Laws, 1990 in CSIRO, 2009).

Formation Area Saturated

Thickness

Saturated

Volume

Specific Yield Stored Water*

Km2 m TL TL

Broome

Sandstone

40,000 100 4,000 0.2 800

Alexander Fm 100,000 20 2,000 0.05 100

Wallal

Sandstone

105,000 250 26,000 0.2 5,200

Erskine

Sandstone

2,800 100 280 0.2 56

Liveringa

Group

65,000 150 9,800 0.05 490

Triwhite

Sandstone

40,000 20 800 0.05 40

Poole

Sandstone

260,000 100 26,000 0.2 5,200

Grant Group 350,000 1,000 350,000 0.1 35,000

Total 46,446

* Note that the volume of water available for sustainable abstraction is likely to be a small fraction of the

total volume of water in storage in the aquifer.

Table 4 Range of typical groundwater salinities in the Canning Basin aquifers (CSIRO, 2009; after

Lindsay and Commander, 2005).

Aquifer Salinity Range (mg/L)

Wallal Sandstone (unconfined) < 1,000

Wallal Sandstone (confined) 2,000

Wallal Sandstone (west of Willare) 2,800 – 3,800

Blina Shale (Willare Bridge Roadhouse) 1,100

Blina Shale (regional) 7,000 – 10,000

Liveringa Group 500 – 3,000

Liveringa Group (west towards Willare) 7,000

Noonkanbah Formation >1,000

Grant Group and Poole Sandstone (Ellendale) 300

Grant Group and Poole Sandstone (regional) 500 – 2,000

Crowe and Towner (1981) provide a table of groundwater salinities for bores

completed in different aquifers on each station. Although that table is missing

geographical coordinates for the bores, this information would be a useful addition

to the WIN database if the bore locations could be identified.

CSIRO (2009) provide a map of groundwater salinity for the Fitzroy Region,

providing a broad spatial overview. However, the value of this map is limited in that

it doesn’t indicate what aquifers the salinity measurements relate to.


15 May 2015

This review has collated all groundwater salinity records stored in the WIN

database, summarizing the results in Table 5 and displaying the data spatially in

Figure 16 for each aquifer. These data demonstrate that the number of bores recorded

in WIN as having salinity information is insignificant compared to the total number

of 2046 known bores in the region. As will be shown in the remainder of this report,

there are multiple sources of additional information on groundwater chemistry and

salinity for each of the main aquifers, many of which post-date the range indicated in

Table 5. Nevertheless, the basic statistics on salinity provide insights as to the general

characteristics of each aquifer, and the data presented in Figure 16 shows the spatial

variability.

Recently, full chemical analyses have been carried out on ten bores in the Valhalla-

Paradise area by Buru Energy (2013), including major and trace chemistry, organics,

physical parameters, bacteria, hydrocarbons, and radionuclides on selected bores.

The results of this investigation are included in Appendix II of Appendix D-1 in Buru

Energy (2013).

Table 5 Summary of the groundwater salinity data included in the WIN database.

No.

Records

No.

bores

Date range TDS range

(mg/L)

Mean TDS

(mg/L)

Median TDS

(mg/L)

Quaternary 37 25 1965 - 1998 100 - 8970 815 248

Wallal Sst. /

Erskine Sst.

255 102 1961 - 1989 90 - 28600 1091 521

Liveringa

Group

148 102 1929 - 1987 90 - 15900 2188 1310

Poole Sst. /

Grant Group

147 93 1953 - 1987 45 - 28052 1121 390

Devonian-

Carboniferous

22 18 1939 - 1987 120 - 1230 420 373

Other /

Unknown

197 127 1909 - 1989 30 - 20000 830 370

4.1.2 Devonian Limestone

The Devonian limestone mainly occurs in north-east of the study area, on the

Lennard Shelf (Figure 6). Most notable outcrops of this formation occur at Winjana

and Geikie Gorges. There have been several geological studies of the limestone (e.g.

Playford and Lowry, (1966)). The total thickness of the Devonian Reef complexes

below the Fairfield Group is greater than 2,000 m (Crowe and Towner, 1981). The

Devonian Limestone contains a number of limestone and dolomite members that are

interbedded with siltstones and have varying degrees of karst development


15 May 2015

(Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd, 2011). Monitoring in various mining areas suggests that the

groundwater system in the upper karstic limestone is laterally continuous (Lennard

Shelf Pty Ltd, 2011). The majority of the information on the Devonian Pillara

Limestone comes from Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011), who report on monitoring of

the decommissioned Pillara Lead and Zinc Mine, which is located in this aquifer just

to the south east of Gogo Station. In particular, they provide standing water level

data for monitoring wells.

Groundwater Recharge

Recharge to the Devonian Limestone is thought to be dominated by rainfall entering

solution features at the surface and possibly throughflow from adjacent fractured

rock aquifers (CSIRO, 2009). Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011) support the theory of rapid

recharge to the aquifer via direct infiltration of rainfall-runoff, describing the results

of ongoing monitoring of standing water levels in monitoring bores in the Cadjebut

area. The monitoring confirms that significant rainfall recharge occurs as a result of

heavy rainfall events, which have occurred historically about every two years and

result in recharge of up to 40% of rainfall.

Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011) suggest that the Permian sandstone, when in hydraulic

contact with the limestone, may provide groundwater storage for this recharge

because of its higher primary porosity.

Groundwater Flow and Discharge

There is little information available on groundwater flow and discharge in the

Devonian Limestone, besides the fact that regional discharge occurs towards the

south-west, with local discharge to Fitzroy River (CSIRO, 2009). It is thought that the

aquifer discharges to the Fitzroy River throughout the dry season in most years

(CSIRO, 2009).

Groundwater Residence Times

There is no information available on groundwater residence times in the Devonian

limestone. One groundwater sample collected from the vicinity of the

decommissioned Pillara Mine by Harrington et al. (2011) was analysed for 14C and

SF6, but the results of these analyses are considered to be unreliable as an indicator of

groundwater age due to the recent flooding of mine shafts.

Figure 16 Groundwater salinity for bores completed in each aquifer, as recorded in the WIN database.


15 May 2015

Aquifer Properties

The Devonian limestone is known to contain karstic features, so aquifer

characteristics are likely to be highly variable. However, this has not been

investigated in detail (CSIRO, 2009). Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011) provide long-term

records of dewatering rates and drawdowns and recoveries during operation, plus

long term recovery of water levels following cessation of mine dewatering 28 July

2008. A rise in groundwater level of approximately 750 m occurred between the

cessation of dewatering in July 2008 and August 2010.This could be used to obtain

aquifer properties. Results of water level monitoring in 9 regional bores around the

mine operation are also provided.

Bore Yields and Salinities

Besides the small amount of groundwater salinity data available in the WIN database

(Table 5), there is little data on the Devonian limestone. The only information

identified through this study was as follows:

(1) GoGo Station Production Bores Usage Reports (March 2013 and May 2012),

which reported that 249 ML had been pumped from the aquifer (one bore)

between Jan 2012-Jan 2013. The reports provide full water chemistry analyses,

with EC reported to be 307-421 mg/L (n=4). Results of groundwater level

monitoring of 13 bores between July 2009 and March 2013 are given. Bores

range in depth from 20 m to 145 m and the depths to water in these bores

ranged between about 1 m and 15 m, with water levels rising by

approximately 1-5 m over the measurement timeframe. The exception was

the bore at 145 m depth, in which the water level rose by approximately 20 m.

(2) Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011) provide some good water quality data from the

Pillara Mine, including the underground workings, tailings storage facility

(TSF) and a potable water supply, sampled in November 2010 and May 2011.

Groundwater TDS around the TSF ranged from 6,800 mg/L to 15,300 mg/L.

The TDS of water discharging from the underground mine workings (as the

groundwater level has increased following cessation of mine dewatering)

ranges from 1,900 mg/L to 4,500 mg/L in 2011.

4.1.3 Fairfield Group

The only useful information that this review has identified for groundwater flow

characteristics or aquifer properties of the Fairfield Group is for the Valhalla-Asgard

area being targeted by Buru Engery. Rockwater (2013) provides a synthesis of the

existing knowledge and recently acquired data, including water chemistry analyses


15 May 2015

for all aquifers at the project sites. The bores drilled by Buru Energy target the Laurel

Formation in the Fairfield Group, which is located below 2000 m depth. Standing

water levels in these bores are between 72 m and 95 m below ground. The Laurel

Formation is reported as being hyper-saline in this area (70,000 – 100,000 mg/L TDS),

which is perhaps not surprising given that it is found beyond 2000 m depth,

however, measured salinities in the bores range between 950 mg/L and 2,500 mg/L,

probably because the bores are completed across multiple formations.

4.1.4 Poole Sandstone and Grant Group

The Poole Sandstone lies directly above the Grant Group and the two are considered

to be hydrogeologically similar, regarded as good aquifers because of their combined

thickness and widespread distribution. They are found in anticlinal structures and

towards the east of the study area, at Gogo and Fitzroy Crossing (Lindsay and

Commander, 2005). The Grant Group consists of three aquifers (youngest to oldest):

the fine and medium to coarse sandstone Carolyn Formation, the Winifred

Formation siltstone, and the fine to coarse sandstone Betty Formation (Ghassemi et

al., 1991).

According to Apak (1996), “There is a marked contrast in the Upper Grant Group between

the western and Southern parts of the St George Ranges. In the western part, sandstones are

more common whereas in the southern area finer sediments including shale and siltstone

occur.”

The Poole Sandstone has two members: the Nura Nura Member, and the overlying

Tuckfield Member (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). The Nura Nura Member

comprises fine sandstone with minor mudstone in the middle section. It is observed

most extensively in the anticlinal structures of the Grant Range and the St George

Ranges (Figure 1). The Nura Nura Member thins out to the east. The Tuckfield

Member also comprises mostly thinly bedded fine sandstone. It forms rounded hills

and is a good aquifer (Lindsay and Commander, 2005).

Buru energy geophysical logs for petroleum wells in the Valhalla-Paradise area

(Figure 11) indicate that there is interbedded shale and sandstone in the Poole

Sandstone, and that the Grant Group is much thicker than the Poole Sandstone in

that location. The Poole Sandstone is also the most significant groundwater-bearing

unit in the area of the proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine (Rey Resources, 2014)

(Figure 11). There, it comprises fine-grained, well sorted and poorly cemented quartz

sandstone. The Duchess Paradise coal mine project proposes to meet some of its site

water requirements by extracting from the Poole Sandstone.


15 May 2015


Recharge to the Grant Group aquifers is inferred to take place in outcrop areas of the

Grant and St George Ranges, and on the northern margin of the Canning Basin, as

well as from the Fitzroy River (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). The total size of

these areas is relatively small, so recharge is probably fairly low (Buru Energy, 2013).

Elsewhere, the aquifers are confined by the Noonkanbah Formation. It is likely that

there is recharge from these to the Grant Group in some areas and discharge in

others. Runoff from the Devonian Limestone of the Oscar Range may also provide

recharge to the Grant Group in some areas, such as Ellendale (Buru Energy, 2013).


Harrington et al. (2011) identified groundwater discharge from the Poole Sandstone

to the Fitzroy River, probably via the alluvial aquifer, just south east of Noonkanbah.

Here, the aquifer is artesian, with around 2-3 m head difference between the Poole

Sandstone and the overlying river and alluvial aquifer. There is also a series of north-

south trending faults at the location of the inferred discharge (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011),

providing preferential pathways for the deep, regional groundwater from the Poole

Sandstone to discharge upwards. This is discussed further in Section 4.3.


Harrington et al. (2011) provide apparent groundwater ages, derived from 14C

activities, between 21,353 yrs and 31,014 yrs for three groundwater bores screened in

the Poole Sandstone (bores 1_96, San Miguel and Big Moana). One sample collected

from the Grant Formation at Jarlmadangah Burr had an apparent age of 10,691 yrs.

Aquifer Properties

There is a range of information on aquifer properties of the Grant Group and Poole

Sandstone, scattered through various reports (Table 6). At Fitzroy Crossing, the

sandstone unit of the Grant Group is strongly cemented and generally has low

permeability. Reasonable yields can only be obtained from bores that intersect

fractures and joints (DoW, 2008, in Buru Energy (2013)).

Table 6 Summary of aquifer property data for the Grant Group and Poole Sandstone.

Estimated Value Location Source Comment

Transmissivity (m2/d)

<152 (K < 25 m/d) Fitzroy River Lodge Global Groundwater (2005) Grant Group

115-525 Fitzroy Crossing Water Corporation bores Grant Group. Several bores.

6 – 10.5

(K = 0.14 to 0.25 m/d)

Duchess-Paradise mine site Letter from GRM to Rey

Resources, 11 May 2011

Poole Sandstone, north and west of the Duchess and Paradise deposits

respectively (101-149 m below ground). SWL available.

110 Liveringa Station Australian Groundwater

Consultants (1971) in URS (2010)

Bore Agricon No. 1. From a brief 6 hr constant rate pump test.

K of approx. 10 – 15 m/d, Ss = 0.001.

Hydraulic Conductivity (m/d)

1.2 – 20 (average=8) Ellendale mine site Buru Energy, 2013 Grant Group. These values are associated with primary porosity.

0.3 Duchess-Paradise mine site Rey Resources (2014) Poole Sandstone. Fine-grained, poorly cemented quartz sandstone. Confined by

Noonkanbah Fm (KH 9 x 10-4 m/d)

Permeability (m/d)

0.1 ? Ghassemi et al. (1991) in Buru

Energy (2013)

Grant Group

Data from drill core and side-wall cores from petroleum wells

0.08 – 4

Average 0.43

Range of locations Buru Energy (2013) From summary of available data.

Some higher values (8 – 20 m/d) from pump tests at Ellendale.

Porosity (%)

11 ? Ghassemi et al. (1991) in Buru

Energy (2013)

Grant Group

Data from drill core and side-wall cores from petroleum wells.

15 - 25

Average 18

Range of locations Buru Energy (2013) From analysis of a range of data


15 May 2015

Bore yields and salinities

A number of town and Community water supply bores are completed in the Poole

Sandstone and Grant Group, all providing data on bore yields, historical

groundwater abstraction, hydrographs, salinities and other water quality data. Bore

yield and salinity data identified through this current review are summarized in

Information collected during drilling at the proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine

site (Figure 11) suggests that the Noonkanbah Formation at that location has a very

low hydraulic conductivity, confining the underlying Poole Sandstone and isolating

it from the overlying Lightjack Formation in the Liveringa Group (Rey Resources,

2014). The formation comprises mainly shale with minor fine-grained sandstone at

that location and is thought to be 400 to 450 m thick.

Table 7. However, overall, there are still few bores completed in the Grant Group

and Poole Sandstone because the formations predominantly outcrop in rugged areas

of the catchment and otherwise occur at depth.

The Camballin town water supply is from the Poole Sandstone (Water Corporation,

2014) and the community bores at Yungngora (Noonkanbah) are completed in the

Poole Sandstone (PB, 2009c). The Junjuwa Community average daily abstraction

from the Grant Group is 210.9 m3/day from two bores, and the Bayulu Community

average daily abstraction is 358 m3/day from two bores, probably also screened in the

Grant Formation. The town water supply at Fitzroy Crossing is obtained from the

Grant Group, although bores with good yields are reportedly difficult to find in that

area (DoW, 2008). Here, three production bores have a licensed allocation of 300

ML/yr (Water Corporation, 2013). A fourth bore was decommissioned in November

2009 due to dieldrin contamination. Water Corporation (2013) provide data from

2008 to 2013, including: the recommended and average pump rates for the 2012-13

water year, bore water levels, which show little change throughout the year, and full

chemistry monitoring data. Water Corporation (2008) contains graphs of water level

and salinity in production bores at Fitzroy Crossing from 1998-2008.

Information on the Fitzroy River Lodge water supply, also obtained from the Grant

Group, is provided by Global Groundwater (2005). They provide drilling and pump

test analyses for the Fitzroy River Lodge bores, as well as bore details, salinities and

full chemistry data.

In general, groundwater in the Grant Group and Poole Sandstone has low salinity

(Lindsay and Commander, 2005; Information collected during drilling at the


15 May 2015

proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine site (Figure 11) suggests that the Noonkanbah

Formation at that location has a very low hydraulic conductivity, confining the

underlying Poole Sandstone and isolating it from the overlying Lightjack Formation

in the Liveringa Group (Rey Resources, 2014). The formation comprises mainly shale

with minor fine-grained sandstone at that location and is thought to be 400 to 450 m

thick.

Table 7). Geophysical logs of oil exploration wells indicate that these low salinities

persist with depth.

4.1.5 Noonkanbah Formation

The Noonkanbah Formation is generally thought of as an aquitard, comprising

siltstone, limestone and minor sandstone, 310-415 m thick (Lindsay and Commander,

2005). It has a wide distribution but is poorly exposed. It does outcrop in the river at

Noonkanbah Crossing, where it comprises fine sandstone, siltstone and shale. A few

pastoral bores produce from it, but the groundwater is predominantly brackish to

saline.

Information collected during drilling at the proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine

site (Figure 11) suggests that the Noonkanbah Formation at that location has a very

low hydraulic conductivity, confining the underlying Poole Sandstone and isolating

it from the overlying Lightjack Formation in the Liveringa Group (Rey Resources,

2014). The formation comprises mainly shale with minor fine-grained sandstone at

that location and is thought to be 400 to 450 m thick.

Table 7 Summary of bore yield and salinity data for the Poole Sandstone and Grant Group aquifers.

Value Location Source Comment

Bore Yields (m3/d)

655 Valhalla-Paradise

area

Buru Energy (2013) Grant Group

Palm Spring No. 1 bore

2,000 Ellendale Lindsay and

Commander (2005)

500 Fitzroy Crossing Lindsay and

Commander (2005)

Town Water Supply

3,180 to 9,085 Liveringa Station URS (2010) Four bores, bore details

provided in URS (2010).

Salinity (TDS) (mg/L)

< 400 Water Authority

(1990)

300 Ellendale Lindsay and

Commander (2005)

Usually between 500

– 2,000

Lindsay and

Commander (2005)

Lowest on the northern

margin.


15 May 2015

< 200 Fitzroy Crossing Fitzroy River Lodge

(Global Groundwater,

2005)

190-313 Fitzroy Crossing WaterCorp (2013) Grant Group.

324 - 640 Duchess Paradise

mine site

Rey Resources (2014) Poole Sandstone

295 - 425 Liveringa Station URS (2010) Four bores, bore details

provided in URS (2010).

Two major ion analyses

available, showing

groundwater is sodium-

bicarbonate type.

1,300 Liveringa

Homestead bore

Allen (1985) in URS

(2010)

Sample collected in

1973.

4.1.6 Liveringa Group

The Liveringa Group consists of interbedded sandstones, siltstones and shales. It is

considered to be a minor aquifer for this reason (Smith, 1992). The major units of the

Liveringa Group are the Hardman (youngest) and Lightjack (oldest) Formations,

which are separated by the Condren Sandstone (Lindsay and Commander, 2005).

The Condren Sandstone is the best aquifer of the Group although its distribution is

limited to the western part of the study area.

The thickness of the Liveringa Group varies from 319 m in the bore East Yeeda-1

(Bridge, 1986) to almost 900 m (Crowe and Towner, 1981), but it is usually about 600

m thick in the central part of the catchment area as intersected by coal exploration

drillholes. The surface extent of the Liveringa Group has been recently revised in the

vicinity of the confluence of the Fitzroy River and the Cunningham Anabranch

(Harrington et al., 2011). This minor revision had major implications for the

understanding of surface water-groundwater interactions.

Some information on the structure of the Liveringa Group is available at the site of

the proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine (Rey Resources, 2014) (Figure 11). Here,

the Hardman Formation directly overlies the Lightjack Formation and forms an

aquitard that has similar characteristics to the upper, shale dominated part of the

Lightjack Formation.

The Lightjack Formation comprises inter-bedded, low permeability shale and fine

sandstone (Rey Resources, 2014). It includes the P1 and P2 coal seams that are the

focus of the proposed Duchess Paradise mine (Rey Resources, 2014). In the Duchess

Paradise area, the lower part of the formation generally has a higher proportion of


15 May 2015

sandstone and the sandier horizons have a combined thickness of about 40 m. Shale

beds occur throughout the formation, therefore vertical hydraulic conductivities are

expected to be particularly low.

Monitoring bores have been proposed at six locations at the Duchess Paradise mine

site, targeting the “superficial aquifer” (presumably the Liveringa Group) and the

Poole Sandstone (Rey Resources 2014).

The Blina Shale, a dark grey-green shale and siltstone with minor sandy claystone, is

a confining bed to the Liveringa Group (Figure 7). It has a maximum thickness of 462

m in bore Kora1 and provides a few small, generally saline supplies in the Derby

area. Groundwater salinities of between 1,100 mg/L and 10,000 mg/L have been

measured in the Blina Shale (Table 4).

Groundwater recharge

Groundwater recharge to the Liveringa Group is believed to be mainly from rainfall

on outcrop areas (Lindsay and Commander, 2005), locally from surface runoff and

leakage through the alluvium in Le Lievre Swamp near the Fitzroy River east of

Camballin (Figure 1). Three nests of piezometers were installed near the Fitzroy

River at Noonkanbah, with three piezometers screened in the Alluvial aquifer and

five in the underlying Liveringa Formation. Despite a number of problems with

some of the piezometers and water level loggers, a comparison between river and

groundwater level hydrographs indicated a strong connection between the river and

the aquifer. In particular, a groundwater response to high river flow events was

observed. This, and comparatively low groundwater salinities measured in these

piezometers compared with other regional bores suggests some recharge to the

aquifer by floodwaters (see subsequent section on groundwater salinity).


In the Grant Range area, groundwater in the Liveringa Group flows west and may

discharge through the alluvium to Lower Liveringa Pool (Lindsay and Commander,

2005). In the northeast, flow probably occurs in a north westerly direction and

discharges into the Meda River (Figure 1).

Lindsay and Commander (2005) suggest that Liveringa Group groundwater may

also discharge to the Fitzroy River alluvium south of bore DHM 7 at Willare, and

that there may be upward leakage into the overlying Wallal Sandstone to the west of

the Fitzroy River. Doble et al. (2010) identified a slight peak in radon-222

concentrations in the Fitzroy River at Willare, suggesting possible groundwater


15 May 2015

discharge into the river at this point. However, there is not enough data to confirm

whether this groundwater is discharging from the Liveringa Group. The subsequent

2010 longitudinal river sampling of Harrington et al. (2011) focused on areas

upstream of this but the authors state that there are potential geological mechanisms

for discharge in this area downstream, identified from the surface geology map, that

warrant further investigation.

The longitudinal river chemistry and isotopic sampling of Harrington et al. (2011)

identified discharge from the Liveringa Group to the alluvium and the Fitzroy River

just upstream of the Cunningham Anabranch. Here, it is suggested that groundwater

in the Liveringa Group flows towards the river and is forced upwards where it meets

the less permeable mudstones of the Noonkanbah Formation. This is discussed

further in Section 4.3.2.

Groundwater residence times

Harrington et al. (2011) provide apparent groundwater ages for newly constructed

piezometer nests at Noonkanbah, near the confluence of the Fitzroy River and

Cunningham Anabranch. Five of these piezometers are screened in the sandstones

and mudstones of the upper Lightjack Formation. Apparent ‘uncorrected’ ages from

14C activities in the sandstones ranged from modern to 15,600 years. However, for the

oldest groundwater sample, SF6 and CFC data suggested recharge years of between

1966 and 2000, apparently conflicting with the 14C data. One possible reason for this

apparent conflict was that the isotope signatures are a result of mostly old

groundwater mixing with a small amount of young groundwater, either recharged

from the river, or remnant drilling fluid from the construction of the bores.

Three other regional bores sampled in the Liveringa Group had the following

apparent groundwater ages derived from 14C activities (Harrington et al., 2011): ‘Bore

1_89’ at Balginjirr Community was ~ 21,000 years, Global Groundwater bore ‘BG2/02-

725’ on Mount Anderson Station was ~10,000 years, and ‘#6 Panoroma’ bore on

GoGo Station was ~6000 years.

Aquifer properties

Some information on the hydraulic properties of the Liveringa Group aquifers is

available for the Duchess Paradise mine site (Rey Resources, 2014) (Figure 11). Here,

the interest is in coal deposits (black bituminous thermal coal) in the Lightjack

Formation. 130 packer tests were carried out on intervals in the Hardman and

Lightjack Formations on 8 diamond-drilled boreholes. These provided the following


15 May 2015

hydraulic conductivity values for the sandstone and shale units (Letter from GRM to

Rey Resources, 11 May 2011):

- Shale deposits: K = 1.83 x10-5 to 1.78 x 10-2 m/day with a mean of 9.12 x 10-4 m/day.

- Sandstone horizons 3.25 x 10-5 to 9.13 x 10-2 m/d with a mean of 7.77 x 10-3 m/d

(includes coal seams).

Further information provided in Rey Resources (2014) includes:

- Total measured horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the Hardman Formation

and upper Lightjack Formation ranges between 5 x 10-4 and 2 x 10-3 m/d. This unit

is reported to consist of shale with minor sandstone horizons, having a low

hydraulic conductivity.

- Total measured horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the lower Lightjack

Formation, comprising the P1 sandstone, P1 and P2 coal seams and the basal

sandstone, ranged between 2.7 x 10-3 and 1.3 x 10-2 m/d. This unit had a slightly

higher hydraulic conductivity than the upper Lightjack Formation but is still

considered to be an aquitard.

Bore yields and salinities

There is little information on bore yields in the Liveringa Group. Buru Energy (2013)

refer to bore yields recorded in the WIN database for the Liveringa Group in the

Paradise-Valhalla being less than 100 kL/day (Buru Energy, 2013). However, the

information obtained from the WIN database for the current study does not include

any bore yield data. Most stock bores near the proposed Duchess Paradise mine site

are believed to draw water from the Hardman Formation of the Liveringa Group.

The underlying Poole Sandstone contains better quality water (324 - 640 mg/L) but is

too deep to be a cost-effective resource (Crowe and Towner, 1981; in Rey Resources,

2014).

Salinities in the Liveringa Group are generally marginal to brackish (500 – 3,000

mg/L) (Lindsay and Commander, 2005). Low salinity groundwater occurs near Le

Lievre Swamp possibly because of recharge of floodwaters, and groundwater salinity

tends to increase to the west towards Willare (7,000 mg/L in bore DHM 8; Lindsay

and Commander, 2005). In reality, salinities probably vary depending on the

formation in which the bore is screened, with fresher groundwater occurring in the

sandstone and more saline groundwater occurring in shales or siltstones (Lindsay

and Commander, 2005).


15 May 2015

At the Duchess-Paradise proposed mine site, groundwater salinity in the Hardman

and upper Lightjack Formation is reported to be 1,630-18,600 mg/L. In the lower

Lightjack Formation, groundwater salinity ranges between 2,200 and 6,270 mg/L

(Rey Resources, 2014). Other groundwater quality data from sampling between

September 2010 and April 2011 is available in Rey Resources (2014).

Harrington et al. (2011) sampled a number of regional groundwater bores as part of

the study of surface water-groundwater interactions in the Lower Fitzroy River. The

three of these bores that were screened in the Liveringa Group had groundwater

electrical conductivities (ECs) of 1,500 μS/cm to 8,800 μS/cm (approx. 1,000 mg/L to

5,600 mg/L TDS). Harrington et al. (2011) also provide water level and salinity data

from November / December 2009 for the three piezometer nests (nine piezometers)

recently drilled near the Fitzroy River, near Noonkanbah. Of these piezometers, five

are screened in the Liveringa Group and had much lower groundwater salinities of

145 mg/L to 687 mg/L, presumably due to the recharge of fresh water from the

Fitzroy River and floodplain.

4.1.7 Wallal Sandstone / Erskine Sandstone /Alexander Formation

The Wallal Sandstone consists of sandstone with minor siltstone, conglomerate and

lignite. It is in hydraulic continuity with the Alexander Formation and therefore the

two are considered to be a single hydrogeological unit. The Wallal Sandstone occurs

in the subsurface in the western part of the Fitzroy Catchment but outcrops only in

small areas, including the west bank of the Fitzroy River at Langley Crossing. The

maximum thicknesses of the Wallal Sandstone (286 m) and the Alexander Formation

(219 m) occur in the Fraser River structure to the northwest of the Fitzroy River. The

greatest amount of information on these units come from the Derby Town Water

Supply investigations, which include a long history of drilling, pump testing and

water quality sampling. The recent drilling of production and monitoring bores on

Mowanjum Station as part of the Water for Food project (early 2015) will provide

further knowledge on aquifer properties and water quality in due course.

A detailed investigation of the Erskine Sandstone to the east of Derby is described in

Laws and Smith (1989), and the results of exploratory drilling at four sites within the

Derby 1:250 000 map sheet area (outside the study area) are described by Smith

(1988, 1992).


15 May 2015


No information on recharge to the Wallal Sandstone / Alexander Formations has

been identified during this study, with the exception that the notes accompanying

the Derby map sheet speculate that recharge occurs largely in outcropping areas.


Lindsay and Commander (2005) describe a “western flow system” for the Wallal

Sandstone and Alexander Formation, where they are mainly confined beneath the

Jarlemai Siltstone, but apparently unconfined to the southwest of the Fitzroy River

(Figure 6). Here, on the low-lying silt plains bordering the coast, bores in these

formations are thought to be artesian.


No information on groundwater residence times of the Wallal Sandstone / Alexander

Formation or the Erskine Sandstone has been identified through this study.

Aquifer Properties

Rockwater (1987) (in Buru Energy, 2013) report a hydraulic conductivity of 44 m/d

for the Wallal Sandstone. Lower values of 0.8 m/d to 15 m/d are reported by Smith

(1992) (in Buru Energy, 2013), although these were determined using slug tests,

which often underestimate hydraulic conductivity.

Bore Yields and Salinities

The “western flow system” provides pastoral water supplies in the area to the

southwest of the Fitzroy River (Lindsay and Commander, 2005).

Groundwater salinities of western flow system are variable (Lindsay and

Commander, 2005). In some areas, near Udialla Homestead, where the flow system is

unconfined, salinities are below 1,000 mg/L. Where the aquifer is confined by the

Jarlemai Siltstone, salinities are greater than 2,000 mg/L. To the west of Willare

(Logue River), salinities of 2,800 – 3,800 mg/L are reported (Lindsay and

Commander, 2005).

4.2 Alluvial Aquifer

Data Availability

Few pastoral bores intersect the Fitzroy Alluvium, as the floodplain is generally

inundated during the wet season. The majority of information on the alluvium

therefore comes from three drill sections conducted at Willare, the Camballin Barrage


15 May 2015

and for a proposed damsite at Gogo (Figure 17; described in Lindsay and

Commander (2005)).

At Willare, four exploratory holes were drilled along the Great Northern Highway,

perpendicular to the Fitzroy River, with a focus on the groundwater potential of the

alluvium (Commander, 1987; Smith, 1988; Figure 17a). The cross section at Camballin

Barrage is a generalized section, based on drilling carried out in 1959 and

reconstructed from drawings. The original drillhole locations have been lost.

The Fitzroy Alluvium is approximately 30 m thick, with a predominantly sandy /

gravelly basal section about 20 m thick, overlain by approximately 10 m of black silts

and cracking clays above river bed level. These facies are consistent with the river

working its way backwards and forwards across an alluvial valley, carving out older

deposits of sand and silt and re-depositing them in the same sequence. Taylor (2000)

studied the geomorphology of the floodplain and river, providing insight into the

depositional and erosional environment of the alluvium. In the study of Lindsay and

Commander (2005), the alluvial plain was considered to comprise the area covered

by an ‘average’ flood as mapped by Geoscience Australia, an area of 3,200 km2.


Recharge to the Fitzroy Alluvium occurs mainly from the Fitzroy River during the

flood season. Flood water percolates downwards and laterally away from river into

the aquifer. This process is only limited by available storage of the aquifer. Recharge

also occurs from rainfall and floodwaters on the floodplain following overbank

flows. However, this is believed to be negligible where low permeability black clay

soils (vertosols) exist (about 50% of floodplain) (CSIRO, 2009). The recharge

modelling of Crosbie et al. (2009) suggests that recharge in these areas is less than 0.2

mm/yr and that recharge is more significant where other Quaternary sediments

occur at ground surface. Enhanced recharge may also occur at the edge of

floodplains (CSIRO, 2009).

At the time of the CSIRO (2009) study, there was little data available to support an

understanding of the dynamics of floodplain inundation and recharge to the Fitzroy

Alluvium. Better knowledge about the river levels required to flood specific assets on

the floodplain is required. Recent flood hazard mapping based on aerial and satellite

imagery (http://floodmap.dli.wa.gov.au), combined with gauge height data may

assist with this type of analysis (DoW, pers. comm., May 2015).


15 May 2015

The alluvial aquifer is also recharged from the regional aquifer systems of the

Canning Basin, predominantly the Liveringa Group, which underlies much of the

alluvium. This is likely to be greater during the dry season when the upward

hydraulic gradient is greatest.


No specific information has been identified on what are likely to be very local-scale

groundwater flow and discharge processes for the Fitzroy Alluvium. However, the

primary discharge mechanisms are likely to be baseflow to surface water systems

and evapotranspiration by deep rooted perennial vegetation.


15 May 2015

Figure 17 Cross sections through the alluvial aquifer at (a) Willare, (b) Camballin Barrage and (c)

Gogo (from Lindsay and Commander, 2005). Refer to source for cross-section locations.

RIVERRIVER SAND

LOOSE BROWN SAND

BROWN CLAY

HARD YELLOW AND BROWN CLAY

SAND SILT AND STONESCOARSE SAND AND STONES

NOONKANBAH FORMATION

HORIZONTAL SCALE

100m500

30

35

40

45m AHD

TOP OF BARRAGE

(m AHD)

0 1 km CLAY/SANDY-CLAY

MAINLY SAND/GRAVEL

LIVERINGA GROUP

-20

-30

-40

-50

WEST

MEDIUM-COARSESANDY-CLAY

100

90

80

70

60

No.

10

No.

14

No.

19

No.

17

No.

20

No.

15

No.

4

No.

5 No.

6

SILTY-CLAY

(m AHD)

020004000 metres from origin

SILTS AND SILTY CLAY

SAND AND GRAVEL0 1 km

COARSE SANDAND GRAVEL

SILT SILT

SAND

SILT

SILT

GRAVEL

SILTSTONE

WHITE SILTGRANT

SWL (1958)

SAND +SILT

SANDAND

CLAY

SILT +CLAY-SILT

SILT+

CLAYSILT + SILTSTONE

SAND +SILTSILT +

CLAY

COARSESAND +GRAVEL

HORIZONTAL SCALE

HORIZONTAL SCALE

GENERALISED SECTION AT THE BARRAGE

HYDROGEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTION AT WILLARE

FITZROYRIVER

GRANT FM

GRANTFM

GRANTFM

NOTE:See Fig 4 for locationof sections.

HYDROGEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTION AT GOGO

HR238/FIG 11

NORTH WESTNORTH WEST

DH

M 7

A

DH

M 8

A

SANDY CLAY

CLAY

3200 mg/L

0

-10

10

2330 mg/L

FINE SAND

FINE-MEDIUMSAND

COCKATOO

BRIDGE

MINNIE

RIVER

COARSE SAND

COARSESAND

DH

M 6

A

DH

M 5

A

(m AHD)

SWL640 mg/L

EAST

FINE SAND/CLAY

MEDIUM-COARSESANDY-CLAY

FINESAND

SANDYCLAY

COARSESAND - HARD LAYERS

COARSE SANDSOMEQUARTZITE

7420 mg/L

FITZROY

RIVER

TD

SKI

LAKE

COARSESAND

?

NORTH SOUTH


15 May 2015


Groundwater residence times are likely to be dependent upon the recharge

mechanism (i.e. leakage of modern river water or discharge of regional

groundwater), and the local connectivity of high permeability zones in the aquifer.

The only data on this is available for the shallow piezometer nests recently installed

near Noonkanbah (Harrington et al., 2011). Unsurprisingly, 14C data indicated that

this groundwater was ‘modern’, and SF6 and CFC-12 data indicated recharge years

between 1980 and 2005.

Aquifer Properties

Rockwater (2011) installed monitoring bores in the Fitzroy Alluvium and the top of

the Grant Group at Fitzroy Crossing, providing groundwater levels, salinities and

estimates of hydraulic conductivity of 0.2 m/d to 130 m/d from slug tests (in Water

Corporation (2012)). They also provide chemical and microbiological analyses of

groundwater samples and the results of a MODFLOW/MT3D model of the transport

of Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous from the Wastewater Treatment Plant to

the River.

Estimated Groundwater Storage

Allen et al. (1992), in a study of the major groundwater resources in Western

Australia, derived a conceptual estimate of 25 GL/yr for the yield of the Fitzroy

Alluvium in the stretch of river valley extending 50 km uspstream of Willare.

Lindsay and Commander (2005) compiled the existing data on the Fitzroy alluvium

between Fitzroy Crossing and the estuary at King Sound. They estimated the storage

of the alluvial aquifer, based on a thickness of 20 m, an area of 3,200 km2 and a

porosity of 0.2 to be 13,000 GL (50 GL per km length of the river). They went on to

develop a preliminary numerical groundwater flow model and used it to estimate

potential borefield yields, considering environmental constraints on pumping.

Bore Yields and Groundwater Salinities

Bore yields from the Fitzroy Alluvium are estimated to be between 300 m3/day and

400 m3/day (Laws, 1990, in CSIRO (2009)). The modelling of Lindsay and

Commander (2005) indicated that a pumping rate of 2,000 m3/day per kilometer of

river could be achieved from a line of equally spaced bores on the alluvial plan, with

a drawdown of 0.5 m at the river bed. Whilst this level of drawdown is likely to be

unacceptable in terms of impacts to dry season flows and the associated aquatic

ecology in the river, this volume equates to a yield of 200 GL/yr for the stretch of

alluvium between Willare and Fitzroy Crossing.


15 May 2015

Groundwater salinity in the alluvial aquifer appears to be low close to the main river

channel, with a number of processes also resulting in high groundwater salinities.

Groundwater salinity measured in the investigation bores at Willare Crossing ranged

between 690 mg/L in bore DHM5A, which is close to the main river channel, and

2,910 mg/L in bore DHM8C (Smith, 1992, in Lindsay and Commander (2005)). The

latter bore is location near Minnie River and Cockatoo Creek, which are stagnant and

possibly tidal during the dry season. Areas of the alluvium that receive inflows of

higher salinity groundwater from the regional aquifers are also likely to have higher

groundwater salinities. Three of the nine piezometers (3 piezometer nests) installed

near the Fitzroy River near Noonkanbah by Harrington et al. (2011) were screened in

the Alluvial aquifer. Groundwater salinities measured in these piezometers in

November 2011 ranged between 145 mg/L and 250 mg/L.

Some indications of groundwater salinities in the Fitzroy Alluvium may be obtained

from dry season river water salinities, which are higher than wet season salinities, for

example from the longitudinal river water chemistry surveys carried out in May 2008

and May 2010 by Doble et al. (2008) and Harrington et al. (2011) (see river EC data

presented in Section 4.3.2). However, since some reaches of the Fitzroy River have

been identified to receive groundwater discharge from the regional aquifers

(Harrington et al., 2011), an understanding of where these discharge processes

operate is required to interpret such data.

4.3 Surface Water-Groundwater Interactions

4.3.1 Regional Context

The prolonged recession of stream flow in the Fitzroy River through each dry season,

and the persistence of in-stream pools during the driest of dry seasons, highlights the

critical role of surface water – groundwater connectivity in this system. The

indigenous communities living along Fitzroy River understand its flooding cycle and

have an acute awareness that groundwater is responsible for maintaining permanent

pools in the dry season (Toussaint et al., 2001; Liedloff et al., 2013).

Lindsay and Commander (2005) presented a simplified conceptual model to

demonstrate how the alluvial aquifer may support dry season river flows and

permanent pools in the main channel, as well as off-stream pools such as Liveringa

Pool. However, they also suggested the higher river salinities that have been

measured historically at Noonkanbah gauging station were most likely due to

discharge of relatively saline groundwater upstream where the river crosses the


15 May 2015

Noonkanbah Formation. Hence there are at least two potential sources of

groundwater that sustain dry season flows and pools.

The NASY project proposed a third potential source of groundwater based on

baseflow index (BFI) analysis (CSIRO, 2009). They showed that dry season baseflow

volumes were higher at the Fitzroy Crossing and Margaret River gauges, which are

situated downstream of Devonian carbonate rock areas. Hence it was proposed that

higher volumes of dry season discharge were sourced from these aquifers than the

fractured rock aquifers located further upstream.

4.3.2 Detailed Understanding for the Lower Fitzroy River

Given the critical ecological and cultural reliance upon dry season flows and

permanent pools in the Fitzroy River, a suite of recent interrelated projects have

focused on better understanding the nature of surface water – groundwater

connectivity between Fitzroy Crossing and Willare. The general approach was to

collect river water samples for hydrochemical analysis at a regular spacing along the

Fitzroy River, compare the results to groundwater chemistry from sampled bores,

and then incorporate the results into a refined conceptual model underpinned by the

hydrogeology interpreted from the AEM survey (Harrington et al. 2011).

Two longitudinal ‘run-of-river’ sampling campaigns were undertaken by helicopter

along the Fitzroy River following very different wet seasons: the first in May 2008

and the second in May 2010. During the May 2008 campaign, surface water samples

were collected between Fitzroy Crossing and Willare and analysed for electrical

conductivity (EC) and radon-222 (Doble et al., 2010). The results indicated marked

increases in the concentrations of both tracers between a location upstream of the

confluence with the Cunningham Anabranch and Noonkanbah community (Figure

18a), consistent with the conceptual model of groundwater discharge in this zone

proposed by Lindsay and Commander (2005).

Whilst EC and radon-222 are useful tracers of groundwater discharge to streams,

they generally cannot be used to inform the source of the groundwater that is

discharging. For this reason, the 2010 helicopter sampling campaign focused on two

separate sections of the river where the 2008 survey had identified groundwater

discharge (Figure 18b), and collected higher-resolution samples for full chemical

analysis as well as more exotic tracers including helium-4 and strontium isotopes

(Harrington el al. 2011). The main focus of the survey was the reach between Jubilee

Downs Station (downstream of Fitzroy Crossing) and the eastern boundary of

Liveringa Station (Figure 19).


15 May 2015

(a)

(b)

Figure 18 Longitudinal river water tracer profiles for (a) May 2008 and (b) May 2010 (from Harrington

et al. (2011)) Yellow and grey triangles mark the locations of the confluence with the Cunningham

Anabranch and the nested piezometers on Noonkanbah Station, respectively.


15 May 2015

This was the first time in the world that helium-4 had been trialed as a tracer of

groundwater discharge to rivers, and it proved to be extremely valuable for

identifying deep, regional sources of groundwater discharge (Gardner et al. 2012).

For the river water chemical and isotopic measurements to be translated into a

meaningful interpretation, it was necessary to obtain groundwater samples from

bores for comparison. This was achieved by sampling the nine new shallow

monitoring bores (3 nests) on Noonkanbah Station and nine other regional bores

completed in the different geological units of the Canning Basin (Harrington et al.,

2011). All bore samples were analysed for major ion chemistry, stable hydrogen and

oxygen isotopes of water, radon-222, noble gases (particularly helium-4),

chlorofluorocarbons, carbon-14 and stable strontium isotopes.

The two longitudinal river sampling campaigns and the groundwater sampling

identified two main zones of groundwater discharge along the 100 kilometre-long

study reach (Harrington et al., 2013). Two very different discharge mechanisms were

inferred from the chemical and isotopic data, which were supported by a revised

understanding of the geology acquired through the AEM survey (Fitzpatrick et al.,

2012).

Around the confluence of the Fitzroy River with the Cunningham Anabranch it was

proposed that old regional groundwater in the Liveringa Group flows westwards

towards the river before being forced upwards into the alluvial aquifer, or directly

into the river when it meets the low permeability mudstones of the Noonkanbah

Formation (Figure 19). The second main discharge zone is along the southern

boundary of Noonkanbah Station where the Fitzroy River is thought to receive even

older regional groundwater from the deep Poole Sandstone, most likely via the

alluvial aquifer through a series of faults that transect the river. In both zones,

discharge of a local groundwater source such as the alluvial aquifer was also shown

to be important.

Modelling of river chemistry profiles from the May 2010 survey revealed that the

total groundwater discharge along the 100 km study reach was around 102 ML/day,

with about 3.7 ML/day coming from the regional aquifers (see Figure 12). The

remainder is sourced from local groundwater flow systems in the alluvial aquifer.

The high inter-annual variability of rainfall in the Fitzroy River catchment would

lead to a high temporal variability in runoff and as a result, a high temporal

variability in groundwater discharge processes. Harrington et al. (2011) proposed


15 May 2015

that wetter wet seasons cause more over-bank flow and floodplain recharge. This in

turn means that, when river levels drop, groundwater discharge comes from a wider

area of floodplain and persists for longer than if the previous wet season had been

drier. This hypothesis was supported by higher river radon-222 concentrations in

May 2008, which followed a much wetter wet season in 2007/08 than in 2009/10.

Figure 19 Surface water sampling locations (A), environmental tracer concentrations (B and C) and

interpreted AEM section along the Fitzroy River (from Harrington et al., 2013).


15 May 2015

4.3.3 Broader-Scale Insights from the AEM Survey

Despite the detailed process understanding for surface water – groundwater

interactions between Jubilee Downs and Liveringa Stations, little is known about

groundwater controls on dry season flows and pool persistence in other reaches of

the lower Fitzroy River, and for that matter the Margaret River and all other

groundwater-dependent surface water features.

The only reliable dataset that can offer some insights to groundwater discharge

mechanisms in other reaches of the Fitzroy River is the interpreted AEM sections of

Fitzpatrick et al. (2012), which extend further downstream (see Figure 6). Figure 20

presents an example of these sections, clearly revealing areas of relatively fresh (low

conductivity) alluvium in certain sections. For example, the right hand side of the top

panel in this figure may reveal a zone of discharge from the Poole Sandstone. Other

panels reveal where more saline groundwater from the Liveringa Group may be

leaking into the alluvium. Conversely, the right hand side of the middle panel

reveals a zone of groundwater recharge around the Fitzroy Weir (Camballin

Barrage). It should be noted, however, that this section and all of those presented in

Fitzpatrick et al. (2012) require ground-truthing via drilling and/or groundwater

testing to establish the reasons for zones of high and low conductivity. Nevertheless,

the AEM sections do provide a useful guide to inform locations for future

investigations.

4.3.4 Potential Impacts of Future Groundwater Pumping on River Flow

There is a high probability that groundwater extraction near the Fitzroy River,

whether it be for the purpose of irrigated agriculture, mine dewatering or any other

beneficial use, will have an adverse impact on river flow and/or in-steam pool

persistence. The nature of this impact could be a reduction in groundwater discharge

rate to the river and/or an induced loss of river water to the aquifer (Figure 2). Such

impacts will be greatest where groundwater extraction is from the alluvial aquifer

immediately adjacent the river. Extraction from deeper aquifers that are

disconnected from the alluvium may be possible, however this will be site specific

and require localised investigations to demonstrate the degree of hydraulic

connection.


15 May 2015

Figure 20 Interpreted AEM sections from approximately Looma (west) along the southern boundary

of Liveringa Station (from Fitzpatrick et al., 2013). See source for exact locations.

The impacts of existing or proposed future groundwater pumping on stream flow

can be predicted using various modelling approaches. Three-dimensional numerical

groundwater flow models such as those presented in Lindsay and Commander

(2005) and CSIRO (2009) allow representation of spatially variable aquifer properties

and river geometry, as well as temporal changes in river flow/stage and groundwater

extraction. However due to the high uncertainty of these models introduced through

lack of reliable input data, hypothetical assessments of groundwater extraction are

often just as reliable using simplified analytical models.

For example, CSIRO (2009) used the well-known Theis (1935) analytical solution for

estimating drawdown impacts in an aquifer such as the Fitzroy alluvium, assuming a

transmissivity of 300 m2/day and specific yield of 0.2. The modelling results indicated

that groundwater pumping at a constant rate of only 0.4 ML/day for 6 months (i.e.,

73 ML in total) would cause drawdown of the water table, and therefore impact

surface water – groundwater interactions, up to one kilometre away from the

production bore. The zone of influence, which was defined as the radius at which


15 May 2015

groundwater level drawdown is 10 cm, was shown to be 500 m in just over 5 months,

and approximately 750 m after one year.

The simple analytical model of Glover and Balmer (1954) was used by Turnadge et

al. (2013) to estimate stream depletion due to groundwater pumping. The stream

depletion ratio (Q/q) is defined as the proportion of groundwater extracted that is

sourced from a connected stream. Modelling results for aquifers with different

transmissivity showed that production bores located less than five kilometres from a

connected stream would derive between 10% and 85% of the water from the stream

after 200 days of continuous pumping (Figure 21). In future, these plots can be used

to estimate either bore set-back distances from the river for assumed stream

depletion scenarios, or bore pumping rates for known set-back distances and

acceptable depletion volumes.

Figure 21 Stream depletion as a function of continuous pumping time, presented for different bore

set-back distances and different aquifer types (from Turnadge et al., 2013).


15 May 2015

5. Existing and Potential Future Groundwater Users

5.1 Licensed Allocations

5.1.1 Overview

CSIRO (2009) presented a map of groundwater extraction licenses for the Fitzroy

Region (20.63 GL/yr), comprising approximately 57% from the Canning-Grant

aquifer, 20% from the Canning-limestone, 15% from the Canning-Broome aquifer,

and the remainder distributed across other aquifers. Surprisingly, only 0.4% was

allocated from the Fitzroy alluvium.

This review has interrogated the Department’s licensing database to provide an

updated account of current allocations at 31st March 2015 (Figure 22). There is

currently approximately 23.5 GL/yr of groundwater allocated in the region shown in

Figure 22, comprising about 20.2 GL/yr in the Canning-Kimberly Groundwater Area

and about 3.3 GL/yr in the Derby Groundwater Area, the latter of which is outside

the scope of the current review. In the Canning-Kimberley area the breakdown of

allocations per aquifer is as follows: Wallal ~1.7 GL (8.6%), Erskine ~0.4 GL (1.9%),

Liveringa Group ~0.9 GL (4.3%), Grant Group ~ 13.6 GL (67.4%), Limestone ~3.6 GL

(17.7%) and Fractured Rocks <0.02 GL (0.1%). The database contains no records of

allocations from the Poole Sandstone, which is surprising given that at least one

Aboriginal Community (Yungngora on Noonkanbah Station) sources their water

supply from this aquifer.

The holders of the three largest groundwater allocations are Kimberley Diamond

Company (11.926 GL from the Grant Group over three licenses), Mowanjum

Aboriginal Corporation (1.54 GL from the Wallal Sandstone) and GoGo Station

(1.5 GL from the Limestone). All other allocations are below 1 GL/yr.

For comparison, there is currently about 14.2 GL/yr of surface water allocated in the

project area shown in Figure 22. The two largest allocation holders: Yeeda Pastoral

Co. (8.0 GL/yr) and Clover Cattle Co. (6.15 GL/yr) account for most of this volume of

water, which can be diverted from the Fitzroy River.

Figure 22 Distribution of current groundwater and surface water licensed allocations at 31st March 2015.


15 May 2015

5.1.2 Town and Community Water Supplies

Almost all of the municipal water supplies in the region are obtained from the

regional Canning Basin aquifers, with a few obtained from fractured rock aquifers,

and none from the Fitzroy Alluvium (CSIRO, 2009). References for each water supply

are provided in CSIRO (2009).

The water supply for Fitzroy Crossing is obtained from the Grant Group, with bores

screened at depths of 30 - 60 m. Here, the Grant Group occurs below the Fitzroy

Alluvium. In 2006 - 2007, abstraction was 91% of the licensed allocation of 250 ML/yr.

Some information on historical groundwater abstraction, water levels and water

quality data from these bores is available in Water Authority (1990). In comparison,

the allocation for the Camballin municipal water supply is 50 ML/yr.

Aboriginal Communities also rely on groundwater for reliable water supplies. The

average daily abstraction at Junjuwa is 210.9 m3/day (77 ML/yr) from the Grant

Formation, and 358 m3/day (131 ML/yr) is extracted from two bores probably

screened in the Grant Formation for the Community of Bayulu.

5.2 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems

5.2.1 Identified Ecological Values

Some of the ecological values of the Fitzroy River Catchment are described in Section

2.6. One of the most comprehensive studies of aquatic ecological assets in the Fitzroy

Catchment was that of Storey et al. (2001), which identified various aspects of the

ecology that could be interpreted as ecological values of the river. The key assets that

were considered included:

Brooking Gorge, in the Devonian Reef system, which is considered to be

significant as it contains aquatic species not represented in other parts of the

ranges (Sutton, 1998; in Storey et al.; 2001). This is due to it being a smaller

watercourse, where flooding is less intense. It is the only known location of

Nymphaea immutabilis subsp. kimberleyensis (a type of water lily).

a new species of Acacia, A. gloeotricha, which has been identified in the

vicinity of Dimond Gorge (Sutton (1998) (in Storey et al. (2001)). Its

distribution outside that area was unknown and it was listed on the CALM

Declared Rare and Priority Flora List as a Priority Species.

the Purple-crowned Fairy-wren Malurus coronatus (Storey et al., 2001). This is

not a waterbird, but is restricted to the understorey vegetation of the riparian

zone. The species is gazette as “Threatened” under the Western Australian


15 May 2015

Wildlife Conservation Act, and its numbers on the Fitzroy River have

declined dramatically over the past century.

stygofauna / cave fauna in the Fitzroy catchment (Storey et al., 2001). Records

from one limited collecting trip as part of a caving expedition to Geikie Gorge

are held by the Western Australian Museum. This includes a new family of

stygal flabelliferan isopod (Tainisopus sp.), two species of cave cockroach

(Nocticola spp.), a planthopper (Fulgoroidea), probably troglobitic and

associated with deep tree roots, and a number of ostrocods and cyclopoid

copepods, whose status is unknown.

The NASY project included an assessment of changes to flow regimes under future

climate scenarios at shortlisted environmental assets (CSIRO, 2009). The

environmental assets were taken from a list of Wetlands of National Significance

(Environment Australia, 2001), and those shortlisted within the study area of the

current project were: Camballin Floodplain (Le Lievre Swamp System) and Geikie

Gorge. The other Wetland of National Significance that was located within the

current study area was Tunnel Creek. A permanent pool on the Fitzroy River, about

13 km long and 100 m wide, was also identified as an important refuge for

freshwater and marine fish (van Dam et al., 2008, in CSIRO (2009)). CSIRO (2009)

emphasise that ecological water requirements are yet to be determined for these

identified assets.

The Northern Australia Aquatic Ecological Assets project (Kennard, 2011) identified

several planning units in the Fitzroy River Basin as High Conservation Value

Aquatic Aquatic Ecosystems (HCVAEs). These planning units included the following

named hydrosystems: Jordan Pool, Lake Alma, Lake Skeleton, Lulika Pool, Minnie

River, Tragedy Pool, Snake Creek, Nine Mile Pool, Six Mile Creek, Loongadda Pool,

Six Mile Pool, Troy’s Lagoon, Mount Wynne Creek, Coogabing Pool, Rocky Hole and

the Fitzroy River itself. The planning unit containing Jordan Pool, Lake Alma, Lake

Skeleton, Lulika Pool, Minnie River and the Fitzroy River itself was listed as a

HCVAE of potential national significance. This planning unit is located just upstream

of Willare.

A draft table of assets of the Fitzroy Catchment has been prepared by FitzCAM,

which is a community group consisting of representatives from the key indigenous

groups of the Fitzroy catchment, pastoralists, irrigators, recreational fishers, and

catchment residents (FitzCAM, 2009). The table is included as Appendix A to this


15 May 2015

report because it demonstrates the breadth of known ecological assets in the region,

including the following water-dependent features:

Lake Gladstone, the largest permanent freshwater wetland in the Central

Kimberley bioregion, providing a refuge for vulnerable species.

Freshwater springs such as Udialla Springs and Honeymoon Springs.

Mallallah and Sandhill Swamps, which are potentially important waterbird

habitat.

5.2.2 Groundwater Dependence of Ecological Values

Knowledge of the groundwater dependence of environmental assets in the Fitzroy

Catchment appears to be limited. The only recent work that has contributed to the

understanding of the role of groundwater in maintaining ecosystems was the

NAWFA study that mapped the persistence of dry season pools. An influence of

groundwater inflows over the persistence of pools was evident (see Section 3.2). The

role of these permanent pools as important refuges for aquatic species is well-

established (Storey et al., 2001). As well as this, it is possible that permanent pools

play a much greater role in providing the major source of energy that drives the food

web for the system. Research in the Lake Eyre Basin showed that, in highly turbid,

permanent waterholes, a “bathtub ring” of algae is the major source of energy

driving the entire food web, supporting large populations of snails, crustaceans and

fish (Davies and Bunn, 2000, in Storey et al. (2001)). This “bathtub ring” model had

yet to be assessed for floodplain rivers in northwestern Australia at the time of the

Storey et al. (2001) study. However, algae growth was evident in the shallow margins

along the lower Fitzroy River and low turbidity in the dry season in the Fitzroy could

potentially also allow algal growth to extend to greater depths.

Close et al. (2012) generally emphasized that groundwater is a significant feature of

northern Australian aquatic ecosystems, through sustaining baseflow in perennial

rivers (e.g. the Daly River, NT), and permanent pools on floodplains and in river

channels of ephemeral systems (e.g. the Fitzroy River). Permanent pools support a

diverse range of water dependent communities (e.g., see McJannet et al., 2009;

Tomlinson and Boulton, 2010; Lamontagne et al., 2005). This knowledge is not

specific to the Fitzroy Catchment but relates to all of northern Australia. It has also

been identified in other areas that groundwater levels play an important role in

species composition and persistence and that changes in groundwater level can

result in changes in species assemblages or complete losses of species (Froend et al.,


15 May 2015

2004, in Close et al., 2012). Close et al. (2012) also state that influence groundwater

recharge has over ecological triggers in northern Australia is really unknown.

5.2.3 Identifying Likely Impacts of Changes in Groundwater Levels to GDEs

Without knowledge of the groundwater dependence and ecological water

requirements of ecological assets of the Fitzroy Catchment, it is impossible to predict

the likely impacts of changes in groundwater levels on these assets.

The general consensus is that the dependencies are likely to be complex, i.e. many

environmental assets depend on triggers (e.g., the rate of change of flow) as well as

the magnitude and duration of flows for reproduction or migration, and some

depend on the frequency and duration of events that occur less than annually

(CSIRO, 2009).

Close et al. (2012) state that the timing and rate of rise and fall (RRF) in flows (surface

water and groundwater) is known to be important to aquatic ecosystems, but state

that this relationship is poorly understood. The timing and RRF of surface water flow

and groundwater levels may directly influence water dependent biota by providing,

for example, ecological triggers for reproductive migrations and spawning cues.

They may indirectly affect factors such as physical habitat, water quality, habitat

connectivity and resource availability (Bunn and Arthington, 2002, in Close et al.,

2012). RRF is known to impact directly on the life history strategies of a range of

organisms, including benthic microorganisms, plankton and fish. In terms of the

influence of groundwater, it is thought that changes in the timing and availability of

groundwater discharge may influence ecosystems by changing the availability of

water at a time of the year when many organisms are highly vulnerable, resulting in

changes to fauna and flora assemblages (Murray et al., 2003, in Close et al., 2012). The

role of RRF of groundwater levels and their role as ecological triggers in northern

Australian wetlands in general are still largely unknown (Close et al., 2012).

Evidence outside northern Australia suggests that modifying groundwater RRF may

significantly impact water condition and quality, alter stable environmental

conditions, and change accessibility of water to terrestrial vegetation (various

references, in Close et al., 2012).

More information is required on ecological thresholds in the Fitzroy region and

across northern Australia. There is a general lack of quantitative relationships

between flow and ecological parameters, meaning that the consequences of flow

changes on ecosystems cannot be predicted (McJannet et al., 2009, in Close et al.,

2012). Of particular relevance to the Fitzroy, Close et al. (2012) state that more


15 May 2015

information is required on the response of key aquatic biota to characteristics (size,

depth, temperature) of in-stream disconnected pools. In particular, water

temperature is identified as being the most important water quality parameter,

directly influencing habitat suitability, and controlling a range of physical, chemical

and biological processes. Close et al. (2012) determined some critical temperature

ranges for a variety of fish and crustaceans.

5.3 Cultural and Heritage Values

The Fitzroy Valley is central to the lives of the region’s Traditional owners and

groundwater is viewed as a life force that supports the river (Toussaint et al., 2001).

Fishing and gathering aquatic fauna is a common way of supplementing food

supplies. As described in Section 2.4, permanent pools in the Fitzroy River system

are considered to be “living water” by the Traditional Owners and a list of “special

places” along the lower river system is shown in Figure 10 (Toussaint et al., 2001;

Storey et al., 2001). Storey et al. (2001) also describe the cultural values of the Fitzroy

River ecology to the Traditional Owners, as sources of medicine, dye and raft-

building materials, as well as triggers for migration and cultural activities. The

ecological and cultural values of specific freshwater habitats, particularly the

permanent pools are strongly linked. The table of assets of the Fitzroy River

Catchment, prepared by FitzCAM, appears to be one of the most comprehensive lists

of places of cultural significance (Appendix A).

Recently, the Nyikina Mangala Traditional Owners along the Mardoowarra-Fitzroy

River have taken steps to begin to “build sustainable livelihoods and secure the socio-

economic wellbeing of their people through innovative ways of living on country” (Poelina

and Perdrisat, 2011). Poelina and Perdrisat (2011) describe the details of the progress

and plans to develop a hybrid economy, which draws on western as well as

Aboriginal methodologies. The Nyikina Mangala people propose that this should be

based on cultural and environmental assets and be self-sustaining. They assert that

the lives of the Nyikina Mangala people are intertwined with their country and that

they have ancestral obligations to pass on a healthy river system to future

generations. Over the past thirty years, the riverside communities of Jarlmadangah

Burru, Looma, Pandanus Park, Bidan, Balginjirr and Oongkalkada have increased in

population as a result of these plans.

The Nyikina Mangala Aboriginal Corporation (NMAC) Strategic Plan (2011) aims to

manage risks in order to promote economic and environmental sustainability. In

addition to this, the Mardoowarra Wila Booroo Natural and Cultural Heritage Plan was


15 May 2015

developed by Nyikina Mangala Traditional Owners as a partnership between the

NMAC and the World Wildlife Fund-Australia (WWF). The Mardoowarra Wila Booroo

Natural and Cultural Heritage Plan was developed to (Poelina and Perdrisat, 2011):

Guide actions to protect natural and cultural values, and manage priority

areas;

Give direction for both the use and conservation of the Mardoowarra-Fitzroy

River, and other important areas within Nyikina Mangala traditional lands;

Guide decisions about future enterprise developments that ensure natural,

social and cultural values are protected.

Other activities of the NMAC that represent an investment in the groundwater

resources of the Fitzroy River Catchment have included (Poelina and Perdrisat,

2011):

considering an involvement in the planning and development of a co-

management strategy of the Myroodah-Luluigui Pastoral leases.

employment and training of the Nyikina Mangala Rangers, who will target

key living water systems, land and natural resource management.

working towards mapping of traditional ecological and cultural knowledge

as well as undertake some on ground works to protect significant “living

water” systems such as springs and soaks.

development of the Fitzroy Catchment Management Plan with the University

of Western Australia (UWA 2010).

Overall, the likely impacts of groundwater extraction on the cultural values of the

Fitzroy River Catchment are currently unknown. As described in Section 3.3, Liedloff

et al. (2013) found that potential future changes to the flow regime of the Fitzroy

River due to surface water diversion or groundwater extraction may have significant

and variable impact on the ability to catch different aquatic species (Figure 15). For

example, such development may alter the species of fish caught at different times of

the year.

5.4 Mining and Unconventional Gas

A map of the current and pending mining leases in the study area is shown in Figure

11. The largest current groundwater allocation for mining use is for the Kimberley


15 May 2015

Diamond Company, which is licenced to extract 11.926 GL from the Grant Group

over three licenses (Section 5.1.1). In addition, documentation on some specific

mining activities was reviewed as part of this project and the information relevant to

groundwater resource management is presented below.

The decommissioned Pillara Lead and Zinc Mine is located in the Devonian Pillara

Limestone (Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd, 2011) (Figure 11). This mine still uses water for

rehabilitation purposes, including dust suppression.

Buru Energy proposes to extract tight gas from the Laurel Formation at a depth of

2,000 – 5,000 m (Buru Energy, 2013). Two bores have been drilled in the study area

(Figure 11). Bore Valhalla North 1 is located on Blina Pastoral Station, and bore

Asgard 1 is on Noonkanbah Station (Figure 11). Here, the Laurel Formation is

located below the Liveringa Sandstone and more than 600 m below the bottom of the

Grant Group. Two bores have also been drilled at Yulleroo, approximately 80 km

east of Willare, outside the study area. All of the wells have been drilled, but were

suspended at the time of the Buru Energy (2013) report. Buru Energy (2013) estimate

that they will use 31 ML of groundwater for a trial extraction and fracking has been

proposed. The report reviewed for this study contained significant amounts of

information on the hydrogeology around the four suspended wells, including

geophysical logs indicating aquifer depths, and estimates of aquifer properties.

Also of interest was a proposed environmental monitoring program, to start in late

2013, comprising of:

A near-field program: Three nests of bores at each petroleum bore site,

monitored every 6 weeks. Sampling water quality (major ions, metals, gas

loggers installed).

A far field program: regularly (approx. every six weeks), sampling

monitoring bores and station bores within 5 km of the bore pads.

The proposed Duchess Paradise coal mine project (Figure 11) is anticipated to extract

up to 28 L/s through slot-wall mining and 37 L/s for underground mining in the

Lightjack Formation (Liveringa Group). The average extraction will be

approximately 1 GL/yr (maximum of 1.5 GL/yr) derived from mine dewatering and

extraction from the Poole Sandstone (Rey Resources, 2014). The range of potential

impacts listed by Rey Resources (2014) are:

- Reduction in water supply available for stock;


15 May 2015

- Reduction in groundwater flows with potential impact on the Fitzroy River

alluvial aquifer and related ecosystem functions and heritage values; and

- Reduced water availability for groundwater-dependent vegetation (suppression

of the capillary fringe).

The report reviewed for this study included information from drilling and testing of

monitoring bores (shallow and deep), with groundwater level and quality data also

provided (Rey Resources, 2014). The report also included details of a conceptual

model of the local hydrogeology around the mine site and a MODFLOW model

developed to assess the impacts of the mine.


15 May 2015

6. Development Opportunities and Constraints

6.1 Prospective Groundwater Resources

Both the shallow alluvial aquifers and the regional Canning Basin aquifers provide

widespread opportunities for future groundwater development in the lower Fitzroy.

The choice of the most suitable groundwater resources depends on the intended

water requirements in terms of quality and volume, and the rate at which it needs to

be extracted. In general, the Fitzroy alluvium, Margaret alluvium and other shallow

alluvial deposits surrounding the larger creeks will provide small, localised supplies

of variable quality. In contrast, the regional aquifers will be able to support much

larger development with greater reliability and more consistent water quality.

The remainder of this section discusses the three primary groundwater resources

that could be developed for irrigated agriculture, as well as any known constraints

that may limit the volume, location and/or timing of their use. The constraints are

generally related to either aquifer properties, water quality characteristics, or

potential for groundwater extraction to impact on streamflow (refer to Figure 2).

Poole Sandstone / Grant Group

The combined aquifers of the Poole Sandstone / Grant Group potentially offer the

greatest opportunity for large scale groundwater development in the region. This is

because they are regionally extensive, contain very good quality (i.e., low salinity)

groundwater, and have several large areas of outcrop and are therefore actively

recharged.

At the time of this review these aquifers are relatively undeveloped, with only about

13.6 GL/yr of licensed extraction, most of which is for Kimberley Diamonds in the

north of the region. Several community water supply bores in the Fitzroy valley are

completed in these aquifers (e.g., Looma?? in Grant Group, Yungngora in Poole Sst.).

Despite the vastness of these aquifers, very little is known about how and where they

are recharged, how fast and in what direction does the groundwater move, and

where are the natural discharge areas. Without this fundamental knowledge, it is

impossible to define management areas or to estimate sustainable extraction limits.

The only known constraint to development is that the Poole Sandstone is thought to

be the main source of deep, old groundwater that discharges into the Fitzroy River

during the dry season along the southern boundary of Noonkanbah Station

(Harrington et al., 2011). It is currently unknown whether the same mechanism is

responsible for supporting dry season flows along other downstream reaches of the


15 May 2015

Fitzroy River. Other unknown constraints may include connections with other

aquifers , which is important for considering potential threats to water quality and

GDEs.

The knowledge required to enable a proper assessment of the development

opportunities associated with the Poole Sandstone and Grant Group is outlined in

Section 7.2.1.

Devonian Limestone

The Devonian reef limestone hosts another regionally extensive aquifer system

characterised by very good quality groundwater. The outcropping areas on the

eastern and north-eastern flanks of the lower Fitzroy region will be most prospective,

as the aquifer will occur at prohibitive depths across the remainder of the region.

The total current allocation from Devonian aquifers is very low (~3.6 GL/yr.). For this

reason, very little is known about the processes of groundwater recharge and flow in

these aquifers. The best knowledge occurs for a relatively small area coinciding with

the largest historical allocation (Pillara Mine) and the largest current allocation

(GoGo Station). This area is characterised by high transmissivity and very low

groundwater salinity. Knowledge of the physical properties and water quality

attributes of the Devonian limestone elsewhere is poor.

The Devonian limestone aquifers support a number of known and mapped

groundwater dependent ecosystems, with the most iconic being Geikie Gorge on the

Fitzroy River and Windjana Gorge on the Lennard River (Figure 1). It is likely there

are many other unmapped GDEs in the outcropping areas that would have high

ecological and cultural significance. Any groundwater development needs to

consider the water requirements of these GDEs and provide sufficient buffers to

negate undesirable impacts. Additionally, the role of the Devonian Limestone in

recharging other connected aquifers is unknown, e.g. the Grant Group.

Alluvial Aquifer

The alluvial aquifers that are associated with the Fitzroy River, the Margaret River

and the numerous creeks that cross the lower Fitzroy valley provide opportunities

for small-scale groundwater development. The location and scale of individual

developments will be limited by variability in water quality and bore yields, and the

degree of connectivity between high permeability sands and gravels.

Despite these limitations, Lindsay and Commander (2005) identified a number of

favorable attributes of the Fitzroy alluvium, most notably that it has the potential to


15 May 2015

be fully replenished each year by infiltration from the river bed during wet season

flows. Using a simple numerical model the authors showed that pumping

groundwater at a rate of 2 ML/day per km on one side of the river would cause a

drawdown of 0.5 m at the river bed at the end of dry season. If this level of

drawdown was acceptable – which is doubtful given the importance of dry season

flows and permanent pools – then a total abstraction of 200 GL/year could

theoretically be achieved over the 275 km length of river.

In practice only a small proportion of the above estimate of 200 GL/year could

reliably and sustainably be extracted from the alluvium. In addition to the

aforementioned constraints of impacts to groundwater dependent ecosystems,

variable bore yields and wide ranging water quality, the siting and maintenance of

bores in such a dynamic floodplain environment would also be problematic.

Lindsay and Commander (2005) recommended a practical way to develop the

alluvial aquifers through the siting of bores in gravelly deposits that are not well

connected to the river channel but are connected to floodways so that they can be

recharged in the wet season. They also suggested that bores could be sited away

from the river and used to artificially maintain dry season flows and pool levels.

In order for localised development of the alluvial aquifers to proceed, a set of

consistent allocation and pumping rules will presumably need to be established, in

order to limit the impacts on adjacent users and groundwater dependent ecosystems.

The types of information that would be required to facilitate such assessments of the

alluvial aquifer is outlined in Section 8.x.

6.2 Managed Aquifer Recharge

Given the abundance of fresh surface water in wet season flows of the Fitzroy River,

harvesting a small fraction these flows and storing the water underground in

aquifers for subsequent use in the dry season is an attractive option. This process is

known as Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) or Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR)

and has been practiced globally with great success for centuries, particularly in areas

where water availability and demand are seasonally opposed.

CSIRO (2009) suggested the shallow alluvial aquifers across northern Australia have

limited artificial storage potential as they are generally full at the end of each wet

season. They also suggested that in catchments such as the Fitzroy, where extensive

floodplains are covered by low-conductivity black clay soils, the use of large

infiltration pits or “galleries” would not be an option. Therefore any MAR scheme


15 May 2015

would require purpose-built injection wells, which are generally cost prohibitive for

irrigation purposes.

Deeper aquifers of the Canning Basin, including those highlighted in the previous

section as well as the Liveringa Group, have greatest potential for MAR. However it

is currently unknown where and how much surface water could be injected into

these aquifers. There has also been no assessment of the operational constraints of

such schemes; for example, how to remove high turbidity from the surface water to

avoid physical clogging of bore screens, and how to mitigate undesirable

geochemical interactions that may cause clogging or dissolution of the aquifer.

In a high level assessment of the potential feasibility of MAR in three catchments

across northern Australia, Lennon et al. (2014) estimated that up to 5 ML/ha could be

stored in the Fitzroy River alluvium. However, the authors also stressed the

approximate nature of this estimate, and recommended site specific assessments to

confirm the suitability of MAR, particularly where water could potentially flow back

to the river.

6.3 Targeted Development Areas

One of the requirements of this study was to review the water supply options for

targeted irrigation development at Mount Anderson, Fitzroy Crossing, GoGo Station

and Mount Pierre.

Around Mount Anderson Station the Poole Sandstone is likely to present the best

prospects for large-scale groundwater development as it occurs at shallow depth and

is characterised (generally) as having moderate bore yields and very good water

quality. Given the local outcrops of the Poole Sandstone and Grant Group, there is

also likely to be reliable annual recharge, although this clearly needs to be confirmed

through detailed investigations. The main constraint to groundwater development

on Mount Anderson is GDEs, including the need to manage impacts to water-

dependent sites of cultural significance in the Grant Range, and the depletion of dry

season flows in the Fitzroy River. Some information in the form of AEM survey

results (Fitzpatrick et al., 2012) and river water chemistry (Harrington et al., 2011) is

available to start investigating surface water-groundwater connectivity in this area,

however this was not the focus area of earlier investigations that collected the data,

so existing knowledge is limited.

Around Fitzroy Crossing there are several opportunities for groundwater

development. To the north and south of the town, the alluvial aquifer is extensive


15 May 2015

and could sustain small developments. However given the strong social and cultural

ties to both the Fitzroy and Margaret rivers it is likely that any major development of

the alluvial aquifer would have detrimental impacts on dry season flows and the

persistence of permanent pools. Accordingly, the most acceptable and sustainable

opportunities are likely to focus on the deeper Canning Basin aquifers, as these may

be disconnected from the river. Specific targets for future exploratory drilling should

include the Fairfield Group and the Grant Group. The Grant Group aquifer is

currently used for the town water supply at Fitzroy Crossing, although it is known to

be low yielding with groundwater flow largely controlled by jointing and fracturing

(DoW, 2008).

Further south on GoGo Station the Devonian limestone is currently being used to

supply water to several centre pivots irrigating fodder crops such as sorghum. At the

time of writing this report it is understood that GoGo Station is planning to expand

their irrigation enterprise through surface water harvesting. Regardless of whether

that eventuates, there is potential to expand groundwater development from the

Devonian limestone. A detailed local assessment of the hydrogeology of this aquifer

could easily be achieved utilizing the bore network and long-term monitoring

records for Pillara Mine. On GoGo Station the Poole Sandstone and Grant Group is

also a potential future water supply option. These aquifers outcrop in several

locations and occur at relatively shallow depth in the southwest (e.g., Big Moana and

#6 Panoroma bores sampled by Harrington et al. 2011), however little is known about

its hydrogeology in this part of the Canning Basin.

The Devonian limestone and Grant Group also offer the greatest prospects further

east on Mount Pierre Station. However, there is no existing knowledge for these

aquifers in this part of the basin.


15 May 2015

7. Critical Knowledge Gaps

All of the recent groundwater related studies in the lower Fitzroy valley, including

that of Lindsay and Commander (2005), have documented data and knowledge gaps.

In essence, the gaps that have already been identified can be summarised as follows:

lack of long-term groundwater monitoring data (levels and water quality) for

all of the aquifers;

lack of reliable river flow monitoring data during low-flow conditions;

poor understanding of groundwater recharge and flow processes; and

limited knowledge of surface-water groundwater connectivity.

a lack of knowledge of the ecological relationships, dynamics and water

requirements of high value aquatic ecosystems (groundwater dependent or

not), limiting the ability to assess the impacts of changes in surface and

groundwater flows to such systems.

Other gaps that have been identified during the course of this review include a

comprehensive database of bore yields, knowledge of different water types and their

suitability for irrigation purposes, and an understanding of controls on groundwater

chemistry for each of the main aquifers.

The following sections put these gaps into context by specifying the types of

information or knowledge that would be required to provide greater confidence of

the groundwater development potential in the lower Fitzroy, both in terms of

establishing management principles and mapping opportunities and constraints.

7.1 Knowledge Required to Facilitate Allocation of the Alluvial

Aquifer

As described in Chapter 6, the alluvial aquifer presents opportunities for small-scale

water resource developments. Due to the heterogeneity of the alluvial aquifer and

the likely complex connections to GDEs, a broad regional-scale assessment of the

alluvial aquifer would not necessarily facilitate future development. Instead, local

scale assessments of individual development proposals are recommended and

should be framed around a set of site-specific allocation and pumping rules.

Development and implementation of such rules is highly reliant upon having

detailed mapping of groundwater-dependent ecological and cultural assets, as well

as baseline knowledge of their relationship to the groundwater system and the

specific ecological water requirements.


15 May 2015

7.2 Knowledge Required for Regional Aquifers

7.2.1 To Better Understand Development Opportunities

This review has found that the Poole Sandstone / Grant Group and Devonian

limestone aquifers present the greatest opportunities for large-scale groundwater

development for irrigated agriculture in the lower Fitzroy valley. Despite the large

regional extent of the two aquifer systems, there is currently insufficient knowledge

to provide confidence about resource availability, to define management areas and to

estimate sustainable extraction limits.

The critical knowledge required for these purposes includes maps of the horizontal

and vertical extent of the aquifers, an understanding of recharge locations and

mechanisms, estimates of recharge rates and volumes, and sound knowledge of

groundwater flow paths, inter-aquifer connectivity and residence times. In acquiring

this knowledge it would also be beneficial to develop an understanding of both the

groundwater salinity distribution and variability of aquifer physical properties.

7.2.2 To Better Understand Development Constraints

One of the key advantages in targeting the deep, regional aquifers is that they are

potentially less connected to surface water features than the alluvial aquifers.

However, recent investigations have already shown that this premise is not always

valid; the deep Poole Sandstone aquifer beneath the Fitzroy River at Noonkanbah is

a significant source of groundwater discharge to the river in the dry season

(section 3.1; Harrington et al., 2011). Similar mechanisms are likely to be important in

other parts of the region, including the mound springs further west on the Dampier

Peninsula (Close et al., 2012). Therefore mapping water-dependent ecological and

cultural assets, understanding their dependence on groundwater, and characterising

the types of surface water-groundwater connectivity is also critical for assessing the

development potential of regional aquifers.

The sections of the Fitzroy River where surface water-groundwater interactions have

been studied in detail are known to rely on both shallow/local and deep/regional

aquifers to sustain dry season flows (Harrington et al., 2011). However, this

knowledge has only been acquired at the start of the wet season (i.e., early May) in

two different years. There remains a major knowledge gap about the temporal

variability in both the mechanisms and rates of groundwater discharge to the entire

Fitzroy River.


15 May 2015

Another potential constraint to developing the regional aquifers is inter-aquifer

connectivity. This process can limit the volume of groundwater available for

extraction due to either the entrainment of poorer quality water from adjacent

aquifers and aquitards, or by inadvertently dewatering other aquifers including the

overlying alluvium. A detailed assessment of the potential for natural and enhanced

inter-aquifer leakage is therefore warranted.


15 May 2015

8. Recommendations for work to address knowledge gaps

The following sections present a prioritisation of technical work required to address

the knowledge gaps outlined in the previous chapter. Figure 23 provides a synthesis

of this work program, demonstrating the dependencies and relationships between

individual projects.

Figure 23 Recommended technical work program to address the hydrogeological objectives of the

Water for Food project in the lower Fitzroy valley.


15 May 2015

8.1 Update the WIN Database

The first recommendation to come from this review is an update of the Department’s

WIN database. Several data requests during the course of the project have revealed

that most of the useful historical groundwater information (e.g., water level

monitoring, aquifer pumping test results and water chemistry analyses) is missing

from the database. Accordingly, there is no consolidated dataset from which a

rigorous analysis of trends or statistics for different aquifers can be readily

undertaken.

The largest dataset that needs to be uploaded – and would be extremely useful for

future investigation – is water chemistry analyses, often for the same bores on

multiple occasions. These analyses exist in numerous reports that have been

captured in this review, including but not limited to the following:

Aboriginal community drinking water source protection assessments for

Bayulu, Junjuwa and Yungngora (Noonkanbah) (PB, 2009a; 2009b; 2009c);

Aboriginal community water supply drilling reports (e.g., Gee (1994) for

Jarlmadangah Buru, Looma, Bungardi, Parukupan);

Buru Energy reports (e.g., Rockwater, 2013; Buru Energy, 2013);

Fitzroy Crossing town water supply reports (particularly WAWA, 1990;

Water Corporation, 2013);

Camballin Groundwater Monitoring Review (Water Corporation, 2014);

Fitzroy Crossing Power Station Detailed Site Investigation (ERM, 2009); and

Surface water – groundwater interactions report (Harrington et al., 2011).

The water chemistry analyses are just one example of useful information that needs

to be collated into a centralized and easy-to-query database. Other key examples

include the extensive records of water level monitoring data from Water Corporation

(2013; 2014) and mining companies (e.g., Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd.) and aquifer

pumping test results for town and community water supplies.

8.2 Regional geophysics survey

A regional scale airborne electromagnetic (AEM) geophysical survey is

recommended as an important next step in understanding the groundwater

resources of the lower Fitzroy valley. The survey conducted in 2010 (Fitzpatrick et

al., 2012) did not cover all of the lower reaches of the Fitzroy River, and only had a

few short flight lines running perpendicular to the main river channel (Figure 6)


15 May 2015

because it focused on geological controls on surface water – groundwater

interactions.

A new broader scale AEM survey would help to define the geometry, extents and

broad water quality characteristics of the main aquifers and aquitards in other parts

of the valley. While it would be ideal to survey the entire study area shown in

Figure 1, the costs of acquiring, modelling and interpreting data over this vast scale

are likely to be prohibitive. Therefore, a more strategic approach is recommended in

which the survey focuses on the most prospective aquifers (Poole Sandstone/Grant

Group, Devonian limestone) and the targeted development areas (Mount Anderson,

Fitzroy Crossing, GoGo Station). The Fitzroy River should also be surveyed

downstream of the 2010 survey limit to Willare so that the entire river has been

captured. Surveying this reach may also identify of the position of the saltwater

interface that originates beneath King Sound.

A map showing proposed focus areas for the AEM survey is provided in

Appendix B. This includes a region to the north of Willare, where the broader West

Kimberley Water for Food project is investigating opportunities for water resource

development around Mowanjum and Knowsley to the south of Derby, and further

east within the alluvium of the May and Meda rivers.

8.3 Establish a representative monitoring network

There is a dearth of historical groundwater monitoring data for the lower Fitzroy

valley, other than the isolated monitoring that occurs for regulatory purposes around

either mine sites (e.g., Pillara) or water supplies for towns (e.g., Fitzroy Crossing,

Camballin) and Aboriginal communities. Long-term water level and salinity trends

in undeveloped areas are critical for understanding groundwater recharge and

discharge processes, which is required for determining sustainable extraction limits.

The establishment of a strategic and enduring groundwater monitoring network

consisting of both existing bores and new, purpose-built bores is highly

recommended. The locations of these bores should consider the following:

existing bores to be used for monitoring must have complete stratigraphic

logs and construction details available;

new and existing bores must be screened or slotted across a known aquifer,

and have casing in good condition;


15 May 2015

monitoring of groundwater dynamics in outcropping areas of the main

aquifers identified as having high development potential (i.e., Poole

Sandstone/Grant Group and Devonian limestone).

monitoring of pre-development groundwater dynamics in areas of potential

targeted development such as Mount Anderson, Fitzroy Crossing and GoGo

Station; and

purpose-built monitoring infrastructure next to known or suspected

groundwater dependent ecosystems, including the Fitzroy and Margaret

rivers, Geikie and Windjana gorges, and the water-dependent assets

identified by FitzCAM (Appendix A) and Kennard (2011) (section 3.2).

It is recommended that the AEM surveys (past and recommended) be used to guide

the siting of monitoring of bores in the most prospective areas of all aquifers,

including the alluvial aquifer. That is, high resistivity/low conductivity zones in the

AEM sections that are indicative of low clay content and/or fresh groundwater.

However, it must be stressed that the drilling of any new monitoring bores should

not occur until the WIN database has been updated with all of the aforementioned

missing information. It would also be useful to synthesize the results of existing

monitoring programs to determine if they could be used to complement the regional

network. For example, long-term monitoring data already exists for Pillara Mine.

Buru Energy also proposed a monitoring program to start in late 2013, including

both a near-field and far-field program (Buru Energy, 2013). The near-field program

had three nests of monitoring bores at each petroleum bore site, which would be

monitored every six weeks and sampled for water quality (major ions, metals,

dissolved gases). The far-field program was also to include sampling monitoring

bores and station bores within 5 km of well pads every six weeks. This data should

be captured and evaluated.

There are a number of existing bores identified in this review that could potentially

be used for future monitoring to meet Water for Food hydrogeological objectives,

including the aforementioned networks operated by Buru Energy and Lennard Shelf

Pty Ltd. In addition, the multi-level piezometers that were installed at three sites on

Noonkanbah Station as part of the DoW/RNWS project should be monitored using

continuous water level loggers to provide better understanding of the importance of

flood recharge to the alluvial aquifers during the wet season. Other existing bores

that should be priortised for monitoring include various unused bores around

Bungardi and Darlngunya communities near Fitzroy Crossing. A number of these


15 May 2015

were visited and recorded by DoW staff in October 2010. Collecting continuous

groundwater level data from these sites would provide insights to the aquifer

responses to local hydrological stresses including natural river flow events and

human-induced pumping from the water supply bores in the Grant Group aquifer.

Similar bores are also likely to exist in the vicinity of the Camballin town water

supply.

Finally, it is recommended the existing surface water monitoring infrastructure be

augmented with automated salinity (as Electrical Conductivity) loggers. These

relatively inexpensive devices enable continuous logging of water level and EC at

any predefined frequency, and would therefore provide critical baseline information

for GDEs such as the pools along Fitzroy and Margaret rivers, Liveringa Pool,

Udialla Springs etc.

8.4 Groundwater dependence of water-related ecosystems

Previous efforts have documented known ecological assets (FitzCAM, 2009) and high

conservation value aquatic ecosystems (Kennard, 2011). However it is currently

unknown which of the aquatic ecological assets – besides the main channel of the

Fitzroy River – rely on groundwater input through the dry season. A field-based

assessment of groundwater dependence is recommended to determine the role of

hydrogeological processes, and thereby enable meaningful risk assessments of the

potential impact of groundwater abstraction near these sites. Approximately 30 sites

are recommended as this reflects the number of assets listed in the aforementioned

references.

The approach should be multi-disciplinary and include ecological surveys,

environmental tracer measurements, and hydrogeological conceptualisation. Field

visits would need to occur at least two times per year (end of wet and end of dry),

and the project should extend over at least two dry seasons to capture the variability

in rainfall/runoff of different preceding wet seasons. The outcome of such a study

would be an informed understanding of which ecological and cultural assets are

groundwater dependent, which can then be used to manage groundwater

development around priority assets.

8.5 Regional groundwater resource investigation

A comprehensive hydrogeological investigation of the most prospective regional

aquifer systems should be a high priority. This study is required to provide the

baseline technical understanding that is necessary for determining reliable estimates


15 May 2015

of groundwater availability and sustainable extraction limits. At present neither of

these could be estimated with confidence. A combined approach that includes

contemporary hydrogeological assessment techniques (e.g., drilling, aquifer

pumping tests and water level mapping) and novel methods (e.g., environmental

tracers) is recommended. These will help to provide the following outcomes:

Maps of aquifer extents and potentiometric surfaces;

Knowledge of recharge processes and estimates of recharge rates;

Knowledge of groundwater flow directions and residence times;

Knowledge of water chemistry for different aquifers; and

Informed understanding of development potential in different areas of the

lower Fitzroy valley.

8.6 Technical investigations in targeted areas

In order for targeted development to occur at Mount Anderson, Fitzroy Crossing,

GoGo Station, Mount Pierre Station, or anywhere else in the lower Fitzroy valley, it

will be critical to evaluate the true water resource potential and map constraints at

each site. Accordingly, focused technical investigations are recommended to

characterise the local aquifer at each site. Bore yields and water quality are obviously

key parameters for determining the feasibility of water supplies for irrigation, but it

will also be critical to develop knowledge of the potential for connectivity with

surface water sites of ecological and cultural significance.

At the time of writing this report, planning is already underway for exploratory

drilling and aquifer pump testing on Bunuba country to the north of Fitzroy

Crossing. The target formation here is the Carboniferous Fairfield Group sediments.

There may also be a need to explore the resource potential of the Grant Group

aquifer, as this has previously been determined to be the best resource for supplying

Fitzroy Crossing. An important consideration for groundwater development in this

location, regardless of aquifer, is the need to avoid pumping impacts on Fitzroy

River baseflow and permanent pools. Therefore a quantitative assessment to address

this risk is also warranted.

Specific details of work programs for other target area will need to be defined as

planning proceeds. In any case, the focus should be on providing improved

confidence around development opportunities and better definition of potential

constraints.


15 May 2015

8.7 Modelling tools and assessments

The proponents of any future groundwater development will need to demonstrate

that their extraction will not adversely impact existing users, including groundwater

dependent ecosystems. This will require site specific technical assessments that

generally include some form of groundwater model. Accordingly, it would be

prudent for the Department to begin collecting the types of data that these models

will ultimately require. Examples include historical groundwater level and water

quality monitoring records, and estimates of aquifer hydraulic properties such as

hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, porosity and storage coefficient.


15 May 2015

9 References Australian Groundwater Consultants (1971). Underground Water Resources ALCCO

Limited.

Allen, A.D., Laws, A.T. and Commander, D.P. (1992). A review of the major groundwater

resources in Western Australia. Report to Kimberley Water Resources Development

Office.

Apak, S.N. (1996). Depositional History of the Lower Permian Carolyn Formation and Poole

Sandstone in the Northern Canning Basin: Implications for Hydrocarbon Potential.

Geological Survey of Western Australia. Record 1996/8.

Appleyard et al. (2006). Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley: an

independent review, for Department of Premier and Cabinet.

Barlow, P.M., and Leake, S.A. (2012). Streamflow depletion by wells—Understanding and

managing the effects of groundwater pumping on streamflow: U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1376, 84 p.

Beard, J. S. (1990). Plant life of Western Australia. Kangaroo Press, NSW., 310 pp.

Bridge (1986). East Yeeda 1 well completion report. Bridge Oil Ltd (unpublished).

Brunner, P., Cook, P. G., and Simmons, C. T. (2009). Hydrogeologic controls on disconnection

between surface water and groundwater. Water Resources Research, 45(1).

Bunn, S.E. and Arthington, A.H. (2002). Basic principles and ecological consequences of

altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environmental Management, 30: 492-

507.

Buru Energy (2013). Laurel Formation Tight Gas Pilot Exploration Program (TGS14)

Environment Plan. Document Number HSE-PLN-017. 26 November 2013.

Close, P.G., Wallace, J., Bayliss, P., Bartolo, R., Burrows, D., Pusey, B.J., Robinson, C.J.,

McJannet, D., Karim, F., Byrne, G., Marvanek, S., Turnadge, C., Harrington, G.,

Petheram, C., Dutra, L.X.C, Dobbs, R., Pettit, N., Jankowski, A., Wallington, T., Kroon,

F., Schmidt, D., Buttler, B., Stock, M., Veld, A., Speldewinde, P., Cook, B.A., Cook, B.,

Douglas, M., Setterfield, S., Kennard, M., Davies, P., Hughes, J., Cossart, R., Conolly, N.

and Townsend, S. (2012). Assessment of the likely impacts of development and climate

change on aquatic ecological assets in Northern Australia. A report for the National

Water Commission, Australia. Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK)

Commonwealth Environmental Research Facility, Charles Darwin University, Darwin.

ISBN: 978-1-921576-66-9. 561pp.


15 May 2015

Commander, D.P. (1987). Derby hydrogeological map—drilling proposal. Western Australia

Geological Survey, Hydrogeology Report 2781.

Crosbie, R.S., McCallum, J.L., and Harrington, G.A. (2009).Diffuse groundwater recharge

modelling across northern Australia. A report to the Australian Government from the

Northern Australia Sustainable Yields Project. CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country

National Research Flagship, Australia.

Crowe, R.W.A. and Towner, R.R. (1981). 1:250 000 Geological Series - Explanatory Notes

Noonkanbah Sheet SE/51-12 International Index, Australian Government Publishing

service, Canberra.

CSIRO (2009). Water in the Timor Sea Drainage Division. A report to the Australian

Government from the CSIRO Northern Australia Sustainable Yields Project. CSIRO

Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, Australia.

Davies, P.M. & Bunn, S.E. (2000). Ecological processes in turbid, arid zone rivers of Australia:

“A bathtub ring concept”. Bulletin of the North American Benthological Society. 17:

175.

Davis, J., Street, M., Malo, H., Cherel, I., Woodward, E. (2011). Mingayooroo–Manyi

Waranggiri Yarrangi. Gooniyandi Seasons (calendar), Margaret River, Fitzroy Valley,

Western Australia. CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, Darwin, NT.

<http://www.track.org.au/showcase/seasonal-calendars>.

Department of Water (DoW) (2008). Fitzroy Crossing Water Reserve Drinking Water Source

Protection Plan. Fitzroy Crossing Town Water Supply. Report 94.

Department of Water (DoW) (2012). Surface water – groundwater interaction in the lower

Fitzroy River floodplain, Western Australia. Unpublished DRAFT.

Doble, R.C., Palmer, D., Cook, P.G. and McCallum, J.L. (2010). Sampling for stream-aquifer

connections by helicopter in a remote, inaccessible area, in Proceedings of

Groundwater 2010: The Challenge of Sustainable Management.

Environment Australia (2001). A directory of important wetlands in Australia. Environment

Australia, Canberra, Third Edition. Available at:

http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/wetlands/pubs/dir

ectory.pdf.

Environmental Resources Management (ERM) (2009). Fitzroy Crossing Power Station

detailed site investigation. Horizon Power. March 2009.

FitzCAM (2009). FitzCAM Asset Table DRAFT 29-10-2009, unpublished.

http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/wetlands/pubs/directory.pdf

http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/wetlands/pubs/directory.pdf


15 May 2015

Fitzpatrick, A., Munday, T.J., Cahill, K. and Stelfox, L. (2011). An interpretation of SkyTEM

Airborne EM data for the Fitzroy River, Western Australia: Final report. CSIRO Water

for a Healthy Country Flagship, Technical Report No. CESRE P2010/1235.

Froend, D., Loomes, R., Horwitz, P., Bertuch, M., Storey, A. and Bamford, M. (2004). Study of

Ecological Water Requirement on the Gnangara and Jandakot Mounds under Section

46 of the Environmental Protection Act, Task 2: Determination of Ecological Water

Requirements. The Water and Rivers Commission, W.A.

Global Groundwater (2005). Fitzroy River Lodge 2005 Drilling and Test Pumping Analysis for

Fitzroy River Lodge, December 2005.

Ghassemi, F., Ferguson, J., and Etminan, H. (1991). Hydrogeology of deep aquifers in the

Canning Basin, Western Australia. In Proceedings of the International Conference on

Groundwater in Large Sedimentary Basins, Perth, Western Australia, 1990: Australian

Water Resources Council, Conference Series no. 20, p. 59-69.

Gardner, W.P., Harrington, G.A., Solomon, D.K. and Cook, P.G. (2011). Using terrigenic 4He

to identify and quantify regional groundwater discharge to streams. Water Resources

Research, 47, W06523.

Gee, S.J. (1994). Aboriginal community water supplies, Groundwater exploration and

completion report 1993/1, Kimberley Region. Water Authority of Western Australia.

Gibson D.L. & Crowe R.W.A. (1982). 1:250 000 Geological Series - Explanatory Notes Mount

Anderson Sheet SE/51-11 International Index, Australian Government Publishing

service, Canberra.

Glover, R.E. and Balmer, G.G. (1954). River depletion resulting from pumping a well near a

river. Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 35, 468-470. GoGo Station Production

Bores Usage Reports (March 2013 and May 2012)

Harrington, G.A., Stelfox, L., Gardner, W.P., Davies, P., Doble, R. and Cook, P.G. (2011).

Surface water – groundwater interactions in the lower Fitzroy River, Western

Australia. Technical Report, August 2011, CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country, 54 pp.

Harrington, G.A., Gardner, W.P. and Munday, T.J. (2013). Tracking groundwater discharge to

a large river using tracers and geophysics. Ground Water, 52(6): 837-852.

Jackson, S., Finn, M., Woodward, E. and Featherston, P. (2011). Indigenous socio-economic

values and river flows – A Summary of Research results: 2008-2010. CSIRO Ecosystem

Sciences, Darwin, NT.


15 May 2015

Kay, W.R., Smith, M.J., Pinder, A.M., Mcrae, J.M., Davis, J.A. and Halse, S.A. (1999). Patterns

of distribution of macroinvertebrate families in rivers of north-western Australia.

Freshwater Biology. 41(2): 299-316.

Kennard, M.J. (ed) (2011). Priorities for identification and sustainable management of high

conservation value aquatic ecosystems in northern Australia. Final Report for the

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities and

the National Water Commission. Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK)

Commonwealth Environmental Research Facility, Charles Darwin University, Darwin.

Kimberley Water Resources Development Office (1993). Fitzroy valley irrigation — a

conceptual study. Government of Western Australia, 232 pp + appendices.

Lamontagne, S., Cook, P.G., Oʼ Grady, A. and Eamus, D. (2005). Groundwater use by

vegetation in a tropical savanna riparian zone (Daly River, Australia). Journal of

Hydrology, 310: 280-293.

Laws, A.T. (1990) Outline of the groundwater resource potential of the Canning Basin

Western Australia. Proceedings of the International Conference on Groundwater in

Large Sedimentary Basins, Australian Water Resources Council Conference Series No.

20.

Laws, A.T., and Smith, R.A. (1989). The Derby Regional Groundwater Investigation 1987:

Western Australia Geological Survey, Record 1989/12.

Lennard Shelf Pty Ltd (2011). Pillara Operations. Annual Hydrogeological Monitoring

Report. 1 July 2010 – 30 June 2011. September 2011.

Lennon et al. (2014). The role of managed aquifer recharge in developing northern Australia.

OzWater 2014.

Liedloff, A.C., Woodward, E.L., Harrington, G.A. and Jackson, S. (2013). Integrating

indigenous ecological and scientific hydro-geological knowledge using a Bayesian

Network in the context of water resource development. Journal of Hydrology, 499: 177-

187

Lindsay R.P and Commander D.P. (2005) Hydrogeological assessment of the Fitzroy

alluvium, Western Australia, Department of Water, Hydrogeological Record Series HG

16.

Marchant, R., Hirst, A., Norris, R.H., Butcher, R., Metzeling, L. and Tiller, D. (1997).

Classification and prediction of macroinvertebrate assemblages from running waters in

Victoria, Australia. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 16, 664-681.

McConnell, K. and O’Connor, S. (1997). 40,000 year record of flood plants in the Southern


15 May 2015

Kimberley Ranges, Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 45, 20–31.

McJannet, D.L., Wallace, J.W., Henderson, A. and McMahon, J. (2009). High and low flow

regime changes at environmental assets across northern Australia under future climate

and development scenarios, CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, Canberra.

Middleton, M.F. (1990). ‘Canning Basin’, in Geology and Mineral Resources of Western

Australia. Western Australia Geological Survey, Memoir 3, pp. 425–457.

Morgan, D., Thornburn, D., Fenton, J., Wallace-Smith, H. and Goodson, S. (2005). Influence of

the Camballin Barrage on fish communities in the Fitzroy River, Western Australia.

Department of Environment report to Land and Water Australia. Murdoch University.

Mory, A.J. and Hocking, R.M., (2011). Permian, Carboniferous and Upper Devonian Geology

of the Northern Canning Basin, Western Australia – A Field Guide. Geological Survey

of Western Australia. Record No. 2011/16.

Northern Australia Land and Water Science Review (2009).

http://www.regional.gov.au/regional/ona/nalwt_files/337388_NLAW_Review_2009.pdf

Nyikina Mangala Aboriginal Corporation (NMAC) (2011). NMAC Strategic Plan, Madjulla

Incorporated, Broome, WA.

O’Connor, S. (1995). Carpenter’s Gap rockshelter 1: 40,000 years of Aboriginal occupation in

the Napier Ranges, Kimberley, Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 40, pp. 58–

59.

Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) (2009a). Bayulu (GoGo) Community Drinking Water Source

Protection Assessment. Department of Housing, July 2009.

Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) (2009b). Junjuwa Community Drinking Water Source Protection

Assessment. Department of Housing, July 2009.

Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) (2009c). Yungngora (Noonkanbah) Community Drinking Water

Source Protection Assessment. Department of Housing, July 2009.

Poelina, A. and Perdrisat, I. (2011), Nyikina Mangala Mardoowarra (Fitzroy River).

Sustainable Livelihoods on Country Case Study. Charles Darwin University.

Purcell, P.G. (1984). ‘The Canning Basin, Western Australia’ in Proceedings of Geological

Society of Australia/Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia Symposium (Ed. by

P.G. Purcell), pp. 1–19. Perth, Western Australia.

Playford, P.E. and Lowry, D.C. (1966). Devonian reef complexes of the Canning Basin,

Western Australia. Western Australia Geological Survey. Bulletin 188.

http://www.regional.gov.au/regional/ona/nalwt_files/337388_NLAW_Review_2009.pdf


15 May 2015

Pollard, J. (1993). ‘Huge WA canal plan welcomed’. Sunday Times, 24 January 1993.Rey

Resources 2011a

Rey Resources (2014). Duchess Paradise Project. Public Environmental Review. February

2014.

Rockwater (1987). ACP No.1 artesian bore completion report Broome, W.A. Report for

Australian City Properties Pty Ltd.

Rockwater (2011). Results of Groundwater Investigations at Fitzroy Crossing WWTP. Report

for Water Corporation, Jolimont.

Rockwater (2013). Hydrogeological assessment of project areas. Report prepared for Buru

Energy Ltd.

Ruprecht, J. & Rodgers, S. (1998). Hydrology of the Fitzroy River. [In] AW Storey and L.

Beesley (eds) Limnology of the Fitzroy River, Western Australia: A Technical

Workshop. Proceedings of a workshop held on Wednesday 18th February 1998, at

Claremont Conference Centre, Edith Cowan University, Claremont, WA

Smith, R.A. (1992). Explanatory notes on the Derby 1:250 000 hydrogeological sheet. Western

Australia Geological Survey, Hydrogeological Series.

Smith , R.A., (1988). Derby Hydrogeological Map bore completion reports. Western Australia

Geological Survey, Hydrogeology Report 1988/20.

Smith, M., Kay, W. and Halse, S. (1998). The Monitoring River Health Initiative and aquatic

macroinvertebrates in the Kimberley region of Western Australia [In] AW Storey and

L. Beesley (eds) Limnology of the Fitzroy River, Western Australia: A Technical

Workshop. Proceedings of a workshop held on Wednesday 18th February 1998, at

Claremont Conference Centre, Edith Cowan University, Claremont, WA.

Smith, M.J., W.R. Kay, D.H.D. Edward, P.J. Papas, K.S.J. Richardson, J.C. Simpson, A.M.

Pinder, D.J. Cale, P.H. Hprwitz, J.A. Davis, F.H. Yung, R.H. Norris, and S.A. Halse

(1999). AUSRIVAS: Using macroinvertebrates to assess ecological condition of rivers

in Western Australia. Freshwater Biology 41: 269-282.

Storey, A.W., Davies P.M. and Froend, R.H., 2001. Fitzroy River System: Environmental

Values. Report for the Water and Rivers Commission, Perth, Western Australia.

Sutton, D. (1998). Assessment of the natural environmental values of the Fitzroy River

Region, WA. Unpublished report to the Australian Heritage Commission, pp 61.

Swarbrick, R.A. (1965 ). Geological Investigation of the Gogo Diversion Dam Site, Western

Australia Geological Survey, Record 1965/30.


15 May 2015

Taylor, C.F.H. (2000). Flood Geomorphology of the Fitzroy River, Northwestern Australia.

University of Western Australia, PhD thesis (unpublished).

Theis, C.V. (1935). The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate

and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage. Transactions

American Geophysical Union 16, 519–524.

Tomlinson, M. and Boulton A.J. (2010). Ecology and management of subsurface groundwater

dependent ecosystems in Australia; a review. Marine and Freshwater Research , 61:

936-949.

Toussaint, S. Sullivan, P., Yu, S. and Mularty, M. (2001). Fitzroy Valley Indigenous Cultural

Values Study (a preliminary assessment). Report for the Water and Rivers

Commission.

Turnadge, C., Petheram, C., Davies, P. and Harrington, G. (2013). Water Resources. In: Grice,

A.C., Watson, I. and Stone, P. (eds) ‘Mosaic Irrigation for the Northern Australian Beef

Industry. An assessment of sustainability and potential. Technical Report.’ A report

prepared for the Office of Northern Australia. CSIRO, Brisbane.

University of Western Australia (UWA) (2010). Fitzroy Catchment Management Plan. The

University of Western Australia. Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource

Management March 2010. 103pp.

URS (2010). Liveringa Station. Groundwater Supply Options – Scoping Study. Prepared for:

Liveringa Pastoral Company. 22 January 2010.

van Dam, R., Bartolo, R. and Bayliss, P. (2008). Chapter 2 – Identification of ecological assets,

pressures and threats. In Ecological risk assessment for Australia’s northern tropical

rivers. Sub-project 2 of Australia’s Tropical Rivers – an integrated data assessment and

analysis (DET18). A report to Land & Water Australia. Environmental Research

Institute of the Supervising Scientist, National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research,

Darwin NT, 14–161.

Water Authority of Western Australia (WAWA) (1990). Fitzroy Crossing Groundwater

Scheme Review. Report no. WG 100. August 1990.

Water Authority of Western Australia (WAWA) (1993). An evaluation of dams in the Fitzroy

Valley. Fitzroy Valley irrigation Concept Plan Study 232, Internal report No. WP 182.

Water Corporation (2008). Annual Statement to Water and Rivers Commission (2007-2008).

5th June 2008.

Water Corporation (2012). Fitzroy Crossing Wastewater Treatment Plan. Application for

Works Approval. February 2012.


15 May 2015

Water Corporation (2013). Fitzroy Crossing Groundwater Monitoring Review 2013. June

2013.

Water Corporation (2014). Camballin Groundwater Monitoring Review 2013. June 2014.


15 May 2015

Appendix A FitzCAM DRAFT Asset Table 29-10-09 (FitzCAM, 2009). Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name

Asset type Description Value Threat

1 King Leopold,

Mueller and Durack

Ranges

Geological,

biodiversity

Internationally significant geological sites including the Egan Formation

(exceptionally well preserved record of early evolution), Goat Paddock (crater), and

Pavement Hill (glaciated rock). Also provide habitat for a number of (fauna) species

considered rare, endangered, vulnerable, priority or of special concern.

2 Geike Range and

Geike Gorge

Geological,

biodiversity

This Devonian Reef System is one of the best preserved examples of its type in the

world and exhibits a range of geological and biological features which make the

area significant at a regional, national and international level. Supports a large

number of endemic land snail and cave dwelling invertebrates. Geike Gorge is

important habitat for the Purple-crowned Fairy-wren.

3 Mimbi Caves Geological The extensive cave system of the Lawford Ranges is recognised as a rare geological

feature.

4 Widespread Geological Tufa deposits

5 The Camballin

floodplain area

(Le Lievre Swamp

System)

Vegetation/

Agriculture

biodiversity

Referred to locally as “frontage” or “flood plain country”, with or without scattered

trees and shrubs. The principal grasses are ribbon grass (Chrysopogon fallax), blue

grass (Dichanthium spp.) and Mitchell grass (Astrebla spp.). The area is regarded as

one of the richest grazing areas of the Kimberley region. Migratory birds.

Failed irrigation projects.

Agricult., tourism,

bird-watching

Poor Manag.

Fire

Feral animals

6 The Fitzroy River

floodplain

Vegetation/

agriculture

Vegetated by Eucalyptus microtheca savanna with fringing woodland composed of

eucalypts, acacias and wild figs.

7 The Fitzroy River

Catchment

Biodiversity One of the few large remaining natural areas on earth – the tropical savannas of

Northern Australia

8 Riparian vegetation

along the Fitzroy

River

Biodiversity Generally good condition and contained several priority species, but areas of high

stock access were affected by bank degradation and weed invasion. Condition in a

declining trend due to fire, erosion and feral herbivores

Cattle access,

weeds

9 Aquatic

invertebrate fauna

along river

Biodiversity Assessed using the AusRivAS protocol - reported to be in good ecological “health”.

10 Fish fauna along Biodiversity Diverse, containing some species endemic to the Kimberley and to the Fitzroy


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


river

11 Waterbirds on

floodplains,

particularly

Camballin

Biodiversity At least 67 species of waterbirds recorded on the Camballin floodplain. Considered

sufficiently important for areas to meet listing under the Ramsar (Wetlands of

International Importance) Convention, and many of the waterbird species are listed

under international agreements (e.g. JAMBA/CAMBA).

12 The Margaret River

(and catchment)

Biodiversity,

agriculture

Cultural sites

of Goonyandi

people

Assessed as in a worse condition than the remainder of the catchment, with heavy

grazing resulting in bare, eroded areas, and a wide riverbed flanked by sand

deposits

Contains bush fruits, medicines, turkey, dingo, goanna, emu, kangaroo

Bush fires

Weeds

Excessive grazing

Bank erosion

13 Lake Gladstone

West of Anne River

Biodiversity,

Food and

water source

Circular, freshwater lake. - largest permanent freshwater wetland in Central

Kimberley bioregion providing refuge for vulnerable species, and of outstanding

historical and cultural value

Water bird site,

some threat’nd

and rare species

Recreation

Pollution

Erosion

Fires

Over-grazing

Ferals

14 Rainforest patches,

various locations

Biodiversity Particularly important to invertebrates such as Camaenid land snails and annelids.

Most have endemic earthworm species associated with them

15 Brooking Gorge Biodiversity Contains aquatic species not represented elsewhere in the ranges. This is due to it

being a smaller water course, where flooding is less intense. It is the only known

location of Nymphaea immutabilis subsp. kimberleyensis.

16 Mornington

Sanctuary

Biodiversity home to at least 600 plant species including at least 10 rare or threatened species

including: Acacia gloeotricha, A. manipularis, Echinochloa kimberleyensis, Triumfetta

hapala, Eucalyptus ordiana, E. mooreana, Grevillea latifolia, Jacksonia remota, Livistona

victoriae, and Olax spartea, and to 33 mammal, 202 bird, 76 reptile and 22 amphibian

species. There are at least 13 species of threatened wildlife including: Red Goshawk,

Purple-crowned Fairy-wren, Gouldian Finch, Freshwater Crocodile, Peregrine

Falcon, Grey Falcon, Australian Bustard and Northern Quoll.

17 Fitzroy River Biodiversity

Cultural

Large, virtually un-regulated except for Camballin barrage. Probably one of the

more important habitats for Magpie goose and Whistling-duck.

Wetlands of the Camballin floodplain are of national importance for Plumed

whistling-duck, and important in a Western Australian context for Pacific heron,

High ecol. Value,

Pastoral,

Tourism

Conserv’n

Unmang. Access

Mining

Ferals

Over-grazing


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


Great egret, Intermediate egret, Glossy ibis, Magpie goose and Wood sandpiper.

Cultural value = living water - creation story

River contains 35 of the 43 species of fish from the region.

Dams

18 Mijirrikan

Point that divides

river

Cultural Secret sacred places, no public access Theft sacred objects,

Fire,

Ferals, weeds, human

impact

19 Livingbirri Upper

Liveringa

Cultural Underground water stream,

“Living water” Important water source (bore)

Water source,

Heritage value

20 Ooloobudah Cultural Songs & stories, Emu dreaming site High cultural

value

Needs to be protected

Jarlmadangah Mt.

Anderson

Cultural Lrge. Mountain, living water. Caves. Sacred area, burial grounds Tourism, Cultural

and conserv’n.

Currently good

condition

21 Mudflats at mouth

of the Fitzroy River

Biodiversity Sometimes support moderately high numbers of waterbirds.

22 Permanent pools –

various locations –

e.g. Telegraph Pool

Biodiversity During the dry season, permanent pools form important refugia for aquatic species,

as do the few billabongs that remain on the floodplain. For example, Telegraph Pool

is a well known fishing spot and also refuge for the EPBC listed threatened species

Freshwater Sawfish Pristis microdon

23 Freshwater springs

such as Udialla

Springs and

Honeymoon

Springs

Biodiversity Found throughout the lower Fitzroy catchment

24 Mallallah and

Sandhill Swamp

Biodiversity North of Noonkanbah - regarded as potentially important waterbird habitat.

25 Wetlands near

Derby

Biodiversity Provide seasonal habitat for a wide variety, and sometimes, high number of

waterbirds. Formed by runoff from adjacent sand dunes, with the water lasting until

July or August. When full they teem with birdlife, with some species such as

Australasian Grebe and Brolga noted breeding there. One site is also a refuge for a

priority listed flora, Nymphoides beaglensis.

26 Freshwater prawns Biodiversity Macrobrachium prawns and Caridina shrimps (both of which are common across the Over fishing,


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


north of Australia, are present in the Fitzroy River sytem. Freshwater prawns are

likely to be of high ecological significance, providing an important link in the food

web that supports the fish fauna. The prawns likely form the majority of

invertebrate biomass in the river, comprise a major component of the diet of many

fish and, because they have distinct breeding migrations, also influence fish

migrations.

Limited knowledge

of life history

27 Threatened fish

species (including

Freshwater

Sawfish)

Biodiversity A number of fishes that are listed as threatened by the IUCN, including the

Northern River Shark (Glyphis sp. C) (Critically Endangered), Freshwater Whipray

(Himantura chaophraya) (Vulnerable), Freshwater Sawfish (Pristis microdon)

(Endangered), Dwarf Sawfish (Pristis clavata) (Endangered), Greenway’s Grunter

(Hannia greenwayi) (Data Deficient) and the Barnett River Gudgeon (Hypseleotris

kimberleyensis) (Near Threatened/Lower Risk).

Northern Australia may soon represent the only geographical region in the world

where viable populations of Freshwater Sawfish persist.

28 Stygofauna Biodiversity A new species of family of stygal flabelliferan isopod (Tainisopus sp.) was recorded

from Lullangarra Cave; two species of cave cockroach (Nocticola spp.), a

planthopper (Fulgoroidea), and a number of ostracods and cyclopoid copepods

were also recorded from caves in the Fitzroy River catchment area.

29 Alluvial aquifer and

groundwater

resources

Aquifer Previous exploratory and geotechnical drilling across the floodplain at Willare,

Fitzroy Barrage and Gogo had confirmed the presence of an alluvial aquifer

composed of a basal zone of gravels and sands about 20–30 m thick, overlain by silts

and clays about 10 m thick. If representative of the entire Fitzroy alluvium, the

aquifer could contain a groundwater storage of 13 000 GL.

30 Ground Water

resource

Water

resources

There are approximately 25 current groundwater licences in the catchment, with an

approximate allocation of less than 2 GL per year. Most of the groundwater licences

are for Aboriginal community bores, some pastoral bores (for diversified activities

other than livestock and domestic use), and limited horticultural activities.

Unlicensed water use includes livestock and domestic bores (pastoral industry) and

possibly some tourist operations and Aboriginal community bores. There is

currently no allocation limit set for the catchment, as this information is not yet

available or determined through an allocation planning process.

31 Surface water Water There are three surface water licences issued in the catchment, the most significant


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


resources resources allocation being approximately 6GL per year at Liveringa Station for irrigation of

fodder crops

32 Marine species

(including northern

river shark)

Biodiversity Species include the northern river shark (Glyphis sp. C), the milk shark

(Rhizoprionodon acutus), the winghead shark (Eusphyra blochii), the dwarf sawfish

(Pristis clavata), the lesser salmon catfish (Arius graeffei), shark mullet (Rhinomugil

nasutus), king threadfin (Polydactylus macrochir), scaly croaker (Nibea squamosa) and

milk-spotted toadfish (Chelonodon patoca).

33 Shorebird habitat Biodiversity King Sound is of particular note as it is the most extensive area of mudflat in the

region. Although the density of birds is not as high as in Roebuck Bay, it

nevertheless supports a very large number of shorebirds.

34 Mangroves Biodiversity 15 species of mangroves are found within this region, most diverse and dense

stands of mangal are found near the mouth of the Fitzroy River. Unlike most

mangrove systems which are aggrading, the mangroves of the Fitzroy estuary are

eroding, and gradually retreating inland. This gives the system intrinsic scientific

interest.

35 River country

knowledge

Cultural The river travels through the traditional countries of many language groups, and

the complexity of cultural relationships to the river country has been further

compounded by the historical relocation of desert groups on the station properties

along the river. Whilst each group has distinct cultural responsibilities and

articulates their relationship in varying ways, the groups are united through a

system of Law that weaves together complex narratives and rituals required for the

sustenance of the river country and its complex ecosystems. There is no single name

for the river except marduwarra, which is a generic word for river. Rather, the river is

conceptualised as series of linked narratives which arise from the many permanent

pools along the riverbed which are subjected to the seasonal processes of flooding

(warramba) and receding waters.

The creation of the river is associated with the activities of mythical beings or

serpents in the creative epoch referred to in English as the ‘Dreamtime’. In three

local languages this creative epoch is variously called - Pukarrikarra (Mangala),

Bukarrarra (Nyikina) and Ngarranggani (Ngarinyin).

36 Broken Wagon Pool Cultural Site considered by the Nyikina to be the origin of the Fitzroy River. According to the

Nyikina and Mangala peoples the Fitzroy River was created by a snake/ serpent that


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


was speared by Wunyumbu at Mijirayikan who was fishing in the pool using the

poison from the majala tree. The serpent reared up with Wunyumbu’s spear in his

head and the track of his tail became the river and the mouth of the river. From

Mijirayikan, Wunyumbu travelled on the serpent’s head as the snake carved out the

river as he travelled upstream

37 Caves Cultural Significant in the ranges landscape are the numerous caves that provide shelter and

are home to resident Wanjina, the creators and protectors of the country. Such cave

sites are the religious centres for each of the clan groupings (dambun) of the

Ngarinyin people

38 Mimbi Caves in

Gooniyand

Cultural Located along limestone ranges, rich with underground springs. Mimbi represents

a key spirit centre which is also central to a distinct trading route known as wunan,

and renown as a place of refuge during the last century.

39 Hann River Cultural The Ngarinyin believe that the Hann River, a source of the Fitzroy River, was

created by snakes referred to as unggud/wunggurr/unggurr)... Unggud, as

metaphysical serpents, are believed to live permanently in deep pools, but can leave

the water, make nests to lay their eggs and travel underground.

40 Geikie Gorge Cultural,

Tourism

Important

community

cultural site

Traditional Bunuba country, provides strong evidence of Indigenous cultural logic

and affiliations to land and water. The area around the large midstream rock

formation is where, in the Dreamtime, a blind Aboriginal elder drowned, after

leaving the tribe to go wandering. The old man sighed and sneezed before he

sank to the bottom for the last time. If you sit quietly around the area, you

can still hear the sighs of that old man.

Cultural, wildlife,

fish.

Good condition but

threatened by weeds,

cattle, pigs

41 Brooking Gorge Cultural,

recreation

Community

cultural site

Cultural site for Bunuba people Tourism,

recreation

fish

Weeds,

Pandanus palms,

nutrients

42 Kapoda springs

About 10km E. FX

Cultural -

community

Well preserved springs with good water quality. Used by community – caves,

paintings

Wildlife, fossils Litter, feral species

mining

43 Diamond gorge –

Junction F.R. and

King Leopold

Range

Recreational

Biodiversity

aesthetic

Steep gorge carved through King Leopold Range, Important aquatic and

escarpment habitat for range of species

tourism Dam

Reduc’n water quality

Over use


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


44 Goola Goolaboo cultural Burial site Indig. cultural,

Pastoral

Overgraz.

Broadacre

farming

45 Marngarda Geeguly

Creek

Cultural,

biodiversity

Cultural values for community Tourism potential Currently good

condition

46 Paradise Hot

Springs

Cultural

recreational

Cultural site associated with many stories, camping spot tourism Currently good

condition

Threat -coal mining

47 Oongalkada Udialla

Spring & Mangel

Creek

Cultural High community social values Tourism

Training centre

Currently good

condition

48 Yigi Yigi Springs Cultural Cultural place – songs & stories Commui’yuse Needs to be fenced

49 O’Donnel valley

Lumbarty Gorge

Juljuljuar water hole

Blue Bush Junction

Cultural

Recreation

Food

Bush tucker

Bush

medicines

Cultural places for community, paintings in gorge, recreational places (camping)

Gidamore spring,

Ngalinggi (on

Margaret river),

Ngulumarra

waterhole,

Mungingoa water

hole,

Wurraangi

Cultural,

Recreation,

Fishing,

dreaming,

Various locations with similar values, recreation, fishing, bush tucker, medicines,

social places, cultural values, meeting places

Over use by humans,

mining, ferals, over-

grazing

50 Tiya Tiya Cultural

Biodiversity

Big hill, cultural significance, mud lark habitat

51 Kajina Hill Cultural Natural statue of man, Sacred site

52 Jintangu Cultural

Recreation

One hot spring, and some cold springs Hunting, good

water source

Cattle, wild dogs

53 Pulany Cultural Sacred massacre site Sacred site plus cattle


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


On Georges River good perennial

water source

54 Winurru Cultural

(personal)

Burial site

55 Pulkartrijarti Cultural Dreamtime spider site Fire

56 Bangangoo Cultural Lizard site – mark of lizard on large rock Fire

57 Parnany hill

At entrance to

Yakanarra

community

Dreamtime

site

Lage rock outcrop – home of rock pigeon Fire

58 Moanampi Swamp

80Km S.W. of FX

Cultural Site made by snake. Food area for humans and animals. Need to cut new road

so that road through

moanampi can be

fenced off

59 Parakapun Cultural

Biodiversity

Burial site,

Special fishing site

Meeting place

Too many people

affect cultural values

60 Lumpu lumpu

Southern boundary

of catchment on

Cherrabun Station

Cultural Break in ranges where desert people enter Cherrabun station

Perm. Water,

Emu,

Bilby,

Hill kangaroo

Camels

Cattel

Ferals

Fire

Rubbish

61 Logue Creek

Edgar range

Biodiversity Unique species – Pandanus palm Small colony, few

plants

62 River Floods Cultural Considered by the Aboriginal groups to “clean the country”, by the process of

flushing foul water and debris from the pools. The Aboriginal people stated they

did not drink the first flushing flow, but waited for the next flush which they

considered “good, clean water”. Ecologically, it is known that elevated nutrient

levels are associated with the initial flush as material is both transported from the

catchment into the channel and mobilised from pool sediments.

63 Floodplain

inundation

Cultural,

ecological

Considered a significant event by the Aboriginal groups


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


64 The Freshwater

Sawfish

Cultural,

ecological

Culturally significant species. It is not only an important food source, but is

included in a number of stories and beliefs of the peoples of the Fitzroy River, where

it is referred to as ‘galwanyi’ in Bunuba and Gooniyandi, ‘wirridanyniny’ or ‘pial

pial’ in Nyikina, and ‘wirrdani’ in Walmajarri.

65 Riparian trees Cultural,

Ecological,

food

Examples include - Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Melaleuca leucodendra and M. argentea. All

three species were used as either utensils for food preparation and presentation, or

other foods were recognised as being associated with them. The bark is used to cook

meat in or the leaves are put inside fish and kangaroo when cooking. Bark and

leaves were also considered to keep meat clean and also infuse meat with the smell

of the plant (also provides some medicinal value for cleansing body). Eucalyptus

camaldulensis was recognised as the host of witchetty grubs. The fruit of another

riparian tree, the fig Ficus racemosa, are dried and eaten later as a sweet. The fringing

Pandanus Palm produces a small edible nut but is not considered “prime tucker”.

Of the other fringing plants, the Waterlily Nymphaea sp. is used as food, namely the

tuber and the seeds (which are ground for flour). The tuber is roasted, while the

lower white stem and the flower are eaten raw. The lower part of the stem of a tall

rush with a yellow flower (not observed and identified) was also eaten raw.

66 Freshwater

mangrove

Food Used to capture fish from the river and waterholes. The Aboriginal people pulverise

the stem and throw the pulp into the water to remove oxygen and so enable fish to

be collected.

67 Invertebrate

microfauna

Biodiversity Widespread – carbon converters – carbon sequestration, soil aeration, water

penetration

Fire

68 Pastoral

leases

Agriculture There are 44 pastoral properties within the Fitzroy catchment, with 16 of them being

Aboriginal pastoral lease holdings. Pastoralism is dominated by live cattle exports.

The value of cattle disposals from the Region was $48.0 million in 2003/04, being 9.7

per cent of the State total. This value has increased to between $60 to $70 million in

2004/05. The Department also estimates that the Kimberley herd of beef cattle is

around 600,000, representing around 30 per cent of the total State herd.

Pastoral

production

Jobs

Poor grazing

management

and fire

management

Ferals

Weeds

69 Irrigated agriculture

Agriculture The West Kimberley has more than five million hectares of soils potentially capable

of supporting irrigation. Around 200,000 hectares of land located near the Fitzroy

River floodplains and the sandplain areas south of Broome are capable of immediate

Agric. Production

Jobs

Erosion

Inadequate

Legislation


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


development. Significant volumes of both groundwater and surface water are

available in this region, and the climate is suitable for a range of crops, which

includes sugar cane, cotton, tropical fruits, vegetables, pulse crops, seed and tree

crops.

70 Fossil soil types Agriculture Suitable for farming of fodder – e.g. adjacent to N. side of Pillara mine site Agric. Production

Jobs

Fire

71 Water resources Agriculture Water resources include surface water from the Fitzroy River and groundwater

resources of the Canning Basin. Large quantities of surface water are potentially

available from the Fitzroy River and groundwater could be sourced from the

Canning Basin. The groundwater areas with most potential for large-scale

agriculture are the Broome, Derby, Wallal, La Grange, Willare and Fitzroy sub-

basins with up to 700 gigalitres potentially divertible from these particular areas.

The Western Australian Government undertook a feasibility study for developing

irrigated agriculture in the West Kimberley and proposed large-scale irrigated

agriculture to the south and east of Broome using groundwater, followed by

irrigation of sandy soils south west of Fitzroy Crossing using surface water from

damming the Fitzroy River at Dimond Gorge. Approximately 225 000 ha could be

developed. Initially, cotton would be the main crop, but other agriculture could

include sugar, leucaena, hemp, horticultural products, exotic hardwoods,

freshwater aquaculture and viticulture. However, cropping ventures have not been

successful. Major problems - inability to maintain constant water supply from the

Fitzroy River which floods often; y birds; insects; heavy weed infestation;

remoteness of the area; lack of experience and poor planning.

72 Mineral resources

Mineral s Top five mineral and petroleum commodities in the Kimberley Region were

diamonds, nickel, iron ore, crude oil and rock. The Region's total mineral and

petroleum production was valued at $660.6 million. The Region currently

contributes 2 per cent of the State's total mineral production by value. In addition,

30‐36 billion tonnes potential coal estimated.

73 Tourist sites Tourism The two-year rolling average for domestic visitor expenditure across 2004 and 2005

was estimated at $195.6 million while international visitor expenditure was

estimated at $31.7 million. Indigenous tourism is on a small-scale but of importance

to some individuals and communities in the Fitzroy catchment.


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


74 Gouldian Finch Aesthetic,

biodiversity

Threatened species of finch, significantly reduced distribution Tourism,

Bird-watching

75 Willy willy Cultural

(personal)

Family birthplace

76 Mingalkala Cultural

(personal)

Family birthplace

77 Pineapple bore

Larrawa station

Cultural

(personal)

Family birthplace

78 Bilby Biodiversity Bawoorrooga community, bilby breeding site Road kill

Fire, Tourists

79 Bohemia downs

Along

Christmas Creek

Cultural Black bream

Dreaming

erosion

80 Bulka Stn. Biodiversity Red finch breeding area fire

81 McDonald spring

Bulka Stn.

Cultural Living water Camel

Fire , Cattle

82 Darngu

Bulka Stn.

Cultural

Historical

Living water, massacre site, First sheep stn. in Kimberly Camel

cattle

83 Ngumpan Cultural Spring water,

Gathering place

Cattle

Fire , Tourist

Road work

84 Beef wood Stn. Cultural Massacre site, soak Fire , Cattle

85 Christmas Creek

Bohemia Downs

Cultural Gunadu site - dreaming Cattle

Erosion

Cabbage Leaf tree

86 Manning Gorge Cultural Living water, dreamtime, stories, paintings, birthplaces. Fish

F.W. turtles

tourism

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


87 Emu Flat on Mornington

Station

Cultural Large circular open flat at the base of a baulk face

escarpment with only one tree. Dreamtime story about 2

emus who were fighting over black bush plum

Cultural maintenance through handing

down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


88 Bulgundi / Saddlers jump-

up on Tablelands Station

Cultural The end of the Fitzroy River

High point between Fitzroy and Chamberlain heads

Home of Lindsay Malay’s ancestors


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

89 Tullewa Hill Cultural Hill on Tablelands

Dreamtime story about rough tailed lizard and a curlew

competing with each other on building the hill


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

90 Wallalay / Wallaby Rock

on the Fitzroy River near

Hidden Pocket

cultural Physical point in the river that marks the limit of the

range for barramundi

important ecological knowledge

relating to the distribution of species


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

91 Cherrabun – Malitia /

Fitzroy Bluff, the sw corner

of Mornington bounded by

the Adcock and Fitzroy

Rivers

cultural Large flat topped mesa where you rub the rock to bring

cherrabun


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

92 Waldamilliga / Fitzroy

Bluff falls

Large waterfall from northern edge of the bluff

escarpment

Frilled neck lizard dancing to bring rain


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

93 Wulungunati-sparni cultural Shallow escarpment as seeps off the old Dimond road

Place where the rock python fell and broke his back and

made the seeps as he fell


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

94 Kumpuny / storm bird egg cultural Between Cadjeput and Blue Bush – you can see it on the

hill


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

95 Mornington main camp to

the west of Home Creek

cultural Old eucalypt surrounded by bauhinia and riparian

vegetation

Sammy’s birthplace

significance for Sammy’s family

96 Patariny / Nimbirrimbin cultural Fitzroy river south of Baulk face escarpment,

downstream from the little; Fitzroy junction

This is a dangerous place, you can’t fish or muck around

here. You have to be careful not to upset galaroo.


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

97 Springs on the Fitzroy up

from Little Fitzroy junction

Cultural and

economic

Fresh water springs and soaks – fish breeding places

Supply of fresh water for one community

Source of fresh water to supply a

community

Loss of water quality

from fire, erosion, run


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


off etc

98 Jurnamilija / Mt Leake cultural Mountain

There is a dreamtime story about kids who were taken

away from this place

It is ok for kids to go there now


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

99 Rock art sites from the

Hann River to the bottom

of Dimond Gorge

cultural Paintings on the steep rock faces at Sir John and Dimond

Gorges.

Nationally significant sites Damming, changes

flow regimes

100 Purungul / sugar bag

North of the Mornington

camp off Annie Creek

cultural Volcanic plug on the side of Annie Creek

Dreamtime story for sugar-bag – you rub the rocks here

to get honey


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

101 Punparringar-ri / fresh

water mussel

Officer Spring

cultural Waterfall and pool in the tributary of Annie creek

Place to find fresh water mussels


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

102 Idle Hole nth of Baulk face,

nth of junction with

Tablelands track

Cultural &

social

Deep hole in the creek surrounded by good vegetation

It is a fishing and camping place

103 Umpirta / Mt Brennan cultural Mt Brennan – flat top mountain It is a burial site. There

was a recent burial at this place

104 Tharringbun / Maggie

Springs

cultural Seep feeding Roy Creek

Supply of fresh water while hunting ?

105 Tablelands track cultural Spring feeding holes in creek lines

Spirit tracks


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

106 West of Mornington camp Cultural Cemetery site

107 Ballaray Junction

Between the Adcock and

Cadjeput

historical A man was shot here

108 Nowingngini / Junction of

Roy Creek & Fitzroy River

cultural Place to find waterlillies – only some people can cook

them here

Information about the preparation of

locally sourced food


down stories

Loss of elders’

knowledge

109 Loris Range / through Geological Sandstone ridge / volcanic butte Fires, cattle, mining


15 May 2015

Asset

No.

Location name

or asset name


Quanbun and Jubilee

pastoral leases

and cultural

110 Alexander Island ecological Island within river boundaries / floodplain approx

100,000 acres

Breeding site for numerous bird species eg purple

crowned fairy wren

Nth ringtail possum, sawfish, eel barrramundi

A secluded area with limited access

that supports a range of significant

species

Mining, dams, over

grazing, human

activity, agriculture

111 Various soil types Geological,

ecological

and

economic

The valley has a range of soil types from light sand to

heavy clay

Most soil types support the existing

cattle industry

Several of the better soil types can

support

Fire, erosion,

concentrated cattle

activity, feral animals

(pigs and goats)

112 Water Ecological

and

economic

Rainfall, run off and sub-surface waters The sustainable use of water can be of

economic value to all those who live

within the valley, both directly and

indirectly

Global weather

changes,

unsustainable use

113 people social and

economic

Catchment residents Untapped workforce

Catchment residents identify stroingly

with the area, strong sense of place for

indigenous and non-indigenous

residents

Poor environmental

practice such as

leaving litter and

starting fires,

Poor health and

unemployment

114 Middle and upper

catchment of the Fitzroy

River

Ecological,

social,

economic

Unregulated high volume river in the tropical savannas High flow rates

Integral to the flora and fauna

underpinning the catchment

Critical habitat is in the riparian zone

for birds

Riverside vegetation folters water and

nutrient run off

Drives coastal and marine ecology via

large seasonal discharge

Mismanaged fire

Overstocking

Weeds

Regulating flow


15 May 2015

Appendix B Recommended priority areas for an airborne geophysical (AEM) survey

Documents

Lower Fitzroy River Groundwater Review Fitzroy River... · 8.4 Groundwater dependence of water-related ecosystems 95 8.5 Regional groundwater resource investigation 95 8.6 Technical