Post-assessment monitoring is important to test and (in)validate the predictions of the Assessment. At the highest level, monitoring efforts should reflect the risk predictions, and focus the effort where the changes are expected to be the largest. However, it is important to place some monitoring effort at locations with lower risk predictions so as to confirm the range of potential and identify unexpected outcomes.
The for the indicated limited potential for hydrological or impacts due to the beyond some localised changes, particularly in the north. Therefore, from a management perspective, there might not be a strong motivation to invest in new monitoring to determine regional , beyond the more local monitoring required by mining proponents under their conditions of operation. Monitoring to address knowledge gaps, such as the role of faults in – or the effect of could contribute to reducing predictive in the modelling.
Any groundwater monitoring effort should be directed to the area surrounding the Rocky Hill, Gloucester Gas Project and Stratford mine developments, where modelling indicates some potential for cumulative effects. Changes to the in the , such as AGL’s decision to not proceed with the Gloucester Gas Project, should be factored into any groundwater monitoring planning.
Any future surface water monitoring should also be directed to streams in this area to better understand the connection between changes in groundwater level and streamflow regimes and the relative contributions to changes in streamflow from groundwater drawdown and changes in catchment . Local information on, for example, stream condition, habitat value, recovery potential and existence of other , is needed to determine actual priorities. Better condition streams, such as Waukivory Creek and the Avon River downstream of the Stratford mine, which have been mapped as being in moderate geomorphic condition and which support a relatively continuous fringe of forested wetlands, are likely to be a higher priority for protection and management than more degraded streams such as Avondale Creek and Dog Trap Creek, which are mapped as being in poor geomorphic condition and having a patchier distribution of forested wetlands.
Product Finalisation date
- 3.1 Overview
- 3.2 Methods
- 3.3 Potential hydrological changes
- 3.4 Impacts on and risks to landscape classes
- 3.5 Impacts on and risks to water-dependent assets
- 3.6 Commentary for coal resource developments that were not modelled
- 3.7 Conclusion
- Contributors to the Technical Programme
- About this technical product