Water for Fodder

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

Public consultation is now closed. Thank you for your feedback.

The Water for Fodder review report is now available.

The Water for Fodder program is an Australian Government measure to help ease the burden of drought on communities across Australia.

Under the program, farmers in the southern connected Murray–Darling Basin can apply to purchase water at a discounted rate. The water must be used to grow fodder such as pasture, hay, lucerne and silage.

Round 1 was open from 11 to 13 December 2019.

How you had your say

We asked you for your feedback on round 1 of the Water for Fodder program.

We sought feedback through an online survey from 26 March 2020 to 9 April 2020.

We received 820 survey responses.

Responses per state. 429 or 52 per cent from Victoria. 362 or 44 per cent from New South Wales. 15 or 2 per cent from South Australia. 2 or less than 1 per cent from the Australian Capital Territory. 1 or less than 1 per cent from Queensland. 11 or less than 1 per cent were from an undisclosed location.

Survey respondents 93 per cent were irrigators 86 per cent had applied under round 1. 25 per cent had been successful under round 1



Eligibility. 75 per cent agreed we should limit who can apply based on how much water they have available. Of these, 31 per cent said that limit should be 250 ML and 33 per cent said that limit should remain 1000 ML. 59 per cent thought that applicants who had sold their water allocation in the past 12 months should not be eligible. 55 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that successful round 1 applicants should not be able to apply in round 2. 45 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that only those involved in dairy or livestock production should be eligible.

Ballot process 82 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed that brokers should be able to apply for the program on behalf of their clients. 51 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that a random ballot is a fair way to select successful applicants. 32 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed. 44 per cent said the ballot was their preferred method of selecting applicants. 26 per cent think the water should be shared across all applicants rather than over a ballot.

Public consultation is now closed. Thank you for your feedback.

The Water for Fodder review report is now available.

The Water for Fodder program is an Australian Government measure to help ease the burden of drought on communities across Australia.

Under the program, farmers in the southern connected Murray–Darling Basin can apply to purchase water at a discounted rate. The water must be used to grow fodder such as pasture, hay, lucerne and silage.

Round 1 was open from 11 to 13 December 2019.

How you had your say

We asked you for your feedback on round 1 of the Water for Fodder program.

We sought feedback through an online survey from 26 March 2020 to 9 April 2020.

We received 820 survey responses.

Responses per state. 429 or 52 per cent from Victoria. 362 or 44 per cent from New South Wales. 15 or 2 per cent from South Australia. 2 or less than 1 per cent from the Australian Capital Territory. 1 or less than 1 per cent from Queensland. 11 or less than 1 per cent were from an undisclosed location.

Survey respondents 93 per cent were irrigators 86 per cent had applied under round 1. 25 per cent had been successful under round 1



Eligibility. 75 per cent agreed we should limit who can apply based on how much water they have available. Of these, 31 per cent said that limit should be 250 ML and 33 per cent said that limit should remain 1000 ML. 59 per cent thought that applicants who had sold their water allocation in the past 12 months should not be eligible. 55 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that successful round 1 applicants should not be able to apply in round 2. 45 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that only those involved in dairy or livestock production should be eligible.

Ballot process 82 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed that brokers should be able to apply for the program on behalf of their clients. 51 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that a random ballot is a fair way to select successful applicants. 32 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed. 44 per cent said the ballot was their preferred method of selecting applicants. 26 per cent think the water should be shared across all applicants rather than over a ballot.