WHEN the NSW government refused the Bickham coalmine proposal this year it promised a new approach to mining approvals that would take proper account of competing land uses.
The Minerals Council, which represents coal companies, welcomed the idea, saying its members would be pleased to work within fair and predictable guidelines.
The issue of whether mining should be permitted to expand on the Hunter's alluvial river land provides a good opportunity to assess whether the promised new approach is capable of achievement.
Farmers, water users and environmentalists are concerned at the prospect of large-scale disturbance to these important lands. Some fear that, if mining is permitted to rupture the alluvium that buffers many riverine areas, the almost inevitable leakage of river water may be impossible to rectify, with far-reaching consequences for the Hunter's waterways and all that depends upon them.
Some miners argue they can contain these risks by using a variety of engineering solutions.
But even if they can prevent water entering their mine workings during the life of their projects, many people fear it may be impossible to guarantee the integrity of the affected rivers and aquifers after mining stops.
Previous expensive attempts at rehabilitating mined alluvial areas do not appear to have achieved reassuring results, suggesting that viable agriculture may no longer be possible in affected areas.
Draft guidelines
In some eyes, the coal that lies beneath the Hunter's alluvial flood plains represents the last of the valley's relatively "easy" coal. With coal prices at high levels it isn't surprising that proposals should be emerging to exploit this resource.
But the government's own 2005 draft guidelines for mining near rivers and aquifers - which have not yet been permitted to attain the force of law - explicitly recognise the tremendous potential risks involved in permitting this exploitation.
If it is true that some coal companies hope to legitimise expected river or aquifer damage by buying entitlements under formal water-sharing schemes, they must be dissuaded. True water sharers live with the reality that their allocations vary from year to year. Once a ruptured waterway starts to leak into a mine there is little chance of reducing the flow to accommodate fellow allocation-holders.
Evidence is abundant that the grand-scale mining now under way in the region has already had what will prove to be a lasting detrimental effect on the valley's natural underground water systems.
Limits must be placed on the amount of damage to be permitted. After all, the mines are temporary tenants of the land and it is a fundamental priority to ensure that, when the coal companies finish their work and leave, the Hunter Valley retains a minimum of environmental integrity to support alternative economic activities.
These issues must be widely debated and clearly resolved before the government permits any more mining on the Hunter's alluvial land.
Email a friend