RIVER IMPROVEMENT ACT 1948

The following statement gives a summary of the provisions of the River Improvement Act 1948
which came into operation on the 1st January, 1949, and indicates the procedure to be adopted by
local authorities and landholders who wish to take advantage of the legislation for river
improvement.

It has long been known that many of the rivers and streams of Victoria are in urgent need of
improvement. Some have become choked by fallen trees or by willows or other growing plants,
so that their channels have lost much of their capacity, and the lands through which they flow
have suffered from floods or waterlogging. Others are eroding their banks, so that, throughout
the State, many thousands of acres of good land have been destroyed. Some rivers have in places
changed course altogether.

The damage caused by floods and erosion has already cost a huge sum—probably millions of
pounds—and it is growing every year; but so far there has not been any systematic and
comprehensive plan for improving and maintaining streams.

Works have certainly been carried out from time to time to improve sections of various rivers,
and such works have usually been successful, for a while at least. Some of these works were
done by the Public Works Department, some by the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission,
and some by municipal councils and other public bodies.

It has not, however, been the duty of any particular body to see that the streams of Victoria
outside the metropolitan area were maintained in good order. The State Rivers and Water Supply
Commission (which will hereafter be called the Commission) like various other bodies, has
power to do works on streams; but has never been given any regular funds for stream
improvement. From time to time various Shire Councils have undertaken stream improvement
operations; and some of them have done excellent work. As a rule, however, works done by
councils have been for the protection of local public works or private properties, and have not
been part of a systematic improvement of a stream as a whole.

There is thus widespread need for the organization of a system of control and improvement of
rivers and streams which will enable them to be put in good order and kept so. The River
Improvement Act forms the basis for this.

Need for Unified Control of a River.

Where works are undertaken for the improvement of a river, it is desirable that they should be
planned as a whole, so that the benefit from them shall be spread as evenly as possible right
along the stream.

There is some analogy between rivers and roads. It is not much use having a first class bitumen
road half of the way, if the rest is only mud; local traffic may benefit from the bitumen, but
through traffic is still held up by the mud.

The flow of a river is usually all “through traffic "; and while works for the local protection of
lands may give local benefit, this benefit may not extend very far up or downstream. Indeed,
extensive works of drainage or of channel-clearing on the upper part of a stream may give rise to
fears, on the part of landholders downstream, that their flooding problems are being intensified
thereby. Many cases have occurred where proposed local improvements have been opposed, or
even held up, on these grounds.

One exception to the remarks above, about the extent of the benefit of local works, is the case
where a stream is eroding badly in one place and silting lower down. Here the checking of the
erosion will result in a reduction of the siltation. If, however, the authority which is endeavouring
to cope with the silted stream cannot get action taken to check the erosion, it is badly
handicapped.

The work of improvement should as far as possible be planned so that no increase of injurious
flooding, erosion, or siltation should be caused anywhere. To effect this, it is usually desirable
that the whole of the works on a stream should be under one authority.

Need for Continuity of Control.

River improvement works need continuity of effort and control. The body which carries them
out should be able to look ahead and plan ahead, knowing that funds will be available to
complete the work commenced.
 Some years ago, for example, when snagging was being done to relieve unemployment, some
of the willows choking one river were poisoned, so that they could be removed more easily after
they were dead. For various reasons, however, the supply of funds was interrupted, and the dead
willows had to be left standing. Many have since fallen and helped to block the very stream the
clearing of which their killing was intended to facilitate.

Again, one of the cheapest and most effective methods of preventing erosion on streams is the
development of a good vegetative cover on the banks, whether it be trees, shrubs or strong-
rooting grasses. In fact, unless in special locations, like towns where it is vital that no risk at all
be taken of further erosion, any engineering works used in erosion control may be regarded
simply as means to check erosion and permit this vegetative cover to be effectively established.
This, however, may naturally take some time and may need continuous care for some years.

The great variation in flow of our Victorian streams, moreover, often makes it difficult to
anticipate definitely the effect of river works. When any works of improvement are carried out,
therefore, it is necessary to watch the stream carefully for some time, to detect and curb any
adverse features which may arise, or to remedy the effects of any flood larger than the flow for
which the works were designed.

Vital Importance of Maintenance.

It is rare that any work of river improvement can be planned so well and carried out so
thoroughly that no more need be done to it. A river channel may be snagged and the erosion in it
checked, to the satisfaction of all concerned; but left to itself, the river will usually start to go
wrong again. Trees will fall in, willows grow in the wrong place, floods or human foolishness
make breaks in the banks where erosion develops; and before many years are out, the work will
have to be done again.

This has been shown time after time. About ten years ago, for instance, sections of various
streams were snagged, the money being provided from Unemployment Relief Funds. Since then,
on many of these snagged sections little or no further work has been done to assure that they
were kept clear. This was to some extent, probably, due to wartime shortages of labour and
machines; but for the most part it was because nobody seems to have felt it their business to keep
the streams clear—not even the landholders who received the most benefit from the original
work. As a result, these streams are rapidly becoming choked again, and the value of the money
spent has largely been lost.

Rating of Lands Benefited.

The improvement of Victoria’s rivers is going to cost, in the aggregate, a large sum of money,
which will be largely wasted unless the work, once done, is properly maintained.

Many landholders have already shown their willingness to help in keeping the streams in good
order, and have contributed financially and otherwise to this work. Others, however, have not;
and if maintenance is left to voluntary effort, the result will be either that the willing ones may
have to bear all the expense—which would not be very encouraging for them—or else they
would maintain their own sections and the unwilling landholders would neglect theirs; in which
case the willing ones might still suffer from the effects of the work left undone.

The fairest way, then, is for one authority to have the power and responsibility of ensuring that
all necessary maintenance is done on a stream, and for all landholders who benefit to have to
contribute towards the cost. This can be ensured by the rating of lands benefited by the works.

River Improvement Districts and Authorities.

To meet the above requirements, the River Improvement Act provides for the formation of
River Improvement Districts, each under the control of an authority; and it also provides for the
levying of a rate on all lands lying within the district and benefited by the river improvement
works.

Definitions.

It may be advantageous here to explain what is meant by certain terms when they are used in
the Act and also in this statement.

“River" includes any river, stream, creek or watercourse, and any lake or artificial storage
along any river, stream, creek or Watercourse.

“River improvement authority” means the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission or any
River Improvement Trust.

“River improvement Trust” means any river improvement Trust constituted under this Act
and, in this statement, includes any drainage Trust constituted under this Act.

“River Improvement Works” includes any of the following:

a) clearing and removing obstructions from the bed and banks of a river;
b) widening, deepening, straightening, diverting, or otherwise improving a river;
c) prevention of and defence against flooding by river waters;
d) making new courses or outfalls for a river, defining and constructing the course of a river
through a swamp, or otherwise draining land;
e) preventing or minimizing erosion of the bed or banks of a river;
f) erecting any weir or any bank, groyne, dam, or other defence against river waters;
g) cleansing a river or preventing or minimizing its pollution:
h) planting, sowing, and maintaining any trees, shrubs, plants, or grasses in connection with
river improvement works;
i) any other works for general or any specific improvement of a river.

Management of Districts.

There are several ways in which river improvement districts could be managed by the
Commission direct, by specially constituted local bodies or trusts, or by the municipalities. There
is a wide range of difference in conditions along the various rivers of Victoria, so that it is not
wise to apply any hard and fast rule to all alike.

It has sometimes been contended that river improvement work should be under the
management of the municipal councils. A serious difficulty about this proposal is that so many
rivers run through several shires; the Ovens, for example, runs through six, and most important
rivers pass through or by two or more. On the Latrobe, where a comprehensive snagging plan
was carried out some ten years ago from Unemployment Relief funds, four Drainage Areas were
formed-one under the control of each Shire Council. The results have not been altogether
satisfactory, and the landholders have asked for unified control.

Rivers, again, often form a boundary between two Shires; and in such a case it would
obviously be invidious for two Shire Councils each to be responsible for the same length of river,
while if only one were responsible, the landholders in the other Shire would not have any say in
the control.

Especially for the larger districts, and for rivers which run through several Shires, it is usually
desirable to have river improvements affairs under the control of one single special authority for
each Stream.

One way of achieving this would be to create river districts under the direct control of the
Commission. There is no insuperable objection to this; and in some cases it may prove the best
solution.