Bruce Thom was the chair of the National State of the Environment Council, a member of the esteemed Wentworth Group of Scientists and a long-time warrior for coastal protection. He wants to see determined and national action on the continent’s estuaries.

The current woeful state of the Murray River Estuary is an extreme replication of what has happened to other estuaries around the Australian coast.

There is Sydney Harbour, with its storage of dioxin in the sediments. The Derwent has similar pollution problems. The Peel-Harvey in Western Australia required drastic surgery to mitigate nutrient overload with the construction of the Dawesville Channel.

Port Philip, Newcastle and Botany Bay have experienced major engineering works to facilitate shipping. These activities dramatically altered habitats and landforms. Channel dredging will continue to do so as global warming takes effect.

But right now most attention is on the internationally famous Coorong lagoon in South Australia and adjoining lakes at the mouth of the once-mighty Murray River, which are in a parlous state.

Decisions on the use of water in the Murray-Darling Basin, combined with drought, have reduced freshwater inflows into the lakes to a trickle. No longer can water flow into the sea.

The international status of the Murray mouth lakes and Coorong as a Ramsar wetland means that the Commonwealth Government has a direct responsibility along with the South Australian Government for its management. But management responsibility extends further.

Victoria, NSW and Queensland all contribute water to the Murray-Darling Basin. The current condition of the mouth in South Australia is a symptom of cumulative environmental impacts. Its problems reflect decades of lack of attention to the management of the whole catchment system, including its estuary, as distinct from the needs of selected parts.

A characteristic of estuaries is the number of government agencies, federal, state and local who have management interests. These interests include controls over catchment flows, foreshore activities and waterway operations. Their objectives may often conflict. Rarely is there coordination of roles based on an agreed management plan.

Two success stories have emerged over the last 10 years. One is Moreton Bay based on the Healthy Waterways Program involving 30 government and non government partners. Here monitoring and management are coordinated to achieve improved water quality and ecosystem outcomes.

At a smaller scale is the management of Lake Macquarie in NSW flowing from a Premier’s Task Force initiative in 1998. An integrated investment program, supported by all levels of government, has demonstrated the benefits of implementing a well-thought out plan.

Livelihoods and quality of life depend on healthy functioning estuaries. This is especially true for Australia where so much of our population is crowded around coastal waterways. The Lower Murray and other degraded estuaries are telling us that estuarine management is both a national and a local problem; it is not one or the other.

Our federal system demands coordinated processes and actions to overcome forces of degradation. Current parliamentary inquiries in the Senate and House of Representatives are hearing these messages.

We greatly need a national strategy that ensures the improvement of estuarine conditions for both natural and human communities. Such a strategy should embrace incentives for all to sing from the same hymn sheet and to implement plans that have common not conflicting objectives.

Critical to the development of a national strategy is an information base. Geoscience Australia is developing such a base through its website OzCoasts. The next step will be agreed decision-support systems that can be used by all estuary managers with appropriate levels of technical and financial support.

We can no longer afford as a nation to allow our estuaries and coastal wetlands to descend into degraded cesspools. Their natural richness must be enhanced not destroyed.