Next month a report into the impacts - positive and negative - of the Murray Darling Basin Plan is due in the Senate.
It comes about half-way through the Plan's seven-year implementation.
The program is still putting community and environmental groups at odds.
Across 1,100 hectares of farmland near Griffith in south western New South Wales, Joe Dal Broi grows wheat and cotton.
And soon he'll be planting a new crop of broad beans, also known as faba or fava beans.
"They're a very good crop to grow. We get about anywhere between 60 and 90 kilos of nitrogen back into the soil which enhances our cotton crop the following year."
To ensure a maximum haul, Joe relies on several sources including irrigation from local rivers.
But he says the Murray-Darling Basin Plan has seen many farms fall short of their potential.
"The way the system's run at the moment, no certainty, no planning, we can't rely on irrigation water. We have to buy in temporary water, we have to have carry-over in our dams. All it's done is just made a mess of farming."
The multi-billion-dollar plan to ration water from Australia's largest river system was signed into law a little over three years ago.
It's proved controversial, as a Senate inquiry continues to weigh up its effect on farmers, river communities and the environment.
David Galeano, from the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, says concerns about reduced irrigation for agriculture are being addressed.
"The Australian government is spending a lot of money modernising irrigation infrastructure, installing drippers and those sorts of things on farms. The idea there is it's made a lot of farmers more water-efficient."
Recent environmental reports are showing improvements in some parts of the Basin.
But scientists, like Charles Sturt University Professor Jonathon Howard, say they're being largely ignored by communities.
"We're getting forest regrowth, we're getting extension of bird-breeding events, which is an indication that fish species are coming back. We're getting a much more resilient and diverse ecosystem as a result of that."
Paul Pierotti, from the Griffith Business Chamber, says he's more concerned about the effects on towns and industries.
"With the negativity in the community and a more recessed economy and a downturn in productivity, we're seeing a lot less homes being built and worse still we've seen housing property prices decrease around 20 per cent and commercial property by up to 50 per cent."
They are claims David Galeano, from the Murray Darling Basin Authority, dismisses.
"Definitely there's some overwhelming positive signs in towns like Griffith. Some new food processing, some new infrastructure being implemented, but it's too early to tell in terms of the overall impacts in that area."
A report detailing those, and other impacts, is due in the Senate on March 17.
Share
