The argument that the flow from Munster "is negligible in relation to the overall flow of the Jock River", is dishonest in its logic.

The bulk of the River’s flow obviously occurs during the spring “run-off”. From the peak flows in the spring it plunges to a small-sized stream for the remainder of the summer. In the last four years, in the Munster area, the Jock River has ceased flowing ---entirely--- in the period between late June and early September. The fish kill has been atrocious during such times as the isolated puddles dry up. Clearly, any steady flow from a treatment plant in Munster, (even if it reaches a low of 250 M³/day) would still represent 100% of the flow of the Jock River ---at that time--- and would be sufficient to maintain a healthy aquatic habitat in the river.

Thus: anything over 0-flow, in the Munster segment of the river, would be regarded as a benefit. Any competent engineer ---with a modicum of integrity--- looking over the data, can very quickly substantiate the pivotal benefits of Munster's highly-treated effluent to the Jock River eco-system.

Similarly, anybody who supports the negative environmental impacts of the pipeline option over the environmentally protective features of the mechanical treatment option, in terms of significance to the health of the Jock River ...can not honestly claim to be all that interested in environmental matters. (Sadly, the Goulbourn-Ward 6 Councillor and the Director of Infrastructure Services seem to fit into that category.)