Farmers are fuming, scientists are satisfied while politicians are plodding the party line. So who do we believe when it comes to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan?
In short, it's complex.
It was revealed on Monday that a key deadline for returning water to the Murray-Darling Basin will be pushed back after the Albanese government brokered a deal with the Greens.
The government has put forward legislation to move the recovery of an additional 450GL of environmental water back to December, 2027, having initially been floated for June next year.
In layman's terms, buybacks allow the government to buy the farmers' water allocation, with the water then taken away from agriculture production.
Murray River Action Group chair Richard Sargood, based at Corowa, said the water buybacks will be "an absolute bloody disaster" that will lead to increased flood risks, food insecurity and job losses.
On the other hand, Professor Nick Bond, director of the Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems at La Trobe University's Albury-Wodonga campus, said the plan would help future-proof the river against drought.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek described buybacks as "unavoidable" while Farrer MP Sussan Ley said it was "lunacy" to "ask taxpayers to buy water that will effectively shut down smaller regional communities, and also increase food prices at the checkout".
These comments came as farmers protested against the deal by driving tractors through the centre of Shepparton and the heads of almost every agricultural body voiced their disapproval.
National Farmers' Federation president David Jochinke said Ms Plibersek had gone "to a trigger that will destroy communities", acting chair of the Murray River Group of Councils Tony Marwood said people were "disgusted" by the deal while NSW Irrigators' Council chief executive Claire Miller said it was "extremely disappointing".
Everyone acknowledges the need to protect our environment, but when you add these voices to those of the protesting farmers, along with Mr Sargood and Ms Ley, it becomes clear that the disapproval is widespread and that a better plan for the plan is needed.