Adani's proposed protections for some of the world's last unspoiled desert oases near its proposed coal mine in Queensland won't work at all and are "all about protecting Adani from prosecution", according to the authors of two reports.

Key points: Reports looked at Adani's draft plans to protect Doongmabulla and Mellaluka springs from impact of proposed Carmichael mine

Reports looked at Adani's draft plans to protect Doongmabulla and Mellaluka springs from impact of proposed Carmichael mine Water policy expert says plan is virtually worthless and would not save the springs or the species that rely on them

Water policy expert says plan is virtually worthless and would not save the springs or the species that rely on them Adani says the draft is "targeted and specific", and part of a "robust, multi-layered approach" to monitoring impact of mine

The Australian Conservation Foundation, which has campaigned against the controversial project, gathered and commissioned the reviews by environmental law and water experts.

They looked at Adani's draft plans to protect the Doongmabulla Springs and Mellaluka Springs from the impacts of the proposed Carmichael coal mine.

In response to these criticisms, Adani told the ABC its draft management plan was "targeted and specific", and part of a "robust, multi-layered approach" to monitoring the impacts of its mine.

The reviews come just months after an independent scientific study found Adani's mine could "permanently drain" the springs, since the source of springs remains in doubt, and Adani has not proposed further work to pinpoint the source.

The Doongmabulla Springs have the country's highest level of legal protection, listed as "endangered ecological communities", and are home to several endemic and threatened species, which are themselves afforded legal protection.

Each are considered "matters of national environmental significance".

But Adani plans to extract up to 12 billion litres of water a year from the Great Artesian Basin and other nearby water sources, and is not strictly limited to any specific volume of take so could extract more than that.

When Adani's mine received environmental approvals from the federal and state governments, details of how it would protect the springs and their associated species and ecosystems were put off, awaiting future management plans.

Key among those plans is the Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Management Plan, a copy of which is dated "January 2018" was submitted to the Queensland Department of Environment and Science.

In draft form, it currently stands at 197 pages, and outlines how the mine's operations intend to be compliant with its approval conditions.

'It's about Adani protecting themselves'

Tom Crothers, a water policy expert, said that plan was virtually worthless, and would not save the springs or the species that rely on them.

"It doesn't protect them at all," said Mr Crothers, a consultant who has worked in natural resource management for more than three decades and was previously general manager of the Water Allocation and Planning Group in the Queensland Government.

"It is about protecting Adani from prosecution for environmental harm. And it's also protecting the company from being held to account for impacts on their impact on environmental assets."

In his review, Mr Crothers found the plan completely ignored damage that could be caused by noise and vibration, and contains no plans to protect some parts of the sensitive ecosystems.

Overall, he noted the almost 200-page plan proposed only three corrective actions if damage was caused to the springs, with almost all damage simply triggering investigations.

"All the way through the document, you see them say 'we'll do an investigation to see if Adani is the cause of the impact, then we'll do more investigations and analysis.' It's about Adani protecting themselves," Mr Crothers said.

Rebecca Nelson, a water lawyer at the University of Melbourne, found those investigations would not be of much use since Adani won't be required to provide all the underlying data to back-up their conclusions.

Dr Nelson is conducting a larger research project on the legal protections for Sydney's water catchment.

She said similarly relaxed provisions there had led to coal mines having significant impacts on Sydney's drinking water.

In that case, Dr Nelson said WaterNSW has concluded that "independently engaged studies produce remarkably different results to those engaged by mining proponents".

Dr Nelson and Mr Crothers point to a string of other weaknesses in the draft plan including:

The environmental triggers for action to be taken are vague, leaving room for Adani to avoid taking action

The environmental triggers for action to be taken are vague, leaving room for Adani to avoid taking action If damage is caused to the springs, radical restorative action is proposed, but there is no evidence presented that it could work

If damage is caused to the springs, radical restorative action is proposed, but there is no evidence presented that it could work The plan ignores threatened species of palm tree at some of the springs

The plan ignores threatened species of palm tree at some of the springs The plan allows for Adani to investigate damage and conclusively prove they caused the problem before taking restorative action

Plan part of a robust, multi-layered approach: Adani

Adani told the ABC it would publish the plan after it was finalised.

"The Draft Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Management Plan is just one part of a robust, multi-layered approach to manage and monitor groundwater-related activities and impacts for the Carmichael Project," a spokeswoman for Adani Australia said.

"It is a targeted and specific plan to monitor and manage approved impacts to groundwater-dependent springs and plants in the vicinity of the project."

She also said the mine's impacts on groundwater and associated ecosystems were already approved by the state and federal governments, and had been reviewed by the Land Court of Queensland in 2015.

Both those approvals defer to this plan for specific protections of the ecosystems around the springs, and the Land Court of Queensland in 2015 noted the importance of the details of management plans like this.

Australian Conservation Foundation campaign director Paul Sinclair called on the Queensland Government to reject the plan.

"Adani's groundwater management plan contains holes that are so big you could drive a coal train through them," he said.

A spokeswoman for the Federal Department of Environment said they were yet to receive a final version of the plan.

"The department continues to work with Adani and Queensland agencies to ensure that this and other plans meet the strict conditions of the Carmichael mine's approval," the spokeswoman said.

Editor's note (19/06/18): A previous version of this story incorrectly noted Adani planned to take "21 billion litres of water a year from the Great Artesian Basin". The story has been amended to say Adani planned to take "12 billion litres of water a year from the Great Artesian Basin and other nearby water sources."