The region's irrigation companies, grower groups and councils discussed the rapidly changing water landscape with representatives from the Productivity Commission.

The commission has been tasked with providing advice to the Government on the most efficient and cost-effective way for the Government to purchase water for the environment.

Coleambally Irrigation (CI) chief executive John Culleton said the forum was a valuable opportunity to raise aspects of the buybacks with the commission.

But he said it was difficult for the industry to speak with any certainty until the draft Murray-Darling Basin plan was released later this year.

The plan, which is being drawn up by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, will set new limits on the amount of water farmers can extract from the system for irrigation.

Mr Culleton said it was CI's opinion that water reform was moving too quickly and without due consideration about the socio-economic impacts the buybacks were having on irrigation communities.

"In essence, we appreciate that the Government has embarked on a very ambitious water reform agenda and we understand what has prompted them to do that," he said.

"(But) the Basin Authority itself is saying that it's got a very tough program and the timelines are very tight ? which is a polite way of saying they're near impossible.

"So, when we get the draft basin plan we think there will be certain things underdone, including the socio-economic modelling which is supposed to provide the authority with some sort of balancing mechanism."

High Security Irrigators - Murrumbidgee business manager Lindy Golden attended the forum and said many within the industry were concerned at the Government's lack of transparency.

She said the Government's pitch that buybacks were aimed at "willing sellers" when in fact many selling were far from willing was misleading.

"The question was raised then how do you define a willing seller? Is a willing seller someone who's been forced to sell by other third party interests?" she said.

"And even those that do go to tender when they are advised they're unsuccessful that's all they get.

"It's not a transparent 'You were unsuccessful because of the price, or the megalitres or because of something else', it's simply you were unsuccessful.

"So the transparency of those tenders leaves a little bit to be questioned."