The Bradfield plan, basically proposed a very long and very large pipe to carry water from the very wet north to the very dry south. It was never ever attempted or considered, except for public money wasters? Like a record spending Premier Bettie? It would literally cost trillions, and there would be no guarantee, that the north would not also be affected by very long dry spells, that might render such expensive infrastructure virtually worthless or useless, just when it was needed the most?
However, and I haven't read anywhere that the following was his plan?
We can and should inject water into various aquifers? Some of our northern surplus could be gravity fed into and top up the Great Artesian basin, which stretches from far northern Q'ld, to northern S.A.
Most of our wasted storm water can first be fed into man made wetlands for cleaning, and then injected into known aquifers, for extended storage or reserve water supplies.
Better and far less expensive than desal plants that cost billions to build and millions to maintain.
We saw some of our inner city houses, crack, crumble and become uninhabitable, during the last long dry spell, simply because the ground they stood on, became extremely cracked and dry.
Ditto many urban roads, which then allowed excess water to enter when the rains returned, creating many potholes, vehicle damage and expensive road repairs in the process!
All that is required to overcome all those problems, is tiny grates set in gutters, about a metre apart, and each feeding storm water run-off, into under nature strip ag pipes.
Whenever the occasional short storms created run-off, this ultra simple solution alone, would prevent drains exceeding their capacity; and, replace most of the moisture lost in the urban environment during extended dry spells, preventing virtually all the problems indicated above.
A stitch in time saves nine!
Rhrosty.

advocacy of the use of any plants that will hold the soil and grow in saline environments...restricting the use of such plants to native species.
Ludwig,
By no doing so you merely slowing down evolution by by a few hundred years if that. This business of keeping everything isolated at huge cost is simply a waste of good money. We can't stop nature. We have distributed enough flora & fauna that we can not change the date for the point of no return. It's called EVOLUTION. As long as there is wind & living things moving ever around you will have introduction of new species i.e. EVOLUTION. To try & stop this is as silly as believing you can make the majority of people think.
To change a couple of rivers towards the interior is not a waste of money. No pipes needed, the water will find it's own way albeit some people may have to accept that they might have to shift to higher ground. They can be compensated by those who benefit. I for one would hold up my hand for some river or lake frontage.

Strongly agree with some of the above, strongly disagree with a bit (eg recycling sewage immediately - long story, dangerous and unnecesssary).

There is a lot of cant in this debate. Here was my effort at clarity!

Fight for the Murray Campaign
c/- Government of South Australia
Adelaide

Dear Sirs

YOUR CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE EASTERN STATES

Are you serious?

The city of Adelaide is not even in the Murray Basin!

If Adelaide chooses to drain the Murray and not let the seas flush out the estuary, well, that is South Australia’s choice. You are free to make that choice.

But please do not give us any sanctimonious humbuggery from the squattocracy of the Adelaide Hills about what the rest of the country owes you.

The ACT uses only some 3% net of its water resources and gives the rest downstream for free, without charge, having stored it for you at our expense, and you have the effrontery to lecture us?

Does the rest of eastern Australia exist only for Adelaide?

I have no animus towards the Province of South Australia, but the fact that the Colony was free-settled does not give it the right to lord it over the other States.

If you want a war over the River Murray and every other river on this side of the Great Divide, be careful what you ask for.

Greed is not good and having an artificial freshwater lake at the mouth of the Murray which loses 2000 Gigalitres of water a year is not something you should be defending when the whole ACT region uses less than 40 Gl net a year for 350,000 people.

Faced with the sort of arrogant hypocrisy embodied in your campaign I am asking our ACT politicians to start charging for the water we send you. Why should we here pay an outrageous $4.66 per kilolitre so you can waste 2000 Gigalitres of water from your artificial lake every year?

Yours faithfully

Terence Dwyer