Thread: Murry River Recreation Concerns

I think this sort of thing is done with the best of intentions and the greater good in mind, but Ron Moon for one should understand the Aussie fondness of going bush, the problems of the Murray I doubt are caused by a few blue dogs or trail bikes, lots of the Murray scenery is dirt, dirt , willy willys and flies with the odd tree thrown in, agriculture has a lot to answer for in this country, I have often wondered why they permit crops that are heavily reliant on water in a country where water is always a concern, ie rice, cotton, why cant we import rice and why dont we do the sheep farmer a favour and use more wool for clothing, the Murray is certianly a gem we need to preserve for ever, theres nothing like it, this sort of thing needs to be handled so we all benifit, the big cod are gone, they will probably never be seen again, I seen a show years and years ago about a guy who held one of the last commercial licences to fish for cod with nets and at that time the river wasnt producing fish and he had been doing it all his life and he was fairly old at least 70 or more.
The Murray does need help and it needs it now, but a happy median must be found, it could also do with a big dose of water as we all could, every aspect has to be looked at before they jump where angels fear to tread.

I think Bob Richardson from the 'Push for the Bush' mob was fighting to maintain access etc along the Mighty Murray.
Not sure of the website but google should find them if you're interested in following it up.

If you lock up parks and everyone stays in their air-conditioned built environments, who will give a toss about the bush?

These policies, over generations, could disengage the voting public from the bush so much that they won't give a toss what happens to it. That'd be ironic...

There will be more to it than just protecting the Murray. A lot of Adelaides water now comes from the Murray, hence why their dams appear to be full all the time and why people in Adelaide do not give a stuff about water restrictions and the rest of the state suffers. So there is also an underlying reason to keep people off the Murray.
As said it is purely agriculture and the rice/cotton farmers that have stuffed this icon. It starts with Qld not caring about the flow on effect from their activities and their holier than though attitude, Then NSW not giving a toss about Vic and SA, Then Vic not giving a toss about SA and the SA government only worried about water for Adelaide. Its about time they all worked together and Howards plan to take over management was a great first step. I grew up on the Murray and it is a major travesty to see what has happened to it over the last 10-15 years.

Originally Posted by CraigE

There will be more to it than just protecting the Murray. A lot of Adelaides water now comes from the Murray, hence why their dams appear to be full all the time and why people in Adelaide do not give a stuff about water restrictions and the rest of the state suffers. So there is also an underlying reason to keep people off the Murray.
As said it is purely agriculture and the rice/cotton farmers that have stuffed this icon. It starts with Qld not caring about the flow on effect from their activities and their holier than though attitude, Then NSW not giving a toss about Vic and SA, Then Vic not giving a toss about SA and the SA government only worried about water for Adelaide. Its about time they all worked together and Howards plan to take over management was a great first step. I grew up on the Murray and it is a major travesty to see what has happened to it over the last 10-15 years.

Me too mate. I spent the first 3 years of my life, living in a tent, on the Murray bank where the town of Glossop now stands. Mum, Dad, older brother and younger sister. OK, 2 tents. We had a big house.

At the moment the lower Murray is below sea level. A few years ago, NSW, and their cotton farmers on the black soil, were taking more water from the Darling than actually falls onto the catchment, and the Darling was flowing NORTH being fed by the Murray. NSW, likes to make sure Lake Victoria is kept nice and full, so much so, that even the much touted "Environmental Flow" does not get through.
The recent floods? Apparently NSW reckons SA "owes" them half of that back.
I haven't been able to figure out the how and why of that yet.
Every body justifying complete disregard for both the river, and the lives it maintains. Millions of people all along the river systems that feed you city dwellers. Millions of people who drink the water that is used to top up the infrastructure of 4 states. Not just NSW. Not just Vic and SA. But, Qld is in the catchment and therefore is involved and affected as well. The Snowy Hydro scheme even affects the Murray system. It has all been connected up under the mountains.


But, I have a plan.

Ask the people who live along the Snowy River what they think about the Snowy's water being diverted to the Murray. You will get a long, loud, and angry earful. The Snowy River and its environs were almost destroyed by the diversion and the riparian rights of Snowy river residents ignored and trampled on.

This whole thread is another example of a problem which, like most of those facing the world today, has a common root - too many people. Yet this is a root cause that almost nobody is prepared to even mention, let alone think about addressing.

John

Originally Posted by CraigE

There will be more to it than just protecting the Murray. A lot of Adelaides water now comes from the Murray, hence why their dams appear to be full all the time and why people in Adelaide do not give a stuff about water restrictions and the rest of the state suffers. So there is also an underlying reason to keep people off the Murray.

Craig, sorry but what a load of bollocks!

2 "pumping" dams have a full level, other than that the major catchment areas are rather dry....

A lot of Adelaides water has ALWAYS come from the Murray...

And Adelaidians do give a stuff mate....

Respectfully, I believe these sentiments to be incorrect.....