Document study for secondary students

Pamphlet – ‘Watering inland Australia’
Pamphlet – ‘Watering inland Australia’
NAA: A9816, 1943/664 part 1

To use this document study in your classroom, download Watering inland Australia (PDF 1.7mb).

Introduction

In 2002 a prominent radio commentator promoted the idea that Australia could be ‘drought proofed’ by forcing some of its rivers to flow inland. Australians have lobbied the government to redirect Queensland coastal waters toward inland Australia for nearly a century. What do large-scale water schemes tell us about contemporary attitudes to the Australian environment?

Study

Investigation

Read document 1. What is LBS Reid most concerned about?

Read document 2. Why did the Whyalla Technical High School write to the Director-General of Agriculture?

Examine document 3. According to TE Field, what is Australia’s ‘greatest menace’? Why did he consider it the ‘enemy’? What did he think would happen if this enemy were ignored? What does this document tell you about TE Field’s attitude toward the Australian landscape?

Examine document 4. According to Darcy Wearns, what were Australia’s main objectives in 1958? What is Australia’s ‘inland problem’?

Read document 5. What was Michael Sawtell’s motivation for publishing this pamphlet? What is his opinion of inland Australia? What words and phrases does he use to support his position? Why is the poem by Henry Lawson included?

Read documents 6 to 8. Select a scheme, then illustrate it on a map. In a paragraph, discuss the impact of the scheme on two parties, which could be the environment, farmers, industry or Indigenous people. Speculate on whether the scheme is feasible.

Read documents 9 to 11. Why did the government need a ‘standard reply’ letter about the Bradfield scheme? What was the Australian Government’s position on inland watering schemes?

Reflection

Why have grand solutions, such as flooding inland Australia, rather than simpler solutions, such as water restrictions and recycling grey water, been so popular? What does this tell us about former attitudes to the Australian environment?

Extension

Some people still advocate the Bradfield scheme. Would it be built today? Who would the major stakeholders be? What would the possible ramifications be?