Bradfield Scheme

The Bradfield Scheme is an inland irrigation project designed to irrigate and drought-proof much of the Queensland interior, as well as large areas of South Australia. It was devised by Dr John Job Crew Bradfield (1867-1943),^[1] a Queensland born civil engineer, who also designed the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Brisbane's Story Bridge. Some people consider the plan to be lacking in scientific justification,^[1] excessively expensive, and overly optimistic.^[2] There have been no attempts to implement the plan although the plan is frequently raised.

The scheme that Dr Bradfield proposed in 1938 requires large pipes, tunnels, pumps and dams. It involves diverting water from the upper reaches of the Tully, Herbert and Burdekin rivers.^[3] These Queensland rivers are fed by the monsoon, and currently flow east to the Coral Sea. The water would enter the Thomson River on the other side of the Great Dividing Range and eventually flow south west to Lake Eyre.^[4] An alternative plan was to divert water into the Flinders River.

Contents 1 Possible benefits 2 Objections 3 Support 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

Possible benefits

• Availability of additional fresh water in arid areas.
• Controlling and reducing the flow of northern rivers into the ocean may benefit the Great Barrier Reef as fresh water causes coral bleaching, and the excess nutrients in the rivers from coastal farming and development support algal growth that can harm the reef.
• The scheme would reduce the massive natural erosion problems in areas of Central Queensland.
• Extra water and vegetation in the interior may then produce changes to the climate of Australia. This may increase the rainfall in areas of Southern Queensland and Northern New South Wales. Extra rainfall may drought-proof Eastern Queensland, and thereby improve river inflows to the Murray-Darling River system. This in turn may drought-proof much of New South Wales and Victoria.
• The elimination of severe periods of high temperatures in Adelaide during summer, since they are caused largely by the drawing of hot air down through the Eyre basin. A full Lake Eyre would moderate the air temperature in the region by the aborption of sunlight by the water instead of heat radiation from dry land into the air.
• It would provide large areas suitable for the production of algae fuel, a type of biofuel.
• The catchment area of the Herbert River holds a population of about 18,000, 75% of whom dwell in the lower flood plain area. Diverting some water from this river would reduce the risk of flood.

No evidence to support the theory that an inland sea would increase rainfall has ever been produced,^[3] nor have any of the other claims been supported.

Objections

Bradfield's scheme and others have been criticised because they are not practical.^[3] This scheme has been criticised because of the high capital and ongoing running costs which would make the project uneconomic.

The extreme evaporation rate in the interior is another negative determinant. No clear evidence has been provided that the amount of water supplied will exceed the evaporation rate. The reduction in river discharge to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon may diminish coastal fisheries by reducing the supply of terrestrial organic matter to the coastal and estuarine environment.

In his early seventies, around the year 1940, Bradfield put considerable time and energy into publicizing a plan to irrigate the western districts of Queensland and part of Central Australia by damming certain coastal rivers and running water-pipes through the Great Dividing Range. Aspects of this scheme, and especially his lack of scientific evidence, were publicly attacked by G. W. Leeper of the school of agricultural science at the University of Melbourne.^[1]

Support

The Bradfield Scheme has not received broad political support from any of the major Australian parties in recent times however it has been pushed by individual politicians such as Bob Katter who advocated the plan whilst National Party member for the state seat of Flinders during the 1980s and continues to support it as an independent in federal parliament. In February 2007, the then Queensland Premier Peter Beattie urged the Federal Government to look at a modern version, saying it is better to find more water than to cut back on current supplies.^[5]

In contrast to this, the scheme is often amongst the policies of a number of minor parties and independent candidates. The website of Adrian Watts states, This scheme was seen during World War II and much of the twentieth century, as an essential step in building a secure and prosperous nation. It was regarded as the next great water engineering project to build after the Snowy Mountains Scheme.^[6] A modified scheme was also strongly supported by Queensland independent senate candidate Selwyn Johnston at the 2007 Australian federal election.^[7]

See also

• Goldfields Water Supply Scheme
• Irrigation in Australia
• Ord River Irrigation Scheme

References

External links

• "AUGMENTING QUEENSLAND'S INLAND WATER RESOURCES by J.J.C. Bradfield.". The Courier-Mail (Brisbane, Qld. : 1933-1954) (Brisbane, Qld.: National Library of Australia): p. 6. 1 October 1938. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article38731715. Retrieved 7 December 2010. 
• Watering inland Australia, Document study for secondary students, National Archives of Australia. An associated 14 page PDF includes:
  • pg.3) Document 1 - Letter from LBS Reid to Prime Minister Chifley, 26 November 1946.
  • pg.5) Document 3 - "Australia's Greatest Menace", extract from address to the Australian Wool Growers Council, 9 June 1943.
  • pp. 7-8) Document 5 - Pamphlet: Watering inland Australia, 27 November 1946.
  • pg.12) Document 9 - "Standard reply for enquiries on Bradfield's Scheme", Dept of Post-War Reconstruction, c 1945
  • pg.13) Document 10 - Letter from S.A. Premier's office to Director-General of Post War Reconstruction, explaining the impracticality of an 'inland sea', 30 April 1945.
    • Evaporation would consume a quantity of water about twice the flow of the River Murray.
    • A channel from Spencer's Gulf to Lake Eyre would cost about 250,000,000.
    • No scientific evidence that an Inland Sea would greatly increase rainfall.
  • pg.14) Document 11 - "Suggested Answer" to question-without-notice explaining the impracticality of the Bradfield Scheme, 14 November 1946.
    • Estimated costs are too conservative.
    • Estimates of water made available are too optimistic.
    • No material increase in rainfall is likely to accrue.
    • The climate of the regions is unlikely to be materially affected.