Good work, Adam, and the cotton industry.

The Cotton Australia story that cotton is an ideal crop for the northern part of the Murray Darling Basin may be correct, if your thinking is confined to that area.

But cotton in the north is a disaster for the south.

Even in the really bad years, cotton was grown in the north, strangling the Darling River. In the good years when there should be a big flow in the Darling to make up for the bad years, the water is siphoned off into massive cotton crops.

The result is that in the bad years there is no flow downstream, and in the good years there is still not much flow downstream.

Cotton is a disaster for the Murray-Darling Basin.

This argument has been brought about by shutting the gate after the horse has bolted.

No, the cotton industry is not to blame for the current situation, inept government policy through over allocation of water, failure to monitor and clamp down on water theft and lack of foresight spawned the cotton industry and their water storages, which has contributed significantly to the water woes.

Had water been flowing down the system for the past years instead of being held in these storages, we would not now have a completely dry system as is claimed today in spite of the drought!

As for cotton offering the best dollar return per megalitre of water, one could ask in comparison to what?

Particularly at the prices cotton farmers pay for our water.

Russia have their Aral Sea brought about by the same philosophy. Australia now has Menindee Lakes and soon the Coorong, by the look of things, to top that. Revitalise the Murray Darling system, get the ecology back to a healthy state, then look at water allocations and cotton after staple crops.

Grow all the cotton you want dryland - keep your chemical residues and GM.

Some common sense at last! People at the bottom of the system think there is a tap that can be turned on to make the river run.

South Australians often claim that irrigation water has been over-allocated in the north of the Murray Darling Basin, when in fact there has been very little available water in northern NSW and QLD for years, while South Australians ,up until recently have had there full allocation.

When it rains again, the river will run.

What is the gross and the net dollar return per meg for cotton????

The fact is that everyone, every community and the environment is hurting from this prolonged drought. There are no winners and proportioning blame doesn't help. Irrigators in all states are accountable for managing whatever water they have been allocated by governments and are not stupid. They use the water efficiently to produce the best returns from whatever crops perform best in their location. If cotton grew well in SA many irrigators their would probably plant it. If farmers in the north could do better from dairying or horticulture they would. At the end of the day it is about water use not the crop.

The facts on natural flow are that the Murray system contributes 82% of the average flows in the Murray Darling system and the Darling 18%. From this flow the environments share is around 40% in the Murray system and 60% in the Darling. It defies logic to single out the Darling as the solution for more water. Improvements have to be found across the entire basin.

Just as questions are rightly asked about irrigation perhaps equally we should ask if the environments share of water is being effectively managed? And it's just Wong thinking that all the solutions are about water volume! It's equally about land and riparian zone management. Let's not revert to simplistic politics and ill conceived solutions. We can do better and deserve better.