SA Tax on Dams

[Hillbillygold]

I am down in Adelaide at the moment and I see there is still an old debate still raging about the state gov taxing farmers for using there own dam water.

This poses a legal question. Dose the SA Gov then consider all dams to be state owned (crown land ) because they cant just own the water in it, surly.

Dose that mean that all river and creeks that feed or run of those dams are considered crown land. I though all government owned land would be crown land and crown land is the peoples land, Correct

I put this question out there for intelligent debate ( no keyboard warriors please )

 

[Wishfull]

I remember there was talk of that years ago. The govt back then tried to say that water that flows into creeks and dams should be taxed because it came off of crown land. But doesn't it eventually flow out to sea and does that mean they can tax the sea as well. It's just a broke government looking for some easy dollars again. There was also talk of taxing rainwater tanks.

 

[silver]

I thimk the idea was supposed to be that if you did not have a dam or rainwater tank in position then that water would have flowed unhindered into gov controlled rivers and water infrastructure. Not sure how that panned out for them, but i can betcha they wern't pupular for thinking that way, n still won't be now ! 8)

 

[Hillbillygold]

so what dose that mean for us prospectors, when we drive on a road (crown land) that crosses a creek (crown Land) dose that mean we can traverse that creek through private property with out fear of prosecution as we have not crossed private property to access the creek. ?

 

[silver]

I recon they were only laying claim to the rights of the water not the tanks or soil, only the potential flow, so, that wouldn't have any impact on private land access at all (just my thoughts is all).

 

[ken2m]

I thimk the idea was supposed to be that if you did not have a dam or rainwater tank in position then that water would have flowed unhindered into gov controlled rivers and water infrastructure. Not sure how that panned out for them, but i can betcha they wern't pupular for thinking that way, n still won't be now ! 8)

So that means when there is a flood the government is responsible as they own the water. That would be an exercise in making the baristors and solicitors richer. And potentially paying out heaps in compensation. Ken.

 

[silver]

I like your mind Ken ! :lol:

 

[Mungoman]

The way it comes across to me is that it's really got nothing to do with crown land, and all to do with rain and rain harvesting.

My logic is this.

On some ones private property there will be micro catchment areas, that combine, over the fuller area, to make up a catchment area - one that would be mapped on a Isohyet chart - what the Americans call a 'watershed'.

If this was about crown land, then private property owners water harvesting wouldn't be under the pump.

Instead, they are. This is about harvesting water and making money from it and nothing else.

I'm from inland NSW, Dubbo way, and our Government restricts the size of a dam or dams that can be put in on any farmers land.

The size of a dam is enshrined in NSW legislation, and is determined by the size of your property and the local areas Isohyet [predictable rain fall]. If you attempt to build a bigger dam, you'll get some government Johnnie who'll tell you to fix it up, or else. This legislation guarantees that The Farmer can only harvest 10% of their areas rainfall, allowing 90% to flow into a Government catchment area.

These smaller catchment areas contribute to larger ones, which go to hydrate the smaller and larger cities, allowing the rainfall over the eastern seaboard to go straight into the ocean, which, I might add, is 90% of NSW's average rainfall.

I lived in S.A. for about 7 years in the seventies and acknowledge that the tap water was pretty ordinary - the beer on tap wasn't much better [go the Coopers!] - on top of that, the States average rainfall is minimal and the water out of the Murray shouldn't be allowed to be drunk as it must be full of every chemical and veterinary product sold in Australia.

The only answer I can think of is, desalination plants run by passive solar energy and state government encouragement of big multi thousand gallon water tanks, or, in-ground cisterns built under every new house, which is what the used to do in the 1800's.

The trouble there is, more Government Johnnies coming out and taxing your tank water...