Groundwater has been a vital resource to humans through the ages. Ancient societies depended on the ability to construct and maintain useful wells. The Persians had systems of qanats as far back as 1500 BC. These were underground conduits for tapping groundwater made by sinking a series of wells and connecting them. The technology was also used in Roman aqueducts, and brought by Arabs to North Africa and Spain. The story of the exploitation of Australia's groundwater resources is of far more recent vintage. Interstate rivalry over the control of surface water resources has been recognised as a factor shaping our federal constitution, but few realise how much the management of our underground water resources is interwoven with our colonial history. In important respects, both the policy debate and the development of institutions to manage groundwater have run in parallel with that of policies regarding surface water. The parallels are particularly close regarding two of Australia's most significant resources of each kind: the Murray-Darling Basin and the Great Artesian Basin. Policy, management structures and remedial solutions developed in response to the problems of the Murray-Darling Basin tend to set the tone for discussion of the Great Artesian Basin, in some cases to the point where ideas developed for management of the Murray-Darling Basin are applied directly to the Great Artesian Basin. The purpose of this article is to provide a framework for discussion of the current policy issues surrounding management of the Great Artesian Basin, with reference to the historical development of existing legislation and institutions. Of interest is the applicability of lessons learned from the debate over management of the Murray-Darling Basin
