SG1 wrote:
"0tterbot" wrote in message
.com...
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
I don't really think this is OT but I have labelled it as such in
case. Many aspects of the future of this country are tied up in
this - not the least of which is whether or not the ratbags in
Canberra can ever put aside party politics to get on with actually
governing. Here is the executive summary

http://www.thebasinplan.mdba.gov.au/...cutive-summary

One point to note about the process, as opposed to the content, is
that both Parties voted for the Water Act of 2007 that specifies
what the Commission must do. So any polly who now says the
Commission is not doing what they should be doing is either
ignorant or a liar or both. Similarly any who say there is a
solution that will make everybody happy should go back on to their
medication and preferably resign public office.

I feel confident that we will now see a rush of populism as those
who need to shore up shaky numbers will snatch some headlines by
taking the part of the irrigators who are currently feeling pain
whether or not it is in the irrigators' or the nation's long term
interest to do so.

i suspect that if there were to be a noticably big rush of populism
you'd have seen it by now (from the liberal party of course - not
the nationals as they can't seem to manage to participate in big
rushes of anything at all, really :-) it's not clear to me that any
self-serving... oops, i mean, self-respecting politician is going to
get too animated about a bunch of disrespectful angry rednecks
having town meetings & putting on a bit of performance art when all
that has happened is that the matter is finally open for discussion.
there's no mass of public support either way really - which makes it
hard to fit a definition of "populist", you must agree.

on some level, everyone knows that if the river dies then all the
towns along it are going to die anyway, water entitlements
notwithstanding. there will always be groups of people who argue
voraciously against their own self-interest (as well as the
interests of everyone else) & it's frankly time to ignore that sort
of carry-on in the pursuit of a solution that helps everyone & where
everyone has to change some of their behaviours or expectations.
being ridiculously optimistic at times, i hope to see such a
solution at the end of this process! philosophically, it completely
exasperates me that country people &
farmers especially, long regarded as the biggest whingers the world
has ever seen or ever will, are acting out that stereotype for the
cameras yet again, & cannot gain anything at all by doing that,
instead of trying to participate helpfully & help solve the problems
for themselves & everyone else.

i grew up in an irrigation area & there, whingeing is like fresh air
or sunshine, they apparently need a little every day just to be
going on with - it must be something in the water g. (i don't live
in such an area now, & there's not much to whinge about here, except
the local council :-) i am tired of such people purporting to be
representative. we don't live in a world where it's just 1953 every
day of one's life - it's time to move on & make some changes & make
real plans for the future. thanks for listening to me whinge! g
kylie
p.s. i think bob katter is fairly adorable in many ways really, but
i also disagree with the perennial idea (one of his personal
favourites) that "rural areas" are all going to drop dead within
weeks without endless subsidies, special treatment, big water
entitlements, gobs of middle-class welfare, and so forth. if that
were really true, the kindest thing to do would be to let them die,
... which i very much doubt would actually happen. it is probably
past time to call the bluff of some of these people. the irrigators
merely should be going first.

I used to be a constituent of Bob's, he is not universally loved
there, but he is a noisy axle (needs greasing). I admired his stand
when the other 2 supposed rural reps went commo. I prefer to eat
Australian rice, first the drought and now maybe faceless cityites
will prevent that. I want this country to grow it's own food.

Amen to that. That doesn't mean necessarily that we should grow all foods
regardless of the climatic suitability or cost effectiveness of it.

I do
not support waste in any industry. I lived in the Victorian wheat
belt for a while and in southern inland Qld as well as up north with
Bob. We don't sell enuf overseas to be able to afford to be net
importers of food. I am watching a local farmer increase the size of
my little village by selling the odd paddock or 3 to developers. More
people less productive land, catch 22?????????

This is another continuing problem. Many towns and cities were established
in the most fertile part of the region - usually near rivers. Our planning
people keep allowing them to grow and plant houses instead of food. At some
point the comparably little good soil we have in reasonable rainfall areas
needs to be protected. Right now it is more profitable to dig it up for
coal or subdivide for building lots.

David

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I used to be a constituent of Bob's, he is not universally loved
there, but he is a noisy axle (needs greasing). I admired his stand
when the other 2 supposed rural reps went commo. I prefer to eat
Australian rice, first the drought and now maybe faceless cityites
will prevent that. I want this country to grow it's own food.

Amen to that. That doesn't mean necessarily that we should grow all foods
regardless of the climatic suitability or cost effectiveness of it.

that's right. i'd rather buy australian any day, but _should_ we be buying
australian rice?

having said that, i think rice is about the only food we possibly should not
be growing. there is somewhere in australia for every crop - it's offensive
that other foods are imported when we grow it ourselves. at a minimum, food
security is actually really important; "food miles" are an important
consideration, and so forth. and to address the original issue, any
irrigators who are growing (for example) wine grapes for export probably
should just shut up right now.

This is another continuing problem. Many towns and cities were
established in the most fertile part of the region - usually near rivers.
Our planning people keep allowing them to grow and plant houses instead of
food. At some point the comparably little good soil we have in reasonable
rainfall areas needs to be protected. Right now it is more profitable to
dig it up for coal or subdivide for building lots.

i think this is actually the more important issue here imo. farmland can NOT
be given up for mcmansions or coal. THAT is obscene. how can this be allowed
to happen??!
kylie

0tterbot wrote:
any
irrigators who are growing (for example) wine grapes for export probably
should just shut up right now.

I think you will find that that is a major part of the water problem in
NSW. The allocated water was not being fully utilised in NSW, so the NSW
government sold it as high security water(first call) to people taking
advantage of the exceptional tax lurks given by the government during
the howard years(?) to the wine industry, which is basically all export
industry.

Rice at least is a staple food crop. also, All/most of the rice growing
areas were established by the government to provide food security.

We have a glut of cheap rice from overseas as global transport is cheap,
cheap, cheap, cheap.

terryc wrote:
0tterbot wrote:
any
irrigators who are growing (for example) wine grapes for export
probably should just shut up right now.

I think you will find that that is a major part of the water problem
in NSW. The allocated water was not being fully utilised in NSW, so
the NSW government sold it as high security water(first call) to
people taking advantage of the exceptional tax lurks given by the
government during the howard years(?) to the wine industry, which is
basically all export industry.


A major part of the problem is that water was administered by the States
separately and historically they have over-allocated it, that is the
allocations are so large that it is only in flood years that irrigators get
100%. This has been exacerbated in the last decade which has been very dry
compared to the base periods when the optimistic allocations were made.

Rice at least is a staple food crop. also, All/most of the rice
growing areas were established by the government to provide food
security.

That may have been true in the middle 20th century, however most of it is
now exported, production is quite seasonal but in good years we are big
exporters of rice. Also on the scale of dollars earned per meglitre of
irrigation water consumed rice is very low. Not to mention that the excess
water that percollates away from rice fields in the MIA contributes to
raising the water table and hence salinity problems.


We have a glut of cheap rice from overseas as global transport is
cheap, cheap, cheap, cheap.


But it will not be so for very long.

David

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
terryc wrote:
0tterbot wrote:
any
irrigators who are growing (for example) wine grapes for export
probably should just shut up right now.

I think you will find that that is a major part of the water problem
in NSW. The allocated water was not being fully utilised in NSW, so
the NSW government sold it as high security water(first call) to
people taking advantage of the exceptional tax lurks given by the
government during the howard years(?) to the wine industry, which is
basically all export industry.


A major part of the problem is that water was administered by the States
separately and historically they have over-allocated it, that is the
allocations are so large that it is only in flood years that irrigators
get 100%. This has been exacerbated in the last decade which has been
very dry compared to the base periods when the optimistic allocations were
made.

Rice at least is a staple food crop. also, All/most of the rice
growing areas were established by the government to provide food
security.

That may have been true in the middle 20th century, however most of it is
now exported, production is quite seasonal but in good years we are big
exporters of rice. Also on the scale of dollars earned per meglitre of
irrigation water consumed rice is very low. Not to mention that the
excess water that percollates away from rice fields in the MIA contributes
to raising the water table and hence salinity problems.


We have a glut of cheap rice from overseas as global transport is
cheap, cheap, cheap, cheap.


But it will not be so for very long.

Ergo we grow our own.


David

Any towns and cities have established in the most fertile part of the area - usually a nearby river. Our planning some people let them continue to grow and plant house, not the food. In some the same dot good soil, we have a reasonable rainfall areas, need of protection.