Murray Darling Basin Plan, Your Thoughts?

[Matt76]

So, leaving the rice argument for the moment, what should be done to fix the issue guys?

Let the farmers use more water?
Keep restrictions tight?
Build dams and suffer the consequences of reducing the water flowing downstream of them?
Change farming practices?

 

[WIR35]

My thoughts:

I'm not very well briefed on the issue, however, generally:

1. Issues like this arise from poor governance and poor management over a long period of time, and;

2. generally the knee-jerk reactions that governments make hastily to "fix" those problems are equally as pathetic.

I wish governments would get a group of independent experts together, analyse the technical details, analyse the effects on all stakeholders, provide the ideal plan, and actually implement it; rather than do all of the above, except to piss away the hard work that the experts have done and then implement their own plan most likely to get them re-elected, which is usually not the best plan to fix the problem.

 

[MintR33]

So, leaving the rice argument for the moment, what should be done to fix the issue guys?

Let the farmers use more water?
Keep restrictions tight?
Build dams and suffer the consequences of reducing the water flowing downstream of them?
Change farming practices?

The Rice argument is kinda not relevant anyway, Its only watered for about 4 months of the year when it can be grown. - No water no rice.

a stark difference to crops like Grapes, Almonds, Citrus etc which are permanent plantations and have to be watered regardless of conditions to keep them alive.

I strongly support and believe building more dams and improving infrastructure is a step in the right direction for both the environment and sustainable farming. We have some of the most efficient and productive farming in Australia which has a history in the Murray Darling basin dating back over 100years.

Drought is a Natural phenomenon... As has been pointed out several times in this thread without dams and also weirs releasing water the rivers would have dried up long ago...

 

[MintR33]

Some interesting words: http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=2&f=0&Itemid=41

 

[jayk]

The Rice argument is kinda not relevant anyway, Its only watered for about 4 months of the year when it can be grown. - No water no rice.

a stark difference to crops like Grapes, Almonds, Citrus etc which are permanent plantations and have to be watered regardless of conditions to keep them alive.

I strongly support and believe building more dams and improving infrastructure is a step in the right direction for both the environment and sustainable farming. We have some of the most efficient and productive farming in Australia which has a history in the Murray Darling basin dating back over 100years.

Drought is a Natural phenomenon... As has been pointed out several times in this thread without dams and also weirs releasing water the rivers would have dried up long ago...

mate, u miss the point. its all about you. what you have suffered in the last cpl of yrs is a fraction of what we in sa have suffered. you started this thread asking a question. why do that if you already know the answer? i'm happy for a debate, i'm happy to be even handed, but obviously ur not!
has ur family built extra dams to take advantage of this extra rainfall, have you invested in improved irrigation? .... improved technology to make use of less water? ..what have you done to reduce ur take of the river?

 

[DVR]

Let the farmers use more water?

No

Keep restrictions tight?

Only as tight as necessary to maintain environmental flows, wether in a drought or not.

Build dams and suffer the consequences of reducing the water flowing downstream of them?

Maybe. However some will complain like hell because their land will be flooded. You cant please everyone eh? That is probably why it wont happen as no politician would sign his political death warrant by signing off on such a proposal.

Change farming practices?

Yes absolutely. If there isn't enough water to grow your chosen crop, modify and adapt.

 

[WIR35]

I heard a quote the other day which rings pretty true;

"It is not the strongest or the most intelligent of a species that survives, but the ones most willing and able to adapt"

Farmers are very traditional people generally, maybe they are doing it tough because of their unwillingness to adapt to the changing world around us....? Food for thought perhaps...

 

[Krankin]

And on that note,

ponder this

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/audio/twt/201010/20101015twt01-suzuki-web-19-12.mp3

 

[DVR]

I LOVE David Suzuki!!!

 

[Krankin]

a stark difference to crops like Grapes, Almonds, Citrus etc which are permanent plantations and have to be watered regardless of conditions to keep them alive.

Sorry, thats not totally true.

In the Goulburn Valley, VIC,
orchards comprising for example, Pears, Apples, Peach and Apricot
produce fruit ONLY once per year and are only watered during the few months of the growing season and the trees are not watered the remainder of the year.
and also some market garden vegetables are watered during their growth to picking time only,
moreover,
it has been stated the the region uses 75% of Victorias annual water consumption.

 

[MintR33]

Sorry, thats not totally true.

In the Goulburn Valley, VIC,
orchards comprising for example, Pears, Apples, Peach and Apricot
produce fruit ONLY once per year and are only watered during the few months of the growing season and the trees are not watered the remainder of the year.
and also some market garden vegetables are watered during their growth to picking time only,
moreover,
it has been stated the the region uses 75% of Victorias annual water consumption.

You missed the point, a tree is always in the ground 365 days of the year, year after year, and must be maintained regardless. Rice is an Annual crop not necessarily grown every year.

 

[MintR33]

has ur family built extra dams to take advantage of this extra rainfall, have you invested in improved irrigation? .... improved technology to make use of less water? ..what have you done to reduce ur take of the river?

Yes, nearly every farmer has been forced too reduce and make the most of every available drop of water it simply isnt possible to sit idle footed and make a farming living with reduced water allocations. Everything from drip irrigation to centre pivot irrigation, improved laser levelling to soil tension monitoring is available and widely used on farms everywhere. I personally am not a farmer I am a Mechanical Draftsman. I have also worked for an Irrigation company in the Riverina undertaking in projects in the area deploying a pressurised water delivery system to farms which makes open channels a thing of the past. Although this is not ideal for all forms of irrigation it is certainly far more water efficient and a step in the right direction.

I heard a quote the other day which rings pretty true;

"It is not the strongest or the most intelligent of a species that survives, but the ones most willing and able to adapt"

Farmers are very traditional people generally, maybe they are doing it tough because of their unwillingness to adapt to the changing world around us....? Food for thought perhaps...

Basically responded to this above. Your quote can be read two ways, depending whether you apply it to the farmer or the government... That is perhaps the government had a willingness to adapt it could look into further options instead of a blanket cut to water allocation.

 

[Krankin]

You missed the point, a tree is always in the ground 365 days of the year, year after year, and must be maintained regardless. Rice is an Annual crop not necessarily grown every year.

"and the trees are not watered the remainder of the year."

.

which point am I missing?



.

 

[WIR35]

Basically responded to this above. Your quote can be read two ways, depending whether you apply it to the farmer or the government... That is perhaps the government had a willingness to adapt it could look into further options instead of a blanket cut to water allocation.

That is true too, like I said in my earlier post, if the government actually acted on the advice given to them from experts, rather than just formulating the plan most likely to get them re-elected, then usually we would have a better result. But they don't.

 

[Haydos]

Although I am not sure how to quote the previous messages I hope you all can understand this. I think it is a common misconception that farmers are traditional and unbending. Certainly this has been true in the past, but a traditional farmer farmer that won't adapt has probably been out of business for years. Water is not cheap to a farmer, and a farmer that is not super efficient is just not profitable. this is the same for rice, orchards, potatoes anything. Over the last 5 years we have invested over 3 million dollars in a effort to upgrade water efficiency. How many other people in Australia can say they have made that kind of contributuion to the environment?

What Wir35 says about getting exerts to formulate a plan and then act is fine, I completely agree. The trouble arises when the government only listens to some of those experts. If anyone has flicked to the acknowledgements page in the plan, there is a definate pattern. Green groups, environmental activists, aboriginal rights groups are all well represented, but farming bodies are not. How is that an educated analysis.

 

[DVR]

Over the last 5 years we have invested over 3 million dollars in a effort to upgrade water efficiency. How many other people in Australia can say they have made that kind of contributuion to the environment?

I'm sure you don't mean $3 million by each farmer so you must mean collectively. Are you sure about that figure? If you look closely it actually seems pretty piss poor. If we assume you talking about 1000 farmers (Yes I'm sure there are lots more but lets just use that number) $3 million divided by 1000 farmers equals $3000 each That's literally not a drop in the environments bucket. AND a lot more than 1000 Aussies have spent a lot more than that putting solar cells on their roof. I'd call that a pretty good contribution to the environment.

Personally, my Garden was knackered because water restricyions ment I could not water it properly. I'm absolutely positive the damage was in EXCESS of $3000

I do however, take you point on farmers being under represented if that is in fact the case, because I dont know if it is or not.

 

[Krankin]

Over the last 5 years we have invested over 3 million dollars in a effort to upgrade water efficiency. How many other people in Australia can say they have made that kind of contributuion to the environment?

That may be true, but you wouldnt fork out that money just for the love of the enviroment,
but in fact as a buisness decision with the intention to have that initial outlay returned, plus a handsome profit.

As for your contribution back to the enviro and comparing with other people, well, other people may not do what the farmer joe does to the said land to warrant that contribution.

 

[MintR33]

I'm sure you don't mean $3 million by each farmer so you must mean collectively. Are you sure about that figure? If you look closely it actually seems pretty piss poor.

I Dont know either whether he means collectively or not either but I really wouldnt be surprised... Expenses are very high, Consider that just a Header costs around 500,000 to $750,000.

And Krankin, I reiterate my words previously that Farmers rely on the environment to survive, so It quite simply isnt in a Farmers interests to abuse it.

 

[will]

And Krankin, I reiterate my words previously that Farmers rely on the environment to survive, so It quite simply isnt in a Farmers interests to abuse it.

yes you are right, to a point. Farmers rely on the environment for their livelihood, i don't think anyone disputes that. but there comes a time where "the farmer" exploits the environment by taking more than it can replenish. this is the point of un-sustainability pure and simple, and that is my issue. i quite frankly don't care if people grow dirt and water it with as much water as they can get as long as it is fair, equitable and sustainable!

to clarify, this is a very dumbed down generalised view to make a point; and yes i realise not all farmers are tarred with this brush - I'm just making a point about (some of) the Farmer/environment relationship where the Murray is concerned. Oh and MintR33, whether you are that farmer or not surely you can't dispute it happens.

 

[MintR33]

Absolutely agree will, but farmers aren't allocated water if it isnt there!

Consider this for a second, if no farmers existed in the basin and the river still went dry do you think the government would still take the same approach?