MDBA
October 21st 2010 00:11
Murray Darling Basin Authority
The guide to the draft for the proposed plan to save the Murray Darling Basin from drying up and becoming wasteland has been released. What a kafuffle it is causing. Irrigators are bellyaching that towns will be destroyed, farmers bankrupted, and whole communities ruined if what has been recommended is put into practice.
I hear greed screaming about having to retreat from it’s safe secure position. Supposing water allocations are reduced by 27-37%. What of diversity in agriculture? Are we so hide bound that we cannot do something else with the land apart from pour water all over it? I am an old man now, but I do remember when every farmer had a variety of ways of gaining an income from his farm. Not any more. The single product farm is promoted by the greedy buggers with vested interests as the way of - economic productivity. It may be the best way to make a quick dollar but it is not sustainable in any way shape or form.
The reality seems to be that the water was over allocated at the very beginning and has not been managed well since that day. Point number two is that the water licenses were made as tradeable items – those things which can be bought or sold at a profit by persons outside the agricultural community. This trading has done nothing to save water as it was touted to do when initiated, instead it has increased the cost of what little water was available during the long drought.
Might I be so bold as to suggest that someone in government research what else can be done with the land held by today’s farmers so that they can make a decent living. I remember working on a farm in the 50’s and there were cattle, sheep, pigs as well as grain cropping and haymaking when the weather was right. Everything depended on the weather – nothing has changed – everything is still dependent on the weather.
The State Governments who took the farmers money for water licences, and still charges the farmer for water used, should be the ones to pay the cost of research into other ways of using the land. Whether we like it or not the environment must be cared for; without it in a reasonably healthy condition, we are all in a mess. After the environment comes livestock and human needs, like drinking water, then what is left could be used for irrigation.
The guide to the draft for the proposed plan to save the Murray Darling Basin from drying up and becoming wasteland has been released. What a kafuffle it is causing. Irrigators are bellyaching that towns will be destroyed, farmers bankrupted, and whole communities ruined if what has been recommended is put into practice.
I hear greed screaming about having to retreat from it’s safe secure position. Supposing water allocations are reduced by 27-37%. What of diversity in agriculture? Are we so hide bound that we cannot do something else with the land apart from pour water all over it? I am an old man now, but I do remember when every farmer had a variety of ways of gaining an income from his farm. Not any more. The single product farm is promoted by the greedy buggers with vested interests as the way of - economic productivity. It may be the best way to make a quick dollar but it is not sustainable in any way shape or form.
Might I be so bold as to suggest that someone in government research what else can be done with the land held by today’s farmers so that they can make a decent living. I remember working on a farm in the 50’s and there were cattle, sheep, pigs as well as grain cropping and haymaking when the weather was right. Everything depended on the weather – nothing has changed – everything is still dependent on the weather.
| 85 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
