Yes NSW & QLD are in drought & property owners are doing it tough but some of it may be self inflicted.
http://encyclopedia.uia.org/en/problem/132923
mezza56 said
08:50 AM Aug 10, 2018
I don't necessarily agree with you on that perspective DD , after 6 years any farm would be depleted of any reserves , I feel sorry for a lot of our farmers and yes they are doing it tough and in some cases probably contemplating the worst scenario. The aussie spirit is to help a mate when he is down and I think its great that various organisations are raising money to help the farmers out. We had a farm back when Mr Keating took over , we had a loan thru PIBA for the farm at the time. Interest rates had risen to astronomical level and the keating govt decided that farmers could repay all their loans and go thru commercial banks , it put a lot of extra pressure on farmers . Now they are giving therm money , go figure ?
Izabarack said
09:24 AM Aug 10, 2018
Fine line. Many a farmer is pushed trying to make a quid off poor farm gate prices. Plus they sometimes make their problems worse by too much tree clearing to allow higher stocking rates - it all ends in tears.
Friend with 25,000 acres near Roma is shooting roos eating the grass he wants for cattle. Might be smarter for him to destock and shoot roos commercially. Seems silly to me to stock cattle when roos thrive in the same conditions. Same friend shoots at least 2 emus a day to feed the farm dogs. Business models and old style land management methods are two problems that could be addressed by a bit of forward thinking. Great story a few years ago where Jerry Harvey's horse property was saved by letting a Greenie take over management of the land.
Iza
RosieW said
11:04 AM Aug 10, 2018
Izabarack wrote:
Fine line. Many a farmer is pushed trying to make a quid off poor farm gate prices. Plus they sometimes make their problems worse by too much tree clearing to allow higher stocking rates - it all ends in tears.
Friend with 25,000 acres near Roma is shooting roos eating the grass he wants for cattle. Might be smarter for him to destock and shoot roos commercially. Seems silly to me to stock cattle when roos thrive in the same conditions. Same friend shoots at least 2 emus a day to feed the farm dogs. Business models and old style land management methods are two problems that could be addressed by a bit of forward thinking. Great story a few years ago where Jerry Harvey's horse property was saved by letting a Greenie take over management of the land.
Iza
We're the same with the roo further west but still in the Maranoa. 65,000 acres,around 100 head left, plus handfeeding weaners. Roo, pigs & goats galore.
Bum end has dropped out of roo meat market - Green Senator raising hell overseas has made a mess of that, or so I hear (may be biased - Greens & shooters tell me this is the case; both vested interests, so not sure of veracity of info). We shoot them for dog meat.
Desert Dweller said
11:32 AM Aug 10, 2018
RosieW wrote:
Green Senator raising hell overseas has made a mess of that. We shoot them for dog meat.
When does the season open. We wanna be there.
pomme said
11:58 AM Aug 10, 2018
First settlers keep getting the blame for too much tree clearing, and degrading the land, but nothing is said about the aboriginals for thousands of years burning of the bush to make for more grassy plains so they could hunt the animals easier, go figure !!!
Pomme.
Eaglemax said
12:40 PM Aug 10, 2018
Maybe overgrazing has something to do with drought or farmers struggling. Little can be done now and NOW is the issue.
I see the problems here sit mostly with the Govt's both Labor, Liberal and Nationals and a lot with the greens.
Take this event 4 days ago. On QandA our Agricultural minister Mr Littleproud when asked about the high level of foreign aid.
For those that don't want to read that article the minister justified providing many millions of foreign aid to third world countries while our farmers battle at home.
When we talk about foreign aid we talk billions, when we talk about assistance for farmers we talk millions...that speaks volumes.
I'd like to list some things that the Govt can do if they suspended foreign aid say, every second year. I'm talking about redirecting 4 billion dollars to this nations infrastructure to indirectly support farming practices here.
Dams- more of them and enlarging current ones, piping to rural towns channels and the like (and covering them), massive tree planting, injection of support for local towns to attract people for rebuilding local societies, rail!!!, more national road repair, tourism, shedding to store feed ready for tough drought periods and so on.
Less than 1.2% of Government expenditure goes on foreign aid at 4 billion dollars annually. https://theconversation.com/new-research-shows-australians-have-wrong-idea-on-foreign-aid-spending-98772 Yet when the chips are down the Government finds a tokenism amount to assist them. There is also an "elephant in the room" and that is pride. Farmers don't like handouts, they are intelligent enough to know that long term strategies as listed above as examples is what is better for the country and some expertise in support services, drought planning, counselling, mental health services...prevention rather than cure. Farm operational support rather than handouts.
As I see it, the Government isn't taking the view "charity begins at home". It's taking the attitude that foreign aid (the continuation of it without much change) is more important. Mr Littleproud in my view is toying with fire. He justifies foreign aid stating an example of aid for Vietnam to get our exported animals slaughtered to our standards. That's ok, but it's ongoing and it shouldn't be while we are so desperate here or we wont be sending cattle to Vietnam as there wont be any.
That's wrong in so many ways. Halve foreign aid until we get our country back together with infrastructure and aid HERE.
Rain Maker said
12:44 PM Aug 10, 2018
Hard times for all on the land and some old practices may be the best but I feel there should be funding available to increase the depth of dams to help drought proof the farms while the dams are at their lowest. Deep dams have less evaporation. I am no expert but makes common sense to me.
Warren-Pat_01 said
01:12 PM Aug 10, 2018
Have we forgotten Dorothy McKellar's poem "I Love a Sunburnt Country"?
DD, yes & no. Where we lived prior to moving to Townsville (Ceduna),farming was a lot of hit & miss. Some farms were in good country, others in not so good. Some had lots of sandy soil, others had large areas of limestone. Some cleared lots of trees because their crops were inadequate (& share farmed with the district when the wind blew - dust storms). Some farmers were "traditional" others were innovative. Today most are being forced to become more innovative.
Townsville has been in drought since TC Yasi in Feb 2011 & only broke this February - our dam was 93% full after that rain. The only thing that saved the city was pumping 100ML a day at a cost of $34,000 a day plus some unseasonal rain in October last.
I was a Climate Change sceptic prior to doing some voluntary work at AIMS (Australian Institute of Marine Science) but after seeing how the climate has changed due to increased amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution has changed my attitudes! There are some things we can do with land acre but the climate is changing dramatically & rain is not getting to where it might have fallen in decades past. The SW corner of WA is one particular area of concern - the "Roaring Forties" are slipping further south. In the north we are seeing more category 4 & 5 tropical cyclones where 20-30 years ago, they were only up to category 3! There has been talk by the BOM that they may have to increase the scale to include a Cat 6!
When you look at what has occurred in the Gulf of Carpentaria of recent times - the cyclones now tend to head west across Arnhem Land, rarely heading south or southwest to bring the rain over the parts of inland Qld, NSW that now are suffering due to the lack of rain.
What the long term answer is, I do not know - perhaps population control?? After all we are the ones who are greedy in our exploitation of resources, clearing what was good farming land to expand our cities that produce more roads for an increasing number of cars needed by us to travel from A-B faster as is occurring in the Kingdom of the Great SE Corner of Qld (& other places) at the moment.
Paull said
03:28 PM Aug 10, 2018
What is the difference between farmers in drought doing it hard & the small business bloke in the city, who goes out of business. losing all his family money, having to sack employees, which starts the process again with their families and losing his house from non ability to pay mortgage, then becoming homeless and has his family live in a caravan or car? why don't these people get a roof at least?
Dave1952 said
03:56 PM Aug 10, 2018
There may be a lot said for resurrecting the Bradfield Scheme. J.J.C. Bradfield had his head screwed on pretty well. I did some traffic control on the Storey Bridge in Brisbane many years ago (designed by Bradfield, as was the Sydney Harbour Bridge) and was told by the engineers (late 1970s) that these two were the first bridges in Australia to incorporate water mains in case of a vehicle fire.
Bradfield had a grand plan to dam water on the eastern side of the Great Dividing Range and pump it over the range to drought affected areas for irrigation.
Not such a silly idea when you consider that, 12 years ago, when I was living and working outside Charters Towers and the wet came, 8 metres of water was flowing over the spillway of the Burdekin Dam. Yes, 8 metres....not 8 feet. We were cut off where we were for six weeks.
Where did all that water go? Down the Burdekin and out to sea. The only water which was saved was that which was retained in the Burdekin Dam and downstream weirs.
I still think it is worth serious consideration to implement the scheme and some of the aid money of which Eaglemax spoke could be used for the construction of said dams, pipelines and pumping stations. It would be also a very useful job creation scheme.
-- Edited by Dave1952 on Friday 10th of August 2018 03:57:12 PM
Cupie said
10:55 PM Aug 10, 2018
Dave1952 wrote:
There may be a lot said for resurrecting the Bradfield Scheme. J.J.C. Bradfield had his head screwed on pretty well. I did some traffic control on the Storey Bridge in Brisbane many years ago (designed by Bradfield, as was the Sydney Harbour Bridge) and was told by the engineers (late 1970s) that these two were the first bridges in Australia to incorporate water mains in case of a vehicle fire.
Bradfield had a grand plan to dam water on the eastern side of the Great Dividing Range and pump it over the range to drought affected areas for irrigation.
Not such a silly idea when you consider that, 12 years ago, when I was living and working outside Charters Towers and the wet came, 8 metres of water was flowing over the spillway of the Burdekin Dam. Yes, 8 metres....not 8 feet. We were cut off where we were for six weeks.
Where did all that water go? Down the Burdekin and out to sea. The only water which was saved was that which was retained in the Burdekin Dam and downstream weirs.
I still think it is worth serious consideration to implement the scheme and some of the aid money of which Eaglemax spoke could be used for the construction of said dams, pipelines and pumping stations. It would be also a very useful job creation scheme.
-- Edited by Dave1952 on Friday 10th of August 2018 03:57:12 PM
Having attended the same Primary School as Bradfield (his photo graced the wall outside the Head Master's office, that I frequented often to get my regular application of the "cuts') I have an enduring interest in Bradfield.
But a little research into the Bradfield Scheme reveals this sort of comment .... sorry .... even one of his firmest early supporters, Qld. Premier Forgan Smith (same family as my recently retired Physician) rejected his proposal ..... I think that it was estimated to cost 30,000,000 pounds way back then.
Conclusion
It would appear that the level of fear of an ecological apocalypse in the Australian inland and the level of faith in the possible panacea of a vast irrigation scheme of the type proposed by Jack Bradfield waxes and wanes in a labile fashion that parallels the tendency for inland Australia to shift in and out of periods of major drought over the medium to longer term. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, we are once again in a period in which political, media and public interest in the state of our inland waterways has intensified during a prolonged drought. Have we simply descended once again into a state of panic, which will be dispelled as soon as the drought breaks, or have we managed this time to instigate a national policy process, which will lead us to an objective and emotionally balanced approach to managing the land and water of inland Australia? It is too early to say for certain, but we can perhaps be encouraged by how rapidly the proposition was removed from the table after being raised by Premier Beattie in February 2007.
It is impossible not to be impressed, and perhaps even inspired, by the grandeur and daring of Bradfields Scheme as a nation-building vision for the future of Australia, and by the energy and enthusiasm with which he and others promoted it. But, as is the case with many other problems facing inland Australia, the issue of how to manage and possibly augment its limited supply of water is far too intricate and complex to be fixed simply by reaching out for a grand solution: no matter how tempting this might be to us in our urgent need to quell a rising state of panic.
The dilemmas currently facing inland Australia arise from aspects of the physical environment which date back many millennia (and, in some cases, millions of years), combined with problems of our own making which have arisen over the past two hundred years. Having taken a long time to develop, these problems are not capable of being solved through a single engineering blueprint. They will only be overcome through the slow growth of insight and a sustained and concerted effort on behalf of governments and the inlands inhabitants.
Simple fact is that there are no quick or easy answers. Probably not even any 'right' ones either.
The dams are dry, the stock are dying, and the banks are making loans that will never be paid, just for farmers to be able to feed their stock. Because they can't sell them, and can't afford to shoot them, in case the drought breaks.
I'm about to get religion and pray for rain. Lots and lots of rain.
Desert Dweller said
07:54 AM Aug 12, 2018
This current situation has had a slow burning fuse over many years. It didn't suddenly happen like a fire or the like.
Many landholders refused to cut stock numbers. Consequently their properties have been severely overgrazed.
These landholders aren't poor, they have some ''bumper financial years'' as well. Maybe if they put some money away for the ''bad years'' it would even things out.
They're a lot richer than most of us. A lot of properties have been owned by the same families for up to a 100 years, so they don't have a property mortgage.
Let them apply for the dole like other unemployed people.
PeterX said
09:37 PM Aug 22, 2018
If no farmers, where do you get your food from?
This drought, is to be the worst drought since 1967, that is over 50 YEARS ago.
And for comments, about lower stock rates, what amount you be prepared to pay extra for product? Like how much as a percentage extra for meat?
A person would have to put away a lot of money to fund 6+ bad years in a row
And, another thing, do you know Big 4 bank repossessed a farmers farm, even though he had NEVER missed a payment.
-- Edited by PeterX on Wednesday 22nd of August 2018 09:40:49 PM
Greg 1 said
12:22 AM Aug 23, 2018
There are a number of misconceptions that you have DD. You appear to be an ex city bloke with no previous connection to the bush.
The average farmer is usually not particularly wealthy in terms of readily available cash. Even if they own their property, who is going to buy it in a drought like this.
So they have some good years. The income from these goes toward their wage for living, paying off the loans they have taken out to finance putting in crops and building herds, replacing worn equipment all of which is horribly expensive.
Just when it looks like they are getting ahead, along comes another drought and the cycle continues.
As far as the dole is concerned, farmers are ineligible for that. Obviously you did not know that.
If their area is declared a drought area, then they maybe eligible for assistance to feed their family, perhaps. And this package has only been available in the last 3 to 4 years. Before that they were on their own.
Why do you think that there are so many suicides in the bush?
The stuff that you have come out with is the typical falsehoods that find their way through cities in this country amongst folk who have no idea of what goes on on a farm.
Sorry for the bit of a rant, but it is something close to me and that troubles me deeply when I see our farmers in trouble like they are in NSW at the moment.
dogbox said
12:11 PM Aug 23, 2018
Paull wrote:
What is the difference between farmers in drought doing it hard & the small business bloke in the city, who goes out of business. losing all his family money, having to sack employees, which starts the process again with their families and losing his house from non ability to pay mortgage, then becoming homeless and has his family live in a caravan or car? why don't these people get a roof at least?
it has taken 6 years for it to become a national problem! if a small business took six years to go broke someone wasn't keeping good books
dogbox said
12:15 PM Aug 23, 2018
Desert Dweller wrote:
This current situation has had a slow burning fuse over many years. It didn't suddenly happen like a fire or the like.
Many landholders refused to cut stock numbers. Consequently their properties have been severely overgrazed.
These landholders aren't poor, they have some ''bumper financial years'' as well. Maybe if they put some money away for the ''bad years'' it would even things out.
They're a lot richer than most of us. A lot of properties have been owned by the same families for up to a 100 years, so they don't have a property mortgage.
Let them apply for the dole like other unemployed people.
I would be more concerned were the relief fund are going an how much is being eaten up in admin charges
Wizardofoz said
09:52 AM Aug 24, 2018
dogbox wrote:
Desert Dweller wrote:
This current situation has had a slow burning fuse over many years. It didn't suddenly happen like a fire or the like.
Many landholders refused to cut stock numbers. Consequently their properties have been severely overgrazed.
These landholders aren't poor, they have some ''bumper financial years'' as well. Maybe if they put some money away for the ''bad years'' it would even things out.
They're a lot richer than most of us. A lot of properties have been owned by the same families for up to a 100 years, so they don't have a property mortgage.
Let them apply for the dole like other unemployed people.
I would be more concerned were the relief fund are going an how much is being eaten up in admin charges
Me too, 2 weeks ago I donated a few hundred dollars via the Salvation Army Fund, despite 2 emails requesting a receipt and confirmation of where the money is going, nothing yet except the usual automated thank you email and a short email reply to my later request saying going to country people suffering from the drought, an official receipt would be nice as well as specific confirmation that all or most of the donation was going to country people suffering In the drought.
-- Edited by Wizardofoz on Friday 24th of August 2018 09:54:14 AM
Aus-Kiwi said
11:34 AM Aug 24, 2018
A small business in city doesnât feed the nation . Itâs infrastructure. Like our roads, electricity, water etc the cities have . Country requires a scheme where farms can be irrigated . I donât think 2000 cattle on 50,000 acres is over stocking . 6 years drought even 1 bull would be hard to feed !! Coles and Woolworths etc donât help with there high profit margins V gate prices ., btw the term dam is often mistaken for damming rivers etc . No itâs water storage ., Ttouble is our country is like an inverted saucer . It either floods in rain . Or drought when dry . Thereâs hardly any continuos rivers flowing over the whole country . Empty streams everywhere!! Weâve camped in or near them .
Yes NSW & QLD are in drought & property owners are doing it tough but some of it may be self inflicted.
http://encyclopedia.uia.org/en/problem/132923
I don't necessarily agree with you on that perspective DD , after 6 years any farm would be depleted of any reserves , I feel sorry for a lot of our farmers and yes they are doing it tough and in some cases probably contemplating the worst scenario. The aussie spirit is to help a mate when he is down and I think its great that various organisations are raising money to help the farmers out. We had a farm back when Mr Keating took over , we had a loan thru PIBA for the farm at the time. Interest rates had risen to astronomical level and the keating govt decided that farmers could repay all their loans and go thru commercial banks , it put a lot of extra pressure on farmers . Now they are giving therm money , go figure ?
Friend with 25,000 acres near Roma is shooting roos eating the grass he wants for cattle. Might be smarter for him to destock and shoot roos commercially. Seems silly to me to stock cattle when roos thrive in the same conditions. Same friend shoots at least 2 emus a day to feed the farm dogs. Business models and old style land management methods are two problems that could be addressed by a bit of forward thinking. Great story a few years ago where Jerry Harvey's horse property was saved by letting a Greenie take over management of the land.
Iza
We're the same with the roo further west but still in the Maranoa. 65,000 acres,around 100 head left, plus handfeeding weaners. Roo, pigs & goats galore.
Bum end has dropped out of roo meat market - Green Senator raising hell overseas has made a mess of that, or so I hear (may be biased - Greens & shooters tell me this is the case; both vested interests, so not sure of veracity of info). We shoot them for dog meat.
When does the season open. We wanna be there.
Pomme.
Maybe overgrazing has something to do with drought or farmers struggling. Little can be done now and NOW is the issue.
I see the problems here sit mostly with the Govt's both Labor, Liberal and Nationals and a lot with the greens.
Take this event 4 days ago. On QandA our Agricultural minister Mr Littleproud when asked about the high level of foreign aid.
https://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/news/national/drought-support-foreign-aid-must-stay-despite-struggles-at-home/news-story/2f44b86164a978b00c9e3be4a27ec1b3
For those that don't want to read that article the minister justified providing many millions of foreign aid to third world countries while our farmers battle at home.
When we talk about foreign aid we talk billions, when we talk about assistance for farmers we talk millions...that speaks volumes.
I'd like to list some things that the Govt can do if they suspended foreign aid say, every second year. I'm talking about redirecting 4 billion dollars to this nations infrastructure to indirectly support farming practices here.
Dams- more of them and enlarging current ones, piping to rural towns channels and the like (and covering them), massive tree planting, injection of support for local towns to attract people for rebuilding local societies, rail!!!, more national road repair, tourism, shedding to store feed ready for tough drought periods and so on.
Less than 1.2% of Government expenditure goes on foreign aid at 4 billion dollars annually. https://theconversation.com/new-research-shows-australians-have-wrong-idea-on-foreign-aid-spending-98772 Yet when the chips are down the Government finds a tokenism amount to assist them. There is also an "elephant in the room" and that is pride. Farmers don't like handouts, they are intelligent enough to know that long term strategies as listed above as examples is what is better for the country and some expertise in support services, drought planning, counselling, mental health services...prevention rather than cure. Farm operational support rather than handouts.
As I see it, the Government isn't taking the view "charity begins at home". It's taking the attitude that foreign aid (the continuation of it without much change) is more important. Mr Littleproud in my view is toying with fire. He justifies foreign aid stating an example of aid for Vietnam to get our exported animals slaughtered to our standards. That's ok, but it's ongoing and it shouldn't be while we are so desperate here or we wont be sending cattle to Vietnam as there wont be any.
That's wrong in so many ways. Halve foreign aid until we get our country back together with infrastructure and aid HERE.
Hard times for all on the land and some old practices may be the best but I feel there should be funding available to increase the depth of dams to help drought proof the farms while the dams are at their lowest. Deep dams have less evaporation. I am no expert but makes common sense to me.
DD, yes & no. Where we lived prior to moving to Townsville (Ceduna),farming was a lot of hit & miss. Some farms were in good country, others in not so good. Some had lots of sandy soil, others had large areas of limestone. Some cleared lots of trees because their crops were inadequate (& share farmed with the district when the wind blew - dust storms). Some farmers were "traditional" others were innovative. Today most are being forced to become more innovative.
Townsville has been in drought since TC Yasi in Feb 2011 & only broke this February - our dam was 93% full after that rain. The only thing that saved the city was pumping 100ML a day at a cost of $34,000 a day plus some unseasonal rain in October last.
I was a Climate Change sceptic prior to doing some voluntary work at AIMS (Australian Institute of Marine Science) but after seeing how the climate has changed due to increased amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution has changed my attitudes! There are some things we can do with land acre but the climate is changing dramatically & rain is not getting to where it might have fallen in decades past. The SW corner of WA is one particular area of concern - the "Roaring Forties" are slipping further south. In the north we are seeing more category 4 & 5 tropical cyclones where 20-30 years ago, they were only up to category 3! There has been talk by the BOM that they may have to increase the scale to include a Cat 6!
When you look at what has occurred in the Gulf of Carpentaria of recent times - the cyclones now tend to head west across Arnhem Land, rarely heading south or southwest to bring the rain over the parts of inland Qld, NSW that now are suffering due to the lack of rain.
What the long term answer is, I do not know - perhaps population control?? After all we are the ones who are greedy in our exploitation of resources, clearing what was good farming land to expand our cities that produce more roads for an increasing number of cars needed by us to travel from A-B faster as is occurring in the Kingdom of the Great SE Corner of Qld (& other places) at the moment.
There may be a lot said for resurrecting the Bradfield Scheme. J.J.C. Bradfield had his head screwed on pretty well. I did some traffic control on the Storey Bridge in Brisbane many years ago (designed by Bradfield, as was the Sydney Harbour Bridge) and was told by the engineers (late 1970s) that these two were the first bridges in Australia to incorporate water mains in case of a vehicle fire.
Bradfield had a grand plan to dam water on the eastern side of the Great Dividing Range and pump it over the range to drought affected areas for irrigation.
Not such a silly idea when you consider that, 12 years ago, when I was living and working outside Charters Towers and the wet came, 8 metres of water was flowing over the spillway of the Burdekin Dam. Yes, 8 metres....not 8 feet. We were cut off where we were for six weeks.
Where did all that water go? Down the Burdekin and out to sea. The only water which was saved was that which was retained in the Burdekin Dam and downstream weirs.
I still think it is worth serious consideration to implement the scheme and some of the aid money of which Eaglemax spoke could be used for the construction of said dams, pipelines and pumping stations. It would be also a very useful job creation scheme.
-- Edited by Dave1952 on Friday 10th of August 2018 03:57:12 PM
Having attended the same Primary School as Bradfield (his photo graced the wall outside the Head Master's office, that I frequented often to get my regular application of the "cuts') I have an enduring interest in Bradfield.
But a little research into the Bradfield Scheme reveals this sort of comment .... sorry .... even one of his firmest early supporters, Qld. Premier Forgan Smith (same family as my recently retired Physician) rejected his proposal ..... I think that it was estimated to cost 30,000,000 pounds way back then.
Conclusion
It would appear that the level of fear of an ecological apocalypse in the Australian inland and the level of faith in the possible panacea of a vast irrigation scheme of the type proposed by Jack Bradfield waxes and wanes in a labile fashion that parallels the tendency for inland Australia to shift in and out of periods of major drought over the medium to longer term. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, we are once again in a period in which political, media and public interest in the state of our inland waterways has intensified during a prolonged drought. Have we simply descended once again into a state of panic, which will be dispelled as soon as the drought breaks, or have we managed this time to instigate a national policy process, which will lead us to an objective and emotionally balanced approach to managing the land and water of inland Australia? It is too early to say for certain, but we can perhaps be encouraged by how rapidly the proposition was removed from the table after being raised by Premier Beattie in February 2007.
It is impossible not to be impressed, and perhaps even inspired, by the grandeur and daring of Bradfields Scheme as a nation-building vision for the future of Australia, and by the energy and enthusiasm with which he and others promoted it. But, as is the case with many other problems facing inland Australia, the issue of how to manage and possibly augment its limited supply of water is far too intricate and complex to be fixed simply by reaching out for a grand solution: no matter how tempting this might be to us in our urgent need to quell a rising state of panic.
The dilemmas currently facing inland Australia arise from aspects of the physical environment which date back many millennia (and, in some cases, millions of years), combined with problems of our own making which have arisen over the past two hundred years. Having taken a long time to develop, these problems are not capable of being solved through a single engineering blueprint. They will only be overcome through the slow growth of insight and a sustained and concerted effort on behalf of governments and the inlands inhabitants.
http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p118181/mobile/ch06s04.html
Sustainable slow selective burning pomme.
Not greed.
The dams are dry, the stock are dying, and the banks are making loans that will never be paid, just for farmers to be able to feed their stock. Because they can't sell them, and can't afford to shoot them, in case the drought breaks.
I'm about to get religion and pray for rain. Lots and lots of rain.
Many landholders refused to cut stock numbers. Consequently their properties have been severely overgrazed.
These landholders aren't poor, they have some ''bumper financial years'' as well. Maybe if they put some money away for the ''bad years'' it would even things out.
They're a lot richer than most of us. A lot of properties have been owned by the same families for up to a 100 years, so they don't have a property mortgage.
Let them apply for the dole like other unemployed people.
If no farmers, where do you get your food from?
This drought, is to be the worst drought since 1967, that is over 50 YEARS ago.
And for comments, about lower stock rates, what amount you be prepared to pay extra for product?
Like how much as a percentage extra for meat?
A person would have to put away a lot of money to fund 6+ bad years in a row
And, another thing, do you know Big 4 bank repossessed a farmers farm, even though he had NEVER missed a payment.
-- Edited by PeterX on Wednesday 22nd of August 2018 09:40:49 PM
it has taken 6 years for it to become a national problem! if a small business took six years to go broke someone wasn't keeping good books
I would be more concerned were the relief fund are going an how much is being eaten up in admin charges
Me too, 2 weeks ago I donated a few hundred dollars via the Salvation Army Fund, despite 2 emails requesting a receipt and confirmation of where the money is going, nothing yet except the usual automated thank you email and a short email reply to my later request saying going to country people suffering from the drought, an official receipt would be nice as well as specific confirmation that all or most of the donation was going to country people suffering In the drought.
-- Edited by Wizardofoz on Friday 24th of August 2018 09:54:14 AM