David Boyd's Blog

Used Cars

2012-01-16T08:21:00.002+11:00

John Clarke, Bryan Dawes skit

[Scene: A car yard. BRYAN is perusing the stock. He is approached by JOHN]

John: Morning! Looking for a new car?

Bryan : Nope. New Prime Minister, actually.

John: You're the third one this morning. Anything in mind?

Bryan : You know...... nothing fancy, reliable, economical family model. Something to get the country from A to B.

John: You mean like a Howard?

Bryan : Yeah...a little Johnny. Nothing flash, does the job. Low maintenance, economical, sensible. Runs for years, no troubles.

John: So.... you used to have one?

Bryan : Yeah. About 10 years. Great little model - don't know why I got rid of him -- biggest mistake I've ever made.

John: What happened?

Bryan : Traded him in for a Kevin 07.

John: Big mistake.

Bryan : Lot of people bought it. Good political mileage.

John: How was the Kevin 07?

Bryan : Came with a $900 factory rebate - that was good.

John: Anything else?

Bryan : Not much. Sounded nice but nothing under the bonnet. It was a lemon.

John: Didn't stick around for long did it?

Bryan : Nah - had a factory recall. Shipped overseas and was never seen again.

John: What was the problem?

Bryan : Lots. But the final straw was the navigation system. Plug it in and it automatically loses its own way.

John: Whatcha got now?

Bryan : It's a Gillard-Brown

John: The hybrid?

Bryan : Yeah. The Eco-drive system - not a good idea. An engine that can't deliver hooked up to a transmission stuck in permanent reverse.

John: Green paintwork with a red interior. And steering that always lurches to the left for no apparent reason - that's the one?

Bryan : The Fustercluck model.

John: The only one they made, Bryan . Not the vehicle of choice for the road to recovery - but did they finish up fixing the navigation system?

Bryan : Made it worse. Turn it on and it does a press release, heads off in all directions and goes nowhere.
John: So that's why you're here?

Bryan : That's right. I'm stuck with a car that's wasteful, expensive, ineffective and past its use by date. I don't suppose you've heard of the "Cash for Clunkers" scheme?

John: Join the queue brother.

Fugitive Malcolm Nadin

2012-01-14T23:07:00.000+11:00

Just outside Gloucester NSW where the NSW Police team searching for Malcolm Nadin have set up its headquarters, a helpful local has made a contribution.

Australian Motor Cars

2012-01-14T10:46:00.003+11:00

Taking taxpayers for a ride

Last week, consultancy firm KPMG published its Global Auto Executive Survey for 2012, in which executives from the world’s leading car manufacturers were asked about the situation of their industry. One of their key concerns was global overcapacity, estimated at somewhere between 20% and 30%.

It is against this background that we have to evaluate the federal government’s decision to grant Ford new subsidies towards the production of its Falcon model; it is likely that new support to Holden will be announced shortly. While Ford will receive an additional $53 million from Australian taxpayers, GM Holden is seeking up to $200 million to continue its Commodore production in Adelaide.

By international standards, both Ford Australia and Holden have always been small. With the rise of new car manufacturers in Asia, they are looking even smaller. All Australian manufacturers have a combined annual production of roughly 240,000 vehicles. Even countries like Romania, Taiwan and Belgium produce more. Australia’s annual output is dwarfed by that of South Korea (4.3 million vehicles), Japan (9.6 million) and China (18 million).

Car manufacturing for the mass market is an industry in which size clearly matters because of scale effects. If Australia did not already have a legacy car industry, it clearly would not be established under the current conditions. This tiny industry almost exclusively catering for our tiny market is simply unable to compete with much more efficient car manufacturers abroad.

If a business proposition is no longer viable, then companies need to draw the right conclusions. Indeed, in the KPMG survey, car executives responded that the global overcapacity should be dealt with through cuts in production and industry consolidation. Presumably, that means the weakest car manufacturers should go.

The response of the government is the opposite. By pouring in hundreds of millions of dollars into an industry that will remain unviable for the indefinite future, government is keeping Australian car manufacturing alive for political reasons.

This is an act of cowardice. A courageous government would not give in to the extortionate demands of global car corporates General Motors and Ford, but rather would explain to the Australian public that there is no justification for a car industry that cannot survive without ongoing taxpayer support.

A car industry is only worth having if it is able to stand on its own feet. Keeping an industry alive for the sake of having an industry is economic folly and a waste of taxpayers’ resources.

Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich is a Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.

Denial

2012-01-14T10:36:00.000+11:00

Two quotes on "denial"-
"Delay is the most insidious form of denial". Ask the bureaucrats.
"De-nile is not just a river in Egypt".

Toorale Money Waste and Community Economic Damage

2011-12-27T08:34:00.000+11:00

Just in case the telling point is lost in too many words-see below. The Darling River flow past Louth for the 2010/11 year was 7,910,553 megalitres. The Government claim of "water returned to the river" in 2010/11 as a consequence of the Toorale close down, was 7,672 megalitres-0.01% of the flow.

Toorale Ramifications

2011-12-26T16:16:00.004+11:00

The Sydney Morning Herald (David Wroe) has written a well balanced article on the waste of money in buying Toorale (pronounced Too-rally) Station at Bourke.http://www.smh.com.au/environment/station-buyout-a-waste-of-money-20111223-1p8ln.html.
I attempted to leverage this with a letter to the Editor which failed to make the final cut-

"Congratulations to the SMH (Station buyout a waste of money- 23rd December) for "outing" the Commonwealth and former NSW State Government for the total waste of $23.75m in purchasing Toorale Station. Not only was this a waste of taxpayer's funds for negligible environmental benefit, it also took out of production the hard hit Bourke community's most productive enterprise. How downstream grazier Justin Mc Clure can argue that a 0.01% increase in flow can generate downstream environmental benefits is a real mystery.

The episode has wider ramifications in terms of the Draft Murray Darling Basin Plan. The Commonwealth Water Act 2007 and the approach of the Murray Darling Basin Authority is deeply flawed and the Toorale outcomes represent a good example of the likely consequences-negligible environmental benefit, but significant negative economic consequences. When flows are low, license conditions prevent extractions and diversions, when flows are significant the impacts of extractions and diversions are minimal. Dorothea Mackellar was absolutely right in describing inland Australia as a land of "droughts and flooding rains", she could have added and "not much in the middle".

In using absolute numbers as the MDBA has done, to prescribe acceptable extractions/diversions limits without gearing these to actual flows (availability) is really nonsense. To argue that these numbers are "averages" doesn't help, given the enormous spreads around the averages. Our current water bureaucrats could do worse than studying how the existing control system operates. It works rather well.
J.D.O.(David) Boyd

7A Eastern Arterial Road,

St Ives NSW 2075
Tel: 02 9449 7501
Mob: 0429 999 444
(Former Chairman and CEO of Clyde Agriculture, the previous owner of Toorale Station)"

The Barrages

2011-12-20T13:20:00.000+11:00

Global non-Warming

2011-12-16T17:59:00.000+11:00

Hitting the Nail on the Head!

Durban failed to explain why models were not achieved (Letter published in The Australian, 16 December 2011)

Your editorial (15/12) discussing Canada’s withdrawal from the binding Kyoto agreement also states your continued acceptance of “the strong evidence of anthropogenic climate change and support (for) limits on greenhouse gas emissions as a precautionary and remedial measure”.

But surely questions must be raised by the failure at Durban to hold any serious discussion of the now obvious failures of the supposed consensual climate science.

Most astonishing is the failure to explain at Durban why predictions based on scientific (sic) models are not being achieved.

Why do we need even to take precautionary action when there has been no real warming for almost two decades, no recent sea-level rise, no Arctic ice-melt, fewer hurricanes than at almost any time in 30 years and no Pacific atolls disappearing beneath the waves?

And, going back further, how do the modellers explain why over the past century temperatures did not rise for about 40 per cent of the time even when CO2 concentrations were increasing?

As the barman said to excessive imbibers, time’s up mate. Your precautionary action is to recognise you can’t get away with believing models.

Des Moore, South Yarra, Vic

Entitlements and Allocations

2011-12-11T19:58:00.001+11:00

The following letter was published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 9th. December, 2011:
"The focus on the 2750 gigalitre (GLS) figure of claimed water "returned to the rivers" is highly misleading. This number refers to extraction entitlements. Irrigation entitlements grant the right to extract water only when when seasonal allocations are made and this depends on water availability. When water is short there are no, or very limited, allocations. Water entitlements without allocations amount to phantom water. During the Millennium Drought extraction entitlements were cut by over 4,000 GLS by the allocation system-it works rather well." (Buying irrigation entitlements will do nothing for our rivers and will only limit agricultural production when water is plentiful.)
( ) Omitted by Letters Editor

Murray Darling Basin Plan and Variability

2011-11-29T09:05:00.001+11:00

John Cox has written a great article putting some hard numbers on my much repeated point about Australian river flow variability and the difference between allocations and entitlement volumes. Here is an extract.

There is no evidence that the sustainable diversion limits in this report were influenced by any social or economic outcomes, as the main thrust of the proposed report is still on satisfying environmental outcomes in the basin with environmental watering plans, water salinity targets and end of valley targets for river flows to keep the mouth of the Murray open.

Despite the Chairman's urging that we see this revised report as "more than just a volume of water" to be cut from irrigators, the proposed Basin plan still places this single cut in irrigators allowance front and centre without any explanation on how this single figure can apply to the widely varying annual flows that we know are a hydrological feature of the Murray Darling basin.

If this 3,573 GL of water buybacks for the environment had been in place between 1984 and 2000, when irrigation diversions averaged about 11,500 GL per year, then agricultural production would have been reduced by 33% for no real reason at all, as flows over the Goolwa barrages averaged about 5,000 GL over this period. This waste of Australia's scarcest resource will also occur in future years of average and above average flows if these cuts are implemented.

If this 3,573 GL had been in place between 2007 and 2010, when irrigation diversions were reduced by about 6,000 GL to about 5,000 GL for these four years, then such cuts would still not have been enough, as there was just not enough water around during these drought years.

It would seem logical to have produced a more dynamic model where irrigation allocations are not cut by a single figure but are dependent upon the water availability in the Murray Darling basin each season.

In fact, the State water agencies have developed quite an expertise in this dynamic modelling area during the recent drought years and progressively set percentage allocations during the season for both high security/reliability water used on permanent tree plantings and low security/low reliability irrigation water that is used on annual crops like cotton or wheat. It is difficult to see why this system needs to be changed.

The second major problem in the report is the lack of any real discussion on the waste of scarce water from evaporation in the artificial fresh water lakes of the Murray Mouth and whether fresh water flows to keep the mouth open 90% of the time would be necessary if the barrages were kept open and the lakes revert to their natural state of tidal fluctuations.

A lock between Wellington and Tailem Bend and opening of the barrages in drought years to form an estuarine environment would not only save 800 GL of evaporation, or more than half of the 1468 GL still to be recovered between 2012 and 2019, but convert this barren fresh water monoculture of carp into a diverse, vibrant ecoculture that would be similar to the Lakes Entrance estuary in Gippsland. Not only would the Murray River have an estuary and open mouth like all of the world's great rivers but an increase in tourism would also be an economic boost to local communities.

We should also be clear about the outcomes of a further 2,750 GL cut in irrigation allocations which would be similar to those of a 3,000 GL cut that was modelled in the draft report. This report stated that in an average run off year, these cuts to irrigators would result in 1,000 GL being made available for environmental watering projects within the basin and an extra 2,000 GL would flow out to sea, making 7,000 GL per year in total. Is this scandalous waste of Australia's most precious resource what Australians really want?
John Cox is a citrus grower in Waikerie, SA

Matt Ridley on Climate Change

2011-11-28T21:05:00.001+11:00

My favourite author of the moment ("The Rational Optimist") Matt Ridley has given a highly acclaimed speech on Climate Change. I commend it to you_
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/ridley_rsa.pdf

Murray Darling Basin Authority Draft Plan-November,2011

2011-11-28T07:42:00.001+11:00

After a quick "skim" of the new Report I have prepared the following Questions for the Authority-

Guidelines ForQuestioners At MDBA Plan Meetings –November, 2011

· What is the specific evidence on which you statethe Basin is “unhealthy”, particularly after the recent wet years?

(The MDBA website states -“Our use of thewater in the Basin has changed how the rivers flow. These changes involume and timing have led to increases in salinity,blue-green algal blooms and water quality degradation, while wetlands, red gumforests, native fish and water bird populations are decreasing (myemphasis). All of these features are symptoms of overuse and they arewhat have led to the latest impetus for water reform.

What is the scientific basis for theseclaimed symptoms? They are inconsistent with the practical observations of manyon-the-ground, knowledgeable, riparian dwellers.

· Are you sure that you are not confusing thenatural results of a typical (but extreme) Australian dry period with chronic“ill-health”?

· Does the Authority accept that the ACF claimthat the Murray Darling Basin is on the point of “eco-collapse” is nonsense?

· Given that the Water Sharing Plan guided allocations saw a cut of over 4,000 GL inextractions during the recent drought and given that critical human needs andassessed environmental needs have first priority; what is the point of theGovernment buying entitlements?Won’t this only prevent production when water is plentiful?

· Does the Authority acknowledge the point made byHarvard Professor John Briscoe that Australia achieved a rare accomplishment inkeeping the Murray River flowing when run-off was at all time (since Europeansettlement) record lows? Does the Authority acknowledge that this was achievedby the existence of upstream storages, the Snowy River diversions and strictlimits on irrigation extractions? Does this not call for additional storages tobetter spread the extreme variability of our river flows?

· When, during the Millennium Drought, there wasno water available for irrigation extractions or to maintain the Lower Lakes inthere unnatural fresh water state, what was the logic for not allowing seawater to enter the Lower Lakes as it always did under such dry conditions beforethe Barrages were built?

· Why does the report not examine the managementof Snowy Scheme diversions, particularly the use of Eucumbene Dam, the largeststorage feeding the Basin? Evidence suggests that Snowy Hydro are not requiredto give sufficient weight to water conservation and supply considerations, consistentwith their hydro electricity generation objectives.

MDB Water-Two Contradictory Quotes

2011-11-17T17:16:00.001+11:00

Quote -
"A very uneven distribution of water resources across Australia and high year-to-year variability means that water resources in some regions are fully or over allocated, while others remain largely undeveloped"

CSIRO Water -Science and Solutions for Australia, 2011

Given allocations are not fixed but made subject to availability, how can anyone argue that water resources are over allocated?? Sure, irrigators face great uncertainty because of Australia's variable rainfall. It is the system of allocations that we use to deal with the variability'

A great quote-
"Perhaps more than any other parts of the Australian economy, farmers understand uncertainty. They live with uncertainty about rainfall and growing conditions. They live with uncertainty about the costs of their key inputs. And, of course, they live with uncertainty about the world prices for their outputs. It is this ability to deal with uncertainty that is one of the strong and enduring characteristics of the Australian farming sector.
Philip Lowe, Assistant Governor (Economic), Reserve Bank of Australia.

I think claims of over allocation are nonsensical! What do you think? Am I missing something?

Our Unbalanced ABC

2011-11-17T17:09:00.001+11:00

On 6th November the ABC Radio National programme"Background Briefing" featured the Qantas dispute.The
programme concentrated on the Coalition's IR policy, or lack of it. I sent in the following comment:-

David Boyd :

14 Nov 2011 9:30:34am

It could only be the ABC "Lefties" who could focus a programme about the Qantas dispute on the Coalition's IR policy!
How about the lack of labour productivity improvements, Labor's winding back of the Hawke/Keating reforms, entrenched Qantas work practices being protected under the guise of job security,enhanced Union power and inflexibility and the flaws of the FWA arrangements?

Uncertainty

2011-11-12T22:15:00.001+11:00

A quote worth remembering-
"Perhaps more than any other parts of the Australian economy, farmers understand uncertainty. They live with uncertainty about rainfall and growing conditions. They live with uncertainty about the costs of their key inputs. And, of course, they live with uncertainty about the world prices for their outputs. It is this ability to deal with uncertainty that is one of the strong and enduring characteristics of the Australian farming sector."
Philip Lowe, Assistant Governor (Economic), Reserve Bank of Australia.

Latest Murray Darling Basin Plan-Apprehension

2011-11-12T08:08:00.001+11:00

Those interested in maintaining Australia's long term agricultural productive capacity are awaiting the release of the latest iteration of the Murray Darling Basin Plan at the end of this month, with great interest and some apprehension. The attached video, particularly Louise Burge's comments, is spot on.

The Murray Darling Basin rivers are not, in general, unhealthy. In fact, following the recent wetter years the Basin has arguably never been in better shape. Yet the likes of the ACF continue to talk about "on the brink of eco-collapse".

The fear is that the Report will proceed from the false premise that the rivers are unhealthy and that this is due to excessive extractions. Leaks suggest that it will again focus on aggregate entitlements and ignore the success of the Water Sharing Plans and their limit on allocations when water is in short supply.

It will fail to recognise the great achievement, as a consequence of storages, diversions (Snowy) and extraction limitations of keeping the Murray River flowing throughout the lowest run-off period in Australia's recorded history. We should be celebrating not lamenting!

Irrigation Extractions in the MDB

2011-10-28T17:00:00.000+11:00

This is worth listening to, especially when Tony Windsor (belatedly) expounds on the allocation process and the compere has a BGO (Blinding Glimpse of the Obvious) and immediately asks "well what's the problem". Good question! But, our ACF representative sticks with his programmed dogma and ignores the obvious.

A View of Murray Darling Irrigation from New York

2011-10-17T19:11:00.001+11:00

Well known New York based Australian author and journalist,Kate Jennings,has contributed an interesting and colourfully expressed article to "The Monthly". It is well worth reading.

Europe

2011-10-02T18:36:00.000+11:00

I have been much interested in the sovereign debt problems of the poor countries of Europe and how the creation of the Eurozone and the single currency, has removed the former main method of dealing with individual economic problems, namely currency devaluation, from the unfortunate members. How fortunate are the U.K. and the Czech Republic under my favourite President, Vaclav Klaus, (to name two), in not being members. The linked speech by Daniel Hannan, the member of the European Parliament for South England, strikes an appealing chord.

The Riverina

2011-09-26T18:58:00.000+10:00

I wonder if the Riverina got its name from all the water which flows thru' it?

Gail and I have just had a great trip out to Condobolin, down the Lachlan River to Hillston, across to the Murrumbidgee River at Hay and then across those various watercourses (the Billabong and Yanko Creeks and the Edwards River that flow out of the Murrumbidgee and Murray Rivers), to Deniliquin. We returned via Conargo, Jerilderie, Lockhart, Wagga Wagga and Gundagai. Crops west of Parkes down to Lake Cargilligo were mostly struggling. Across the southern Riverina pastures and crops were wonderful.

Our main purpose was to attend the Annual Ram Sale and the big party put on by FS Falkiner and Sons (the Bell Group) to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Wanganella Merino Stud which has had such an impact on the development of the Australian Merino's genetics over all those years. With fabulous sheep prices, (the auctioneers were able to announce at the ram sale that young merino ewes in the Hay Sale that very day had made $280/head) and much better wool prices, the mood was buoyant.

We had a wonderful trip meeting so many old friends including some Sydney and Melbourne based Bell associated friends who were having there first real exposure to the bush and the Merino world in particular. One group asked me to explain why I did not believe that irrigation extractions were having a negative impact on the health of our Murray Darling Basin rivers and why I believed that Commonwealth Government "buy backs" were a waste of taxpayer's money. For once the words seemed to fall out convincingly!

In summary, this is what I said:

It rains or it doesn't. Our dams fill (or partially fill) or they don't.
An irrigation license (entitlement) grants the holder the right to extract water when, and only when, there is an allocation.
Allocations are reviewed several times per year and subject to water availability allocations are made, or not made.
Allocation decisions are guided by water sharing plans and these plans, in general, specify that critical human needs have first priority, assessed environmental needs have second priority and when, and only when, these priorities are met are decisions made on allocations. These may be anything from nil to 100% of the entitlements specified in licenses.

Given this process the purchase of licenses by Government during say, drought conditions, when there are no allocations is pointless. In fact, the purchase of licenses under all conditions would seem to be pointless. The group appeared to get the logic.

Murray Mouth

2011-08-29T14:17:00.000+10:00

I today sent the following letter to The Australian. Probably too long for publication-but I felt better!
The article by Jennifer Marohasy (The Weekend Australian- Sea Will Save the Murray-27th August) is a very accurate, well balanced review of the Lower Lakes issue in the context of the Murray Darling Basin Plan.

The key characteristic of the Australian rainfall pattern is massive variability. So much so that average statistics, with the massive spread around the average, are effectively meaningless. This variability results in fresh water flows at the Murray mouth being highly irregular. The Murray mouth was regarded by explorer Sturt as being the entrance to Lake Alexandrina with Lakes Alexandrina and Albert and the northern end of The Coorong forming the river estuary, with the actual entrance to the Southern Ocean being an ever changing channel, difficult to negotiate at the best of times and sometimes closed altogether. At times the lakes were mostly fresh water, sometimes mostly salt, depending on tides, winds and most of all upstream river flows.

In the 1930's the South Australians constructed "The Barrages" between the lakes and the ocean outlet to convert the Lower Lakes (Alexandrina and Albert) into an all times fresh water storage held above sea level. This was beneficial for navigation, irrigators and more recently for recreation/canal style housing development. This action carried with it a quite unreasonable expectation that there would always be sufficient fresh water flows from upstream to maintain the lakes at their elevated fresh water levels, notwithstanding very high evaporation. When this failed to happen, the failure was always blamed on upstream extractions for irrigation when the major cause was simply lack of run-off.

This situation was dramatically demonstrated in the 2002-2008 period when catchment run-off was at record low levels and there simply was not enough water to maintain the lakes in their elevated fresh water state even though upstream irrigation extractions were effectively prohibited. Fortunately upstream storages were sufficient to meet critical human needs and maintain minimal river flow.

The bottom line is that under dry conditions there is simply not enough water to maintain the lakes in their unnatural elevated fresh water state and better management of the Basin strongly suggests that, at least under these conditions, The Barrages should be opened to allow salt water to enter. A weir (or lock) would need to be built on the Murray above Lake Alexandrina to provide fresh water for river and lake irrigators (piped) and to protect Adelaide's fresh water supply from downstream salt water intrusion.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus

2011-08-19T07:54:00.002+10:00

This great man has charmed his way around Australia with his simple clear economists's logic. Although he speaks with a thick accent he has a great command of the English language and is worth listening to. I heard him in person in Sydney and closely watched his presentation to the National Press Club. His experience of communism makes him very alert to threats to freedom. Here is an edited version of his Melbourne presentation.
Later
Here is the speech to the National Press Club, which is even better.

Global Population

2011-07-22T16:19:00.000+10:00

"The spread of birth control and a desire for smaller families tend to accompany economic growth and development almost everywhere." The Economist,21st July,2011

This fact has led demographers to project world population peaking at 9/10 billion by mid century and then beginning to drop continuously as it would already be doing in the developed world, if it were not for immigration.

To my mind this should encourage countries such as Australia to concentrate their production on energising,feeding and clothing the developing world in the knowledge that lifting countries out of poverty and disease will not only make life more bearable for them, but will have the environmental benefit of stopping global population growth. The sooner living standards are improved in the third world the sooner population growth will cease.

In the interim we'd better concentrate on lifting productivity growth in preparation for the economic challenges we will face when global population starts to decrease. For Australia, a more flexible deregulated labour market would be a good place to start. Unfortunately Julia Gillard as P.M. and Labour Minister has been taking us backwards in this regard.

Optimism

2011-07-15T17:45:00.000+10:00

In these grim cold days of carbon taxes and incompetent Government,falling confidence and retail sales (David Jones), we all need something to cheer us up. Have a listen to Matt Ridley,The Rational Optimist. It is very refreshing.

My Climate Change Position

2011-07-05T23:38:00.000+10:00

I just don't have enough basic education to evaluate the technical arguments. My firm sceptic position is more influenced by my view of human motivation, my tendency to want to challenge conventional wisdom and my attraction to the logic of people like Nigel (Lord) Lawson.

When I read the comments of Freeman Dyson (Princeton) and all the other sceptic material, I perceive a very compelling case on the sceptic side.

Then when I listen to the Parliamentary ravings of Wayne Swan, in particular, constantly quoting the Stern Report, discredited by our own Productivity Commission, and suggesting that Australia, with its tiny proportion of greenhouse gases, can change the climate, I smell bullshit!

I liked Tony Abbott's comment the other day- "socialism disguised as environmentalism"

Murray Darling Basin Statistics

2011-07-05T23:28:00.003+10:00

Remember that book "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics"? Well,we are seeing that theme borne out in the debate leading up to the next iteration of a Murray Darling Basin Plan. Leaks from Canberra have suggested that the new report will state that 2,800 GL should be recovered "for the river" by way of the purchase of Licenses covering this amount of water. Some are arguing that at least 4,000 GL's should be recovered.

Where would 4,000 GL's go this year when there is more water around than "you can poke a stick at" and it would only add to the 000's of GL's flowing from the Murray mouth. In the drought years where would the extra 2,800 (or 4,000) GL's have come from when there was no water for anyone.

Critics will leap at me and say we are not talking specific annual figures,but averages. However, when the spreads around the average are so enormous surely average figures are meaningless.

Let's look at how the system really works. All irrigation licenses are subject to seasonal allocations. A license without an allocation represents phantom water. No allocations means no water. Thus we have a self regulating adaptive system that governs irrigation extractions in line with available water. Critical human needs and designated environmental needs have priority over irrigation. All of this is spelled out in Water Sharing Plans.

The much criticised "Guide to the Murray Darling Basin Plan" constantly refers to 13,700 GL's as the irrigator's surface water usesage figure. A close reading of the report reveals that that number is an average.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, actual extractions for irrigation in the Murray Darling Basin over the last five years have been-
(GL'S)
2005-06 7369
2006-07 4458
2007-08 3141
2008-09 3492
2009-10 3564
These figures suggest that the allocation system is working well. In a highly variable flow regime an adaptive methodology such as this would seem ideal. Some suggest that irrigators seek greater certainty. I contend that irrigators understand and accept the variability risks and in any event "certainty" is a concept foreign to Australian farmers!

It seems to me that we really need to go back to basics. Were our rivers really unhealthy or are we confusing the natural results of extreme dryness with lack of health? If they really were (or are) unhealthy, how did this manifest itself and what were the underlying causes? Perhaps throwing water at the perceived problem is not the answer.

I note that the Australian Conservation Foundation describes the Murray Darling Basin as being at the point of eco-collapse, which really is complete nonsense. I have travelled over much of the Basin in recent months and the recovery following our flooding rains is a joy to behold.

Carbon

2011-06-27T18:50:00.003+10:00

The Editor
Letters to the Editor
Herald Sun
24 June 2011

Open Response to Eminent Persons and Others

Carbon is a dirty grimy substance that pollutes the atmosphere and for this reason is presented to you as the Government's target to tax.

However the substance the Government intends to tax is carbon dioxide[CO2] which is neither a pollutant or a poison , but a colourless tasteless, odourless gas that as my agricultural science master taught me is nature's greatest fertiliser necessary for the life of all trees plants, pastures and crops. Then through photosynthesis those same trees, plants, pastures and
crops turn CO2 into oxygen the very substance we breathe to live and that sustains all human, animal and bird life on earth.

It is intellectually dishonest for Prime Minister Gillard, Minister Combet, and advisors Garnaut and Flannery to mislead people by using the term carbon pollution.

The people of Australia deserve honesty in a debate that seeks to raise billions of dollars in a new tax.

Peter Nixon
Fmr Minister for Primary Industry

Carbon Dioxide

2011-06-27T18:34:00.004+10:00

Extract from Senaor Nick Minchin's Valedictory Speech-

"Perhaps the most curious thing to me on reflecting on my career is the amount of time and energy occupied by consideration of the issue of carbon dioxide. Little did I know when I entered this place 18 years ago that carbon dioxide would play such a significant role in mycareer.Education, health, defence, foreign affairs,taxation and fiscal and monetary policy—all of these I expected to dominate political discourse. But carbon dioxide? Never. As I learnt in school, carbon dioxide is a clear, odourless, tasteless and invisible gas that is actually vital to life on earth. It constitutes 0.04 per cent of the atmosphere. Nature is responsible for 97 per cent of the earth's production of CO2; humans, just three per cent. And yet many now see anthropogenic CO2 as the greatest threat to humankind on our planet, a threat which demands no less than an economic revolution to avert. Anyone who dares question this as yet unproven theory of anthropogenic global warming is branded a denier, as we heard from my good friend Senator Evans today, and treated as a veritable pariah.

I must say that when I first learned of the existence of the Australian Greenhouse Office, I assumed it was responsible for supplying tomatoes to the Parliament House kitchen. But, no, as I soon learnt as industry minister, it was in fact a government funded redoubt of veritable soldiers in a war against carbon dioxide.The zealotry and obsessive passion of these warriors in the battle against the apparent evils of carbon dioxide remains a curiosity to me. After fighting these people for three years as industry minister, I really did wish they would just go away and grow tomatoes. I am quite surprised and rather disappointed by the loneliness, isolation and indeed demonisation the sadly misunderstood CO2 is experiencing. Thus,upon leaving the parliament, I am contemplating the foundation of an organisation called 'The Friends of Carbon Dioxide'. Membership will of course be open to all, including the plants whose very existence depends on CO2. I think this organisation's slogan, 'CO2 is not pollution', self-selects. It has both accuracy and melody to commend it. I do acknowledge the remarkable power of CO2. After all, it led me to have to do something I had thought unthinkable, and that was to resign from the coalition frontbench at the end of 2009—albeit for only a very short time. CO2 played a significant part in the demise of Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull.It may well result in the demise of our current Prime Minister, so that really is some gas!

I do remain optimistic that one day the world will realise that carbon dioxide is more of a friend than an enemy to the earth's flora and fauna, and I do seriously believe that, given the extraordinary complexity of the natural forces controlling our climate, which have done so for millions of years, the only sensible policy response to the natural process of climate change is prudent and cost-effective adaptation."

Truth-a self lecture

2011-06-17T11:48:00.000+10:00

I like this:
"Perception will not be our driver,because reality ultimately takes over from perception and it's reality we rely on in establishing our record. (Graeme Samuel in discussing his time as Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 12.06.11.)

I believe we should constantly seek after our perception of the truth, uninfluenced by whatever the conventional wisdom may be. In pursuing a point, don't get angry or rude,but just keep hammering away at what you believe to be true. Sir Gustav Nossal talks of "sweet reason".

Beware of being dogmatic and remember the saying (attributed to J.M. Keynes)- "When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do, sir?"

Live Cattle Exports

2011-06-13T13:09:00.001+10:00

I am deeply concerned at the turmoil caused in Northern Australia by the suspension of the live cattle trade to Indonesia.

Nobody would condone the animal cruelty witnessed in the Four Corners programme. And nobody would contend that what we witnessed was representative of the whole Indonesian abattoir scene. The cruelty must be stopped, but to do that by suspending the entire export trade is surely using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and creating more problems than it solves.

What we are now witnessing is a Government reacting to an extreme television expose stirred up by animal liberation extremists, with apparently no understanding or real concern for the massive impact upon northern Australian beef producers,Indonesian farmers and all of the ancillary services which support Northern Australia's major agricultural industry, at the height of their selling season.

Industry experts, many of whom have visited Indonesian abattoirs, say that they have never witnessed such cruelty. Whilst any cruelty is unacceptable,there is no doubt the Four Corners producers dug deep and hard to find footage to meet their chosen angle.

Industry experts also say that it would be a relatively simple matter to immediately make export sales conditional upon ultimate slaughter in Australian approved abattoirs only. The Indonesian President has personally advocated this solution.

Most of the Australian public would not know of how exports of weaner cattle to Indonesia have in recent years dominated the beef industry in our North. Station programmes,transport (road and shipping), marshalling yards,feed production etc. all represent significant investment and employment to service this trade. At the Indonesian end,local investment in feedlots, abattoirs and small farmer production of feed for the feedlots, all represent very important economic activity and employment for a developing country.

If our Government has any real concern for human and animal welfare, rather than pandering to noisy extremists,it would immediately move to resolve this matter now,not in six months time.

(This post, minus the fourth and fifth paragraphs, was published as a letter in The Australian on 14th June.)

The Barrages and the Lower Lakes

2011-06-08T11:22:00.000+10:00

The linked article,published in The Australian on 7th June should be compulsory reading for all those interested in the management of the Murray Darling Basin.
I wrote the following letter to the Editor in support, which at this point has not been published:
Congratulations to Johnny Kahlbetzer for so succinctly explaining (‘Free-Flowing Estuary Vital to Healthy River System-The Australian 7th June) the mis-treatment of the Lower Lakes at the mouth of the Murray River. For far too long the South Australian's have been playing the "end of the river victim's card" and this has diverted attention from the unnatural state of Lakes Albert and Alexandrina and has focused attention on upstream diversions rather than the root cause of downstream barriers blocking out the Southern Ocean. It is extraordinary that this situation and the enormous losses of fresh water to evaporation, did not rate a single mention in the much criticised Guide to the Murray Darling Basin Plan.

Murray Darling Basin Debating Terms

2011-05-28T10:34:00.001+10:00

Those of us who care about Australia's future (sustainable) productive capacity,must beware of being lulled into a "negotiating stance". If we believe, as I do, that talking about reduced extractions in terms of absolute numbers which relate to the maximum (100% allocation) figures applicable to Licenses, (7000 or 4,000 or 2,800 GL) is meaningless, then we should refuse to debate/discuss in those terms.

Even high security licenses require allocations. It always seems to me that if less water is to be extracted, it is the seasonal allocations which should be addressed not the licenses on issue. One view is that if allocations are more generous (when there is adequate water) as a consequence of there being fewer licenses in operation, then nothing is saved. Almost no one seems to accept that buying licenses in, say, drought times when allocations are nil, is buying phantom water. The Bureau of Stats. figures for extractions in the MDB show clearly how extractions drop in drought years when allocations are constrained.

We should constantly make the point that in a highly variable water flow situation these numbers are meaningless and are irrelevant to actual extractions and their environmental impact. By way of example, another 10,000GL extracted this year would have had bugger-all impact and would have been flood mitigation positive. In one of the recent drought years it would have been intolerable.

One needs to constantly go back to the objective. Healthy rivers and wetlands (which includes being occasionally impacted by our irregular, but much too frequent droughts); responsibly high levels of production as we meet our moral obligation to provide food (and fibre) for a hungry world; etc.

Water

2011-05-27T22:12:00.000+10:00

The linked article is one of the very best I have read. I commend it to you.

Today The World Has Gone Mad!

2011-05-23T11:09:00.006+10:00

Get Up on the Murray Darling Basin-

"The Murray Darling Basin has been sucked dry by decades of over extraction. Despite recent rain and floods the Murray Darling Basin is on the brink of ecosystem collapse. Already over 90% of the floodplain wetlands have been destroyed along with native fish and bird populations."

That is total rubbish.In the last ten days I have travelled extensively in the Basin, including along the Darling,Macquarie and Lachlan Rivers and can report the MDB has never been in better shape!

Climate Commission On Global Warming-

"ONE of Julia Gillard's top climate advisers says climate change denial is a luxury the world can no longer afford, declaring the decisions Australian politicians make now will affect future generations."

Apparently, Australia's 1.3% component of the 3% (that is .000039%) human induced contribution to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will make the difference!

Really, do these alarmists think we are all stupid!

High Praise For Murray Darling Water Management

2011-05-06T22:36:00.000+10:00

A leading world authority on water has lavished praise on Australia's water management during the Millenium Drought which has now broken so spectacularly.

Harvard Professor John Briscoe is a former Senior Water Advisor at the World Bank and was called in as an advisor to the Murray Darling Basin Authority in the preparation of the controversial Murray Darling Basin Plan. He has now made an invited submission to the Senate's Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.

In commenting on Australia's inland water management during the drought he states "Over the last 10 years Australia did something which no other country could conceivably have managed – in a large irrigated agricultural economy (the Murray Darling Basin) a 70% reduction in water availability had very little aggregate economic impact. Before the buts and the buts and the buts, this extraordinary achievement is, in my view, the single most important water fact of the 21st century, because it shows that it is possible (with ingenuity and investment) to adapt to rapid climate change and associated water scarcity". He goes on to say "how dramatically this perspective is different from the political and public perception, which is largely that “we have done a terrible job”. High praise indeed.

Professor Briscoe goes on to quote Malcolm Turnbull saying “our water management has been extraordinarily ill informed in years past” and the Murray Darling Basin Plan saying “over the past few decades….the focus has swung to looking at economics …and the role of the environment has been overlooked.” He finds these two comments to be "(a) extraordinarily widespread and (b) extraordinarily erroneous." He adds "What is obvious to me is that the overwhelming factor behind the dismal situation in the MD Basin was the dramatic reduction in rainfall and even larger reduction in river flows. It is equally clear to me that the institutional response (of the Murray Darling Basin Commission,the basin states, and farmers) was extraordinarily innovative and – within the bounds set by nature – effective. Not only for the economy but, as shown by the National Water Commission,for ameliorating the environmental damage of the terrible drought."

In his submission Professor Briscoe analysis the impact of the Commonwealth Government using international environmental treaties to gain power over the States and how this had prevented the Water Act gaining a proper balance between environmental and socio-economic factors.

He concludes his submission with the following statement:
"My conclusion is stark. I believe that the Water Act of 2007 was founded on a political
deception and that that original sin is responsible for most of the detour on which Australian
water management now finds itself. I am well aware that unpredictability is an enemy and that there are large environmental, social and economic costs of uncertainty. But I also believe that
Australian cannot find its way in water management if this Act is the guide. I would urge the
Government to start again, to re-define principles, to engage all who have a stake in this vital
issue, and to produce, as rapidly as possible, a new Act which can serve Australia for generations to come. And which can put Australia back in a world leadership position in modern water management."

We would do well to take careful note and act on these objective comments from a knowledgeable analyst untainted by Australian domestic politics.

Murray Darling Basin-The Lower Lakes and The Barrages

2011-04-18T10:01:00.001+10:00

Jennifer Marohasy recently debated a representative of the Australian Conservation Foundation on the Murray Darling Basin Plan. Here are the notes of what she said.

Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)

2011-04-05T10:03:00.000+10:00

This paper by the highly regarded Don Aitken is probably, in my ever humble opinion, the best balanced commentary on this issue that I have read. I commend it to all for quiet, contemplative reading.

Garnaud and Climate Change

2011-03-25T09:54:00.000+11:00

What a clear, crisp communication. Factual and unemotional-

Need for review of Garnaut policies (Letter published in AFR, 25 March)

You report that, in an address to the National Press Club, Blue Scope Chairman Graham Kraehe accused Ross Garnaut of using “very selective, highly misleading” figures (“Bluescope fires salvo at Garnaut”, March 23).

Kraehe was, in fact, being generous to Garnaut’s latest “updates”, which are replete with incorrect or misleading data and analyses.

In his “key points” on the science of climate change, Garnaut claims that “the statistically significant warming trend has been confirmed by observations over recent years”. It is widely accepted that this is not the case and careful statistical analysis shows no significant change since 2001.

Garnaut also claims that “the rate of sea level rise has accelerated and is tracking above the range suggested by the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]”. Again, this is not the case. Satellite measurements show the average sea level has risen at 2.2 mm a year since 2002, which if continued would produce a rise of only 22cms by 2100. This would be well within the range of 19-59cms projected by the IPCC and would result in minimal inundations.

Garnaut also grossly exaggerates the extent of scientific support for the dangerous warming thesis. For example, in a recent letter to the US Congress 74 scientists drew attention to 678 peer-reviewed scientific studies providing a point-by-point rebuttal of that thesis.

If it is to be responsible the government must carefully review the Garnaut expositions before starting additional emissions policies.

Des Moore
Director, Institute for Private Enterprise
South Yarra Vic

Indigenous Employment in the Murray Darling Basin

2011-03-24T11:00:00.001+11:00

The linked well expressed submission by the NSW Aboriginal Land Council strikes a chord. My mind was focussed on this issue during my time as Chairman of the Darling Matilda Way Sustainable Region Advisory Council. The central conclusion I came to was the need for economically sustainable job opportunities in those river towns with significant aboriginal populations. The cotton industry's aboriginal employment initiative was a great example of what can be achieved.

The major impediment was identifying those industries that were economically sustainable in what are mostly remote areas. Almost by definition, irrigation in "river towns" is a stand out and this aspect needs to be given full weighting in consideration of the socio-economic impact of the proposed water reforms.

Harvard Professor John Briscoe on Murray Darling Basin Plan

2011-03-18T10:09:00.004+11:00

This submisssion to the Barnaby Joyce inspired inquiry by Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, is in my opinion one of the best things I have read on this subject. A clear, objective view, from an expert not caught up in local politics. I commend it to all. It puts the Craig Knowles interview (see previous post),in perspective. Some of my water expert friends have told me(nicely),that my enthusiasm in that regard was naive!

MDBA New Chairman

2011-03-16T16:55:00.001+11:00

This interview with Craig Knowles is encouraging. Early days, but here's hoping!

Farmer's Water Allocations

2011-03-11T08:59:00.002+11:00

All licenses/entitlements in the Murray Darling Basin are subject to seasonal allocations, or on the "unregulated" rivers, the attainment of minimal river heights. I believe it was the late Professor Peter Cullen who made the statement that "in a dry country like Australia we shouldn't be growing thirsty crops like rice and cotton". Both Australian industries lead the world in their use of science and technology. By every measure they lead their respective world "competitors"-yields, water use efficiency, etc..

The Peter Cullen statement was "parroted" by the "chattering classes" over their chardonnays in Paddington. Cullen was subsequently convinced by the likes of fellow Water Commissioner Peter Corish, that annual crops like rice and cotton are in fact ideal for our highly variable rainfall and river flows. No or little water, no crop. He recanted before he died and withdrew the comment, but the chattering classes never caught up and the statement is still frequently quoted.

Likewise I still hear references to "rights to permanently extract water which need to be withdrawn". There are no such things! For some reason people seem to resist thinking about it sequentially. It rains or it doesn't. Dams fill or they don't and water is allocated or it is not. The defined requirments of the environment, critical human needs and stock and domestic needs are all given priority before allocations for irrigation are granted. This process is all set out in the much debated Water Sharing Plans applicable to each river. And this is why it is just plain wrong to blame extractions for irrigation for low water flows. The simple cause of low river flows is lack of natural run-off! Dorothea Mackellar understood this so well,hence "droughts and flooding rains". See Clive James wonderful essay.

Climate Change and Water Conservation From Clive James

2011-03-07T11:11:00.012+11:00

For someone who for decades has been 'dining out' on "Droughts and flooding rains", (and not much in the middle) in trying to explain the massive variability of Australia's climate and inland water flows and the need for conservation, it is deeply satisfying to read Clive James' wonderful article. I commend it to all.

MD Basin Plan

2011-03-06T21:50:00.001+11:00

Spot-on!
Axe Murray-Darling plan and start again: US expert
Peter Ker
March 5, 2011
AUSTRALIA'S performance on reforming the Murray-Darling Basin has been savaged by one of the world's top water experts, who says the process is flawed by political deception and opportunism.

Harvard University professor John Briscoe - a former senior water adviser for the World Bank - has urged Australia to dump the work done on the plan and start again with a new act of parliament.

His comments follow months of controversy over whether the Water Act of 2007 had forced the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to prepare a reform plan that favoured the environment over social and economic concerns.

Advertisement: Story continues below
In a statement to a Senate inquiry, Professor Briscoe said there was no doubt the Water Act gave priority to the environment, and claims to the contrary were ''poppycock''.

Despite living abroad, Professor Briscoe is well acquainted with the basin plan as he was hired by the authority to participate as a foreign expert, and was asked to review the basin plan before it was released publicly in October.

The Water Act was created by Liberal MP Malcolm Turnbull during the Howard government, and Professor Briscoe said the environment was given legal primacy in an act of political opportunism because it was one of the few ways the Commonwealth could constitutionally take control of water from the states.

''That original sin is responsible for most of the detour on which Australian water management now finds itself,'' he said. ''Australia cannot find its way in water management if this act is the guide.''

Professor Briscoe said his involvement with the basin plan was dogged by the most ''elaborate confidentiality'' measures he had ever seen, and he had urged authority chief executive Rob Freeman and former chairman Mike Taylor to tell the Labor government that the Water Act ''would not and could not work''.

''We were given to believe that there was no appetite for such a message at higher levels in the government in Canberra,'' he said.

The Gillard government has resisted calls to replace the Water Act in recent months, and has declared - unlike most observers - that the act is designed to treat environmental, social and economic factors equally.

Putting himself further at odds with the government, Professor Briscoe took a dim view of plans to spend taxpayers' money on the modernisation of irrigation infrastructure.

''This is a very expensive way to save water and many of the investments will be made in areas that will, sooner or later, go out of production,'' he said.

In a further blow to the authority's credibility, leading scientists have accused it of misusing their work in creating the basin plan.

The CSIRO cited several instances where its work was wrongly applied, including one occasion relating to illegal interception of water. ''CSIRO has some concerns with how the authority has interpreted or applied this work in the development of key aspects of the basin plan,'' it said.

The CSIRO asked the basin authority to correct certain references to CSIRO work in the final version of the plan.

Climate Change (Note not "Global Warming" as its effectively non-existent)

2011-03-05T10:26:00.002+11:00

I can't vouch for the precise accuracy of the following, but the general perspective would be correct.
ETS tax for dummies
Let's put this into a bit of perspective for laymen!
ETS is another tax. It is equal to putting up the GST to 12.5% which would be unacceptable and produce an outcry.
Read the following analogy and you will realize the insignificance of carbon dioxide as a weather controller.
Pass on to all in your address book including politicians and may be they will listen to their constituents, rather than vested interests which stand to gain by the ETS.
Here's a practical way to understand Julia Gillard Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
Imagine 1 kilometre of atmosphere and we want to get rid of the carbon pollution in it created by human activity. Let's go for a walk along it.
The first 770 metres are Nitrogen.
The next 210 metres are Oxygen.
That's 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go.
The next 10 metres are water vapour. 10 metres left.
9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre.
A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre.
The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre - that's carbon dioxide. A bit over one foot.
97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural.
Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. Just over a centimetre - about half an inch.
That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere.
And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre.
Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre!
As a hair is to a kilometre - so is Australia 's contribution to what Julia Gillard calls Carbon Pollution.
Imagine Brisbane 's new Gateway Bridge , ready to be opened by Julia Gillard. It's been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Julia Gillard says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted - there's a human hair on the roadway. We'd laugh ourselves silly.
There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about.
It's hard to imagine that Australia's contribution to carbon dioxide in the world's atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And I can't believe that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair away.
Pass this on quickly while the ETS is being debated in Federal Parliament.

MD Basin-Eucumbene

2011-03-05T09:37:00.000+11:00

Letter published in The Land on 24th February-
"Max Talbot, Cooma makes an excellent point in his letter (Look outside basin-The Land, February,10). At 4,800 gigalitres, Eucumbene Dam is the largest single dam feeding the Murray Darling Basin (MDB). It is essential that its operation, and the operation of the other Snowy storages, be fully integrated in any comprehensive plan for optimising long term benefits from water management in the MDB.

It is quite extraordinary that for Eucumbene, the most important dam in the entire system, information on the amount of water in storage and releases, is not readily available. Does somebody have a vested interest in not having an informed market?
David Boyd"

I have followed up with the following-
"Each week you faithfully publish Dam Levels for all the major dams storing water for use in the Murray Darling Basin-with the notable exception of the biggest one of all-Eucumbene. Can you not get the information? If so, do you know why? Can this be corrected?"

Murray Darling Basin Plan-New Broom

2011-01-31T14:34:00.000+11:00

I sent the attached letter (so far unpublished) to The Australian on Saturday:-
Would someone please explain to Minister Burke and new MDBA Chairman Craig Knowles that:
1)the Murray Darling Basin was not suffering from "ill-health", but the natural results of extreme dryness,
2)these dry symptoms have, in recent months, been dramatically cured by Mother Nature,
3)the extreme variability of our inland rivers is dealt with by issuing irrigation licenses which are subject to seasonal allocations, when water is short allocations are minimal or non-existent,
4)buying back licenses when there are no allocations is buying "phantom water", activation of licenses , at times of plentiful water, could amount to flood mitigation,
5)if there truly is a problem of "over-allocation" when water is scarce, then it is the Water Sharing Plans that guide the allocations which should be reviewed,not the number of licenses on issue.

David Boyd

Global Warming-Motives of Alarmists

2011-01-28T16:38:00.002+11:00

The following is a quote from James Delingpole's blog. It struck me as a good summary.He is describing ideological differences with a "friend".

"The biggest of those ideological differences has to do with Anthropogenic Global Warming.In a nutshell, I think it has been greatly exaggerated by a number of special interest groups with an axe to grind:scientists in pursuit of the trillions of dollars worth of funding; eco-charities who depend for their donations on scare stories; leftists using environmentalism to further an anti-capitalist agenda; deep greens who believe man is a blot on the landscape and that he should be punished through tax and regulation; governments and NGOs who see it as a way of raising taxes, increasing control, and being seen to be addressing popular concerns;cynical corporations who wish to “greenwash” their image or make easy money through taxpayer funded scams like wind farms;and so on."

Conservatism and Inland Water Management

2011-01-22T12:07:00.000+11:00

I think it was John Howard who once described a conservative as someone who did not believe that everything his grandfather said was necessarily wrong!

Nobody could accuse present day water managers (bureaucrats and attention seeking scientific advocates)of being conservative. They appear to approach current issues from the clear position that their forebears didn't really have a clue about what they were doing.

So much so, we now have a widespread "conventional wisdom" view that in the Murray Darling Basin (MDB) our rivers are all "over allocated" and that this has given rise to their "ill-health".(They conveniently overlook the fact that the "ill-health" was really the natural result of extreme dryness which Mother Nature has dramatically corrected over recent days.)

The much maligned forebears of these modern "dark green" commentators recognised the massive variability of the inland rivers of temperate Australia and devised a dynamic, adaptive, self correcting management system. Water licenses/entitlements were issued subject to seasonal allocations. Think of it sequentially-it rains, or it doesn't. Our dams have plenty in storage or they don't. Our water managers then, guided by long debated Water Management Plans, determine the percentage (if any) of the licensed amount which may be extracted.

This methodology allows account to be taken of environmental and critical human needs before any extractions for irrigation are allowed. It means that in a year when water is in short supply such as in 2008/9 only 3,500GL were extracted in the MDB, not the 13,700GL upper limit which the Guide to the Murray Darling Basin Plan keeps referring to.

Farmers understand the system and its logic and accept the risks involved. They also recognise the smoke screen of politicians talking about granting certainty. A concept totally foreign to Australian farming!

Likewise, they recognise the nonsense of asking the CSIRO to calculate the Sustainable Diversion Limits for each of the rivers. If "sustainable" means the "annual" amount that can always be extracted, then given the fact that all of our inland rivers,including the mighty Murray, sometimes actually stop flowing, then the limit must be placed at nil.

Faced with these variability issues the modern water managers then revert to using averages. Given the massive spreads around the average such mathematics quickly becomes meaningless.

All of this was well understood by those who devised the system. It is clearly not understood by those who glibly state that our rivers are over-allocated and advocate correcting the perceived problem by having the Government buy up water licenses without ever mentioning the role of seasonal allocations.

Oh for more conservatives!

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2011-01-14T07:37:00.003+11:00

Letter published in "The Land" of 13th January:-
Your article ("Floods won't stem Basin reform" The Land January 6) attributes remarks to the MDBA CEO, Rob Freeman, where he claims the existing planning systems allocate too much water during dry periods. If this is so, which I doubt, it is the Water Sharing Plans which guide seasonal allocations, that should be addressed not the total licenses/entitlements on issue. This is not the first time Mr Freeman has made this ambit claim.

In my view the entire Plan and the Water Act are based on two false premises and a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of our inland rivers in temperate Australia.

The first false premise is the belief that our rivers are "unhealthy". We have confused lack of health with the natural results of extreme dryness, a condition which has been dramatically corrected by Mother Nature in recent months.

The second false premise is that this "unhealthy condition" was the result of excessive extractions by irrigators.

Nowhere in the Plan Guide does it acknowledge that in the last two years for which we have figures available, total extractions were only 3,500GL in 2008/9 and only 3,000GL in 2007/8.

In other words, the allocations governed by the water sharing plans for each major river, would seem to be working well and this self-correcting mechanism is doing just what it was designed to do.

The Plan Guide constantly refers to the total extraction limit of 13,700GL without explaining that licenses/entitlements without allocations amount to phantom water.

The fundamental misunderstanding is in not recognising that the key characteristic of Australia’s inland rivers is massive variability. The last 7 to 10 years of drought and the recent "big wet" is a classic example.

In such circumstances it is really nonsense to ask CSIRO to calculate “Sustainable Water Yield” which I take to mean the annual amount that can always be extracted. Likewise the setting of Sustainable Diversion Limits makes no sense unless these are set at zero. Irrigators understand and live with these risks and the Minister's call for certainty is really a smoke screen.

I firmly believe that the Water Act (2007) should be repealed (not fiddled with and only amended) and we should start the whole process again.

DAVID BOYD
St Ives

Dams

2011-01-08T06:28:00.005+11:00

Letter published in today's Weekend Australian:
"At last a senior politician has had the political courage to tell it like it is.("Dam them -- Abbott's solution to harness flooded rivers", 7/1). The last seven to 10 years of drought and the recent "big wet" is a classic example of Australia's natural variability.

We need to conserve water from the big wet events, when retention has minimal environmental impacts and in many cases is flood mitigation. In these circumstances a tiny proportion of the flow amounts to a lot of water.

It should be recognised that during the recent drought years, if it were not for the storages in the catchment of the Murray, the Snowy diversions and restrictions on irrigation, the Murray River would have stopped flowing as it has done several times since white settlement.

This fact demonstrates the value of dams in a country with such variable rainfall and we need more of them.

David Boyd, St Ives, NSW

The following sentence at the end of the second paragrph was omitted from the published letter-"Such storages need to be efficient (read deep for evaporation minimisation), and built in a manner which allows smaller flows to pass when there are real environmental or critical human needs downstream."

Conventional Wisdom

2010-12-29T22:51:00.000+11:00

The front page of today's Australian has no less than three clangers, all in passing.
1) Reference to "carbon pollution"!! Carbon pollution? What the hell is that? I thought carbon was an essential part of life?
2) Reference to the "ailing Murray Darling Basin". Perhaps they mean "ailing" from excessive water flows!
3) "Ailing" from "excessive farmer allocations". Allocations in the last two drought constrained years for which figures are available were only 3,500GLs and 3,000GLs respectively, not the 13,700GLs that the Plan keeps referring to and which it wants to reduce by only 3/4,000GLs.

What a strange world!

Climate Change

2010-12-21T16:08:00.002+11:00

A quote from Joanne Nova in an article in last Saturday's Weekend Australian
"The swelling ranks of sceptical scientists is now the largest whistle-blowing cohort in science ever seen. It includes some of the brightest: two with Nobel prizes in physics, four NASA
astronauts, 9000 PhDs in science, and another 20,000 science graduates to cap it off. A recent US Senate minority report contained 1000 names of eminent scientists who are sceptical, and the term professor pops up more than 500 times in that list."

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2010-12-18T13:52:00.001+11:00

The market researchers/analysts tell me that you wont win a "counter-intuitive" argument. Because people have been conditioned by repetitive claims of a particular point of view, to forthrightly state the opposite is likely to be dismissed out of hand. So they advise coming at the issue in a more subtle or different way. Sorry,but I am just not built that way! I like to think that I seek after truth and get emotionally upset when I see claims that I regard as untruthful. I do understand that there are deep philosophical arguments about what is truth, but let's keep it simple.

The debate about our inland rivers is a good example. It seems to me that the (conditioned) starting point for most commentators is that it is taken as a given that "our rivers are unhealthy and that this is due to taking too much water out of them". The MDB Plan certainly starts from that accepted position. I think that both the lack of health and the excessive extraction claims, are untrue. (And this is where your counter-intuition is triggered and I've lost you!) But, please read on.

It is a fact that the Murray Darling Basin has never been more sustainably productive. Yes, it has always been subject to huge variability, and there is no better example than the last ten years of record low rain (and run-off) and now massive floods. We must stop claiming that the natural results of dryness amount to river “ill health” and blaming that on extractions, when low availability has meant very low allocations/extractions (if any). Our forebears did a much better job than they are being given credit for.

A significant exception is the acid sulphate soils of the Lower Lakes. Not allowing salt water in, as happened naturally in dry times, has been a gross error and the evaporation losses of fresh water are indefensible. Certainly we can manage the system better, but let’s concentrate on making the cake bigger and stop all of this self flagellation and accept the dominance of Nature. Examine the numbers!

The MDB Plan keeps talking about the upper limit for extractions of 13,700GL. It never mentions that total extractions in 2008/9 (the most recent years for which figures are available) were only 3,500GL. In other words, the allocations governed by the water sharing plans for each major river, would seem to be working well and this self-correcting mechanism is doing just what it was designed to do. Focusing on reducing water licenses/entitlements and ignoring allocations really makes no sense. Likewise the oft repeated statement that "our rivers are over-allocated" most commonly reveals a lack of understanding of just how the system works.

Murray Darling Basin Plan-Malcolm Turnbull

2010-12-18T12:53:00.003+11:00

I follow Malcolm Turnbull on Twitter. Why? Because I have found him intelligent and interesting. When he was John Howard's Parliamentary Secretary for Water we had him out to Bourke to discuss irrigation issues and I was very impressed how quickly he got his mind around them. I was surprised by his commitment to the ETS and to global warming in general,but was inclined to write it off as the ex-merchant bankers enthusiasm for another trading instrument.
So when his Tweet alerted me to his written declaration on the MDB Plan I quickly looked it up. My reaction is best summarised in my two comments on his website:
David Boyd says:
December 12, 2010 at 9:33 pm
Malcolm,
You can do better than serve up some of this conventional wisdom! Have a look at the ABS statistics of actual diversions compared with the meaningless averages referred to in the Plan. The water sharing plans appear to be working rather well. Get your mind around the sheer quantum of the current flows. The last decade of drought and now these massive floods, highlight the natural variability of the Basin. We need more conservation (read dams), which in current circumstances would amount to holding back a miniscule percentage of the flow. We need to be careful not to confuse the natural results of dryness with bad river health. Where is this “ill health” today?? Nature is all powerful!
and
David Boyd says:
December 13, 2010 at 4:48 am
Malcolm said ” at the core of so many of our problems is trying to europeanise our australian landscape and hydrology.”
Wow! That is classic dark green dogma. He has come out of the closet and revealed himself as an ideological dark greenie! What an insulting comment to all of those world class Australian agricultural scientists who have led the world in sustainable, arid land agriculture. It is a fact that the Murray Darling Basin has never been more sustainably productive. Yes, it has always been subject to huge variability, and there is no better example than the last ten years of record low rain (and run-off) and now massive floods. We must stop claiming that the natural results of dryness amount to river “ill health” and blaming that on extractions, when low availability has meant very low allocations/extractions (if any). Our forebears did a much better job than they are being given credit for. A significant exception is the acid sulphate soils of the Lower Lakes. Not allowing salt water in, as happened naturally in dry times, has been a gross error and the evaporation losses of fresh water are indefensible. Certainly we can manage the system better, but let ’s concentrate on making the cake bigger and stop all of this self flagellation and accept the dominance of Nature. Examine the numbers!

Cheer Up!

2010-12-18T10:06:00.000+11:00

Extract from today's Economist magazine:-
"It may not feel like it in the West, but this is, in many ways, the best of times. Hundreds of millions are climbing out of poverty. The internet gives ordinary people access to information that even the most privileged scholar could not have dreamed of a few years ago. Medical advances are conquering diseases and extending lifespans. For most of human history, only a privileged few have reasonably been able to hope that the future would be better than the present. Today the masses everywhere can. That is surely reason to be optimistic."
Happy Christmas.

The World Has Been Cooling for 15 Years

2010-12-08T10:34:00.010+11:00

The following is an extract from the UK Daily Mail:-
"But buried amid the details of those two Met Office statements 12 months apart lies a remarkable climbdown that has huge implications - not just for the Met Office, but for debate
over climate change as a whole.Read carefully with other official data, they conceal a truth that for some, to paraphrase former US VicePresident Al Gore, is really inconvenient: for the past 15 years, global warming has stopped.

This isn't meant to be happening. Climate science orthodoxy, as promulgated by bodies such as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU), says that temperatures have risen and will continue to rise in step with increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, and make no mistake, with the rapid industrialisation of China and India, CO2 levels have kept on going up.

According to the IPCC and its computer models, without enormous emission cuts the world is set to get between two and six degrees warmer during the 21st Century, with catastrophic consequences.

Last week at Cancun, in an attempt to influence richer countries to agree to give £20billion immediately to poorer ones to offset the results of warming, the US-based International Food Policy Research Institute warned that global temperatures would be 6.5 degrees higher by 2100, leading to rocketing food prices and a decline in production.

Even Phil Jones, the CRU director at the centre of last year's 'Climategate' leaked email scandal, was forced to admit in a little noticed BBC online interview that there has been 'no
statistically significant warming' since 1995.

One of those leaked emails, dated October 2009, was from Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the US government's National Centre for Atmospheric Research and the IPCC's lead author on climate change science in its monumental 2002 and 2007 reports. He wrote: 'The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can't.'

After the leak, Trenberth claimed he still believed the world was warming because of CO2,and that the 'travesty' was not the 'pause' but science's failure to explain it.

The question now emerging for climate scientists and policymakers alike is very simple. Just how long does a pause have to be before the thesis that the world is getting hotter because of human activity starts to collapse?"

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2010-12-08T09:56:00.000+11:00

In a great article in the SMH on 4th December, Paul Myers wrote (extract):-
"Despite recent claims to the contrary, the authority had, at best, a vague responsibility to consider the economic and social impacts of its recommendations. Its priorities, put in place by Malcolm Turnbull as water minister, were environmental.

So it was little wonder that when, in early October, the authority suggested 27 to 37 per cent cuts in irrigation water entitlements - all for the environment - there was such a savage response. Previous cuts in groundwater use and surface irrigation in the past several years had already bitten hard.

Coupled with severely reduced allocations during the drought, it has slashed basin irrigation water use well below the authority's new recommended cap: to just 3492 gigalitres in 2008-09. It was 3141 gigalitres in 2007-08 and 4458 gigalitres in 2006-07.

This seems to prove that the current, much-maligned allocation system - whereby state water authorities decide how much of a licensee's entitlement can be used - is an effective self-correcting mechanism. This, however, is not the public perception, nor does it hold water with the authority, environmentalists, scientists and the former water minister, Wong, all of whom have been determined to slash irrigation entitlements."

Why are the MDBA,the scientists,environmentalists and politicians so set on this misguided path??

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2010-11-30T20:46:00.001+11:00

Letter Published in "The Land" of 25h November,2010

I think we can all agree with Tony Windsor (Letters, 18th November) that "we have a problem". But, I'm not sure we would agree on what the problem actually is. As I and many others see it, the problem is the dominance of dark green ideology, and classifying the natural results of an extreme dry period (and mis-management of the Lower Lakes), as river ill-health. First, let's scientifically examine the symptoms one by one and see if the rivers really are "unhealthy" or simply water deprived. Second, let us examine the hard numbers, (not the loose meaningless averages thrown around by the MDBA), for run-off, river flows and extractions, to determine whether these low river flows are really the result of excessive extractions.

The MDBA quote the annual average surface water extraction limit at 13,700 GL. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics the total extractions for the last three years all added together are only 11,092 GL and for 2008/09 alone, only 3,492 GL. The seasonal allocation system would appear to be working well!

Tony Windsor is in a wonderful position to help get some truth and common sense into the debate. There is no better place to start than correctly defining the problem.
David Boyd

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2010-11-08T22:57:00.000+11:00

In my view the key characteristic of inland Australia is its massive rainfall variability. It really is a nonsense to talk about averages for flows, extractions etc. when there is such a huge spread around the average. According to the ABS, actual total extractions in the whole Basin were 3,142GL in 07/08 and 3,492GL in 08/09. In other words about the same as the 3/4000 GL they want to claw back! These figures compare with the average surface extractions of 13,700GL which they keep talking about.

The three conclusions I take from this are 1) We should be focusing on the highly variable Allocations not Licenses/Entitlements. 2)The seasonal allocation methodolgy seems to be working well-bugger all water/bugger all allocations. 3) It is a nonsense to talk in terms of absolute numbers in something which has such massive variability.

Murray Darling Basin

2010-10-27T14:52:00.016+11:00

There is a very widely held view that we need to "restore the health of our rivers". This statement assumes that they are unhealthy, which might well be the case. However, we have just been through nearly a decade of the lowest rainfall/run-off that has ever been recorded.

Whilst this is extreme, under natural conditions it was not unusual for Australia to have very dry periods and for all of our inland rivers to periodically stop flowing altogether. So we need to be careful that the results of natural dryness are not being branded as "unhealthy". Likewise given this enormous natural variability we need to define just what we actually mean by the term "sustainability". The question asked of CSIRO to determine the "Sustainable Diversion Limits" of our rivers, seems to me to be a question which fails to recognise this variability. If "sustainable"in this sense means "annual" then the answer for even the Murray must be "nil"! We need to be very careful of using average statistics when the spread around the average is so enormous.

I believe we need to closely examine the "unhealthy" notion. What are the specific factors that indicate this apparent lack of health-acid sulphate soils, salinity, blue green algae, river red gum depletion, fish stock depletion, the ravages of carp- seem to me to be the main claims. We need to examine the truth and cause of each of these compared with natural conditions, before we leap to the conclusion that we need to extract less water. Particularly since extractions have been minimal in recent years. Perhaps throwing more water at the issue is not the solution?

Murray Darling Basin Plan

2010-10-26T17:45:00.004+11:00

Preamble
As I listen with interest to the media debate and the reporting of the meetings with irrigators, I am increasingly alarmed at misunderstandings and perhaps deliberate falsehoods. I am provoked to write the following because I am passionate about building an ever stronger Australia with a strong, sustainable agricultural sector. I take two things as a given. First, farmers above all others have a vested interest in not debasing the physical assets (environment) on which their long term future depends. Those who fail to do this inevitably fail economically and successful farmers repair the damage. Australian land is renowned for its recuperative capacity. Second, in a global context, Australia has a moral responsibility to maximise its food and fibre production, always providing this can be done sustainably.

More specifically, we need to recognise that the most significant feature of Australia's weather is massive variability. All of our Murray Darling Basin rivers on occasions stop flowing, entirely as a consequence of lack of rain. As Henry Lawson wrote, "they can be either muddy gutters or second Mississippi's". The "big wets" are surprisingly frequent, but totally irregular. It has been forever thus.

We also need to bear in mind that water is dynamic. It doesn't hang around and wait to be used. It either runs to the sea or to some wonderful inland wetlands, evaporates, or is used to grow things. There is no shortage of water in the world and Nature has given us a wonderful recycling system whereby salt water is continually converted to fresh water. There is, however, in many countries a limited supply of fresh water and in Australia in particular, we need to conserve water from the big wet events to even out the abovementioned variability. I see evaporation of fresh water as very wasteful. Some 70% of the Earth's surface is covered by (salty) oceans-plenty of water for cloud formation.

Where you have massive variability it seems to me to make little sense to debate using absolute numbers in respect to the aggregate level of desirable extraction limits or in stating flows. Averages can be very misleading. When absolute statistics are used they need to be be related to the highly variable flows.

The Plan
The Plan effectively blames extractions ("over allocated") for the extremely low river flows of recent years. Farmers are being blamed for the drought. No wonder they are upset.

The Prime Minister has said "we cannot go on as we are". The Opposition Leader has said that "we are taking too much water out of our rivers". I do not accept these statements and believe they reveal a lack of understanding of how our system of managing irrigation actually works.

The two key terms are "Licenses/Entitlements" on the one hand and "Allocations" on the other. They are constantly confused in the current debate.

State Governments have issued "Licenses/Entitlements" to farmers, but the usage of these has to be triggered by the granting of "Allocations". Allocations are granted seasonally by Governments in accordance with available water. This is how variability is dealt with. When water is short, allocations are low or non-existent.

The Governments action in granting, or not granting, allocations is governed by a "water sharing plan" for each irrigation river in the basin. These water sharing plans take account of water availability, environmental, livestock and domestic needs before irrigation extractions are allowed. Whilst water sharing plans are hotly debated by people pushing the various competitive needs, it is a most sensible and effective approach.

However, of recent times there has simply not been enough water to go around and quite correctly it is irrigation extractions which have been severely constrained. Few realise that if it were not for the headwater storages, the Snowy Scheme diversions and severe restrictions on irrigation extractions, the Murray River would have actually stopped flowing altogether, as it has done under very dry conditions several times in recorded history. Through this drought we were able to keep it flowing and to maintain at least some water in the Lower Lakes at the mouth of the river as a result of these factors.

Blame
In my time with Clyde Agriculture I had the experience of being an irrigator and a flood plain grazier. For example, the Clyde property Oxley Station downstream from Warren is the largest property in the famous Macquarie Marshes. Properties such as this receive great benefit from what graziers term "beneficial flooding". Shallow flood water acting as natural irrigation with resultant prolific growth of natural grasses. It is great cattle breeding and fattening country. When water is short the "marsh graziers" invariably blame the upstream irrigators even when they also have no water. At Bourke, Clyde is an irrigator and when water is short downstream graziers invariably blamed the irrigators for taking it, even if they had been unable to extract water for months. It seems to be a quirk of human nature to blame other people rather than accept the power of Nature to dominate us all.

The Lower Lakes
One of the main arguments put forward to demonstrate that the Murray in unhealthy is the presence of acid sulphate soils as the fresh water in Lakes Alexandrina and Albert (the Lower Lakes) dries back. In discussing the Murray Darling Basin I often say "beware the South Australians", where the "blame factor" is most apparent. If you live in the driest State in the world's second driest continent (I understand Antarctica is the driest), and you only have one major river in your state (the Murray) and you live at the end of the stream, you are going to have a "hang-up"! From the time young South Australians are in short pants they are told that those awful farmers in Queensland, NSW and Victoria "take all our water". It is not an unfamiliar story around the world. It led Mark Twain to his famous comment "whisky is for drinking and water is for fighting over"!

The facts are that the South Australians have played the "victim's card" very well over the years and in terms of water sharing appear to get the best deal of any of the States in the basin. Furthermore, largely to support a small irrigation industry, which can be catered for in other ways, they converted the Lower Lakes into a permanent, highly inefficient, fresh water storage. Under natural conditions the Lower Lakes formed the natural estuary of the Murray River and depending on river flows, were sometimes fresh and sometimes salty. (See lakesneedwater.org).

Evaporation of fresh water from these lakes is enormous and it is truly outrageous that under dry conditions, upstream users are deprived of water so as to send large quantities of fresh water down to the Lower Lakes to mostly evaporate. Under natural conditions salt water would have flowed in, but this is blocked by "The Barrages", as the series of weirs are called.

The problem of the Lower Lakes is, in my view, more a downstream problem than an upstream problem. However, the South Australians refuse to address anything other than what they term a "fresh water solution".

In dry times, before The Barrages were built,salt water has been known to come quite a long way up the main stem of the Murray.The Barrages, for much of the time, also prevent fresh water from entering the northern end of The Coorong.

The Lower Lakes will require much less fresh water if they are maintained in their natural estuarine state. In times of low flow the sea would always be able to keep water in the lakes at sea level and the problem of acid soils would be resolved.

Conclusion
From the foregoing I conclude that:-

we need to specify just what is meant by the statement that we need to "restore health" to the system. Are we not simply calling the natural results of the driest period in our relatively short records,"unhealthy"? Australia has always been subject to long periods of very dry conditions;
buying back irrigation licenses/entitlements when there are no allocations will do nothing for our rivers (this really is "phantom water") and will only constrain production when water supplies are plentiful;
if our rivers are "over allocated", and to claim this we need to specify under what flow conditions we make the claim, then it is the water sharing plans which should be addressed. There is no point in withdrawing licenses/entitlements which under flood conditions may well be a means of flood mitigation;
our forefathers did a great job of dealing with our massive run-off variability by building deep dams and diversions (Snowy) in the mountainous headwaters of our major temperate Australia river system. We need to make the cake bigger, by doing more of it;
we need to address the efficiency (read evaporation) of some of our water storages, including the Menindee Lakes. The Barrages at the mouth of the Lower Lakes should be removed and the Murray given back its estuary. The proposal to service irrigation by building a weir above the entrance to the lakes should be pursued.
the Water Act 2007 (Commonwealth) is excessively weighted towards environmental issues. It needs amendment, or at least be differently interpreted, so as to strike a proper balance.

Finally, from all of the above, one must conclude that the Murray Darling Basin Plan, as presently presented in the Guide, is deeply flawed.

David Boyd has spent over 50 years working in Australian agriculture. Prior to retirement in 2007 he was Chairman and a very "hands-on" CEO of Clyde Agriculture. Clyde was a major grazier (wool and beef), dryland grain producer (wheat) and irrigator (cotton). He has had a lifetime interest in water flows.

Water

2010-10-26T17:38:00.000+11:00

Letter sent to The Australian 24th October,2010
Your lead story-After the dry,here comes the overflow,Weekend Australian 23rd October-accurately reflects the joy of again having good flows into the Macquarie Marshes. Unfortunately the joy is spoilt by politically correct references to "government water buybacks" and an emphasis on conflict between irrigators and "marsh graziers". The reality is that over the last ten years both irrigators and graziers have both suffered as an all powerful Nature has failed to provide water for either. Now that same Nature has provided generously for both. Why are we humans so reluctant to attribute the extremes of our rainfall to factors beyond our control?
David Boyd

Murray Darling Basin

2010-10-22T08:41:00.001+11:00

Letter published in "The Land" on Thursday,21st October-
Peppercorn really hits the nail on the head with his thoughtful and sensible column 'Nature shows up flawed water plan-The Land October14",with, in particular, his comment on managing seasonal allocations rather than buying Licenses/Entitlements. The "Plan" is deeply flawed. It fails to recognise the massive variability of our river flows, the extent to which irrigation diversions have been constrained through a run of very dry years, and the appalling waste of water through evaporation from the Lower Lakes which have been closed off from the sea for some seventy years. The Plan effectively blames irrigators for the fact that our rivers have had drought induced low flows for much of the last ten years. The terms "license", "entitlement" and "allocation" are constantly confused in the metropolitan media coverage.

Few people recognise that if it were not for the headwater dams (Dartmouth and Hume in particular), the Snowy diversions and restrictions on irrigation diversions, the Murray would have stopped flowing altogether some three/four years ago. Surely this is evidence to the fact that we need to conserve more water in the big events by building more dams in appropriate places.

David Boyd,Sydney.

Irrigation

2010-10-17T17:07:00.001+11:00

Letter published in The Weekend Australian on 16th October:
In your front page today (Heated backlash Forces Murray inquiry) you categorically state that:

"The move to reduce water usage is an attempt to address the fact that states have sold irrigators licences to extract so much water from the system that not enough water is being left in the rivers to preserve the environment."

This statement is factually incorrect. No water can be extracted by irrigators holding licenses unless the use of those licenses has been triggered by the State Governments applying seasonal allocations. Allocations are only granted after assessed environmental needs have been met. The problem in much of the last ten drought years has been that there has been no water for the process to even begin. Irrigators are being blamed for Nature's failure, until recently, to send enough rain to cause run-off into our waterways. No wonder they are upset.

David Boyd,St Ives,NSW

Irrigation

2010-10-17T16:52:00.000+11:00

Letter sent to the Sydney Morning Herald on 14th. October:
"Amidst all of the verbiage and political analysis, there is one point that cannot be made too often. The entire Plan is based on the false premise that the recent dryness of our inland rivers is caused by "mis-management and over allocation". Those who understand the physical nature of our inland waterflows and the the way irrigation licenses/entitlements interact with allocations, will understand that this is not possible. Licenses/entitlements are subject to seasonal allocations. When water is short so are allocations! It really is as simple as that. It is by this method that we sensibly deal with the main characteristic of our inland rivers-their massive variability."

Irrigation

2010-10-13T21:42:00.000+11:00

Letter published in the Sydney Morning Herald on Monday 11th October-
Paul Myers cuts through all the political correctness to the facts. Our rivers flows are massively variable as a result of our notoriously variable rainfall. We have been through a ten year drought with the lowest run-off in Australia's recorded history. Recently the situation has reversed as it has always done in the past. Pity we didn't have the infrastructure in place (read dams) to conserve more. As the floods descended last month the residents of Shepparton would have been delighted to see some upstream flood mitigation in the form of greater dam capacity!
David Boyd St Ives

Irrigation

2010-10-09T07:56:00.002+11:00

Now this article from today's SMH is worth repeating. I couldn't have said it better myself!

You can't pay to save the environment if rains fail

Paul Myers

October 9, 2010

THERE is one word that will fix the water problems for which the Murray-Darling Basin Authority believes, incorrectly, it has found the solution: rain.

There is another far more contentious word that would eliminate the claimed need for irrigation water cuts and make more water available to grow food: dams.

And there is a third word that explains why water use has become such a contentious issue: perception.

These three words are the explanation and the answer to eastern and southern Australia's water problems. But don't expect a fourth word - reality - to hold sway in the final basin water plan.

The reason the Murray-Darling Basin's river systems got into strife was a decade of record-low rainfall, not farmers' water extractions. The public perception is otherwise: farmers are widely viewed as having been irresponsibly taking water while the rivers dried up; moreover, once they are stopped from pumping water, the rivers will be automatically "fixed".

How wrong can you be? Irrigators are able to access water only when river flows reach prescribed levels. Little or no water flow means no allocation, as rice and cotton producers know so well. Occasionally, even when rivers flow strongly, farmers are prevented from taking water in deference to the environment.

But has all this "saved" unallocated water made a difference? No, because the water didn't exist and there was no "extra" water to go anywhere, anyway.

A prime example is the much-vilified Cubbie Station in south-west Queensland. This year it has been able to fill its water storages and is about to plant 22,000 hectares to cotton - without a public outcry. Why? Because in a big rainfall year there is plenty of water for everyone; in dry years the water simply can't be extracted.

Quite simply, buying farmers' water entitlements won't fix a problem that the irrigation licensing system didn't create. Rivers rely entirely on run-off and controlled releases from dams. In an average year, if there is such an occasion, there is 21,000 gigalitres of run-off in the Murray-Darling Basin - almost twice the amount of water farmers are entitled (licensed) to extract when there is full allocation.

But in big rainfall years, such as 2010, a million gigalitres of rain can fall across the basin, producing far greater run-off than can be used.

In years like this, water flushes down rivers and excess quantities are held in headwater and other dams.

It is a lesson that should be heeded, because if the several billion dollars to be spent buying farmers' water entitlements was allocated to building one or more headwater dams, food production would be enhanced rather than constrained, there would be more irrigation rather than less, the environment would be protected and the public would receive a return on its investment.

If there is one villain in the water debate it is evaporation. When the water reaches the lower lakes of the Murray fully 50 per cent evaporates. This is precisely what will happen if the water plan is adopted.

Climate Change-Carbon Demonisation

2010-10-08T09:49:00.003+11:00

The science of climate change/global warming is most certainly not settled. In recent months we have had:-

the revelations of the "climategate" emails
the very balanced Review Committee of enquiry into the IPCC's alarmist reporting
the revealed gross exaggeration of the Himalayan glacier melting claims
the back-off from an extreme alarmist position by the highly respected Royal Society of the UK.

Locally (in Australia) we have had our own Productivity Commission's debunking of the alarmist nature of the Stern Report to the UK Government, chiefly through the use of widely criticised, excessively low, discount factors; and the beautifully expressed paper by David Smith explaining the essential nature and value of carbon to mankind's welfare.

Notwithstanding these developments and the fact that anything Australia does would, in any event, have negligible impact on global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, we now have the Gillard Government establishing a Committee of "true believers" to determine the best means of putting a price on carbon!

What a strange world we live in.

Banjo Paterson

2010-10-01T21:35:00.001+10:00

The Banjo is not famous for his philosophical input. However, I have long been attracted by his poem "Come-By-Chance" from which the following extract is taken-

Though we work and toil and hustle in our life of haste and bustle,

All that makes our life worth living comes unstriven for and free;

Man may weary and importune, but the fickle goddess Fortune

Deals him out his pain or pleasure careless what his worth may be.

Conservation v's Preservation

2010-09-29T09:27:00.002+10:00

I have long had problems with the "dark green" philosophy in respect to land management. I am indebted to a favourite branch of my own Church for putting some very clear words around what I have often struggled to express.

The Brisbane Diocese of the Anglican Church has commissioned a report on the Queensalnd Government's Wild Rivers Act. That report concludes that the Queensald Government has-

"mistakenly replaced sensible conservation values with harmful preservation values. In trying to keep the environment as it is now (preservation) they have compromised opportunities for development and wealth creation. They have ignored other more rational approaches which recognise the dynamic nature of the environment and the fact that with sensible management and monitoring, the land can be both protected and productive." (My emphasis).

I literally couldn't have said it better myself! This argument can be applied very widely to many situations.

Climate Change

2010-09-27T16:09:00.000+10:00

I have just been watching the Labor/Greens Coalition press conference on the Climate Change Committee. Julia Gillard talks of believing in the science of global warming, as if there was a scientific consensus. Bob Brown talks of the economic benefits of having a price on carbon as if it doesn't matter what the rest of the world does. He waxes eloquently about the great benefits to Australia of fixing our climate by reducing carbon emissions. Carbon, an essential part of life and plant growth, continues to be demonised.
These people really are in cloud cuckoo land.

Irrigation

2010-09-22T10:39:00.000+10:00

The following letter was published in today's The Australian:-

"There is water everywhere in the Murray-Darling Basin. Perhaps the answer isn't the federal government's big master plan, but rain!

David Boyd, St Ives, NSW"

The Lower Lakes

2010-09-22T10:27:00.000+10:00

This IS worth reading-http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2010/09/the-murray-a-fresh-perspective

Irrigation

2010-09-19T08:32:00.001+10:00

The Victorian floods and big rainfall in NSW, after ten years of the lowest run-off we have seen in our short recorded history, greatly assists my central argument that water shortages in our rivers were not caused by extractions. By believing the fallacy that 'we are taking too much water out of our rivers' the whole approach of our bureaucrats, dark green scientists and and politicians is deeply flawed.

I note a tone of alarm in the MDBA spokespeople of having to release their report when there is water all over the place. The MDBA CEO was saying the other day that we must not be influenced by the immediate situation of water everywhere, but need to deal with the "averages"-fair enough. He then added that our current rules don't allow for the variability. What nonsense-they do, but the recent approach doesn't. Fancy asking CSIRO to estimate 'sustainable yield' of our rivers. If 'sustainable' means 'regular' or 'every year' the only 'sustainable yield' would be NIL. Even the mighty Murray River went dry under natural low rainfall conditions before we built our major storages. It is the wrong question from people who have no appreciation of the massive variability. Our water managers of old understood the variability and have dealt with it most effectively by differentiating between Licenses/Entitlements on the one hand and Seasonal Allocations on the the other.

I once heard John Howard describe a "conservative" as someone who does not believe that everything his grandfather said was necessarily wrong! Modern water managers are certainly not conservatives. They seem to believe that the water managers of old got everything wrong. They didn't! They really understood the nature of our rivers and struck a very good balance between socio-economic and environmental needs. Perhaps they worked in an era when 'production' was given more weight than the 'environment'. But, the pendulum has certainly swung to an environmental extreme. That thinking then takes us to the fundamental "green" debate about man's place in the environment and what the right balance between conflicing objectives should be. We could be here for hours! Let's not 'go there' at the moment!

Water and Irrigation

2010-09-17T16:35:00.005+10:00

The recent flooding in Victoria and consistent rain in NSW has seen a great boost to storage levels in most of the major dams feeding the Murray Darling Basin. It is a timely reminder of the key feature of the Australian climate-massive rainfall variability. After some ten years of drought (on and off) and the lowest water run-off in our short recorded history, we are reminded just how fast things can turn around. It also reinforces how our philosophically green "water managers" have got it so wrong. I fear that we are going to see a graphic example of this when the long awaited Murray Darling Basin Plan is released on 8th. October.

How many times have we heard that our rivers have been "mismanaged and over allocated"? How many times have we heard that the problem is that "we are taking too much water out of our rivers"? When all the time the major problem has been simply lack of run-off creating rainfall.

Let's face it, water is dynamic and doesn't wait for you to use it. Rivers run to the sea, if they make it, and water in storage evaporates. Whilst we must keep a proper balance between environmental and socio-economic needs, in rugby parlance it really is a "use it or lose it" situation. Sure it would help if we could reduce evaporation from shallow storages and if we had more dams in the headwaters of our catchments. Consider that the Murray River would have stopped flowing altogether some four years ago, as it always did under very dry natural conditions, if it were not for the headwater dams (Dartmouth and Hume in particular), the Snowy diversions and restrictions on irrigation extractions. Yet we managed to keep water in the system and to our shame sent water down to the Lower Lakes, Australia's most inefficient water storage, to largely evaporate.

When are those upstream going to wake-up to the perpetual victim's attitude of most South Australians and insist that those wretched barrages at the Murray mouth are removed? They keep fresh water out of The Coorong, stop the impact of tidal pulses keeping the Murray mouth open, and deprive the Murray of a natural fresh/salt water estuary.

When are we going to clearly explain to our well meaning city cousins (we failed with Penny Wong), the difference between a Water License/Entitlement and a Water Allocation? The former without the latter really is "phantom water". The failure of the purchase of the Toorale Station water licenses to trigger any meaningful amount of additional water in 2010, is a wonderful case study demonstrating what little impact purchasing licenses, only triggered by big flows, actually has in a good flow year. Yet the negative socio-economic impact is very meaningful.

We need to explain that we deal with the variability of river flows by way of seasonal allocations-no (or limited) water-no allocation. It's that simple. If we really are "over allocating" then we should reduce allocations, but why cancel licenses which in big flows may well contribute to flood mitigation. The residents of Shepparton would have liked to have seen more extractions (and/or more storage) upstream last week and a huge amount could have been stored whilst only being a very small percentage of the total flow!

Australian Agriculture

2010-09-10T16:09:00.002+10:00

I recently wrote a paper on investment in Australian agriculture. This what I wrote:-

"Australian Agriculture Investment

Background

· To the nations considerable advantage farming and grazing production of Australia’s major bulk commodities is dominated by family farmers.
· These family farmers bid the price of land to levels where returns on funds invested are very low. In these circumstances it is extremely difficult for conventionally funded, publically listed companies to compete.
· An important element of ‘wealth creation’ comes in the form of capital gain on land and more recently water licenses.
· As the best land is tightly held, successful operators seldom realise the capital gains in cash terms, but they are nevertheless “real”.
· A key feature of Australia’s climate is massive rainfall variability.
· The major commodities most suited to Australia’s production base are dependent on very price volatile international markets.
· This volatility largely stems from supply side factors, particularly weather.
· There has recently been significant international recognition of the probability of demand increases for food and some large international players have been positioning themselves accordingly. However, there is little evidence of Australian institutions so acting.
· Given all these features of the industry, if significant capital is to be raised it needs to come from “institutions” who have a long term focus from a wealth creation perspective and are able to withstand rainfall and price volatility.
· This price and rainfall volatility can be cushioned by a commodity and geographical spread and the judicious use of pricing mechanisms-derivatives and forward physical sales.

Sources of Capital

· Recent investment in Australian agriculture has come largely from overseas sources-Macquarie Fund, Terra Firma, Eastern Australian Agriculture, etc. An exception has been the recent WA super fund Westscheme investment in RM Williams Agricultural Holdings.
· From a narrow nationalism point of view it would seem unfortunate if something as quintessentially Australian as broad acre agriculture was not seen as an area for investment by our local institutions.
· A significant proportion of Australian savings are now in superannuation funds. These funds have very little exposure to Australian Agriculture.
· These type of investment vehicle funds are better able to take a long term earnings perspective and accept ‘wealth creation’ in the form of unrealised capital gains. The AMP’s long term investment in Stanbroke Pastoral Company is a good example of the returns to be earned.

Management

· A serious deterrent to institutional investment in Australian Agriculture has been concern with securing competent management.
· The industry’s appeal as an investment area has been tarnished by “too-clever-by-half” tax driven ventures often proposed by entrepreneurs of dubious repute.
· Thus, it would seem that any investment proposals chances of success would be enhanced if assets and management (including a prospective C.E.O., Chairman and independent Directors) could be “packaged” with an investment offering."

Politics

2010-09-08T20:52:00.000+10:00

I am deeply disappointed that two of the "Rural Independents" have failed to support the Coalition in forming a minority Government. My perspective is that a Government shown to be incompetent, to the point they removed their own leader, has been returned to power, notwithstanding the fact that to all intents and purposes the Coalition "won" the election. They won the primary vote, are leading the two party preferred vote and won the most seats of any party in their own right. The Labor party won ten seats on Green preferences, where they failed to win the Primary vote.

The action of Tony Windsor and Rob Oakbridge (Rural Independents) is a betrayal of the broad Australian electorate and of the voting preferences of their individual electorates. I console myself in recalling the old proverb-"it's a long road without a turning".

The Murray Darling Basin

2010-08-29T18:11:00.004+10:00

Today, as I did my morning walk I listened to an old (June) podcast of ABC Radio's "Big Ideas"-titled the Canary in the Coalmine. My pace increased as my blood pressure rose!
The speakers were David Paton, Associate Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Adelaide and Richard Kingsford, Professor of Environmental Science University of NSW.
I was provoked to write (belatedly) the following message in the on-line "Comments" relating to this ABC Radio National programme.
"When these guys acknowledge the existence of "The Barrages" which separate the Lower Lakes from the sea and The Coorong from fresh water, then I will believe they are "fair dinkum". Meanwhile they are merely playing "dark green" politics. How can you make the absurd statement that the Lower Lakes are below sea level for the first time in 7,000 years, when before the Barrages were built in the late 1930's, they were always at sea level!!

I have never heard so many misleading statements and half truths. They ought to pack off to Cuba where their political philosophies would be at home.

Flinders Ranges/Innamincka/Birdsville/Lake Eyre Flying Visit 21st and 22nd August 2010

2010-08-22T21:44:00.015+10:00

For many years I have wanted to see the Cooper (Cooper Creek) after a flood, visit Birdsville and have a look at Lake Eyre, particularly from the air. After the big rains of last summer and since, with good flows into Lake Eyre we decided this winter was the time to do it. I was much looking forward to spending Election eve ay the Birdsville Hotel!

With our friends Bruce and Libby Standen we flew to Adelaide, an uneventful trip with some great views of the Murrumbidgee River (Hay) and the Murrumbidgee/Murray junction.Stayed overnight at Glenelg and at 9:00AM yesterday morning we boarded a Beechcraft King Air-pressurised, twin engined turbo prop jet-a very smart machine. This was a regular tour heavily advertised on the internet and read well. We four were accompanied by a guide and six other passengers. I managed to snare the co-pilot seat for the first leg which was a relatively short hop, for a machine with a cruising speed of 270 knots, to Port Augusta for refuelling. We were told just before take-off that the itinerary had been changed and that we would not be going to Maree, but straight to Innamincka after overflying the Flinders Rangers and Wilpena Pound in particular. We were also told, almost in passing, that we would be going to Coober Pedy on the way back tomorrow.

I was surprised that the pilot immediately ascended to 22,000 feet before descending in to Port Augusta. Good views of Yorke Peninsular, Port Pirie and Wyalla, but hardly the best altitude for general sightseeing.

We flew slightly east of north from Port Augusta and flew around Wilpena Pound after descending to about 5,000 feet. We couldn't take many photos as the windows were fogged over from the cold at the higher altitudes we had been at! It was however, good to get a general idea of what the Flinders Ranges are all about and the Pound in particular. I would now like to see it on the ground. We had quite good views of Lakes Torrens and Frome as we flew on to Innamincka again at high altitude, where we landed for lunch. Our guide placed himself in a back seat where there was no window and apart from handing around a brochure provided no information on what we were looking at-which seemed rather strange. Perhaps he didn't know!

An attractive young barmaid at Innamincka amused me with her very definate view that it would be raining today (Sunday) and that it would start at 6:00AM. She proved to be right!Innamincka surprised me with the undulating nature of the country. The "town" is down in a shallow gorge no doubt cut by the Cooper over millions of years, but well above flood levels now. It is near the junction of the Strezleki Creek with the Cooper. The Strezleki flows north quite a long way before joining the Cooper which by this stage is flowing in a general westerly direction towards Lake Eyre, still many hudreds of river miles away to the south west.

It was determined that it was too wet for us to land at the "Dig Tree" (although I noticed other aircraft on the ground), but that we would overfly it. This turned out to be laughable as the pilot didn't know which tree it actually was and the guide who couldn't see out anyway, was of little help. After several circuits of the general area we went thru the climbing routine and headed for Birdsville. Lots of the country covered by lake like water and I noticed that the lakes had all been joined up, with some big patches of green where the water has receeded, so I concluded it was flood water rather than local run-off. We flew over the Coongie Lakes and Goyders Lagoon, according to my very detailed road map, although there was no confirmation from the pilot or the guide that that was what we were looking at!

Birdsville was just as I expected, on the banks of the Diamentina. The sealed airstrip is right beside the Pub so one simply parks and walks across.David Brook was as good as his word and knocked on our door soon after we arrived and we organised to meet for dinner. I first met David and his wife Nell at the World Hereford Conference in Armidale in 2004, where we shared the platform. He and Nell gave a fascinating speech on life at Birdsville, where South African born Nell went, sight unseen, after her marriage to David. They now have some 8m. acres around Birdsville where they run some 30,000 Hereford cattle. They also raised six children. David was until recently the Mayor, is a 50% owner of the Pub (and the one at Innamincka). He has lived in Birdsville all of his life. He and Nell were instrumental in setting up the OBE Organic Beef organisation and David is Chairman. OBE is a private company owned by the twenty cattle suppliers. They toll kill at a service abbatoir and do their own marketing both domestically and export, particularly to the US.I was most interested to learn from Nell that the catalyst for setting up the organic beef initiative was the threat to the entire Lake Eyre Basin (one sixth of Australia) from the move to have it declared a World Heritage Area, which would have most likely led to destocking. A response which I feel reflected some great innovative thinking. Given that no fertilizers are used and there are no problems with internal or external parasites, meeting the organic criteria did not involve major changes to production practices.

Over dinner I was able to keep everyone posted with the Election Results by accessing the internet on my Iphone. I learned that Telstra NextG came online three days previously.

This morning (Sunday) we woke to stories that it was raining at William Creek, Coober Pedy and Oodnadatta and the weather there was deteriorating.

As arranged David Brook took us on a tour of the town and the famous Birdsville Race Course. We also made a brief visit to his very comfortable home in "suburban" Birdsville. There has been much development around Birdsville of more recent years and the town has a freshness about it. Obviously tourism is ever increasing business. It had only five houses when David was born.

A decision was made that as the aircraft was required in Adelaide the following day and as the weather was too bad for "low" flying over Lake Eyre etc. we had no alternative but to climb above the weather and return to Adelaide. We also learned that at high altitude the aircraft's fuel consumption could be lowered by as much as 50% and there was now no need for a refuelling stop. This we did, flying for over half the trip at 29,000 feet, still in the cloud. My sense and observation was that the ceiling was not much higher, but the pilot made no effort to "go see". Perhaps other aircraft told him otherwise.

In any event we had a fast trip back and arrived in Adelaide to a bright sunny day. Somewhat of an anti-climax. We managed to get an earlier flight home to Sydney, with some good views of the Adelaide Hills and the Murray before cloud obscured further viewing.

Whilst I enjoyed the outing this tour, particularly considering the price paid, was really second rate by way of factors other than the uncontrollable weather and we intend to take it up with the promoters. Link to all photos.

National Broadband Network

2010-08-18T08:37:00.001+10:00

My son works at the cutting edge of the Internet Business. We had the following email exchange;

Hi,
Did you see this?
Malcolm Turnbull's Article in The Australian, 17th August, 2010

"The Coalition's spend is less but all Australians will have access to privately provided broadband services, most of which are virtually indistinguishable from Labor's, just at a much lower cost.

Scrutiny of the Rudd-Gillard National Broadband Network reveals no fewer than seven separate reasons why it is going to fail Australians.

First, the NBN will cost far too much to build. It will be the largest investment of taxpayer funds in the country's history. While Labor claims it will find private partners, the NBN is so risky and its likely returns so low that it will probably be entirely funded by taxes. And even the chief executive of NBN Co admits the final cost is highly uncertain.

Several countries have subsidised high-speed broadband, but not on the scale Labor proposes. The taxpayer contribution in Singapore was $200 a person and in New Zealand $330 a person. Labor's extravaganza will cost Australian taxpayers more than $2000 a person.

This vast expense is why the Rudd-Gillard government has refused to submit its plan to Treasury for cost-benefit analysis. It would show the cost of the NBN far outweighs the benefits.

Second, the NBN will increase internet costs for users. Once the government has built a white elephant utterly incapable of earning a reasonable return on capital invested but assured of a monopoly over carriage of internet services, what do you think is going to happen to user charges?

One possibility is that the monopoly provider jacks up prices. The implementation study estimates that for the NBN to earn merely the bond rate, real prices will need to increase 1 per cent each year, rather than decrease rapidly as they have in recent years. And if it doesn't, then its value won't equal the cost of investment. If the government instead decides to charge reasonable wholesale fees, the cashflows earned by NBN will not justify a value remotely near $43bn. Even if most households sign up, the NBN may be worth less than a quarter of that investment.

The trouble with the NBN is that it has been decreed by politicians, not driven by market demands.The fastest networks of today run over optical fibre and there are already many thousands of kilometres of fibre in our networks. The question is whether the huge extra cost of mandating every home in Australia be connected to fibre-optic cable is justified. Millions of Australians can already achieve fast broadband speeds over networks currently in place, and we know today's speeds will increase rapidly in coming years.

Consumer preferences often turn out to be very different from what politicians, engineers and bureaucrats anticipate. The reality is that broadband involves horses for courses: some consumers and businesses want fibre optic now; others will be fine with cheaper alternatives such as hybrid fibre-coaxial (which can already deliver 100 megabits per second) or very high speed ADSL; yet others will prefer wireless. Only bureaucrats think in terms of one size fits all.

And don't forget, Canberra is terrible at building and operating commercial services. Perhaps the most unbelievable aspect of the NBN is that a government-controlled entity can roll out a vast undertaking such as national fibre-to-the-home on budget and on schedule. This from the people who couldn't build school assembly halls without billions in rorts? Who tragically mismanaged the home insulation program? Who put less than half the computers promised in schools at double the cost?

For the past 30 years there has been a realisation that governments are better off leaving it to the private sector to run businesses. That is why Telstra (and its peers abroad such as British Telecom) were privatised in the first place.

In addition, Canberra will have a huge conflict of interest. A remarkable part of Labor's broadband fantasy is the idea that the government can even-handedly pursue the national interest when it is both owner of the monopoly broadband network and regulator of Australia's communications market.

Let's say the NBN turns out to be the dud that most business observers expect and that five years down the track an alternative emerges providing adequate service at a lesser cost; say a variant of wireless. Will the government surrender its monopoly, rendering its investment worthless? Or will it enforce laws barring households and businesses from using a cheaper and perfectly adequate substitute technology?

If you don't think this Labor government would do that, you are wrong. Its heads of agreement with Telstra requires Telstra not to offer cheaper HFC broadband of 100Mbps because it would compete with the NBN. Good for the NBN monopoly, perhaps, but terrible for consumers.

Last, money spent on the NBN can't be spent on other services. In economics, one of the most important concepts is "opportunity cost", the idea that once you spend your money on one thing, you can't spend it on something else. If tens of billions of taxpayer dollars are invested in this low-yielding yet risky venture they can't be spent on better hospitals, schools, roads or public transit. There is no benefit to taxpayers or the Australian economy from spending $43bn or more if the NBN is worth a fraction of that when sold. Such risk is better borne by the private sector so shareholders, not taxpayers, lose out if the plan goes off the rails.

Clever governments understand that you fix problems by empowering initiative and enterprise, by creating an environment where the ingenuity and flexibility of the market is best able to deliver the cheapest and most effective solutions."END QUOTE

Mike to Dad,
He is spot-on!

Murray Darling Basin

2010-08-17T21:38:00.001+10:00

On Sunday 15th August I sent the following letter to the Sydney Morning Herald.
"Senator Wong's response ( Phantom Water SMH 14th August) to Debra Jopson's expose on phantom water (SMH 12th August) clearly demonstrates how the Senator and her extreme green advisers just don't "get it". The "lack of water flowing down the rivers of the Murray Darling Basin" is not caused by "decades of mis-management and over-allocation". It is caused by the lack of inflows to which the Senator refers. Let me try to explain.

Australia's rivers are highly variable and water is dynamic, it either runs away to the sea or it evaporates. We deal with the variability by building storages and having seasonal allocations for irrigation. When there is no or very limited water, there are no allocations. Having some water in the headwater storages, with minimal allocations for irrigation, allowed the Murray River to be kept flowing through this drought of record low rainfall and run-off into the river and dams.

Buying back an irrigation license/entitlement when there is no allocation generates no water. It will "generate" extra water (leave it in the river) when there is a good flow or flood and there would have been an allocation, but that is not when our rivers most need it and that will limit agricultural production for negligible environmental benefit.

By way of example, the first major water buy-back by this Government was the purchase of Toorale Station, Bourke in 2008 for $23.75m. There has been additional water in the Darling River as a consequence of this purchase during the big flows earlier this year. This additional water amounted to less than 1% of the flow past Bourke! Of the flow past Bourke that reached either the Menindee Lakes Storage or the Lower Lakes Storage at the mouth of the Murray, at least 50% will evaporate.

Engineering changes to reduce evaporation of fresh water in these storages could make a meaningful impact. All we have seen so far is political action pandering to misconceptions which will do little for the environment but have a long term negative impact on our ability to produce agricultural products for a hungry world."

Irrigation-Politics and Sovereign Risk

2010-08-14T12:29:00.007+10:00

I was recently asked to write an overview of the politics of Australian irrigation with emphasis on the Barwon-Darling River. This is what I wrote:-

Big Picture-Background
Australia is claimed to be the most urbanised country on earth with the great majority of the population clustered in coastal cities. The very strong democracy, highly visible in a pre-election environment, appropriately has the voting power where the people are. Thus, the people with the electoral power are geographically separated from rural activities and generally have little knowledge of agriculture.
Furthermore, Australian urban voters have been strongly influenced by environmental advocates who are given significant exposure by the media. The “virtuous greens” are a significant market segment in our cities and like to feel they are playing their part in “saving the planet”.
There is a widely held perception that our inland rivers, from which irrigation water is extracted, have been “over allocated and mismanaged” by previous authorities, who did not have the benefit of today’s environmentally enlightened incumbents. This is mostly nonsense, but I believe it is a widely held belief.
Australia’s rainfall and thus river flows, is highly variable and thus it makes good sense to conserve water in efficient dams when flows are big. This can be for later use and/or flood mitigation. Usage by irrigators is controlled by variable allocations within each water year. An irrigation license/entitlement allows water to be extracted from the river only when defined conditions are met and allocations are made. When flows are low or non-existent, allocations are likewise low or absent. Irrigators understand this and knowingly accept the risks involved.
The drought of recent years has seen the run-off into our major state owned dams at the lowest level since white settlement and this has still not been corrected. This fact if by far the most significant cause of low river flows. Yet the belief that our rivers have been “over allocated and mismanaged” has seen Governments (mainly Federal) attempting to correct the situation by the purchase and effective cancellation of irrigation licenses. This will do nothing for our rivers when flows (and thus allocations) are low and will only constrain production when water supplies are plentiful. But, that does not appear to be understood.
Most of the focus has been on the Murray Darling Basin which covers Victoria north and west of the Great Dividing Range (GDR), all of NSW west of the GDR, and the southern half of Queensland west of the GDR until the Lake Eyre catchment in the far west of that state. This area includes some of Australia’s very best country (soils and rainfall) and some 80% of its irrigation. After the Murray and Darling Rivers join in south western NSW the river flows west in to South Australia before turning south and flowing in to Lakes Alexandrina and Albert (the Lower Lakes) from where it originally flowed in to the Southern Ocean. However in the 1930’s, the South Australians built a series of weirs (“The Barrages”) just above the ocean entrance to convert the Lower Lakes from their natural state of being sometimes salty and sometimes fresh, depending on river flows, into a state whereby they always contain fresh water and the sea is obstructed from entering. The Lakes are wide and shallow and evaporation losses of fresh water are huge.
South Australia is the driest state in the second driest continent on earth, (Antarctica is the driest), and the Murray River is the only decent river in the state. South Australians adopt a “victims attitude” and children are taught in primary school what a poor deal the state gets with upstream irrigators, in particular, extracting water that is “rightfully theirs”. The inefficiencies of water use, particularly the evaporation losses from the Lower Lakes are taboo subjects, rarely mentioned.
It would seem, perhaps by accident, that South Australians hold most of the key posts in the Commonwealth Government involved in the management of water. Senator Penny Wong the Minister for Water and Climate Change is a Senator for South Australia. Senator Nick Xenaphon is also a South Australian Senator and came to Canberra with one of his key objectives being to “save the Murray”. The new CEO of the Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) is a former South Australian water bureaucrat. Professor Mike Young, probably Australia’s best known water scientist and a prominent member of the philosophically “dark green” Wentworth Group of “concerned scientists”, is Adelaide based and will not publically acknowledge the problem of “The Barrages”.
Against this backdrop, the Federal government has passed legislation to give it greater control over management of the Murray Darling Basin and the Murray Darling Basin Authority has been charged with writing a management plan for the Basin which in terms of the Water Act 2007 gives very much more weight to environmental issues than it does to socio-economic issues. The Productivity Commission has recommended that the Act be amended to correct this, but there would appear to be little public support for such a move. Irrigators are very concerned that the MDBA plan will recommend significant reductions in entitlements for irrigation.
Today it was announced that release of the MDBA Plan will be delayed until after the election. A change in Government would probably see greater sympathy for the irrigator’s position and certainly the junior member of the Coalition, The Nationals have a better understanding of the situation than do the Labor Party representatives.

NSW and the Cap
In the mid 1990’s the Australian States agreed that a cap should be placed on further irrigation development and extractions in the Murray Darling Basin. The agreement broadly was that extractions should be capped at the 1994 level, based on water that would be extracted, under the then management regimes to service the level of development which then existed. This “cap” was progressively implemented river by river with the exception of the Mungindi-Menindee reach of the unregulated (meaning no physical regulation by way of a major dam) Barwon Darling. The Barwon Darling cap implementation was complicated and delayed by the highly variable nature of river flows, a lack of reliable historical information and a very strong lobby by local irrigators.
In 2006 a deal was struck between the Government and Barwon Darling irrigators to apply the cap at an interim level of 173GL (173,000ML). This compared with the total entitlement of 517 GL-a cut of 67%. The 517 GL was the aggregate of all licenses including “sleepers” and the total amount had never been used. Usage was more in the area of 250GL. The interim figure was based on a computer model of the river in which the irrigators had little confidence. The model was to be reviewed by a representative “working group” and many thought the correct figure would be more like 240GL, once metering errors and the like were corrected. A particularly strong argument was that the area of cotton grown in 1994 could certainly not have been grown with only 173GL. The agreement had some attractive features including introduction of carry-over water in years when extractions were below individual irrigators share of the 173GL’s and the introduction of an initialisation amount credited to individual irrigators water accounts.
This working group had one or two meetings, but never completed its work. Then out of the blue, earlier this year, the Barwon Darling (Mungindi/Menindee) irrigators received from the NSW Office of Water a convoluted letter advising that the 173GL figure was to be reduced to 143GL’s (a further 17% cut) on the basis that the Murray Darling Basin Authority supported by the Independent Audit Group, claimed that the Darling River was continually exceeding cap. Cap was defined not as the simple 173GL number, but yet another modelled figure which apparently took account of river heights and calculated a different cap figure. This was news to the signatories to the agreement with the Government who without exception believed that the cap figure (interim) was simply the 173 GL’s against which actual metered extractions would be compared.
The NSW Government appeared to accept the irrigator’s argument and the point that if they had a problem with the MDBA/Ministerial Council they needed to deal with it in the context that they were bound by their agreement with the Barwon Darling irrigators. The government has now deferred the matter for twelve months mainly to monitor what happens in 2010 when river flows have been so much greater. In legal terms the Government has great power and any legal action by the irrigators would be unlikely to be successful.
Summary
There is little public sympathy for the irrigator’s position. Yet:
• Irrigated agriculture contributes approximately 25 per cent of the gross value of Australian agricultural production, 3% of GDP, 22% of exports, but only uses 0.4 per cent of Australia’s farming area (Source: CSIRO, 2006)
• Australia utilises about 8% of its available water for industry, agriculture and support of the population, with agriculture using about 65% of this, or less than 6% of Australia’s water (Source: National Land and Water Audit 1997 – 2002)
• In their ‘natural’ state, the rivers located in the southern half of Australia experience more variable flows than virtually any other rivers in the world (Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2005)
• Between 1885 and 1960, the Darling River stopped flowing at Menindee on 48 occasions – well before irrigation existed on the river or its tributaries (Australian Farm Institute).

On the local scene Mungindi/Menindee extractions average only about 6% of flows past Bourke. The final cap figure, be it 143GL or 250GL, compares with an annual average flow past Bourke of 2,500 GL’s, with extractions only allowed from the bigger flows. This would seem a small environmental price to pay for all of the socio-economic benefits derived, particularly to a series of disadvantaged towns along the river whose populations include a large proportion of indigenous Australians.
It should also be noted that water flowing past Bourke is usually stored downstream in the Menindee Lakes. A series of natural lakes engineered to form a highly inefficient water storage, where normally half the water diverted is lost to evaporation.
To my mind, the irrigator’s argument has “right” on its side, particularly if it is accepted that Australia has a moral responsibility to sustainably maximise its agricultural production. I remain sufficiently naive to believe that in the long run “right” will prevail.
David Boyd
22.07.10

Waste of Good Water

2010-08-13T10:40:00.001+10:00

Letter published in The Australian on Friday 13th August,2010

"In a world worrying about food security, would someone please explain to me why both our main political parties and the Greens want to send fresh water downstream to Australia's most inefficient water storage-the Lower Lakes- where most of it will evaporate, rather than removing The Barrages at the mouth of the Murray River and returning the Lakes to the natural estuary they once were?

David Boyd,St Ives, NSW"

Murray Darling Basin

2010-08-12T07:22:00.004+10:00

Both of our competing political leaders are pandering to the Murray mouth fresh water alarmists. Alan Jones with over 1m. listeners to Radio 2GB in Sydney, has been talking about the nonsense of the Government buying non-existent water, that is entitlements when there are no allocations. In an attempt to help him get words around the two key issues I sent him the following email. Pretty patronising of me to try to help one of the very best communicators around, but it is not easy to clearly express.

Dear Alan,
You may recall from our meetings at Bourke (Port of Bourke Hotel and all that), when I was Chairman and CEO of Clyde Agriculture; that I have a passionate interest in getting the truth into the public arena about our rivers and irrigation. It is a big communication challenge and I struggle to get the words right. However, perhaps my latest iteration might help.

There are two issues which 'get at me'.

First, we deal with the massive variability of our rivers by granting irrigation licenses/entitlements, that are subject to seasonal allocations. No, or limited, water, no allocations. Thus, the Government buying licenses, when there is minimal water and thus no allocations, will do nothing for our rivers, but will restrict agricultural production when water supplies are ample.

Second, the issue of "The Barrages" that close the Lower Lakes off from the Southern Ocean while they evaporate their heads off. I can do little better than quote from the website of a Goolwa (SA) based organisation LakesNeedWater-

"Since we started LakesNeedWater over one year ago, our core message has consistently been that the Lower Lakes should have, well, water. This is hardly rocket science after all. Why anyone would believe that holding back seawater and allowing the lakes to dry out is preferable to allowing seawater to mix with freshwater defies logic. Among the great rivers of the world, such as the Nile, the Amazon, the Yangtze, and the Mississippi, the River Murray is alone in being cut off from its mouth. Does anyone honestly believe it is healthy for a river to be separated from the ocean by kilometres of barrages, resulting in the loss of 90% of its historic estuary?

The scaremongers have it all wrong with their single-minded obsession with fresh water in the Lower Lakes. The River Murray needs a healthy estuary, not artificially maintained freshwater lakes. Rivers need estuaries. It really is that simple."

I hope this helps. Keep up the good work.Regards,

David Boyd

ABC TV Coverage of the Lower Lakes Without a Single Mention of the Scandal of "The Barrages". ABC News,7:30 Report,and now Landline.

2010-08-08T13:28:00.001+10:00

I am not into conspiracy theories, but sometimes I wonder! The biggest problem of the Lower Lakes is not upstream extractions (with minimal allocations there have been bugger all in recent years anyway); but the downstream blocking of seawater entering the Lakes as it always did when river flows were low, before The Barrages were built. For further background see lakesneedwater.org

You wont get a S.A. funded scientist to publically criticise them, for fear of their funding drying up!

Water Storages and Efficiency

2010-07-10T12:06:00.002+10:00

The South Australian based organisation "LakesNeedWater" have a clearly expressed introduction on their website which bears repeating:

"LAKES NEED WATER AND RIVERS NEED ESTUARIES

Since we started LakesNeedWater over one year ago, our core message has consistently been that the Lower Lakes should have, well, water. This is hardly rocket science after all. Why anyone would believe that holding back seawater and allowing the lakes to dry out is preferable to allowing seawater to mix with freshwater defies logic. Among the great rivers of the world, such as the Nile, the Amazon, the Yangtze, and the Mississippi, the River Murray is alone in being cut off from its mouth. Does anyone honestly believe it is healthy for a river to be separated from the ocean by kilometres of barrages, resulting in the loss of 90% of its historic estuary?

The scaremongers have it all wrong with their single-minded obsession with fresh water in the Lower Lakes. The River Murray needs a healthy estuary, not artificially maintained freshwater lakes. Rivers need estuaries. It really is that simple."

Water

2010-07-06T18:22:00.009+10:00

I was recently pondering my obsessive interest in water and had a BGO (Blinding Glimpse of the Obvious)!
>Some 70% of the Earth's surface is covered by the oceans i.e. salt water.
>Nature provides us with the most wonderful re-cycling system whereby warmth over our oceans causes evaporation and cloud formation, winds moves the cloud around and as it cools (condensation) it falls as beautiful fresh water.
>There is no shortage of total water, but there are often shortages of fresh water.
>From earliest days, man has stored fresh water to deal with these shortages. We don't lie in the rain with our mouths open to meet our drinking needs-rather we store fresh water when it is available to cover for our future drinking needs.
>Storage methods for our drinking and washing requirements need to be "efficient". That mostly means avoiding evaporation. There is plenty of salt water in the oceans to meet cloud formation needs.
>Exactly these same principles apply to storing water for irrigation (food and fibre production)needs. Only the scale is different. We need to store and to store "efficiently".
>This is particularly the case in Australia where we have the most variable rainfall on Earth. Our predecessors did a great job in building water storages-dams.
>We need more, but they need to be deep (valleys)to minimise surface area and thus evaporation and have good catchments.
>Storages also need to be flexible so as to allow flows from smaller events to pass and to take "the top" off the bigger events, both for flood mitigation and storage for future needs.

Climate Change-Famous Forecasts that Failed.

2010-07-06T17:32:00.003+10:00

In 1969, Richard Nixon’s presidential advisor, Daniel Moynihan, summarised for the President the general concern of scientists about “the carbon dioxide problem". This report was recently released.
Moynihan’s memo reads, in part:
“It is now pretty clearly agreed that the CO2 content in the atmosphere will rise 25% by 2000. This could increase the average temperature near the earth's surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter.”

These predictions were wide of the mark:

•Rather than increasing by 81 parts per million as the "pretty clearly agreed" experts feared, CO2 rose by only 45 parts per million.

•Rather than spiking by 3.9 C (7 degrees F), the actual temperature increase between 1969 and the year 2000 was a practically imperceptible 0.3 C. Which means the experts were off by 1200 percent.

•Most embarrassing of all, rather than rising 305 cm (10 feet), sea level increased by a paltry 10 cm (3.9 inches). Which means the experts overestimated that particular danger by 2950 percent.

Moral of the story: no one has ever been able to predict the future. Not even highly educated, highly regarded government advisors.
See: http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/07/nixon-was-told-sea-level-would-rise-by.html

Climate Change

2010-07-02T17:14:00.004+10:00

In the last few weeks I have been told by a leading geneticist and a retired physicist/nucleur scientist that there is no credible scientific case against the accepted alarmist global warming view. These two and so many others seem quite oblivious to the revelations from East Anglia, the IPCC and the work and views of the likes of McKittrick, Freeman Dyson, and many other highly educated and intelligent authorities.

In my view the claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been brought into serious disrepute by the revelations of the emails from the Climate Research Institute of the University of East Anglia, the discrediting of Michael Mann's "hockey stick" theory and many other revelations.

In Australia we have even witnessed the Commonwealth Government having a meeting of public servants to train them in dealing with the sceptics views. How misguided, superior and condescending can you get!

I came across the linked paper which has particular relevance to my agricultural interests and expresses in very moderate language the fundamental views of those who question the so called "settled" science.

TV Feature on Bourke and the BIG Season of 2010

2010-06-22T08:23:00.002+10:00

ABC TV's Landline Programme ran a feature on "Bourke Battlers" on Sunday 30th May. It includes segments (some out of context) of an interview with me. Here is the link.

2010-06-17T23:05:00.003+10:00

Letter published in The Weekend Australian of 29th May,2010
When is someone in authority going to have the courage to remind the South Australians (Floodwaters wont reach Murray mouth-The Australian 28th May), that under natural conditions the Lower Lakes were "full" of salt water when river flows were low? The idea that they should be kept full of fresh water is a modern day construct which followed the building of "The Barrages" across the river mouth in the 1930's. With huge evaporation losses it is an irresponsible use of fresh water.
David Boyd

BlogLog of Our Kimberley By Boat Tour 29th May to 15th June, 2010

2010-05-28T07:24:00.107+10:00

Link to photos
TO READ THIS POST SEQUENTIALLY (BY DATE), SCROLL DOWN TO 'START' AND READ TO BOTTOM, THEN SCROLL UP AT THE END OF EACH DAY
Tuesday 15th June
Weather cool and showery again. After some gift shopping we taxied to the airport. Our flight was an hour late due to headwinds for west bound inward flights. Heavy cloud all the way to St Vincent's Gulf. Water bodies were showing up clearly in the setting sun and we got a clear view of the solid body of water in the Murray after its sharp southerly turn in South Australia. I was reminded of the concept of Chris Hammer in his recent book on the Murray-Darling- "The River". He describes the Murray River, blocked off from the sea by The Barrages and fed by the upstream dams and Snowy diversions, as a "closed system". He goes on to say that as our early settlers were so disappointed that they didn't find the anticipated inland sea, they decided to create one!

Kimberley by Boat Tour

Monday 14th June
The first wet morning since we left Sydney 16 days ago. Took a walk up the Hay Street Mall before meeting Marjorie (my long-time Secretary) and Darryl Kelly for a ferry ride across to South Perth for lunch. Tried to find the house where we three Dalgety cadets lived in 1964, but subsequently discovered we were a few blocks short. Google maps shows the house and nearby church still there.

Sunday 13th June
A nice relaxed morning at our very comfortable McAlpine House before our 1:00PM 2.5 hour flight to Perth. Good views of Broome and surrounds on take-off including the Roebuck Plains marine plain country, which from the air looks like an old river delta. Then cloud cover for an hour or so before the skies cleared. All rugged looking country and I was reminded how good the eastern Australian pastoral country is by comparison. From 38,000 feet I only saw three station homesteads until we reached the clearly defined farming country. It is marked by an almost straight east/west line where the pastoral country stops and farming (cultivation) begins. By contrast with the sparcity of homesteads, I was surprised to see perhaps hundreds of mine sites in the pastoral country. I knew, of course, that WA was the mining state, but always imagined it was dominated by a limited number of very large mines, I was surprised at how many smaller mines were visible. Also noted several well developed, sealed, long airstrips. I really should have a better understanding of Australia's premier export industry!

On arrival at The Weld Club we heard what we thought were church bells. Quickly checked the internet and found St.George's Cathedral had a Choral Evensong scheduled to begin in 20 minutes. We spruced ourselves up and walked across the park to attend. Lovely singing and a fine "Address" on my favourite Ecclesiastes. We had an upmarket dinner at a very scruffy McDonalds before retiring early. Could have done without a 1:30AM phone call from Katie!

Saturday 12th June
We were picked up at 8:00AM by the Horizontal Falls people and driven to the airport. Our aircraft was a turbo-prop Cessna Caravan mounted on these huge floats with retractable wheels under the floats. A grotesque looking machine standing some twenty odd feet off the ground. I doubted it would ever get in the air. I volunteered to sit up the front in the co-pilot seat which was quite hard to get in to, but I was delighted and kept it throughout the fascinating trip. The aircraft with twelve passengers lifted off using surprisingly little strip. We flew north up the coast of the Dampier Peninsular at at only 1500 feet, over lovely looking white sandy beaches.We flew over James Price Point where the proposed gas processing plant is to go, and could see the Lacepede Islands in the distance. The pilot spoke glowingly of the successful Aboriginal Community at Lombadina before we landed on a bush strip at Cygnet Bay quite close to Cape Leveque and One Arm Point. We were taken on a tour of the Brown Bros. Pearl Farm and given lengthy explanations of the operation by a very tall, shapely guide;before a soft sell of pearls. In spite of my encouragement Gail again resisted.

We then took off again and flew due east and landed in Talbot Bay. Here we found the Orion with its new lot of passengers inspecting the Horizontal Falls. These "falls" are a feature of the huge 10 metre tides and the existence of two adjoining water bodies which can only be entered through narrow gaps. The tidal movements create a huge surge of water through the gaps as the water tries to equalise. The tide was dropping whilst we were there and the water on the inside, surging to get out appeared about one metre higher that that outside. There were all sorts of whirlpools and eddies on the downward side and entry was clearly very dangerous. Our "driver" went thru' both gaps several times and when on the upward slope of water enjoyed "hovering", I wondered what would happen if he had sudden engine failure! Afterwards I noticed that the boat was powered by two large ourtboards and he assured me that he had dual fuel lines. Sensibly the Orion Zodiacs did not attempt to get through. It was strange to see the familiar guides on the Zodiacs with their new passengers. We had a delicious lunch of baramundi on a house boat that doubled as a pier for the sea planes. The boat was surrounded by small fish with several sharks gorging themselves. One of the guides was sporting three heavily bandaged fingers as a result of a recent encounter with one of the sharks. When it grabbed him ( he was cleaning fish over the side) he had the presence of mind to enter the water with it so that he could get it to release his fingers rather than leaving them in its clamped shut teeth.

We flew back at 5,500 feet, over King Sound and got a great perspective of the area. We could see the Fitzroy River to the south, but could not actually sight Derby. A most interesting day capped by an enjoyable dinner at Matsos with the Farrars.

Friday 11th June
We rented a small vehicle and Alan Farrar accompanied us to Roebuck Plains, about half an hours drive from Broome. Met Station Manager, Doug Miller and was immediately impressed with his open, friendly, competent style. He took us on a drive through some of their best country, which was much better than I expected it to be, particularly what they call the marine plain (200,000 acres) much of which carries a good body of salt resistant couch grass. Roebuck is owned by an arm of the Indigenous Land Corporation. It is just under 900,000 acres and runs 11,000 Brahman breeding cows and some 24,000 head in total. Heifers are joined at a minimum of 280kgs. for eight weeks, but are given a second chance. Heifers get the best country and all cattle are pregnancy tested annually. Branding percentages for heifers are 86% and overall figure is 73%. The property has a staff of 15 permanents and usually has an additional 10 trainees. There is good ground water at around 20/30 metres and there are 38 solar powered sub-bores. Cattle are mostly sold as weaners to the live export market (Indonesias), where Doug says they receive Roma equivalent prices and better. Being so close to a major live cattle shipping port the property is strategically located and can take advantage of cargo completion demand. Whilst we were there they were trucking cows to Harvey south of Perth. A distance of 2,600 kms-costing $120/head. They have a problem with intruders and usually lose around 500 head of cattle per annum as"town killers".

On enquiring where his wife Sara came from, we discovered she was Tony and Jan Austin's daughter from Boggabri who we have met many times and who were very good friends to Gail's brother Barry and his late wife Jenny, when they lived at Boggabri. I never cease to be amazed at the "smallness" of rural Australia.

After a sleep and a swim in the Hotel pool Gail and I walked down to Matso's a boutique brewery come restaurant. Had a delicious sefood bisque and loved their Mango beer.

Thursday 10th June
We disembarked for the final time at 9:00AM and were delivered by bus to the very smart McAlpine House. Built by Lord McAlpine in an old tropical style it is now owned by one of the Paspaley's. We walked in the heat of the day down to the Boulevard Shopping Centre, had some lunch and purchased a "carry-on" bag to better manage our excessive luggage.

Approaching sunset we took a taxi to Cable Beach to watch the sunset. We then attended our final Art Gallery for an opening of new works by Aboriginal Artists before dining with some of the Orion passengers at a great fish restaurant. I am still meeting some of the passengers. Finally, met and chatted to Trevor Kennedy who I found most personable and interesting. He was born in Albany and worked as a journalist before pursuing a business career which included CPH and the Qantas Board. His wife Christina is the aunt of Doug Miller who manages Roebuck Plains cattle station which we are to visit tomorrow.

Wednesday 9th June
Overnight we tied up to the Broome pier. This very long structure is tightly secured and anybody entering or leaving is closely monitored. You are not allowed to walk along it. We attended another Art Gallery (The Bungalow) and some extensive purchases were made. Broome is a city of 15,000 people, but the population swells to over 40,000 at the peak of the tourist season. It has a busy feel about it, but also strikes you as a "frontier western town". A sense enhanced by a generous coating of red dust. I had to remind myself that we were actually in a coastal port.In the afternoon we did an optional Hovercraft tour which apart from being my first ride in a Hovercraft was of little interest. The machine steers like a vehicle with smooth tyres on a very wet slippery claypan. Apart from viewing some mud flats and mangroves we saw some dinosaur foot prints and were amused by a matter-o-fact, very direct young "pilot". Then at 5:00PM we were entertained by the Bardi Aboriginal Dancers from north of Broome. These dancers have travelled widely and were excellent. Gail was captivated. So as not to have too quiet a day we then left the ship to attend a cocktail party and a soft sell of Paspaley Pearls. In spite of my encouragement Gail was not in a mood to buy!

Tuesday 8th June
Weather wise, yet another magnificent day. When I walked out on deck at 6:00AM yesterday I was immediately hit by the warmth and strong smell of smoke. Apparently burning-off was going on to the south. Today the smoke was gone and the water was still a wonderful aqua/green colour.Today was packed with activity. A lecture from Colin Laverty on collecting aboriginal art. Colin and his wife are knowledgeable serious collectors and he is a great communicator. Clear, to the point and brief!

We are anchored off the The Lacepedes-four small, sandy islands, the home to massive bird life-in particular the Brown Booby. We explored them from the Zodiacs, but did not land.

Mid morning we were invited to a lecture by one of the guides on Climate Change. James Creswell has swallowed the alarmist line hook line and sinker and seemed oblivious to all of the recent dis-crediting of the IPCC and its contributing thermomaniacs. It really was unbalanced and way over the top. The concerning thing was that a large majority of those present agreed with him. It got too much for George Snow, a leading yachtsman (Brindabella) who was at Canberra Grammar School a few years behind me. His brother Michael was a year ahead of me. George took James on and was clearly very well read on the subject. I attempted to support him, but was taken on by those around me! Quite a controversy.

After lunch I had a look at the Bridge and all of the high powered electronics of a modern ship. In the evening we were entertained by the crew which was a little long and not particularly good!

Monday 7th June
Another day packed with interest and beauty. Overnight we headed further down the coast and anchored this morning in Doubtful Bay. We went ashore at Raft Point in the now very familiar manner and climbed up to a rock ledge which houses an aboriginal art gallery-wandjinas and bradshaws.

The ship then sailed closer to Montgomery Reef which is only exposed at lower tides. We inspected this from the Zodiacs. It was not my concept of a narrow reef, but a huge expanse of coral from which water (salt) was still cascading with the water at of just above the low tide level. Spring tides here have a 10 metre range, so our ship could sail right over it at high tides. The daily changes (tides) from wet to dry, encourage all sorts of wildlife as fish are trapped and birds have a field day. We travelled up a “river” within the coral in some very still (stagnant) water. We saw lots of large turtles in the water, and on the way back to the ship a large sea snake. Once again a nice little surprise when not altogether accidently we came across a tiny sand island with an Orion Flag and staff offering refreshments!

Then at sunset we again boarded the Zodiacs after the ship had repositioned itself near a place called Lanngi which is said to have great spiritual importance to the aboriginals. We entered a rock lined cove which at its point had a small waterfall.

Sunday 6th June
Overnight we sailed further south west and are now anchored in Prince Frederick Harbour. A glance out the cabin window reveals sharply rising hills and some cliff faces and on the nearest island an area of rain forest.

Later
What a great day! After breakfast we attended a lecture by two archaeologists who were doing a “dig” not far from Mitchell Falls. These two were flown in by one of the several helicopters that we were about to use. A most interesting lecture on Kimberley art, from an archaeologist’s viewpoint. We were then ferried to the nearby beach on Naturalist Island where we boarded a helicopter for Mitchell Falls. This bay is quite spectacularly beautiful with the water a lovely aqua green. On the helicopter trip we flew over the Mitchell Plateau at about 2,500 feet, had a great view of the falls from the air, before we landed and viewed them, after a short walk, from ground level. I had a swim in the Mitchell River above the falls where the water was fresh, but not excessively cold. Lovely views of the bay again before we landed back on the beach just across from where the Orion was anchored.

After lunch we headed off up the Hunter River on the Zodiacs in search of wildlife and to view the area from the water. Saw occupied Osprey nests, dolphins and finally a moderate size salt water crocodile. So far my impression is that birdlife is relatively scarce on the Kimberley coast. The scenery, particularly the red cliffs arising straight out of the water, was spectacular in the afternoon sun. The rain forest of which there is quite a lot in this area, is the result, not so much of the rainfall, but the presence of basalt soil. This would have to be my favourite spot on the Kimberley coast-so far.

Saturday 5th June
We are now anchored off Bigge Island on the north-west corner of the Kimberley Peninsular. We had a very choppy spray filled visit to the island in the Zodiacs to view some Wandjina rock art. Wandjina is a spirit god according to local aboriginal tradition. No photographs were allowed. A very geologically interesting island, with tides of around six metres. Great rock patterns and colours particularly from tide effects. A trip thru’ the rocks in an inland passage was a highlight.

Lots of different rock shapes with, to my imagination, overtones of Easter Island.

After lunch on board we attended a lecture by Professor Howard Morphy (husband of Frances) on Kimberley Rock Art. Morphy gains great credibility with me, because unlike our young, cocksure Orion guides, he readily admits uncertainty and ignorance where it exists. The dark theatre combined with the engine drone created soporific conditions and highlighted how tired this elderly collection of passengers have become. Whilst I was still awake, I glanced around and estimated that 33% of the “students” were asleep!

A little before sunset we again journeyed to another beach on Bigge Island, of great natural beauty, for the deferred “Captain’s Cocktails”. The “Pacific Princess” joined us in the bay, but moored out of sight so as not to spoil our feeling that we were the only people here? We had a lovely trip back to the Orion in fast fading light.

Friday 4th June
Overnight we sailed further west at the top of the Kimberley Peninsular and at 7:00AM anchored in Vansittart Bay. The red cliffs along the shoreline have largely disappeared and we look on to a much flatter landscape.

We attended a most interesting lecture by Frances Morphy on Kimberley Aboriginal languages. It was not without criticism of our bus drivers at Wyndham for referring to cattle men “taking up” pastoral leases. Frances saw this as a denial of the facts which she says, were that the land was “invaded” and the original landholders dispossessed and often killed! Subsequently, she referred to recent activity where Indigenous people were “taking up” pastoral leases and she lauded their ability to run them! Whilst the lecture was culturally most interesting as was the encapsulated “basis of languages”, as usual it set me thinking about how we improve the self-respect and living standards of aboriginal and part aboriginal people. I remain convinced that education and employment opportunities in economically sustainable businesses, is central to progress. Alcohol remains a major problem. The encouragement by the Whitlam Government to maintain “hunter gatherer” life styles has clearly been a disaster.

After lunch our group (titled the Grevillias-50% of passengers) took the Zodiacs across to Jar Island-so named because of the discovery of Indonesian jars on the island-to view quite a lot of so called Bradshaw art.

Thursday 3rd June
Awoke around 6:00AM and decided there was an urgent need to burn some calories! Met friends Allan Farrar and John Reynolds doing the same thing. John led me on his route march around the ship which included some deck changes via stairs. As we walked we noticed the ship bearing towards the land on our left (south-west). As we had breakfast we dropped anchor in the cove downstream of the King George waterfalls, near the northern extremity of the Kimberley Peninsular.

We “squibbed” the five hour trip on the Zodiacs (rubber duckies) which included a climb to the top of the falls, after dire warnings of how challenging the walk would be and settled for a ride on the tender up the cove to the foot of the falls. Spectacular scenery with steep red cliffs rising straight from the water. Words such as “grandeur”, “majestic”, even “awesome”, come to mind. A lovely feeling of remoteness and isolation, even if we did come across a Marine Research vessel anchored nearby and a yacht coming down the sound as we went up. It was further up the cove/sound to the falls than I imagined, but it was worth the trip. The climb for the walkers didn’t appear nearly as “challenging” as we had been told and we probably should have done it.

Near the foot of the falls we were plied with a glass of champagne (I drank Gail’s as well), before we headed back down the sound. Towards the open sea we had some excitement, as without warning the diesel motor stopped. We drifted quite some distance downstream, fortunately remaining in the middle of the sound, as futile efforts to re-start the motor were made. Two-way contact was made with the Orion. Firstly, the large Orion fishing boat got a rope to us as we came uncomfortably close to the rocks and held us in the protected waters until another tender arrived to which we fourteen passengers were transferred and returned to the Orion. Wonderful exaggerated stories of shipwreck and gallant rescue ensued. A lovely command from one quiet gentleman as we began the transfer-“abandon ship, men first!”

After lunch we slept deeply-our first real break, until we decided to take a walk around the deck to view the setting sunlight on the red cliffs. We ran in to Judy Watson’s art class which we managed to persuade Gail to join. She did some lovely water colours of the surrounding scenery.

Wednesday 2nd June
After some late re-arrangements mainly thanks to Sandra Forbes (Allan Farrar's wife), we were able to fly to the Bungle Bungles AND visit the Warmun Art Centre. What we did not know until we took off, nearly an hour later than expected, was that we were also to fly over Lake Argyle and the Argyle Diamond Mine-a wonderful unexpected bonus. This would have to be one of the most interesting flights I've ever been on and to add to my pleasure (and view) I managed to get myself up front in the (unoccupied) co-pilots seat of the Airvan-an aircraft built in Morwell,Victoria.

The Kimberley country from the air is much as I expected. Red-brown hills with many rugged peaks and somehow to my mind looks the great age that it is. The Ord Dam is a surprisingly small structure when you consider the volume of water it stores. Obviously a perfect sight for a dam. Capacity is stated at over 10,000 megalitres which is twice the biggest (Eucumbene) in the south of Australia and its always nearly full. The literature says that under flood conditions it can hold three times this much? It is not so much the annual average rainfall received (32 inches), but the fact that it is concentrated over four to five months (the Wet).
The irrigation area is relatively small at14,000 green hectares. When the long discussed Stage 2, which is now underway, is completed it will still total less than 40,000 green hectares. Major crops are sandlewood, mangoes, chia, melons, grapefruit. Some is exported, but none from Wyndham it mostly goes via Perth.
Argyle Lake is a massive expanse of what appears to be mainly deep water and I hope my photos do it justice. The Argyle Mine is massive with half a mountain cut into. The Bungle Bungles are truly extraordinary, as is the fact that they really only came upon the Australian consciousness in the early 1980's. I wont try to describe them, but let our photos do the talking. We landed at Turkey Creek to view the Warmun Aboriginal Art Centre, which in contrast to Kununurra, was very well presented in a Closed Aboriginal Community. No access without permission, no alcohol, no photographs without permission (which was readily given). I don't feel adequate to comment on the art, but I am gradually developing an "eye". We were again presented with some traditional dancing preceded by a smoking ceremony-we had to walk thru' some eucalypt smoke, which was clean and refreshing and reminded me of how the Sydney North Shore used to be when we were all burning-off on a Sunday afternoon, before the Greenies took over!

We then had an interesting drive back to the moored ship on the Wyndham jetty, which took a bit over two hours. I appreciated the opportunity to see the country we had mostly flown over, from the ground.

Tuesday 1st June
Nice gentle rocking to sleep with a comforting engine drone in the background. Beautiful warm mild weather with a good weather forecast for the "Expedition", not allowed to call it a cruise! The water was a lovely clear aqua colour as we left Darwin. Now that we are well in to Joseph Bonaparte (otherwise known as "blown apart") Gulf the water is muddy and this got even browner as we entered the narrower Cambridge Gulf with all the rivers flowing into it.

We received yet another unnecessarily long briefing from the Chief Guide who confused everyone with too much information. After lunch and tying up at the Wyndham Jetty we were bussed to Kununurra via Wyndham township to visit the Warringarri Art Centre on the edge of town. This was poorly presented in terms of facilities and tidiness, but at the end of the day we witnessed a very authentic dance/corroboree performance. Most interesting with great rythum. Gail was entranced. Wingham is a battling little town of 800 people 70% indigenous. Kununurra, 120 kilometers south, is new and fresh and now has 8,000 people. Major industries are the irrigation and the Argyle Diamond mine.

Then back to the ship for a shower and late dinner. Very good dinner companions for the second night in a row in the form of Peter, a Macquarie Street dentist and his Canadian wife, Jan. Peter is obviously a very keen photographer with great equipment. Suggested he put his photos on a web album for us all to enjoy!

Monday 31st May
An early morning walk along the waterfront revealed the Orion coming in. Took many photos hoping I had the right boat, which proved correct. The local ABC Radio are quite categoric that the wet season ended and the dry season began last night, with the arrival of a gentle southerly wind. The change is about a month late.
As scheduled we met the rest of the NSW Art Gallery group at yet another Gallery. Some very substantial purchases were made (by others). We then toured the Supreme Court art collection before taking our by now familiar bus to the Museum and Art Gallery of the NT and then on to Charles Darwin University to see the indigenous exhibits and they provided a sandwich lunch. They also have a graphic printing business which we visited. At each of these venues we were given most interesting talks by enthusiastic, knowledgeable experts. A feature was the blending of the old and the contemporary in modern indigenous art. There were no extravagant claims or long standing cultural heritage although there certainly is a heritage of artistic work in a whole variety of forms in Aboriginal societies.

We did a lengthy bus run to collect luggage from endless hotels enroute to the wharf. First impressions on board, very favourable. Well presented relatively roomy cabin. Too many safety drills and a talkative chief guide who clearly likes the sound of his own voice. The Group are relating well and prospects look good. Sailed on schedule at 5:30PM and great views of Darwin in the setting sun, from the water. Also photographed a great sunset as we sailed off in to it. Dinner in the sumptuous large dining room was excellent.

Start
We set off on this long-planned trip by flying to Darwin tomorrow. Neither Gail nor I have ever been there. After working in four different states (Queensland, NSW, SA and WA), and having had national responsibility for the Dalgety branch network throughout Australia when I visited every single branch (bar one), and having had the opportunity to see much of the world; it strikes me as odd that I have never been to Darwin or the Kimberleys. However, that is about to be corrected.

The trip on the Orion has a focus on Aboriginal art, being sponsored by the Art Gallery of NSW. I have to admit having little interest in Aboriginal Art and a certain scepticism about the true heritage history all those dots.Namatjira did't paint like that. I wonder if that view will change as I become better informed?

Saturday 29th May
Awoke to discover that The Australian newspaper had finally run one of my letters with which I have been bombarding them, about the scandal of the Lower Lakes.

Cool and wet as we left Boyd Cottage in the capable hands of Ernst and Valda as we headed for the airport.
Cloud cover and some turbulence as we headed north-west. Very frustrating as we flew over the familiar western NSW country and couldn't see a thing. Thought I spotted the Cobar/Bourke road divide through the clouds just out of Nyngan, but didn't see the ground again until around Hungerford when it cleared. From then on we got great views. First of the distant Bulloo Overflow water way out to the west. We were on the wrong side of the aircraft to see Thylungra and Windorah, but got a great view of the Cooper Channels then Lake Yamma Yamma near Haddon Corner (cnr. of SA). You could actually see the green grass in the channels from 30,000 feet and I was reminded of someone saying to me recently that if it looks good from the air (he was talking about 3,000 feet) it is fabulous on the ground! After flying over Farrar's Creek we crossed the Diamentina where the channels (flood plain) were wider than the Cooper. We went right over the top of what I think was Monkira Station and saw lots of the Georgina Channels. This country is having a wonderful season and there is still water running in the main water course channels, but most of the flood water has receded leaving prolific growth and lots of full lakes. It really hits you just what enormous areas of land I am talking about and the distances. The Lake Eyre catchment runs right up to around Mt Isa and it makes you wonder why it doesn't get more water, until you think about how much dissipates in the flood runners and lakes; something the South Australians don't seem to understand in respect to those Queensland rains which theoretically run in to the Darling.

We flew along what I took to be the eastern side of the Barkly Tableland where I was surprised to see areas that had been flooded and which I took to be carrying a big body of feed. I must have a look at all this country on the ground before too long. We then ran into tropical like poor quality timber country as we passed Katherine and then the inevitable cumulus tropical clouds as we descended into Darwin. VERY humid and hot followed by a heavy downpour soon after we arrived. The "Mantra on the Esplanade", as the name suggests, looks out over a green park to the water-approaches to the harbour. Somewhat surprisingly it actually faces south as the Darwin CBD is on a peninsular which curls to the south.
The city is fresh and new, having been largely rebuilt following Cyclone Tracy on Christmas Eve 1974. At that time the population was only 48,000 people and all but 11,000 were evacuated to southern capitals prior to the rebuilding. Population has since grown to 120,000-still relatively small.
We went for a walk along the waterfront between showers and returned to the Mantra for an early dinner.

Sunday 30th May
After a too large breakfast we went looking for a Church and fortunately (?providentially) found the Anglican Christ Church Cathedral where the service was only ten minutes old-so we joined. Quite high church and we felt very much at home. The Cathedral a modern structure, was built after Cyclone Tracy amidst the gardens with much use of glass to bring the outside in. Only one arch of the old Church remains.
Met a guy who had been at Kings School with my Godfather's son John when I was jackerooing with my Godfather at Talwood. The Dean was the grandson of a former Bishop of Adelaide, but not the one who built the Etonia (a la Eton College) a boat which still plies the Murray and which I was able to locate for Adrian Swire.

We walked back past the Supreme Court,Government House, Parliament House and along the waterfront. These are all bright, relatively new buildings set in much greenery. It helps to have a fresh start-post Cyclone Tracy.We took the round trip on a tourist shuttle to visit the main sights of Darwin and precisely at the appointed hour we were picked up by the NSW Art Gallery organised bus to visit a private graphic printing business which works with indigenous artists across northern Australia to produce print editions of their work. I was particularly interested in firstly, how much the art work reflected true heritage and second what positive impact the enterprise has on building economic sustainability for the artists and their communities. The general impression in respect to the latter was not huge, but "every little bit helps".

We subsequently visited a number of Art Galleries where some of our number made purchases. Gail and I gave the market visit a miss and had a relatively early night after very slow service in the hotel dining area.
NOW SCROLL UP!
TO READ THE OFFICIAL LOG OF THIS EXPEDITION GO TO

Irrigation

2010-05-05T10:51:00.000+10:00

Extract from an Email Exchange following last night's 7:30 Report. It sums up my basic position.
I just wish all of those irrigation knockers would get a better understanding of the massive variability of our rivers, the magnitude of the bigger events and the opportunity to have good sustainable economic activity, including irrigation AND good environmental outcomes. We need more storages to conserve a small proportion of water in the big events (actually quite a lot of water), but those storages must be efficient. "Efficient" basically means minimising evaporation (depth) and having the flexibility to allow medium and smaller flows to pass through.

ABC 7:30 Report

2010-05-04T20:54:00.000+10:00

Tonight's 7:30 Report provoked the following response from me to the reporter, my friend Paul Lockyer, who has reported so well on all the water out west.

Dear Paul,

Tonight's 7:30 Report made my hair stand on end! The only more inefficient water storage than Menindee Lakes in the MD Basin is the Lower Lakes themselves. Consider this extract from my Blog:-

"The South Australian's claim that the dreadful condition of the Lower Lakes (Alexandrina and Albert) is due to extractions and lack of fresh water from upstream. No mention of the fact that under natural conditions the Lower Lakes were sometimes salty and sometimes fresh depending on fresh water flows, or lack of them, from upstream in Victoria, NSW, and Queensland. No mention of the impact of the building of "The Barrages" at the mouth of the lakes which converted the Lakes to all times fresh with the expectation that there would always be sufficient fresh water flows from upstream.

Under natural conditions with no dams in the Upper Murray catchment and no Snowy diversions, with the minimal run-off of the recent drought years, the Murray would have stopped flowing some three years ago. Salt water would have entered the Lakes and the lower reaches of the river itself as it always did under such dry conditions in the past, prior to the building of the Barrages. So it can be argued that the dire condition of the Lakes is largely a man-made problem.It is only the water stored in the Upper Murray dams, the Snowy diversions and restrictions on irrigation that have enabled the Murray to maintain any flow at all. The solution to the Lower Lakes problem lies downstream, not upstream."

Messrs. Kingsford and Young are well aware of this, but it apparently doesn't suit their agenda! There is an organisation based around Goolwa who are pushing for the opening up of the barrages and I asked their spokesperson why there was so much resistance and received this most insightful reply:-

"Good question David, not sure exactly, why the resistance to restoring the Lower Lakes to an estuarine ecosystem.

My feeling is that it is career suicide for anyone to come out with this option. And it is people with careers who are in charge of fixing this.

SA folk are going to feel as though they have lost the battle over water. When do you say, "Uncle"?

It would not go over well to be labelled the politician who gave up. I don't know of a single politician in SA who has stated they are in favour of the estuarine idea. In fact all the political parties have stated a 'freshwater only' official stance.

Given that the government has such a bias, then any scientist, civil servant or academic is treading on thin ice to say differently. Especially if they want that next contract, job or grant.

The local community advice groups consist of farmers, irrigators, and locals who either have vested interests in freshwater lakes, or don't want to change.

The water levels will most likely be lower than a full freshwater lake. When full the lakes are .7 meters above sea level. Most people have fixed jetties including the local marinas.

It is difficult and uncomfortable to be vocally in favour of the death of a freshwater ecosystem that for most people is the only ecosystem they've known in the region."

There is only a small irrigation industry which draws on the Lower Lakes. There is a sensible proposal to build a weir upstream at a place called Wellington and pipe water to the irrigators from there.

I had a fly over the Darling, Warrego, Paroo, the Bulloo Overflow and the Cuttaburra Basin last Sunday week. Full report on my blog-http://davidboydsblog.blogspot.com

Best wishes,

David

Australian Irrigation Misunderstandings

2010-05-04T12:11:00.001+10:00

Arguably the world's leading weekly, "The Economist" recently ran an article on this subject. A well informed commentator wrote the following comment.
"There are great misunderstandings about Australia's water/irrigation situation. I contend that 90% of current water problems are the result of drought and around 10% mismanagement and over-allocation. It is disturbing to see Ken Henry so misinformed. Allocating water to the Lower Lakes (an estuarine system at the mouth of the Murray River converted in to a highly inefficient fresh water storage principally for recreation)and storing water in the shallow Menindee Lakes are issues which should be addressed.The Government buying water entitlements when there is no water, will do nothing for our rivers in drought times and only restrict production when there is plenty of water around. Remember Australia's river flows are massively variable and water is dynamic, it runs to the sea or it evaporates, it doesn't wait for you.In the present drought if it was not for the big dams in its headwaters,the Snowy River diversions and severely limited irrigation extractions, the Murray River would have stopped flowing three years ago. Australia needs more storages, but they must be efficient(deep)and highly flexible to allow medium and smaller flows to pass.They would store water by taking the top off the big events. These events are totally irregular, but surprisingly frequent-just like what has happened in the Darling catchment since Christmas.The governments purchase of the famous Toorale Station to save its water extractions, has proven a great waste of taxpayer's money. Had Toorale been operating since Christmas it would have extracted 0.4% of the flow in the Darling. $23.75m for 0.4% of the flow!!!"

Bourke Show Visit - Travel Log

2010-04-28T11:39:00.194+10:00

Thursday 22nd April,2010
After discovering the BMW had a flat battery, I finally set off from St Ives at 12 midday and drove straight to Dubbo. Only took 4.5 hours with one stop for a McDonald's hamburger in Mudgee.

The Dubbo visit was focussed on the Clyde alumni. I stayed with former Toorale and Pier Pier Managers, David and Robin Englert, in their very comfortable home. A nicer couple you would not find. They both have lived in the bush all of their lives and have four grown up sons. They have great values and understand how the corporate pastoral scene operates. Robin's father was a Station Manager and David (a solicitor's son from West Wyalong), was a long time employee of the old Scottish Australia Company (SACO). He and I first met in the back bar of Bourke's "Fitz's Hotel" (Fitzgeralds Post Office Hotel) in 1960. I was 19 at the time and a very junior employee of Dalgety, David was a jackeroo (or Overseer) on Moombidary Station over the Queensland border, west of Hungerford. I often say that that bar is where I learned to drink!

David was the first Station Manger recruited by Clyde after Swire's took over from Dudley Dunn in 1988 and he and Robin played a big part in establishing the Company's caring culture in those important formative years. They were great mentors for young staff and also had considerable success with recruitment, including Tony and Michelle McManus who later managed Toorale.

We had dinner at the new Chinese Restaurant within the Macquarie Club, with former Clyde staff the Englerts, Tony and Michelle McManus (Wingadee and Toorale until its tragic sale to the Government in 2008)and Bob and Fran Ellis (Merrimba). The Ellis' had a long connection with our family thru' our respective fathers. Both worked for the old AML&F Company and Dad was Bob's father's best man in 1943, only six years before Dad's premature death from Hodgkins Disease. A very enjoyable evening.

Friday 23rd April
Drove to Bourke via Coonamble and Walgett. Ever since Sydney the country looks quite magnificent with a huge body of summer grasses.Clyde are not encouraging visitors as they enter the sensitive selling period, so I did not call on any of the Coonamble Stations, but I did have a good look at the wonderful Wingadee, which is traversed extensively by public roads! As you would expect it is in peak condition. I was particularly impressed with how well the Bambatsi panic has finally established itself in Lower Bullock and the Nursery Paddocks in the Castlereagh River flood country. Three wet summers have helped. It is notoriously hard to establish, but great once it gets a go on. On the negative side, the regrowth of dogwood in the country we cleared in Rheeces Paddock is alarming.

The country gets even greener and lusher as you approach Brewarrina. There has clearly been a push to lift presentation of the Brewarrina township. Some smart new signage as you approach and the town was better presented than I have seen it for some years.

I called on Murray and Skye Bragg who are now managing Beemery Station for the new owners-the Nugent family now of Glen Innes, but formerly of Tambo. Murray and Skye have moved to the Yambacoona (Beemery add-on) homestead, as for reasons unknown, the Beemery homestead, cattle yards, main shearing shed and quarters have all been located on the Beemery Cotton Farm which was subdivided from the rest of the Station, as Clyde wished to retain it! Why this was done goodness only knows as the whole Beemery Station homestead complex was established to service a sheep station not an irrigation operation, which has its infrastructure, including housing, closer to the developed fields. In any event the Nugents are lucky to have the services of the Braggs and they have got off to a wonderful start with a spectacularly good season,a full complement of livestock, rumoured to have been bought very cheaply from Clyde. The Beemery flock of some 12,000 Egelabra blood classed ewes is a wonderful asset in the current sheep price boom. I recall with some sadness how excited the then Clyde management were when we were able to purchase Beemery from the Russell family (Logan Downs Pastoral Co.) in 1994. It is recognised as one of Bourke's very best grazing properties and had extensive water licenses.

The Beemery Cotton Farm, which Clyde have retained, is undoubtedly the best cotton development on the Barwon/Darling with the great benefit of deep storages and great soils. It took eight years to get the approvals (for the water storages-the irrigation licenses were already in place) from the NSW Government and I have often attributed my very grey hair to the frustrations of dealing with dark green bureaucrats over the Beemery development. These bureaucrats made an art form of the saying that "delay is the most insidious form of denial". The whole matter is worthy of a book in its own right. Whilst it was going on I read Tony Grey's book on the Jabiluka uranium mine. It was good therapy, as it made me realise that I was not the first person to endure the delights of dealing with those who think they know better than their political masters and wish to block those who want to create wealth, pay tax and generate economic activity to the great benefit of all concerned. There were times when I felt these resistors of progress should have been tried for treason!

I arrived in Bourke in time for a drink with Richard Turner, former Clyde GM -Pastoral, and dinner with Geoff and Anne Wise at the Port of Bourke Hotel. Very familiar territory as this pub was until about two years ago owned by Clyde.

Geoff Wise, a veterinarian by training, is the General Manager of the Bourke Shire, having previously been the Regional Director of the Department of Land and Water Conservation and the Western Lands Commissioner. He was a valuable member of the Darling Matilda Way Sustainable Region Advisory Committee which I chaired. How lucky Bourke is to have this high calibre couple as enthusiastic residents.

Also present at the Hotel were most of the stud breeders offering rams at tomorrow's sale. I have often noted that Bourke's merino ram sale, run in conjunction with the Show, is one of the few sales you can go to where the breeders from the three dominant medium and strong wool stud breeding areas are represented-the Macquarie Valley,the Riverina and South Australia. It was not an early night.

Saturday 24th April
The crowd at the Bourke Show was below expectations, although I still saw lots of people I knew. The local grazing fraternity are a fine group who relate well to each other and I much enjoy their company. Les Walsh from Landmark (formerly Dalgety) who I have known for 47 years and who was a key player in Clyde operations, as our local agent, hosted a dinner at the "Pub" that evening.
Not entirely by accident I met Tim Lee from ABC Landline (Victoria) who was keen to do a TV interview for running on a future Landline programme. Tim proved a most interesting and intelligent companion and he joined Les,Nick Wadlow (my friend Rob Ashby's son-in-law from Old Ashrose in S.A.)and a friend of his Craig, for a most enjoyable dinner.

Sunday 25th April
Following all of the recent rain, particularly in south-western Queensland there is a huge amount of water coursing down the western rivers and I was keen to have a look at this from the air.
We had arranged a flight in a high wing light aircraft for today, so I was alarmed to hear some showers of rain on the roof overnight.The day dawned showery and overcast and prospects did not look good. We had some misgivings embarking on this venture on what was Anzac Day. At 5:45AM Les Walsh and I attended a small moving Dawn Service at the Bourke War Memorial in Central Park. I recalled that in the small rotunda at this same park the Queen and Prince Phillip were officially welcomed to Bourke a few years ago.

Our pilot and the aircraft owner was to be John Oldfield from Belalie Station a man in his mid-seventies who knows the back country very well from the air, and the aforementioned Les Walsh, who has been in Bourke for some 40 years and knows the country very well at ground level.

After nearly giving it away, the weather looked better to the south-west so we decided to change our proposed route and go for a fly down the Warrego on Toorale and then decide whether it was worth going on. The three of us finally took off about 10:00 AM and headed for Boera Dam on Toorale. The dam was still spilling to the south west, the pipes were open and the left bank bywash was running. The banks which stop the spilled water from running back to the river have been over-topped in several places and there was plenty of water running back into the river.

I felt quite sick at seeing all of the improvements we had made to this great property falling in to disrepair. The new cattle yards,new shearing shed,three new houses,lots of ponding, all of the laser levelled fields and cotton farm roads and channels-all looking sad and neglected.The whole episode is a tragedy with the current flood demonstrating the main feature of this Station. I just hate waste from every perspective and I don't think the Clyde management had any real understanding of what enormous waste was involved in selling Toorale to the Government to become a National Park.

The Homestead Dam is seriously breached and I understand there is no intention of carrying out repairs to this or the over-topped banks.Ross' Billabong has been running from the Darling and this water has met with the Warrego mainstream water creating a huge lake. Henry Lawson wrote a very colourful piece of prose describing Ross' Billabong and how it sometimes runs from the Darling to the Warrego and sometimes from the Warrego to the Darling. We also flew over the old shearing shed where Lawson worked as a "rouse-about" in 1892
.

The Warrego is carrying a big stream to the Darling at the main junction.Downstream on Talowla the Little Warrego is also carrying a stream of the spilled water which over flowed at Boera. For a full description of how the system works click here.

From Toorale we flew down the Darling to Louth and decided to abandon our plans to go all the way to Wilcannia to view the Paroo/Darling junction/s, but rather to fly due west over the Paroo/Cuttaburra water and then follow the Paroo upstream to Wanaaring.

As we flew down the Darling on Anzac Day I recalled that our famous war historian C.E.W. Bean, who did so much to create the Anzac tradition, also immortalised the Darling River in Australian history with his newspaper reports for the Sydney Morning Herald in 1909 which later formed two books-'On the Wool Track' and the 'The Dreadnought of the Darling'. The "Dreadnought" was the "Jandra" a modern replica of which plies the Darling weir pool to this day.His exposure to the Australians of the Darling did much to form his views on their characteristics and the reasons they made such good soldiers and this was carried in to his writings of their deeds from Gallipoli. The modern day leading political journalist Michelle Grattan has written a modern version of the first book-'Back on the Wool Track' to which I was able to make a small contribution and in which Toorale features.

The Paroo/Cuttaburra water was not as spectacular as I imagined it would be, and we flew right across it from east to west, flying over the Tongo homestead and Tongo Lake before heading north. In this area the water spreads widely into lots of "flood runners" and lakes.I think the main body had gone through, but I doubt that it will make a big contribution to the Darling. From Wanaaring we flew north/west over Peter Hughes Thurloo Downs homestead and then due west over Delalah Downs old house into the Bulloo Overflow country.This was one of the most spectacular things I have seen.Literally hundreds of thousands of acres covered in shallow water.Delalah Downs has an area of some 660,000 acres of which one third can be inundated from Bulloo water. Along with Thurloo Downs, Peter Hughes has 1.3mil acres, making him the biggest landholder in N.S.W. Gail and I have know him since he and his late wife Janet were good friends when we were first married and living at Nyngan in 1966. The Bulloo Overflow looked as I imagine Lake Eyre to look, with a distinct difference that it is not salty and it is beautiful soft soil which will explode with growth as the water dries back.We flew in a wide turn over almost continuous water until we struck the Queensland/NSW border before heading east along the border fence. This is BIG country and even in an aircraft it seems to tale a long time. We flew over Hamilton Gate, Merintu, and Moombidary, crossed the now much smaller Paroo below Hungerford and south west to the Cuttaburra Basin, another famous water body. The Cuttaburra Creek comes out of the Warrego just below the Cunnamulla weir and these days carries much more water than the Warrego. The basin is a huge area of land north of Yantabulla which is wonderful cattle fattening country and a notable bird breeding area.

From here we headed back to Bourke over Ford's Bridge, the flight having taken just on four and a half hours.
I count myself very fortunate to have flown with two such knowledgeable companions which meant that this trip lived right up to my high expectations. Between them John and Les identified every single homestead we flew over.

Tim Lee wanted to do a TV interview with me for Landline, this morning, but postponed it because of the poor light in the overcast weather. However, it was now a bright afternoon and we proceeded with this interview in the garden at the Riverside Motel. This Motel is of a very high standard in a group of historic buildings and is beautifully presented amidst a magnificent garden. It is a great asset for Bourke and a great credit to the owners John and Sipha Hickson.

One of the issues discussed in the TV interview was the recent unheralded action by the NSW Goverment to lower the 'cap' on annual water extractions from the Barwon/Darling by a further 17% from 173 gigalitres to 143 gigs. This follows the cut of entitlements a few years ago of 67% from 523gigs. This action is truly outrageous given the "rubbery" nature of the figures and the agreement with the NSW Government that the 173 figure was an interim minimum and would be revised upwards when the figures were firmed up as a result of the review of the model they were using. A committee was established to carry out this review and for some reason it has never completed its work. I was asked to attend a meeting of the Mungindi/Menindee Advisory Council at Walgett tomorrow to agree a course of action by the irrigators and concerned local citizens.

Following a much needed 'nap' I had a most enjoyable dinner with Les and Frances Walsh in the "Dalgety White House" (now their very comfortable home), where I have been many times before. One of the nice things about getting older is all of the past experiences shared with long term friends, and the bond this provides and enrichment it gives to good conversation. A most enjoyable evening and as usual great tucker from a gifted cook (Frances).

Monday 26th.April
I gave former Mayor and long term friend Wayne O'Mally a lift across to Walgett and we shared much information on a two hour drive. It reminded me of the old agency adage-if you want to get to know a client better-take him on a trip somewhere.

The meeting at Walgett was very well conducted by Chairman Ian Cole and was attended by the State and Federal M.P.s Kevin Humphries and Mark Coulton. Geoff Wise briefed the meeting on the extraordinary method used by the State Government, the Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) and the Independent Audit Group (IAG) to calculate the applicable 'cap' on irrigation extractions in each year. I wont try to explain it, because it is incomprehensible! It was always my understanding, and I was involved in all of the negotiations leading up to the signing of an MOU, which established the 173 gig figure as the interim minimum, that the model was to be used to establish the 'cap' and extractions would be simply the actual measured extractions. It now seems that somehow or other what the extractions should be in any particular year is also a modelled number and it is in comparison with this modelled number that the claim is made that the Barwon/Darling is exceeding'cap'. Frankly, I don't understand it, nor did anyone else present. I made a brief comment which covered four points:-

We were dealing with whether the 'cap' should be somewhere between 143 and 250 gigs.(when river heights were sufficient for any pumping at all), from a river which had an average annual flow past Bourke of 2500 gigs.Whatever figure was finally agreed, that did not seem an excessive impost in seeking a reasonable balance between environmental and socio-economic objectives.
The only basis for what the 'cap' should be was the wretched NSW model, which was admitted to be very "rubbery" and this was used by the three parties ie NSW Government,MDBA and the IAG
The 173gig figure was always intended as an interim number whilst the model was being validated/corrected and was also to be the minimum. The MOU clearly states that the final figure would be in the range of 173 to 250 gigs
There was an agreement that in philosophical terms, that at the various forums (particularly MDBA and COAG) the NSW Government would ,with irrigator support,strongly seek the maximum defensible 'cap' compared with the dark green attitude of wanting a low figure. They need to take a leaf out of the Queensland Government approach.

I was nominated to a Committee to meet with the Minister to discuss the matter at an early date, in spite of my protests that I no longer had any formal representational base.

Here is a link to all the photos I took on this trip.

Water Management-Facts and Myths

2010-04-21T10:27:00.001+10:00

My friend, noted economist, David Trebeck recently gave what I think is the best paper on the general subject of water that I have read. Here is the link I commend it to you.

Australian Wool Industry

2010-04-12T11:03:00.001+10:00

Attendance at yesterday's RAS Sheep and Wool Show Opening reminded me that I had never recorded the speech I was invited to deliver at the same event two years ago. It seems that it remains relevant to this great industry.

2008 SYDNEY ROYAL SHEEP AND FLEECE SHOW OFFICIAL OPENING
Acknowledgements:
President RAS- Rob Vickery (and Tina)
Chairman Sheep and Wool Committee- Robert Ryan
President NSW Stud Merino Breeders Association- Rob Lindsay-
President Australian Stud Sheep Breeders Association Ltd (NSW)-Ian Cameron
GM Agriculture RAS- Sue White

Ladies and Gentlemen
I am indeed very honoured to be asked to perform this task. Sheep and wool have played such a special place in Australia’s history both in economic and cultural terms.
It is great to be amongst so many friends and such magnificent animals and fleeces.

I am mindful of the platform this official opening has provided for the airing of some of the great issues that have beset the merino section in particular, of the wider sheep industry.
(I could have referred to destructive internecine warfare, but I thought better of that.)

What I would like to do in these few minutes is to share with you some broad observations covering the merino, meat and dual purpose sections of the overall “Sheep industry”. I am mindful that this is not only a merino Show.

Even that segmentation (merino,meat and dual purpose) is misleading as it infers that merinos are not meat sheep. The facts are, however unintended, many merino breeders/woolgrowers over the last decade or so, have been principally in the meat business at least until the last year or so, when we have seen better wool prices.
This fact has been well recognised by the NSW Stud Merino Breeders when they introduced the Merino Wether Lamb Challenge within the annual Dubbo Show and Sale-a very appropriate and innovative initiative.

The thinking and attitudes of all of us are greatly influenced by our individual experiences. In my case, twenty-eight years as an employee of Dalgety, what used to be known as a “Pastoral House” or a “Woolbroker”, then nineteen years with Clyde have left their mark.

According to the media Clyde is Australia’s largest woolgrower and its fourth largest cotton grower (when we have any water). (I understand we run number seven with wheat and are one of the largest beef producers in NSW, but are not in the big northern Australian beef league).

Clyde runs 120,000 merino breeding ewes with 12,000 of these on Pier Pier at Coonamble, being joined to Borders. The tops of the Ist X ewe lambs from Pier Pier go to Wirribilla at Walcha where we run 10,000 Ist Border/ Merino X ewes which are joined to Dorsets. Thus the Company has considerable exposure to the wool and sheepmeat markets and a vital interest in the future of these industries.

We spent a not so small fortune in feeding our breeding ewes through the drought, being mindful of the massive drop in sheep numbers and the fact that the merino ewe is the cornerstone of both the wool and meat sheep industries.

Our management focus is on driving down unit costs of production. I believe that we producers can only have limited influence on consumer markets in the great population areas of the world and our main focus needs to be on the things we can control or influence.
In this regard the work the specialist meat breeds have done on genetics and nutrition over recent years, coupled with the development of export markets (lamb to U.S. in particular) has been one of the great success stories of Australian agriculture.

The merino segment has often been criticised for its lack of productivity increases. However, considerable progress has been made, particularly in producing more wool of lower micron on larger animals. This real progress is masked in the aggregate figures. You could not fail to be impressed when you look at the wool quality and quantity on the magnificent animals you see around us here today.

More needs to be done to reduce wool harvesting costs, not to mention the urgency of developing practical mulesing alternatives. In the short term, whether the intradermal approach or the use of clips proves the way to go, I’m not sure. What I am confident of, is that with the current pressures the industry will find a way. Longer term, surely a genetic solution will be developed-whether that be producing bare-bottomed sheep (with plenty of wool elsewhere) or genetically developing infertile blowflies, remains to be seen. I don’t think Australia would be the poorer if the blowfly entered the threatened species list, although there would no doubt be a dark green group somewhere which would find cause for complaint. After all we now have people in Victoria trying to have the dingo declared a threatened species.
Australia produces 60/70% of the world’s apparel wool-the only broadacre industry where Australia is the dominant world producer. So it is vitally important that we have a vibrant, innovative sheep industry led in genetic terms by the stud breeders.

Whilst agriculture continues to grow in absolute terms, this growth has been tiny compared with the massive growth of our minerals and energy sector. Agriculture remains a significant contributor to our export income.

However, Australia’s ever increasing urbanisation means that agriculture is an area of considerable mystique to much of our population and is faced with a very real communications challenge in “selling” its benefits to the broader Australian populace. It is events such as the Royal Easter Show, which provide a wonderful opportunity to take up this challenge.

All too often agriculture is seen as environmentally damaging and yesterday’s business, with the wool industry in particular singled out for much criticism. How frequently do we hear the criticism, often from people who ought to know better, that all we have done in Australia is apply inappropriate European agricultural methods to a land we did not understand? This is truly insulting to our forbears, let alone to some of the world’s very best agricultural scientists.

Our forebears quickly identified the fact that merino sheep thrived, particularly in our arid and semi-arid areas and could produce top quality wool. I have always been impressed by the way our early stud breeders identified the Riverina and the Macquarie as areas where merinos would thrive and set up their studs there, so soon after white settlement.

As for being yesterday’s business, reflect on the fact that over the last 15 years, in the face of generally low prices, but with premiums for finer wools, and throw in the worst drought in Australia’s recorded history, the industry has adapted by halving the total sheep flock whilst doubling the production of wools 19micron and finer. I am not talking in % terms, but in absolute quantities.

What happened to the salinity beat-up (at least in Eastern Australia) of a decade ago? Now the negative focus is on “climate change” and the fact that we will have variable seasons. I wonder what some of these evangelists think we have been dealing with for the last 200 years?

I was much impressed with the wheat farmer on a recent Four Corners programme who when asked about climate change quite innocently responded “we definitely had that-it is always highly variable and is always changing”!

With those few observations let me conclude by simply saying-
The stud breeders of Australia of all commercial animals carry a huge responsibility to lead the way with genetic improvement. They stand at the top of the genetic pyramid and lead the industry on the genetic front.

It is imperative that they remain open-minded and embrace relevant science and technology that contributes to the need to produce ever more productive animals.

I congratulate all of the exhibitors on the quality we see before us both in the sheep and fleeces and I have great pleasure in declaring the 2008 Sydney Royal Sheep and Fleece Show officially open.

David Boyd
29.03.08

Toorale Station, Bourke

2010-03-28T21:41:00.001+11:00

The purchase (for $23.75m)and closing down of Toorale Station at Bourke, can now be viewed with the value of two years hindsight and can be clearly seen as the great act of bastardry that many saw it as at the time.

It was an action totally driven by cheap politics for consumption in Adelaide, that will have negligible beneficial impacts for the Murray River and very damaging socio-economic impacts on the local Bourke community.

The purchase of irrigation licenses when there are no allocations (or in Toorale's case river heights below pumping or diversion levels) has no benefit when water is scarce and will only limit production when water is plentiful-like it is now.

Since Christmas and prior to the arrival of the latest flood waters from Queensland the equivalent of three Sydney Harbours has flowed down the Darling past Bourke. Had the Toorale water licenses been operable Toorale would have extracted a mere 10,000 megalitres-0.7% of the flow.

The conversion of Toorale to a National Park takes out of play Bourke's most productive property and denies the Bourke Shire Council 10% of its shire rates. And this in a world screaming for increased food production.
Will we ever learn?