Stupidity on environment is no joke in the bush

The people in the Murray Darling Irrigation areas are no dumber than the rest of Australia --yet they get treated so by the cynical shells of men like David Maher. Barry Cassidy too, like most journos, is running around when he should sit still for awhile . Its Scoop mode ( Evelyn Waugh)-- chasing the noise but missing the scoop right before his very eyes . His panel would never see that Tony Burke  is out of his depth on water issues resorting to completely offbeat catchphrases like algal blooms and acid sulphate soils ( Sure they exist - but only in great proportions in the panic minds of the easily led and the many bureaubrats hanging on in the service through the drip feed  )

For the Burkes of this world,  there is always another disaster to draw attention to - next week it will be the floods . Barry - worry when a politician smiles at you . It means he's leading and you are following !

Its all very well for city people  and the  ignorant on ABC Insiders to patronise , ( Maher in particular)  but none who got past kindergarten in complex ecological study  would come out with these clangers on the Murray Darling Plan   ( the italics are the big picture plan conservation constraints)
- "the plants will  adjust" ( green spokesman ) basic physiology means plants need a fixed amount of water it you starve plants they will weigh less and more farmers will give them away at below cost price( cauliflowers of late) as they do so often.   Trust the greens to think that one fact will make them experts in ecological matters.
-"Over allocation"  is not a dirty word .  the whole focus on numbers (overallocation ) by polys and the media is understandable- they want to make what's complex simple.
--the whole focus on numbers by polys and the media is understandable- they want to make what's complex simple .

You ask  the farmer to live by  a number.   How about you hold the crap artists in government for a number -- what is an environmental flow ---go on , ask the river health people 
- why does Michael  Taylor's crew  have to spend another few years trying to make sense - don't they know what they are doing?;  after all , who else would send people broke over water conservation when OVER allocations is ONLY applicable as a proportion of the supply system .

And if we have to do this to save the river - who cares; the people of austarial( according to the polys )  want the river to be saved .You can't have it both ways .  Make up your mind - if you only  half do the job you might as well do nothing . Overallocation allows you to store and be a conservationist  to do it when there lots around - its true conservation.

The meddling by the river worriers will only ever add a little el to the largely ecologically irrelevant mid peak flows ( in a dry land ) Any who ever studied water conservation on land knows that the seed is specifically placed to grow at the edges of the resilience cycle - not in the mish mash middle where more water would do nothing for the life of the riverine system

-- Burke wants to spend our taxes to try and stop farmers from using water when its there . If he  keeps cutting allocations the storage of the current flood water would be forbotten . The dumb focus on overallocation ignores that fact that States have always reviewed how much water a land holder can get in a dry period - Tony Burke is trying to riding a camel in a world that  can sometime best support buffalo.   The dummmy thinks that its cost effective to lower exepecetations by lowering a few estimates . The people who he takes seriously are more accountant like than ecology accountable

Why do Polys resort to taxes to try and do" conservation" ?

1. Because we let them,  and because the logic is simple . 
If you think about that ; It suits them and too many of us 

The public don't really want to do something about conservation .They don't want to give up anything .  They want the government to do everything . So the government tax our water and power on the logic that we will use less because it costs more - its brilliant logic and it suits everyone . 
Everyone that is , who doesn't think deeply about these things or those who are trained to do the hard vigilance planning and disciplined stuff that keeps conservation culture and our caring culture alive - 
All this latest move will do is drive is a reaction against conservation . 

The trouble with tax driven change of this type  is , amongst other things  is it gives a licence to our polys to spend our money telling us what to do .

-

2.Because money can motivate and governments have no other tools in the toolbox( at the moment )see the vehicles below)  . Mind you the lack of a method   won't stop them trying to find a few,,  and wasting money on that effort .  

 3 . Because the real stuff of conservation is much tougher-- and therefore even the tax money probably won't be used well . They like simple things 

.3 Because the real stuff of conservation is much tougher and you require competencies they increasingly don't have 

The consequences of this crass coercion is that conservation no longer remains a choice , that only tokens and changing objects of worship will be bought ( dying trees instead of biodiversity sprees) .

Even a lot of noise from the Greens won't be able to stop this unsustainable move into the dark of government directed nannyism and speculation.

The greatest evil is being done in the name of the best of intentions . Will the real conservationists please stand up !