Media release:12th October 2009
Senator the Hon. Penny Wong, Minister for Climate Change and Water
The Australian Government has appointed a new expert scientific panel to provide advice on the long-term management of the Coorong and Lower Lakes, Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Penny Wong, announced today.
“The Rudd Government has committed $330 million to support the South Australian Government in addressing the many challenges facing the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth,” Senator Wong said.
“As part of this commitment, the Australian Government has advanced funds to South Australia for feasibility work on a long-term solution to the environmental problems facing this icon site.
“The number one priority is to avoid acidification.”
The Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts has engaged a panel of experts with hydrological and ecological expertise to advise the Federal Government on management options now under development in South Australia.
“The panel will provide expert advice to inform the Commonwealth's contribution to South Australia's long-term planning process — helping to ensure that the final plan is well grounded in science, and strives for the best and most practical outcomes," Senator Wong said.
Members of the expert group are:
Don Blackmore — former Chief Executive of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission
Dr Andrew Herzceg — CSIRO Land and Water Hydrology Research Program
Prof Gary Jones — Chief Executive of the eWater CRC
Prof Richard Kingsford — School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales
Assoc Prof David Paton — Head of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Adelaide
Adjunct Assoc Prof Keith Walker — School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide.
The $330 million provided to support South Australia in meeting the challenges faced in the Lower Lakes area include:
$200 million towards a long-term plan for the Lower Lakes and Coorong;
up to $120 million towards the cost of irrigation and drinking water pipelines for communities dependent on the Lower Lakes; and
up to $10 million for bioremediation and revegetation to help address the risk of acidification.
Other Rudd Government commitments to South Australian water projects include $328 million towards the Adelaide desalination plant and $137 million for eight stormwater harvesting and wastewater recycling projects across South Australia.
Shirley's comments: It is important to have scientific committees, however it is also important to listen to and involve others that are also concerned about this issue with a non scientific background. Scientists cannot be trained to have the experience of years and years of living and working on the land. Peter Andrews is a natural for this position because he understands so well the functioning of water and plants in the landscape. It is called ethics. We must not become so scientifically minded that important issues are disregarded because they do not fit into a time frame or are not seen as financially viable. This poorly degraded landscape in SA needs to be protected from those that wish to exploit it further. I noticed that irrigation will be a part of the plan before the reparation has even begun. There are not many that could face a challenge like that but I believe in all fairness to Australians Peter Andrews should be given a chance to be involved in such a project if he was willing to take the job. Like minded people like scientists trained to think one way who are ununable to understand Natural Sequence Farming (no disrespect intended) is even more reason to have Peter on the committee as there needs to be opposition and opposing views to stop serious mistakes. There should be at least some areas where NSF should be implemented to show that NSF should be given the benefit of the doupt by govenment and scientists. I noticed that $200 milion dollars has been given to the planning of this project PLANNING! what about implementing! I would like to hear what Peter thinks about that. Could he get involved. Will Penny Wong give him a go? Would Peter do it if he could?
Coorong
Moderator: webmaster
-
Shirley Henderson
- Posts: 356
- Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
- Location: Thirlmere
Ethics committees essential in decsion making process
The reasons to have ethics involved in the decision making about water ways including Natural Sequence Farming is to protect the land from decisions based solely on scientific approaches aimed at financial gain. In restoring our landscape it is important to include the survival of all living things. Although we need waterways to assist with the growing of food for future generations it is not just a resource, it is a life giving source. Natural Sequence Farming has shown that there are ways to bring water back to the landscape as a functioning whole incorporating the survival of whole landscape systems.
We need these important views to be incorporated into decision making if our landscape is to survive tampering by scientists with money to spend.
I believe that it is our right as Australians to demand that Peter Andrews be listened to and for his opinions to be publicly documented for further research in the future.
Excerpts from Wikipedia
Aldo Leopold argues that the next step in the evolution of ethics is the expansion of ethics to include nonhuman members of the *biotic community,* collectively referred to as "the land." Leopold states the basic principle of his land ethic as, "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise."
He also describes it in this way: "The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land...[A] land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such."
*Biotic communities may be of varying sizes, and larger ones may contain smaller ones. The interactions between species are especially evident in food or feeding relationships. Therefore, a practical method of delineating biotic communities is to map the **food network** to identify which species feed upon which others and then determine the system boundary as the one that can be drawn through the fewest consumption links relative to the number of species within the boundary.
**Food chains describe the eating relationships between species within an ecosystem or a particular living place. Many types of food chains or webs are applicable depending on habitat or environmental factors.
Shirley’s comments: Although scientists would be aware of the above I don’t understand why they would discount plants such as willows with their restorative traits and other plants deemed as weeds. They also provide food, shelter, habitat, water, soil health and the list goes on.
We need people with the ethics of the landscape at heart to be involved in such a huge undertaking. When our future and the future of our children are at stake it should not be up to Government and one bunch of scientists to make all the calls. Their decisions have to have ethical considerations as well as practical and logical ones when preservation the continuance and restoration of Coorong Lakes, the Murray Darling and others.
Keep in mind that the Government is a business and business is about making money.
Our business is about living and living well as well as working with the land to ensure the survival of Australians and all it’s diversity.
We need these important views to be incorporated into decision making if our landscape is to survive tampering by scientists with money to spend.
I believe that it is our right as Australians to demand that Peter Andrews be listened to and for his opinions to be publicly documented for further research in the future.
Excerpts from Wikipedia
Aldo Leopold argues that the next step in the evolution of ethics is the expansion of ethics to include nonhuman members of the *biotic community,* collectively referred to as "the land." Leopold states the basic principle of his land ethic as, "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise."
He also describes it in this way: "The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land...[A] land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such."
*Biotic communities may be of varying sizes, and larger ones may contain smaller ones. The interactions between species are especially evident in food or feeding relationships. Therefore, a practical method of delineating biotic communities is to map the **food network** to identify which species feed upon which others and then determine the system boundary as the one that can be drawn through the fewest consumption links relative to the number of species within the boundary.
**Food chains describe the eating relationships between species within an ecosystem or a particular living place. Many types of food chains or webs are applicable depending on habitat or environmental factors.
Shirley’s comments: Although scientists would be aware of the above I don’t understand why they would discount plants such as willows with their restorative traits and other plants deemed as weeds. They also provide food, shelter, habitat, water, soil health and the list goes on.
We need people with the ethics of the landscape at heart to be involved in such a huge undertaking. When our future and the future of our children are at stake it should not be up to Government and one bunch of scientists to make all the calls. Their decisions have to have ethical considerations as well as practical and logical ones when preservation the continuance and restoration of Coorong Lakes, the Murray Darling and others.
Keep in mind that the Government is a business and business is about making money.
Our business is about living and living well as well as working with the land to ensure the survival of Australians and all it’s diversity.
Coorong
Lets face it Shirley, not this Government nor any other Government is going to fix these problems. For starters, as per usual they are looking at the wrong end of the problem. The Coorong is at the end of a very long problem, going all they way up the Murray into the Snowy Mountains. We, the people are the only ones going to fix the problem! We need to identify farmers along the river who are implementing NSF and encourage them to share with their neighbours, have open farm days with farmers witnessing the results. Peter cannot do this alone and we all need to help. Hopefully this grass roots approach will slowly spread up and down the river like a beautiful green carpet!
Re: Coorong
+1Julian wrote:Lets face it Shirley, not this Government nor any other Government is going to fix these problems. For starters, as per usual they are looking at the wrong end of the problem. The Coorong is at the end of a very long problem, going all they way up the Murray into the Snowy Mountains. We, the people are the only ones going to fix the problem! We need to identify farmers along the river who are implementing NSF and encourage them to share with their neighbours, have open farm days with farmers witnessing the results. Peter cannot do this alone and we all need to help. Hopefully this grass roots approach will slowly spread up and down the river like a beautiful green carpet!
Everything in moderation, including moderation.