Chickens come home to roost
Twenty years ago in Australia when I was studying agriculture many people who wouldn’t then, and probably still wouldn’t, describe themselves as environmentalists understood that farming on “the oldest continent” (a reference to the age of the soils) was fundamentally unsustainable.
Articles I wrote that stick in my mind include one interview with a university lecturer who was proposing getting rid of the hard-hooved European animals and simply “farming” free-range kangaroos – since their soft feet cause almost no erosion. And with Tim Flannery, Australia’s foremost public intellectual, who suggested the sustainable human carrying capacity was a few million (population now 20 million).
And there was a great deal of concern about the Murray-Darling basin – then primarily about salinity – for the salt of millennia that had been washed deep into the ground was being brought back to the surface by irrigation water, but some were also questioning whether the level of irrigation licences bore any reality to the water available.
Now, it is clear, they didn’t:
The Prime Minister said yesterday that unless there is substantial rain within a month, there would be no water allocations for irrigation or environmental flows from July 1. “We should all pray for rain,” he said.
The looming catastrophe will directly affect the 50,000 farmers who depend on the river system for their livelihoods as well as the millions in Adelaide and the numerous towns along the basin, which stretches from southern Queensland to South Australia.
Quite simply, there are too many people in Australia for the environment to support. I’ve seen many estimates from pre-colonial times of the Aboriginal population, but it was probably around Flannery’s estimate. How it can get back there is, however, an interesting question…



It’s not the gross numbers, but how we choose to live.
Now they are talking about shutting down the Snowy Mountains hydro plants, which supply Canberra’s electricity.
At this rate, Kevin Rudd won’t be taking power, he will be setting up a crisis government to deal with a national disaster.
Mind you, there are plenty of Australians like me (and probably you) who think that disaster has been going on for twenty years.
Comment by david tiley — April 22, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
I hadn’t heard about the Snowy hydro but it doesn’t surprise me – no doubt that electricity will instead be generated by some carbon polluting method, which will then further stuff up the climate etc etc…
Comment by Natalie Bennett — April 22, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
[...] According to Sydney, in the Antipodes (he fraternally provided some examples from New Zealand) settlers fought hard to cultivate land much more marginal than that which was left unused in Britain, and despite droughts and fires exported their produce overseas and made a good living. He praised Hitler’s agrarian policy, which utilised German land more fully and reduced the need for imports, and was puzzled that the British preferred the picturesque over the productive, `the dangerous result of a short-sighted policy […] beauty will not feed a nation’s workers (or employ them), and in these times efficiency is a more valuable asset than is scenery’. There’s no question that Britain in 1940 was underutilising its land, since during the war it made strenuous efforts to increase the area under cultivation, so as to reduce the need for imports (and hence vulnerability to U-boats). But from the perspective of 2007, in the middle (or, hopefully, near the end) of the worst drought on record, it seems strange to boast of how intensely Australia uses even marginal land: it’s precisely this sort of behaviour that has landed us in the current fine mess. [...]
Pingback by Airminded · An Anzac on England — April 24, 2007 @ 4:08 pm