Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

jennifer

Stop Global Warming, Stop Burning-Off in the NT

By

Maybe I have been a bit harsh with my title for this post? Then again, I am, after all, at heart, a global warming skeptic.

And now the NT government is proposing aboriginals stop burning-off to reduce C02 emmissions.

“Government figures show the Territory has Australia’s highest rate of emissions per person. The service’s hazard reduction officer, Patrick Skewes, says Indigenous land owners and communities need to change the way they use fire.

“They need to understand the damage that they’re doing too and that’s an educational program,” he said. “Just because you’ve had a bad habit for 100 years doesn’t mean to say that it’s a good thing … bad habits become cultural as well.”

Would this be a good outcome for the NT environment? Is there too much burning-off in the NT?

At this blog David Ward from WA has suggested:

“By insisting, through our political representatives, that CALM burn the bush more often, and more patchily, we will make it safer, see more wildflowers, avoid most animal deaths, and avoid dense, choking smoke from fierce wildfires. We will have to live with occasional light smoke from prescribed burns. If most litter were less than five years old, smoke would be minimal, and arson would be futile. All it could cause would be a mild, creeping fire, which would benefit the bush.

Think of the savings and benefits by working with nature, instead of fighting it. No more squadrons of aircraft, anxious home owners, and choking smoke for a week or more. The police could get on with catching burglars. More young Noongar people should be employed by CALM to help manage the bush with fire, restoring their culture and healing their self esteem.”

Read Ward’s entire post at https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000672.html

Cane Toads Threaten WA?

By

I received the following email from someone looking for advice:

“I rarely get involved in environmental causes but I think this one is worth it because the opportunity seems to be now or never. The consequences of cane toads don’t seem to be life or death but I’d certainly rather live without them and also save my tax payer dollars from trying to manage the problem later on. Same as international quarantine.

To me it’s a no brainer – but happy for any sceptics to tell me why I might be misguided… ”

Subject: Fw: help STOP THE TOAD

Hi everyone, please read this and log onto the online petition (takes
2mins of your time) to lobby the West Australian govt to support this
initiative to stop the cane toadentering WA. If they manage to cross
into the Kimberley, this will havedevastating consequences on our state’s biodiversity, and they will eventually make their way into the South-West. Please help by filling in the petition and forwarding this message on. Kath

if you have problems reading this email please go to
http://www.stopthetoad.com/sttemail.htm

URGENT – ALERT – JUNE 2005
We have just 4 months to STOP THE TOAD from entering WA!
Scientists and community groups in Western Australia and the Northern
Territory are combining forces to implement a trapping program to
stop cane toads reaching the Ord River as rains open the way for them in the next wet season (Nov 2005-March 2006).

The trapping program aims to Stop The Toad at a natural barrier
inside the NT.

Your help is sought to encourage state and federal governments to
support this initiative.

Sign the online petition at www.stopthetoad.com to inform the WA
Premier,the Northern Territory Chief Minister and the Federal Minister
for the Environment of our grave concern.

We take the fight to the toad and stop its advance across the top
NOW. Or we suffer the consequences for ever more.

Failure will mean the loss of much of the Kimberley’s amazing
biodiversity, with serious implications for WA’s tourism, economy and
Aboriginal communities.

Most people in the north of Australia believe it’s worth a try. We are
supporting them.
Please, support us, and let your friends know about this critical
issue too.

GO to www.stopthetoad.com

I am not sure that I would empty my piggy bank on the cause (see the plea for donations at the link) and I probably wouldn’t sign the petition because it seems over-the-top as in the following text,

“The cane toad’s rampage through Qld and the NT has already caused the local extinction of animals like quolls and some goanna species and the impacts on fresh water crocodiles, snakes and birds are bound to be just as devastating. This toxic feral pest eats any native animal that will fit into its mouth. It poisons anything that bites it or picks it up. It is toxic even at egg and tadpole stage. It is extinction in motion.

But I think it is great that WWF and the other conservation groups are focusing on ferals and weeds and stopping their spread – probably the best thing these groups can do for the environment is to raise awareness of these issues and prod governments into action.

Taralga’s Potential Windmills

By

Some residents of Taralga don’t like windmills and have sent me the following poster picture Download file (180 kb).

It came with the following text:

“Place on notice boards, dart boards, toilet doors……the mind boggles. Let’s just get the message out. No prizes for the most original use…………….”

I am not sure that windmills are the most efficient generators of electricity, and the people of Taralga (NE of Canberra) have a right to protest, but I actually think the windmills in the picture look rather beautiful.

On Pious Hope & Queensland’s Rangelands

By

The following note on rangeland management is from a reader of this blog who lives in western Queensland. The note was followed by the the comment that, “a major problem of rangeland management is that politicians and bureaucrats have undying faith in the efficacy of pious hope and regulation to rectify problems now largely caused by previous doses of pious hope and regulation”.

He writes,

“Among the myths of rangeland management are:-

1. that rangelands are fragile

Wrong on either meaning of “fragile”. In the sense of Wedgewood china, wrong because the organisms involved have had some millions of years of the vaguries of semi-arid and arid regions and are basically as tough as old boots.

In the ecological sense of “fragile” (having frequent changes in species composition), wrong because “resilience” is the ticket in these regions, not “stability”

2. that things happen slowly in the rangelands

Wrong – more that nothing much happens, then things can happen very rapidly and then nothing much happens – (but you don’t get to see this if your rangelands watching is by intermittent visits). Contrast “state and transition” vs “Clementsian succession”.

3. that one size fits all (the shifting spanner of management)

Lower George Street (in Brisbane) has a bad case of this at the moment.

So fire or not depends on what we have to manage. Pretty well documented that lack of fire got us to the current woody vegetation increase problem. And New England and Southern Africa experience says fire for managing some pasture species. Unusual to need fire every year for such management.

And (for rangeland) one of the Charleville Pastoral Laboratory results is that out here we are looking at about 90 percent of the dry matter by about the end of March, and we shouldn’t be aiming to use more than about 30 percent of that via grazing animals over the next 12 months – so there is the rest for roos etc and insects and mulch. And on the economics side, at least 90 percent of the net income will come from around 70-75 percent of the stocking rate.

I’m afraid we didn’t doo too well on this score for the last 4-5 years. But there is hope – a warm winter so far and 119mm in May and 72mm so far in June, and the pasture species are finally responding (even buffel seedlings in June), so we may be able to get back to the above.

This note follows the posting by Graham of 28th June which was Part 2 of ‘Managing our Rangelands’.

GM Ban Challenged

By

It is not every day that I agree with the Hon Warren Truss MP but today’s media release from him is a beauty:

Australian Agriculture Minister Warren Truss today called on State and Territory governments to end their moratoria on the cultivation of GM crops if they are at all serious about making their jurisdictions investment centres for biotechnology.

Mr Truss said that all the States, and the ACT, had sent delegations to the BIO 2005 conference in Philadelphia in the United States this week – looking to attract investment in their respective biotechnology sectors.

“How can the States and Territories hope to attract any investment while they keep their moratoria on GM crop cultivation in place?” he said.

“You also have to question the credibility of Victoria hosting next year’s Agricultural Biotechnology International Conference while maintaining a moratorium on the commercial use of agricultural biotechnology.”

Mr Truss said that, since 2003, the Australian Government had invested around $1.29 billion in biotechnology-related R&D.

“But the State’s moratoria mean that only the cotton and cut-flower industries can take advantage of the latest developments in GM crop breeding,” he said.

“The real losers are Australian farmers, who are quickly falling behind their major competitors as they are denied the benefits of new technologies.

“How much longer can Australian farmers match overseas competitors if unscientific State bans on genetically-modified organisms (GMO) deny them access to higher-yielding, pest and disease resistant, drought-tolerant plant varieties?

“These bans are usually based on claims that being GMO free will deliver marketing advantages for Australian products.

“How many more years do we have to wait for the so-called ‘market advantage’ to eventuate?

“Australia must continue to evaluate new GMO varieties in a sound scientific way to help build consumer confidence in the safety and benefits of these products. Agricultural biotechnology in Australia will go no where unless State-imposed bans on GMOs are lifted.

“If a particular State government wants a future as a centre for biotechnology, it must do more than offer support for the related research and declare itself a ‘bio-hub’.

“That government must allow that research to be commercialised and used by Australian farmers,” Mr Truss said.

This is Part 5 of my series on GM Food Crops. Part 4 was posted on 20th June and can be found at https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000681.html while Part 3 was posted on 14th and can be found at https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000662.html .

Managing Our Rangelands (Part 2)

By

In my first post on rangelands (Part 1, posted 22nd June), I wrote how these are vast areas covering most of Australia. And I asked the question, how should these areas be managed/not managed?

Graham Finlayson is a reader of this blog and has a property near Bourke in New South Wales. Graham is also an advocate of ‘holistic management’. His property has been destocked for 15 months out of the last 41. He has had 60mm of rain over the last fortnight.

According to Graham, “My decision on when to restock will be based on if and when the condition of the land and pasture are capable, as a minimum ground cover level is targeted.I always try to keep in mind what I want the place to look like in 5 to 10 years time and base todays decisions on that.”

Graham emailed the following comment on rangeland management:

“There is currently a lot of conflicting debate over how we are managing our rangelands, or in fact any of our land or ecosystems in general. This has been accelerated I believe by the ongoing drought, to the extent that most of the metropolitan population are now more aware and concerned.

Rather than look for pity for ‘the poor farmer’ with this kind of exposure, I feel embarrassed at the extent of the damage that we have inflicted on our landscape. The paddock does not become a dust bowl because of ‘the drought’, rather it is a direct result of the decisions we have made. If our management of stocking rates, crop choice, animal movement etc are based on hope, tradition, ignorance or apathy, and we do not put the health of our land first than it will suffer. This can happen in any season but we feel it the most when it just ‘won’t rain’.

I am a firm believer in the methods and philosophies of Alan Savory, which are being practiced in differing variations all over the world with great success. Rather than fight against what I was starting to learn, I embraced the new way of thinking as the answer that I had been looking for in my never ending battle against mother nature. Suddenly I realised that not only do we not have to be constantly struggling to survive, but we also have within our grasp the ability to greatly improve our ecology as well.

This country is badly scarred by claypans (bare ground) which I believe probably formed originally in the late 1800’s as a result of very poor grazing management. The Western Division (aprox. 45 per cent of NSW) actually carried 15 million dry stock equivalents (dse) or sheep in the late 1880’s until the inevitable drought of the 90’s which saw that number decimated. Since then, in over one hundred years we have averaged approximately 7 million dse with plenty of good and bad seasons throughout that period. This tells me that not only have we dramatically altered the landscape to the extent that we have halved its capability, but also that it had that capability. Even though we greatly improved our water and fencing etc we continued to gradually mine our resources through using management techniques not suited to our environment. If the land could sustain 15 million dse before we altered the environment then perhaps it will again, if we provide that sort of environment for a similar system to flourish.

Imagine the benefit to every country town of doubling production and profitability. Economic independence, more jobs and younger people, less crime and welfare dependence. The positive effects would be enormous, especially if the land management took into account inevitable dry spells as just another factor to be aware of and managed for without reducing profitability. It is these interrelated aspects of ecology, economics and people that holistic management is all about.

For us to be able to improve our grazing management and control we almost quadrupled the number of paddocks we have. This allows us to combine the effects of using larger mobs for beneficial “herd effect” where it is required, and the ability to ‘rest’ the paddocks for 48 to 50 weeks every year. The amount of time the livestock are out of the paddock is more crucial then the number of head that you have present when grazing. This system negates the need to use fire as a tool that is used often. It seems to me that fire is the only tool in the tool box for many people in decision making positions.

Remember that if the only tool in the toolbox is a hammer, then all your problems look like nails.”

I appreciate not everyone is a fan of holistic management. I am keen to post alternative views. Email me at jennifermarohasy@yahoo.com.au.