There are a couple of hard truths that farmers in irrigation areas have to face up to.

The first one is that farmers were getting water too cheap. I have been a farmer and I know what you can efficiently grow with a megalitre of water and it made no sense in the past, for water to be costed at about 10 percent of alternative feed sources.

The second one is that there has been massive over allocation of water and that has to stop. In order for this to happen, then some compensation will have to be paid. I have seen figures of up to $2500 per megalitre, which is probably pie in the sky, but whatever amount it finishes up at, it will run into billions of dollars.

Instead of the associated towns and villages suffering because of the reduction of employment in agriculture, the recipients of all this largesse, should invest the money in off farm projects in their own districts and so provide employment and education for those displaced.

The outcome of all this could well be a win-win situation for both the farmers and the environment. How about the farmer organisations getting their heads out of the sand and seeking to find constructive practical solutions to what is undoubtedly a very compicated process, instead of just being pig headed and negative.

David

You forgot or didn't know that in around the year 2000 Albury/Wodonga region experienced a minor earth-quake, something like a M3. Strangle the Hume Weir group declared the dam wall was damaged and it needed repair. Well what they did is released water till the dame was approx. 15% full. This was the year 200, just before the century drought that has just broke and was used to proport so called Global-Warming. This is the reason why the water wasn't available though 2000-2010.

Was there damage to the Hume Dam wall? Well the best I could see if they had some basic scaffolding setup and some divers going in here and there and you heard nothing afterward. You just saw the dam drained to near empty. Conspiracy? Highly possible. We are talking International interested in our water system here, both to buy up and control at a world level.

Farmer need to declare any no-Government body invalid and continue to use their constitutional right to irrigate without restrictions for proper use of the river water. see s.100 Aust.Constitution.

That your choice, United Nations control, or Australians!

If the dismantelling of the barrages is a good idea, then there would not be any need to cut any water quotas. Is that correct or not.
The sea will be doing what they need the extra water for. Yes or no.

It isn't quite that simple. When the water in the Coorong is saltier than the sea, which it is at the moment, then the barrage should be opened to let all the very salty water out. For some bizarre reason the people in charge seem to be very reluctant to do this. The barrage should then remain open until some fresh water comes down the river. I presume that the original reason for the barrage was to stop sea water from going back up the river, but for various reasons, one of which is the low flow coming down the river, this concept has been self defeating as the lakes are now much saltier than the sea. The farmers who relied on the brackish water from the lakes have been deprived of this water since the level has dropped and in any case it is now too salty. It could well be argued that these farmers need to be looked after, but considering the present increasing demand for water upstream, I suspect that they will be sacrificed on the alter of expediency.

That being said, the main aim of the water reforms is not to save the Coorong, but to restore the health of the whole river system which has been brought to its knees by the over allocation of water. Incidentally, the over allocation doesn't only apply to the surface streams, it also applies to the underground aquifers which are rapidly becoming depleted and if pumped down too far will also become salty. The Coorong can be saved by just opening the barrage and letting the tidal flows operate as they did before the smart white men thought that they could do better.

David

So you are saying there is more to it than keeping the mouth open.
How will extra flow help the river system. once the water has flowed there will be no more.
A regulated flow is surely better than a torrent when it rains and nothing when it doesen't rain.
Why was cotton ever allowed to be grown in AU. Isn't that the worst water user of all time.
I think if water savings have got to be made everybody has got to share in the deal.
The currant proposed water solution will not do a thing for river health. The water can only pass once.

Don't worry,

If this begins to influence opinion polls, Julia Gillard will drop it like a hot potato.

Remember she said because of the hung parliament she feels no obligation to honour her election promises.