Thanks Peter. This is a useful contribution to the climate change adaptation discussion. Australian farmers have proven themselves great innovators, and astute adopters of technology, again and again - and I'm sure can respond to the climate change challenge too.

Pasture cropping appears to me to be a logical next step along the technology development pathway from minimum tillage, offering further options for harnessing seasonal variations, while also increasing soil carbon and agro-ecosystem functional diversity. It is also pleasing to see that some of these innovative technologies are narrowing the difference in practices between so-called "conventional" and "alternative" - eg. organic production modes.

"The first sign of climate change is increasing climate variability"...

Er...what?

Doesn't this mean "If the climate changes, it changes"?

What you are actually trying to say is that you believe it will get warmer, but since you don't have any evidence of this, you will clutch at any change at all -- colder, wetter, drier, windier -- as proof that those wicked human beings are mucking up the perfect climate we had. Once upon a time. (But not during the Medieval Warm Period or the Ice Ages, of course).

Unfortunately there is no evidence that the climate is becoming more 'variable'. either, whatever that means. Hurricane levels are down, La Nina is back, and we look to be in for a long cold summer while the northern hemisphere has a long cold winter. Just as we did a decade or so ago, and again a decade or so before that.

Still, if farmers are getting more efficient and using less water, good luck to them. Does that mean they will soon be able to stop asking for more taxpayer handouts?

Sorry, silly question.

*Does that mean they will soon be able to stop asking for more taxpayer handouts?*

Ah, that is a great question, Jon J. So lets level the playing
field. No hand outs to farmers, no handouts to manufacturing
industry and no handouts to unions. No more standover awards,
let the market prevail. No termination payments, when businesses
are on their knees.

Farmers do in fact compete in the global economy with about 60%
or more of their production. So the big question remains, can
the rest of Australia do the same?

Jon J, only a percentage of farmers get a "handout", in a percentage of years. $4billion(which usually includes the administration costs) have flowed to farmers over the last 4 to 5 years. We have about 125000 farmers, which works out to $8000 per farmer pa during an unprecedented drought. I don't know what unemployment benefits amount to, but I'd suggest this is close to that. And a bit less than the Baby bonus costs taxpayers. I'd suggest it was as important to ensure there are farmers kept in business through hardtimes, especially if we subsidise new mouths to feed.
I doubt farmers seek "handouts", but I'm sure they are gratefully received by those qualifying in times of need.

Those that complain mysteriously tend to overlook multi billion dollar stimulus packages.

Less of a silver lining than a way to maintain some viability a bit longer. If the predictions of drying SE Australia, with a side order of more and more extreme weather events prove correct - and despite the noisy deniers, the science has tended to underestimate rather than overestimate the pace and extent of climate change - the longer term outlook isn't that good for Australian agriculture.

Not that this sector will fail to innovate as they try to keep going, but it's sadly ironic that this innovative sector harbors a big proportion of people who prefer to hold to the old orthodoxy that weather and climate are beyond our understanding or ability to change, who deny the validity of climate science and who resist strongly any serious policy to limit emissions.

*who prefer to hold to the old orthodoxy that weather and climate are beyond our understanding or ability to change, who deny the validity of climate science and who resist strongly any serious policy to limit emissions.*

Ken, it really comes down to results. If those who claim to
understand climate, could at least predict that climate ahead
for a few months, perhaps more people would take notice.

So far, they haven't been too accurate and farmers are skeptics,
given the number of snakeoil salesmen around.

As to limiting emissions, we need more then feelgood exercises.
A place like WA is populated at a little over 2 people per square
km, our emissions really don't matter. With China and India
each building a new coal fired power station a week, whatever
we do, still won't matter. Other then make some feel good.
That is rather pointless.

"..despite the noisy deniers, the science has tended to underestimate rather than overestimate the pace and extent of climate change.."

No significant warming for the last fifteen years, according to Phil Jones. It's kind of hard to see how anyone could have underestimated that, Ken.

Necessity is the Mother of Invention.

For a well-referenced view of what is happening and what may happen in the Murray Darling Basin, have a look at SEACI (South East Australian Climate Initiative) CSIRO, May 2010. And before any knees start jerking, and denialists start clamouring about closing down CSIRO, look at the pages of references: researchers in their dozens, from many different agencies, all providing evidence based on measurement and observation. Also, as mentioned in another post, look at The Copenhagen Diagnosis, University of New South Wales, 2009; again, pages of well-referenced science. It is simply not possible to assert as a fact, that "there is no evidence". What is important to MDB farmers is that variability is the new normal. And no, variability is not the same as change, and calls for much smarter adaptation than simply "hotter" or even "colder".

Yabby, month to month or year to year variability - and the difficulties in accurate predictions on those time scales - do not invalidate understanding of the longer term trends or the climate processes underlying them. Australian agriculture is very much at risk from those longer term trends, especially if they continue to be intensified by global failure to rein in emissions. And Australia is a major contributor to global emissions via the fossil fuels we export as well as being leading per capita emitters; global action will not be advanced by Australia continuing to encourage the global consumption of coal and gas and then going on to do no more than the least it can get away with locally rather than the most it is capable of. And claiming it's contribution to emissions don't count; lots of Australians might be happy to think we make no difference to global climate but you can be sure that the rest of the world is not so easily fooled.

We are participating partners and profiteers in Chinese and Indian emissions growth but, should we decide to seriously act on climate we would not be going it alone.

Ken, the most valuable thing that climatologists can do for farmers,
is to understand enough about about how climate works, that they
can at least make somewhat accurate short term predictions.

Its quite simple really. If its going to be a crook year, they
won't risk that half a million$ on inputs to grow a crop and go
fishing instead.

Given that they cannot do that, farmers are deducting that they
seemingly don't know enough yet, to understand what is really going
on.

Blaming Australia for what others burn in terms of coal, is like
blaming Saudi Arabia for our oil use. If you think that they could
not find other coal on the planet, you are mistaken.

The thing is, the genie is now out of the bottle. A large chunk
of the third world is now intent on achieving our kind of cushy
lifestyle and will do whatever it takes to achieve it. Building
power plants of one sort or another will continue at a massive
rate. The sheer mass of people involved, plus another 3 billion
or so added to the global population, will overwhelm everything
else.

Even if every Australian was wiped out tomorrow, within 100 days
they would have replaced us, given that the global population
keeps growing at around a quarter million per day.

Whatever Australia does, in the bigger scheme of things, we simply
don't matter.

You won't put the genie back in the bottle and the best way for
farmers to deal with climate change, is to lessen risk as climate
changes. More accurate forecasts from those who claim to understand
climate, would be a huge help.