Considering not so long ago we were termed the Cinderella state before the discovery of gold, which did help to supply the money to spread the wheat belt out to where it is now. Although we do have bad drys including this year, our cockies seem just as reliable on far poorer soils than T'othersiders as they say.

Not in touch with records, but believe there have been three years in the last ten that in yield have easily beaten T'otherside as we repeat on poorer soils.

As many crops are harvestable over here, with early unseasonable summer rains helping yields in the south, the Cindrella state may win again.

Anyhow, with all our grizzling about cockies needing to give up compared to the bod's operating the ugly monstrous mechanical giants pulling valuable but expendable resources out of the ground, what really are our great grandkids going to rely on? In a years or so some of us could even have great great grandkids coming along.

Seeing that all Western graingrowers bar Australia and New Zealand are now being subsidised, is it criminal that our cockies should now have a bit of help?

Understand that Peter Costello's Future Fund has now just about covered our overseas trading debt now around five hundred billion dollars.

And as a big trading debt helps our dollar keep low in value helping to increase our export profits, so what the hell its all part of modern business.

It is so interersting to note Big Biz minded Johnny Howard at last interested in rural problems. Nothing like GW Bush, however, who has had an 80 billion dollar promissary note worth of US rural subsidies guaranteed from around 2002 right up to 2012, making sure the republicans at least will still hold the Presidency mainly through Mid-West votes.

As far as our cockies are concerned, maybe our Johnny should learn a bit more about rural protection from his bestest proven bosom buddy over there?

Of course, If we can get rid of the farmers now, It won't be such a problem, next time we want their water for the "productive" city.

It seems to me that Andrew does not know a lot about farming.

You can farm anywhere, its just a question of stocking rate, given
prevailing weather conditions and the odds of taking the risk to
sow a crop, based on information at the time. Many smart farmers
in the West this year, reckoned that the crop risk was not worth it,
given the conditions and took a years long service leave. Makes
perfect sense!

Livestock are another thing altogether. Many people have gone broke,
trying to feed too many livestock, through a drought. It makes
far more sense to cut numbers early, before the paddocks are bare
etc.

Thats where we have a problem. Processors
are not silly, they know that if it doesent rain, farmers have no
choice but to sell. Given limited slaughter capacity in an inflexible meat industry, they can simply drop their prices and
wait. Farmers don't like to give away livestock, so hang on
hoping for rain, often with fatal consequences.
Right now mutton is at 60c a kg cwt or 300$ a tonne liveweight, about
the same as the price of wheat. That does not mean that the global
mutton price has dropped from 3000$ a tonne.

The solution is a simple one. Given that Govt can't legislate for
rainfall, meat production will always be at the vagaries of climate.
Any meatworks could introduce another shift, if they had the labour
and so double capacity. Yet our city legislation does not allow
for that, despite their inability to legislate for weather.

Allow us to bring in extra labour from SE Asia, to cope with
varying climate, on a seasonal basis. Those workers could earn here
in a month, what they earn in a year back home. Our farmers would
benefit, there would be real competition in the market, due to
demand. The animals would benefit, no standing around in paddocks
waiting for a slaughter date, as is now the case in WA, due to
lack of labour. In fact a win-win situation for all, so why don't
city slickers allow it to happen?

Whenever you reach an intellectual impasse and nothing seems viable take a hard look at Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A. It was once void of human life, trees, water and had only an abundance of sand. Some sand pile!

This is a good article Andrew.

But once again the big picture is missing, although I do sense that you have moved closer to it compared to your previous articles on this forum.

“We should be helping these farmers to move on while the drought is focusing the country’s attention on the bush.”

Absolutely. And in so doing we should be pulling right back on our overall agricultural demands from the land, especially of course on what is now known to be marginal or long-term unviable land.

But what is going to happen if we pull back on this primary industry sector while continuing to facilitate the overall expansion of our society?

It is glaringly obvious that we need to pull back on the whole kaboodle, or at least, strive to stop it from continuously growing!

Your previously-expressed support on this forum for continued population growth sits at stark odds with your message in this article.

“And if something is unsustainable then, by definition, it must come to an end”

Well, of course. And if the productivity off the land is not sustainable at the current rate, then how on earth can an ever-increasing demand for this productivity be sustainable?

Andrew, when are you going to admit that population stabilisation in this country is absolutely ESSENTIAL in our efforts to achieve sustainability….and that with the current rural/drought crisis and the water issue in urban areas, the time is right to really push this fundamental message?

No matter what we do, global warming is now a permanent fact.

Governments here are trying to come to the realisation that this is NOT a drought, this is the new permanent climate. The draught is now the normal pattern. We have to adapt to this situation.

Intervention is needed to save the overall land.

If farmers still have a passion to farm, there are a few options. I understand that the old cotton fields in the south of the US have plentiful well water, aquifers and rivers and their draughts are not as bad as ours. They can still grow cotton there, but most gave up about 30 years ago leaving unused land. Surely the Australian Government could organise a "buyback" scheme of Australian cotton farms, and assist in granting US Green Cards for the US, for cotton farmers to live and do their business where "king cotton" belongs: In the USA.

You can strike a baragain in Cotton utopia: in Louisianna. Now that so many have left the State. They didn't like water much. You do.

Similarly, other crops need will never get again find water in Australia. A similar "buy back" scheme should encourage such farmers to consider relocating to New Zealand as there is plenty of water there. In the mean time, the Governments can regenerate the environment and terraform the land.

If you can't solve the problem, look at all the possibilities and relocate. You really want to farm using specialised skills? You are probably on the wrong continent.

You can sit and pray on this dry dust bowel but I doubt this will work. The big dry is a booming a "wake-up" call to us all. It says: move on, wake up or perish.

Your ancestors would not give it a second thought. With Government assistance to relocate, they would be praticle enough to move on before you lose too much. It will get worse over time.

Your lives working in your agrarian traditions and protecting your families are more important than your national pride at this stage.