I would be very interested to hear how the Victorian position on the Murray Darling is different from the Commonwealth. My guess is that it is do with water rights and who owns what.

The invention of property rights and the trading of those rights as a way to solve issues like the use of water is not a happy one. The problems are that when you create something out of thin air that has real value then it is certain to create problems. Every smart operator sees money being created out of nothing and wants to get a piece of the action because they can see how they can get wealthy by manipulating the process not by creating something of value.

The issue that should be addressed is how to build a system that will encourage directly through market mechanisms the development and implementation of technologies that will effectively increase the supply of water through savings and better use and mechanisms that will find the true marginal price of producing "new water" or saving water and of directing the use of water to the most economically valuable. This can be done and the way to do it is address the problem directly.

If you think water rights creates problems imagine the problems that are going to be created with emissions rights (or the right to pollute) where we need to get countries to agree. This whole approach to solving problems associated with community properties (water and air) will not work - or if it does work it will take too long and be too expensive. A new approach is needed that does not depend on inventing property rights for something that is not property.

DEMOS, I find it amusing that you describe scientists as a special interest group.

Is there anything that can't be commodified, economised, politicised, pigeonholed and packaged?

That statement says more than I ever could about the pickle we are in. Not only do we face the spectre of population overshoot in the teeth of diminishing critical resources and inclement weather, but we appear to lack the humility required to re-think it all from scratch. Yes, I am guilty too. No, I am not fit to tie Ghandi's loincloth. That's about it for my humility (but you already knew that).

I love the cut and thrust in OLO, but I can't help thinking that one day the excrement that comes out of our bottoms will be far more precious than the excrement that comes out of our mouths.

OK - that's my rant - forgive me.

I need an army of scientists to find out the full extent of the demands that I have been placing upon this planet. I want to know about the best plants to grow, given available water, quirky climate, geography, soil health and fossil energy requirements. I no longer want to be out of the circle of take and give. I no longer want my nutrition to be at the expense of the soil's nutrition. I want to leave rich loams for our grandchildren, and forests for them to dwell in.

It's do-able. It really is!

chris, the only body willing to decide for the good of the majority of the people, is the majority of the people.

scientists can gather evidence and create strategies, but they can not decide those strategies without considering the consequences for their own career. they are looking out for themselves, just as we all must in a competitive world.

seek their advice, but choose which strategy through referendum.

Chris, I spent 4 years of the 6 years it took to develop the Logan & Albert water management plan, on the consultative comity.
We had more than a few scientists involved, & not one of them came without a personal agenda.

We had 3 types of scientist, government, academic, & commercial [consultants], & they all had the same major objective. To secure their joint & exclusive claim to the term "EXPERT". This was obviously critical to their continued financial wellbeing.

I was horrified when I discovered just how little they knew about our little short coastal rivers, & even more so when I found they were more interested in protecting their status as "expert" than learning from the considerable bank of knowledge of the commity members.

We have a dreadful management plan, partly because of the lack of knowledge of these scientists, whos advice was accepted above wiser council, & partly because of a government agenda, which was kept hidden, until the plan was drafted.

If you wish to be controlled by dills, get your scientists on the job. If you want something that will work, keep them in their ivory towers, where they can do less harm.

thank you hasbeen. chris: like i said...

You'd think that someone who spent 4 years on a committee would know how to spell that word...