By removing the water and preventing floods, we are also destroying that landscape and rivers functions that give life to it. The key lies in striking a better balance between the needs of the natural environment, agriculture and our cities. It also lies in being a lot smarter in how we use our water. For example, almost all of our urban storm water and most of our sewage effluent is not recycled.
The second myth – of making the desert bloom by turning coastal rivers to run inland – is as much in vogue today as it was 100 years ago. The drought has prompted calls to revive the Bradfield scheme, a 1930-40s plan to turn the Tully, Herbert and Burdekin rivers back across the Great Divide into central Queensland and connect to the Murray-Darling. Two centuries of development in Australia seem to have taught us little about the hazards of salinity, soil and water degradation, loss of habitat and species and the simple fact that the communities from which the water is taken will one day want it back. An awful political dilemma.
The third myth of “drought-proofing” our drier areas is equally fraught with risk because it invites us to grow things in areas where the nature of Australia makes it inadvisable to do so. It involves bringing water to places where it is normally only an episodic event, and can cause unforeseen problems. From a national perspective it is also unnecessary. Australia has a huge “fertile crescent” of reliable high rainfall country and fertile soils around our coastline, on which we could develop sustainable agriculture and horticulture."
"The critical need is not to drought-proof the inland, for that is impossible.
It is to myth-proof Australians."
Read the complete The Guardian article by Honorary Professor John Williams
#jailclimatecriminals #climatechange #jail climate criminals #suethefossilfools
Related:
Dar