Agamtes Readers, real people - Having they’re say on the issues of the day.
A selected sample of recent readers comments made on Agmates.
Click on the article headline to see the article and all readers comments.
.
Kevin Rudd exposed by 60 Minutes report
Matt B writes:
“And also excuse me if I’m a bit skeptical of Agmates intentions… given you encourage farmers to cut down random trees as acts of civil disobedience… I must admit that one has me confused. Next you’ll have the great ute and dog CO2 muster with 10,000 utes idling in a paddock for a weekend and then claiming GW is false because the earth did not warm up;)
I mean look at 60 minutes, David Evans not even a credible research scientist - he has never published ANYTHING to do with climate science in his life… if the science is in hot debate then SURELY they can do better than David Evans.”
.
Ken writes:
“When is everyone, including our so called illustrious leaders, going to realize that the main offender in any level of global warming is CO. The world needs CO2 to survive, without it we all would not exist. The ETS is just another twisted politically manufactured tool to enable the government to introduce their rotten dirty air tax, whichever way you look at it.
The government is hell bent on gouging out as much as they are able from everyone’s pay packet and pensions they possibly can by any grubby little underhanded tactic available, and let the people wallow in it.If we, the people, allow the government to introduce the ETS then we all will be paying big time for years to come for no real reason. I think it is time the Australian people stood up and said a resounding NO to Mr. Rudd and his unwanted air tax.”
.
Mum & Dad Farmers to decide who will control AWB
Rowell Walton writes:
“If there is a shred of decency left in the AWB board they should now provide the farmer directors with the list of farmer shareholders and the recourses to canvas and mail each and every one of them so every body can have the opportunity to be provided with full information … lacking dreadfully in the mainstream media, and cast well thought out votes. You would have thought that the board after spending millions and failing on the second round would realise that the growers want to retain their A class control of the AWB.
Imagine what may happen if a government decided it would not accept the will of the people and after loosing and postponed the poll till later to see if they could change a few minds. I think I have heard of that somewhere before.”
.
Peter Cannon writes:
“Having attended the AWB EGM Meeting, one thing that was clear to me, those present where not interested in the Australian Wheat Growers’ survival or anything to do with wheat, just their own greed and they’re share price.”
.
Politicians Playing Games While the Murray darling Dies
Silver Moon writes:
“There are more than 10,000 dead tortoises around Lake Alexandrina. A native fish species has just become extinxt in the wild. Surely those two things in themselves should be enough to spark a bit of action from the government. I’d like Rudd to nationalise water.”
.
Whip Wielding Dad sorts out party gate crashers.
Brett writes:
“Leave it to the Police to handle”. What a joke. Had they phoned the police, it would have taken half an hour to send one car with two police - by which time they would have been gone. When will we re-establish the fundamental right to protect property and person. “Police cannot find the youths” - no surprise there. The average copper would have trouble finding the seeds inside a watermelon without public help…”
.
Dave Bugler writes:
“Consequences and actions - simple. Don’t break in - he has every right to defend family, guests and home vigorously. If he did not he would not be the man of the house. Well done Dion from every single person I’ve have spoken to. I believe the police individually would give you unconditional support. Unfortunately civil libertarians, the judicial system and stupidity rule. They and the polies need to understand what the electorate feels. We are not doing our youth any favours by not giving them parameters in life.”
.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
.
Have your Say! If you have something to contribute, either leave your comment here or click on the article headline. Got something to add, just join the online forum on the subject.
.
.
Related Posts
- Your Say - Agmates Readers have Their Say!
- If Clive Hamilton Had His Way There Would be No Internet Sites like Agmates.
- Courier Mail & Crikey win an Agmates “Onya”
- Welcome - These New Agmates Traders!
- Welcome! - These New Agmates Traders
Tags: Your say
Thanks to Agmates and Steve for his continued good work in bringing to the attention of the Australian people issues that the major papers will not print .
Keep up the good work Steve .
What causes global warming ?
Why is it that global warming has become such a big issue?
Back in the sixties and seventies the government was getting farmers to broad acre farm. Clear and plant at any cost. I was working for a contractor driving an old Alice Charmer dozer and we cleared thousands of Acres . Back then you could see the change in the environment with the land heating up.
Now this in no way blaming the farmers they were at the time practicing best practice but if you take away all of the trees you take away the earths cover the ground heats up and no trees to eat up carbon. Heated up the ground Don’t eat up the carbons. Produce less oxygen. Creates less rain.
Simple solution plant millions of trees in areas that are marginal farming areas. Eat up carbon, Create Oxygen. Create rain. Have a renewable resource in the timber, Sell the carbon credits . Create jobs and wealth for regional and country centres.
Am I right or wrong? I am open to any suggestions or criticisms.
Hi Peter,
Yes, a lot of your comments are correct.
One big negative however is the the more trees you have the lower the water runoff into rivers and dams etc. so this results in a reduction in irrigation water availability.
The concept in itself is fine but it should be the landowners decision to do utilise his/her land to best advantage, whether this be financial or whatever.
The trouble is that a lot of farming land already has returned to a degraded type of native vegetation, because of the native vegetation laws in Australia. As result Australia is able to achieve its Kyoto targets; but the farmer has gained nothing. No carbon credits , no timber sales,etc because the growth is woody weeds etc. In fact the farmer has lost the ability to manage his/her property in a multitude of cases.
Until there is an equitable reward scheme; whether that be purchasing of properties for carbon sinks, a reliable price for carbon sequestration on farm land for past and future sequestration, your concepts are unlikely to gain widespread support amongst farmers.
Hi Peter & John,
You each have some interesting comments. It has now been recorded that correctly grazed pasture sinks carbon better than tree plantations. This is a serious plus for farming. It is oft forgotten that pastures and crops are generally green (a sign of chlorophyl) which converts CO2 to O2 + glucose.
Unfortunately good farming areas also grow trees better than marginal areas perhaps due to better soils and higher nutrient levels. However growing trees in marginal areas is a reasonable plan.
The topic of woody weeds is a serious one and has led to thousands of hectares both farmed/grazed or national park being rendered useless and unmanageable. Try fighting a bushfire in a wattle/quinine thicket its not easy I assure you!
Land holders should have a choice over what is financially better for them but also what they would prefer to do with their land. Trees are not always the answer and food is a valuable commodity. Correct land management e.g. more products from land with long term future soil, water and production goals.
These concepts are not new but have been shelved due to consumer greed and demand. These concepts are also financially rewarding to the producer and future generations.
John,
Like I said this is some thing that the farmers would have to be rewarded for doing .
The government should pay for the tree planting and in return get a portion of the return from the sales of the carbon credits and the timber when it is mature . I don’t know if you know this but there are other ways to reduce carbons and improve marginal lands.
For over fourty years I have been asking that no more rubbish be put into land fills and all rubbish that is recyclable be recycled and all of the food scraps, grasses, cardboard, paper and any thing else that could be use as mulch be mulched up and transported to areas where the ground is marginal for farming to improve the soils.
This would do a number of things but mainly it would reduce the amount of methane that is coming from land fill dumps and reduce the carbons as well as improve the grounds to be able to grow hardwood forests and it would reduce the amount of water needed to grow those forests.
Have you ever thought why councils like land fills. It is the amount of money they make out of burying rubbish that gets them.
My ideas may be silly but until I am proven wrong I will plod along and try to get a change where our hard working farming people can make a decent living and also help to make our country a leader in reducing carbons with out further taxes .