Identity crisis
Like many woolgrowers, I recently received an email survey from Australian Wool Innovation seeking my views as a levy payer on the organisation's performance and responsiveness to stakeholders.
I am, like many woolgrowers, an older, rather conservative male (in my late sixties).
What raised my eyebrows was Question 3 on "gender".
Rather than asking respondents whether they were male or female, the survey asked "what gender do you identify with?"
Besides offering the boxes male and female as options, respondents could alternatively tick "non-binary" or (would you believe it) "prefer not to say".
The format and content of this question (in my mind) says it all in respect of AWI's lack of connection to its client group.
Woolgrowers/sheep-breeders are practical folk, required to focus on our livestock as nature bred them, not based on political correctness.
We mark and otherwise look after our stock as they present to us. Our own (or for that matter our animals') "gender identity" is hardly relevant.
After reading the gender identity question, I was half-expecting to also see another question asking whether I had a favourite ewe!
I now am even more certain that AWI is out of touch with its client group, and that it, along with its over-paid officials and the wool tax levied on producers, should all be abolished.
BRENDAN O'REILLY, "Glen Avon", Wyangala.
Worker disparity
Can I be forgiven for wondering what century I'm in?
It seems, that according to our dear leader, Prime Minister Scott Morrison, if you are Asian or a Pacific Islander, you can come here to do the hard work on farms, stations and orchards.
But if you are an English backpacker, you can lounge around the bars and coffee shops of Port Douglas and Bondi without ever assisting our labour-starved agricultural sector and still get your working visa extended.
I thought we put this sought of discrimination to rest together with the White Australia Policy 70 years ago.
GRANT NUTHALL, "The Alps", Bigga.
Time to stop cherry picking
Forgive my scepticism, but as a multigenerational food producer in southern NSW I have to question the way in which the CSIRO calculated its Murray-Darling Basin inflows.
We all know Australia is a country of extreme variables, so it is not surprising we are in a cycle of reduced rainfall.
When making the calculations to support its finding of reduced inflows in recent times, the CSIRO has compared the past two decades with data from 1910 to 2000.
This includes the Millennium drought, but excludes the Federation drought.
As such, the final analysis would likely be skewed.
Many scientists have long had food producers in their sights, as we saw from their incorrect claims that the Lower Lakes were traditionally a freshwater system and therefore needed to be constantly filled with freshwater from upstream dams.
As we now know, they were traditionally estuarine - but governments have gone too far down the path of promoting the freshwater narrative to acknowledge the error and rectify it.
Each year the Lower Lakes evaporate 1.6 Sydney Harbours, which is a monumental waste.
With a growing population can we really afford to cut off staple food producers closer to the water storages?
The most recent drought and COVID-19 pandemic have proven we are not sustainable in some staple foods.
Government departments need to stop cherry picking data to appease their political masters.
Instead, we need to start mature conversations about the best ways to manage our water, which could be helped with better science.
These discussions will benefit from accurate, non-biased scientific analysis that does not exclude important periods in recent history to provide the answer the scientists or politicians seek.
LAURIE BEER, Mayrung.
Cats and climate change
More than 5000 people have signed a petition that is calling upon the NSW Government to strengthen legislation in relation to domestic cats.
Under the current law, cats are allowed to freely roam our neighborhoods, 24 hours a day, unless they meet the criteria for being a 'nuisance', that being making a persistent noise (which interferes with the peace) or causes repeated damage to another's property.
North West Local Land Services recently posted on social media that pet cats that are allowed to roam and kill 186 native animals a year on average.
When we consider the demise of our native birds and small marsupials as a result of urban development and climate change, predation by cats seems an unacceptable burden for them to bear.
Most cat owners love their furry friends and contain them within the home or a cat run, ensuring they are safe from vehicle collision or an altercation with another cat or dog which might cause injury or death.
Updating the Companion Animals Act 1998, section 31, would be a win not only for our native species, but also for cats and cat lovers.
The petition is available at me.getup.org.au/petitions/a-petition-to-confine-domestic-cats-in-new-south-wales
PENNY MILSON, Tamworth.
All for the 'zombie PELs'
I would like to make a few points in relation to the NSW petroleum exploration licences (PELs) and the so called zombie PELs.
Australia and NSW in particular needs energy, and solar and wind are not up to the task for base load.
The choices are coal, coal seam gas, or uranium. But the best choice is a no brainer, because coal seam gas is the least intrusive and most environmentally friendly (i.e. very little surface disturbance, no subsidence, no dust).
In 2009 I had a an exploration core hole on my property, which is situated on the Liverpool Plains in PEL 1. Santos drilled down to 1000 metres. This had no effect on my underground water and minimal effect on my farming operation.
The regulations controlling the coal seam gas industry are so stringent that it is almost impossible for an underground water supply to be compromised in any way, let alone be destroyed, as the Lock the Gate propaganda states.
I think you will find that most of the opposition to CSG that comes from Lock the Gate is from people who live where there is no gas anyway, or for example the North Coast. They are dead set against CSG extraction because they will not benefit.
Certain companies made mistakes years ago, but to my knowledge Santos has been careful and conscientious. Santos inherited the spill in the Pilliga Scrub near Narrabri. I have inspected the site and consider that Santos is doing a good job rehabilitating the area.
A survey was conducted in our area in PEL 1 with a resounding result that 90 per cent of people on Voca Road were in favour of CSG development. All the people with exploratory wells on their properties in PEL 1 were happy with the operation and would welcome Santos back.
When you weigh up the pros and cons of CSG, I think the benefits to our area and NSW in general far outweigh the remote risk of any environmental damage. I believe Santos should be allowed to explore and develop CSG extraction in the so called 'zombie PELs'.
GEOFF BARKER, "Boonery Park", Curlewis.
Send your letter to the editor to letters@theland.com.au