Brian Gordon, Northside Produce

Confession 1

The Senators extracted some remarkable information from various GBR science institutions during the Senate Inquiry. We will go over some of these in the next few posts.

The Australian Institute of Marine Science stated that the “inshore Reefs”, which they claim are affected by river plumes carrying farms mud and pesticides, are only 3% of the Reef. Half of these 3% are north of Cooktown where there is no agriculture. Even for most of the inshore reefs near the agricultural areas, the measured pesticide concentrations are extremely low or undetectable. Mud concentrations from the rivers on those inshore reefs are about 1% of the natural concentrations that occur naturally by resuspension by waves.

So 97% of the Reef is totally unaffected by farm mud or pesticides. And there is only a tiny affect on half of the remaining 3%.

How much closer to negligible can the farmers influence be?

Many thanks to Senators Canavan, McDonald, Rennick, and Roberts (in alphabetical order).

Note: all confessions were extracted ethically without any instruments of torture.

Confession 2

Large corals have yearly growth rings like trees so drill cores from large corals give a history of growth rates going back to the year 1600. The data shows no reduction in growth rate due to agriculture which began around 1900. This confession was like getting blood out of stone, the result of tenacious questioning by the Senators of the Australian Institute of Marine Science.

If all the mud and pesticides are poisoning the Reef, the first thing that will happen is that coral growth rates will slow. Growth rates should have started declining in 1900 and declined even further in the 1950s, 60s and 70s when pesticides and fertilizer were used in quantity. But coral growth rates in this period, if anything, increased slightly. Since the 1970s agricultural practices have greatly improved to retain soil and limit fertilizer and pesticide losses. Things have got much better since the 1970s.

At the Senate Inquiry, AIMS tried to dodge this attack by saying the data only includes one type of coral (the boulder-like Porites species) and is not indicative of other types of coral. But AIMS conveniently forgets that they have used this same data on the Porites to claim that climate change is damaging the Reef – ALL the corals of the reef. They can’t have it both ways when somebody starts asking hard question. This just damaged the credibility of the organisation even further. But we should be happy that they finally confessed the obvious.

In any case, here is more excellent evidence that the impact of farming is negligible.

Again, many thanks to Senators Roberts, Rennick, McDonald, and Canavan (in reverse alphabetically order).

Note: Although this confession was extracted ethically without the use of instruments of torture, there was a period during the Senator’s questions when I thought they might have to get out the thumbscrews.

Confession 4

Hallelujah - an honest appraisal of this threat.

So why are farmers forced into tough new legislation on pesticides when there is no risk? Why was this statement not in the 2019 Reef Outlook Report? Why did AIMS and GBRMPA and JCU not tell the State government this when they were drafting the latest Reef legislation? Why was it necessary for bulldogs Rennick and Robert to extract this confession of such fundamental importance? This should have been well known. The science organisations should have been shouting about this wonderful news.

The idea that pesticides are killing the reef is obviously ridiculous. Certainly, there may be some issues in the creeks and rivers, but there is very little indication that there are any major problems even there. By the time the water is diluted in the ocean, there is no chance that the Reef, 50 to 100 km offshore, is in danger.

I am reminded of an artificial wetland that Tully farmer Peter Jackson has built. His farm drains into this billabong. If there is going to be poisonous water, this is where it should be – before it is diluted by the rivers and ocean. But Peter Jackson’s billabong is teaming with life and he is proud of it. He will show you the picture of the Barra he caught in the billabong – he caught it with the bucket of his excavator. If the water at the bottom of this farm is teaming with life, it is obviously not going to be poisonous on the Reef way over the horizon.

But let’s be fair to AIMS. He gave a straight answer to a straight question. I commend Dr Hardisty for this. We are starting to get somewhere.

This statement by AIMS was an answer to a “question on notice” from Senator Rennick.