New tactic to save the Swan

Your problems? Solved. email nick leth at gmail dot com. No worries. Now.

The front page of today's (28 Dec 2011) West has the headline: New tactic to save the Swan: $100 river levy.

What a sad load of rubbish.

This "tactic" is to raise money. To take money from the general public. To do what? No idea... What sort of tactic is that?!

The newspaper article is based on "a draft strategy prepared by the Swan River Trust". Perhaps the "strategy" has some actual actions which have some relevance to saving the Swan River. Perhaps it is just that the reporters -- Jane Hammond and Yolanda Zaw -- were too lazy to read past the obvious headline item of a $100 levy.

All-in-all, it's a light-weight, meaningless article. An attempt to raise public ire, with a new levy... proposal... as its justification for front page placement. Plus a photo filler -- half a page -- of people having fun on a different river!

There is no worthwhile point to the newspaper story.

There is a very serious point to the strategy which the story pretends to report.

Can the Swan be saved?

I wonder why the Swan River is called the Swan River? Have you seen it lately? You'd be lucky to see a swan, anywhere near the Swan River.

Why have the swans left the Swan River?

Where do swans nest? In reed beds, scrub, swamps beside rivers and lakes. The first actions of Swan River Colony settlers was to fill in the swamps and dredge the river. Now the river is edged with walls, houses and roads.

Where can swans nest? Nowhere near the Swan River...

We have also covered the river with boats. Damaged river banks with the wash from boats. Run boats, ferries, river cruises up and down the river, to make sure that swans will have no peaceful sanctuary for swimming, eating, mating, breeding.

We fish from the river, with occasional complaints that there are less fish due to river pollution. Pollution?

We use the river as a drain and a tip. Muck and filth from industrial areas is washed down drains into the Swan. Fertiliser from farms and lawns and gardens is washed into the river. As we power our boats up and down the river we dump rubbish, broken bottles, plastic wrappers, leftover food... Waste of all kinds now floats and sinks in our river. To be covered by the oil and diesel that is a normal byproduct of powerboats.

What could possibly live in this rubbish tip of a river? By choice? Nothing. By the evidence? Very, very few swans.

The few swans that do live near the river will be hunted and killed. Original settlers would have eaten them. Now, the eating is left to the "domesticated" cats and dogs which are allowed to roam the river edges. There is a "benefit" to allowing building close to water: it's less distance for the cats to travel on their daily killing sprees.

So what are our plans to save our Swan River?

First, we will raise a heap of money. Not as much as is already being spent -- to little apparent effect.

Then we will build enormous office blocks on the edge of the river.

What?! More buildings?!

Yep, that's it. That's the Premier's big plan: to build more buildings... bigger buildings... right to the edge of our dying river.

So, while one hand of the government continues to destroy the river, what will the other hand be doing? The "river levy" "could raise $59 million a year". Which is less (by 18%) than is -- reportedly -- already being spent to "protect" the river system.

Here's my guess:

The government will pass 10% of the levy to the Swan River Trust. The Trust will employ more bureaucrats and more policy writers. 50% of the levy will be spent of publicity: brochures, leaflets, press releases. These will have no impact whatsoever. The rest of the "river levy" will simply disappear into general government spending...

Can we afford to save the Swan River? Not really.

As long as we focus on more money, more people, big projects, imitation of the rest of the world... the river will come a sad last. Saving a river costs money. Even preserving a river has a huge opportunity cost.

While we follow the policy of money and growth before all else -- we cannot afford to be sentimental. We cannot afford to have a clean river. We cannot afford to leave any "natural" environment unexploited...

Perhaps I did miss one possibility...

In my predictions, allow 1% to be dedicated to a museum exhibit. An exhibit of stuffed swans. So that our children can see what it was that we destroyed.

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems. Agamedes Consulting: Support for your thought. email nick leth at gmail dot com