Albury’s Keystone cops.

Thought I’d relay an incident I observed the other day.

I was on my porch reading a book, heard a disturbance in the park opposite and was dismayed to see a guy beating up a woman.

My first instinct was to go lay him low but then I thought “no, do it properly, let the police handle it”.

So I called them, in due course a convoy of police vehicles has turned up (after doing a full lap of the park and disappearing down a side street in true “Keystone cops” fashion).

When they pulled up, I told them what I’d seen and pointed them in the direction of the guy.

I should point out that the park was far from unoccupied at this point, there were approximately sixty children ranging in age from around nine to maybe 15 in the park training for rugby.

There were a number of adult supervisors too, all did nothing.

One of the officers has asked me if the guy has actually punched her (apparently it’s acceptable by police standards to throw a woman by the head rag-doll fashion to the ground, but not to actually punch her).

I told him what I’d seen and said I was prepared to make a statement.

Said cop proceeds to go over to this guy (with around six other officers in tow), I didn’t hear what was said, but there was a lot of toe-ing of the ground and then…they get back in their cars and drive off.

Guy walks away.

Not taken into custody, not even searched for weapons, no “can we see some identification” just off you go home, you’ve been a naughty boy.

Can anyone explain to me how a guy gets to bash a woman in front of sixty (or so) kids, witnesses all around, police attend and he just gets to walk away? Because I certainly don’t get it.

Albury’s “top cop” can go into bat for his officers with open public letters till the cows come home, but blatantly stupid misuse of police discretionary powers like this just make me wonder why we bother with a police force at all.

Perhaps a little more time spent cleaning house and ferreting out the undesirables among his own ranks and a little less time spent issuing PR spin might be a worthwhile excercise.

Albury doesn’t deserve a rare and precious flower.

It’s an oversight of town planning rather than one of nature that one of the most retrograde populations of troglodytes has been dumped on top of one of the few remaining populations of one of the rarest flowers on earth.

I became aware of the plight of the crimson spider orchid a few years ago and made discreet (albeit persistent) enquiries about what I could do to ensure its longevity.

The response, whatever the source, was the same.

“Leave it the hell alone”.

Worthy of a Darwin award nomination?

 

Now you really have to wonder when even the great bastion of tactlessness that I am has to think long and hard about an opinion piece.

I saw this story in the Boredom Ale (border mail) through the week and I have to admit, my first reaction was not so much one of sympathy, rather what a bloody waste.

What the Ballarat Courier fails to mention is that this guy had a longstanding known allergy to bee venom, left his can of alcoholic drink lying around (a known bee attractant) while he went of doing God only knows what, came back, took a swig, SPAT OUT A BEE, and then, far from removing himself to a hospital post haste, KEPT ON DRINKING WITH HIS MATES!!!

Apparently he was found dead some time later.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Darwin awards, in order to qualify, one has to remove one’s self from the gene pool (either die or render ones self infertile) as a result of ones own foolishness.

You can read some examples here.

I’m not saying if he should qualify or not, and  I certainly feel bad for his family.

Without drawing any unnecessary conclusions and assuming the circumstances I gleaned from the BMare in fact accurate, you’d have to speculate whether his death was avoidable had a modicum of common sense entered the situation.

I guess it’s all in the transcript now.

the great organic con.

I’m in the process of searching for a course to help me become a better gardener.

I enrolled in horticulture at Wodonga a couple of years ago and didn’t find it to my liking.

I didn’t like the focus on chemical remedies and there were a number of other philosophical differences between that and the way I like to do things.

When I discovered a permaculture course at Thurgoona TAFE I was quite excited, my excitement was short lived however as I found the course seemed to be heavily involved in the organic food movement which I have serious reservations about.

I prefer not to use chemicals, I doubt anyone would call me a chemically reliant gardener, I have lost stuff rather than spray, I prefer a “soil up” approach, meaning that I see it as priority 1 to enrich the soil and it’s resident flora and fauna.

To me these things aren’t revolutionary, they are good practice and most importantly they work.

To my great chagrin I discovered the focus of the course I was looking at was on commercial organic production, a scam if ever I have seen one.

A quick review of the “organic” movement will show you that it was “invented” by a couple of rich aristocracy types in Britain during the middle of last century.

Indeed “bonnie” Prince Charles has just celebrated 25 years of “organic gardening” in one of his country estates.

Which is really my main criticism of it, it’s elitist, a form of food snobbery really.

Organic METHODS work exceedingly well, in fact they are unsurpassed in my opinion, the problem is that the TERM “organic” seems to have been subverted and there is immense pressure for people who use these methods of food production to become ”licenced” or “accredited”.

In effect the term “organic” (really a meaningless buzz-word, what does an IN-organic apple taste like I wonder?) has been subverted by those who stand to make a quick buck from regulating it and sold of as a commodity for profit.

Another way for money to run uphill in other words.

If anyone who produces food for either their or someone else’s consumption chooses to use chemicals in their production, they have little choice but to have some multi-national like Monsanto dipping into their pocket.

Genetic modification seems set to compound this problem massively.

However if a food producer chooses to advertise that they do NOT use chemicals in their processes, they have a completely separate group sticking their hand in their pocket by way of organic “accreditation” which can run to multiple hundreds of dollars per year.

For a small operator, this is nothing short of crippling.

Ever wondered WHY you pay between two to five times MORE for produce grown without chemicals and grown locally than for equivalent grown far away and WITH chemicals?

I know I have.

Well the answer is that all that “accrediting” BS has to be payed for, in the short term it’s the poor beggar scratching a living off the soil who picks up the can.

Longer term, if he or she wants to stay afloat, they have little or no choice but to pass on the cost to the consumers of their produce.

The process of “organic accreditation” came about in response to people claiming their produce was grown pesticide and herbicide free, and the claims turned out to be spurious.

The solution?

A heavy handed, over regulated, top heavy industry which can’t compete on an even footing because it is hamstrung by maintaining the cost of the bureaucracy that feeds on it.

A veritable plague of $75KPA+ “locusts” which in all likely hood wont stop devouring until there is nothing left.

As with so many things when you decide not to use chemicals, the “cure” is worse than the ailment.

Anyway, nobody’s going to tell me how to grow things and if I choose not to use chemicals that’s my buisiness.

As for “organic accreditation/ certification” well I guess it would make good fertiliser (if you can stand the stench).

My solution? grow your own and put the whole filthy lot of them out of buisiness as quickly as possible.

Still up to my elbows in dirt

Apologies for the continuing lack of fresh posts on this blog, as I mentioned previously I have been working away on my vegetable garden, native re vegetation project and a number of other things which are occurring at my place (no that’s not a photo of my garden, it’s a photo I boosted, MY corn looks HEAPS better!!).

In any rate, the soil enrichment programme I have embarked on is quite time consuming (and labour intensive), in any rate I’ll endeavour to get SOMETHING of substance written in the foreseeable future (bringing the number of substantial posts on this blog to one).

Hope you’re all well.

Why water restrictions are counter-productive.

First let me point out that I have been a water miser for a lot longer than it has been fashionable, it comes as a result of growing up with a keen interest in gardening in the state of South Australia.

As my father used to chant almost like a mantra “it’s the driest state in the driest continent on earth” (actually Antarctica has significantly less available ground water, but we won’t begrudge an old man his indulgences).

Over the past few years we’ve all been slugged with water restrictions, so much so that it’s now almost second nature, they have become an accepted norm, but what in fact is the point?

Actually if local councils decided that they wanted to actively embrace a policy which provided maximum inconvenience and hardship to low income earners while simultaneously providing none whatsoever to households with a much higher disposible income they couldn’t do much better than to impliment the water restrictions policy they currently have.

Basically, if you can afford to install a massive rainwater tank (or twenty) then you have a virtual licence to waste water, you can do what you like with it, pour it down the drain, create a mangrove swamp, install a pool, whatever you like and the council has narry a word to say.

If in fact (like I suspect most people do) you fall into the low or middle income bracket and don’t have a lazy ten grand lying around to make sure your rhododendrons have a constant supply of water then it’s tough tits.

There is indeed a state government reimbursement scheme to provide partial re-imbursements to people who install rainwater tanks (welfare for the well heeled, sounds like a co-alition policy to me).

The council provide nothing at all, zip, nada, not one solitary red cent nor a brass razoo.

Except of course by providing the restrictions which have effectively been a free kick to the private companies making a killing out of peddling rainwater tanks to those who can afford it.

In fact if you are a middle/ low income earner and you’d like to help reduce your own grocery bill, reduce food miles and reduce our national dependancy on agri-buisuiness through subsistence farming (growing your own fruit and vegetables to feed yourself and your family) the council’s attitude is that it’s an evil which must be stamped out.

You’re taking the water from the poor struggling rice and cotton farmers who need every megalitre, otherwise they’ll have to settle for a BMW rather than a Mercedes Benz come harvest time.

In fact if you want to become more self sufficient through subsistence farming (as people have since the dawn of time) the only ”assistance” you’ll get from the council is a hefty fine.

Which brings me to my next point, who actually are the council issuing fines to?

Not those wealthy enough to monopolise the aquifer by installing their own miniature equivalent of the Hume dam in their back-yards, certainly not.

No, it’s the people who can least afford it the council plans to fine.

The very people who have most to gain by growing their own fruit and vegetables, the very people who can least afford a monetary infringement, these are the people council has squarely in their sights as “water cheats” (ie people who show the audacious temerity to water their gardens three times a week in high summer).

Fines don’t punish evenly (unless they are means tested, which they aren’t) they punish people with a lower disposable income much more heftily than those with a high disposable income.

It’s poorly though through policy and a draconian measure on the part of the Albury council.

I don’t endorse people growing lush lawns in the middle of a big dry, of course it’s a waste, (whether you have a rainwater tank or not) but if by restricting water the council has stamped out people’s right to the quiet satisfaction of enjoying a home grown tomato picked fresh from the vine then they have lost their way.

I for one won’t be tightening my water belt any tighter than it currently is, and you can bet for certain that I won’t be paying any fines that come my way.

Common sense prevails.

I’m no fan of Wodonga council, there I’ve said it!!

Nonetheless I’m heartily gladdened to hear that common sense and what’s best for the community has prevailed over the vested interests of an overly powerful lobby group.

Namely the yokels protesting over the move of the sale yards.

FFS, it’s a stinking sale-yards, Wodonga is growing and no-one wants to live near it.

It’s called reality, get used to it.

Now a bunch of these spoiled ratbags are threatening to boycott the new sale yards.

Good, I hope they do, the end result will be that it’s the boycotting farmers not the sale yards that go out of business, so it’ll be a good result all round.

So now what?……

Now that the dust has died down and all the votes are counted, the new Albury council is well and truly ensconced for the next four years (and there’s not a damn thing you can do about it), it would appear it’s now well and truly time for the council to make a decision on the issues they procrastinated about as hot potatoes during the lead up to the recent elections.

Specificaly, the proposed stadium fee, the fate of the PS Cumberoona, the re-development of QEII Square (and hopefully a long over-due name change) and of course last but by no means least, what to do with the dilapidated eyesorehistoric landmark that is the DC-2 “Uiver”.

Surely a trip down to metal-land to pick up a dirty great big shed would cost less than the proposed $1million to restore the aging aircraft to it’s “former glory”.

They might even throw in a discount if we agree to put up a “metal-land” sign indicating that the shed came from there.

I can hear the testimonials already “if it’s good enough for the Uiver…”

Perhaps Merv Hughes could do the honours and cut the ribbon at the officail opening.

Pour a concrete slab, bung a shed up around it and the aviation tragics, sad little people terrified of change , aviation buffs and amateur historians can go to town resurrecting it in their own time-and at their own expense.

Everyones happy (except the poor buggers who have to look at a dirty great big aluminium shed instead of a rusting aircraft hulk, but I guess if you cared about little things like aesthetics, you probably wouldn’t move to an industrial estate in the first instance would you?).

Heck, let’s re-name Albury “Uiver-town“, it’ll be great, maybe the “Weekly Times” might do a story about it, we’ll be listed among towns like “Cowes”, “Glenthompson”, “Metung” and “1770″ as one of those pokey little places with nothing really to offer but an unusual place name to be memorised by pub-trivia buffs “just in case it comes up in a question”.

Splendid, I don’t see a down-side really.

Henceforth the city of Albury shall be called “Uiver-town”

Huzzah!!

What the….??

Ah Deniliqun, home of the “ute on a stick”, the “ute muster” and generally all things “ute” may now have a new claim to fame, Deniliquin may prove to be home to the smallest, most insignificant, drug bust in Australian law enforcement history.

A true waste of police, court and media resources if ever there was one.

As briefly described in this “breaking news” article, where else but in the Border Mail.

Apparently it took a team of detectives to raid a house and net a whopping haul of 15 grams of cannabis.

That’s right, you didn’t misread, 15 lousy grams.

Admittedly I am assuming they executed the warrant in search of drugs, given that according to the Border Mail report, an unspecified quantity of cash was also seized.

Had the warrant been executed searching for weapons, stolen goods, a fugitive or something and netted 15 grams of cannabis in the process that is a slightly different matter, but 15 grams? They executed a warrant for 15 measly grams?

Please, I’ve been to parties with a communal bowl bigger than that.

15 grams as a traffic able quantity? Please, that’s personal use. Small potatoes.

Hardly worth the police time, and certainly not newsworthy.

In fact I wouldn’t mind a seat in the public gallery when the matter goes before a magistrate, just to see if he (or she) laughs as hard as I did at the pathetic “fruits” of Deniliqin CIB’s “raid”.

Honestly, I know a few pubs they could pass the hat around at the end of the night and probably come up with more than 15 grams if they are that hard up.

The “Big Ugly”, now less so.

OK, I’ll admit it, I’ve been glib about David Entwicht and his work as a consultant “place-maker” for the Wodonga city council in the past.

Flippant even, you might say.

Yes I’ve taken the opportunity to sink the slipper over “Gorf land” and fairy-lights on the water tower and other Entwichian enterprises in the past. I have, there’s no point denying it, the evidence is right there in black and white.

Truth is I actually think he’s one of the best things to happen to the region in a long, long time.

I think he’s been severely hamstrung by being assigned the community arts equivalent of the Herculean tasks, namely trying to beautify Wodonga’s water tower, arguably an iconic landmark which might well be described as lacking aesthetic -or indeed ANY- redeeming grace.

I suspect one might have to travel to former soviet Russia and marvel at the pre-1960’s communist architecture of the high density housing projects to find an uglier man-made structure anywhere on this earth.

Still, the rednecks seem quite attached to it, like many of their conservative values, an anachronistic abomination which remains purely because they lack the imagination to replace it.

Despite my cynicism, which I will admit is both ardent and staunch, the “big ugly”, Wodonga’s water tower IS actually starting to look….well,….less ugly.

At least it is at night, during the day it remains an abjectly noxious eyesore so I guess that’s a fair compromise. 

In fact having read a bit about David Entwicht, having seen some of his work and proposals for the future, I’d say we are actually privileged to have as one of our regional contemporaries, a visionary of some note.

I’d even go as far as to say I’m becoming a fan.