| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 74448 | 2006-11-23 00:32:00 | Brash resigns | leonidas5 (2306) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 501418 | 2006-12-13 23:31:00 | Not sure who these dairy people are,one is loath to call them farmers,the first thing they did round here was to cut out the shelter,to allow huge irrigation units to go in.So who are they?not the local sheep farmers I am sure,they were largely marginal at best,these things costs millions. Quite a few of them will probably be Queen street farmers with dollar signs in their eyes. So they cut out the shelter belts which would have given the stock some shelter and also hinder the flow of the wind a little so drying the land up more requiring more irrigation. |
mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 501419 | 2006-12-13 23:55:00 | With respect to aquifers elsewhere,people don't deliberately empty them,on finding the error of their ways,this can be remedied. Er...no. Take Canterbury (and I wish someone would :D). It is an alluvial plain not much above sea level. The water pressure in the aquifers keeps the seawater out but when the fresh water is pumped away, sea water infiltrates the strata - carrying salt. It is a one-way process, once the salt is there it will take aeons to be diluted and removed. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 501420 | 2006-12-14 00:02:00 | Just to confirm I'm on the team, I agree with all of you about Queen Street farmers, clearing of shelter belts and the idiocy of establishing dairy farms in quasi-desert regions. The problem is that Environment Councils don't have enough technical information yet to stop the irrigation schemes. There was a case in Canterbury where the Council declined a water right application only to have the Environment Court grant it because the Council didn't know with certainty the size of the underground aquifer. If in doubt, grant it - crazy stuff. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 501421 | 2006-12-14 02:16:00 | Er...no. Take Canterbury (and I wish someone would :D). It is an alluvial plain not much above sea level. The water pressure in the aquifers keeps the seawater out but when the fresh water is pumped away, sea water infiltrates the strata - carrying salt. It is a one-way process, once the salt is there it will take aeons to be diluted and removed. That must be the Southland Canterbury,I most certainly have not heard of this sea water infiltration. Do you just make it up as you go 001?:rolleyes: |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 501422 | 2006-12-14 02:25:00 | I most certainly have not heard of this sea water infiltration. Yet. Bad things take time too.:mad: |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 501423 | 2006-12-14 03:05:00 | That must be the Southland Canterbury,I most certainly have not heard of this sea water infiltration . Do you just make it up as you go 001?:rolleyes: Aaarrrgghhh - ya got me! :lol: But just for the hallibut, check Google -quite a lot of hydrologists share my delusion . google . com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=seawater+infiltration+aquifer&sourceid=opera&num=25&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8" target="_blank">www . google . com :) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 501424 | 2006-12-14 03:06:00 | That must be the Southland Canterbury,I most certainly have not heard of this sea water infiltration. Do you just make it up as you go 001?:rolleyes: I think, no, I know; that dairying in Southland is a very different thing to dairying in Canterbury. I haven't heard about sea water infiltration in Canterbury either. I've heard the worst effect is the draw off from the rivers which lessens flow etc. There just might not be enough water to go round eventually, which might leave some who have done their budgets, on the basis that they can rely on irrigation, rather disappointed. I think that it is a mix of people who invest in dairying in Canterbury. Quite often sheep farmers will convert their properties. Then there are North Island farmers who see an opportunity and buy a property for conversion, also investors of the type mentioned before so called "Queen Street Farmers" might have a go. I know young sharemilkers who've gone there with the specific aim of building up their equity in stock (because herds down there are much bigger on the average than in the Nth. Island) so that it gives them the opportunity to buy their own place back in the North Island. It might work for some, but I'm not all that keen on it myself. The irrigation issue, lack of shelter (as someone has already pointed out) and a general perception that it's not all that good. |
jcr1 (893) | ||
| 501425 | 2006-12-14 03:13:00 | That must be the Southland Canterbury,I most certainly have not heard of this sea water infiltration. Do you just make it up as you go 001?:rolleyes: That's the problem with being a mere woodworker and not a scientist Cic. We scientists generally know what's going on around us :) For a very much closer to home search, including Christchurch and the Hutt Valley Waiwhetu aquifer see here: www.google.co.nz |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 501426 | 2006-12-14 04:23:00 | That's the problem with being a mere woodworker and not a scientist Cic. We scientists generally know what's going on around us :) For a very much closer to home search, including Christchurch and the Hutt Valley Waiwhetu aquifer see here: www.google.co.nz Do tell T how you see anything 200ft up an Ivory Tower. My brother in-law writes the scientific paper in the dominion each week,I will ask him when he arrives down this weekend. Unlike you T,who believes everything they read,I like to talk to proper scientists.Nothing less than a PhD will do.:) |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 501427 | 2006-12-14 04:53:00 | Sigh. I get the impression Terry and Cicero could continue this debate ad infinitum. However you are now both adding the art of subtle insults to your discussion. Keep it above the belt please. |
Jen (38) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | |||||