Working with or against Nature?

Both sides of politics accuse the other of working against nature ,
Whose right?
The thinking left accuse the right of exploiting nature and blame capitalism for its driving of the careless use of the earth's resources.   The thinking right  accuse the left of working against human interest  by adopting a cynical view of human nature and transferring that onto the people who work with the environment .The left are on safe ground provided they adopt a no touch policy for themselves  . Its head in the sand ,impractical and projection  politics while they do that.
As a earth processes risk management  planner , I agree that both parties have critical points to make. There is no more exploitative and dangerous  driver of damage  to our sensitive destructive environment than rampant capitalism .

We desperately need  a diverse way of running the economy that doesn't just accept capitalism or the over governance and loss of freedom that comes from the lefts way of thinking.
There is however no excuse
--for the ignorance and arrogance of both sides when it comes to real life decisions about risk.
- for politicians telling us how to do environment . As if they are qualified to do the doctoring !
--for extremes of not doing anything ,or for giving carte blanche to industry

The right are wrong to keep giving trump cards to those who find new ways to justify careless pressing of the flesh,
The left are wrong to continue with no touch policies which  protect them from ever having to face the fact that death and droughts occur and trees and ecosystem phases must die to live. The carbon in trees must be harvested to be sequestered . and so on . No touch can mean we do silly things like pretend change is not inevitable like trees  dying and rotting and creating acid water and the poor soils of our country
Explaining the Controversy and Confusion?
Both parties are beset by forms of blindness derived from their own prejudices and  not respecting the complexity of earth management and those who study both sides of the story properly . The wannabes wouldn't try to tell doctors how to do their job- why do they try to tell us ours !

.
No touch policies lead to forms of blindness and denial ;they can mean we resist the inevitable . Like soil moving down hills and mountains falling into the sea .
Such is the temptation of all those who let themselves be persuaded by the idealists on the left

Instead of blaming man,  the left are prone to blaming nature ,
In 2016 we had a wet October in on the Great Ocean Road, but we often  have very wet Octobers . Deep soils will move off the slope quite naturally under such rainfall
The no touch policy of the left can mean we do silly things like pretend change is not inevitable or even worse --that we should resist change or not work with it

Landslides on the Great Ocean Road   October 2016  The biggest landslide of the 120 named  can be blamed on  BOTH nature and people . Neither the inevitability of nature or the careless work of man can be the sole target.
The reality that has yet to be faced on the Wye -Sep section facing the GOR is that the soil wants to move across the road and the  current left government is making every effort to stop it .

I would suggest we work with nature and help it across , The alternative to a few weeks work is millions trying to hold it there .The alternative is to spend a lot of money on consultants and engineering when the rocks, the shallow soils and me agree its time to part company
We and the West ( through our history to date ) can only afford one way to work with nature and that is to work with it .

The only way to do that is to have people in the system who know and accept both political realities and force consideration of sound practice ( not unsound prejudice ) by knowing the risks in the situation .By training big picture planners .
Neither parties have been doing that so they spend time going around in circles.  Offering to throw money at problems they poorly perceive and will never fix .

Greenlabor living in a dream

What a bunch of confused and blinkered worriers are Labor ,Greens and now Xenophons. In their ignorance they want to convert the Murray Darling Basin system of ephemeral streams with diverse flows and variable water quality into perennial streams of more uniform quality:uniformity instead of natural diversity .
You would think they would have learnt from the water ignorant greenlabor governments who worried themselves silly about water . Transferring their worry about everything running out to things like water. - the useless desal plants as an eg . Greenlabor like to think they “ say what scientists say” but they don't even get that ecosystems have to die to live. Their dumb confusing concepts( like enviro flows) don't let streams dry out , or trees die. Greenlabor are Living lessons in limited visions of Nature.

Misplaced concreteness about old growth forests

While good forestry has for a long time left older stands amongst the harvested areas , the Greens have overstated the place of really old trees in habitat because they don't want to face the idea that all living things die and need to be regenerated . Trees do die and so do the animals.Natural degradation has been denied --and by those who want to claim real green for themselves .
Complex processes that confuse human induced degradation with natural degradation made life and thinking hard for the simpleminded.

Now we have the very odd and pathetic attempt to preserve trees in the suburbs beyond their mature dates - so they risk falling on people . Odd ball trees  too whose habitat role is usually overstated.Nothing to do with forests as forests need friends ,

Its true of course that more old trees could be preserved over the several hundred year life cycle  ( max)  than was convenient for many logging systems , Thankfully more consideration is now given in harvesting systems to ensure habitat retention actually occurs within and on the boundaries of coupes in native forests .Mora koalas still live outside our growing old growth forests than within them.

A recent program on Catalyst thankfully celebrates the old forestry principle that the foresters job to make sure habitat and regeneration of  all things in its ecomia occurs, By denying the foresters  role , the Greens have left much of the industry in the hands of industry., How clever are the Greens ?

The chainsaw is used in the story as the means to create an even more successful habitat than nature provides ( for the endangered parrot) , Some hope that a more positive and less fearful view of our relationship to the earth is possible. About time.

Misplaced concreteness about old growth forests

While good forestry has for a long time left older stands amongst the harvested areas , the Greens have overstated the place of really old trees in habitat because they don't want to face the idea that all living things die and need to be regenerated . Trees do die and so do the animals.Natural degradation has been denied --and by those who want to claim real green for themselves .
Complex processes that confuse human induced degradation with natural degradation made life and thinking hard for the simpleminded.

Now we have the very odd and pathetic attempt to preserve trees in the suburbs beyond their mature dates - so they risk falling on people . Odd ball trees  too whose habitat role is usually overstated.Nothing to do with forests as forests need friends ,

Its true of course that more old trees could be preserved over the several hundred year life cycle  ( max)  than was convenient for many logging systems , Thankfully more consideration is now given in harvesting systems to ensure habitat retention actually occurs within and on the boundaries of coupes in native forests .Mora koalas still live outside our growing old growth forests than within them.

A recent program on Catalyst thankfully celebrates the old forestry principle that the foresters job to make sure habaita and regeneration of  all things occurs, By denying the foresters  role the Greens have left much of the industry in the hands of industry ,

The chainsaw is used in the story as the means to create an even more successful habitat than nature provides , Some hope that a more positive and less fearful view of our relationship to the earth is possible. About time.