Just imagine
Peter Dana-Olsen Recently a story appeared in the Sydney Daily Telegraph of July 31, 2004 with the lead line: "Agent Orange on Green River" and "Ultimate Weapon Against Weed". Now let's imagine this scenario — totally fictitious of course — taking place in one of the offices of the Primary Industries Department. A think-tank is in progress, concerning the elimination of Salvinia, the insidious aquatic weed clogging the Green River. 1st Speaker: We've got to think of other ways to rid the evil aquatic weed on the Hawkesbury. 1st Clerk: How much is it costing now? 1st Speaker: Hundreds of thousands of dollars and we can't keep up with it! 1st Clerk: It seems to be a simple enough problem. I've done some research and $15,000 worth of Agent Orange will fix the problem in short order! 1st Speaker :I think he's on to something — what would be the downside of this treatment? 2nd Clerk: According to the NSW AG fact, p.7, 6.13, it states, "Following intensive herbicide control programs, the dead plant material can sometimes cause a temporary pollution problem and de-oxygenate the water." 1st Clerk :then how do we solve the temporary pollution problem? 2nd Clerk: The fact sheet says, "by integration of control methods with physical removal of some weed prior to treatment". 1st Speaker: But isn't that what we're doing now? We still have to pay for some removal. 2nd Clerk: But with this treatment, the pollution can be reduced. 1st Speaker: So it can be reduced, but what happens to the rest of the pollution? 1st Clerk: Maybe it just goes away. 2nd Clerk: I'm reading this Agent Orange article in the TELEGRAPH, quoting Hawkesbury Green Councillor Leigh Williams, along with environmental lobbyist Sue Gleeson as saying, "This spray related to the notorious Agent Orange used in the Vietnam War; also known as "Agent Blue"; has not only the potential to pollute the water, but can also cause physical and psychological illness. Much of our drinking water is drawn out of the North Richmond area, so that would have been contaminated." 1st Clerk: What do THEY know. 1st Speaker: Well we certainly can't call it "Agent Orange" so we will use the trade name "REGLONE" and most folks wouldn't associate "REGLONE" with Agent Orange. 2nd Clerk: I have a leaflet here, obviously put out by some environ freaks, writing about the problem of the spray that used to be on the Darling River about four years ago. The plant growth accelerated after application of the spray, then the plants died on top of the water, sinking and rotting on the bottom, percolating methane gas, and releasing a whole range of green house gases. It also released nutrients into the water, which encouraged further weed growth and if weeds aren't available to absorb these nutrients — the water becomes undrinkable and/or unusable — so the Darling River ended up neuro-toxic along with turtles we found bleeding from their eyes, nose and anus! 1st Clerk: BLOODY HELL! Those turtles shouldn't be there anyway. 1st Speaker: Well, we should be able to solve those minor problems, so all in favour of spraying say 'AYE' 1st Clerk: AYE 2nd Clerk: AYE 1st Speaker: AYE, too. Then it's settled — let us bow our heads and spray. Of course this scenario could never happen in our present stage of enlightenment.