Water restrictions have been eased, and there seem to be no critics of this decision. But should this really be the case? Or am I out of touch? The ABC calls it "An early christmas present for Melbourne." In Melbourne water capacity is only at 37.4%. When the catchments are less than half full, is it appropriate that more people should be able to water their gardens? Is this really neccassary? Is it a waste? Our roses will look beautiful again.
If it is in the interest of more sporting grounds to be watered so that playing surfaces are less hard and less injuries occur, then it should be allowed, but the watering of gardens is unnecessary. What is needed rather is a concerted push to make peoples gardens more resilient to the current climate. We should not waste a precious resource on mere vanity. Perhaps if individuals feed themselves off their garden then an exception should be made, but the idea during a time of drought that people should be able to increase their water usage is simply unsustainable.
Since 1997, when the capacity of the catchments was near 100%, the water levels have been dropping. We do not know when this trend will stop, or if it will. Decisions such as John Brumby's do not help, nor do they communicate to the public the idea of water being a precious resource.
The Age puts forward the idea that it is a decision made in an election year. If this is true, it is simply not acceptable to play with the future of a state to gain another four years of power. Perhaps if there was more foresight and restriction of water use, desalination plants would not need to be built to sustain our thirst. This is a bad decision and shows that John Brumby is out of touch with the current water scenario. In the future when restrictions are once again placed on Melburnians, I wonder how many litres would have been wasted on Flora unsuitable for an Australian climate and if then we would have finally learnt our lesson, to take only what we need. Watch water levels closely.