You have been a long term follower of NSF and a long time contributor to this Forum.
i simply cannot believe you would pose or ask that question.
Have you not learnt anything about how this landscape once managed its water to rejuveante the landscape, restore its groundwaters and fill its floodpalin systems by preventing the minimum erosion from happening and allowing for the maximum flood to run across the landscape sustainably for thousands if not millions of years???
Don't you see a totally different landscape today?? One that is severly eroding, losing all its matter mostly out to sea. A highly incised and altered landscape that has turned all of out rivers, streams and creeks into deeply incised drains ripping the guts out of the land by waters destructive force.
I know you are aware that water, uncontrolled, is one of the most destructive forces on Earth but managed carefully it is also one of the most productive forces.
What you have stated
It has recently been announced by those that survived the floods that in some cases they were worse than they had to be because some councils had been slack in cleaning up watercourses
above is a comment that sees this destructive force as the NORM. It is now,
for exactly the reason you have stated. The removal of instream vegetation and chokes was the very method used by our inique landscape to de-energise the destructive forces of water in this flat, fragile landscape.
We have removed all the plants from our wetland system and incised our waterways. These present day systems send water raging out of control like we saw in Qld recently which, horrorfied the whole country.
If you wish to see the same catastrophe repeated again, then do
as you have hinted at.
May I humbly suggest, that you re-read Peter's books to get a clearer picture of the true way water once moved gently across
our land building systems, NOT destroying them.
I know that you would NEVER advocate the latter Col. What you have quoted is sheer BS!!!!