the Coorong environment and its dependant human community

Dear Friends,

I write to you because, over the last five years I have been journeying with a concern over the health and wellbeing of the Coorong environment and its dependant human community.

I have been working (most recently on a voluntary basis) with the local communities, to help raise awareness, to find solutions and build resilience of the whole of the wetland community (plant, animal and human). Through this work, I have become increasingly aware that while the wetland is severely degraded (its primary productivity is estimated to be a tenth of its pre-European state) the human community that lives around and depends on the wetland is mirroring this disturbance.

Working on drought preparedness and climate change planning with the communities, when responding to the impacts of the Millennium Drought, I ended up calling in specialist social workers. They described the community as collectively suffering post-traumatic stress from the impacts of the drought and the constant conflicts with ‘outsiders’ since that time.

For the communities that live around the wetland, as well as river communities upstream, the River, Lakes and Coorong are their source of both financial security and personal or collective identities. Issues that damage this identity create significant distress and are often correlated to higher than normal cases of suicide and substance abuse, particularly among fishermen, farmers and Indigenous elders.

A common theme that keeps arising in my conversations with communities, particularly with the Ngarrindjeri and the fishermen, is their tiredness with the constant fighting of issues and the need to reframe the debate into a conversation around the restoration of plenty (for nature and humans) rather than the division of an ever decreasing little. They see this, as per Barnett (2018) as an opportunity to build resilience, both within the environment and within the dependent community.

Identifying the baseline of this 'plenty' is clearly key, however the sociological disturbance appears to have resulted in well-meaning individuals inadvertently, out of desperation, biasing the collective memory of how the system “works' and what has caused this system to degrade. This has happened on all sides of the water debate, causing dramatic shifts in what is considered the healthy state of the wetland. The uncertainties around climate change may be further confounding understandings around the ecological baseline.

To restore a system, we need to exercise some deep truth finding. To sit with the broad array of historic records. To find the true baseline (or baselines) to how this system once functioned. To identify what we valued about this “Kakadu of the South” (thank you Auntie Meryl) and start toward identifying where we might be able to restore it to in the future.

I see this as a means of environmental peace-making. A means of peace-making that is immediate, is fitted to my particular skills and to the place and opportunity I have been planted within. As such, I feel increasingly called to assist with this process.

After much contemplation and discussion, it seemed to me that a clear way forward would be for me to stop work for what I believe will take three years, and work with the community to collate these historic records, using them to establish true baseline conditions, particularly in the most unhealthy and contested area of the wetland (the South Lagoon of the Coorong). This collective baseline would inform the first steps the community and stakeholders would take on agreed to path toward restoration.

Many of the stakeholders and academics who work in the area have agreed that this is a positive way forward, suggesting that I do this in the form of a PhD, to maximise my access to other academics, research materials and a tax-free stipend to enable me to pay the bills, while I do this.

The Federation University has been suggested at the most appropriate University through which to do this work and has agreed to facilitate the management of a scholarship, if I can obtain commitments for the required 'Industry' co-contribution.

I have attached to this letter both a draft research proposal (it will not be finalised until I have had a chance to ensure it meets the needs of all parties) and paperwork from the university with regard to ‘Industry’ sponsorship. I have also attached a copy of my curriculum vitae.

In total, the costs for a complete PhD scholarship (tuition and stipend) start at $204,000 and go up from there, depending on research costs. The Federation University (Professor Peter Gell) has offered a full tuition PhD scholarship and a half-stipend as their contribution, which is effectively $156,000 of that base budget.

The struggling local fishery, recognising this as a fundamental understanding, have committed to contributing another quarter-stipend ($8,000 per annum or $24,000 over three years) to assist me to do this work. This leaves my just $8,000 per annum ($24,000) of that base budget, to enable me to do this work for a period of three years. Ideally I would secure at least $2,000 per annum in additional funds, to cover any unforeseen costs.

The purpose of this letter is two-fold;
• Is it possible for Friends to recognise this calling as a concern, to provide me with some of the moral support I will need to complete this?
• Is there any way Friends can see to contribute financially toward this work, by providing the remaining quarter-stipend ($8,000 - 10,000 per annum) or a smaller annual contribution, to help cover research costs?

In friendship,