The Boss reckons this gum tree is about sixty years old, one of the tallest along our stretch of river. It was a popular shade tree for fishermen, who could easily slip a boat in beneath it; and it provided welcome shade for innumerable campers over the years.
It came down a week after December's flood receded.
Maybe its part of the cycle of life along the river, The Boss says - or maybe not.
This one was a strong, healthy tree; it was low down on the bank so it's roots could get to moisture from the river during the long drought and it never looked like being in trouble. So it survived a lot of floods over the years, as well as droughts.
What it didn't survive is the so-called environmental flows, according to The Boss, who keeps an eye on these things.
He reckons the long e-flow in August, followed by another one in November, had the banks unnaturally wet by the time the flood came in early December.
The Boss has been rattling on about this before, as you probably know, but he has us down along the river just about every day of the year and he watches what's happening to it.
He says the environmental flows are too frequent for the health of the river and its banks and he's worried about the possibility of even more being shoved down the Goulburn this way to satisfy the Murray Darling Basin Plan.
Environmental flows will destroy the river, he reckons, if they can't be managed more like the natural flooding regime - which means much larger lumps, a lot less frequently...just like natural floods.
This way, the banks have time to dry out, the billabongs get a regular drink and the wider floodplain gets a watering - part of the environmental benefit supposedly part of the Plan.
It's a pay-off, he reckons: the Murray Darling Basin Authority and the governments need to figure out a way to deliver over-bank flows, just now and then, to keep the Goulburn in good shape.
Why would we want to destroy the Goulburn to help South Australia keep their artificial lower lakes looking nice for tourists?
PS: My video of the week: