Permaculture?

[boskysquelch]

So as an expert in Permaculture, how do you view David Graham's research?

I don't need to do research to stae the obvious...yes I have worked in beef farming & dairy...

As an expert on the Spotted Owl protests of current and past...what do think about their demise, scientifically, ecologically ... and the symbolism attached to them in NA Culture...and why do think others of not even the same continent have chosen to react so passionately to their down fall.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Did I say I was an expert? I'm a novice. I like the underlying ethic and principles. I want to hear experiences of the practice.

The origin and underlying ethic and principles are scientific.

You don't decide what variety of grain to plant based on the menstral cycle of a imaginary earth fairy. You decide based on the suitability of the grain to the environment you're going to grow it in, input of resources vs. the yield, and it's longterm effect on the eco-system.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

I don't need to do research to stae the obvious...yes I have worked in beef farming & dairy...

As an expert on the Spotted Owl protests of current and past...what do think about their demise, scientifically, ecologically ... and the symbolism attached to them in NA Culture...and why do think others of not even the same continent have chosen to react so passionately to their down fall.

You've not heard of irony?

 

[Art Stephens]

The origin and underlying ethic and principles are scientific.

You don't decide what variety of grain to plant based on the menstral cycle of a imaginary earth fairy. You decide based on the suitability of the grain to the environment you're going to grow it in, input of resources vs. the yield, and it's longterm effect on the eco-system.

Your missing the point though - mass agrarian systems of destruction and earth-rape - also based on the application of scientific principles. So there's an underlying approach or ethic, beneath 'the scientific'. Don't hide it. Celebrate it.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Your missing the point though - mass agrarian systems of destruction and earth-rape - also based on the application of scientific principles.

The current agrarian system is built mainly on short-term capitalist gain, not science or they wouldn't have been feeding cows to cows, etc.

 

[Art Stephens]

The current agrarian system is built mainly on short-term capitalist gain, not science or they wouldn't have been feeding cows to cows, etc.

So.. the misapplication of science.. and what was the basis for that misapplication - what was the underlying ethic??

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

So.. the misapplication of science.. and what was the basis for that misapplication - what was the underlying ethic??

You need to read the sentence again if you didn't get the answer to that question.

BTW, if you want to talk hippy/dippy sky fairy crap the relevant thread is this-a-way:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=293099

 

[Art Stephens]

You need to read the sentence again if you didn't get the answer to that question.

BTW, if you want to talk hippy/dippy sky fairy crap the relevant thread is this-a-way:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=293099

So much hostility. Fear again.

 

[Diamond]

Could it support six billion people?

 

[Art Stephens]

Heard a radio show with Lovelace on - popn could be down to 2bn by end of the century - or less.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

So much hostility. Fear again.

Ah, a troll. How lovely.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

To be honest, I think all the Goddess stuff can be fairly harmless. I have plenty of friends who go on like that but for whom I have deep respect, some of them can even see pixies, and also live in Totnes

It can be pernicious however, particularly when it's used to reduce progressive social thinking about sustainability to reactionary mysticism and Malthusianism.

 

[Art Stephens]

To be honest, I think all the Goddess stuff can be fairly harmless. I have plenty of friends who go on like that but for whom I have deep respect, some of them can even see pixies, and also live in Totnes

It can be pernicious however, particularly when it's used to reduce progressive social thinking about sustainability to reactionary mysticism and Malthusianism.

You can open up to this stuff. I don't see myself as into 'mysticism'. Just trying to see things in a more universal way. Stumbling, but trying.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

To be honest, I think all the Goddess stuff can be fairly harmless. I have plenty of friends who go on like that but for whom I have deep respect, some of them can even see pixies, and also live in Totnes

It can be pernicious however, particularly when it's used to reduce progressive social thinking about sustainability to reactionary mysticism and Malthusianism.

We've spent the last 500 years trying to shed the superstitions that godbotherers imparted to the culture. I'm not keen on spending the next 500 fixing the superstitions of goddessbotherers. This probably sounds more negative on religion than I really am. Religion can be personally satifying for many people, I just don't think it should be in the cultural driver's seat.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

You can open up to this stuff. I don't see myself as into 'mysticism'. Just trying to see things in a more universal way. Stumbling, but trying.

Consider this then. Science is not the problem. Capitalism is the problem.

 

[Jonti]

Could it support six billion people?

Permaculture?

For sure.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Or to put it another way ...

This arithmetic mentality which disregards the social context of demographics is incredibly short-sighted. Once we accept without any reflection or criticism that we live in a "grow-or-die" capitalistic society in which accumulation is literally a law of economic survival and competition is the motor of "progress," anything we have to say about population is basically meaningless. The biosphere will eventually be destroyed whether five billion or fifty million live on the planet. Competing firms in a "dog-eat-dog" market must outproduce each other if they are to remain in existence. They must plunder the soil, remove the earth's forests, kill off its wildlife, pollute its air and waterways not because their intentions are necessarily bad, although they usually are <snip> but because they must simply survive. Only a radical restructuring of society as a whole, including its anti-ecological sensibilities, can remove this all commanding social compulsion -- not rituals, yoga, or encounter groups, valuable as some of these practices may be

source

 

[Art Stephens]

Consider this then. Science is not the problem. Capitalism is the problem.

I have spoken of the misapplication of science. Its more a case of the revulsion of some to "non-scientific" thinking - beyond the limitations of science. Its like a painter who won't use the full palette.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

The relevant systems are complex and unpredictable and the risks of fucking things up are huge. The particular systems primarily responsible for screwing up the global ecology are in power, heavily armed and perfectly willing to commit any crimes they need to to maintain the status quo.

We're running out of chances, so we need to think clearly and act effectively therefore retreating into la la land seems unlikely to me to be terribly helpful.

 

[Crispy]

Hilarious alt account Hollis. Off you fuck

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Ohh, I was enjoying that rant.

 

[Crispy]

It's a very interesting topic. But he can use his regular account to talk about it just like the rest of us

 

[perplexis]

Actually the problem with hippies is that they know too little and are very eager to share it around.

That's so unbearably true. It just reminded of an old hippy housemate, and I guffawed quite violently to myself.
It's a phrase that I think I've been looking for to describe the aforementioned hippy for years.

 

[contadino]

It has nothing to do with mysticism, spirituality, or hippy-dippy shit - unless you consider a seed germinating to be spiritual.

Permaculture is a pretty sound set of ideals. The problem it's suffering from at the moment is that it's been turned into a new money-making scheme. Expensive books, courses, presentations, etc.. and most of the material is inadequate as the success of a permaculture site is entirely dependent on local climate and species.

 

[contadino]

As if on cue, this appeared today on Transition Culture...

http://transitionculture.org/2009/07/03/responding-to-sharon-astyk-on-permaculture-and-transition/

"What has long concerned me is that there are lots of people out there in permaculture, all with great motivation and intention, diseminating things which may or may not work, and not enough people actually rigorously testing it, revisiting projects, documenting successes and failures, and being honest about them. Misperceptions and half-truths become enshrined as fact. There is very little first hand, testable research taking place, although Permaculture Activist magazine has historically done a great job of drawing together what research there is. This is, I think, at least partly because permaculture tends not to attract people who do active, detailed, scientific research."

 

[Herbsman.]

 

[co-op]

It has nothing to do with mysticism, spirituality, or hippy-dippy shit - unless you consider a seed germinating to be spiritual.

Permaculture is a pretty sound set of ideals. The problem it's suffering from at the moment is that it's been turned into a new money-making scheme. Expensive books, courses, presentations, etc.. and most of the material is inadequate as the success of a permaculture site is entirely dependent on local climate and species.

Bingo!

I'm currently living and working at a very nice little project in the south of Spain where one of the terraces has been turned into a "forest garden". Forest Gardens are somewhat totemic in permaculture because one of the 'founders', Bill Mollison, was originally a forestry worker in Tasmania and it was his observation of the complimentary relations between plants in natural eco-systems in the Tasmanian forest that partly led to Permaculture being formalised as a design system. He realised that overall crop yields were much higher per hectare in natural forests than in 'conventional' monocultures - albeit that of course many of these crops weren't of much, or any, benefit to humans.

The Forest Garden then is an attempt to reproduce the 'natural' climax vegetation system (assumed to be a forest) but tweaked towards human-benefitting plants, eg nuts, fruits etc with underplanting of other crops - "stacking" in the jargon, giving much more efficient three-dimensional use of the space. By mimicking the natural vegetation form, less labour is needed to maintain the garden - unproductive plants are crowded out.

Problem: where I am, forest is not the natural climax vegetation. There were never forests here. To keep trees alive, they need to be irrigated regularly (once or twice a week) using acequias (ancient Moorish irrigation lines) that deliver water from a spring. I have to regularly trample over the site opening and closing irrigation channels. Underplanting is a total pain in the arse, I walk all over it every time I irrigate. I used to tread round it but now I can't be bothered, if it's in the damned way I walk on it.

Moral: as you say, observe the local vegetation etc. But this "forest garden" has been planted (and then maintained) for years - even visited by Patrick Whitefield (?sp.) - a bit of a permaculture guru - and given the thumbs up. I really wonder at how this happened - some very un-self-aware cultural imperialism really - "forests are the norm". Well no, not everywhere they aren't, actually a minority of the planet really.

Permaculture is essentially a thoughtful and intelligent design system, but the minute any part of it becomes doctrinal, it's horseshit. Forest Gardens are a great idea where forests are the natural climax vegetation. Anywhere else they are as a daft as turf golf courses in Abu Dabai or any of the other nonsenses of the modern world.