Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Kris Holstrom" <kholstrom@gmail.com>]

Check out the subterranean heating systems designed by John Cruickshank at hobbithouse@compuserve.com. The system uses perforated pipe (french drain pipe) at several levels in the growing beds in greenhouses. My greenhouse uses this method. THrough the winter I grow mostly salad greens in the greenhouse at 9000' elevation yet I don't have to put any heat on until it is -10 degrees F outside. The tubes all feed into a box with a small 1 amp fan that blows the warm greenhouse air into the soil. I am also off-grid so the low power use of the fan is a must.

 

Happy to give more details, but definitely check out John's website.

Kris H

 

On 3/26/06, livingontheland-request@lists.ibiblio.org < livingontheland-request@lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:

Send Livingontheland mailing list submissions to
       livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       livingontheland-request@lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       livingontheland-owner@lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Livingontheland digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. topic question ( bennett@frognet.net)
  2. My Saudi Arabian Breakfast (TradingPostPaul)
  3. Re: topic question (TradingPostPaul)
  4. geothermal heating and cooling ( bennett@frognet.net)
  5. Re: topic question (Robert Norsen)
  6. greenhouse and more (birdwalk)
  7. Re: My Saudi Arabian Breakfast (Robert Norsen)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:58:37 -0500 (EST)
From: bennett@frognet.net
Subject: [Livingontheland] topic question
To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID:
       <2272.65.141.120.78.1143395917.squirrel@webmail.frognet.net" target="_blank">2272.65.141.120.78.1143395917.squirrel@webmail.frognet.net >
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

Would it be an appropriate topic for this list to discuss using
geothermal heating and cooling methods for home and greenhouse use?
D.



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:01:34 -0700
From: "TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net >
Subject: [Livingontheland] My Saudi Arabian Breakfast
To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <200603261101340727.05DE37BF@mail.gilanet.com" target="_blank">200603261101340727.05DE37BF@mail.gilanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"


An eye-opener about growing and eating local.
paul, tradingpost@riseup.net
---------------

   My Saudi Arabian Breakfast
   By Chad Heeter
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=71299

   Please join me for breakfast. It's time to fuel up again.

   On the table in my small Berkeley apartment this particular morning is a healthy looking little meal -- a bowl of imported McCann's Irish oatmeal topped with Cascadian Farms organic frozen raspberries, and a cup of Peet's Fair Trade Blend coffee. Like most of us, I prepare my breakfast at home and the ingredients for this one probably cost me about $1.25. (If I went to a caf? in downtown Berkeley, I'd likely have to add another $6.00, plus tip for the same.)

   My breakfast fuels me up with about 400 calories, and it satisfies me. So, for just over a buck and half an hour spent reading the morning paper in my own kitchen, I'm energized for the next few hours. But before I put spoon to cereal, what if I consider this bowl of oatmeal porridge (to which I've just added a little butter, milk, and a shake of salt) from a different perspective. Say, a Saudi Arabian one.

   Then, what you'd be likely to see -- what's really there, just hidden from our view (not to say our taste buds) -- is about four ounces of crude oil. Throw in those luscious red raspberries and that cup of java (another three ounces of crude), and don't forget those modest additions of butter, milk, and salt (another ounce), and you've got a tiny bit of the Middle East right here in my kitchen.

   Now, let's drill a little deeper into this breakfast. Just where does this tiny gusher of oil actually come from? (We'll let this oil represent all fossil fuels in my breakfast, including natural gas and coal.)

   Nearly 20% of this oil went into growing my raspberries on Chilean farms many thousands of miles away, those oats in the fields of County Kildare, Ireland, and that specially-raised coffee in Guatemala -- think tractors as well as petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides.

   The next 40% of my breakfast fossil-fuel equation is burned up between the fields and the grocery store in processing, packaging, and shipping.

   Take that box of McCann's oatmeal. On it is an inviting image of pure, healthy goodness -- a bowl of porridge, topped by two peach slices. Scattered around the bowl are a handful of raw oats, what look to be four acorns, and three fresh raspberries. Those raw oats are actually a reminder that the flakes require a few steps twixt field and box. In fact, a visit to McCann's website illustrates each step in the cleaning, steaming, hulling, cutting, and rolling that turns the raw oats into edible flakes. Those five essential steps require significant energy costs.

   Next, my oat flakes go into a plastic bag (made from oil), which is in turn inserted into an energy-intensive, pressed wood-pulp, printed paper box. Only then does my "breakfast" leave Ireland and travel over 5,000 fuel-gorging, CO2-emitting miles by ship and truck to my grocery store in California.

   Coming from another hemisphere, my raspberries take an even longer fossil-fueled journey to my neighborhood. Though packaged in a plastic bag labeled Cascadian Farms (which perhaps hints at a birthplace in the good old Cascade mountains of northwest Washington), the small print on the back, stamped "A Product of Chile," tells all -- and what it speaks of is a 5,800-mile journey to Northern California.

   If you've been adding up percentages along the way, perhaps you've noticed that a few tablespoons of crude oil in my bowl have not been accounted for. That final 40% of the fossil fuel in my breakfast is used up by the simple acts of keeping food fresh and then preparing it. In home kitchens and restaurants, the chilling in refrigerators and the cooking on stoves using electricity or natural gas gobbles up more energy than you might imagine.

   For decades, scientists have calculated how much fossil fuel goes into our food by measuring the amount of energy consumed in growing, packing, shipping, consuming, and finally disposing of it. The "caloric input" of fossil fuel is then compared to the energy available in the edible product, the "caloric output."

   What they've discovered is astonishing. According to researchers at the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable Agriculture, an average of over seven calories of fossil fuel is burned up for every calorie of energy we get from our food. This means that in eating my 400 calorie breakfast, I will, in effect, have "consumed" 2,800 calories of fossil-fuel energy. (Some researchers claim the ratio to be as high as ten to one.)

   But this is only an average. My cup of coffee gives me only a few calories of energy, but to process just one pound of coffee requires over 8,000 calories of fossil-fuel energy -- the equivalent energy found in nearly a quart of crude oil, 30 cubic feet of natural gas, or around two and a half pounds of coal.

   So how do you gauge how much oil went into your food?

   First check out how far it traveled. The further it traveled, the more oil it required. Next, gauge how much processing went into the food. A fresh apple is not processed, but Kellogg's Apple Jacks cereal requires enormous amounts of energy to process. The more processed the food, the more oil it required. Then consider how much packaging is wrapped around your food. Buy fresh vegetables instead of canned, and buy bulk beans, grains, and flour if you want to reduce that packaging.

   By now, you're thinking that you're in the clear, because you eat strictly organically-grown foods. When it comes to fossil-fuel calculations though, the manner in which food's grown is where differences stop. Whether conventionally-grown or organically-grown, a raspberry is shipped, packed, and chilled the same way.

   Yes, there are some savings from growing organically, but possibly only of a slight nature. According to a study by David Pimentel at Cornell University, 30% of fossil-fuel expenditure on farms growing conventional (non-organic) crops is found in chemical fertilizer. This 30% is not consumed on organic farms, but only if the manure used as fertilizer is produced in very close proximity to the farm. Manure is a heavy, bulky product. If farms have to truck bulk manure for any distance over a few miles, the savings are eaten up in diesel-fuel consumption, according to Pimentel. One source of manure for organic farmers in California is the chicken producer Foster Farms. Organic farmers in Monterey County, for example, will have to truck tons of Foster's manure from their main plant in Livingston, Ca. to fields over one hundred miles away.

   So the next time we're at the grocer, do we now have to ask not only where and how this product was grown, but how far its manure was shipped?

   Well, if you're in New York City picking out a California-grown tomato that was fertilized with organic compost made from kelp shipped from Nova Scotia, maybe it's not such a bad question. But should we give up on organic? If you're buying organic raspberries from Chile each week, then yes. The fuel cost is too great, as is the production of the greenhouse gases along with it. Buying locally-grown foods should be the first priority when it comes to saving fossil fuel.

   But if there were really truth in packaging, on the back of my oatmeal box where it now tells me how many calories I get from each serving, it would also tell me how many calories of fossil fuels went into this product. On a scale from one to five -- with one being non-processed, locally-grown products and five being processed, packaged imports -- we could quickly average the numbers in our shopping cart to get a sense of the ecological footprint of our diet. From this we would gain a truer sense of the miles-per-gallon in our food.

   What appeared to be a simple, healthy meal of oatmeal, berries, and coffee looks different now. I thought I was essentially driving a Toyota Prius hybrid -- by having a very fuel-efficient breakfast, but by the end of the week I've still eaten the equivalent of over two quarts of Valvoline. From the perspective of fossil-fuel consumption, I now look at my breakfast as a waste of precious resources. And what about the mornings that I head to Denny's for a Grand-Slam breakfast: eggs, pancakes, bacon, sausage? On those mornings -- forget about fuel efficiency -- I'm driving a Hummer.

   What I eat for breakfast connects me to the planet, deep into its past with the fossilized remains of plants and animals which are now fuel, as well as into its future, when these non-renewable resources will likely be in scant supply. Maybe these thoughts are too grand to be having over breakfast, but I'm not the only one on the planet eating this morning. My meal traveled thousands of miles around the world to reach my plate. But then there's the rise of perhaps 600 million middle-class Indians and Chinese. They're already demanding the convenience of packaged meals and the taste of foreign flavors. What happens when middle-class families in India or China decide they want their Irish oats for breakfast, topped by organic raspberries from Chile? They'll dip more and more into the planet's communal oil well. And someday soon, we'll all suck it dry.

   Chad Heeter grew up eating fossil fuels in Lee's Summit, Missouri. He's a freelance writer, documentary filmmaker, and a former high school science teacher.




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:12:31 -0700
From: "TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net >
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] topic question
To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <200603261112310461.05E83D1E@mail.gilanet.com" target="_blank">200603261112310461.05E83D1E@mail.gilanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


We really can't broaden out into shelter sustainability but greenhouse technique can relate to sustainable growing.  In a nutshell:  it's about healthy soil and sustainable growing, and not including commercial self promotions in general.

paul, tradingpost@riseup.net
---------------
The care of the Earth is our most ancient and most worthy, and after all our most pleasing responsibility. To cherish what remains of it and to foster its renewal is our only hope.
  - Wendell Berry
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 3/26/2006 at 12:58 PM bennett@frognet.net wrote:

>Would it be an appropriate topic for this list to discuss using
>geothermal heating and cooling methods for home and greenhouse use?
>D.
>




------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 13:34:29 -0500 (EST)
From: bennett@frognet.net
Subject: [Livingontheland] geothermal heating and cooling
To: "Healthy soil and sustainable growing"
       <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org >
Message-ID:
       <2323.65.141.120.78.1143398069.squirrel@webmail.frognet.net" target="_blank">2323.65.141.120.78.1143398069.squirrel@webmail.frognet.net >
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

> technique can relate to sustainable growing.  In a nutshell:  it's about
> healthy soil and sustainable growing, and not including commercial self
> promotions in general.
>
Okay, I'll try this topic out.  If it's "off", then I'm sorry and
moderators can delete.  How's that? :-)
I'm planning to build a greenhouse; well, actually two of them.  One
will be freestanding 25x48 (have had the hoops for years, so...) the
other will be more of an attached, enclosed 8x16 porch on our house.
We live in zone 6.  Winter temps sometimes get to 20 deg. below zero
(nighttime) in Jan., but are just as likely to be 50 deg. in the
daytime.  (Like much of the country, we've had some real strange weather
the last few years.)  I don't necessarily want WARM greenhouses, but at
least the one attached to the house, we don't want to freeze.   We'll
use as much solar thermal gain as we can for both greenhouses.  We will
also probably use some composting and livestock sheltering for heat in
the free-standing gh.
Summertime here for the past 15 - 20 yrs. has meant at least one month
of near drought conditions with temps. in the 90s and above.  It's also
quite humid in the summer.  We're located between hills so don't get as
much breeze as we'd like.
The challenge:  We need to cool the ghs in the summertime, especially
the one attached to the house.  Traditional electric air-conditioning is
cost prohibitive.  Our weather is too humid for swamp-coolers.   I'm
sort of thinking a geothermal system might be do-able and make sense.
What do you all think?
Would just running plastic pipe in a serpintine manner down 3 ft. or so
underground and blowing hot air in and the (hopefully) coold air out
work?  Would the pipe need to be perforated to allow any condensate to
escape?  Would regular squirrel-cage furnace blowers be sufficient to
blow through such piping?
Comments please.
D.



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:51:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Robert Norsen <bob@bnbrew.com>
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] topic question
To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing
       <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <20060326205105.95777.qmail@web31803.mail.mud.yahoo.com" target="_blank"> 20060326205105.95777.qmail@web31803.mail.mud.yahoo.com >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

If it is a feasable alternative to burning more oil and coal?  why not?  Bob

bennett@frognet.net wrote:  Would it be an appropriate topic for this list to discuss using
geothermal heating and cooling methods for home and greenhouse use?
D.

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/livingontheland/attachments/20060326/3ba0373b/attachment.htm

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:09:20 -0600
From: "birdwalk" < birdwalk@frontiernet.net>
Subject: [Livingontheland] greenhouse and more
To: "Healthy soil and sustainable growing"
       <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <0bec01c65119$8cd32d40$01fea8c0@pc >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

one the green house front I am seeking input

what I want to accomplish is a green house I can grow some veggies and herbs in all year round - with a swimming pool for me to exercise in - preferably one that I can share with fish although not sure about that merely from the standpoint of I want warmed water.  possibly a bio filter through a fish pond and hydroponics set up for veggies that  cam benefit from sharing with species of fish that could take warmer water?

I am starting from scratch with this one so all ideas are welcome
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/livingontheland/attachments/20060326/d6fbe9af/attachment.htm

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 13:15:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Robert Norsen < bob@bnbrew.com>
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] My Saudi Arabian Breakfast
To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing
       < livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <20060326211509.5891.qmail@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com" target="_blank"> 20060326211509.5891.qmail@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Yep  It all makes  no till, grown at home, plucked and eated raw by the fewest people we can arrange  to have to support on the planet, conserving soil, water and oil  dammed important.    So as a nation and as a world, under our skilled political leadership,  we head the opposite direction.  Gonna be a collision  of hungry angry people some day sooner than we expect.  We will look back on the peaceful days of just one war,  in Iraq.    Bob

TradingPostPaul <tradingpost@riseup.net> wrote:
An eye-opener about growing and eating local.
paul, tradingpost@riseup.net
---------------

My Saudi Arabian Breakfast
By Chad Heeter
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=71299

Please join me for breakfast. It's time to fuel up again.

On the table in my small Berkeley apartment this particular morning is a healthy looking little meal -- a bowl of imported McCann's Irish oatmeal topped with Cascadian Farms organic frozen raspberries, and a cup of Peet's Fair Trade Blend coffee. Like most of us, I prepare my breakfast at home and the ingredients for this one probably cost me about $1.25. (If I went to a caf? in downtown Berkeley, I'd likely have to add another $6.00, plus tip for the same.)

My breakfast fuels me up with about 400 calories, and it satisfies me. So, for just over a buck and half an hour spent reading the morning paper in my own kitchen, I'm energized for the next few hours. But before I put spoon to cereal, what if I consider this bowl of oatmeal porridge (to which I've just added a little butter, milk, and a shake of salt) from a different perspective. Say, a Saudi Arabian one.

Then, what you'd be likely to see -- what's really there, just hidden from our view (not to say our taste buds) -- is about four ounces of crude oil. Throw in those luscious red raspberries and that cup of java (another three ounces of crude), and don't forget those modest additions of butter, milk, and salt (another ounce), and you've got a tiny bit of the Middle East right here in my kitchen.

Now, let's drill a little deeper into this breakfast. Just where does this tiny gusher of oil actually come from? (We'll let this oil represent all fossil fuels in my breakfast, including natural gas and coal.)

Nearly 20% of this oil went into growing my raspberries on Chilean farms many thousands of miles away, those oats in the fields of County Kildare, Ireland, and that specially-raised coffee in Guatemala -- think tractors as well as petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides.

The next 40% of my breakfast fossil-fuel equation is burned up between the fields and the grocery store in processing, packaging, and shipping.

Take that box of McCann's oatmeal. On it is an inviting image of pure, healthy goodness -- a bowl of porridge, topped by two peach slices. Scattered around the bowl are a handful of raw oats, what look to be four acorns, and three fresh raspberries. Those raw oats are actually a reminder that the flakes require a few steps twixt field and box. In fact, a visit to McCann's website illustrates each step in the cleaning, steaming, hulling, cutting, and rolling that turns the raw oats into edible flakes. Those five essential steps require significant energy costs.

Next, my oat flakes go into a plastic bag (made from oil), which is in turn inserted into an energy-intensive, pressed wood-pulp, printed paper box. Only then does my "breakfast" leave Ireland and travel over 5,000 fuel-gorging, CO2-emitting miles by ship and truck to my grocery store in California.

Coming from another hemisphere, my raspberries take an even longer fossil-fueled journey to my neighborhood. Though packaged in a plastic bag labeled Cascadian Farms (which perhaps hints at a birthplace in the good old Cascade mountains of northwest Washington), the small print on the back, stamped "A Product of Chile," tells all -- and what it speaks of is a 5,800-mile journey to Northern California.

If you've been adding up percentages along the way, perhaps you've noticed that a few tablespoons of crude oil in my bowl have not been accounted for. That final 40% of the fossil fuel in my breakfast is used up by the simple acts of keeping food fresh and then preparing it. In home kitchens and restaurants, the chilling in refrigerators and the cooking on stoves using electricity or natural gas gobbles up more energy than you might imagine.

For decades, scientists have calculated how much fossil fuel goes into our food by measuring the amount of energy consumed in growing, packing, shipping, consuming, and finally disposing of it. The "caloric input" of fossil fuel is then compared to the energy available in the edible product, the "caloric output."

What they've discovered is astonishing. According to researchers at the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable Agriculture, an average of over seven calories of fossil fuel is burned up for every calorie of energy we get from our food. This means that in eating my 400 calorie breakfast, I will, in effect, have "consumed" 2,800 calories of fossil-fuel energy. (Some researchers claim the ratio to be as high as ten to one.)

But this is only an average. My cup of coffee gives me only a few calories of energy, but to process just one pound of coffee requires over 8,000 calories of fossil-fuel energy -- the equivalent energy found in nearly a quart of crude oil, 30 cubic feet of natural gas, or around two and a half pounds of coal.

So how do you gauge how much oil went into your food?

First check out how far it traveled. The further it traveled, the more oil it required. Next, gauge how much processing went into the food. A fresh apple is not processed, but Kellogg's Apple Jacks cereal requires enormous amounts of energy to process. The more processed the food, the more oil it required. Then consider how much packaging is wrapped around your food. Buy fresh vegetables instead of canned, and buy bulk beans, grains, and flour if you want to reduce that packaging.

By now, you're thinking that you're in the clear, because you eat strictly organically-grown foods. When it comes to fossil-fuel calculations though, the manner in which food's grown is where differences stop. Whether conventionally-grown or organically-grown, a raspberry is shipped, packed, and chilled the same way.

Yes, there are some savings from growing organically, but possibly only of a slight nature. According to a study by David Pimentel at Cornell University, 30% of fossil-fuel expenditure on farms growing conventional (non-organic) crops is found in chemical fertilizer. This 30% is not consumed on organic farms, but only if the manure used as fertilizer is produced in very close proximity to the farm. Manure is a heavy, bulky product. If farms have to truck bulk manure for any distance over a few miles, the savings are eaten up in diesel-fuel consumption, according to Pimentel. One source of manure for organic farmers in California is the chicken producer Foster Farms. Organic farmers in Monterey County, for example, will have to truck tons of Foster's manure from their main plant in Livingston, Ca. to fields over one hundred miles away.

So the next time we're at the grocer, do we now have to ask not only where and how this product was grown, but how far its manure was shipped?

Well, if you're in New York City picking out a California-grown tomato that was fertilized with organic compost made from kelp shipped from Nova Scotia, maybe it's not such a bad question. But should we give up on organic? If you're buying organic raspberries from Chile each week, then yes. The fuel cost is too great, as is the production of the greenhouse gases along with it. Buying locally-grown foods should be the first priority when it comes to saving fossil fuel.

But if there were really truth in packaging, on the back of my oatmeal box where it now tells me how many calories I get from each serving, it would also tell me how many calories of fossil fuels went into this product. On a scale from one to five -- with one being non-processed, locally-grown products and five being processed, packaged imports -- we could quickly average the numbers in our shopping cart to get a sense of the ecological footprint of our diet. From this we would gain a truer sense of the miles-per-gallon in our food.

What appeared to be a simple, healthy meal of oatmeal, berries, and coffee looks different now. I thought I was essentially driving a Toyota Prius hybrid -- by having a very fuel-efficient breakfast, but by the end of the week I've still eaten the equivalent of over two quarts of Valvoline. >From the perspective of fossil-fuel consumption, I now look at my breakfast as a waste of precious resources. And what about the mornings that I head to Denny's for a Grand-Slam breakfast: eggs, pancakes, bacon, sausage? On those mornings -- forget about fuel efficiency -- I'm driving a Hummer.

What I eat for breakfast connects me to the planet, deep into its past with the fossilized remains of plants and animals which are now fuel, as well as into its future, when these non-renewable resources will likely be in scant supply. Maybe these thoughts are too grand to be having over breakfast, but I'm not the only one on the planet eating this morning. My meal traveled thousands of miles around the world to reach my plate. But then there's the rise of perhaps 600 million middle-class Indians and Chinese. They're already demanding the convenience of packaged meals and the taste of foreign flavors. What happens when middle-class families in India or China decide they want their Irish oats for breakfast, topped by organic raspberries from Chile? They'll dip more and more into the planet's communal oil well. And someday soon, we'll all suck it dry.

Chad Heeter grew up eating fossil fuels in Lee's Summit, Missouri. He's a freelance writer, documentary filmmaker, and a former high school science teacher.


_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/livingontheland/attachments/20060326/47f3c993/attachment.htm

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland


End of Livingontheland Digest, Vol 35, Issue 8
**********************************************

-- 
Kris