Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - [NAFEX] Pomona time again!

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jacquelyn Kuehn <jakuehn@verizon.net>
  • To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [NAFEX] Pomona time again!
  • Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:30:25 -0500

I am in need of quite a few more articles for the fall Pomona; your experiences and observations are valuable to all. If you have a few minutes, please write them down and send them along to me. Thanks to all who have already submitted something for fall!
<x-tad-bigger>Jacquelyn A. Kuehn</x-tad-bigger>
Musician, writer
http://www.pennsacreskitchen.net
www.wmugradio.org

11 AM-12:30 PM M-F (Eastern)



On Jul 24, 2009, at 12:21 PM, nafex-request@lists.ibiblio.org wrote:

Send nafex mailing list submissions to
nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

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

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

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


Today's Topics:

1. California's screwed tree crops (Alan Haigh)
2. Re: California's screwed tree crops (Ginda Fisher)
3. Re: California's screwed tree crops (Ernest Plutko)
4. Re: California's screwed tree crops (Mark Angermayer)


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

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:36:38 -0700
From: Alan Haigh <alandhaigh@gmail.com>
Subject: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops
To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID:
<1f544d60907240636v6a0e5835k94681b5d04b0f874@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Please members, can we refrain from another fruitless debate on global
warming?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/nafex/attachments/20090724/75e4ef48/attachment-0001.htm

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

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:49:08 -0400
From: "Ginda Fisher" <list@ginda.us>
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops
To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>,
"nafex@lists.ibiblio.org" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <200907241349.ADQ37564@ginda.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Sure, I don't want to fight about global warming today. ?I do want to elaborate a little on the prior post, from Richard Harrison, asserting an increase in hill hours in some warmer states.

That's not inconsistent with global warming. ?My understanding is that chill hours are not hours when it's really cold, but are only hours when it's sorta chilly (near or above freezing, up to 40 or 50F), when the trees are metabolically active but 'feel cold'. ? I gather that in very cold places the native ?trees don't need a lot of chill hours, since they have to come out of dormancy quickly and do their thing. ?It's places with long bumpy springs and late frosts where the local trees have adapted by needing a lot of chill hours.

So if global warming is linked in some areas with a longer spring, you could easily get both higher average temps and more or similar chill hours.

Also, the US is a large country with lots of climate zones, some quite chilly. ?Surely agricultural plantings can move north if we get even quite a lot of global warming. ?Concurrant disruption of rainfall patterns is a more serious agricultural threat, but I'm sure the US will continue to be able to grow food _somewhere_, however cliate change plays out.

-- Ginda

Alan Haigh wrote:

Please members, can we refrain from another fruitless debate on global warming?


_______________________________________________?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/nafex/attachments/20090724/7f10af86/attachment-0001.htm

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

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:03:59 -0500
From: "Ernest Plutko" <ernestplutko@wiktel.com>
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops
To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <380-22009752414359531@wiktel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Every writer has opinions that are interesting to read.

---- Original Message ----
From: alandhaigh@gmail.com
To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: RE: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:36:38 -0700

Please members, can we refrain from another fruitless debate on globa
l
warming?




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

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:13:00 -0500
From: "Mark Angermayer" <hangermayer@isp.com>
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops
To: "Ginda Fisher" <list@ginda.us>, "North American Fruit Explorers"
<nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <003a01ca0c79$9fde42c0$711ef504@computer5>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I've no opinon on global warming, but do have an opinon on predictions.
They tend to be extremely fallable, even by learned folks. I thought an
article in the last Pomona illustrated this remarkably. The article was
written by an educated man, Dan Henenway, who used to participate on this
forum. The original article was written in 1983, and was reprinted by
permission in the last Pomona. The article is a call to action for urban
communities to grow their own food. Agricultural errors aside, the article
makes two predictions illustrating man's non-niscience.

First, the article states that although California provides nearly two
thirds of our vegetables today (1983) by the year 2000, California "will be
barely self-sufficient in food for its own people." This did not come to
pass. California' is still the number one state exporter of most fruits,
and virtually all vegetables. California has also become the number one
producer of milk, surpassing Wisconsin.

The article further states, "And bear in mind that the U.S. Department of
Agriculture predicts that by 2000 a loaf of bread will cost you well over
$7.00." Here we are a decade later, and a loaf of bread in these parts
costs about 2 bucks.

I've come to take these type of predictions with a grain of salt.

If there's a food shortage in the U.S, I doubt it will be caused by drought,
climate change, or pests. War, economic collapse, and corrupt governments
are generally the cause in the modern era.

Mark
KS

P.S. Although I disagree with much of what Mr. Hemenway wrote, I agree its a
good idea for folks to be more self-sufficient when it come to growing food.


----- Original Message -----
From: Ginda Fisher
To: North American Fruit Explorers ; nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] California's screwed tree crops


Sure, I don't want to fight about global warming today. I do want to
elaborate a little on the prior post, from Richard Harrison, asserting an
increase in hill hours in some warmer states.

That's not inconsistent with global warming. My understanding is that chill
hours are not hours when it's really cold, but are only hours when it's
sorta chilly (near or above freezing, up to 40 or 50F), when the trees are
metabolically active but 'feel cold'. I gather that in very cold places
the native trees don't need a lot of chill hours, since they have to come
out of dormancy quickly and do their thing. It's places with long bumpy
springs and late frosts where the local trees have adapted by needing a lot
of chill hours.

So if global warming is linked in some areas with a longer spring, you could
easily get both higher average temps and more or similar chill hours.

Also, the US is a large country with lots of climate zones, some quite
chilly. Surely agricultural plantings can move north if we get even quite a
lot of global warming. Concurrant disruption of rainfall patterns is a more
serious agricultural threat, but I'm sure the US will continue to be able to
grow food _somewhere_, however cliate change plays out.


-- Ginda




Alan Haigh wrote:

Please members, can we refrain from another fruitless debate on global
warming?
_______________________________________________





_______________________________________________
nafex mailing list
nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web
sites.
Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have
permission!

**YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
No exceptions.
----
To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be used
to change other email options):
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex

File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
Please do not send binary files.
Use plain text ONLY in emails!

NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/



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

_______________________________________________
nafex mailing list
nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web sites.
Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have permission!

**YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
No exceptions.
----
To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be used to change other email options):
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex

File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
Please do not send binary files.
Use plain text ONLY in emails!

NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/


End of nafex Digest, Vol 78, Issue 52
*************************************




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page