Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

pcplantdb - Re: [pcplantdb] synthesis[29][12.04.04]

pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: pcplantdb

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lfl@intrex.net>
  • To: Permaculture Plant Database <pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [pcplantdb] synthesis[29][12.04.04]
  • Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:15:17 -0800

Chad Knepp wrote:


I have a similar lack of enthusiasm for this idea as a tool as I did
to the Guild Builder concept in that I think it over specializes to an
extent that makes it a poor impedance match with the tool (computers
and their programmers). I am in favor of a more generalist approach
and personally think the best way to figure out a crop rotation or a
guild is with an observant human mind that is in touch with the best
info available (hopefully PIW). At the moment I just can't imagine a
computer system I would trust to really generate a guild or crop
rotation.
I can embrace the concept of relationships because making connections
between information is an important concept, even if I don't currently
have a real clear idea of implement it. If oberservation has
determined following one annual with another is a beneficial
relationship this could be recorded as such and the interconnection
between the two plants could/should be displayed on both plants.

1- rotation cropping for disease suppression
2- rotation for the sake of trying different combinations of plants growing
in close proximity
(might give rise to some guild discoveries or field performance improvements)
3- companion cropping
4- intercropping or sometimes called close cropping
5- succession cropping

These, I suppose, could be considered attributes to be included in a
relationships database

On interesting thought I had was having search method that selected
plants/elements that had the most interconnections with itself. To
the extent and accuracy of the relationship data this could build a
[simplistic] guild focused around a single plant. Regardless of the
specific usefulness, the number of relationship interconnections
between elements should be one of the valuable products of the PIW
dataset as it develops.

That is amazing. This is certainly something the DB should be able to do.

> However, we recently got a letter from the Whole Systems
> Foundation, replying to our proposal, saying that we need to
> demonstrate PIW’s applicability to larger-scale
> agriculture. Assuming that large-scale Permaculture is even
> possible and desirable (I know we’ve discussed this, but
> let’s assume for now), the tool described above would
> certainly be applicable to large-scale farming. What do you think?

I disagree with their analysis. I think PIW currently is a VERY
helpful tool with information that is directly applicable to large
scale agriculture. For example, you could use it now to look up new

plants that might work in your crop rotation... I also think the
possibility of having the most and best [relevant to agriculture]
botanical information on the planet has something to contribute to
large scale agriculture.

This is a major goal to work towards, achievable and important.
I assume you mean to include some sort of elegant "connection/access" (rather
than just a link)
to existing, ongoing, botanical databases. Rich talked about this before and
described
ways to make this happen and the importance of all parties involved using XML
tools and methods.

LL
--
L.F.London
lfl@intrex.net
http://market-farming.com
http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page