permaculture

[YankeePerm@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/6/97 12:37:34 PM, lflier@mindspring.com wrote:

>I think the problem here is that we're assuming that everyone knows that
>permaculturists are supposed to interplant different species together as
>opposed to monocropping.  When Mollison came up with the "guild" concept,
>that was far from obvious, and still is to many people that we would teach.
>
RESPONSE;  Well that is not true.  Any of it.  In the 70s the issue of
polyculture vs monoculture was long since old hat.  The persistence of
monoculture has nothing to do with a lack of alternatives but is a direct
result of the industrial model, heritage of Eli Whitney, being applied to
agriculture.  I don't want to get deep into this theme as it is beside the
point and we are all limited in our time.  What Mollison did was what we
honor him for--incorporated the concept of multiple plants into a DESIGN.
 The design was a system of design.  The term permaculture pertains to that
system of design.  Most of permaculture elements are not new, of course,
newness not being the point.  However they should be valid.  Polyculture is a
far cry from what Bill means by guilds.  Recipes of any sort have no place in
the fundamental permaculture design.  We already have an excellent, valid
Mollisonian term for things arrangements that tend to repeat in enough
designs to be formalized.  We call them Standard Designs.  This can be a
species assembly, where one is know to work.  We don't have to pervert the
English language, thereby creating confusion, to use this term.  Using two
terms for the same thing violates the conservation principle, which Bill was
surely stressing in the course I took in 1981.

>My understanding of a guild as Mollison defines it is any group of diverse
>species that are in beneficial relationship to each other (and that
>includes us). I think what Dan is trying to say is that we should never
>stop thinking about what might make up a good association and that's why he
>doesn't want to follow any prescribed list.  I agree that we should never
>stop observing and experimenting, but I also think it's OK to look at what
>has worked for other people.  This is the way other cultures used to pass
>on knowledge to each other and they DID survive quite well before one
>culture (us) decided to flaunt the basic laws of survival.
>\

REPLY;  Yes, I agree with all that.  So long as we don't call it something
that means something else.

>In the course I took from Bill Mollison he emphasised many times that the
>knowledge we pass on to others must be simple and easy to pass on to more
>people in turn, including people who are "uneducated", of a different
>language or culture, and have little scientific knowledge.  In coming up
>with guilds, he told us to keep in mind the basic concepts: you should take
>advantage of layers (canopy, understory, herb, root, vining plant, etc.),
>and think in terms of what each of the plants need and what could give it
>to them.  That is, if a plant is plagued by a particular pest insect, plant
>something with it that will attract predators of that insect, such as a
>dense ground cover that snakes or lizards might like.  If a plant uses a
>lot of nitrogen it can be planted with a nitrogen fixer, etc.
>
RESPONSE;  I disagree with Bill, or at least Lee's account of Bill's views,
here.  I've worked teaching permaculture in many places and I have not found
any great difference in intellectual capability between peasants and college
professors, except that probably the peasants have less in the way to
understanding what we are talking about.  What people of limited means and
limited formal educatio need is some space to work out their permacultures,
not being talked down to, being given the Dr. Suess version of permaculture.
 Living close to survival margins does not allow for the risk of change, even
very, very promising change.  That is the central difficulty, not that these
peopel can't think permaculturaly.  In is my personal view that literacy is a
barrier to permaculture-type thinking.  Non-literate people have more of an
"of course" reaction.  When I taught permaculture in the prison system, it
was the illiterate students who first grasped the principles.  As a
professional writer, this is a bit disquieting, but nonetheless I think that
a literate society probably cannot avoid its own extinction.  Well that is
yet another topic and one which requires more continuity that email excanges
to explore.  However the last thing we need is recipes for those poor
ignorate bastards who haven't been to college.  They are already way ahead of
where we were when we began permaculture.

>As to how to determine what works and what doesn't in your climate and
>microclimate, Mollison suggested two things: 1) observe what works well in
>natural systems and try to find out through research what characteristics
>make them work well, and 2) the first year, plant out as many diverse types
>of species as you can get your hands on.  Be prepared to have to control
>some species that try to take over!  But you will observe out of 50 or 100
>species that you might plant, that 4 or 5 of them do exceptionally well
>together, a larger number will do well but not quite as well, and some will
>fail altogether.  The next year, plant more of the successes, less of the
>failures, and try the neutrals in different associations along with some
>that you didn't plant last year.  But the important thing is that if you
>plant out hundreds of species right away, SOMETHING will grow, and you will
>both learn something and have something to eat, probably even if there's a
>bad drought or other adverse condition.
>
RESPONSE;  This is good advice right up until the last point, which is
irresponsible.  Something might indeed grow and choke out what you had going
that was right.  Experience is what we need and we can't afford to take short
custs on wisdom.  In a situation such as most Eastern North American forests,
where widespread decline is rampant and unlikely to be reversed, this is good
advice.  Throw it all out.  Plant New York City by air with kudzu and red
cedar (which already is growing in eaves of 40 stories up, apparently wind
planted), and other rampant species.  Fine.  But we need experience to know
what places are so far gone that we are in an "anything is better than
nothing" situation.  And we need to understand that the more isolated places
are, e.g. island, high valleys, etc., the more sensitive they are to being
irreparably damaged by a shotgun approach.

>As for Dan's comments that we think we know too much about nature, I'd like
>to restate another Mollisonism that is often understated:  ANYTHING we know
>about permaculture is ONLY applicable to that 4% of the earth's land mass
>that we should need in order to produce our own food.  If a natural system
>exists well on its own we should LEAVE IT ALONE.  However almost anything
>will help heal the land by comparison to monoculture farming, strip malls,
>and places that have become desert due to deforestation.  These are our
>areas of focus and we should not attempt to "fix" the rest of the world,
>unless we have ourselves damaged it and it needs to be healed.  Nor should
>we step up our present rate of food production simply because we can now
>get a higher yield from the same space.  That would only result in a
>population increase.  The idea is to decrease the amount of space and
>resources we are currently using to produce food, and that doesn't need to
>be rocket science.  Other cultures and species have fed themselves just
>fine by simply being observant of natural patterns and passing their
>observations on.
>
>= Lee =

NO RESPONSE.  I can't figure the point here.  If we are in a bind, we need to
be more careful, not more reckless, no?

For Mother Earth, Dan Hemenway, Yankee Permaculture Publications (since
1982), Elfin Permaculture workshops, lectures, Permaculture Design Courses,
consulting and permaculture designs (since 1981), and now correspondence
courses via email.  Next starts in Oct. 1997. Internships available.
Copyright, 1997, Dan & Cynthia Hemenway, P.O. Box 52, Sparr FL 32192 USA
 YankeePerm@aol.com  

We don't have time to rush.