permaculture

[ed sarten <esarten@yahoo.com>]

Man must eat what his local environment supports,and how mans body needs 
specific nutrients related to his immediate environment.Man in the jungle 
should eat many fruits,tropical vegetables,fish, very little meat,man in 
temperate zones should eat more grains,leafy greens,beans,poultry, fish,In 
the desert,cactus, desert figs,fruits, chiles, beans,little grain,greens 
maybe reptiles, rodents ,doves in winter.northern plains,deer,rabbits 
,poultry,grain,buffalo,potatos, or a few domestic stock.In the arctic (where 
I Live} its hard to grow grain,you have only 3 months to grow a garden.Ground 
and water is frozen at least 6 months a year.We have a lot more meat animals 
than we do people.selective hunting balances our ecosystem,for example to 
many bears mean fewer moose ,so eat more bears.Eating meat in the arctic is a 
sustainable practice if managed versus promoting too much agriculture (which 
I encourage some agriculture up here).Domestic raising of reindeer,bison, 
goats and musk
 ox are also sustainable practices for protein in the arctic where free 
roaming meat is healthy for the few people who live in it and need fat and 
fur to stay warm.This is a far different scenario than all you folks down 
south that need to forget McDonalds and enjoy the fruits and vegetables you 
have that I sometimes dream of having.Eat what you have in natural abundance 
where you live even if its grasshoppers or cactus and we will all do fine and 
so will the land.

david@sustainablehabitats.org
 This page was sent to you by: david@sustainablehabitats.org.

WEEK IN REVIEW | January 27, 2008
The World: Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler
By MARK BITTMAN
Got vegetables? The days of eating 200 pounds of meat a year may be on the 
way out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?ex=1202187600&en=a1087de0ce76df87&ei=5070&emc=eta1




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

ABOUT THIS E-MAIL
This e-mail was sent to you by a friend through NYTimes.com's E-mail This 
Article service.  For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
help@nytimes.com.

NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring




       
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it 
now.
>From LINDARAY@att.net  Tue Jan 29 15:02:53 2008
Return-Path: <LINDARAY@att.net>
X-Original-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 3E27B4C022; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:02:53 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,
        REMOVE_BEFORE_LINK autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from fmailhost01.isp.att.net (fmailhost01.isp.att.net
        [207.115.11.51])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F24194C020
        for <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:02:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from fwebmail07.isp.att.net ([207.115.11.157])
        by isp.att.net (frfwmhc01) with SMTP
        id <20080129200251H0100mt3r0e>; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:02:51 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [207.115.11.157]
Received: from [74.237.114.58] by fwebmail07.isp.att.net;
        Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:02:49 +0000
From: LINDARAY@att.net
To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:02:49 +0000
Message-Id: 
<012920082002.25463.479F86690002B7690000637722230706129B0A02D29B9B0EBFA7BEADBEBBB2B7B4@att.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Oct 30 2007)
X-Authenticated-Sender: TElOREFSQVlAYXR0Lm5ldA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [permaculture] NYTimes.com: Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler
X-BeenThere: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Id: permaculture <permaculture.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture>
List-Post: <mailto:permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:02:53 -0000

Thank you Ed, for a more balanced(IMO) view of things ref meat consumption.

Although definitely not vegetarian, I'm way down in the South where 100F days 
aren't all that rare.

The American Indians knew that in cold weather, man needs animal fat to stay 
healthy. As I recall, the Lewis and Clark Expedition were perishing in those 
deep-winter woods until Sacajawea clued them in :).

That doesn't change the fact that I think factory farms are karmically evil 
and completely disgusting.

IMO we need to figure out how to broach 'Humane treatment of animals' as an 
advertising edge to meat and animal product producers. 

Linda
..who trades for venison every chance she gets.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- Original message from ed sarten <esarten@yahoo.com>: 
-------------- 


> Man must eat what his local environment supports,and how mans body needs 
> specific nutrients related to his immediate environment.Man in the jungle 
> should 
> eat many fruits,tropical vegetables,fish, very little meat,man in temperate 
> zones should eat more grains,leafy greens,beans,poultry, fish,In the 
> desert,cactus, desert figs,fruits, chiles, beans,little grain,greens maybe 
> reptiles, rodents ,doves in winter.northern plains,deer,rabbits 
> ,poultry,grain,buffalo,potatos, or a few domestic stock.In the arctic 
> (where I 
> Live} its hard to grow grain,you have only 3 months to grow a garden.Ground 
> and 
> water is frozen at least 6 months a year.We have a lot more meat animals 
> than we 
> do people.selective hunting balances our ecosystem,for example to many 
> bears 
> mean fewer moose ,so eat more bears.Eating meat in the arctic is a 
> sustainable 
> practice if managed versus promoting too much agriculture (which I 
> encourage 
> some agriculture up here).Domestic raising of reindeer,bison, goats and 
> musk 
> ox are also sustainable practices for protein in the arctic where free 
> roaming 
> meat is healthy for the few people who live in it and need fat and fur to 
> stay 
> warm.This is a far different scenario than all you folks down south that 
> need to 
> forget McDonalds and enjoy the fruits and vegetables you have that I 
> sometimes 
> dream of having.Eat what you have in natural abundance where you live even 
> if 
> its grasshoppers or cactus and we will all do fine and so will the land. 
> 
> david@sustainablehabitats.org 
> This page was sent to you by: david@sustainablehabitats.org. 
> 
> WEEK IN REVIEW | January 27, 2008 
> The World: Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler 
> By MARK BITTMAN 
> Got vegetables? The days of eating 200 pounds of meat a year may be on the 
> way 
> out. 
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?ex=1202187600&en=a
>  
> 1087de0ce76df87&ei=5070&emc=eta1 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------- 
> 
> ABOUT THIS E-MAIL 
> This e-mail was sent to you by a friend through NYTimes.com's E-mail This 
> Article service. For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
> help@nytimes.com. 
> 
> NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 
> 
> Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company 
> _______________________________________________ 
> permaculture mailing list 
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org 
> Subscribe or unsubscribe here: 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture 
> Google command to search archives: 
> site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------- 
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it 
> now. 
> _______________________________________________ 
> permaculture mailing list 
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org 
> Subscribe or unsubscribe here: 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture 
> Google command to search archives: 
> site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring 
> 
> 
>From keithdj@mindspring.com  Tue Jan 29 15:21:22 2008
Return-Path: <keithdj@mindspring.com>
X-Original-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 7A33E4C0D3; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:21:13 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.3
Received: from mxsf06.insightbb.com (mxsf06.insightbb.com [74.128.0.76])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF984C07D
        for <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:18:06 -0500 (EST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,271,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="212611088"
Received: from unknown (HELO asav02.insightbb.com) ([172.31.249.124])
        by mxsf06.insightbb.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2008 15:18:03 -0500
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AswMAEcYn0dKggva/2dsb2JhbAAIiCmJRp1r
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,271,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="195158973"
Received: from 74-130-11-218.dhcp.insightbb.com (HELO [127.0.0.1])
        ([74.130.11.218])
        by asav02.insightbb.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2008 15:17:57 -0500
Message-ID: <479F89F2.3000902@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:17:54 -0500
From: Keith Johnson <keithdj@mindspring.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Permaculture ibiblio <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
References: <p06230916c3c4501076d5@[192.168.0.199]>
In-Reply-To: <p06230916c3c4501076d5@[192.168.0.199]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [permaculture] The Bacterium That (Almost) Ate the World
X-BeenThere: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Id: permaculture <permaculture.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture>
List-Post: <mailto:permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:21:22 -0000

Oops, sorry, we didn't mean to eliminate all terrestrial plants.

Albert Bates wrote:
> From:
> Nature's Operating Instructions: The True Biotechnologies, Sierra Club 
> Books
>
> Elaine Ingham would never treat soil like dirt. She reveres it, as we 
> all should, since this precious substance is the thin brown line 
> between plenty and starvation. Given the necessity of topsoil to human 
> survival, you'd think we'd have legions of soil biologists on the 
> case, but Elaine is one of only a handful of serious scientists 
> deluging into this microcosmos that feeds the world and helps support 
> life on earth.
>
> Until recently an associate research professor of forest science at 
> Oregon State University, Elaine has twenty-five years of experience in 
> microbiology, botany, plant pathology, and soil and ecology research. 
> She founded Soil Foodweb Inc. and is currently president of the Soil 
> Foodweb Institute in Australia and research director of Soil Foodweb 
> in New York. She serves on the boards of several sustainability 
> organizations and is an active member of numerous prestigious 
> microbiology and ecology associations. She has done stints as 
> president of the Soil Ecology Society and program chair of the 
> Ecological Society of America and has penned over fifty peer-reviewed 
> scientific papers.
>
> Elaine speaks to groups around the world on how to grow plants without 
> the use of toxic pesticides or synthetic fertilizers while at the same 
> time increasing soil fertility and crop production. She has led 
> countless workshops and training sessions at which farmers are taught 
> highly practical techniques for building soil health, using 
> sophisticated composting methods, and enhancing microbiological 
> communities for crop production. Unquestionably one of the world's 
> leading specialists in soil health, she is an exceptionally creative 
> innovator who has made major contributions to our understanding of the 
> soil food web (as she likes to call it) and its structure and function 
> in terrestrial ecosystems from arctic to tropical climates. Her 
> research spans agricultural. grassland, and forest ecologies, where 
> she has analyzed the action of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, nematodes, 
> and mycorrhizal fungi from over 30,000 soil samples.
>
> When a scientist of Elaine's stature warns us about the catastrophic 
> potential of topsoil loss and the escape of genetically modified 
> organisms into the already compromised environment, we do well to pay 
> close attention.
> ----
> Unnatural Selection: The Bacterium That (Almost) Ate the World
> Elaine Ingham
>
> IN MY PROGRAM at Oregon State University in the early 1990s, we 
> started testing the ecological impacts of most of the genetically 
> engineered organisms being produced at that time. The question our lab 
> was asked to ad¬dress was, Did these engineered organisms have any 
> impact out there in the real world?
>
> The first fourteen species that we worked on - microorganisms, 
> bacteria. and fungi - were organisms incapable of surviving in the 
> natural environment. Putting them in the world would be like taking 
> penguins from the South Pole and dropping them into the La Brea tar 
> pits. Would there be any ecological effect if we dropped a penguin 
> into the middle of the tar pit? Probably not; the impact would be 
> rapidly absorbed by the system.
>
> These first fourteen species of GMOs that we tested had a similarly 
> negligible impact. On this basis. the USDA Animal and Plant Health 
> Inspection Service, the regulatory agency that was determining U.S. 
> policy on genetically engineered organisms, set a course that 
> essentially said that a genetically engineered organism posed no 
> greater risk to the environment than the parent organism does.
>
> GMO number fifteen. however, was a very different story. Klebsiella 
> planticola, the bacterium that is the parent organism of this new 
> strain, lives in soils everywhere. It's one of the few truly universal 
> species of bacteria, growing in the root systems of all plants and 
> decomposing plant litter in every ecosystem in the world.
>
> The genetic engineers took genetic material from another bacterium and 
> inserted that trait in the GMO to allow Klebsiella planticola to 
> produce alcohol. The aim of this genetic modification was to eliminate 
> the burning of farm fields to rid them of plant matter after harvest. 
> The idea was that you could, instead, rake up all that plant residue, 
> put it in a bucket. and inoculate it with the engineered bacterium, 
> and in about two weeks' time you would have a material that contained 
> about 17 percent alcohol. The alcohol could be extracted and used for 
> gasohol. for cleaning windows, or for myriad other uses: cooking with 
> alcohol in Third World countries, for instance.
>
> The genetic engineers thought this transformation would bring huge 
> benefits. We would no longer have to burn fields, we would breathe 
> better in the fall, and both the company and farmers would get a 
> product that could be sold. There was actually a fourth win: the 
> sludge at the bottom of the bucket is an organic fertilizer, and there 
> are no waste products from that material. So what's the problem? 
> Suppose you're a farmer and you've got live, alcohol-producing 
> Klebsiella planticola that you're going to spread on your fields 
> (which might be easier than gathering up all the plant waste and 
> putting it in buckets). Can it wash into the root systems of your 
> plants? Most likely. Once it's there and growing in the root systems 
> of your plants, it's producing alcohol. What level of alcohol is toxic 
> to plants? It's one part per million. How much alcohol does this 
> engineered organism produce? Seventeen parts per mil¬lion. Very soon 
> you will have drunk dead plants.
>
> We did this experiment under controlled conditions in the laboratory 
> be¬cause I wasn't going to take this kind of risk out in the field. We 
> constructed three kinds of microcosms of a field, filled them with 
> normal field soil as a growing medium, and planted wheat plants in the 
> three separate systems - each consisting of multiple units - and put 
> them in an incubator. In the first third of the units, we added only 
> water. We added parent, non-GMO bacterium to the second group and the 
> engineered Klebsiella planticola to the third. About a week later, we 
> walked into the laboratory, opened up the incubator, and said, "Oops, 
> what did we do wrong?" Many of the plants were dead and were turning 
> into slime on the surface of the soil. In all the units with just 
> water in the system, the plants were doing okay. In those that had 
> been inoculated with the parent Klebsiella planticola, the plants were 
> even bigger, because increased nutrient cycling in the root system 
> makes more nitrogen available, causing the plants to grow bigger. 
> Clearly the parent organism was a benefit to the plant. But where the 
> engineered bacterium was growing, all the plants were dead. Later we 
> tried this experiment using several different kinds of soils, but the 
> result in every case was dead plants.
>
> Take that information and extrapolate it to the real world. Given that 
> the parent organism lives in the root systems of all plants, what's 
> the logical outcome of releasing this organism into the natural 
> environment? Very possibly, we would have no terrestrial plants left. 
> Some plants, such as riparian and wetland plants, have mechanisms for 
> dealing with alcohol production in their root systems. But the logical 
> extrapolation of that experiment is that we would lose terrestrial 
> plants.
>
> I have attended some of the United Nations biosafety protocol 
> meetings. At the 1995 meeting in Madrid, the U.S. delegation was the 
> strongest in saying, in essence, "Don't worry, be happy. Trust us. We 
> don't need a biosafety protocol. Why would biotech companies ever do 
> anything to harm people?" To me, their words echoed those we've heard 
> before from tobacco, pesticide, and fertilizer companies.
>
> At one such meeting, I related the story of Klebsiella planticola as 
> an example of the lack of adequate testing for the ecological impact 
> of genetically engineered organisms. The biotech companies object that 
> it costs too 'much to do this kind of environmental testing. In my 
> view, that's just hype, because I pointed out that our lab spent a 
> very insignificant amount of money to do these simple experiments, 
> especially considering that if this bacterium were let loose in the 
> environment, we would have some very significant problems with our 
> food supply.
>
> No one in his or her right mind is going to test for the kind of risk 
> Klebsiella planticola represents because once you release an organism, 
> there is no way to get it back. How far does a single-point 
> inoculation of a genetically engineered organism spread in one year? 
> An engineered Rhizobium bacterium that was released in Louisiana in 
> the mid-1990s spread eleven miles per year and has by now dispersed 
> across the North American continent.
>
> At these United Nations meetings I warned that corn pollen is going to 
> move a lot more than three feet away from the plant. "Oh no," said the 
> biotechnology representatives present. "Corn pollen falls out of the 
> air three feet from the plant." I would say, "Wait a minute, you've 
> never heard of bees? How about birds? and insects? and wind "Oh no, it 
> falls out of the air within three feet of the plant." Why do our 
> bureaucrats choose to to believe these "scientists"? Just open any 
> plant textbook and you find that corn pollen can be round in the 
> Antarctic and the Arctic. But if you listen to Monsanto, corn pollen 
> can't possibly be there.
>
> Armed with the knowledge of this peril, we need to convince members of 
> Congress that appropriate ecological testing must be done prior to 
> releasing GMOs into the environment. If this happens, it could help 
> keep the problems that are already starting to occur from getting worse.
-- 
Keith Johnson
"Be fruitful and mulch apply."
Permaculture Activist Magazine
PO Box 5516, Bloomington, IN 47407
(812) 335-0383
http://www.permacultureactivist.net
http://www.PermacultureTradingPost.com
Switch to Solar Power the Easy Way
http://www.jointhesolution.com/KeithJ-SunPower
http://www.PowUr.com/KeithJ-SunPower
Blog: http://kjpermaculture.blogspot.com/
also Patterns for Abundance Design & Consulting
http://www.permacultureactivist.net/design/Designconsult.html
also Association for Regenerative Culture
http://www.ARCulture.org
also APPLE-Bloomington (Alliance for a Post-Petroleum Local Economy) It's a 
small world after oil.
http://www.relocalize.net/groups/applebloomington
also Bloomington Permaculture Guild
http://my.calendars.net/bloomingtonpccal/
and: http://bloomingtonpermacultureguild.blogspot.com/
also: Bioregional Congress
http://www.bioregional-congress.org