Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] Trends in America

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Steve Read" <steveread@free.fr>
  • To: "permaculture" <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] Trends in America
  • Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:32:55 +0100

Hello, christopher nesbitt,

Thanks for your reply and the subsequent analysis of old Mayan culture, I
wasn't aware that people considered them highly spiritual and elevated, If I
gave the impression that I thought they held property in common then I
didn't mean to, personally I have no illusions about past civilisations in
general.

However we could perhaps look at the situation now; as you pointed out people
are using private property around you as a means to ensure stability and
security of tenure. You have done likewise, although having at first the idea
to open up your private paradise to a more communal situation. Looking around
you see the local people doing the same thing and perhaps see in this a
justification of your tenure status? I don't know about the other PmC
teachers you brought in but I imagine that a private property apologist like
Toby would also help to justify your tenure status.

I would perhaps suggest that someone such as you who has wider contacts than
many of the local neighbours of yours, and I imagine much experience of
nations where private property held by individuals is the norm, might be more
questioning as to the efficiency of this as a long term solution.

An even cursory glance at the USA toady reveals many of the problems
associated with private property as a medium to longterm solution,
particularly at this time of mortage arrears, repossession and negative
equity.

Then we can look at the structures which are needed to legitimise private
individual property, these form the basis of the nations states in which many
people live and are again perhaps not the most optimal longterm solution to
human socio-economic needs.

We can look also at how anyone, let alone the less well off can access
private property, few have the means to get their own place without recourse
to incurring a big and longterm debt. Their lives are now locked into a
debt/repayment cycle which will lock them into a certain pattern of living
which will enable them to repay that debt, a job, any job very usually, few
can afford to be unemployed even for a short term. How do you envisage the
local people around you getting their private property? Perhaps you have a
solution to logterm private debt whereby people end up paying far more for
their property than the original cost that is if they end up at the end
rather than experiencing a global economic downturn etc etc.

In China the landlord class is apparently being reinstated, people going to
the city will be able to sell their land to a landlord who can then rent it
out, this is apparently seen by the Chinese authorities as the solution to
their "inefficient" agriculture which hasn't seen harvest increase in the
manner deemed appropriate, so you are in good company.

If, Christopher, you can show me situations where private property doesn't
lead to division into the propertied class and the rent paying class, doesn't
lead to longterm debt, where in order to service their debts people aren't
forced into accepting whatever job is available, doesn't cause people to be
leading precarious lives tied to the whims of big banks, where the agents
that legitimate private property are ones that one would like to see in
future abundant sustainable communities, then I would be happy to change my
assertion that private property is a universal longterm ill.

That people use it as a solution to their current unstable situation does
not, imo, mean that it is the optimal solution, a viable longterm solution or
one that will be effective at longterm earth and people care.

The space I left before to be filled in with names/details of projects that
had found a communal ownership strategy I left in the perhaps forlorn hope
that others knew more than I (something I usually find). I ahd hoped that
there would be more voices raised against this obscene dividing of this Earth
onto little private holes where people retreat with some idea of security at
the same time denying to themselves that any security comes from the
Police/Courts and Governments, insitutions they often don't trust, disagree
with and would like to change.

As an aside many Brits believe they own their own home, ignoring the fact
they live in a Monarchy, Britain belongs to their Queen, that she doesn't
chose to wield her power is another matter.

SteveR

======= At 2008-10-31, 04:29:54 you wrote: =======

>Hi Steve,
>
>I didn't assume anything about you. I know nothing about you. I just
>find that the idea that property is an inherent wrong is uninformed,
>but seems to be popular amongst people in the developed world who have
>access to property. I am pretty sure the only part I mentioned about
>you is that many people here do not have the things you subsequently
>agreed that you have, and that perhaps yo had not considered that they
>would like to, and that commonly held land and the problems associated
>with it were barriers to their accessing those things they wanted. All
>I discussed was my experiences regarding what I see as problems
>related to commonly owned property and benefits of private land
>ownership for both the people who own it and for the land itself, but
>looking at it on a very local scale. This is not a universal view,
>applicable to all situations, but it is something I have observed
>during my life of protracted observation of the place where I live. I
>am not advocating anything. I am pointing out that the desire to own a
>piece of land is near universal in the rural agrarian Maya communities
>I have worked in.
>
>As an aside, Kekchi and Mopan people are still on the periphery of the
>currency based economy, especially the back villages, and still engage
>in currency free trade, firewood for corn, corn for a pig, a days
>labour for a days labour. There are many cultural traits that they
>have retained that are under threat. One is that a very high
>percentage of the children do not want to be farmers like their parents.
>
>As far as the Maya holding all things in common, that is plain wrong.
>That never happened. That is mere Caucasian mythology about indigenous
>people that just never happened.
>
>> Its important to not fall into the trap of mistaking indiginous
>> peoples for ones who have some sort of cultural purity and are in
>> some way unaffected by the marketing and straight forward socio-
>> economic pressures driving this 'modern' world, the Macdonaldisation
>> of the planet continues apace.
>No worries about me romanticizing Maya people. They are just people.
>
>I would be interested to see you fill in that gap where communally
>owned property has allowed people to access TVs etc. With the
>exception of Cuba, which has not allowed access to TVs (but has very
>good health care and education), I am not thinking of any, but, again,
>my experience is limited. I agree that things like Ecovillages are a
>way forward, but even those are a form of ownership, albeit more
>cooperative and egalitarian.
>
>While I would say that, in my opinion, commonly owned land has not
>worked well here, I had a consultancy in Venezuela in 2006, looking at
>cacao, which was very interesting. I had previously been to Venezuela
>to look at coffee, but cacao is my thing. One part of my time there
>was in a place called Cata, one valley over from the famous El Chuao.
>The community an abandoned cacao grove the community took over. The
>cacao grove was 400 acres or so, managed by the community, divided
>into sections, owned by the community, but individual families had
>access to and responsibilities for set plots, delineated, clearly. All
>of it was centrally fermented and marketed through the cooperative at
>Ocumare. There were a few other communities that provided cacao to the
>coop, too. It was a wonderful example of community managed
>agriculture, well organized, only a few unhappy people (all
>cooperatives have their unhappy members), and I was struck by how
>market savvy they were. World market prices for cacao was swinging
>between USD1200-1600 a tonne. Fairtrade/organic was USD1950 a tonne,
>and they were getting USD4500 a tonne. That is a place where a form of
>collective ownership worked, but with clearly delineated boundaries
>and responsibilities. Any earnings were directly tied to their
>management practices. That is a nuanced private land ownership/
>commonly held land model that I really admired.
>
>As far as scholarships, we host courses, attracting great teachers
>from all over the world, like Toby. One course we have done the last
>three years is a permaculture design course. We are able to provide or
>find funding to allow local students to take the course free of cost.
>This is subsidized by students who are paying, and by the teachers,
>like Toby, who are willing to facilitate training for free (hat off to
>Toby Hemenway, Penny Livingston, Larry Santoyo, Albert Bates and
>Andrew Goodheart Brown, who have done that in tha past, and to Albert,
>Goodheart, Andrew Leslie Phillips and Maria Ros who are doing that
>this year). 23 Belizeans have taken a PDC here, including extension
>officers from Ministry of Agriculture, extension officers from NGOs as
>well as Peace Corps volunteers, and hundreds of farmers have been
>given training in agroforestry.
>
>Anyway, I am not on an opposite side to you, I just see that universal
>platitudes about the evils of ownership are not wholistic in scope.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Christopher
>
>On Oct 30, 2008, at 3:51 PM, Steve Read wrote:
>
>> Hello, christopher nesbitt,
>>
>> Thank you for the examples which are all very interesting, although
>> i'm not sure why you imagine that my experience is exclusively
>> 'developed world' it most certainly isn't I have lived and worked
>> in a number of different countries, cultures and environements,
>> 'nuff said
>>
>> You are discussing driven societies/people, the socio-environmental
>> pressures that have driven cultures that by tradition held all in
>> common to reject that way and adopt private property as a way of
>> dealing with the developmental pressures most cultures are
>> undergoing go unmmentioned in your list of successful projects, as
>> do the millenia many of these cultures have lived and thrived with
>> their old communal way.
>>
>> " would like all the things that I suspect you enjoy or have access
>> to, Steve, a computer, an education for their children, a TV, a
>> car" I'm sure they would and I'm not going to apologise for
>> currently being in a culture where 2nd hand computers/cars trickle
>> down to me, on the contrary I am lucky to have lived in such
>> cultures and seen/see at first hand the pitiful state to which so
>> many people are reduced. When people start bandying comparisons
>> between rich and poor countries I often suggest they dig out some of
>> the social and health statistics, despite all these 'golden years'
>> of capitalism, private ownership and development these so called
>> developed countries carry hidden in their dark underbelly millions
>> of dispossesed, come and live in a cardboard box under a bridge in
>> the winter in London, to be woken at 5am to be doused with
>> disinfectant, Cold, the Cold. The shifting cultivators around you
>> don't have these 'luxuries' simply because the areas they live in
>> have star
>> ted down this Oh So Wonderful developmental path later than here, so
>> what? Bruno in Brazil who did a PDC with me pointed out that many
>> people were 'dispossesed' becaus ethe Govet had a lwa that stated
>> that any labourer who worked for 'you' for more than 90 days (I
>> think) became eligible for pensions and stuff so your wonderful
>> private property owners simply kick them off at the end of that
>> period and get new ones, no chance to develop a veg patch or
>> anything.
>>
>>
>>
>> the gap above can be filled in with examples from developing
>> countries where communally held land etc has enabled then to
>> improve their standards of living, have a TV etc.
>>
>> Its important to not fall into the trap of mistaking indiginous
>> peoples for ones who have some sort of cultural purity and are in
>> some way unaffected by the marketing and straight forward socio-
>> economic pressures driving this 'modern' world, the Macdonaldisation
>> of the planet continues apace.
>>
>> There would be too nuances of private ownership, where a land is
>> owned by an extended family and lived and worked by them through
>> generations, this resembles in many ways a tribal communal tenure,
>> the legal status giving the extended family security of tenure
>> similar to when tribal lands are decreed as being "owned" by such or
>> such tribe. Before current modern pressures undermined tribal areas
>> they too had security of tenure, although they may often have had to
>> fight to keep it. If we do as I keep suggesting and buy the land to
>> put it into a safe common holding, educate people to use it wisely
>> then where is the difficulty?
>>
>>
>> What do you mean 'scholarships'? I am glad Toby has had the
>> opportunity to see and experience these areas, I'm sure it has
>> enriched the quality he brings to his designs.
>>
>> SteveR
>> ======= At 2008-10-30, 19:00:47 you wrote: =======
>>
>>> Hi Steve and Toby,
>>>
>>> I am going to make some observations of land tenure from the limited
>>> perspective of living in proximity to indigenous communities, but am
>>> not emotionally attached, am not attacking anybody. This is an
>>> alternative view of the problems and benefits of land tenure in Maya
>>> communities in southern Belize:
>>>
>>> I have lived in a piece of land in southern Belize for the last 20
>>> tears. When I bought it, I bought it cheap because it lacked road
>>> access (still lacks road access), had no grid (still has no grid
>>> electricity), and the land was severely damaged abandoned pasture
>>> land
>>> and old citrus groves. I have used my labour, my thoughts, my
>>> energies, income earned off the farm as well as income from the farm,
>>> to rehabilitate the soil, make this land a beautiful farm, and to
>>> make
>>> a very well established food forest, with many hundreds of species.
>>>
>>> When I bought this land, I wanted to open it up to be a community. I
>>> invited local people, and international people, and.... no one was
>>> really interested. They all wanted to pursue their own thing, so I
>>> pursued my own thing, too. I now have an Eden, which I intend to pass
>>> on to my children, which I share through courses. Toby has taught
>>> here, twice, and knows that we provide scholarships for participants
>>> who can not afford to take the courses we offer (made possible by
>>> teachers like Toby who are willing to facilitate scholarships).
>>>
>>> If this land had been community owned, it would have all been burned
>>> down and planted to corn years ago.
>>>
>>> Moving on to the matter that you may not have considered: most people
>>> in the developing world want private property, at least the people I
>>> know. For the last 20 years, I have lived in San Pedro Columbia,
>>> Toledo, Belize. My neighbors are mostly Kekchi Maya people who did
>>> have community land tenure, and, as the book "the Tragedy of the
>>> Commons" points out, community land was not always well managed. I am
>>> not saying that it couldn't be, but my experience here has shown me
>>> that, here at least, it is not. Fallow crop rotational cycles
>>> appropriate for the types of soil we have here, 12-15 years, were not
>>> observed when that land was everybody's and nobody's. The incentive
>>> was, at the time, to chop it, burn it and plant it out to corn before
>>> someone else did, resulting in shortened fallow cycles of 7 years, 5
>>> years, 3 years, with the predictable decline in production and an
>>> increased environmental cost of erosion, siltation, and fire damage
>>> (we lost 50 acres of habitat to a caretaker for a privately owned
>>> piece of land "managed" by absentee land owners this last year,
>>> though
>>> the core areas of the farm were largely unaffected). Any one who
>>> fallowed a piece of land for more than 7 years could expect to find
>>> someone else clearing it for their milpa when they went out to their
>>> farm.
>>>
>>> Toby has been to two of the farms in San Pedro Columbia with well
>>> developed agroforestry. One is Saul Garcias land, farmed for 40
>>> years,
>>> worthy of a book of its own, amazing levels of biodiversity both
>>> between species and within species, and the other is Ignacio Ash's
>>> farm, a very wel developed farm that is a cacao dominant polyculture
>>> that has been in one family for 3 generations. He has also been to
>>> Burton Caliz's farm, which is another farm that is amazing. These
>>> farms are exceptional, and a common feature is that they are "owned",
>>> that the person who established them expected to have something to
>>> pass on to their children.
>>>
>>> In 20 years time I have watched all the rainforest within a two hour
>>> walk of the village chopped and burned up for corn. Lack of
>>> delineated
>>> properties resulted in a land use pattern that is full of contention
>>> and conflict, where the land was not stewarded for the long term
>>> benefit of the community or for the land itself, and has kept this
>>> community mired in stagnation, economically marginalized by a lack of
>>> access to traditional avenues of credit (and this is not a debate
>>> about wether or not that is a good thing) and with a social
>>> prohibition on making long term investments in the land, like
>>> planting
>>> cacao, enforced by sabotage, community censure, arson and violence.
>>> Any attempt to plant long term crops like cacao or coffee, or timber
>>> trees in association with cacao or coffee was seen as a resource
>>> grab.
>>> Cattle pastures were not managed to avoid soil damage, because it was
>>> not "theirs", and the way to show intention to use that land was
>>> through not fallowing it.
>>>
>>> Commonly owned land here resulted in greed, fear and division, too,
>>> worse, in my opinion, than where property was delineated.
>>>
>>> The few cacao farms in this watershed of any size are held by
>>> families
>>> that managed to get their land titled back in the 1920s or 1950s,
>>> like
>>> Ignacios, whose grandfather planted out most of the cacao he has.
>>> Saul
>>> "stronged" his land and would probably have chopped anybody who tried
>>> to steal it from him into several chunks a few years ago. He owned
>>> that then and now by respect for his abilities and age, respectively.
>>>
>>> Now, the land that provides the ecological services displaced by
>>> shifting cultivation tends to be privately owned land. I allow people
>>> to collect firewood from my land, for example, since their is no
>>> firewood close to the village anymore, except on privately owned
>>> land.
>>>
>>> Another community near hear is San Antonio village, a Mopan Maya
>>> community that was established in 1840. San Antonio is very well
>>> developed (if you like agroforestry, there is a section in the middle
>>> of the village that is staggeringly productive, combining several
>>> back
>>> yards to make a small carbon sink and block of habitat for birds that
>>> is also very productive in food and cacao). The largest cacao farms
>>> in
>>> Toledo are all owned by farmers in this village. Average acreage of
>>> cacao farms in Maya communities is a bit over an acre. In this
>>> community, the median acreahe is 4 acres, with several farms as large
>>> as 12 acres. Some of the farms are being managed by the children or
>>> even grandchildren of the initial farmer. San Antonio village is like
>>> a garden, one of the prettiest villages in Toledo, and well
>>> developed.
>>>
>>> San Antonio is a prosperous village. People invest their energies
>>> into
>>> their land because it belongs to them.
>>>
>>> Looking at San Antonio Village, and San Pedro Columbia we see one
>>> community with property rights that has engaged in very sophisticated
>>> agroforestry, land that is passed securely from generation to
>>> generation, who can access credit to expand their farms, buy TVs,
>>> build new houses, have shops, that is able to send children to
>>> school,
>>> and another, that has also developed, but not as quickly, that is
>>> still dependent (though less so) on shifting cultivation, that lacks
>>> access to credit and has been marginalized at the boundary of the
>>> currency based economy. Both of these communities are engaged in
>>> agriculture. Both of these communities have access to the same
>>> markets. Both of these communities are over 100 years old. One of
>>> these communities is a nicer place to live (hahaha, and I don't live
>>> there)!
>>>
>>> San Antonio observes better agricultural practices on commonly owned
>>> land, too, with 60 feet from any waterway kept forested, and the
>>> school and church well taken care of, a pride in ther community that
>>> is an extension of their pride in their farms.
>>>
>>> There are some differences in the communities apart from property
>>> rights. San Antionio is Mopan Maya, a lowland Maya in the Yucatecan
>>> language group, and the Kekchi are a Quichean people, highland in
>>> origin, who arrived in Belize after 300 years of perpetual
>>> displacement. The Mopan came from San Luis Rey, Peten, with the
>>> intention to settle that valley, a single movement to establish a
>>> settlment, from a place very similar to San Antonio, same plants,
>>> soils, weather patterns. The Kekchi in Columbia arrived as the front
>>> end of a wave of the displaced of the displaced of the displaced, and
>>> have a legacy of living for a few generations in one place and then
>>> migrating, either by choice or external factors. They are from the
>>> highlands, cooler, with a pronounced wet season and dry season, and
>>> different plants. But, apart from that, right now, they both have
>>> access to the same markets, the same level of service (clinics,
>>> schools, extension services, hospitals). The biggest difference has
>>> been their relationship with the land they farm.
>>>
>>> There are people here who speak against private property for the
>>> Maya,
>>> saying the communal land system is their culture (debatable, but
>>> certainly the model since the Conquest). Most of these proponents own
>>> their own land, if Maya, or are Caucasian, who own property back
>>> where
>>> they come from. Most Maya people would like property they can pass to
>>> their children, or use to access credit, and can increase the value
>>> of
>>> by their labour, etc.
>>>
>>> I am not debating the merits of access to credit, or economic
>>> integration with the balance of the country and the global economy,
>>> but it is worth noting that %99.9 of the farmers I know would like to
>>> own their land, would like access to more money, would like all the
>>> things that I suspect you enjoy or have access to, Steve, a computer,
>>> an education for their children, a TV, a car, and they don't have
>>> those things because with poor land tenure, making shifting
>>> cultivation provide the bulk of their income (financial and caloric),
>>> they are always two steps from a bad crop failure and loss.
>>>
>>> San Pedro Columbia surveyed most of the land five years back and gave
>>> the land to people. I wish I could say that was done transparently
>>> and
>>> was painlessly, but it was not. It was done in the months before a
>>> general election with the intention of gaining votes. I am sad to say
>>> it worked, and that party swept into power for a second term (though
>>> they lost the next election when they had no assets to give away).
>>> Having aid that, most people got the land they were farming, and are
>>> happy with this. They have also started planting out more tree crops,
>>> and the overall health of that land is better as people have
>>> incentive
>>> to manage it well, by planting long term crops, and to avoid burning
>>> into their neighbors lands.
>>>
>>> There is also a movement in Belize for land owners to set aside a
>>> percentage of their land to be maintained as habitat and for the
>>> ecological services wild areas provide, which is a whole other
>>> subject. Their are talks about incentives for this, etc.
>>>
>>> In closing I would say that the 30 prettiest farms I have seen (I
>>> worked as the head of extension for a cacao cooperative here, and
>>> have
>>> visited well over 400 farms in Belize, and dozens of farms in Costa
>>> Rica, Panama, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Venezuela) have all been farms
>>> where the owner had very secure land tenure, either property or long
>>> term leased land, and an ability to transfer ownership to their
>>> children. I am not saying that communal land doesn't work, or that
>>> private property is a panacea that will solve all of the problems
>>> facing farmers here (or anywhere), but that land here is better
>>> maintained when the stakeholders have something to pass on to their
>>> own children via secure property rights.
>>>
>>> Just my .02.
>>>
>>> I have to run, go plant some more trees.
>>>
>>> In development,
>>>
>>> Christopher
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 30, 2008, at 1:26 AM, Steve Read wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello, Toby Hemenway,
>>>>
>>>> Interesting approach to extrapolte from one PDC and its mug praxis
>>>> to principles and strategies of land tenure; It reminds me too of
>>>> the platitudinous arguments that Thatcher & Co. put forward to
>>>> justify selling off the council owned housing, frankly I rarely saw
>>>> a run down council house except on estates that had been designanted
>>>> as 'problem' estates by the local council and were then therefore
>>>> following some strange logic of their own refilled with more
>>>> 'problem' families. And then of course council blocks that fell into
>>>> disrepair and misuse becaus ethey were simply so badly designed.
>>>>
>>>> Your argument also belies the fact that for prbably millenia humane
>>>> societies have enabled land tenure strategies that allowed
>>>> sustainable, durable use of commonly held assets. Th
>>>> e fatuous book 'Tragedy of the commons' has been massively
>>>> instrumental in creating a mythology around this subject. Your
>>>> argument also imo seems to betray a certian myopia, looking out the
>>>> window do I see a world where privately owned resources are not
>>>> destructively exploited, a world where privately property is tended
>>>> and nurtured for subsequent generations? Or do I see a world where
>>>> the traditional class layers have gone to be replaced by one big
>>>> squandering propertied class in the rich countries and those that
>>>> are becoming fatter? For myself I only have to go to the municipal
>>>> dump to see where private property ends up, even when still in good
>>>> condition.
>>>>
>>>> I imagine that you personally however are tending well your private
>>>> patch of Earth, your private Eden.
>>>>
>>>> And of course there's Renting property out, what a great way to
>>>> increase my income, living off the sweat and labour of others,
>>>> keeping the world split into have's and have nots and of course
>>>> expecting the people who are renting the property to look after it
>>>> as if it were their own, well how is it they can do that in rented
>>>> accomodation and yet wouldn't be able to do it in commonly held
>>>> accomodation?
>>>>
>>>> I would however agree with you Toby that there is some education to
>>>> be done, its not difficult, one simply transports the emotional
>>>> content that one has for 'mine' to 'ours'. I frankly fail to see
>>>> that if we can't do this and that as designers we are not promoting
>>>> this how we are to move along towards sustainable interconnected
>>>> communities.
>>>>
>>>> Buy the land and free it into a safe common legal entity, then help
>>>> people develop the capacity to nurture it, and in this I am speaking
>>>> too and perhaps in particular of the urban areas. This definately
>>>> seems to be the philosophy developing here in France.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve R
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ======= At 2008-10-30, 04:45:47 you wrote: =======
>>>>
>>>>> A story I may have told before: On opening day of a PDC, the venue
>>>>> was
>>>>> kind enough to put out mugs, each with a participant's name on it.
>>>>> They
>>>>> asked that each person be responsible for rinsing and putting away
>>>>> their
>>>>> own mug. The system worked beautifully; the classroom stayed free
>>>>> of
>>>>> scattered mugs; each was back in the rack at the end of the day.
>>>>> Then,
>>>>> come our mid-class day off, the mugs were put through an industrial
>>>>> sterilizer and the labels were removed. They went back to the
>>>>> classroom
>>>>> unlabeled. Within a few days, mugs were everywhere--under chairs,
>>>>> on
>>>>> shelves, left outside, many full of molding tea leaves, and another
>>>>> couple of dozen mugs had been commandeered from elsewhere since no
>>>>> one
>>>>> could find a clean mug and it was easier to grab another from the
>>>>> stash.
>>>>> Soon almost every mug the place had was in our classroom, dirty and
>>>>> haphazardly stuck anywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was pretty surprised, since the participants seemed like decent
>>>>> folks.
>>>>> The lesson I took home was twofold: private ownership is one way to
>>>>> encourage responsibility toward resources, and, a culture that is
>>>>> used
>>>>> to private ownership is liable to behave irresponsibly toward
>>>>> resources
>>>>> held in common.
>>>>>
>>>>> Toby
>>>>> http://patternliteracy.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nancy Frank wrote:
>>>>>> Steve -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it will be awhile before we get as far as we've come and
>>>>>> return to common land.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nancy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards.
>>>> Steve Read
>>>> steveread@free.fr
>>>> 2008-10-30
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _____________________________
>>> Christopher Nesbitt
>>>
>>> Maya Mountain Research Farm
>>> San Pedro Columbia, Toledo
>>> PO 153 Punta Gorda Town, Toledo
>>> BELIZE,
>>> Central America
>>>
>>> www.mmrfbz.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>
>>
>> Best regards.
>> Steve Read
>> steveread@free.fr
>> 2008-10-30
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
>_____________________________
>Christopher Nesbitt
>
>Maya Mountain Research Farm
>San Pedro Columbia, Toledo
>PO 153 Punta Gorda Town, Toledo
>BELIZE,
>Central America
>
>www.mmrfbz.org
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
>
>

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Best regards.
Steve Read
steveread@free.fr
2008-11-08






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page