Mary asked whether or not permaculture is feasible practically. Mary ,
I do not really know what kind of permaculture you are talking about. As far
as agriculture is concerned, ecologists have been studying sustainable agri
culture in the field of agroecology. My view is that sustainable agriculture
is possible in a small scale than a large scale. There are several techniques
for alternative agricultures (e.g., no tillage agricultue, inter croping, orgna
nic, fertilizer). Basically, agriculture can be sustainable if there is no los
s of soil organic matter and soil nitrogen. Soil organic matter is lost by
errosion caused by intensive tillage and irrigation. Soil nitrogen is lost by
taking the plant. So, in order to supply the nitrogen, inorgnice fertilzer is
often applied to the soil, which eventuially destroy the soil biotic community.
The best sorce of organic nitrogen is mannure (animals and human). Currently,
they are just flushed into the river system which eventually cause the eutroph
ication and water contamination. This is crazy system. We damp organic fertil
izer to where it is unwelcome, while the needy place is substituted by inorgani
c fertilizer.
The no tillage system requires the use of herbicide in order to kill weeds.
Inter croping system works in a small scale because a large machine has not yet
be able to adjust to the system.
Basically, permaculture is ecologically sound but economically unsound. It wi
ll sure increase the food price. In a small scale, it's very fine. Mary, you
are certain able to practice at your garden, because you are not selling it so
that you do not have to think of economic profitability.
The transformation of large scale agriculture to more ecologically sound
agriculture is possible, if large amount of consumer buy the food from farmers
who practice it and if goverment support the transformation (e.g., through
subsidization, tax break). Sorry, again I have to mension about policy side.
Toshihide Hamazaki
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jul 13 10:28:39 1995
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 12:31:54 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karla M. Armbruster)
Subject: Re: Wolf re-introduction
I must confess I hevn't been in on this whole conversation, so I hope I'm
not covering old ground, but I have to ask:
Isn't transporting wolves by force to an area where, as far as I can tell,
a lot of people are hostile to them and perhaps even prepared to kill them
just another form of domination? I would guess that the re-introduction
process would absolutely wreak havoc with the wolves' pack structures.
Doing it this way just seems to me to be sacrificing the wolves to assuage
our own guilt (or perhaps to advance careers of scientists who can do
studies on the re-introduction process). It seems that the better
(although less realistic) way would be to make sure there are corridors of
wilderness from where wolves live now to Yellowstone or wherever we want
them. Then we would have to make the area "hospitable" to wolves in
whatever way we can, including programs of public discussion and education
for people who live in the area. Then let the wolves come on their own, if
they want to.
______________________________________________________________________________
Karla Armbruster
Department of English
Ohio State University
164 W. 17th Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43210-1370
Phone: 614-292-6065
FAX: 614-292-7816
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"O only universe we know, forgive us."
Galway Kinnell, from "On Frozen Fields"
