Ben Brownell

I've been toying with some similar ideas and experiments (similar climate and substrate) and can't recommend the pond scheme without significant interventions. Namely, line it with a membrane and supply regular supplemental water. Even with impermeable subsoil, water will quickly 'wick' outward through any adjacent topsoil, like draping a paper napkin into a glass of water. It's nice to have even a 3-season water feature in dry climates, so maybe worth the effort to engineer it on a small scale, but if it's not a priority for you I'd keep doing your prior strategy - I use basins like that as low profile compost / yard waste pits or to charge biochar over a season or two, much more effective than raised piles in dry climates.

Anne Miller wrote:Sounds to me like you want to do something very similar to Wheaton Labs.

Why not look at the structure that is used there.

Hi Anne, I am curious, and don't know details - can you elaborate a little or point to documentation of the ownership structure/plans of WL? I haven't paid real close attention, but got the impression it was initially a 'private' (ownership) project, that built up the capacity to host and teach others, and can now offer a form of sweat + skill equity 'buy in' for committed participants. I think that approach makes good sense, for projects that have the initial momentum to develop and sustain independently, i.e. not requiring capital investment to accommodate more people. Is there also a long term plan to transition to a community owned-run organizational form? Thanks for highlighting, it's certainly a relevant case study!

That's a big tangent I'll leave for other discussion threads Daniel, but I will say one objective of mine is to create reasonably fluid structure that helps people grow and adjust or relocate with relative ease, keeping some of the "stakes" of member-ownership low enough to avert persistent conflict or dysfunction. Lots of tools and tactics to apply toward those ends, I'm not so concerned.

There's some wisdom in something like a "Limited Equity Housing Co-op" model adapted to land based living I think, which can also work in conjunction with a land trust, but again my question is more geared toward initial steps in those directions and pooling resources to get there.

Indeed much to consider and push back on in the ways we are typically shown what 'ownership' looks (and acts) like, Daniel. Some big deep sprawling questions down those tracks!

While I recognize their ultimate importance, and at least some of the ways that initial approach/attitude effects eventual outcomes, for purposes of my present focus I'm going to default to current legal and financial standards and work out how best to attract and retain people who can navigate those constraints while also eyeing some of the larger values and visionary aims of systemic change. I've seen too many examples of people/projects going the other way around though, and simply failing to reconcile the demands of status quo society - leading to breakdown and suffering.

I'm not personally in a position to sponsor an optimistic experimental community undertaking, so substantial financial input is a necessity of taking things forward here. However, my goal has always been making it much more accessible and affordable and rewarding for passionate + practical people to join and collaborate on this 'going concern' rather than setting out fresh on their own.

Your point re: more expanded view of stakeholdership is really key though, and that's one of the cruxes here. It is not simply a binary question of Did you pay your entrance fee? but more of an organic process of settling in and building relational strength. That's why I'm really interested in creative ways to onboard people in a few stages through increasing privilege + responsibility, with options to amicably reverse or exit without either side taking an unfair loss. Tricky stuff, and worth chewing on

Interested in hearing thoughts and experiences from anyone who has looked into transitioning from 'sole proprietor' or 'landlord' status towards a cooperatively held & run land project with multiple stakeholder-tenants!

I know quite a bit about different structures of intentional community formation with an established or committed group, however this question is more aimed at the uncertain prospect or trial of onboarding one or a few new long term stakeholders into an existing owner-operated permaculture property. The process may aim for one of those proven co-owned community models eventually, or something new/different. It's somewhat unpredictable, and therefore needs some flexibility and safeguards to allow things to unfold and formulate an amenable structure over a reasonable timeline, without anyone taking undue risks or burdens.

It's a pretty complex and consequential process, but maybe there are some sensible steps and models to work with? For example, I think figuring out a way to enter a mutually beneficial short term trial phase that still involves some meaningful financial and other commitments, but is also easily terminated by either party if things don't click. That could look like say a one year personal loan as a tentative down payment on buy-in. Or a package of infrastructure improvements/additions by and for the newcomer, which are in large part moveable (i.e. tiny house on wheels) and could be extracted.

I've been turning this puzzle over in my mind and welcome additional perspective and anecdotes! I'll elaborate a bit more as I go or find some reference points, but wanted to open this up here in case it resonates. I think my eventual aim would be something like a co-homestead model similar to co-housing or community land trust, with some shared amenities and essential co-op governance, but privately held improvements and some personal live/work/steward space. That would require a threshold number of participants to work out, through some kind of incremental process and refinement over likely several years of this transitional phase. Seem reasonable?!

I bet there are some crafty 'natural' solutions to sealing earthen wall or cavity to hold water (fairly) long term. How about firing an appropriate clay content wall material in situ? Or coating the surface with a layer of pitch glue, natural latex, or other durable sealant? Or perhaps a compromise like repurposing an above ground pool membrane or similar?

In my case, I'm in an area with some (already well compacted) non-porous subsoil geology, which leads me to think that simply digging in below grade and capping with some barrier to evaporation would work reasonably well.

To the original suggestion, I think well engineered compacted earth with the right kind and proportion of clay could do pretty well as a tank wall - that's essentially what people do to create pond reservoirs. There would be some seepage, and perhaps unwanted biological activity/buildup to manage.

I've got several seedlings started this season collected from mature healthy looking asian (hybrid?) stock in an old neglected orchard nearby, probably 50+ years old along the upper margin of unirrigated pasture on a bench above Klamath river near Oregon/Cal border (average maybe 20" annual precipitation). I'm planting directly in probably neutral or alkaline native grassland soils, plus some biochar and mulch. Many are situated in part shade + browse protection under nitrogen fixing shrubs (ceanothus). Will be doing a little supplemental watering over summers 1 + 2 at least, and occasional nutrient tea. Honestly don't expect great success, but a handful of survivors would be worth it! Good pointers noted above; I'd be curious to hear any more reports from dry/mediterranean zones. Would (southern) European species or crosses likely perform better?

Tank is right about 6' x 2' Jay, it's a standard size stock watering tank, that I happened to find used locally. Surface area to depth ratio probably does matter for heating efficiency, but you might be able to rig a taller one to have one upright side of the tank heated by a wide chimney flue?

Mike, I think this approach helps on a couple levels versus direct fire-under-tank. I think durability of both the metal itself and the seam glue that seals around the base perimeter is a consideration with very high temperature epxosure. And yes, the metal/sand sandwich really helps even out the temperature conduction. I generally have heating dialed in with practice, tapering off fuel feed rate toward the end to be able to get right in at ideal temperature without hot spots on bottom. Some kind of thin wood slat buffer inside could also be used as needed.

Thought I'd share this setup here, as it's served well now for a few years and one of the best overall ultra low tech designs I've seen for this.

Photo should be pretty explanatory, it's just two parallel 'stem' walls made of stone mortared with mud/cob up to about 16" above ground, with an opening in the front to feed the fire and one out the back to mount a 6' smoke stack, all done such that a flat metal panel cap (heavier gauge ribbed roofing in this case) can mount evenly end to end to enclose the fire box below. The addition of an inch or so of loose sand or fine aggregate on top of the metal creates an even base for the tub, and really helps to both distribute and hold heat in between the fire and tub.

Takes an hour plus or minus to heat a half full volume of water, and will hold temp for several hours easily. Quite delightful, and I'm sure with some creativity same principles could be adapted to larger tub sizes, but this is quick and easy enough that it sees regular use!