Ryan Boyd

Melissa Ferrin wrote:

Ryan Boyd wrote:[

But I think this is a moot point because human beings tend to oversimplify solutions to complex problems.  We crave answers.  It isn't going to be one concept that properly addresses the infinite complexity of the global issues we face.  And you're right, not worrying about going big is important and spheres of influence shouldn't be overlooked.  The way I see it, permaculture is one piece of the puzzle in our solution to global issues--least of which is climate-related.  It has it's sphere of influence, as does renewable energy, or nuclear power, or sustainable living, or recycling/upcycling, or tiny home living, etc. but permaculture does encompass multiple issues at once, which is part of its appeal.  However elegant a solution it is, the "one size fits all" model tends to be an oversimplification as history has taught.

Aren't the teachings of permaculture just the opposite? Humans overcomplicate simple solutions. Humans want to throw tech at problems,  to use tech to solve problems that were created by tech, which in turn create more problems.
I thought the teachings of permaculture said that we find solutions to problems by looking at the cause of those problems and thinking about when would this problem actually be the solution. For example, got ticks? rather than spray for ticks, bring in guinea fowl who love to eat ticks, If I had guinea fowl then I'd want to have a lot of ticks to feed them--the problem becomes the solution.  Is that not the very core teaching of permaculutre, that along with seeing ourselves as a part of the whole. When we see everything as one, or at the very least interconnected, we will no longer use solutions that create more problems.

We are in agreement here; humans over complicate solutions to simple problems.  This usually happens in the name of convenience--for example, car manufacturers put these sensors for tire pressure now...they almost always end up failing and need to be repaired.  The simpler solution is to just manually check your tire pressure from time to time.  But now we have to get the sensor fixed when it fails, lol.
My point is that the opposite also tends to be true; humans over simplify solutions to complex problems like climate change, or issues of global environmental scale.  We simply can't fathom the scale properly in this case.  We also cannot accurately grasp the near infinite number of connections between organisms and environments, and therefore trying to predict the consequence of action is very difficult.
A fascinating example of our inability to understand scale is seen in an exponential growth thought experiment.  And this can actually be calculated--if you could fold a piece of paper 100 times, how thick would it be?  Something like 90 billion light years thick, the size of the known universe!  

Melissa Ferrin wrote:I think too many people think they have to go big.
But it's like go fund me, or similar, if a million people put in one dollar, you'd have a million dollars, if one person put in 10,000 dollars you'd only have  1% of a million.  a lot of people doing little things is a big deal.
You are doing a great job Paul.
And so is pretty much everyone on premies. Keep up the good work.
Don't overlook any sphere of influence. There are some great ideas on this thread, and on all the threads.

That's a good point.  Unless your goal is to go big, of course, which I think most of us here would like.  Plus, for world wide change you pretty much have to go big.  I'd also argue that getting one million people to do even a small thing is still going big.  Lots of little change adds up to big change

But I think this is a moot point because human beings tend to oversimplify solutions to complex problems.  We crave answers.  It isn't going to be one concept that properly addresses the infinite complexity of the global issues we face.  And you're right, not worrying about going big is important and spheres of influence shouldn't be overlooked.  The way I see it, permaculture is one piece of the puzzle in our solution to global issues--least of which is climate related.  It has it's sphere of influence, as does renewable energy, or nuclear power, or sustainable living, or recycling/upcycling, or tiny home living, etc. but permaculture does encompass multiple issues at once, which is part of its appeal.  However elegant a solution it is, the "one size fits all" model tends to be an oversimplification as history has taught.

I think multiple solutions will have to come about, in part, organically.  An external force like resource scarcity, climate degradation, disease or famine will probably act on the population but that would still be an organic rather than a 'designed system' type of movement towards a solution.  Although I do believe design will play its role, i.e. permaculture--it's just a part of the solution rather than the be-all and end-all.  That has been my mistake when thinking about permaculture.  It's awesome to have many communities of people working to spread the knowledge within it and expand its sphere of influence, just like there are experts in renewables for example helping to spread its sphere of influence.  All of these things are coalescing toward a solution.

paul wheaton wrote:Knowledge.




I wish for people to know about permaculture.  To know about laundry lines, rocket mass heaters, hugelkultur ...    to hear about some ideas about getting community living to work with less drama ....  




Knowledge.




People understand the basics of how a nuclear reactor works, but they don't have one in their home.  Nor have they built one.  Yet they have never heard of rocket mass heaters or hugelkultur.

People can understand about a few dozen little permaculture thing-a-ma-bobs and implement one or two.  And, in time, they might get the opportunity to move their city apartment to a tiny home on a permaculture community.  





Knowledge.





Knowledge solves global problems.





https://permies.com/t/174825/live-apartment-good-rocket-mass

Kudos to you for sticking to your vision and for the effort you put in.  I do my small part and keep working on it.  I think many people are interested in a more traditional and simpler way of life.  A less argumentative and a more nurturing one as well.  However, vasts number of them will sit in a cubicle until they are emotionally drained.  Yet others simply prefer a face-paced, technology driven, city apartment existence and nothing will change that.  I don't think its a bad thing, just a challenge.  The more flexible we are, with our thoughts, ideas, goals and efforts, the more resilient and creative we can become.

Personally, I have no hostility about permaculture ideals--even when people have differing thoughts about how to achieve the goal.  Discussion is always necessary.  I think the foundation is great and should be a component of the overall goal but what is the clearly defined vision here?  To convert as many folks as possible to live within a permaculture designed homestead?  I think that is admirable but may not have as big an influence as a slightly tweaked vision.  Consider this; it seems much more feasible to get millions of people to buy local, organic food versus getting millions of people to adopt a different way of living all together.  That isn't a knock on permaculture at all--many people may adopt that way of homesteading but what about the millions of people who live in apartments, work full-time or even up to and over 60 hours a week, have no land, have no interest in buying land, have no money, have no time, or simply can't for a million other reasons get into a permaculture lifestyle?  Those millions of folks CAN purchase goods and services from and support other permaculture practitioners who sell those goods and services like food, education, skills workshops, etc.  Which is why I think a vision with more actual influence would focus on how to garner support from non-permaculture people (in ADDITION to promoting permaculture), by primarily offering food/services to local communities--from permaculture-style farm "hubs".  At the core, I  believe farmers/producers have the ability to affect more change than simply asking "everyone" to adopt a permaculture life style because of the nebulous web of community connections they can make with non-producers.

I love permaculture and it offers a "solution" to a large part of our global problem but unfortunately, it doesn't seem scalable to me either.  Certainly, most people don't want to live in communes and many others have zero interest in growing food and practicing sustainability.  This is permaculture's fundamental problem as a global solution.

But we keep on brainstorming...so how can we appreciably affect a majority of the population globally and thus the quality of life on our planet?
That's the million dollar question.  So we have to organize our thoughts.

First, there are so many proposed ideas that we have to sift through them and put them into "large scale" and "small scale " buckets.  If we want to scale up, then we start by looking at the "large scale" ideas first.  To me, this would be things like setting up "hubs" that operate similar to Wheaton Labs but MUST be flexible to change based on local demands, infrastructure requirements, etc.  These hubs will be regional centers for instruction and demonstration.  They will need funding, at least initially unless an already established farm but will probably still need funding.
Those "hubs" will ideally facilitate more local growth of small, sustainable farms within specific eco regions.  If we can grow enough of these smaller farms (and hubs) that then supply large sections of the population with their food, I believe we will have reached a tipping point.  If we can collect data on this or somehow quantify what those results could look like (would there be greatly reduced CO2 emissions, decreased energy demand, for example?) then we'll have some numbers to back it up.
Perhaps this is the mission of Wheaton Labs and I am simply restating it.  If not, simply put the goal MUST be clearly defined, succinct, and backed by data and demonstration.  Therefore;
We need many more small scale producers, i.e. farmers.  This is much more feasible than expecting a majority of people to embrace permaculture design ethics for their individual homes.  BUT if we can get more young people to produce food sustainably, then in theory we need fewer people to commit and still have global impact, i.e. flood the market with locally sourced.  We HAVE to focus on the idea that has the most global impact at scale.  This is my best strategy for meeting that goal; show interested farmers how to build a sustainable, high efficiency farm with permaculture ethics and then go on to production for local markets.

Hello,

We are interested in digging some smaller pocket ponds/pools in our agroforestry area. The main goal is to encourage amphibians to inhabit the area to help with pest control. We already have swales dug--can anyone offer suggestions for smaller scale pond building? We would most likely be digging these by hand, and the soil has good clay content. We also have a tractor that we could use to help compact the soil. Has anyone transplanted tadpoles into these types of ponds with success, or should we wait for mother nature? Thanks!

Thanks again to all for the excellent advice. I posted this picture elsewhere, but in case anyone is interested and hasn't seen it these are the swales we will be planting on:

Thanks for the insightful information! Ideally (landowner permitting), I will be incorporating hugelkulture beds next to the trees so we can get vegetable production as well. Perhaps if I can't get this done as soon as I would like, I will plant some hardy vegetable crops right near the tree--good advice. What are some good crops beside the corn you mentioned? I was thinking about some jerusalem artichokes, sunflower, and rhubarb. Suggestions for good pollenator attractors? The area we are planting is roughly 5 acres and all will be planted on the downhill side of our contour swales. Since the land manager is a traditional style vegetable farmer (tilling, weeding, etc) I am having a harder time getting them to try the hugelkulture, but I really think this is the way to go. She just needs a little solid evidence to for convincing I want to avoid fencing but I have a feeling this might be a little difficult, at least in the begining. Also, has anyone had any luck with Sepp Holzer's method of shocking the trees before planting? It sounds like a great way to get hardier trees from the get go...
Thanks again!

Hello,

We have cut swales and will be planting some apple trees soon. We are located in Wisconsin zone 5A, and I was interested in suggestions for what other trees/nuts/anything else that people could recommend. I would like to try and get a lemon tree here by making a small sun trap with stones too. What are some suggestions for companion plants to apple trees? I have heard that rhubarb is nice because the large leaves will also help funnel water to the newly planted trees. Also, can anyone offer some ideas to keep the deer from nibbling the new plants? Any advice would be much appreciated, thank you!

Ryan

Swale and A-frame pics