GAMCOD1 - the 20 crops

Growing a million calories on dirt.  Year 1.  GAMCOD1.

There is a bonus for growing a million calories.  And part of that bonus is that there need to be some minimums on different kinds of foods.  Maybe the thing to do is to list 30 basic crops and then require that at least 20 of these make their minimums at the finish line.  

potatoes
wheat
sepp holzer grain
corn
beans (no soy allowed)
peas
strawberries
sunflower
sunchokes
amaranth
winter squash
zukes
daikon radish
beets
turnips
parsnips
cole crops
cukes
melon
onion
tomato
pepper
carrot
lettuce
radishes (non daikon)
greens

No soy or hemp allowed (discussion for this decision is limited to the cider press).

My guess is that people are going to lean heavily on stuff at the top of the list to hit the million calorie mark.  And people will minimize growing the things at the bottom of the list.  I slapped this list together without looking at official numbers - so maybe I need to change the order of the list.  

Maybe the thing to do is to say that there is a flat requirement of 10,000 calories from each species on the list?  And for the control acre, it would be a minimum of 1000 calories.  ??

What are other species to add to the list?


Along the way, there needs to be evidence of establishing perennials, these are not expected to produce the first year.  If they do, their calories can be counted in the million.  But there needs to be evidence that each of these species has been established.

rhubarb
apple
peach
apricot
nut
raspberry
plum
pear
nectarine
cherry
black locust
stinging nettles
blueberry

what are other species to add to this list?

To that perennial list, assuming they will grow there I might add:
Horseradish
Walking Onion
Blackberries
Goji Berries
Honey Berries (sure wish they would grow here)
Wild Black Cherries (very large trees, great for shade, fantastic jelly and wine... will they grow there?)
Other Cherries
For nuts, will PECANS grow there?
Asparagus

I think that a list of 30 pick 20 is a really good idea, maybe a bonus point for each one over the 20 "basics" that you manage to reach the bonus calorie limit with?

Strawberries may be a problem, in their first year they don't produce anything but you have them on the list for first year production. My strawberries DO produce in the first year, but I buy commercial bare root plants that are a year old and ready to go, I would assume that would not be allowed.

What about oilseed crops like camelina, mustard, flax?

My season seems to be about the same length as yours and I have a way easier time growing pearl millet than amaranth.  It's way easier to harvest and clean, too.

There is sorghum that should theoretically grow there.

You mention wheat and Sepp holzers rye. What about other grains? Barley, oats, etc.?

Buckwheat?

I was going to suggest lots of the same stuff Mark suggested for perennials, especially asparagus, gojis, haskaps, and cherries. I was going to say chokecherry specifically.

Also grapes and goumis.

What about hardy kiwi? Not sure if you're worried about it taking over if left intended, though

Jan White wrote:
Also grapes and goumis.
What about hardy kiwi? Not sure if you're worried about it taking over if left intended, though

O wow, I forgot about grapes and kiwi, gotta have both of them. Never heard of goumis, based on a quick search, I think I need some.

I'm having second thoughts on the wild cherry and pecans. I would have to have them assuming they will grow but at maturity (although it might take 1/2 a century or more), they could hog a 1/4 acre each. 10 years down the road one might be faced with either cutting them down or moving vegetable gardens and smaller perennials somewhere else. I've been there done that, as they say. Although some things like blackberries or even papaws might grow under them or at least around the edges. Grapes don't belong near a garden either as they have really big spreading roots.

Maybe a third component of the project is needed for large, long lived woody things?

Is transplanting seedlings allowed?  If not, are melons normally successful in your climate?  And peppers for that matter?

I was wondering the same thing for strawberries - maybe they should be on the perennial list.

I really like the idea of requiring 20 from a list of 30.  That way the smart folks will plant nearly 30 so that at least 20 hit the minimum.

Calorie-wise, my main crops are winter squash, carrots, onions and potatoes.  Quantifying the routine harvest crops like summer squash, peas and greens will be a struggle.  Also making sure they don't grow lettuce/zucchini for size instead of flavor.  "Hey, look at this bolted head of lettuce, it weighs 3 lbs.  Gimme points. "

Garlic needs to be planted in the fall.

My understanding is that 1,000,000 calories is roughly food needs for one person for a year. I'm not sure the suggestion of 10,000 calories per vegetable makes sense. What does 10,000 calories of lettuce look like? Would you want to eat 10,000 calories of lettuce over a year?

1 medium iceberg lettuce is around 500g. At 14 calories per 100g, that is 70 calories per lettuce. Around 150 heads of lettuce over the year. Lettuce is highly seasonal - with successive sowing you can probably crop out doors for a couple of months of the year. So while they are in season you would be eating multiple whole lettuces per day. I'm not sure even the most hardened vegetarian would happily eat 1kg of lettuce every day for months at a time.

What about flipping the requirement. Instead of a minimum to aim for, cap each major crop to say 100,000 calories each. If you grow more there is no harm, but it doesn't count for your tally beyond a certain point.

I think that may be easier to plan for as well, as you can compensate at planting for a bad harvest. If i aim for, say, 200,000 calories of potatoes knowing that only 100,000 will count then I won't be so worried about a dodgy harvest.

But aiming for 10,000 minimum calorie count on some of those crops would be pretty hard, as some of those crops are very vulnerable to conditions and pests. For me lettuce has been very variable. One year I had lettuce booming. The following I had bad weather and a slug plague and got very little. The vaguaries of growing crops, especially permaculture growing, are such that crops will fail from time to time. Forcing a minimum yield of crop in a bad year will either be unreasonably difficult, or will force the grower to make compromises (do I use slug pellets this year, or do I let the lettuce fail?).

I like the idea that you finish the season with a reasonable amount of at least 20 different calorie crops.  And I agree that lettuce is not going to be a great choice.  

Maybe we need to say something like:  10 different things of at least 20,000 calories, plus 10 more things of at least 2000 calories.  

And then to hit a million calories, the gardener might bet on wheat, potatoes and the three sisters.

I think that's a very good approach

Maybe we need to require 3 sisters and encourage more sisters?  Thumbs up for this post if you think 3 sisters should be a required thing for each of the five gardens.

paul wheaton wrote:Maybe we need to require 3 sisters and encourage more sisters?  Thumbs up for this post if you think 3 sisters should be a required thing for each of the five gardens.

I'm not keen. More restrictive, and it removes personal choice. I'm not sure what is gained? It you have shown you can successfully grow 1,000,000 calories do you need to do more?

I think the more you dictate the requirements for success (list of crops, caloric minimums, specific combinations, etc.) the less innovation will result. A million calories on an acre is a stretch for the first year based on our experience doing something very similar. And some crops did well while others were very poor. That will change as the soil improves.

It would be very interesting to see how someone plans out each year with the knowledge that the soil must be built up for really great growth. If perennials are used, how do they adapt to the poor initial soil conditions, then begin to produce as the soil improves. A really smart person might plant green manures/nitrogen fixers and large biomass producers the first year to get the soil healthier, then kick ass the following years.

This would be a very useful example to others, showing that you can start with poor soil, whether it's virgin pine soil or urban front yard, and turn it into a paradise in just a few years.

Not much grows in the winter but a feller still has to eat. Are there any requirements for processing and storing the food? I've recently been rethinking some of my crops with a focus more on things that need little of anything other than a place to store them. For examples, dry beans and corn and in my case sweet potatoes rather than squash or potatoes. I sure miss my squash and taters but, in my garden, sweet potatoes are so much easier.  

I think focusing on the calories as well as the nutrition should be the goal, less so than requiring a particular plant. At the top of the priority list for me, is "grow what you'll eat and enjoy", along with "grow a variety of plants to meet your vitamin and mineral needs". Beans, grains, some root crops, and (eventually) nuts can make up a lot of calories, but without fruits and veggies (which are mostly not calorie dense) a person will not thrive or even survive without artificial multivitamins.

I would stick to a requirement of "at least 20 plants from the following list". Perhaps if there's a good list of support plants, requiring some of those for chop and drop accumulators or encouraging pollinators. Same with perennials, perhaps a square footage dedicated to them since there won't be a calorie count for the first year or three? Avoiding external inputs for mulch or fertilizer will require a certain percentage of nitrogen fixers or dedicating another part of your land for growing those chop and drop/mulch plants.

Transplants and seedlings would be a given depending on the location, some places have too short a growing season otherwise to avoid such well-established and effective practices, and some species of plants aren't true from seed so a grafted seedling provides a known element that has several years head start over a seed. No reason not to try both of course if you have the space, you never know if your seed could become a new variety that tastes great and does great in your area unless you try. If it sucks, you can still use it to graft and know it can handle your area as root stock.

What provisions will be made to deal with the veggies being produced? It takes a lot of time to deal with crops once they are harvested and weighed. In the small farm food project I’m currently involved with, it takes 6 manhours to harvest, sort, clean, wash, bag, and label a half pickup truck bed of veggies to take for selling…a full truck bed if I throw in 4 big bunches of bananas and two 5 gallon buckets of lemons. Then it’s 8 more hours at the market selling the next day.

If I were in such a competition and stretched for time….I can foresee that labor will be intensive setting up the garden the first year…. I would entertain the idea of dumping into a compost bin the excess veggies I couldn’t personally use. It would take too much valuable time to process them for storage or to sell them. After all, it’s the million calories and planting the required crops that is the goal, not the need to feed myself through the year. After a winter of having the time to set up the infrastructure, then I’d be able to utilize everything I produced. But that first year might be quite the stretch.  I’m just guessing since I have no experience with the weather, water, and soil conditions on your place. But I do wonder.

While I could easily produce a million calories and meet the plant varieties goal here in Hawaii, I’m not so sure with your location with its questionable soil and water. What I’ve seen harvested from your lands (judging from the photos posted to date) doesn’t bode well for significant production the first year. I think I’ll stay put where I am. <<<grin>>>

I don't recall anywhere that Paul mentions/requires that "the farmer" is the sole consumer of "the million calories". So, I think the anti-lettuce argument is sketchy... quick rotation, and cool season growing could be plusses for lettuce, spinach, etc...

I like the idea of both a floor and a ceiling for a selection of the crops. There is a desire/need for a certain amount of staple stuff, balanced with a desire for variety.

For the perennial list:
black walnut
sugar maple?
hazelnut
chestnut
pinon pine?

10,000 calories of lettuce is easy enough to grow but would eat a large amount of man hours to pick and process, especially in a poly-culture it's about 145lb of lettuce.

I do think that a upper limit would be better than a lower limit. so 1million calories from a minimum of 20 plants from this list (or inducing those on the list but not limited to it) with no one plant or plant family allowed to count for more than 10% of the total.

What happens if someone hits, or overshoots the overall 1,000,000 calories target but fails the overall project because one or more of their planted crops fails?

I'm all for encouraging a variety, but I would be concerned that arbitrary thresholds for certain crops - where ever they are set - would be restrictive. They would limit choice and don't reflect the reality of attempting to do permaculture gardening.

If I plant 24 crops, have 5 crop failures, but still grow 1,000,000 calories total have I failed? I know how aggrieved I would feel about that. And for many people attempting this they will be growing new species, new varieties etc... without experience of those crops in their specific location.

I'm confused on this point -- Do only the crops from that list count? If the grower has 20 crops from it, and then chooses 2 crops not on the list, do those 2 crops not count toward the million calories? Or is that list just the minimum of varieties that must be grown?

Calories from stuff not on the list can count, but I will need to judge them as edible.  I suppose somebody could grow a million calories of juniper and say they are, technically, calories ...  and they might even prove edibility by eating some of the wood - but I would still veto it.

Michael Cox wrote:What happens if someone hits, or overshoots the overall 1,000,000 calories target but fails the overall project because one or more of their planted crops fails?

I'm all for encouraging a variety, but I would be concerned that arbitrary thresholds for certain crops - where ever they are set - would be restrictive. They would limit choice and don't reflect the reality of attempting to do permaculture gardening.

If I plant 24 crops, have 5 crop failures, but still grow 1,000,000 calories total have I failed? I know how aggrieved I would feel about that. And for many people attempting this they will be growing new species, new varieties etc... without experience of those crops in their specific location.

I'm pretty sure if you don't have at least 20 different plants from the approved list, then you would fail. There has to be a hard cutoff, otherwise why would 19 be allowed but not 18 or 17 and so on. So perhaps growing 30-35 different plants would be more resilient, that way if 5-10 fail you are still good to go. Crop failure is a pretty major issue, so the more you can to account for that the better.

Asparagus is a great choice to add. It can produce for many years. We relocated some crowns that were over 50 years old. Hoping they didn't forget how to produce....

Guidelines are good. There has to be a way to fairly compare the plots. Minimum number of annuals and perennials.

At first I liked the 3 sister idea, now I am thinking it may be restrictive.

It may be good to create a form for the gardeners to use to track their crops. This would give them idea on how they will be considered. I wonder how many folks track their gardens on paper. We have our records, but not sure if everyone does that year to year and season to season.

Calories can be counted in the million.  I know you our listing crops but would you consider animals in the future to meet your calory count?

Amateur question but why is the Black Locust included in the perennial list?  

From google I gather you can only eat the flowers so no calories there.  For future honey harvests perhaps?

Jenny Ives wrote:Amateur question but why is the Black Locust included in the perennial list?  

From google I gather you can only eat the flowers so no calories there.  For future honey harvests perhaps?

In addition to attracting pollinators with the early flowers it's a nitrogen fixing tree which responds well to coppicing, so perhaps chop and drop or coppicing on rotation to use the wood and release some of that nitrogen in the soil?

I saw it was a nitrogen fixer but if the measurement for the challenge is calories...

paul wheaton wrote:Maybe we need to require 3 sisters and encourage more sisters?  Thumbs up for this post if you think 3 sisters should be a required thing for each of the five gardens.

I could see requiring "variable story intercropping."  Basically 3-sisters, but the sisters can be any species of food producing trellis, climber, ground-cover.  Like, I dunno, okra, wild yam, i dunno, sweet potato.

Siberian pea ?

Miles Flansburg wrote: Siberian pea ?

None.

Why no Siberian pea? Just curious before I plant the seeds I bought, if doing so would be a mistake...

paul wheaton wrote:
...
And then to hit a million calories, the gardener might bet on wheat, potatoes and the three sisters.

What kinds of corn do well up at the lab?

This is a super fun idea and I will enjoy following along! I like the top cap being 10% or less for any one food. And picking 20 minimum from the list, with any additional foods adding to the total after reaching a million calories from the listed foods.

]I don't really see that this experiment is about establishing anything much like a long term permaculture growing operation, especially when it is only set up as a 5 year experiment.  If it was a  25 year permaculture experiment, the crop choices would be heavier on cane and vine crops as well as tree crops, especially chestnuts, which should really be the backbone of any permaculture operation.  It seems more like a 5 year gardening experiment, and basing it on calories produced over a 5 year period seems to de-incentivise the use of the actual permaculture crops that I mentioned above.  Also, out of pocket expenses are unclear: are applicants paying for housing locally out of this salary? Do you have to buy all the gardening tools you need? Do you have to build structures to house your tools?  Are you buying all the plant materials like seeds, plants, etc. out of pocket as well? Anyone like myself who is already a permaculture homesteader for 35 years + would have to leave their existing living situation to participate in this "competition".  I can't imagine anyone who has invested in permaculture on their property for any length of time would ever consider participating in this experiment away from their homes, unless those paying the salaries of such participants would also be paying for someone to manage their existing homestead while they are away, and it would take tens of thousands of dollars monthly for (someone like) me to even consider applying for such a position.  One has to wonder, what is the real purpose of this project?  What happens to these 5 parcels of land after 5 years when the participants go back to their existing homesteads?  It might make more sense to offer a competition like this to those who are just starting out with the intention of creating a permaculture homestead ON THEIR OWN LAND, in a similar geographic region to each other.  But rather than compete to see who can outdo each other, they should all collaborate to see how much they can help each other out...because after all, aren't we all in this TOGETHER?  

I did notice a suggestion that  each item on the list, if chosen, should have at least 10,000 calories for each crop.  Does anyone know how many calories per pound you get out of lettuce?  The other thing I noticed is that there aren't any (or maybe many) actual perennial or tree crops listed, so in my mind this is not a permaculture experiment, but a gardening experiment.  In 5 years, no new plantings of chestnuts or other crops would be yielding any "calories" yet, but in 15 years, chestnuts properly spaced, fertilized and pollinated,  may well produce an abundant amounts of calories beyond any annual cropping attempts.

May I just ask a possibly dumb question. Why are you doing it with professional gardeners. Would that even truly be a challenge for them? What about a novice who wants to do it but has never had the land/ time/ resources, but has done all the research and just wants the opportunity to actually apply it in more optimal circumstances? That would be an amazing opportunity to truly try all the things they’ve learned and researched, plus that prize money could be used to bless their circumstances to be able to apply it in their real lives. I know so many people who would move down that scale you’ve got if they were simply given an opportunity to not live paycheck to paycheck.

Kathleen Nelson wrote:May I just ask a possibly dumb question. Why are you doing it with professional gardeners. Would that even truly be a challenge for them? What about a novice who wants to do it but has never had the land/ time/ resources, but has done all the research and just wants the opportunity to actually apply it in more optimal circumstances? That would be an amazing opportunity to truly try all the things they’ve learned and researched, plus that prize money could be used to bless their circumstances to be able to apply it in their real lives. I know so many people who would move down that scale you’ve got if they were simply given an opportunity to not live paycheck to paycheck.

As someone in this situation of having been in the mindset for years but never having the space to apply it, I think you are onto something. I would not leave my homestead in the future to work on a season long project elsewhere, especially if I had animals involved. But us new folk who have no ties to land and animals yet are the ones who would happily do this as long as it was a wage that would pay for the basics like housing and debts and that sort of thing.

I also agree with the idea earlier that was mentioned on this is too short term of a project to really help push permaculture ideas, it is more a multi-crop system built for 7 years of time. Not a food forest intended to last over a decade.

The current description and application form do not feel like enough information to me to feel comfortable stepping into this. I would suggest more concrete information and details about possible arrangements from the get-go.

Robin Wild wrote:

Kathleen Nelson wrote:May I just ask a possibly dumb question. Why are you doing it with professional gardeners. Would that even truly be a challenge for them? What about a novice who wants to do it but has never had the land/ time/ resources, but has done all the research and just wants the opportunity to actually apply it in more optimal circumstances? That would be an amazing opportunity to truly try all the things they’ve learned and researched, plus that prize money could be used to bless their circumstances to be able to apply it in their real lives. I know so many people who would move down that scale you’ve got if they were simply given an opportunity to not live paycheck to paycheck.

As someone in this situation of having been in the mindset for years but never having the space to apply it, I think you are onto something. I would not leave my homestead in the future to work on a season long project elsewhere, especially if I had animals involved. But us new folk who have no ties to land and animals yet are the ones who would happily do this as long as it was a wage that would pay for the basics like housing and debts and that sort of thing.

I also agree with the idea earlier that was mentioned on this is too short term of a project to really help push permaculture ideas, it is more a multi-crop system built for 7 years of time. Not a food forest intended to last over a decade.

The current description and application form do not feel like enough information to me to feel comfortable stepping into this. I would suggest more concrete information and details about possible arrangements from the get-go.

Yes exactly. We recently sold all our animals and are between properties. I have the time and flexibility right now. If I did this and they picked me would I just be signing up for a year or 7 in all my reading of this forum I haven’t found that answer. Also children and the Sepper program if I did it. But honestly it sounds like if you don’t have the experience or aren’t an influencer in permaculture then you won’t get picked anyway. Not being angsty just from reading the info and questions in the registration form that’s what it appears to be saying. Which is understandable and Paul wants to get data and information to be able to take permaculture more widespread but I just wonder if helping the novices not set in their ways but willing to learn and with an idea of what they’d like to try wouldn’t get him more of the enthusiasm he’s wanting for this project.