posted 12 years ago
In a post on another forum, a person said, " ...not considered a permaculturalist because she grows annual vegetables and she tills." This made me stop and think. Just what do people consider to be permaculture? No annuals, really? But if that is what nature intended the plant to be, it is not acceptable to permaculture? Thus, does a purist permaculture follower need to go against nature? Ummmm. No tilling? But nature tills via insects, worms, birds, and mammals. If we bar chickens, pigs, aardvarks, warthogs, elephants, etc from our gardens so that we can harvest the crop for our food, would we then not be allowed to till in substitute for the tilling animals we barred? Must permaculture mean no-till, really zero till? My thoughts are just how purist can we get and still have enough food and resources to support our family?
I live in the tropics where veggies deemed annuals grow for years. I have 5 year old tomato plants, 8 year kale and chard, 10 year parsley and still going. Would these be acceptable permaculture plants to a purist in the tropics but not if one lived in say, Montana? if a purist shuns annuals, does he also shun buying seeds? Or is seed saving the only acceptable way to go?
How different is sustainable agriculture from permaculture? I find the terms confusing because I don't have a clear definition.
While I consider how I farm my homestead to be mostly sustainable, fairly self-reliant, low impact, and organic, I now wonder if it fits the description of permaculture.
...Su Ba
www.kaufarmer.blogspot.com
It's never too late to start! I retired to homestead on the slopes of Mauna Loa, an active volcano. I relate snippets of my endeavor on my blog : www.kaufarmer.blogspot.com