William James wrote:
Last night I was considering just working with the landscape as is and using a succession of plants to meet my goals.
1) Where there are contour lines, planting a hedge of fast pioneers (black-locust is ever-present here) and other trees which could break up the clay along the contour and provide infiltration and water pacification. It would also act as a biomass accumulator line, which I could accentuate by piling whatever biomass I had there. I could then plant my target trees in and around those n-fixers which would then become chop and drop.
2) Where I imagined ponds (because of the naturally wet area) I could plant willow and clumping bamboo.
I would rather invest my money in plants than bureaucratic messes.
As for water, at least in the establishment phase I could invest in bringing municipal water to the property.
To make matters worse, any visible land modification project (any hole) needs a geologist (500-800 euros) + 6 months in the town hall as it waits for approval. That means no ponds, no raised beds, no swales -- unless you're willing to pay the price.
Jennifer Wadsworth wrote:
You know, I just finished Geoff Lawton's online PDC (great class, and my 2nd PDC) - he goes into some depth about how when you rip or dig swales, you immediately have to get in there with a diverse cover crop (mainly legumes) so that they will hopefully outcompete the pioneer species.
William James wrote:I have heard somewhere that Geoff overstates n-fixers for temperate climates. I did the calculations based on his indications for n-fixer ratios and the seed and transplant needed per even 100 square meters was enormous. If I had the money, I would love to try his stacking ratios to see what happens.
The problems of the world fade way as you eat a piece of pie. This tiny ad has never known problems:
permaculture bootcamp - learn permaculture through a little hard workhttps://permies.com/wiki/bootcamp