........Its cool for lifestylers , but is it sufficient to do much to feed the masses?........
........Let's get out of the unmanageable, unharvestable food forest and into pastoral silviculture, or multi-story alley cropping, or some of those other "feed the burgeoning hordes" approaches.......
While a herb spiral might looks cute, it ain't gonna change nobody's world.
Permaculture has become a lot of BITS ..... the hugelkultur bit, the rocket stove bit, the banana circle bit. Too many to enumerate, BITS. Its cool for lifestylers , but is it sufficient to do much to feed the masses?
Let's get out of the unmanageable, unharvestable food forest and into pastoral silviculture, or multi-story alley cropping, or some of those other "feed the burgeoning hordes" approaches.
Yes Permaculture is many things to many people. The edge I am sharpening here, is that we are in danger of trivialising a very broad set of principles as we reduce Permaculture to a series of cutes.
Charles Tarnard wrote:...there is no proof that it works. I live in suburbia, on a small lot, and have grown nothing but grass in my first 13 years here. I now have become very interested in growing my diet in my yard, and am trying to use the things I learn here to my best advantage.
Charles Tarnard wrote:On my scale, there is nothing but the 'cutes,'
Charles Tarnard wrote:I can hardly push the idea that permaculture is a collection of successful theories.
John Pollard wrote:I thought the idea was to get more and more people headed away from the the large unsustainable entities thereby shrinking them until they're no longer............? You can't change things from the top down.
Shane McKee wrote:Oh bugger - does this mean we've hit Peak Permaculture?!
Garry Hoddinott wrote:....Head turners among the food producers are Doherty, Saladin, Shepherd and Savory. None eschew permaculture but all have moved away from it to some extent. I could be cynical and say that by creating their own BRANDS they are shoring up their own enterprise, or perhaps they genuinely feel permaculture does not have the legs for the food production niche they are pursuing.
If we are doing the self sufficiency thing on small acreage or even city lots, we are pretty much un-locking un-used land and turning it into food production. Your quote suggests that if I have some small acreage, I should either leave it fallow or turn it over to big ag for them to farm. If everybody had a permaculture garden in there back yard and was self sufficient, we wouldn't need the big farmers and we'd have a much more resilient and diverse culture in general.
Garry Hoddinott wrote:What is the third principle of permaculture - sharing surplus?? Right? ... or some such.
Well people unless we have surplus we are sharing diddly squat. If we are doing a self sufficiency thing on small acreages we are pretty much locking up otherwise "productive" farmland.
Permaculture can be adapted to anything even financing to some extent. I was just trying to state that it's basis is a food forest and it was created as a system for the average person to use. It doesn't matter if "all the needs of humanity" are met in back yards or on big farms.
kirk dillon wrote:I would love to see the average citizen as well as Big Ag both adopt permaculture. If there is a way to make money in permaculture I'm sure somebody will eventually figure it out. I am looking at trying that on a blank piece of land