Kyrt Ryder wrote:
In the end though, it seems like we may have a contrasting view of how much Zone 5 is needed?
Your position appears to me [though I could be mistaken, please clarify if I have it wrong] that privately owned land should have large swaths of Zone 5, perhaps in the vicinity of 1/2.
Mine is that people should focus on making the very best use they can of the land they have so we stop pirating resources from other lands and a greater portion of land can be gradually returned to wilderness. If that means the average zone 5 is no more than 10-15% of the person's property so be it.
[That being said, I feel every zone- even zone one- should include a certain amount lush habitat for living creatures. Hedgerows, ponds, etc etc etc]
Tyler Ludens wrote:
Kyrt Ryder wrote:
So far as I'm aware Mollison's primary goal in Zone 5 was encouraging Permaculturalists to leave the bush alone, not to create productive human systems and then give them back to the bush. [Not saying there isn't a certain amount of place for the latter, but that seems more like a multi-generational project to me.]
From Chapter 1, page 6-7:
"As the basic of permaculture is beneficial design, it can be added to all other ethical training and skills, and has the potential for taking a place in all human endeavors. In the broad landscape, however, permaculture concentrates on already-settled areas and agricultural lands. Almost all of these need drastic rehabilitation and re-thinking. One certain result of using our skills to integrate food supply and settlement, to catch water from our roof areas, and to place nearby a zone of fuel forest which receives wastes and supplies energy, will be to free most of the area of the globe for the rehabilitation of natural systems. These need never be looked upon as 'of use to people', except in the very broad sense of global health."
"We abused the land and laid waste to systems we need never have disturbed had we attended to our home gardens and settlements. If we need to state a set of ethics on natural systems, then let it be thus:
- Implacable and uncompromising opposition to further disturbance of any remaining natural forests, where most species are still in balance;
- Vigorous rehabilitation of degraded and damaged natural systems to stable state;
- Establishment of plant systems for our own use on the least amount of land we can use for our existence; and
- Establishment of plant and animal refuges for rare or threatened species."
"We create our own life conditions, now and for the future. In permaculture, this mean that all of us have some part in identifying, supporting, recommending, investing in, or creating wilderness habitats and species refuges..."
"As will be clear in other chapters of this book, the end result of the adoption of permaculture strategies in any country or region will be to dramatically reduce the area of the agricultural environment needed by the households and the settlements of people and to release much of the landscape for the sole use of wildlife and for re-occupation by endemic flora. Respect for all life forms is a basic, and in fact essential, ethic for all people."
To me, the message seems clear - Zone 5 is made up of natural ecosystems and created refuges, and that it is our responsibility to reduce the amount of land for human use and to return most of the land to ecosystem functions.
John Weiland wrote:
Neil, when you say "left to nature" are you indicating no human presence and/or observation of that wild space?
Gilbert Fritz wrote:I guess I don't see why one couldn't have a zone3/4 AND a zone 5.
Gilbert Fritz wrote:I would support shrinking (not eliminating) zone 5 on small patches of private land, especially in suburbia, so we could expand zone 5 in big swaths elsewhere. That would be more conducive to large wild animals and natural processes.
John Weiland wrote: is there some quantitative description of how much wildland/wilderness per unit landmass is needed for safeguarding the biodiversity in question? Is this covered in Mollison's arguments? (I don't have his work and don't know if he stipulated a certain percent to be zone 5...
Nicole Alderman wrote:
Rene Nijstad wrote:I know there are a lot of people who cannot afford to take a PDC, and some who somehow feel it's a pyramid scheme, but why don't we all at least get the book?
Because I don't have an extra $124 to spare . So, thank you for suppling the quotes and knowledge for those of us who can't afford it but would love to learn form it!