Elisha Gray

This plant volunteered to grow alongside my raised bed of lettuce and cooking greens. I was wondering if its lamb's quarters, its now over 4 feet tall....

I have lots of jewel weed volunteers in and around my compost pile. Other then that it seems to like partial shade and very moist fertile soil near forest edges (my untouched soil here is neutral to slightly alkaline clay).

Foraging for jewelweed, you look for it in low lying areas near streams, ponds, in swamps. The foraging books I have also note that it prefers nearly the same habitat as poison ivy but jewelweed doesn't like sandy soil and doesn't grow near the seashore (probably for the same reason).

Before you try and grow it, I recommend trying to identify it growing wild in your area (just to make sure you can easily identify it). I was once excited to read of the mythical properties of the plant and then after finding it in the woods realized that its one of those "weeds" I've been fighting back at the edge of the property.

I agree, the first looks like Jewelweed and the 2nd Mugwort. I'm not too far from Connecticut and I have these all over my property. The best way to check if its jewel weed is to see how water beads up and rolls off the leaves.

Jewelweed is one of those volunteers that I let run wild, personally I use it for minor skin irritations (it works about as well as any off the shelf ointment). I find that it loves to volunteer near my compost pile, and I'm not going to fight with any invasive plant that neutralizes Poison Ivy oils if applied before the rash sets.

Steve Brill is a forager in the north east and has a great write up on how to identify/use Jewelweed is: http://www.wildmanstevebrill.com/Plants.Folder/Jewelweed.html. He also links to a so-so Mugwort video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4itYSPTnL88

Ben Stallings wrote:Can you point me to an existing study, or should I test it myself?

No... Only personal observation of smart phone devices transmitting data.... They will become too hot to hold but are completely cool to the touch. Without a control case in each observation of this effect is worthless because it could just be poor design or malfunctioning radio equipment of one device. Feel free to take it with a grain of "some crazy dude said so on the internet"


The control channel has better penetration then the other signals (its required to coordinate hand offs between towers).... Sure attenuation of a signal doesn't guarantee "less" overall exposure, but its a good start if your only concerned with putting some distance between the transmitter and where your children sleep....

On the faraday cage line of discussion... Wire lathe and plaster construction methods do wonders to disrupt signal transmission. Its why people with "old houses" can't get a signal inside.... Making sure that the wire lathe is grounded during construction would enhance this effect.

So in terms of health dangers... a half mile is more then a safe distance. Radio waves ARE dangerous but it all comes down to exposure. High energy, low duration will begin to cook your innards and be extremely damaging. This is how a microwave operates... the radio waves used in WiFI and Cellular communications are in fact microwaves. Technicians working on live cell phone towers have very specific guidelines on how long they can remain present at a tower. You notice this effect when the cell phone in your hand appears to feel hot (the device isn't hot its just slowly cooking you). At a half mile your not going to be worried about this effect....

Low energy, long duration is questionable. There is no hard evidence that this is damaging, and (as others have pointed out) at this point exposure is damn near unavoidable. Anything with electricity is emitting it in small does, and all of the fun wireless electronics provide much more intense doses. There is a lot of speculation that could this could cause things like autism and slews of other unexplained "modern" illnesses.... The sad truth is that even if this speculation is found to be true... would society turn its back on these technologies? How many people need to get sick before being able to call 911 from the middle of nowhere has a net positive effect on society....

Whatever your concern... you can avoid the amount of time you spend near the thing and try an put obstacles between yourself and the source. In the summer time people get worse cell signal because those pesky green tree things have leaves that block and absorb the signal... Wire-lathe and plaster walls provide a Faraday cage effect...

If low energy, long duration turns out the be harmful... rural folk won't be as hard hit as city folk... In NYC there is a cell tower pointed strait down for something like every square yard of the city.... It could be worse... you could be within a half mile of 60 towers! (Although rural towers have higher energy output to cover more area).

In your permaculture planning you can treat this energy source like wind or any other on your property that needs mitigation. Meanwhile try to take advantage of the benefits these gadgets bring... Your going to be dealing with the ill effects either way.

So its my 4th year with my raised beds and I've decided to establish a new garden area (12' x 25') for the homestead annual vegetables. After much consideration and research, I've decided that I'm more confused whether to go dig or no dig now then I was when decided to establish the area early last fall.

So I pose this question to other homesteaders: How would you establish 12x25 undisturbed top-soil (last winter I piled the leaves in this area so some of the grass is already dead). Would you go dig? No dig + Sheet Mulch? What are you doing now? How is it working? How do you feel about it?

Right now I'm leaning towards a very traditional victory garden. My goal is to produce a very productive patch of healthy vegetables. Due to personal time constraints I need to minimize how labor intensive upkeep is, and importing organic matter to the property has been a challenge.

I've recently been reading Steve Solomon's books and am inclined to follow his methods because my experience in the garden thus far supports a lot of what he has to say.

However because I'm implementing permaculture practices elsewhere on my property; I'm a bit torn when considering going completely traditional; Being in my 4th garden year I've already learned the hard way that while idealism and enthusiasm are cheap, hard work and carefully applied technique are often more productive.

One thought I had was to dig down maybe 10'' with my spade, backfill the hole with branches/rotten logs from around the property and then push the soil back on top to create a slightly raised bed. In this area I have 3-5'' topsoil and then a moderate clay. I wouldn't use mulch and do weed control with the hoe.

Another thought I had was to do a bake off of different techniques, sheet mulch one area, double dig another, ect.... Then I'd let field trials make my decision. (I've already learned the hard way that bio-intensive raised beds are not a sustainable practice for the part time homesteader. ) Again my end goal is to find the no gimmick; truly manageable, sustainable, and efficient way to produce a large portion of the household vegetables.

I can't speak for earthquakes because I've never needed to deal with one. But overall the craftsmanship/quality of work put into the house make a huge difference. Modern buildings fare a lot better because code in those areas require things like hurricane ties, which in essence are meant to hold the roof down if wind gets underneath it during a storm (structurally speaking most roofs are held down by their own weight, nails and such just keep them from moving around relative to the structure).

A dome seems like it has less edges that would allow storm winds to get underneath it, but I still think quality of work is still going to be one of the most important factors if you expect a building to stand against the elements in time. Usually the homeowner is deeply involved with the construction of alternative buildings, which naturally impacts the quality of work.

Insurance requirements (like mandatory flood insurance), really become a strong incentive to rebuild a home even in the worst locations. Areas near me flood annually, after one big storm an owner was out shopping for new bedroom furniture because "her house flooded again, this is the 4th year in a row!".... 5ft of water in the first floor of the house, 4 years in a row is a damn good sign that your house is in a poor location. But to her credit, its almost impossible to sell a house with water damage that bad so her only option may have been to keep rebuilding until they could sell the house.

Houses don't need to last forever to be sustainable, recognizing the impermanence of the structure might lead to a more sustainable design... Very little economic damage is done if a tent gets blown over in the night. Consider the following:

Rene Bagwell wrote:I don't believe a can of bear spray could stop a griz.

At first glance I would have assumed that too... I did a lot of research before deciding to carry the spray... The two facts that sold me was the rubber meets the road statistics on people trying to take down a bear in a high stress situation and failing to do anything but provoke the attack half of the time. The other thing that sold me on was reading (in a PDF I couldn't find quickly on Google) that forest rangers are now required to carry the spray in grizzly country in addition to their firearm because of its proven stopping power.

So far not overacting and moving slow has been enough to escape any encounters I've had (including encounters with Mothers + Cubs)... I'll be sure to update this thread on the effectiveness if I ever need to use the spray. I carry it for piece of mind, it helps me stay relaxed and make smarter choices.

Further Reading:
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/bear%20spray.pdf

"The question is not one of marksmanship or clear thinking in the face of a growling bear, for even a skilled
marksman with steady nerves may have a slim chance of deterring a bear attack with a gun. Law
enforcement agents for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have experience that supports this reality --
based on their investigations of human-bear encounters since 1992, persons encountering grizzlies and
defending themselves with firearms suffer injury about 50% of the time. During the same period, persons
defending themselves with pepper spray escaped injury most of the time, and those that were injured
experienced shorter duration attacks and less severe injuries"

Its only natural to fear/respect Bear's but that fear is not always very rational. The still make me nervous but Bears are welcome around here and have done an amazing job spreading seeded grapes/choke cherries all over this mountain...

(These were taken last summer from my backyard)

I'm relatively new to bear country (4 years), and I live close to an area where the DEP chooses to relocate nussince black bears from urban areas all over the state. I've had plenty of close encounters around the house and on deep forest hikes... Bears in the woods (while more intimidating at first glance) prefer to stay away from people, where city Bears tend to have no fear of people.

Being in a state with strong anti-gun laws I've taken to keeping an airhorn/bear pepper spray foggers around the house and that I take with me out on hikes...

In the woods I've needed to draw the pepper spray a few times but never needed to use it on a bear... When I've stumbled into a mother bear with several cubs on a hike, there is usually a few second stand off where neither the bear or you move... I find that having at least some kind of weapon on me helps me make the right decisions that help avoid a conflict.

The first time I saw a bear I turned my back only to have it start to charge at me... when I stood my ground it backed off.... From this experience I learned that posture and attitude is VERY important, and that young city males tend to be foolishly aggressive.

I don't partake but I support the bear hunt, although I think the hunters should ONLY be allowed to take a bear INSIDE city limits... I doubt they would ever allow that due to safety concerns, but I think that the bears would adapt to that kind of hunt by avoiding population centers.

After several years without a hunt the bear population had exploded around here... I was having close encounters weekly... Now that the hunt has resumed I don't have "encounters", I just occasionally see a bear leaving the area after noticing me.

I've really come to enjoy sharing the mountain with the bears, and I think not feeling vulnerable to a bear attack is a large contributor to that enjoyment. The forestry folks at a nearby state park do have done a lot to planting berry bush's and nut trees to provide the bears with more natural foraging opportunities, and that's a very permaculture approach to coexistence as well.

--Multi-Mode