Alex Love

paul wheaton wrote:

Alex Love wrote:My wife and I would both like to attend part 1. But we would be bringing a dedicated babysitter adult and two children with us. Thus, we would NEED to be able to rent non-shared accommodations, such as Allerton Abbey, in order to safely contain them during the events. I would need to know something of that sort is available to me (and, of course, the cost) before I can book. Also, would there be an additional fee for non-participants being on the land? The only difference I would anticipate from a hosting perspective would be food, which seems to be included/not-included. We are used to bringing our own food everywhere we go, so that's not a problem (although that's mostly because most places you go only serve "food like substances").

Alex,

Sorry for the delay.  I had several conversations with Jocelyn about how to accommodate you.

First, we are making changes to allerton abbey right now and we hope to have those changes ready in time for the jamboree.   Mostly because a big part of part 3 of the jamboree will be in allerton abbey.  So Jocelyn and I had a few talks about whether this could be juggled or not and in the end we decided that the smart thing to do is to remove allerton abbey from the list of potentials on the jamboree page.  

There is a motel about 7 minutes away and a few other options that are closer (and many more that are further).  More info about those are provided once you register for the event.

Thanks for conversing about it, and for the response. I don't want to stick them in a hotel for three days, so I guess it won't work out this time.

My wife and I would both like to attend part 1. But we would be bringing a dedicated babysitter adult and two children with us. Thus, we would NEED to be able to rent non-shared accommodations, such as Allerton Abbey, in order to safely contain them during the events. I would need to know something of that sort is available to me (and, of course, the cost) before I can book. Also, would there be an additional fee for non-participants being on the land? The only difference I would anticipate from a hosting perspective would be food, which seems to be included/not-included. We are used to bringing our own food everywhere we go, so that's not a problem (although that's mostly because most places you go only serve "food like substances").

Forgive me if this has been addressed, but my concern with joining Paul's community is not the benevolent dictatorship aspect (with apologies to Churchill and credit to Plato, democracy is overrated), but in the lack of security. And I'm not even talking about how only Paul has any property rights. Assuming Paul is what Geoff Lawton would call an ethical angel, my question is: what happens in the event of Paul's death? Most people leave their property to their ungrateful children, who then promptly turn around and sell the property to the third party buyer with the most cash. I see it constantly as a probate attorney. The upshot in this case being that those who have given to and become dependent upon the land are up a creek without a paddle (to put it politely). I don't know whether Paul's child(ren) is/are ungrateful, but the vast majority of kids are. Plus, it might be nice to know that one could ensure that one's own ungrateful children could carry on on the land (assuming they weren't actually ungrateful and were equally committed to the project). I think that Paul will find that unless there is some provision made for these eventualities, and for giving people some sense of buy-in/ownership/security, the higher caliber recruits will sit it out (and I say that as someone who wakes up every day and ask himself how he can responsibly move toward a homesteading lifestyle).

kevin evans wrote:

Alex Love wrote:If all goes according to plan, we will shortly have cash on hand to buy land. We will be moving forward with on the ground hunting this summer (late August or early September). A few people have expressed interest in collaboration (even if you are not in a cash position, that doesn't mean collaboration is out of the question ... legal structure to be determined), please private message me if you remain interested as we would be open to meeting in person while we're "in the [western Washington and Oregon] neighborhood."

Hi there alex... i'm actually brand new to this forum & just happened upon your post somewhere else... depending on where you may want to end up, I could potentially have an option for you. My ex & I had partnered up a couple years back & found ourselves in your exact situation. We actually had liquidated almost all that we owned and had our van & trailer packed to head east to the georgia/virginia region after 2 solid years of coming up empty for pacific NW land we could afford/want. Long story short, I had flown to georgia to look at a place & she called & set get back NOW! We landed a 5 acre piece in Lewis county washington (I know, not "the" best natural building option so far as counties go) Anyway, this 5 acre, was actually a 20 acre spot before the old fella passed & they divided off 15 & 5. We purchased the 5 with a trailer & 100 year old MASSIVE barn.

So the other 15 acres sits. They had it for sale for a few years then took it off the market. The basic story is there is 1/2 of it that is pretty much an old growth forest that buts up to a year round creek.. it's a full on river in the winter. It's set on 2 tiers kind of, steep cliff to river basin. It's got a pond on it.

Anyway, if you'd like to chat & get more details let me know. You'd be looking at property butted up to a 35 year old newly singled guy building massive hugelkultur beds, building trails through the forests & eventually taking my cobbing skills & building myself a new seasonal home. The big game plan is to get my spot set up as a place where natural building teachers can come & host workshops. Part of the plan is a giant barn kitchen to do all cooking on site for intensive week long trainings.

15 acres could do the trick (although I've been looking into it, and having 20 or more acres does make it easier to qualify for the lower agricultural property taxes). I'd love to swing by and see the place/have a chat. You sound like exactly the kind of neighbor we want. By the way, I'm currently taking Geoff Lawton's online Permaculture Design Course.

If all goes according to plan, we will shortly have cash on hand to buy land. We will be moving forward with on the ground hunting this summer (late August or early September). A few people have expressed interest in collaboration (even if you are not in a cash position, that doesn't mean collaboration is out of the question ... legal structure to be determined), please private message me if you remain interested as we would be open to meeting in person while we're "in the [western Washington and Oregon] neighborhood."

Dennis Lanigan wrote:Alex, if you're referring to rain water collection in WA, which the State used to say it egregiously controlled, this is no longer the case. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wr/hq/rwh.html

This is a recent change/clarification which allows for ROOFTOP water harvesting only. That such an announcement was even necessary illustrates the problem. Somebody else owns the water that falls on your land, and you do not even have a right to the reasonable, non-dimminishing use thereof. You have to apply for a permit, which is based upon a first in time, first in right system (which leads to any number of perversions, some of which I outline above ... riparian rights in the east of the country are a much more balanced approach). Sure you can have a well, and don't need a permit to irrigate up to half an acre (presumptively, above what you can accomplish with roof water?), but then you are dependent upon the continued availability of that technology, upon nobody else overdrawing the aquifer (a problem which is going to be reaching critical mass in the plains states), and are at the mercy of any pollution of the aquifer (which is such a common unpriced externality in our capitalist system). And, by the way, not giving the land the benefit of slowing down the runoff to prevent erosion and allow for full utilization of the irrigation water. So, yeah, I'm sorry to say that it's still a problem.

Just an update: We're just back from the Big Island of Hawaii. We were looking at land and doing some fact finding. I think we've come to the conclusion that there are some definite advantages to Hawaii, but that, on balance, it's not for us. So far as Vermont/rural New England is concerned, while we love the culture, we feel that the long, harsh winters would become the defining reality of life. So, even though I am frustrated by the high land prices and restrictive land use regulation, and hate, hate, hate the water use laws in Washington/Oregon, that's really where our heart has always been. I guess we just needed to take another long look around to really be sure of that.

robert anteau wrote:Hello Alex,

I am toying with an idea just like your own. I was in fact in WA looking at land last summer. I am trying for a summer 2014 move. I had envisioned a 5 acre at a minimum. I have to say I am more interested in property that could be sub-divided as I believe that leads to the least amount of conflict. My reply may be slow sometimes as I am currently living in Amsterdam and work keeps me busy.

REgards,
Robert

As was I (looking at land in WA and OR last summer). We're about to list our home (we're pocketing the equity and downsizing our monthly expenses), and expect to be ready to buy around the same time (summer 2014), but not necessarily move right away. I've been thinking it makes sense to find land first and then see who fits in with it (there are too many variables the other way around), kind of the way Rob Roy of Cordwood fame did it (he got land under contract and then advertised sub-divisible shares in Mother Earth News). So, if anyone has an angle on a specific piece of property in a rainy portion of WA, OR, New England or Hawaii, please let me know.

I've been giving a lot of thought to the idea of community. It seems to me, and I'll admit that Paul Wheaton has influenced my thinking on this a fair amount, that community is something that can't be built purposefully. Rather it's something that develops organically from shared purpose and experience. In this society/economic paradigm, everyone and everything is replaceable. Although we're entirely dependent upon a complex global system, we feel less dependent than ever. Community is something that our individualistic, compartmentalized society is hungry for (consciously or unconsciously), but we have forgotten how to do. As Paul says, everyone talks about it, but it never happens because everyone wants to be in total control of the process.

@Lori - We (at least two of the couples) are open to anywhere with adequate rainfall. The Big Island of Hawaii would be wonderful for all season growing, so long as you're out of the more dangerous volcanic zones. It just seems like you're paying an awful lot for the land. Anything on any island seems to have a premium attached.

@Eve - My understanding of the Pockets of Freedom map is that it is asserting it's possible to get building permits for alternative buildings in that county (or at least earthships), not that the county does not enforce the building codes. I would love to be able to ignore the building code, but I'm not comfortable with living life looking over my shoulder like that. We're now leaning toward avoiding the sub-division and setting up the land trust or a non-profit corp. Agree with you that finding a pre-existing permitted residence seems the way to go ... although it raises the buy-in price, and we are determined to do this debt free.

@Kyle - A mind-meld with a stranger is rare, but stimulating when it does occur. I do listen to Jack fairly regularly. Although I don't agree with him 100%, of course, he's intelligent, thoughtful and has a good heart.

@Steven - We are moving deliberately in that direction. We plan on selling our house and dramatically downsizing in the first half of this year, and we want to get more hands on experience relating to successful permaculture operations and natural building. That's actually why I've been slow in replying on this thread. I'm trying to spend less time talking and more doing.

The water issue in all of the west half of the country is troublesome. I've looked into it a bit for both Washington and Oregon, and my understanding is that without permits (which are issued on a first in time basis), you are allowed to rainwater harvest for household, but not agricultural, use off of non-pourous surfaces only. If you own the land, but not the water, you don't own much do you? The prior appropriation doctrine creates all sorts of perversions, such as farmers in California selling their water rights to cities because they can make more on the water than by using it for farming, or a friend of mine in Yakima, WA who has unlimited unmetered water on a subdivision lot, but the people the water flows by on the way to Yakima can't touch it. In the east you have riparian rights to reasonably use water on your property. For that reason, we've been looking at New England as a backup/alternative local (which we originally discounted due to the harsh winters). So, I'm curious why @Bengi is considering FL and doesn't want to stay in New England, particularly in light of global climate change. I'd rather be somewhere cold or coldish, with some wiggle room, and the northeast is not projected to lose rainfall due to climate change (unlike almost everywhere else, including the PNW).