Stuart Pedasso

+ Follow
since Jun 15, 2015
Apples and Likes
Total received
In last 30 days
Total given
Total received
Received in last 30 days
Total given
Given in last 30 days
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand First Scavenger Hunt

Recent posts by Stuart Pedasso

Dry sump.
And pucker factor.

Goop usually starts leaking from the PCV valve or any other valve cover grommet, if left inverted too long.

Anything loose in the vehicle, plus whatever you have in your pockets also tries to leap onto the roof.

I prefer when they just flop, as opposed to turtle.
Much less cushion to remove.
6 years ago
Despite the commercial popularity, electric vehicular systems are the antithesis of green.
Start with the batteries and work your way back through the system, it is not very low impact not to mention a lot of engineering.
One could say a much more environmentally friendly option would be buy anything not new and just tune it up.

Diesel is an option but it still means having a second fuel supply to consider and again it is not very friendly for green things.
Biodiesel is a great option though especially if you can grow and process your own oil crop.

The only folks who have to worry about burning gasoline are the ones who don't convert existing carbureted, naturally aspirated gas engines to CNG or propane via bolt-on aftermarket kit.
A mostly metal assembly with a few rubber hoses that can be installed in an afternoon in a driveway.
It is kind of hard to spill some propane on the ground.
Besides, on CNG the vehicle will run at any angle, even upside down, a factor I have found to be handy a few times.

I'm waiting for Paul to post up pics of a skidded farmtruck.
6 years ago
It would appear this is a dead end of sorts.

A quick web search of public data shows very similar communications from at least a year ago, from an individual named Naaman Hagman, on another permaculture site.
This name does or did appear on a title of property ownership in Shasta County.
I believe there is also a Myspace page floating about.

The property that is or was owned in the name of Naaman Hagman appears to have been put up for sale earlier this year.
The pictures provided by the broker of the property have all of the earmarkings of having been used for a different sort of horticultural pursuit.
In the course of my Shasta County land-scoutings, I have seen a lot of them (pun intended).

The dates of the post here and elsewhere, and the dates of the property listing and delisting, suggests that the property seems to have either already resold immediately or has been taken off the market due to encumbrances.
The broker lists the property as "sold".

There is always the possibility of a chronological mishap in data; so if Naaman Hagman does still own this parcel, and it did not get forfeited as a result of a C.A.M.P. raid and resold at a government auction, a response would be just super...
6 years ago
The only thing ugly about any debate is believing that one idea is the only true idea, there are too many facets to anything to permit such myopia.
Closed minds do not open doors.

I'm sure those pesky Oaks can just find another area to become endemic to, we've got enough varieties already. Phrasing.
Didn't a couple Canadians write a spiffy little ditty about just such a dilemma, sans infestation?

I still haven't met anyone who can successfully argue that the GSOB has done anything except decimate large swaths of already compromised ecosystem.
I regret that you have interpreted that as some sort of challenge; again, context.
There is no silk pajama to be won.

Studies do exist however that indicate how this Arizona native (as in: from Arizona) travelled as far and as fast as it did.
The one (study; not native) released by the USFS and CDFA two years ago comes to mind.
My fellow stupid non-native natives keep carrying the aforementioned non-native's in on their firewood.
Reports suggest over 800 non-native insect species were intercepted in this manner.
By the way, reports indicate that is up to four species of Oak, not three.

Permaculturalists also appear a seemingly interesting breed though.
You can anticipate what a chicken or goat might try to eat if it runs out of food, but not a beetle.
It could simply be a case of mind over matter: if you don't mind, it really doesn't matter.
Until it becomes your problem.

But enough about instinctual survival and inevitable adaptability in the absence of natural predators.
More instead about the native species topic, since that was after all at the heart of my cheerful diatribe.

There are so many examples of native vs. non-native and invasive vs. non-invasive interaction at any given time that I honestly must admit it seems like hubris at minimum to ignore their existence.
By the way, native does not mean a plant type restrictively. Thought maybe I should throw that out by now.

I can think of another truly invasive but possibly native occurrence that is affecting the entire world currently, that our particular invasive species was very slow at paying attention to.
Maybe that has something to do with the hyper-reactivity being displayed in these last ill-informed and ill-prepared generations.
We do tend to be a knee-jerk reaction sort of species. It is a bit of a kick really.
Mind over matter.

I think the fair and basic idea of the term native could at one time back in the good ol' days have been construed as 'before you got there'.
Apparently the good ol' days was sometime circa 1986.
It seemed presumable that if you did not carry it in, it was already there (this seemed especially trustworthy in the more rugged and unspoiled areas, not so much downtown, where that diaper on the curb should NOT be but definitely is native).
That was what we were trying to do in places like Santa Cruz, and Monterey, where an arguably non-native and invasive species...mankind...had done a lot of damage in a short time and threatened the wellbeing of an ecosystem that was already there and harming no one.
We weren't trying to make a statement or fight a cause. We were just trying to make it like it was before our species got there and effed it up.

The habitat was healthy and diverse before the dozers and graders showed up.
That was the native flora that was found on site when they arrived.
After they finished their invasive service building their non-native bridge or asphalt onramp, they left it mostly bare subsoil churned up through the remaining topsoil and some weeds beginning to show if we were lucky; but usually a lot of clay with six to twelve inch deep ruts, brackish water, and erosion.
That is how we found it, that is how it was before we got there.

Repairing the habitat meant using native plants, native rocks, native earth, native water, whatever you can use onsite to erase the hate we commit, because hate really is the only way you can define such behavior.
But we really weren't on a quest to be holistic or symbiotic.
Restoration projects funded by the state require use of native and available resources, but probably because they are cheap or free not because of some idealogical position.
Where else were we supposed to get the materials to do the job?
What is more native than what is already native?

Of course there were natives prior to the last natives.
I'm sure the neo-natives would have considered them...native.
Rather than focus on who was where first, perhaps consider instead what impact they had on their system.

So what was it like before you got there?
Kudzu and antifreeze? Guess that is your native species.
Hope your local native wildlife knows better than to drink that sweet tasting stuff.
And hopefully your favorite native trees can hold up under the weight of The Beanstalk, Jack.
Does that mean kudzu and antifreeze are evil or useless? Of course not.
In most cases they did not put themselves there.

What about when we take what may have been considered a native species and selectively breed it until it no longer resembles what it was.
Is it still considered a native, and safe to reintroduce?
If it is essentially a native species (or at least half of one) would that make the discussion of reintroduction a moot point?
This is more of a Sandpeople vs. Jawa's sort of consideration however, and I admit it clearly only applies to special circumstances.

I think people may use native in place of the term low impact, because for one thing a lot of people are simple and think in simple terms.
Somehow that idea seems to have become invasive (I know, ironic isn't it) and just like pork and eggs and coffee and red wine and butter, we can't practice moderation, it has to be all or nothing.
Essentially you might say we can't be trusted with ourselves.

We are generally a herd mammal, and tend to reflect herd mentality.
If you heard enough people say native, then you would probably start saying it too.
If you need proof of this social phenomena, spend a year as an outsider in any small town.

If you really want to give a pro-native species arguer a run for their money, ask them how they feel about rodents and roaches in their home.
A lot of self proclaimed really progressive and alternative people fail this one so don't feel bad if I made you flinch.

One could additionally argue, should they find themselves sufficiently motivated, that it was a non-native species called a Federal Government that allowed an invasive species called a Society to compromise an entire environment for a smooth place to pasture a non-native AND invasive species known as an automobile.
But that would most certainly be some acrobatic phrasing.
6 years ago
We can safely heat this material in open smelters for copper ore extraction.

We can safely harvest 1,000 Sequoia Redwoods every year, and there would still be Redwood trees here the next year.

We can safely trample this creekbed because the county considers these plants weeds.

The damming of the Klamath River was done for the good of American society.

William A. Clark, John Cleveland Osgood, and James Buchanan Duke were merely pioneers ahead of their time in colonizing the Americas.

That timberland is the sole private property of William Randolph Hearst.

The Modoc Tribe was relocated for their own good.

You are 100% correct.
It really is about how things are phrased.
6 years ago
Maybe there is a bit too much hyperbole involved with the terminology these days and where it is being applied; humans do love to classify everything around them right out of existence.

Back in the day with the three-C's, when we went out to repair an area damaged by the highest life form (often this meant replanting a compacted creek bank or estuary facing siltation due to heavy equipment during a bridge or highway construction project), we usually did so with those plants that were from the area we were attempting to rehabilitate.
For that reason it would be fair and necessary to say that we only planted native species.
The idea was to 'leave no trace'.

I haven't met anyone yet who can successfully argue that the GSOB has done anything except decimate large swaths of already compromised ecosystem.
In certain parts of California that have been or expect to be overrun by the now-infamous Goldspotted Oak Borer, I have heard that donations of any Oak variety are welcome, even though Valley Oaks and Black Oaks seem to be considered hardest hit.
All of the above mentioned varieties of Oak are highly valuable habitat, now threatened by a singular invasive non-native species...
Incidentally Coast Live, Black, and Valley Oaks are considered endemic to California.

Again, context.
Some people will warp anything to achieve a goal, no matter how apparently skewed.
Ask any organized religion.
6 years ago
Remember: when dealing with the Devil, you never really get what you expect.
With even a simple glance one can determine there is a bit more to it than a drought.

Considering that it would have only taken (in theory) a single engineer, and possibly an attorney in the last sixty years creating and submitting an affordable state-approved option to the wet septic tank and field, something tells me another round of 'few years of dry' won't really make a difference.
This is not the first dry spell in the West, it is just the first one that had to carry the burden of the population that is now on the land.
Trust me the elected are still very busy deciding who owns what.

It seems tens of thousands of acres across the state remain upside down just due to the cost of setting up this needed infrastructure prior to building anything.
Were it not for this primary factor, I could show you hundreds of listings right now for parcels five acres or greater, all for under $1000.00/acre.

In many rural subdivisions that are effected by HOA's or POA's, you need the majority of landowners in order to dissolve the HOA/POA; and you will find that (for a myriad of equally selfish and justified reasons) it rains gold coins more frequently than this occurs.

Counties do not usually do what you hope or expect; they do what the dollars tell them to do.
The County solution is usually to raise your taxes to gather funds to pave and run the pipes. The 1915 Bond Act comes to mind.
Counties can and do use the courts to assign back fines for violations that have been ongoing code violations.
These sort of properties remain on tax sale rolls for years due to the attached fines, until someone buys and assumes the debt.
If the next owner defaults, the property goes back to tax sale.

The frequent reply I hear to this topic is 'just do it'.
The usual stock answer of 'just do it your way and get away with it for as long as possible' not only promises to serve freshly baked Disaster Surprise to your American dream, it also really spits in the face of the neighbor who had to go through all of the channels and expense of dealing with the system before being able to do the same.
I won't be surprised if such a neighbor feels resentful of my shortcuts and reports me for real and/or perceived code violations at every opportunity.
Acting indifferently to a community is not the way to become symbiotic with one; at that juncture, am I any better than the person who sneaks on to public lands to poach, grow cash crops, or excavate for minerals?
This just does not seem to me like the right way to make an impression on people I hope to live a long time near.

So the centuries-old dilemma of the human condition remains: how do you convince the "Haves" that they want to give a charitable opportunity to the "Have-Nots"?
Changing the mindset of the greedy and divided masses over something like a toilet, when they can't even come together on matters far more critical, is a self-destructive exercise in diminishing gains.
So rather than jump in the fire to fight it whilst being incinerated in the same action, I am asking if anyone has discovered any other options?
Because I still have not.
6 years ago
Hello there,

I understand your concern.

The idea of having to pay more money to tear down the home I just paid to build, all over a toilet -or having an abatement notice from the County legally demanding the same at the threat of losing my property- is heartbreaking enough just in thought.
We would probably lose everything and most likely become homeless.
If that is the objective of their system...persuasive message received and mission accomplished.

I hope no one minds me kicking up an older topic, but I would appreciate hearing about composting options that have been used successfully in the Northwestern Region.
In every California County that I know of, for rural land you must install a standard septic tank system and leech field (at a cost of approximately $15,000.00) in addition to drill a well (approximately another $5,000.00), before any sort of building permit will be considered.

If this is not the absolute case, someone please speak up!
To my knowledge this singular issue was (prior to the Water Rights Fights) killing homesteading and micro farming efforts more than anything.
They either have been stepping up the code enforcement, or are just doing a lot of posturing; however my impression was the former more so than the latter.
6 years ago