Maybe we should consider yields rather in terms of minerals, vitamins
and general nutritional value per suare meter, instead of volume and
weight. It appears that organic vegetables have up to 100% more
mineral content (preliminary studies cited in Paul Pitchford's
"Healing with whole foods"). So in terms of mineral/vitamin/etc.
yield, what at first sight (volume and weight) appears to be a lesser
yield, may in fact be a far superior one.

Volume and weight are really irrelevant; the ability of produce to
sustain healthy life is the real issue. Looking at it that way,
natural or veganic farming has a far superior yield compared to
chemical farming.
Also comparing input of energy and "products" (chemical or not) with
output, natural and organic farming have a much higher relative yield,
they are much more efficient.

I myself experienced very clearly that I needed to eat much less
volume and weight once I began to eat only organic food. It has a much
higher nutritional "density", so to speak.

So forget about producing only 80% compared with chemical neighbours,
if you compare input-output-efficiency and nutritional "density", the
neighbour looses spectacularly... It's even worse than that: some (or
all) of chemically produced foods are even non-foods in reality,
industrially grown cabbages for instance have been reported to cause
infant death (intoxication by nitrates). Who cares for the chemical
neighbours' nitrate bomb disguised as cabbage anyway?

Bart

Couldn't agree more about the nutritional density factor. However I do
believe the 80% figure allows the industrial farming sector to frame the
debate, and it's highly misleading. Studies have shown diversified small
farms to be far more productive overall than industrial farms when total
output is taken into account instead of a single cash crop mechanically
farmed with chemicals.


paul tradingpost@...

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
--Henry David Thoreau
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 2/2/2007 at 9:18 AM Bart wrote:

>Maybe we should consider yields rather in terms of minerals, vitamins
>and general nutritional value per suare meter, instead of volume and
>weight. It appears that organic vegetables have up to 100% more
>mineral content (preliminary studies cited in Paul Pitchford's
>"Healing with whole foods"). So in terms of mineral/vitamin/etc.
>yield, what at first sight (volume and weight) appears to be a lesser
>yield, may in fact be a far superior one.
>
>Volume and weight are really irrelevant; the ability of produce to
>sustain healthy life is the real issue. Looking at it that way,
>natural or veganic farming has a far superior yield compared to
>chemical farming.
>Also comparing input of energy and "products" (chemical or not) with
>output, natural and organic farming have a much higher relative yield,
>they are much more efficient.
>
>I myself experienced very clearly that I needed to eat much less
>volume and weight once I began to eat only organic food. It has a much
>higher nutritional "density", so to speak.
>
>So forget about producing only 80% compared with chemical neighbours,
>if you compare input-output-efficiency and nutritional "density", the
>neighbour looses spectacularly... It's even worse than that: some (or
>all) of chemically produced foods are even non-foods in reality,
>industrially grown cabbages for instance have been reported to cause
>infant death (intoxication by nitrates). Who cares for the chemical
>neighbours' nitrate bomb disguised as cabbage anyway?
>
>Bart

Have to throw in these references about farm size and efficiency.

paul tradingpost@...
-----------------

While the “bigger is better” myth is generally accepted, it is a
fallacy. Numerous reports have found that smaller farms are actually more
efficient than larger “industrial” farms. These studies demonstrate
that when farms get larger, the costs of production per unit often
increase, because larger acreage requires more expensive machinery and more
chemicals to protect crops.
from http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth3.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial agriculture is efficient.
THE TRUTH:
Small farms produce more agricultural output per unit area than large
farms. Moreover, larger, less diverse farms require far more mechanical and
chemical inputs. These ever increasing inputs are devastating to the
environment and make these farms far less efficient than smaller, more
sustainable farms.

Proponents of industrial agriculture claim that “bigger is better” when
it comes to food production. They argue that the larger the farm, the more
efficient it is. They admit that these huge corporate farms mean the loss
of family farms and rural communities, but they maintain that this is
simply the inevitable cost of efficient food production. And agribusiness
advocates don’t just promote big farms; they also push big technology.
They typically ridicule small-scale farm technology as grossly inefficient
while heralding intensive use of chemicals, massive machinery,
computerization and genetic engineering - whose affordability and
implementation are only feasible on large farms. The marriage of huge farms
with “mega-technology” is sold to the public as the basic requirement
for efficient food production. Argue against size and technology - the two
staples of modern agriculture - and, they insist, you're undermining
production efficiency and endangering the world's food supply.

While the “bigger is better” myth is generally accepted, it is a
fallacy. Numerous reports have found that smaller farms are actually more
efficient than larger “industrial” farms. These studies demonstrate
that when farms get larger, the costs of production per unit often
increase, because larger acreage requires more expensive machinery and more
chemicals to protect crops. In particular, a 1989 study by the U.S.
National Research Council assessed the efficiency of large industrial food
production systems compared with alternative methods. The conclusion was
exactly contrary to the “bigger is better” myth: “Well-managed
alternative farming systems nearly always use less synthetic chemical
pesticides, fertilizers, and antibiotics per unit of production than
conventional farms. Reduced use of these inputs lowers production costs and
lessens agriculture’s potential for adverse environmental and health
effects without decreasing - and in some cases increasing - per acre crop
yields and the productivity of livestock management systems.”

Output Versus Yield

Agribusiness and economists alike tend to use “yield” measurements when
calculating the productivity of farms. Yield can be defined as the
production per unit of a single crop. For example, a corn farm will be
judged by how many metric tons of corn are produced per acre. More often
than not, the highest yield of a single crop like corn can be best achieved
by planting it alone on an industrial scale in the fields of corporate
farms. These large “monocultures” have become endemic to modern
agriculture for the simple reason that they are the easiest to manage with
heavy machinery and intensive chemical use. It is the single-crop yields of
these farms that are used as the basis for the “bigger is better” myth,
and it is true that the highest yield of a single crop is often achieved
through industrial monocultures.

Smaller farms rarely can compete with this “monoculture” single-crop
yield. They tend to plant crop mixtures, a method known as
“intercropping.” Additionally, where single-crop monocultures have
empty “weed” spaces, small farms use these spaces for crop planting.
They are also more likely to rotate or combine crops and livestock, with
the resulting manure performing the important function of replenishing soil
fertility. These small-scale integrated farms produce far more per unit
area than large farms. Though the yield per unit area of one crop - corn,
for example - may be lower, the total output per unit area for small farms,
often composed of more than a dozen crops and numerous animal products, is
virtually always higher than that of larger farms.

Clearly, if we are to compare accurately the productivity of small and
large farms, we should use total agricultural output, balanced against
total farm inputs and “externalities,” rather than single-crop yield as
our measurement principle. Total output is defined as the sum of everything
a small farmer produces - various grains, fruits, vegetables, fodder, and
animal products - and is the real benchmark of efficiency in farming.
Moreover, productivity measurements should also take into account total
input costs, including large-machinery and chemical use, which often are
left out of the equation in the yield efficiency claims.

Once the flawed yield measurement system is discarded, the “bigger is
better” myth is shattered. As summarized by the food policy expert Peter
Rosset, “Surveying the data, we indeed find that small farms almost
always produce far more agricultural output per unit area than larger
farms. This is now widely recognized by agricultural economists across the
political spectrum, as the inverse relationship between farm size and
output.” He notes that even the World Bank now advocates redistributing
land to small farmers in the third world as a step toward increasing
overall agricultural productivity.

Government studies underscore this “inverse relationship.” According to
a 1992 U.S. Agricultural Census report, relatively smaller farm sizes are 2
to 10 times more productive per unit acre than larger ones. The smallest
farms surveyed in the study, those of 27 acres or less, are more than ten
times as productive (in dollar output per acre) than large farms (6,000
acres or more), and extremely small farms (4 acres or less) can be over a
hundred times as productive.
------------------

Small-scale farming is as old as agriculture itself. One study of 15
countries, primarily in Asia and Africa, found that per-acre output on
small farms can be as much as four to five times higher than on large ones.
Russia, over the years, has often produced 30% to 50% of its food on
household plots representing as little as 3% to 5% of all Russian farmland.
The productivity of small-scale farms is also being widely recognized by
agricultural economists who call it the “inverse relationship between
farm size and productivity.”
http://www.growbiointensive.org/grow_need.html
---------------------

"However, by managing more “intensively” the new farmers are able to
net far more profit from each dollar of sales.  They reduce their costs of
purchased inputs through diversification, increase the value of their
products through niche markets, focus on the things that they do best, and
work together to do the things that they can’t do as well alone.  As a
result, their net return per dollar of sales may be 40 to 50 percent rather
than the 15 to 20 percent for a conventional farm.  Thus, the net returns
on a farm with $100,000 in annual sales may be $40,000 to $50,000 and even
a farm with $50,000 in annual sales may net $20,000 to $25,000 to support
the small farm family.  The bottom line is that 10 acres, intensively
managed to produce high valued products, may generate more profits than
1,000 acres used to produce bulk agricultural commodities - corn, cattle,
wheat, cotton, etc.   Many small farms make some fairly big profits."
Farming for Profit and Quality of Life, John Ikerd
http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/faculty/jikerd/papers/SFTkeynote.html
--------------
"“Get big or get out” is a refrain with which American farmers are all
too familiar.  Small farms are seen as being too small to survive, and
thus, unworthy of serious consideration.  For example, government programs,
including publicly funded research and education, tend to focus on large,
commercial agricultural operations as the future of American agriculture.
In fact, the opposite is true.  Most large, commercial farming today are
too big to survive.  Small farms are the future of farming in America. "
Many Farms Are Too Big To Survive, John Ikerd
http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/faculty/jikerd/papers/SFT-Too%20Big.htm
-----------



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 2/2/2007 at 8:10 AM Tradingpost wrote:

>Couldn't agree more about the nutritional density factor. However I do
>believe the 80% figure allows the industrial farming sector to frame the
>debate, and it's highly misleading. Studies have shown diversified small
>farms to be far more productive overall than industrial farms when total
>output is taken into account instead of a single cash crop mechanically
>farmed with chemicals.
>
>
>paul tradingpost@...
>
>Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
>--Henry David Thoreau
>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
>On 2/2/2007 at 9:18 AM Bart wrote:
>

>>So forget about producing only 80% compared with chemical neighbours,
>>if you compare input-output-efficiency and nutritional "density", the
>>neighbour looses spectacularly... It's even worse than that: some (or
>>all) of chemically produced foods are even non-foods in reality,
>>industrially grown cabbages for instance have been reported to cause
>>infant death (intoxication by nitrates). Who cares for the chemical
>>neighbours' nitrate bomb disguised as cabbage anyway?
>>
>>Bart

Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and to avoid
falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of Fukuoka would be
pragmatic:

     " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man must look
back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one of the false visions
and concepts that permeate him and his society. This is what the 'do-nothing'
movement is all about. Natural Farming can be seen as one branch of this
movement. Human knowledge and effort expand and grow increasingly complex and
wasteful without limit. We need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify,
and reduce our knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural techniques. It is
the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of a revolution to change the
way we live."

Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and 'success' might
not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.

Jamie
Souscayrous

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Tradingpost
   To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:10 PM
   Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Success Stories for Kikoricco



   Couldn't agree more about the nutritional density factor. However I do
   believe the 80% figure allows the industrial farming sector to frame the
   debate, and it's highly misleading. Studies have shown diversified small
   farms to be far more productive overall than industrial farms when total
   output is taken into account instead of a single cash crop mechanically
   farmed with chemicals.

   paul tradingpost@...

   Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
   --Henry David Thoreau
   *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

   On 2/2/2007 at 9:18 AM Bart wrote:

   >Maybe we should consider yields rather in terms of minerals, vitamins
   >and general nutritional value per suare meter, instead of volume and
   >weight. It appears that organic vegetables have up to 100% more
   >mineral content (preliminary studies cited in Paul Pitchford's
   >"Healing with whole foods"). So in terms of mineral/vitamin/etc.
   >yield, what at first sight (volume and weight) appears to be a lesser
   >yield, may in fact be a far superior one.
   >
   >Volume and weight are really irrelevant; the ability of produce to
   >sustain healthy life is the real issue. Looking at it that way,
   >natural or veganic farming has a far superior yield compared to
   >chemical farming.
   >Also comparing input of energy and "products" (chemical or not) with
   >output, natural and organic farming have a much higher relative yield,
   >they are much more efficient.
   >
   >I myself experienced very clearly that I needed to eat much less
   >volume and weight once I began to eat only organic food. It has a much
   >higher nutritional "density", so to speak.
   >
   >So forget about producing only 80% compared with chemical neighbours,
   >if you compare input-output-efficiency and nutritional "density", the
   >neighbour looses spectacularly... It's even worse than that: some (or
   >all) of chemically produced foods are even non-foods in reality,
   >industrially grown cabbages for instance have been reported to cause
   >infant death (intoxication by nitrates). Who cares for the chemical
   >neighbours' nitrate bomb disguised as cabbage anyway?
   >
   >Bart





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

High yield and sustainability are not mutually exclusive. To agree that you
have to sacrifice one for the other gives up the field to the "how will we
feed the world" agribusiness spin. Serious researchers and growers have
shown higher outputs from small areas grown organically. We know healthy
plants producing well from healthy soil are higher brix and taste better.
And I'm not talking about some weird hybrids either.

paul tradingpost@...

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
--Henry David Thoreau

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 2/2/2007 at 4:52 PM Jamie Nicol wrote:

>Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and to
>avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of Fukuoka
>would be pragmatic:
>
>    " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man must
>look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one of the
>false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society. This is what
>the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming can be seen as one
>branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort expand and grow
>increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We need to halt this
>expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our knowledge and effort.
>This is in keeping with the laws of nature. Natural Farming is more than
>just a revolution in agricultural techniques. It is the practical
>foundation of a spiritual movement, of a revolution to change the way we
>live."
>
>Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and 'success'
>might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
>
>Jamie
>Souscayrous
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Tradingpost
>  To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
>  Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:10 PM
>  Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Success Stories for Kikoricco
>
>
>
>  Couldn't agree more about the nutritional density factor. However I do
>  believe the 80% figure allows the industrial farming sector to frame the
>  debate, and it's highly misleading. Studies have shown diversified small
>  farms to be far more productive overall than industrial farms when total
>  output is taken into account instead of a single cash crop mechanically
>  farmed with chemicals.
>
>  paul tradingpost@...
>

I would agree that we should consider yields rather in terms of minerals,
vitamins
and general nutritional value per suare meter, instead of volume and
weight.  I am currently a horticulture student.  In production no one cares
about nutrition it is only about weight and that is usually achieved by trying
to pump the product full of water as water is heavy.  They really try to get
that fine line of as much water as possible, but still make it taste good enough
for people will buy it.  I think the population would really be shocked to find
out how much the food industry doesn't care about nutritional value.  Also I
know too that a lot of times chemical farmers get better yields but actually
have more damaged product so in the end you might be getting 80% of your
neighbours yield but in terms of sellable produce getting the same yield and
better nutritional value!

---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well I have another perspective on success and failure - nature doesn't
succeed or fail! Failure and success are human concepts, not nature's.
One may employ various methods called "natural" but does that make one a
"natural farmer"?  On a semi-related humorous note: The Taoist master
Chuang Tzu once had a dream that he was a butterfly. He lived the life of
a butterfly, gathering nectar and flying in an insect's world. Suddenly,
he awoke and found himself laying in bed, a person. But then he thought
to himself, "Was I before a man who dreamt about being a butterfly, or am
I now a butterfly who dreams about being a man?" I find that if "I" and
nature are one, I have to laugh at the futility of my seriousness in
striving after my concept of success or avoiding the disappointment in
failure....afterall, I'm just dreaming.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:16:52 -0800 (PST) biggly boop pongy pig
<bigglybooppongypig@...> writes:
I would agree that we should consider yields rather in terms of minerals,
vitamins
and general nutritional value per suare meter, instead of volume and
weight. I am currently a horticulture student. In production no one cares
about nutrition it is only about weight and that is usually achieved by
trying to pump the product full of water as water is heavy. They really
try to get that fine line of as much water as possible, but still make it
taste good enough for people will buy it. I think the population would
really be shocked to find out how much the food industry doesn't care
about nutritional value. Also I know too that a lot of times chemical
farmers get better yields but actually have more damaged product so in
the end you might be getting 80% of your neighbours yield but in terms of
sellable produce getting the same yield and better nutritional value!

---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Its Masanobu's Birthday today. Just wanted to give a
shout out and give thanks for changing my life, and
thus hopefully the world!

Happy Birthday and to all- Keep Farming!

On my end I have figured out my rock problem, and
should begin planting new ground cover very soon-
Phase 1!


-Ty

I agree wholeheartedly that this is the real issue of natural farming,
and that in natural farming yield is not a goal - in a sense, there is
no goal. Thank you for pointing this out.

However, let's be careful not to get trapped in Nothingness (which is
one of the diseases of zen). If my industrial farmer neighbour comes
to me and tells me, "hey, did you see the sun came up in the west this
morning", I will tell him that this is not true, i.e. that this is not
the right way to use these words. I know there is really neither east
nor west, that these are concepts or illusions, and that the sun
(another concept) doesn't care, and so on. However, if you open your
mouth and use words, you should use them correctly.
In the same way, if he comes to me and tells me "you and your natural
farming, your yield is pitifull", I think it is important not to let
ourselves be trapped in his incorrect (selective) use of the term
"yield", only referring to weight/volume and making abstraction of
many other important factors.
Or we can just smile to him of course, but I for one know that if my
smile doesn't come profoundly from the heart, I better argue :)

This "industrial high yield"-lie is a stick behind the door with which
organic producers/consumers/sellers are often beaten on the head -
with their own full cooperation, choosing to go along with the narrow
weight/volume-perspective and not finding an adequate response.

But again, I do think it is very iportant to remember, time after
time, that he real issue in natural farming is doing nothing.

Bart

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and
to avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of
Fukuoka would be pragmatic:
>
>     " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man
must look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one
of the false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society.
This is what the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming
can be seen as one branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort
expand and grow increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We
need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our
knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural
techniques. It is the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of
a revolution to change the way we live."
>
> Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and
'success' might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
>
> Jamie
> Souscayrous
>

The only time an argument exists between natural farming and conventional
farming is when I am having it in my mind. If I am arguing (making one
view good and another view wrong) that's when I get trapped in the
illusion of concepts. If I make a distinction between "nothingness" and
"somethingness" as if they are states of mind I could be trapped in, I am
also trapped. Once I start having this petty argument with my neighbor, I
am indeed trapped. Unless of course I also know the trap is an illusion,
in which case I can play and be in love with my conventional farming
neighbor.

If natural farming is about how "to do" and how "not to do" then I am not
doing it and not - not doing it.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

b 2007 08:53:16 -0000 "Bart" <bartovan@...> writes:
I agree wholeheartedly that this is the real issue of natural farming,
and that in natural farming yield is not a goal - in a sense, there is
no goal. Thank you for pointing this out.

However, let's be careful not to get trapped in Nothingness (which is
one of the diseases of zen). If my industrial farmer neighbour comes
to me and tells me, "hey, did you see the sun came up in the west this
morning", I will tell him that this is not true, i.e. that this is not
the right way to use these words. I know there is really neither east
nor west, that these are concepts or illusions, and that the sun
(another concept) doesn't care, and so on. However, if you open your
mouth and use words, you should use them correctly.
In the same way, if he comes to me and tells me "you and your natural
farming, your yield is pitifull", I think it is important not to let
ourselves be trapped in his incorrect (selective) use of the term
"yield", only referring to weight/volume and making abstraction of
many other important factors.
Or we can just smile to him of course, but I for one know that if my
smile doesn't come profoundly from the heart, I better argue :)

This "industrial high yield"-lie is a stick behind the door with which
organic producers/consumers/sellers are often beaten on the head -
with their own full cooperation, choosing to go along with the narrow
weight/volume-perspective and not finding an adequate response.

But again, I do think it is very iportant to remember, time after
time, that he real issue in natural farming is doing nothing.

Bart

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and
to avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of
Fukuoka would be pragmatic:
>
> " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man
must look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one
of the false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society.
This is what the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming
can be seen as one branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort
expand and grow increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We
need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our
knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural
techniques. It is the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of
a revolution to change the way we live."
>
> Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and
'success' might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
>
> Jamie
> Souscayrous
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I flirt with nature, like the woman I love. One motivation for farming
naturally as far as I can tell is "First, do no harm". It used to be for
me that my motivation for farming naturally was to prove I am right and
anyone not getting on my band wagon was wrong, or greedy, or ignorant.
Whether the people I know who are farming conventionally are guilty or
not, my whole motivation was to prove they are. This motivation, until I
realized it, was nothing less than a form of war. I made conventional
farming and those farmers my enemies. I judged them and what they were
doing as criminal and I put them in the prison of the concepts I believed
in. The result became this great divide between us and I became
imprisoned in the same prison I constructed for them.

I now view all this suffering as my greed, aggression and ignorance, not
theirs, my war in myself with the enemy being me against myself.  I
couldn't see Nature until I stopped thinking in a way that was harming
myself. Until I stopped believing in the illusion that something or
someone outside my mind was causing harm, my natural farming was merely
academic....dead, no joy, like a weapon. Yes, I know the damage done by
conventional farming methods, but I doubt condemning the people who
practice it will end the harm.

I am in conflict with and divided from Nature in myself when I believe
the yield I get "should" be different than it is. I am in conflict with
and separate from Nature when I get stuck on thinking a crop failure
shouldn't have happened, or that success is based on a fixed set of
results. This is not to say that I don't have results in mind. All
results are exactly what they should be and when I see that, I am
grateful. There is no harm in being grateful for reality. I get
aggressive and greedy if I believe it should be otherwise. Conventional
farming methods and conventional farmers are, in a sense, my teachers. I
am grateful for that too and then I remember my gardening practices have
nothing to do with them, not as a means of opposing them. This makes me a
harmless activist, not because I oppose them. I don't oppose them...they
don't oppose me. Their minds change when they change, and they are
changing, just like mine.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 06:49:38 -0600 Andrew E Fister <aefister@...>
writes:
The only time an argument exists between natural farming and conventional
farming is when I am having it in my mind. If I am arguing (making one
view good and another view wrong) that's when I get trapped in the
illusion of concepts. If I make a distinction between "nothingness" and
"somethingness" as if they are states of mind I could be trapped in, I am
also trapped. Once I start having this petty argument with my neighbor, I
am indeed trapped. Unless of course I also know the trap is an illusion,
in which case I can play and be in love with my conventional farming
neighbor.

If natural farming is about how "to do" and how "not to do" then I am not
doing it and not - not doing it.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

b 2007 08:53:16 -0000 "Bart" <bartovan@...> writes:
I agree wholeheartedly that this is the real issue of natural farming,
and that in natural farming yield is not a goal - in a sense, there is
no goal. Thank you for pointing this out.

However, let's be careful not to get trapped in Nothingness (which is
one of the diseases of zen). If my industrial farmer neighbour comes
to me and tells me, "hey, did you see the sun came up in the west this
morning", I will tell him that this is not true, i.e. that this is not
the right way to use these words. I know there is really neither east
nor west, that these are concepts or illusions, and that the sun
(another concept) doesn't care, and so on. However, if you open your
mouth and use words, you should use them correctly.
In the same way, if he comes to me and tells me "you and your natural
farming, your yield is pitifull", I think it is important not to let
ourselves be trapped in his incorrect (selective) use of the term
"yield", only referring to weight/volume and making abstraction of
many other important factors.
Or we can just smile to him of course, but I for one know that if my
smile doesn't come profoundly from the heart, I better argue :)

This "industrial high yield"-lie is a stick behind the door with which
organic producers/consumers/sellers are often beaten on the head -
with their own full cooperation, choosing to go along with the narrow
weight/volume-perspective and not finding an adequate response.

But again, I do think it is very iportant to remember, time after
time, that he real issue in natural farming is doing nothing.

Bart

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and
to avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of
Fukuoka would be pragmatic:
>
> " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man
must look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one
of the false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society.
This is what the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming
can be seen as one branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort
expand and grow increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We
need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our
knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural
techniques. It is the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of
a revolution to change the way we live."
>
> Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and
'success' might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
>
> Jamie
> Souscayrous
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fukuoka san- Otanjobi omedeto gozaimasu

On Feb 2, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Ty Robinson wrote:

Its Masanobu's Birthday today...


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Michael Burns
http://www.cayuta.org
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Earn your permaculture design certificate.
The Finger Lakes Permaculture Institute
offers affordable local classes.
http://www.fingerlakespermaculture.org
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dear All, it is very encouraging for me to hear the words of Andrew and Bart. I
feel in their words my own restless moving from one position to another, always
attempting to be right, to follow the true...only, of course, to time and again
to have all positions exposed as false. It is indeed our minds that move.

This, I believe, is why there is NF. There is no better way to be brought back
time and again to the spectacle of the restlessness of our minds in the
techniques with which we choose to grow our plants. Because it is nature that
grows plants, not us. Perhaps it is better not to even attribute agency to
nature and say plants just grow.

If we once make that commitment to attempt 'do-nothing' then we discover that in
letting go we are open to everything and the discovery of what a very scary
place that is when we have been used to dictating just where, when and how a
plant should grow. Fukuoka calls NF a 'methodless method', but how difficult it
is to let go all the techniques we have learnt, even the unconscious ones, and
it takes a very remarkable person to just let go and accept that nature is
perfect.

It would be easy to imagine that NF is simply the words we are anonymously
sending out into this electronic ether, but NF is nothing if it is not what we
actually practice. If NF remains just words it changes nothing, NF is practice,
every day. Working outside with the ever unfolding of nature is constantly to be
brought back to the unknowableness at the heart of existence', which certainly
contains fear but can also transform into the most extraordinary joy at the
simple wonder of existence itself: "Why am I alive? I don't know. But I'm just
so happy to be so".

NF is not just doing nothing either, it is not renunciation of the world and
withdrawal into ourselves. The world is real, intimately so. It is as if through
the resolute practice of NF that we learn through experience to stop chasing
techniques for this and that, to let all our goal directed activity recede like
the tide on a beach. Having let go fully, the tide does not disappear over the
horizon, but at some moment the tide turns. I hope that what we can do here with
these disembodied words is to describe what our practice of NF actually is
having experienced the turning of the tide. Making what we discuss here the
actual embodiment of our understanding of NF in our own gardens or fields.

I live in a bioregion prone to weather extremes, heat in summer, cold in winter,
strong winds, inconstant and sometimes destructive rain, even though it is a
wonderful climate for most of the year...what does that mean for a natural
agriculture on my small piece of land? Fukuoka describes the need to know before
you begin what a natural agriculture should look like. But, therefore, one would
also have had to have had the experience of letting go all techniques first. So
what have I deduced (deduction rather than induction, says Fukuoka) in the few
years I've been here? That NF in this bioregion begins with trees, whether for
orchards, cereal fields or vegetables. That's it. It isn't much, but when I look
at the overgrazed hills above and the wasted vines around, I can feel the lack
of trees like an ache in the ground that passes through my boots and into my
body.

So I cast tree seeds whenever I can, on my land and the land above that makes up
my small watershed. Indeed, it might well be that there is nothing else to do
but cast seeds.

I'd like to finish with a question: Is there a difference between Fukuoka's NF
as detailed in 'One-Straw', 'Natural Way' and 'Road Back' and his last book,
'Recapitualtion'? Does anyone know or has anyone had an insight in their
practice that might have offered an answer to this question, because it seems to
me that Fukuoka ultimately simplified everything to just casting seedballs.

I've probably gone on longer than I should have and combined too many things,
but I hope it is still possible to follow what my path of NF looks like. I'd
love to hear yours?

Jamie
Souscayrous

----- Original Message -----
   From: Andrew E Fister
   To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 4:30 PM
   Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Flirting with nature


   I flirt with nature, like the woman I love. One motivation for farming
   naturally as far as I can tell is "First, do no harm". It used to be for
   me that my motivation for farming naturally was to prove I am right and
   anyone not getting on my band wagon was wrong, or greedy, or ignorant.
   Whether the people I know who are farming conventionally are guilty or
   not, my whole motivation was to prove they are. This motivation, until I
   realized it, was nothing less than a form of war. I made conventional
   farming and those farmers my enemies. I judged them and what they were
   doing as criminal and I put them in the prison of the concepts I believed
   in. The result became this great divide between us and I became
   imprisoned in the same prison I constructed for them.

   I now view all this suffering as my greed, aggression and ignorance, not
   theirs, my war in myself with the enemy being me against myself. I
   couldn't see Nature until I stopped thinking in a way that was harming
   myself. Until I stopped believing in the illusion that something or
   someone outside my mind was causing harm, my natural farming was merely
   academic....dead, no joy, like a weapon. Yes, I know the damage done by
   conventional farming methods, but I doubt condemning the people who
   practice it will end the harm.

   I am in conflict with and divided from Nature in myself when I believe
   the yield I get "should" be different than it is. I am in conflict with
   and separate from Nature when I get stuck on thinking a crop failure
   shouldn't have happened, or that success is based on a fixed set of
   results. This is not to say that I don't have results in mind. All
   results are exactly what they should be and when I see that, I am
   grateful. There is no harm in being grateful for reality. I get
   aggressive and greedy if I believe it should be otherwise. Conventional
   farming methods and conventional farmers are, in a sense, my teachers. I
   am grateful for that too and then I remember my gardening practices have
   nothing to do with them, not as a means of opposing them. This makes me a
   harmless activist, not because I oppose them. I don't oppose them...they
   don't oppose me. Their minds change when they change, and they are
   changing, just like mine.

   Andrew Fister
   Wandafar Sanctuary
   Glasgow, KY

   On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 06:49:38 -0600 Andrew E Fister <aefister@...>
   writes:
   The only time an argument exists between natural farming and conventional
   farming is when I am having it in my mind. If I am arguing (making one
   view good and another view wrong) that's when I get trapped in the
   illusion of concepts. If I make a distinction between "nothingness" and
   "somethingness" as if they are states of mind I could be trapped in, I am
   also trapped. Once I start having this petty argument with my neighbor, I
   am indeed trapped. Unless of course I also know the trap is an illusion,
   in which case I can play and be in love with my conventional farming
   neighbor.

   If natural farming is about how "to do" and how "not to do" then I am not
   doing it and not - not doing it.

   Andrew Fister
   Wandafar Sanctuary
   Glasgow, KY

   b 2007 08:53:16 -0000 "Bart" <bartovan@...> writes:
   I agree wholeheartedly that this is the real issue of natural farming,
   and that in natural farming yield is not a goal - in a sense, there is
   no goal. Thank you for pointing this out.

   However, let's be careful not to get trapped in Nothingness (which is
   one of the diseases of zen). If my industrial farmer neighbour comes
   to me and tells me, "hey, did you see the sun came up in the west this
   morning", I will tell him that this is not true, i.e. that this is not
   the right way to use these words. I know there is really neither east
   nor west, that these are concepts or illusions, and that the sun
   (another concept) doesn't care, and so on. However, if you open your
   mouth and use words, you should use them correctly.
   In the same way, if he comes to me and tells me "you and your natural
   farming, your yield is pitifull", I think it is important not to let
   ourselves be trapped in his incorrect (selective) use of the term
   "yield", only referring to weight/volume and making abstraction of
   many other important factors.
   Or we can just smile to him of course, but I for one know that if my
   smile doesn't come profoundly from the heart, I better argue :)

   This "industrial high yield"-lie is a stick behind the door with which
   organic producers/consumers/sellers are often beaten on the head -
   with their own full cooperation, choosing to go along with the narrow
   weight/volume-perspective and not finding an adequate response.

   But again, I do think it is very iportant to remember, time after
   time, that he real issue in natural farming is doing nothing.

   Bart

   --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
   wrote:
   >
   > Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and
   to avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of
   Fukuoka would be pragmatic:
   >
   > " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man
   must look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one
   of the false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society.
   This is what the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming
   can be seen as one branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort
   expand and grow increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We
   need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our
   knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
   Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural
   techniques. It is the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of
   a revolution to change the way we live."
   >
   > Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and
   'success' might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
   >
   > Jamie
   > Souscayrous
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jamie,

I really get a lot from your (and many others of you!) posts here - you help
me realize what it is that I've already been thinking about, or at least the
kind of things I've been thinking about. I love the "flirting" idea - that's
really how I feel sometimes, though often it's just simple all-out love :-)

Here are a few random thoughts from an ecologist (who also teaches a
sustainable gardening class), brought forth by your last post, but also the
past few days' excellent sharing here. Please consider this "thinking out
loud" and sharing, not some dogma that I adhere to or promote. And please
excuse my abundant use of "", but I don't know how else to inflect my
meaning.

I sometimes think of NF, and "do nothing", in slightly different words - I
think of what I "do" with my land as "allowing", or maybe even better
"getting out of the way as much as possible". Busy-humans seem to have a
need to DO things, and most of what we do is thwart natural processes. Ah,
but what constitutes "as much as possible"?... That seems to me to be where
most of our questions lurk.

The more I learn about soil microbiology and ecology, the more I realize I
don't need to know about soil microbiology and ecology, except insofar as my
learning reminds me continuously to get out of the way! I would no more
"turn over" the soil in my garden than chop off my hand - such a violent and
personal grotesquery - not only because I know what it would do, but equally
because I don't know. To me, science is for wonderment, not control. Every
new "fact" that comes to light merely shows how deep (indeed bottomless!)
the well of the unknown and unknowable truly is.

Fortunately, and this to me is MF's (Happy Birthday, Good Man!) great gift
to us all... We don't NEED to know! Imagine being told that in five minutes,
you were going to be consciously responsible for and in control of all your
bodily functions and metabolisms and whatnot. You'd be dead shortly
thereafter. Fortunately, you don't have to, and life goes on just fine. Just
as impossible and idiotic to me is the notion of "managing" ecosystems. You
don't manage ecosystems, you get out of the way.

That said (here comes the busy monkey!), so much of our land is so hurt, and
it seems natural to want to, well, "do" something to help it along. We throw
seed, we throw mulch. So far so good. Of course we never spray chemicals,
but do we hand-pick bugs? Do we pull up sod-forming grasses coming into our
vegetables? There are plenty of other "weeds". And of course, there's the
ultimate kicker: do we have any "right" to even "grow" "vegetables" in New
Hampshire, USA? Do we only grow what comes up without any help? The "weeds"
that we have around here are 99% introduced by humans anyway - why shouldn't
we pull them? MF writes about chopping down trees and burying them to put
carbon back into the soil - that seems pretty extreme to me...

My point is that many of us, I believe, have our hearts in a very seeking
place, and we get hold of principles, and we want to take them to their
logical conclusions. And at the same time, we want to eat real food from our
land. And we struggle over just where that line falls between "doing
nothing" and "fidgeting". We are all trying to find that line, and trying to
find it under all different conditions of climate and soil. That's one
reason I value this group so much.

I will close with a little story. A very good friend of mine grew up in a
family that always had large vegetable gardens, and grew a lot of their food
with what are, I'm afraid to say, "traditional" methods around here:
rototill every spring and fall, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, etc.  He
knew my gardening ways very well, and needed no convincing to go in a more
NF direction, and tried to persuade his father (a real engineering type) to
at least go somewhat organic, and then, finally no-till. He wasn't getting
anywhere. One day his father called him to say that he was selling his
rototiller - he'd been digging a hole to transplant something or other, and
discovered a big fat toad resting down in the cool earth. It was the very
thought of rototilling that toad* that changed this man's whole notion of
gardening, and indeed soil. The moral of the story? I don't know, but
certainly there is one...

All best,

Steve

*PS - It helped that he liked toads. I guess that somehow, in his mind, that
toad became "toads", and "toads" became that toad, and *presto*, that was
the end of rototilling. A beautiful thing :-)

Another thanks to all the wise questioning that goes on here, making every
day a celebration of Masanobu Fukuoka's birthday.

The practice in letting go of attempts at control in Natural Farming is a
skill that I am trying to practice with the current situation in the
community garden here.  The thoughts expressed on this newsgroup, always
fascinating, have been especially helpful lately.

As submitted in our report a while back, our school has for some years been
involved in various park & neighborhood projects that were based on
no-till, mixed seed grouping (not in clay balls, though), weed & insect
inclusion & study.  The park projects, planted borders along an alley, were
repeatedly, if inadvertently, mowed down by constantly changing maintenance
crews who simply saw them as a big jumble, even after official meetings &
signage.  The park border projects have been frustrating as well as
intriguing.

We contacted other schools & churches in the area to found a community
garden on land that one of the churches could share.  From the outset, we
spelled out that we wanted the garden to contain examples of Fukuokan
inspired gardening, as well as allowing all other gardeners their own
choices of models to follow (from reading Ruth Stout's lasagna gardening,
Mollison's permaculture, Jeavons' biointensive, or just what they remember
their grandparents telling them) as long as no petrochemical,
non-biodegradable fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides were used.  Another
community garden in the city got a grant for their professional designers
to serve as consultant to new gardens, & we invited them into our garden.
To our surprise, the first thing that they had to say was that everything
that we had done in the months we had spent building the garden should be
back-hoed & the whole thing started over (after they spent a few months on
their paid professional design.)  A contract requirement for community
gardeners would include keeping the bed weeded.

The conflict in the community garden is a force that is pushing against
allowing anyone to maintain a Fukuokan respect for studying their garden
bed, & my lesson in letting go seems to be yield like the willow so that
the passing storm will not break my stance.  In this case, it may be called
"smile as if saying "Okay, we will all do what the consultant says,"
without actually saying "Okay, we will all do what the consultant says."
Eventually, the consultants, conventional organic gardeners, will likely
make an example of our school's garden, probably using the standard
comparison of yield in weight, to show that Natural Farming methods "do not
work as well" as labor-intensive control of more aspects of the garden bed.

This community garden, however, was founded as a project of the
neighborhood's Emergency Preparedness & Sustainability Committee.  The
stated purpose of the garden includes examining how well the garden could
be sustained during changing times, including really hard times, including
emergencies, including the likes of James Howard Kunstler's book, The Long
Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, & Other Converging
Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century
<http://www.amazon.com/Long-Emergency-Converging-Catastrophes-Twenty-First/dp/08\
71138883>.
That possibility stands in contradiction to the presumed requirement for
every food plant everywhere to be dependent on a double-digging rototiller.

The toad sitting passively in the hole has challenged the rototiller, & the
lesson has not been lost.  Flirting with the toad is playful enough.  If
anyone has to kiss it though, the consultants may have to learn to
demonstrate that.

Peace,
Napi

Join us on forums about gardening, plants, cacti, succulents, herbs, bonsai,
rare species..

Visit http://www.plantsworld.net

The site is dedicated to the world of plants.  You are invited to  discuss any
topic regarding plants. You can also upload photos of your plants, identify your
plants and exchange expirience with other members. If you are into plants, this
is the right place to be. Registration is free, and we are wish you a lot of joy
through interaction with our members.

If you have knowledge, mood and time you can join our team of moderators!

---------------------------------
Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Another way to say what Jamie said....I think.

"Thirty spokes converge upon a single hub.
It is on the hole in the center that the use of the wheel hinges.

We make a vessel from a lump of clay,
It is the empty space within the vessel that makes it useful.

We make doors, walls and windows for a room,
But it is the empty space contained that makes the room livable.

Thus, while the tangible has advantages,
It is the intangible that makes it useful."

This is my experience of NF. Whatever advantage I may perceive in some
method for handling the tangibles of gardening, it is ultimately and
always only the intangible I serve. Thus, I have noticed, my own
usefulness in NF is not in culturing nature necessarily, but in being
cultured by the intangible. And this is not to say that I need to be, or
do anything differently than I am already, until that changes. It seems
to me every step on the path of NF is stepping into empty space and
seeing I am there.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:50:41 +0100 "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
writes:
Dear All, it is very encouraging for me to hear the words of Andrew and
Bart. I feel in their words my own restless moving from one position to
another, always attempting to be right, to follow the true...only, of
course, to time and again to have all positions exposed as false. It is
indeed our minds that move.

This, I believe, is why there is NF. There is no better way to be brought
back time and again to the spectacle of the restlessness of our minds in
the techniques with which we choose to grow our plants. Because it is
nature that grows plants, not us. Perhaps it is better not to even
attribute agency to nature and say plants just grow.

If we once make that commitment to attempt 'do-nothing' then we discover
that in letting go we are open to everything and the discovery of what a
very scary place that is when we have been used to dictating just where,
when and how a plant should grow. Fukuoka calls NF a 'methodless method',
but how difficult it is to let go all the techniques we have learnt, even
the unconscious ones, and it takes a very remarkable person to just let
go and accept that nature is perfect.

It would be easy to imagine that NF is simply the words we are
anonymously sending out into this electronic ether, but NF is nothing if
it is not what we actually practice. If NF remains just words it changes
nothing, NF is practice, every day. Working outside with the ever
unfolding of nature is constantly to be brought back to the
unknowableness at the heart of existence', which certainly contains fear
but can also transform into the most extraordinary joy at the simple
wonder of existence itself: "Why am I alive? I don't know. But I'm just
so happy to be so".

NF is not just doing nothing either, it is not renunciation of the world
and withdrawal into ourselves. The world is real, intimately so. It is as
if through the resolute practice of NF that we learn through experience
to stop chasing techniques for this and that, to let all our goal
directed activity recede like the tide on a beach. Having let go fully,
the tide does not disappear over the horizon, but at some moment the tide
turns. I hope that what we can do here with these disembodied words is to
describe what our practice of NF actually is having experienced the
turning of the tide. Making what we discuss here the actual embodiment of
our understanding of NF in our own gardens or fields.

I live in a bioregion prone to weather extremes, heat in summer, cold in
winter, strong winds, inconstant and sometimes destructive rain, even
though it is a wonderful climate for most of the year...what does that
mean for a natural agriculture on my small piece of land? Fukuoka
describes the need to know before you begin what a natural agriculture
should look like. But, therefore, one would also have had to have had the
experience of letting go all techniques first. So what have I deduced
(deduction rather than induction, says Fukuoka) in the few years I've
been here? That NF in this bioregion begins with trees, whether for
orchards, cereal fields or vegetables. That's it. It isn't much, but when
I look at the overgrazed hills above and the wasted vines around, I can
feel the lack of trees like an ache in the ground that passes through my
boots and into my body.

So I cast tree seeds whenever I can, on my land and the land above that
makes up my small watershed. Indeed, it might well be that there is
nothing else to do but cast seeds.

I'd like to finish with a question: Is there a difference between
Fukuoka's NF as detailed in 'One-Straw', 'Natural Way' and 'Road Back'
and his last book, 'Recapitualtion'? Does anyone know or has anyone had
an insight in their practice that might have offered an answer to this
question, because it seems to me that Fukuoka ultimately simplified
everything to just casting seedballs.

I've probably gone on longer than I should have and combined too many
things, but I hope it is still possible to follow what my path of NF
looks like. I'd love to hear yours?

Jamie
Souscayrous

----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew E Fister
To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 4:30 PM
Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Flirting with nature

I flirt with nature, like the woman I love. One motivation for farming
naturally as far as I can tell is "First, do no harm". It used to be for
me that my motivation for farming naturally was to prove I am right and
anyone not getting on my band wagon was wrong, or greedy, or ignorant.
Whether the people I know who are farming conventionally are guilty or
not, my whole motivation was to prove they are. This motivation, until I
realized it, was nothing less than a form of war. I made conventional
farming and those farmers my enemies. I judged them and what they were
doing as criminal and I put them in the prison of the concepts I believed
in. The result became this great divide between us and I became
imprisoned in the same prison I constructed for them.

I now view all this suffering as my greed, aggression and ignorance, not
theirs, my war in myself with the enemy being me against myself. I
couldn't see Nature until I stopped thinking in a way that was harming
myself. Until I stopped believing in the illusion that something or
someone outside my mind was causing harm, my natural farming was merely
academic....dead, no joy, like a weapon. Yes, I know the damage done by
conventional farming methods, but I doubt condemning the people who
practice it will end the harm.

I am in conflict with and divided from Nature in myself when I believe
the yield I get "should" be different than it is. I am in conflict with
and separate from Nature when I get stuck on thinking a crop failure
shouldn't have happened, or that success is based on a fixed set of
results. This is not to say that I don't have results in mind. All
results are exactly what they should be and when I see that, I am
grateful. There is no harm in being grateful for reality. I get
aggressive and greedy if I believe it should be otherwise. Conventional
farming methods and conventional farmers are, in a sense, my teachers. I
am grateful for that too and then I remember my gardening practices have
nothing to do with them, not as a means of opposing them. This makes me a
harmless activist, not because I oppose them. I don't oppose them...they
don't oppose me. Their minds change when they change, and they are
changing, just like mine.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 06:49:38 -0600 Andrew E Fister <aefister@...>
writes:
The only time an argument exists between natural farming and conventional
farming is when I am having it in my mind. If I am arguing (making one
view good and another view wrong) that's when I get trapped in the
illusion of concepts. If I make a distinction between "nothingness" and
"somethingness" as if they are states of mind I could be trapped in, I am
also trapped. Once I start having this petty argument with my neighbor, I
am indeed trapped. Unless of course I also know the trap is an illusion,
in which case I can play and be in love with my conventional farming
neighbor.

If natural farming is about how "to do" and how "not to do" then I am not
doing it and not - not doing it.

Andrew Fister
Wandafar Sanctuary
Glasgow, KY

b 2007 08:53:16 -0000 "Bart" <bartovan@...> writes:
I agree wholeheartedly that this is the real issue of natural farming,
and that in natural farming yield is not a goal - in a sense, there is
no goal. Thank you for pointing this out.

However, let's be careful not to get trapped in Nothingness (which is
one of the diseases of zen). If my industrial farmer neighbour comes
to me and tells me, "hey, did you see the sun came up in the west this
morning", I will tell him that this is not true, i.e. that this is not
the right way to use these words. I know there is really neither east
nor west, that these are concepts or illusions, and that the sun
(another concept) doesn't care, and so on. However, if you open your
mouth and use words, you should use them correctly.
In the same way, if he comes to me and tells me "you and your natural
farming, your yield is pitifull", I think it is important not to let
ourselves be trapped in his incorrect (selective) use of the term
"yield", only referring to weight/volume and making abstraction of
many other important factors.
Or we can just smile to him of course, but I for one know that if my
smile doesn't come profoundly from the heart, I better argue :)

This "industrial high yield"-lie is a stick behind the door with which
organic producers/consumers/sellers are often beaten on the head -
with their own full cooperation, choosing to go along with the narrow
weight/volume-perspective and not finding an adequate response.

But again, I do think it is very iportant to remember, time after
time, that he real issue in natural farming is doing nothing.

Bart

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jamie Nicol" <jamienicol@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear All, in an attempt to broaden the discussion of 'success' and
to avoid falling into 'esoteric' chatter, I thought some words of
Fukuoka would be pragmatic:
>
> " To achieve a humanity and a society founded on non-action, man
must look back over everything he has done and rid himself one by one
of the false visions and concepts that permeate him and his society.
This is what the 'do-nothing' movement is all about. Natural Farming
can be seen as one branch of this movement. Human knowledge and effort
expand and grow increasingly complex and wasteful without limit. We
need to halt this expansion, to converge, simplify, and reduce our
knowledge and effort. This is in keeping with the laws of nature.
Natural Farming is more than just a revolution in agricultural
techniques. It is the practical foundation of a spiritual movement, of
a revolution to change the way we live."
>
> Obviously, the tenor of these words seems to suggest that NF and
'success' might not be to do with yield, qualitative or quantitative.
>
> Jamie
> Souscayrous
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Friends,

The next 6 weeks will be a crucial time to pursuade MEPs to reject the
Virrankoski proposal (the document, recommending a major move to GM technology)
so that at the European Parlaiment Plenary session on March 14th as many as
possible vote NO to GMO.
Just to remind you: at this session ALL European Parliamentarians will be
invited and voting.

So, below we have listed some more suggestions for getting their attention and
raising their awareness.
Targetting MEP's on a country by country basis is the only way we can reach them
all. So concentrate on YOUR MEPs! Yes, go for it .... NOW is always the best
time!!

With kind regards,
Jadwiga Lopata and Julian Rose
============ ========= ========= ========= =======
ICPPC - International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside,
34-146 Strysz¸«Ńw 156, Poland tel./fax +48 33 8797114
biuro@icppc. pl www.gmo.icppc. pl www.eko-cel. pl

TO LOBBY MEP's PLEASE DO IT:

1. Organize a meeting with your MEPs. Show them one of the films about GMO
threats (Like: 'Life running out of control" or 'The future of food"). Organize
two tables with foods: one with good quality, traditional, local foods; second
with GMO foods. After the film invite your MEPs to the party. Invite press. Most
likely all MEPs will go to the table with traditional foods. Make photos, ask
them questions why they choose this food not GMO. Involve press!

2. Send by e-mail and fax a LETTER (http://icppc. pl/pl/gmo/ eng_index.
php?id=eng_ eu_a) to your MEPs. Or better
compose your own letter. Send your e-mail with a title 'Will you be re-elected?'

3. Phone to your MEPs and ask them how they will vote at the plenary session?

NOTICE: If you make a list of e-mails of MEPs from your country please send this
to us. We will put on our website to help others.


---------------------------------
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in the summer.
It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)

I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is bassically just
weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much that 's even
edible.

What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend plannting
to make this space more edible.

I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes there or
not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not improved
so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...

and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more productive... they
only have one or 2 berries per bush....

Jeff

Dharmahouse Courses and retreats  -   2007
                                        Calendar
   The calendar below shows our courses & retreats, and our open / closed periods
for 2007.
            1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20
21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31    Jan    M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     Feb    T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W



     Mar    T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     Apr    S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M

     May
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T

     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     Jun
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F

     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S

     Jul    S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     Aug
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T

     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T

     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     Sep    S
     S

     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S

     Oct    M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     Nov    T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F

     Dec    S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M
     T
     W
     T
     F
     S
     S
     M

                 Open to visitors
           Work project / Open to visitors            Course / retreat
             Community closed


   Full Permaculture Design Course with Steve Read
   1st - 10th May 2007
   English
   A ten day, residential, certified Permaculture Design Course led by Steve
Read. The course will cover the International Permaculture Institute Syllabus,
including practical work projects around the community. There will also be the
opportunity to practice yoga and meditation, and to walk in the beautiful
surroundings of the Cévennes National Park.
   More information about the course and about Steve Read.

   Cost (includes 3 vegetarian meals a day):
   €400 indoors / €350 camping (concessionary rate: €300 camping)


   "The Basics of Using the Natural Energy from the Sun"
   A solar energy course with Richard Komp
   18th - 23rd May 2007
   English
   We are very fortunate to be able to welcome Dr. Richard Komp, an expert in
solar energy since the 1950's, in leading this in-depth course on all aspects of
solar energy. The course will be of a practical nature, with a group project
every day, and lectures and discussions drawing on Richard's extensive knowledge
of solar energy systems.
   Every course participant will receive copies of two of Richard's books:
Practical Photovoltaics, and the course text The Maine Solar Primer, which has
do-it-yourself plans and a good section on passive solar architecture.
   More information about the course and about Richard Komp.

   Cost (includes 3 vegetarian meals a day):
   €300 indoors / €240 camping (concessionary rate: €180 camping)


   A six day metta retreat with Marjó Oosterhoff
   1st - 6th June 2007
   English
   An opportunity for a deep exploration of the practice of metta
(loving-kindness meditation).
   This retreat is suitable for meditators of any experience, including
beginners.
   More information about the retreat and about Marjó Oosterhoff.

   Cost (includes 2 vegetarian meals a day):
   €180 indoors / €150 camping + Dana (concessionary rate: €100 camping)



   An eight day insight meditation retreat with Ajahn Sundara
   23rd - 30th June 2007
   English and French
   A senior nun from the Amaravati Buddhist Monastery of the Theravadan Thai
Forest Tradition in the lineage of Laung Poh Chah.
   Please note this retreat is for people with previous experience of meditation.
   More information about Ajahn Sundara.
   Also see: www.amaravati.org

   Cost (includes 2 vegetarian meals a day):
   €250 indoors / €200 camping + Dana (concessionary rate: €130 camping)

         The Dharma House co-housing project gathering
   1st - 5th August 2007
   A meeting for all those interested in being involved in forming a Co-housing
Eco Community.
   Five days of workshops and discussions around various aspects of community
living, looking at the possibilities for forming an ecologically aware community
inspired by the teachings of the Buddha. These five days will be a chance to
meet and get to know other interested people, and to spend some mindful time
together meditating and walking in the local countryside.
   More information about the Dharma House community project.

   Cost (includes 3 vegetarian meals a day):
   €125 indoors / €100 camping


   A weekend of Deep Ecology with Joanna Macy
   "The Dharma and the Great Turning"
   10th - 12th August 2007
   English
   Joanna will be joining us on the 11th of August to discuss the Dharma and the
Great Turning - the transition from the industrial growth society to a
life-sustaining society, a revolution affecting every aspect of our lives. On
the 12th there will be the opportunity to continue discussing the themes and
issues raised, to meditate together, and to spend time in nature.
   More information about Joanna Macy.

   Cost (includes 3 vegetarian meals a day):
   €100 indoors / €70 camping + Dana


   An eight day yoga retreat with Miguel Paredes
   17th - 24th August 2007
   English and French
   Eight days of restorative and energizing yoga and meditation, taught by
Miguel, a teacher of Sivananda yoga since 1993.
   More information about the retreat and about Miguel Paredes.

   Cost (includes 3 vegetarian meals a day):
   €370 indoors / €340 camping (concessionary rate: €300 camping)

       Cottage renovation project   3rd - 31st September 2007
   Volunteers with building and carpentry skills needed to help with this project
   A chance to live and work with the community, and to spend time in the
beautiful surrounding countryside.
   In addition to the renovation project, visitors are welcome as usual during
this period (see the Visiting page for more information).




   Please visit the website to book  and for further info www.thedharmahouse.com

   Concessionary rates are available on some course / retreats for those who are
unemployed or in full time education.

   Contact info@...


The Dharma house community project
www.thedharmahouse.com

Info and discussion group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DharmaHouse/

may all beings live in light!

---------------------------------
  What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get a free analysis of your
email personality. Take the quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear All, when we start on the road of NF I'm sure we all soon start rubbing up
against the line we've drawn between intervention and non-intervention, action
and 'do-nothing', as Steve points out. Just how much do we let nature be?

Fukuoka realised there is a difference when he destroyed his father's citrus
orchard by neglect, this is when he learnt the difference between doing nothing
and 'do-nothing'.

But, as I hoped to suggest in my last post, I believe that the personal process
that occurs as we follow the path of NF has the effect of changing the very
ground upon which this question of intervention rests. When we give up our
goal-based, technique-driven orientation to gardening/farming there comes a
point when it is no longer about intervention at all. When we have actually seen
into 'do-nothing' and can be said to start farming with 'no mind', which Fukuoka
says is the prerequisite for NF, it is not a matter of our intervention on
nature at all because we have discovered that we are not not nature ourselves.

Therefore, I do not feel that it is any longer about how far we intervene, but
from where we begin gardening/farming. As Steve points out, Fukuoka cut down and
buried trees on the hillsides he transformed into a citrus orchard after it had
been left denuded by a previous culture of potatoes. Fukuoka undertook such an
interventionist step because of the felt need for the remediation of the soil.

But, surely, this is just the instrumentalist approach of conventional or
organic farming? But, of course, the answer to this question is no: Fukuoka had
already had his insight and long started on the road to NF. He knew every
contour of the land, every change of weather and the wild foods and their
seasons - he had real-ised (ie made real in his own life) already that in life
there was simply nothing to do, simply be alive and grateful for it. He knew
what to do because he felt what to do, because he wasn't other than what was
(nature itself, thusness, tathata).

But, all this is very well, but how can we know that the destruction of the
trees, the digging of the soil and the burying were not conventional agriculture
but NF? And the answer to this question is what NF itself is, perception - the
ability to see what is and not the conceptions and theories with which we
normally see the world. The actual fact of the incredibly diverse, lush and
productive orchard that soon came into being on that hillside (there are photos
in Fukuoka's books and I have also seen videos showing this orchard) and the
fact that through the practice of NF, the ever simplifying of the practice
itself, Fukuoka realised he could achieve the same effect of the buried trees by
planting black acacia (Acacia mearnsii [molissima]).

I do not believe that where we draw the line of intervention (or
non-intervention) is in fact a question to be decided from within NF. Or, to say
the same thing from a different direction, one can do anything one wants.

This leaves nature wide open to abuse but, as NFers, our work is not to protect
nature but to start the long journey that brings us (ourselves) back to nature.
If we begin from the right place then what we do will embody our understanding,
just as Fukuoka's farm has done, and by this embodiment there will be something
from which others can learn if they so desire.

Jamie
Souscayrous

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Steve Gage
   To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 8:38 PM
   Subject: RE: [fukuoka_farming] Flirting with nature


   Jamie,

   I really get a lot from your (and many others of you!) posts here - you help
   me realize what it is that I've already been thinking about, or at least the
   kind of things I've been thinking about. I love the "flirting" idea - that's
   really how I feel sometimes, though often it's just simple all-out love :-)

   Here are a few random thoughts from an ecologist (who also teaches a
   sustainable gardening class), brought forth by your last post, but also the
   past few days' excellent sharing here. Please consider this "thinking out
   loud" and sharing, not some dogma that I adhere to or promote. And please
   excuse my abundant use of "", but I don't know how else to inflect my
   meaning.

   I sometimes think of NF, and "do nothing", in slightly different words - I
   think of what I "do" with my land as "allowing", or maybe even better
   "getting out of the way as much as possible". Busy-humans seem to have a
   need to DO things, and most of what we do is thwart natural processes. Ah,
   but what constitutes "as much as possible"?... That seems to me to be where
   most of our questions lurk.

   The more I learn about soil microbiology and ecology, the more I realize I
   don't need to know about soil microbiology and ecology, except insofar as my
   learning reminds me continuously to get out of the way! I would no more
   "turn over" the soil in my garden than chop off my hand - such a violent and
   personal grotesquery - not only because I know what it would do, but equally
   because I don't know. To me, science is for wonderment, not control. Every
   new "fact" that comes to light merely shows how deep (indeed bottomless!)
   the well of the unknown and unknowable truly is.

   Fortunately, and this to me is MF's (Happy Birthday, Good Man!) great gift
   to us all... We don't NEED to know! Imagine being told that in five minutes,
   you were going to be consciously responsible for and in control of all your
   bodily functions and metabolisms and whatnot. You'd be dead shortly
   thereafter. Fortunately, you don't have to, and life goes on just fine. Just
   as impossible and idiotic to me is the notion of "managing" ecosystems. You
   don't manage ecosystems, you get out of the way.

   That said (here comes the busy monkey!), so much of our land is so hurt, and
   it seems natural to want to, well, "do" something to help it along. We throw
   seed, we throw mulch. So far so good. Of course we never spray chemicals,
   but do we hand-pick bugs? Do we pull up sod-forming grasses coming into our
   vegetables? There are plenty of other "weeds". And of course, there's the
   ultimate kicker: do we have any "right" to even "grow" "vegetables" in New
   Hampshire, USA? Do we only grow what comes up without any help? The "weeds"
   that we have around here are 99% introduced by humans anyway - why shouldn't
   we pull them? MF writes about chopping down trees and burying them to put
   carbon back into the soil - that seems pretty extreme to me...

   My point is that many of us, I believe, have our hearts in a very seeking
   place, and we get hold of principles, and we want to take them to their
   logical conclusions. And at the same time, we want to eat real food from our
   land. And we struggle over just where that line falls between "doing
   nothing" and "fidgeting". We are all trying to find that line, and trying to
   find it under all different conditions of climate and soil. That's one
   reason I value this group so much.

   I will close with a little story. A very good friend of mine grew up in a
   family that always had large vegetable gardens, and grew a lot of their food
   with what are, I'm afraid to say, "traditional" methods around here:
   rototill every spring and fall, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, etc. He
   knew my gardening ways very well, and needed no convincing to go in a more
   NF direction, and tried to persuade his father (a real engineering type) to
   at least go somewhat organic, and then, finally no-till. He wasn't getting
   anywhere. One day his father called him to say that he was selling his
   rototiller - he'd been digging a hole to transplant something or other, and
   discovered a big fat toad resting down in the cool earth. It was the very
   thought of rototilling that toad* that changed this man's whole notion of
   gardening, and indeed soil. The moral of the story? I don't know, but
   certainly there is one...

   All best,

   Steve

   *PS - It helped that he liked toads. I guess that somehow, in his mind, that
   toad became "toads", and "toads" became that toad, and *presto*, that was
   the end of rototilling. A beautiful thing :-)





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There was an article at NYTimes.com yesterday about trees in Niger.
It reported that farmers started noticing scarcity of trees about 20
years ago and started leaving saplings alone in their fields instead
of uprooting them. They started "owning" the trees on their
properties, protecting them, planting around them, etc. One of them
is a nitrogen fixer that obligingly drops its leaves in the rainy
season so it doesn't compete for water or light with crops!
(The "government" had been claiming the trees as "government
property" so no one had felt responsible for them. They were "in the
way" so farmers would pull them out.) Now the government has changed
policy and allowed the trees to be husbanded by the farmers, who can
get far more benefit over time by selling fruits, seeds, coppicing,
etc. than by cutting it down. Previous tree planting programs by the
government had been expensive failures.
Now satellite photos show extensive regreening of large areas of
Niger. "Experts" are "surprised."
It was very heartening to read this, I wanted to pass it on.
I am reading Christopher Alexander's works now, the 4 volume series
about the Nature of Order. He describes in great detail the way "The
Wholeness" continually changes beautifully through "structure
preserving changes" in Nature. Incredible insights and illustrations
from arts and sciences. The Niger example was a good example of
this, where all they had to do was stop pulling out trees, stop
getting in the way of the activity of Wholeness.
Brian Kennedy
www.thefreedomofcraft.com

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@...> wrote:
>
> So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in the
summer.
> It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)
>
> I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
> but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is bassically
just
> weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much that 's even
> edible.
>
> What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend plannting
> to make this space more edible.
>
> I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes there
or
> not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not
improved
> so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...
>
> and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more productive...
they
> only have one or 2 berries per bush....
>
> Jeff
>
Jeff,

it would help to know where the lake country is - what zone?  If
there are trees around, collect the leaves and use as mulch, or pile
them up this year and use the compost next year.  How shady is the
spot?  Some vegies can take more shade than others.   have the
raspberries ever been pruned or cut back?

anthony   NH zone 5

I have never seen nor heard of Jerusalem Artichoke being invasive. Is it, in
your area?  Yo, I
love the stuff, and wish it grew here with more abundance!!  Love to serve up
that nice
black stuff to unsuspecting folk, and have them fall in love! <G>

That Mullein, btw, is some of the best medicine you can have for those who do
hard work
for a living; like homestead/farmer types.  It is one of the finest herbs for
helping back
troubles, joint troubles, and is also (most folk know of these applications) for
respiratory
problems. Not "food", but is such a gentle, effective, and all-purpose healing
and useful
herb, I'd certainly think twice before dismissing it.  It also is a great plant
for opening up
hardpan and other depleted soils- one reason it's growing where it is now.  So,
if you don't
want it where it's at, why not propagate it where you have some soil that isn't
doing so
well?

How about some asparagus?  I remember this simply because this plant was
discussed
elsewhere that I read this morn- but asparagus is some mighty fine eats, and
easy as an
old log to care for.

Am not certain what you mean by "mules tail" do you by any chance know the
botanical
name for it, or have/have links to pics of it?

If you can grow the egyptians, you can grow some fine garlic, too.

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "garden03048" <apdirusso@...> wrote:
>
> --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@> wrote:
> >
> > So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in the
> summer.
> > It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)
> >
> > I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
> > but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is bassically
> just
> > weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much that 's even
> > edible.
> >
> > What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend plannting
> > to make this space more edible.
> >
> > I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes there
> or
> > not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not
> improved
> > so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...
> >
> > and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more productive...
> they
> > only have one or 2 berries per bush....
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> Jeff,
>
> it would help to know where the lake country is - what zone?  If
> there are trees around, collect the leaves and use as mulch, or pile
> them up this year and use the compost next year.  How shady is the
> spot?  Some vegies can take more shade than others.   have the
> raspberries ever been pruned or cut back?
>
> anthony   NH zone 5
>

I live in zone 4 borderline to zone 3 mn/nd
THe other primary weed in question
is also known as horseweed aka Erigeron canadensis

It gets sun from about 10 am until just about dusk.
It is close to swamp also, during spring water table is generally
within a foot of the surface....

The raspberries are wild, never been cut back,
but have competition from poison ivy, sumac and dogwood,,,...
I'm discouraging the ivy, encouraging the sumac, and nuetral about the
dogwood...

the rasberries are only in direct sun 4-6 hours a day...
I know the good properties of mullein so I don't mind it,
but it doesn't get me fed.. lol... i keep thinking someday
I"ll discover a use for the gazillion seeds each plant produces...






--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "debhlv" <debhlv@...> wrote:
>
> I have never seen nor heard of Jerusalem Artichoke being invasive.
Is it, in your area?  Yo, I
> love the stuff, and wish it grew here with more abundance!!  Love to
serve up that nice
> black stuff to unsuspecting folk, and have them fall in love! <G>
>
> That Mullein, btw, is some of the best medicine you can have for
those who do hard work
> for a living; like homestead/farmer types.  It is one of the finest
herbs for helping back
> troubles, joint troubles, and is also (most folk know of these
applications) for respiratory
> problems. Not "food", but is such a gentle, effective, and
all-purpose healing and useful
> herb, I'd certainly think twice before dismissing it.  It also is a
great plant for opening up
> hardpan and other depleted soils- one reason it's growing where it
is now.  So, if you don't
> want it where it's at, why not propagate it where you have some soil
that isn't doing so
> well?
>
> How about some asparagus?  I remember this simply because this plant
was discussed
> elsewhere that I read this morn- but asparagus is some mighty fine
eats, and easy as an
> old log to care for.
>
> Am not certain what you mean by "mules tail" do you by any chance
know the botanical
> name for it, or have/have links to pics of it?
>
> If you can grow the egyptians, you can grow some fine garlic, too.
>
> --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "garden03048" <apdirusso@>
wrote:
> >
> > --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@> wrote:
> > >
> > > So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in the
> > summer.
> > > It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)
> > >
> > > I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
> > > but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is bassically
> > just
> > > weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much that 's even
> > > edible.
> > >
> > > What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend plannting
> > > to make this space more edible.
> > >
> > > I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes there
> > or
> > > not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not
> > improved
> > > so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...
> > >
> > > and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more productive...
> > they
> > > only have one or 2 berries per bush....
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > Jeff,
> >
> > it would help to know where the lake country is - what zone?  If
> > there are trees around, collect the leaves and use as mulch, or pile
> > them up this year and use the compost next year.  How shady is the
> > spot?  Some vegies can take more shade than others.   have the
> > raspberries ever been pruned or cut back?
> >
> > anthony   NH zone 5
> >
>

If you can handle an unusual recommendation, I've heard peeing on rhubarb does
wonders, so maybe
yours needs a boost.



________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com

Here is more on my urine therapy suggestion.  Pee in a 5 gallon bucket and fill
with water.
Pour on the soil. Also I hear rhubarb needs sun.
--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "garden03048" <apdirusso@...> wrote:
>
> --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@> wrote:
> >
> > So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in the
> summer.
> > It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)
> >
> > I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
> > but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is bassically
> just
> > weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much that 's even
> > edible.
> >
> > What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend plannting
> > to make this space more edible.
> >
> > I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes there
> or
> > not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not
> improved
> > so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...
> >
> > and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more productive...
> they
> > only have one or 2 berries per bush....
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> Jeff,
>
> it would help to know where the lake country is - what zone?  If
> there are trees around, collect the leaves and use as mulch, or pile
> them up this year and use the compost next year.  How shady is the
> spot?  Some vegies can take more shade than others.   have the
> raspberries ever been pruned or cut back?
>
> anthony   NH zone 5
>

Hello,
This is Michiyo from Japan.

I would like to hear your opinions about the possibilities for a
meeting concerning natural farming.

European friends brought up this topic to me and we all feel the
need to share our progress and achievement to date, and to get
together for the first time to see who is doing what in different
regions of the world.  So it will not be a formal conference type of
meeting, but we are thinking about a small report session.

At this point, I would like to know who can give a tangible report--
written document, photograph, or video on an individual natural
farmer's or communities' achievement made by seedball technique, no-
till farming or other low-imput farming who share Fukuoka's
philosophy.
I am also interested in hearing what is now happening to the farms
whose photographs are in the last Fukuoka's book(the collection of
photographs). Please update me with their activities if anyone has
information.

If there's anyone who wants to share your personal experiences or
know of anyone who have something to say, please let me know or
respond to this thread.

Any comments or suggestions appreciated, too.

Sincerely,
Michiyo

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@...> wrote:
>
>
> I live in zone 4 borderline to zone 3 mn/nd
> THe other primary weed in question
> is also known as horseweed aka Erigeron canadensis
>
> It gets sun from about 10 am until just about dusk.
> It is close to swamp also, during spring water table is generally
> within a foot of the surface....
>
> The raspberries are wild, never been cut back,
> but have competition from poison ivy, sumac and dogwood,,,...
> I'm discouraging the ivy, encouraging the sumac, and nuetral about
the
> dogwood...
>
> the rasberries are only in direct sun 4-6 hours a day...
> I know the good properties of mullein so I don't mind it,
> but it doesn't get me fed.. lol... i keep thinking someday
> I"ll discover a use for the gazillion seeds each plant produces...
>
>
>
>
> Maybe you should try cutting back the raspberries.  Some people cut
them to the ground in late winter.  I have 'domestic' everbearers
that I cut down to three feet or so.  I also remove dead canes.  This
I do in late winter or early spring.  Seems to help a lot.

anthony  NH zone 5
>

Jeff, did you know that goats will eat the poison ivy with no ill
effects to them?  Many people use goats to eradicate, or control
poison ivy.

Gloria, Texas

--- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@...> wrote:
>
>
> I live in zone 4 borderline to zone 3 mn/nd
> THe other primary weed in question
> is also known as horseweed aka Erigeron canadensis
>
> It gets sun from about 10 am until just about dusk.
> It is close to swamp also, during spring water table is generally
> within a foot of the surface....
>
> The raspberries are wild, never been cut back,
> but have competition from poison ivy, sumac and dogwood,,,...
> I'm discouraging the ivy, encouraging the sumac, and nuetral about
the
> dogwood...
>
> the rasberries are only in direct sun 4-6 hours a day...
> I know the good properties of mullein so I don't mind it,
> but it doesn't get me fed.. lol... i keep thinking someday
> I"ll discover a use for the gazillion seeds each plant produces...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "debhlv" <debhlv@> wrote:
> >
> > I have never seen nor heard of Jerusalem Artichoke being invasive.
> Is it, in your area?  Yo, I
> > love the stuff, and wish it grew here with more abundance!!  Love
to
> serve up that nice
> > black stuff to unsuspecting folk, and have them fall in love! <G>
> >
> > That Mullein, btw, is some of the best medicine you can have for
> those who do hard work
> > for a living; like homestead/farmer types.  It is one of the
finest
> herbs for helping back
> > troubles, joint troubles, and is also (most folk know of these
> applications) for respiratory
> > problems. Not "food", but is such a gentle, effective, and
> all-purpose healing and useful
> > herb, I'd certainly think twice before dismissing it.  It also is
a
> great plant for opening up
> > hardpan and other depleted soils- one reason it's growing where it
> is now.  So, if you don't
> > want it where it's at, why not propagate it where you have some
soil
> that isn't doing so
> > well?
> >
> > How about some asparagus?  I remember this simply because this
plant
> was discussed
> > elsewhere that I read this morn- but asparagus is some mighty fine
> eats, and easy as an
> > old log to care for.
> >
> > Am not certain what you mean by "mules tail" do you by any chance
> know the botanical
> > name for it, or have/have links to pics of it?
> >
> > If you can grow the egyptians, you can grow some fine garlic,
too.
> >
> > --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "garden03048" <apdirusso@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So I have this weekend spot in lake country that I go to in
the
> > > summer.
> > > > It has rhubarb that doesn't do too good (too shaded, i think)
> > > >
> > > > I put some egyptian onoins there and they love it,
> > > > but its an old (very sandy) strawberry patch, that is
bassically
> > > just
> > > > weeds. mostly grass and mules tail and mullen, not much
that 's even
> > > > edible.
> > > >
> > > > What vegetables and other perrenials would you recommend
plannting
> > > > to make this space more edible.
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to decide wether I want to put jerusam artichokes
there
> > > or
> > > > not, i have some here in a planter, but they're wild, and not
> > > improved
> > > > so the tubers are really small..., and they're invasive,...
> > > >
> > > > and what can I do to make the wild raspberries more
productive...
> > > they
> > > > only have one or 2 berries per bush....
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > Jeff,
> > >
> > > it would help to know where the lake country is - what zone?
If
> > > there are trees around, collect the leaves and use as mulch, or
pile
> > > them up this year and use the compost next year.  How shady is
the
> > > spot?  Some vegies can take more shade than others.   have the
> > > raspberries ever been pruned or cut back?
> > >
> > > anthony   NH zone 5
> > >
> >
>