Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Proposed changes to website

Expand Messages
  • Larry Haftl
    Hello all, Based on recent comments and suggestions I propose making the following changes to the website. Your thoughts and comments about this will be
    Message 1 of 5 , Nov 6, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello all,

      Based on recent comments and suggestions I propose making the following
      changes to the website. Your thoughts and comments about this will
      be greatly appreciated.

      Regarding a subsection for project reports and such, currently there
      is the "Images" subsection with the following description: "A collection
      of photographs of farms and gardens that use the Fukuoka Farming
      method
      (or variations on the method)."

      What if I change the name "Images" to "Projects" and the description
      (and purpose) to be: "A collection of reports and photographs of
      gardens, farms and projects that use the Fukuoka Farming method".
      I don't think that is a big change, but would clarify the purpose
      of that subsection and give us a place specifically for reports on
      what we, and others, are doing.

      Regarding a place for posting information for teachers as Napi has
      requested, we currently have a subsection called "Opportunities"
      with the description: "This section contains a calendar of events,
      apprenticeship and employment opportunities, classes and seminars,
      as well as other special offers and opportunities."

      What if we use this subsection to include what Napi is requesting.
      We could leave the name the same, change the description to include
      something like "...seminars, and teaching resources." and post pages
      there for teachers' uses as well as the other items mentioned. Would
      this work for you Napi? Does anyone have any problem with this? Any
      other ideas?

      BTW, if any of you ever want to make comments, suggestions or questions
      without going "public" with it, PLEASE feel free to email me directly.
      I have a standing policy that personal emails are "privledged communications".
      In my business it could be no other way.

      As to a place for book reviews, I still think they should go in the
      "Articles" subsection, but I can change the description to include
      "book reviews". Would this be OK or do they need to be somehow set
      off differently?

      If you have visited the complete site you may have noticed a pattern
      of using sub-pages within subsections if there is more than one document
      for the subsection. This is deliberate on my part for structural
      and maintainence reasons. I can easily add subpages without making
      major revisions to a subsection's primary page. This means we can
      add things such as a sub-page for book reviews or teachers resources
      or whatever with minimal hassle and no changes to the common navigation
      structure. The common navigation structure is the navigation bar
      at the top of every page. If I make a change to it I have to change
      it on EVERY page by hand (for you techies, I know about and use style
      sheets on my site, but I can't be sure they will work on a mirror
      site, so I don't use them on the Fukuoka site).

      That leaves the question of how comprehensive or focused the links
      section should be. On the one hand there is the risk of distracting
      from the focus on Fukuoka's teachings and methods. On the other hand
      it would give people easier access to other somewhat kindred websites.


      Let me clairfy something here. In my mind (and on my lists of links)
      there are three different categories of links.

      The first is sites that have specific Fukuoka-related content --
      the Greenbelt project in Europe, news articles and interviews about
      and with Fukuoka, where to get his books, other documents that talk
      about him and his methods, etc.

      The second category is sites that have information that might be
      directly useful in implementing a project using Fukuoka's methods
      -- plant encyclopedias, research documents on cover crops, trees
      or whatever, sources for organic seeds, etc.

      I don't think anyone would argue against including those two categories
      of links, but if I'm wrong please let me know.

      The third category is sites related to other methods of sustainable
      agriculture -- Permaculture, biointensive, biodynamic... pick your
      favorite flavor -- and philosophically friendly sites -- holistic
      lifestyles, tree-hugging, etc. This, for me, is where things become
      sticky.

      Let me give you my arguments against including them, but before I
      do I want to say two things. If the group concensus is that they
      should be included, I will include them. Not grudgingly or with muttered
      deprecations, but truly freely and willingly. The second thing is
      that just because I set up and maintain the website, please don't
      let that mislead you into thinking that my opinion on this matter
      counts any more than yours does. In my mind, and I hope in yours,
      it doesn't!

      Having said that let me argue against including category three links
      for the following reasons:

      In researching the other methods I was made constantly aware, not
      as a Fukuoka Fanatic but as a trained journalist, that all of the
      other methods are human-centered. All of them are based on the idea
      humans can have ultimate control over what will or will not grow.
      When they do talk of "working with nature", the underlying subtext
      is nature as subserviant to the human's will. Don't just take my
      word for this. Check it out yourself.

      When people find themselves outside of their normal comfort range
      for any length of time they will usually try to turn to or grasp
      something more familiar to hold on to. Fukuoka's methods tend to
      force us to get way outside of our normal comfort range. They also
      force us to think in non-traditional ways, and if we get confused
      or uncomfortable we have a tendency to reach for something more traditional.
      Consider how many comments on this list have involved the making
      and using of compost. Try to find a document on organic gardening
      that DOESN'T promote the use of compost. And then look at what Fukuoka
      says about compost.

      We have been culturally conditioned to look for quick answers, solutions,
      and gratifications (thanks in no small part to TV). Fukuoka's methods
      are indeed simple, but understanding them and how to use them is
      anything but.

      My concern with including the category three links, given the conditions
      I just outlined, is that they will be providing nothing more than
      a distraction and escape from having to think about and confront
      what Fukuoka is all about -- natural farming.

      One last point: Any of those links we might post are already available,
      along with thousands more, to anyone who knows how to type a keyword
      into any search engine. At most, all we would be doing by posting
      those types of links is making it a bit more convenient for visitors
      to the Fukuoka site to leave the site for essentially unrelated sites.


      Please take the time to think about and comment on all that I have
      proposed here. I think it's time to firm up the website's overall
      structure and begin fleshing out the empty content pages.

      Larry Haftl
      larry@...
      http://larryhaftl.com/fukuoka
      http://FukuokaNaturalFarming.org
    • Justin .
      ... Great idea. ... Larry, I had difficulty in finding this section. Now I have seen where it is listed - on the home page. But on the other pages (eg images
      Message 2 of 5 , Nov 7, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        >From: Larry Haftl <larry@...>
        >Hello all,
        >Based on recent comments and suggestions I propose making the following
        >changes to the website. Your thoughts and comments about this will
        >be greatly appreciated.

        >What if I change the name "Images" to "Projects" and the description
        >(and purpose) to be: "A collection of reports and photographs of
        >gardens, farms and projects that use the Fukuoka Farming method".
        >I don't think that is a big change, but would clarify the purpose
        >of that subsection and give us a place specifically for reports on
        >what we, and others, are doing.

        Great idea.


        >Regarding a place for posting information for teachers as Napi has
        >requested, we currently have a subsection called "Opportunities"
        >with the description: "This section contains a calendar of events,
        >apprenticeship and employment opportunities, classes and seminars,
        >as well as other special offers and opportunities."

        Larry, I had difficulty in finding this section. Now I have seen where it is
        listed - on the home page. But on the other pages (eg images page,
        philosophy page etc) at the top, where the pages are listed, this one is
        absent. Now that I've found it, it appears to be empty.


        >What if we use this subsection to include what Napi is requesting.
        >We could leave the name the same, change the description to include
        >something like "...seminars, and teaching resources." and post pages
        >there for teachers' uses as well as the other items mentioned. Would
        >this work for you Napi? Does anyone have any problem with this? Any
        >other ideas?

        All great. Sounds very practical.

        [..]
        >As to a place for book reviews, I still think they should go in the
        >"Articles" subsection, but I can change the description to include
        >"book reviews". Would this be OK or do they need to be somehow set
        >off differently?


        Great.

        [...]
        >That leaves the question of how comprehensive or focused the links
        >section should be. On the one hand there is the risk of distracting
        >from the focus on Fukuoka's teachings and methods. On the other hand
        >it would give people easier access to other somewhat kindred websites.

        You know what I'm gonna say don't you...

        >Let me clairfy something here. In my mind (and on my lists of links)
        >there are three different categories of links.


        Yes, I feel that is the good idea. Seperate the links into 3 categories.


        >The first is sites that have specific Fukuoka-related content --
        [..]
        >The second category is sites that have information that might be
        >directly useful in implementing a project using Fukuoka's methods
        >-- plant encyclopedias, research documents on cover crops, trees
        >or whatever, sources for organic seeds, etc.

        Regarding this, perhaps we could also make appendises. For example, in
        Robert Hart's book on Forest Gardening, there is at the back a great list of
        plants and their varieties, what their characteristics are, and what
        environment they are best for. I think that is very Fukuesqe, in that it is
        so important to have the appropriate varieties, so that they can more easily
        establish t6hemselves in natural symbiosis. I'm sure that if all the lovely
        people on the list could contributr info on their experienc with various
        varieties and sspecies, we would have a good, practical resourse.


        >I don't think anyone would argue against including those two categories
        >of links, but if I'm wrong please let me know.

        Great.

        >The third category is sites related to other methods of sustainable
        >agriculture -- Permaculture, biointensive, biodynamic... pick your
        >favorite flavor -- and philosophically friendly sites -- holistic
        >lifestyles, tree-hugging, etc. This, for me, is where things become
        >sticky.

        >Let me give you my arguments against including them, but before I
        >do I want to say two things. If the group concensus is that they
        >should be included, I will include them. Not grudgingly or with muttered
        >deprecations, but truly freely and willingly. The second thing is
        >that just because I set up and maintain the website, please don't
        >let that mislead you into thinking that my opinion on this matter
        >counts any more than yours does. In my mind, and I hope in yours,
        >it doesn't!


        You're great. A fine example to us all.

        >Having said that let me argue against including category three links
        >for the following reasons:
        >
        >In researching the other methods I was made constantly aware, not
        >as a Fukuoka Fanatic but as a trained journalist, that all of the
        >other methods are human-centered. All of them are based on the idea
        >humans can have ultimate control over what will or will not grow.
        >When they do talk of "working with nature", the underlying subtext
        >is nature as subserviant to the human's will. Don't just take my
        >word for this. Check it out yourself.

        In the hope of my being able to learn from responses to what I'm about to
        say, may I play (from an uneducated perspective) devil's advocate:
        "ultimate control over what will or will not grow" - The permaculture people
        who I have talked with, all tell me about the fundamental importance of
        learning from nature. They emphasise working as much as possible with
        nature, and understand that they do not have "ultimate control over what
        will or will not grow". An example could be in their design. They talk of
        designing the layout of the garden or whatever. Then they talk of whatching,
        seeing what happens, and working with the changes. Rather than sticking
        ridgedly to their original plan, they adapt there ideas in accordance with
        what nature has manifested.

        "subserviant to the human's will" - on the other hand, of course, these
        peole I have talked with are trying to control "what will or will not grow",
        and do have the will to have nature work for them. But is this not true for
        Fukuoka? As you have said, he was a comercial farmer! Do you suppose that it
        was the "will of nature" to manifest a rice field? If so, why did it not do
        it by itself? Was it not in fact Mr. Fukuoka applying his will upon nature,
        that brought about those fields of grain.

        Was it "human centred" or "nature centred"?
        If we look at the products - grain and fruit, to sell in the markets - I
        would say that it was human centred. If we look at the methods, we could say
        that it is a manipulation of nature - flooding the fields to kill the weeds,
        applying straw mulch, getting chickens to shit on the straw for the
        necessary chemical decomposition to take place, diging the slopes to create
        terraces for the orchard, cutting down trees for those terraces, applying
        machine oil emulsion on the trees to control insects - I think these are all
        well thought out ways of controlling nature. Some people could use the word
        "subservient".

        But I think that word brings dark conotations, doesn't it. I think when we
        look at the motivation, we would not be comfortable using that word
        "subservient". The motivation behind what Fukuoka was doing, I think, is
        important. I think he has said, the techniques themselves are not the most
        important things. He talks about a personal transformation be importnt,
        doesn't he. He has a love for nature, and has has a direct (non-intelectual)
        experience of being an integral part of nature. And this is reflected in his
        approach. How does nature do it? And he learns a lot like that. One of my
        permaculture friends up in Scotland bought some land, which was said to be
        totally of no agricultural value. He likes walking around, looking at all
        the different plants growing there, seeing such variety. He planed, among
        other things, some willow. He was told it would never grow up there in
        Scotland. He now has lots of willow, and makes all kinds of things out of
        it.
        Robert Hart talked about how England is naturally woodland. He said, farmers
        are always fighting against woodland. That means, every field is trying to
        revert back to being a wood. So Robert thought it is easier to make a
        woodland garden. If trees want to grow, lwt them grow. Of course, he wanted
        to be able to eat as I'm sure Fukuoka-san likes to eat also. So he helped
        food producing trees to grow, and shrubs and so on.

        Also, we have to think of what Our intensions are. What does natural farming
        mean for us? If we have some feeling or experience of the
        interconnectedness/interdependance of everything, then what consequence does
        that have? For some, it means we should farm naturally. For some, it means
        we should give our children an education which bears this in mind.
        I beleive Fukuoka has been very concerned about pollution. He talked about
        the terrible consequences of pollution from farms in Japan. We can see, he
        is seeing the wider picture. He is seeing beyond just farming. He is seeing
        the interconnections. It is not a different topic to think about, for
        example, renewable energy. Energy IS useful! Where I am now, it gets dark at
        about 5 or 5:30. And it gets cold. There is not enough wood for everyone to
        burn. We do use electricity. So wind and solar power countering
        energy-related environmental costs is really not so far away from thoughts
        of pollution in the Inland Sea (see one straw revolution).
        For many people, Natural farming might be about sustainability, and perhaps
        ideas of using the environment while at the same time being able to share it
        with other species. I know that for me, that is very important. That is
        quite "counter-subservientist". That is like, using nature (let's be honest)
        but not being selfish about it and letting other species do their thing too,
        and so allowing ourselves to co-exist with all the spiders and frogs and so
        on. And even admit and perhaps enjoy our co-dependance within this
        interconnected web.
        That is the idea I get from Fukuoka. And that is what I get from many other
        places too. A friend of mine is living in a wood, coppicing. That wood has
        been coppiced now for about 400 years, and supports a great deal of
        wildlife. I have heard about a small-leafed lime tree in the South of
        England, which has been coppiced for about 6000 years - that is one tree -
        one very old tree!


        >When people find themselves outside of their normal comfort range
        >for any length of time they will usually try to turn to or grasp
        >something more familiar to hold on to. Fukuoka's methods tend to
        >force us to get way outside of our normal comfort range. They also
        >force us to think in non-traditional ways,

        very Zen.

        >and if we get confused
        >or uncomfortable we have a tendency to reach for something more
        >traditional.
        >Consider how many comments on this list have involved the making
        >and using of compost. Try to find a document on organic gardening
        >that DOESN'T promote the use of compost. And then look at what Fukuoka
        >says about compost.
        >
        >We have been culturally conditioned to look for quick answers, solutions,
        >and gratifications (thanks in no small part to TV). Fukuoka's methods
        >are indeed simple, but understanding them and how to use them is
        >anything but.
        >
        >My concern with including the category three links, given the conditions
        >I just outlined, is that they will be providing nothing more than
        >a distraction and escape from having to think about and confront
        >what Fukuoka is all about -- natural farming.


        I think that if they don't want to think about it, they won't anyway. If
        they are interested enough to follow Fukuoka links, they will. If they
        don't, they won't regardless. But I think you do have a point, of sorts. I
        think the answer is in the idea of categories. As an example, I could
        suggest that you have a page for the links (so they can all be seen at once
        -less hassle), broken into sections. At the top, you have all Fukuoka stuff,
        showing the priorety. Below, sectioned off, you have the other stuff, with
        an approriate title, such as "other", or "similar topics" or "stuff we are
        also interested in" - whatever.


        >One last point: Any of those links we might post are already available,
        >along with thousands more, to anyone who knows how to type a keyword
        >into any search engine. At most, all we would be doing by posting
        >those types of links is making it a bit more convenient for visitors
        >to the Fukuoka site to leave the site for essentially unrelated sites.

        I must disagree here. For me the situation is fundamentally different, and
        that is why I feel it as being so important. The point is, you can only
        search for something if you know what you are looking for. I never found
        Fukuoka because I didn't know to look. I am very greatful for being
        introduced to his wok by my dear friend Edward. That was my point in giving
        the Amazon analogy. "poeple that bought this book also bought/recommend..."
        I am being introduced to something new, which could be the thing I was
        always wanting.

        Secondly (sorry to go on), had somebody in the street mentioned to me
        Fukuoka, I may have never bothered to follow it up. But it was recommended
        by Edward. That's why I trusted it.
        A search churns out so much stuff. I rather go on recommendations.

        Thanks Larry. You're really doing a great thin with the site.
        Best wishes,
        Justin.

        _________________________________________________________________
        Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
        http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
      • emilia
        the special particularity of natural ag. is the maintaining the dynamic of a wild soil in spite of practicing an agriculture system...agriculture is a
        Message 3 of 5 , Nov 7, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          the special particularity of natural ag. is the maintaining the dynamic of a wild soil in spite of practicing an agriculture system...agriculture is a manipulation, meaning an action is done by human hands: which implies we are imposing something to whatever could have been there "naturally"...but out of all the "manipulations" that humans can do, if the one done is stablishing an agriculture with a dynamic that corresponds to what the soil would have going there if let to itself (instead of agriculturally occupied): is a less harmful thing that whatever other agriculture disturbing the soil would be happening there...
          so my opinion on what links, etc. to put on the fukuoka site should be consistent with this particularity of no-till...if we integrate whatever other "systems" that are already recommending remedies to the disbalances started by touching the soil...it seems to me that we are missing the point, the purpose of the site: the vegetable ( including of annuals) production with soil's self-fertility should be emphasized as what it is: a unique proposition!
          if we drown this info on all the others: ecological, biodynamic,biointensif, etc (but with tilling ways) we wont communicate the important fukuoka-san message...

          david holmgren's vegetable garden is done biodynamically ...& years ago when we met, he didn't show much interest in changing ways...permaculture proposes perennial plants for permanent places but neither him nor bill mollison have endorsed no-till for (annual) vegetable growing...we have this endeavour to carry on: so lets do it without drowing this unique info on all the other stuff...
          i think that in the titles of the sections/sub-sections: the no-tilling, self-fertile dynamic of this agriculture should be emphasized or at least mentionned...

          my comments on larry's posting:

          What if I change the name "Images" to "Projects" and the description
          (and purpose) to be: "A collection of reports and photographs of
          gardens, farms and projects that use the Fukuoka Farming method".
          i would add the word "principles" to Fukuoka farming method" so as to allowd synergistic ag. to be part of the evolution in this research
          Regarding a place for posting information for teachers as Napi has
          requested, we currently have a subsection called "Opportunities"
          with the description: "This section contains a calendar of events,
          apprenticeship and employment opportunities, classes and seminars,
          as well as other special offers and opportunities."

          just as long as the projects relate to activities of gardening without tilling...if they are "only" ecological it seems to me we are again missing the point of our specificity...

          As to a place for book reviews, I still think they should go in the
          "Articles" subsection, but I can change the description to include
          "book reviews". Would this be OK or do they need to be somehow set
          off differently?

          yes: please make it clear that they are books

          That leaves the question of how comprehensive or focused the links
          section should be. On the one hand there is the risk of distracting
          from the focus on Fukuoka's teachings and methods. On the other hand
          it would give people easier access to other somewhat kindred websites.

          Let me clairfy something here. In my mind (and on my lists of links)
          there are three different categories of links.

          The first is sites that have specific Fukuoka-related content --
          the Greenbelt project in Europe, news articles and interviews about
          and with Fukuoka, where to get his books, other documents that talk
          about him and his methods, etc.

          The second category is sites that have information that might be
          directly useful in implementing a project using Fukuoka's methods
          -- plant encyclopedias, research documents on cover crops, trees
          or whatever, sources for organic seeds, etc.

          I don't think anyone would argue against including those two categories
          of links, but if I'm wrong please let me know.

          this 2 categories are up to the point

          The third category is sites related to other methods of sustainable
          agriculture -- Permaculture, biointensive, biodynamic... pick your
          favorite flavor -- and philosophically friendly sites -- holistic
          lifestyles, tree-hugging, etc. This, for me, is where things become
          sticky.

          what about just mentioning one permaculture site (like the british one) that would give the many other links?

          My concern with including the category three links, given the conditions
          I just outlined, is that they will be providing nothing more than
          a distraction and escape from having to think about and confront
          what Fukuoka is all about -- natural farming. i agree

          emilia

          Larry Haftl
          larry@...
          http://larryhaftl.com/fukuoka
          http://FukuokaNaturalFarming.org








          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          fukuoka_farming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Justin .
          ... How does Agroforestry fit in with this. Does Forest Gardening involve any tilling? If not, it sounds like there would be no problem giving links for that.
          Message 4 of 5 , Nov 7, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            >From: "emilia" <emhaz@...>
            >the special particularity of natural ag. is the maintaining the dynamic of
            >a wild soil in spite of practicing an agriculture system...agriculture is a
            >manipulation, meaning an action is done by human hands: which implies we
            >are imposing something to whatever could have been there "naturally"...but
            >out of all the "manipulations" that humans can do, if the one done is
            >stablishing an agriculture with a dynamic that corresponds to what the soil
            >would have going there if let to itself (instead of agriculturally
            >occupied): is a less harmful thing that whatever other agriculture
            >disturbing the soil would be happening there...
            >so my opinion on what links, etc. to put on the fukuoka site should be
            >consistent with this particularity of no-till...


            How does Agroforestry fit in with this. Does Forest Gardening involve any
            tilling? If not, it sounds like there would be no problem giving links for
            that.
            Regarding Permaculture, I think the suggestion of a link to the British site
            is a good idea. There are lots of people involved with that association who
            are interested in and perhaps use Fukuoka's techniques. I am sure also that
            if you asked them, they would add our site to their links page. That would
            be very good.

            An example of no-till permaculture could be Ben Law. He has a book, "The
            Woodland Way: A Permaculture Approach to Sustainable Woodland Management"
            which I will be happy to review once I've read it. He is the coppicer. I
            don't think he ever tills. As I have said, his woods have been continually
            coppiced for 400 years. This then, also seems consistent.

            Emilia, do you have a web-site?
            Best wishes,
            Justin.


            _________________________________________________________________
            Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
            http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
          • Beatrice Gilboa
            ... consistent with this particularity of no-till...if we integrate whatever other systems that are already recommending remedies to the disbalances started
            Message 5 of 5 , Nov 8, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              emilia wrote:

              >> so my opinion on what links, etc. to put on the fukuoka site should be
              consistent with this particularity of no-till...if we integrate whatever
              other "systems" that are already recommending remedies to the disbalances
              started by touching the soil...it seems to me that we are missing the point,
              the purpose of the site: the vegetable ( including of annuals) production
              with soil's self-fertility should be emphasized as what it is: a unique
              proposition!
              if we drown this info on all the others: ecological,
              biodynamic,biointensif, etc (but with tilling ways) we wont communicate the
              important fukuoka-san message...

              So is my opinion too, more clearly said than I did before.

              Beatrice
              Israƫl



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "emilia" <emhaz@...>
              To: <fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 3:12 PM
              Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Proposed changes to website


              > the special particularity of natural ag. is the maintaining the dynamic of
              a wild soil in spite of practicing an agriculture system...agriculture is a
              manipulation, meaning an action is done by human hands: which implies we are
              imposing something to whatever could have been there "naturally"...but out
              of all the "manipulations" that humans can do, if the one done is
              stablishing an agriculture with a dynamic that corresponds to what the soil
              would have going there if let to itself (instead of agriculturally
              occupied): is a less harmful thing that whatever other agriculture
              disturbing the soil would be happening there...
              > so my opinion on what links, etc. to put on the fukuoka site should be
              consistent with this particularity of no-till...if we integrate whatever
              other "systems" that are already recommending remedies to the disbalances
              started by touching the soil...it seems to me that we are missing the point,
              the purpose of the site: the vegetable ( including of annuals) production
              with soil's self-fertility should be emphasized as what it is: a unique
              proposition!
              > if we drown this info on all the others: ecological,
              biodynamic,biointensif, etc (but with tilling ways) we wont communicate the
              important fukuoka-san message...
              >
              > david holmgren's vegetable garden is done biodynamically ...& years ago
              when we met, he didn't show much interest in changing ways...permaculture
              proposes perennial plants for permanent places but neither him nor bill
              mollison have endorsed no-till for (annual) vegetable growing...we have this
              endeavour to carry on: so lets do it without drowing this unique info on all
              the other stuff...
              > i think that in the titles of the sections/sub-sections: the no-tilling,
              self-fertile dynamic of this agriculture should be emphasized or at least
              mentionned...
              >
              > my comments on larry's posting:
              >
              > What if I change the name "Images" to "Projects" and the description
              > (and purpose) to be: "A collection of reports and photographs of
              > gardens, farms and projects that use the Fukuoka Farming method".
              > i would add the word "principles" to Fukuoka farming method" so as to
              allowd synergistic ag. to be part of the evolution in this research
              > Regarding a place for posting information for teachers as Napi has
              > requested, we currently have a subsection called "Opportunities"
              > with the description: "This section contains a calendar of events,
              > apprenticeship and employment opportunities, classes and seminars,
              > as well as other special offers and opportunities."
              >
              > just as long as the projects relate to activities of gardening without
              tilling...if they are "only" ecological it seems to me we are again missing
              the point of our specificity...
              >
              > As to a place for book reviews, I still think they should go in the
              > "Articles" subsection, but I can change the description to include
              > "book reviews". Would this be OK or do they need to be somehow set
              > off differently?
              >
              > yes: please make it clear that they are books
              >
              > That leaves the question of how comprehensive or focused the links
              > section should be. On the one hand there is the risk of distracting
              > from the focus on Fukuoka's teachings and methods. On the other hand
              > it would give people easier access to other somewhat kindred websites.
              >
              > Let me clairfy something here. In my mind (and on my lists of links)
              > there are three different categories of links.
              >
              > The first is sites that have specific Fukuoka-related content --
              > the Greenbelt project in Europe, news articles and interviews about
              > and with Fukuoka, where to get his books, other documents that talk
              > about him and his methods, etc.
              >
              > The second category is sites that have information that might be
              > directly useful in implementing a project using Fukuoka's methods
              > -- plant encyclopedias, research documents on cover crops, trees
              > or whatever, sources for organic seeds, etc.
              >
              > I don't think anyone would argue against including those two categories
              > of links, but if I'm wrong please let me know.
              >
              > this 2 categories are up to the point
              >
              > The third category is sites related to other methods of sustainable
              > agriculture -- Permaculture, biointensive, biodynamic... pick your
              > favorite flavor -- and philosophically friendly sites -- holistic
              > lifestyles, tree-hugging, etc. This, for me, is where things become
              > sticky.
              >
              > what about just mentioning one permaculture site (like the british one)
              that would give the many other links?
              >
              > My concern with including the category three links, given the conditions
              > I just outlined, is that they will be providing nothing more than
              > a distraction and escape from having to think about and confront
              > what Fukuoka is all about -- natural farming. i agree
              >
              > emilia
              >
              > Larry Haftl
              > larry@...
              > http://larryhaftl.com/fukuoka
              > http://FukuokaNaturalFarming.org
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > fukuoka_farming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > fukuoka_farming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.