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

RE: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Regarding White Ant problem.

Expand Messages
  • Dieter Brand
    Larry, Welcome back! Thanks for trying to mediate, but don t worry, we are not at each other s throat, it s all very civilized. I wouldn t write off NF, or
    Message 1 of 16 , Jan 3, 2008
      Larry,

      Welcome back! Thanks for trying to mediate, but don't
      worry, we are not at each other's throat, it's all very civilized.

      I wouldn't write off NF, or organic no-till, as a commercial
      non-starter. Even though it may not be possible to adapt
      it to many places in the way originally envisaged by Fukuoka.
      Other than difficult climatic conditions, there are also
      economic and regulatory conditions, especially in the
      industrialized West, which make it hard for farmers to
      go this way.

      Anyway, I think Fukuoka is still a source of inspiration to
      many, even in regard to practical gardening/farming matters.
      There undoubtedly also is the philosophical and spiritual
      dimension to Fukuoka. I feel in tune with many of his ideas
      in this respect too. Yet, used in a "dogmatic" way this
      tends to stifle pragmatic discussions about the question
      of how to put NF into practice. That, I think is a tragedy.

      We don't only face a climatic melt down, but unnoticed
      by many, this goes hand in hand with the contamination of
      the food chain with innumerable toxic substances that will
      kill us all sooner or later and a loss of organic matter in
      agricultural soils on which all live on this planet depends.
      If NF cannot contribute anything in practical terms to
      solving these problems, then we might as well forget all
      about it.

      Dieter Brand
      Portugal

      Lawrence <lawrence@...> wrote:
      Jamie Nicole wrote:
      > ... Fukuoka_Farming is not about farming at all ... (snip)

      Dieter Brand wrote:
      I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one, if words
      are to have a meaning then natural farming is farming, is farming,
      is ... And no matter what interpretation we may attribute to some
      of Fukuoka's words, the man grew his food by an ingenious method
      developed in years of meticulous and painstaking efforts.

      You don't have to disagree, just understand that you are talking about the
      same thing from two different perspectives, both of them accurate and valid
      though limited.

      To some, Fukuoka Farming is (or can be) a method for growing food (Dieter's
      perspective). To others it can be a philosophical way of life or approach to
      living that uses growing food as a vehicle or means to achieving a state of
      being more closely in tune with nature and natual processes than might
      otherwise be possible (Jamie's perspective).If I misrepresented either one
      of you in this paragraph I apologize and would welcome correction.

      For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who set up the Fukuoka
      Farming website (www.fukuokafarmingol.info). Haven't done anything to it for
      quite some time because of matters somewhat unrelated to the topic of the
      website, but I think I'm at a point where I'll be working on it again later
      this month.

      Personally, from what I've seen, heard and experienced I think Fukuoka's
      methods are useful in food production to a point, but only to a point. The
      only farm I know of that used Fukuoka's methods without
      modification/adjustment was Fukuoka's farm, which no longer uses his methods
      because they eventually turned out to be not commercially competitive. The
      work done by Emilia Hazelip and others to adapt/employ his methods to create
      commercially viable market gardens shows more promise for sustained,
      commercial food production. But then so does hydroponics, aquaponics,
      aeroponics, etc.

      I'm going to be changing the website. Probably leave what's there there and
      add other stuff. I'm totally open to suggestions on how to make the website
      more useful. If any of you have any ideas for this then please let me know
      either through this forum or directly at "L at haftl dot com".

      Larry


      Recent Activity

      5
      New Members

      Visit Your Group
      Sitebuilder
      Build a web site
      quickly & easily
      with Sitebuilder.

      Best of Y! Groups
      Discover groups
      that are the best
      of their class.

      Shedding Pounds
      on Yahoo! Groups
      Read sucess stories
      & share your own.



      .





      ---------------------------------
      Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Tradingpost
      Jamie, isn t it american indian languages that don t have separate nouns and verbs? No thing is thought of separate from what it does or what you do with it.
      Message 2 of 16 , Jan 3, 2008
        Jamie, isn't it american indian languages that don't have separate nouns
        and verbs? No thing is thought of separate from what it does or what you do
        with it. All is in flux, all is process. That is so different from western
        concepts where we add fertilizer to soil and never see the networks of life
        that make the whole greater than the sum of its parts.

        paul tradingpost@...

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

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

        On 1/3/2008 at 9:20 AM Dieter Brand wrote:

        >Jamie,
        >
        > "methodless method", you like these things, just as you like
        > Meister Eckehart, the dancing Wu-Li Masters (or was that
        > someone else?) and so many other icons of my distant youth.
        > We can throw ko-ans at each other until we drop dead.
        >
        > When we caught the ox we can ride on his back to the market
        > square, and, in the end forget all about the ox. Then, words
        > will again mean what they always meant, farming will be
        > farming again.
        >
        > Dieter
        >
        >Jamie Nicol <souscayrous@...> wrote:
        > Dear Dieter, Fukuoka used what he called a 'methodless method'
        >and he came
        >to it not through human ingenuity but by letting go all knowledge.
        >
        >It is true that I am not a farmer, although I farm (or is that garden?
        When
        >does a gardener become a farmer?)
        >
        >Words will always miss their target because they 'thing' the world and
        what
        >I'm trying to express is no 'thing' at all.
        >This is as true of a book as it is of an email discussion as it is of a
        >finger pointing at the moon.
        >
        >Jamie
        >Mas Franch and Souscayrous
        >
      • Robert Monie
        Hi Larry, Let me second Dieter s welcome back. One update long overdue on your site is to expand the stars section. When that sidereal mapping was made,
        Message 3 of 16 , Jan 3, 2008
          Hi Larry,

          Let me second Dieter's welcome back. One update long overdue on your site is to expand the "stars" section. When that sidereal mapping was made, most of us were "seeing stars"; that is, growing stuff in our imagination rather than the soil. Now we've got some real farmers like Dieter growing lots of plants more or less naturally, and they have certainly earned a place on "the map." And those of us who have worked on the soil, have grown used to having our fondest assumptions bite the dust before the reality of nature as it is played out on our little squares of earth.

          It is an amazing thing that food for humans grows at all amid the forbs and grasses fit for cows; it is an evolutionary wonder that we did not have to develop the cud-chewing capacity and multiplex stomach of the ruminants; instead we developed (with the help of nature) our own kind of food. Reverence, therefore, rather than contempt or indifference is the proper stance for us as we view the handiwork of generations of human plant breeders and farmers of all persuasions, whose names and provenance we will never know, that gave us bok choy, tomatoes, peaches, buckwheat, and all the rest of the foods that grace our tables today.
          We benefit from all their meddling, their serendipity, their failures, their blood sweat and tears.

          Bob Monie
          New Orleans, La 70119







          Dieter Brand <diebrand@...> wrote:
          Larry,

          Welcome back! Thanks for trying to mediate, but don't
          worry, we are not at each other's throat, it's all very civilized.

          I wouldn't write off NF, or organic no-till, as a commercial
          non-starter. Even though it may not be possible to adapt
          it to many places in the way originally envisaged by Fukuoka.
          Other than difficult climatic conditions, there are also
          economic and regulatory conditions, especially in the
          industrialized West, which make it hard for farmers to
          go this way.

          Anyway, I think Fukuoka is still a source of inspiration to
          many, even in regard to practical gardening/farming matters.
          There undoubtedly also is the philosophical and spiritual
          dimension to Fukuoka. I feel in tune with many of his ideas
          in this respect too. Yet, used in a "dogmatic" way this
          tends to stifle pragmatic discussions about the question
          of how to put NF into practice. That, I think is a tragedy.

          We don't only face a climatic melt down, but unnoticed
          by many, this goes hand in hand with the contamination of
          the food chain with innumerable toxic substances that will
          kill us all sooner or later and a loss of organic matter in
          agricultural soils on which all live on this planet depends.
          If NF cannot contribute anything in practical terms to
          solving these problems, then we might as well forget all
          about it.

          Dieter Brand
          Portugal

          Lawrence <lawrence@...> wrote:
          Jamie Nicole wrote:
          > ... Fukuoka_Farming is not about farming at all ... (snip)

          Dieter Brand wrote:
          I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one, if words
          are to have a meaning then natural farming is farming, is farming,
          is ... And no matter what interpretation we may attribute to some
          of Fukuoka's words, the man grew his food by an ingenious method
          developed in years of meticulous and painstaking efforts.

          You don't have to disagree, just understand that you are talking about the
          same thing from two different perspectives, both of them accurate and valid
          though limited.

          To some, Fukuoka Farming is (or can be) a method for growing food (Dieter's
          perspective). To others it can be a philosophical way of life or approach to
          living that uses growing food as a vehicle or means to achieving a state of
          being more closely in tune with nature and natual processes than might
          otherwise be possible (Jamie's perspective).If I misrepresented either one
          of you in this paragraph I apologize and would welcome correction.

          For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who set up the Fukuoka
          Farming website (www.fukuokafarmingol.info). Haven't done anything to it for
          quite some time because of matters somewhat unrelated to the topic of the
          website, but I think I'm at a point where I'll be working on it again later
          this month.

          Personally, from what I've seen, heard and experienced I think Fukuoka's
          methods are useful in food production to a point, but only to a point. The
          only farm I know of that used Fukuoka's methods without
          modification/adjustment was Fukuoka's farm, which no longer uses his methods
          because they eventually turned out to be not commercially competitive. The
          work done by Emilia Hazelip and others to adapt/employ his methods to create
          commercially viable market gardens shows more promise for sustained,
          commercial food production. But then so does hydroponics, aquaponics,
          aeroponics, etc.

          I'm going to be changing the website. Probably leave what's there there and
          add other stuff. I'm totally open to suggestions on how to make the website
          more useful. If any of you have any ideas for this then please let me know
          either through this forum or directly at "L at haftl dot com".

          Larry

          Recent Activity

          5
          New Members

          Visit Your Group
          Sitebuilder
          Build a web site
          quickly & easily
          with Sitebuilder.

          Best of Y! Groups
          Discover groups
          that are the best
          of their class.

          Shedding Pounds
          on Yahoo! Groups
          Read sucess stories
          & share your own.

          .

          ---------------------------------
          Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

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






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • pattyloof
          ... clearer. I must have missed it then. Sorry to offend. Patty
          Message 4 of 16 , Jan 3, 2008
            --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Brand <diebrand@...> wrote:

            > I have clearly explained
            > why there are ants in one place and not in another based on first hand
            > experience for over 10 years. I don't think, I can make it any
            clearer.


            I must have missed it then. Sorry to offend.

            Patty
          • Dieter Brand
            Patty, No offence at all. I was saying that, as far as I could see, if ants can find shelter they will multiply in direct proportion to the food available and
            Message 5 of 16 , Jan 3, 2008
              Patty,

              No offence at all. I was saying that, as far as I could
              see, if ants can find shelter they will multiply in direct
              proportion to the food available and that in this region,
              predators, even if they exist elsewhere, didn't have
              a significant impact on ants.

              I live on a heavy clay soil, that is ideal for building
              rammed earth constructions, ants take advantage of
              this by building extensive tunnels underground. They
              mainly live on seeds, even though they will also
              collect dead insects and other things. And since
              there are plenty of seeds from grass and weeds
              they have been able to prosper and multiply. Similar
              conditions have led to large ant populations all around
              probably since time immemorial, except, in places with
              sandy soil where ants can't build their tunnels.

              But as I said, I don't see ants as a pest, they can be
              a nuisance at times, but they also fulfil many useful
              functions.

              Dieter

              pattyloof <pattyloof@...> wrote:
              --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Brand <diebrand@...> wrote:

              > I have clearly explained
              > why there are ants in one place and not in another based on first hand
              > experience for over 10 years. I don't think, I can make it any
              clearer.

              I must have missed it then. Sorry to offend.

              Patty






              ---------------------------------
              Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.