I love this post Steve.
Our local council are taking all the greenest places to build houses on,
and creating "parks" out of what is left of the countryside. It is
getting hard to find somewhere to walk that isn't managed or manipulated
by unscrupulous and greedy man.
I think it is a great point that birds and other creatures don't have to
ask permission to help disperse seeds, and neither does the wind. If we
are going to work with nature we have to start compensating somehow for
the widespread carnage that is known as "development".
This forum has rekindled my interest in wild foods that are indigenous,
and there seem to be a few places where you can buy seed/bulbs etc. As
gardeners we all know there is always a surplus when you grow things, so
my intention is to distribute that surplus thoughtfully in my local
area, wherever natural habitats have been damaged or overtaken by
developmments of whatever sort.
If we are not part of the solution, we are probably part of the problem,
as they say.
Wonderful contributions on this subject, and thanks for all the plant
info in the database!
Much love from Whinnie
Steve Sainsbury wrote:
> Interesting discussion.
> In my opinion, our interests as "the public" are in having abundant,
> available sources of food - not in arbitrarily following the letter of
> code of planning (which, all too often, is geared toward private
> for profit).
> If the planning commission wants to cut down trees, they don't ask the
> public; so why should the public ask permission to plant trees?
> Is it illegal for plants and trees to self-seed? Or to have their seeds
> dropped from the sky by a bird? Why then should humans ask permission to
> seed trees in public places?
> The "errant" ones ('errant' meaning 'wrong,' not 'few') are those who seek
> to seize and regulate our last remaining wild and green spaces.
> Contrary to
> the opinions of some people, many of these regulators are not
> actually elected officials, but permanent secretaries with a guaranteed
> salary and no vested interest in upholding the local, public good.
> It is this desire for control of public places by administrators and
> middlemen which places our green space in danger. The ancient tradition of
> planting food along our "migration routes" will go on, I think,
> despite any
> Hopefully I won't offend anyone when I say that a serious reality check is
> in order. Our lands are being sold off to the highest bidder everywhere we
> look. There are no unlimited resources. Perpetuation of sustainable
> local food systems (a.k.a. - guerilla planting) in otherwise purely
> decorative public byways is a highly intelligent, organised act - not the
> anarchy it's made out to be.
> Right, I'm climbing down off MY soapbox now..
> Peace and love,
> (replying to:)
> Tue Apr 8, 2008 12:48 am (PDT)
> excuse me? The public consists of everybody as a whole not of
> errant individuals. And The Public via its elected representatives
> has made laws you'd best check on.
> Or you risk destruction of illegal plantings which is a waste of your
> time and efforts and of the plants themselves, and maybe a fine.
> Check with your local jurisdiction about this stuff. If you have to
> go before a city planning commission or something do so.
> Mary Christine Erikson
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]