In article ,
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:

They'll go and spend 2 bucks buying a plastic packed bunch of miserable
coriander rather than spending a few minutes putting in a few seeds and
doing a bit of watering now and then. A whole seasons worht of coriander
could be had for the 2 bucks they spend, but they'd rather buy it than put
in a small effort.

Hah. I've tried to grow coriander in Sydney. I'd never seen a plant with
only two leaves bolt before...

They already DO have that problem. But given that consumers don't bloody
care how many food miles their food has done, just so long as they can eat
what they want, when they want, it is consumers who will get hit time and
time again till they get a bit smarter and start to shop smarter. I cannot
believe that any Australian would buy oranges produced in California, but
the shops are full of them and they sell.

There was the time I bought a few lemons -- and I KNEW that lemons were in
season at the time, and assumed they were local -- got home and saw the word
California on the stickers! Aiee!

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:41:18 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:
snipped

Len I seem to have missed this post somehow and gone on to reply to you
further down the thread - maybe I have a propagation problem, I swear I
couldn't see this yesterday.

Anyway I find much good sense in what you say here. I recall fondly the
market gardens embedded in or close to the city and it does make sense in a
world where transport costs are set to rise hugely. But how to stop or even
reverse the trend of turning such areas into housing?

David

g'day david,

some here think that this is my idea totally? but that is so they can
protect their comfort zones at this time. i responded to your post,
and along with what mollesin and holmgren also say we need change and
as you poijnted out it needs to start at some point or the change will
be harder and harder to do.

it took around 40 or 50 years for us to be taken to where we are now
so it could easily take that long to turn around. so it is no good
anyone exposing the hind quarters with their head in a bucket of sand,
you know what happens while your behind is exposed hey?

this will take a drive from the whole community, but alas once we say
never then never it will be. there is a lot more food could be grown
at home than what there currently is so even there, there is no effort
going on.

but anyway unless something new comes along this will be my last
response as i see it i'm only a messenger, the problem is already
occuring.

we need farmers with insight who can see that even without the
permaculture label (which is about all you can realy say) they need to
be very much more sustainable, and the farmers won't budge until
pressure comes from the community.

every time i see tv shows of england i see this monolithic castles and
edifaces with vast areas of well kept lawn and pretty gardens, yet i'm
sure like here there are people in those communities that are short on
food, so waht if you have to walk along paths between productive vege'
gardens or fruit trees to get to the building.

food does not grow overnight it takes time for all crops to mature.

take care mate.

With peace and brightest of blessings,

len & bev

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I doubt that roof/balcony gardens in the big cities of my acquaintance
(Sydney, Melbourne) are ever going to produce more than a supplement to
the
diets of the inhabitants and that would be at a great cost of materials.
These cities are looking at permanent water restrictions and great
increases
in the cost of water. Squandering tap water in this way is pointless.
Roof
water is insignificant in high rise due to the high ratio of people to
roof
area.

you might be over-focussing on roof growing, here, david :-)

sydney & melbourne have a lot of land space in people's yards. while back
yard (and balcony!!) fruit & veg growing seems insignificant, it's not
really (particularly when you consider how common it was once and (i dearly
hope) will be again. have you seen any of the designs (e.g. clive blazey's)
for food gardens in the ordinary smallish yard? it's actually fairly
impressive. considering that farming itself (on farms) isn't going away any
time soon, i can't see that there'd be too many problems anyway, but
certainly cities like sydney & melbourne would be fully capable of most
(although not all) householders growing a surprising quantity of fruit & veg
_if they wanted to_.

added to that, another of c. blazey's "things" is substituting food plants
for ornamentals (food plants being handily ornamental as well, nice that). a
tiny yard (such as i had myself in sydney, various locations) with some
ornamentals can be refigured to a tiny yard full of food plants. i doubt
that such a yard could meet all the householders' needs, but you need to
consider how much they _could_ produce. as more people make such changes, we
will know more. it's endless really - small town near here has a strip where
the street trees are fruit trees (possibly planted by householders, i don't
know). people are thinking of new ways to make gardening more vertical, to
handle small spaces. etc. i have lived nearby to food-oriented gardens in
the burbs of canberra! hence that is why i believe they're more common than
we think, and are entirely practical too. anyone could do it.

You seem to be assuming there will be a great catastrophe and that drastic
measures will be required to survive. My original question was about
whether
permaculture was a suitable replacement for broadacre farming, I am more
interested trying to find ways of not having a catastrophe.

i think the poster's point is that cuba actually had that catastrophe, but
they turned it around. in a crisis, people are galvanised. until such a
crisis, well, they're not, & until then tend not to think about the problem,
even. this is actually a problem, because things like "loss of agricultural
land" or even "climate change" don't really affect anyone in (say) sydney at
this time. they cannot conceive what the problem might be. yet, we all know
that in an unforseen severe crisis, you could starve the population out
within a week (although it actually takes longer than a week to starve to
death, of course - say 3 or 4). there's no food storage there beyond 3 or 4
_days_, it would be (relatively) easy (for an Organisation of Baddies) to
block the roads so nobody could go in or out. really!

now, i doubt that will ever happen of course, but equally i doubt the
populace even realises how vulnerable they potentially are. the cuban
situation was apparently national, so therefore a bit more easily solved by
the populace as a whole. gardening is entirely empowering, for quite obvious
reasons. what a high-density mega-city could or would do i don't know, & i
must admit it's really not my problem, so i don't have any intention of
devoting more thought to that.

It's in that ring area about 1 1/2 hours from the city centre that so much
good land is getting turned into housing estates. I agree with you and
Len
that there is a problem there. I don't see how to fix it though, do you?

get the developers on the run! g seriously, in nsw it is looking like
developers' days of doing whatever the hell they like are going to be, of
necessity, numbered. not a bad thing, that.

How did we go from agrarian economies to the present? By huge increases
in
specialisation and efficiency.

no, because the industrial revolution happened!

"huge increases in specialisation and efficiency" really only occurred in
the way that (i assume) you are thinking of, post ww2. hello, herbicides!

Sadly broadacre farming has serious unwanted
side effects and demands inputs that are going to be much more expensive
or
not available in future.

it's also not AT ALL efficient in the way (i assume) you are thinking of.
for example, backyard veggie gardens are massively more water-efficient than
a broadacre veggie farm & more able to supply their own inputs. small farms
are more efficient than big ones. sheer magnitude does not equal something
being genuinely efficient - it brings a certain economy of scale, but in
every other way is less efficient - even growth and plant health is not so
good, because it's monocultural, so you don't get the returns per square
metre that you would on a small, mixed farm. so yes, the cost of inputs is
inefficient as well, and the undesirable outputs impinge seriously on any
genuine "efficiency". someone told me recently (no idea how true it is, but
it doesn't sound "wrong" to me based on my observations) that with broadacre
farming, you only expect to make 6% over your inputs (ie. make $106 dollars
for every $100 spent) which doesn't count the eventual cost of damaging
outputs. by any measure, that is wildly inefficient & is going to have to
change rapidly.

I mention efficiency because it must be a factor in
any system of sustainable growing that replaces the broadacre farming. In
a
future of very limited resources where the per capita consumption of
resources
will have to be reduced in countries like yours and mine how can we
countenance inefficiency?

we can't countenance it now, yet we do :-)

solutions would include: smaller, more mixed farms. farms focussing on
growing crops or livestock which work in the conditions that exist, not to
continue trying to alter conditions when it can't be done. the populace
growing more of its own food (whether that means in one's own yard, or
buying locally, as directly as possible). further reducing the import sector
(which actually is quite small at the moment in terms of food, thankfully -
to not allow this to increase whatsoever, and actively work on reducing it
to near-zero). active governmental preservation of agricultural land
(including putting their foot down re expanding cities even more). proper
support for farmers - rather than bailing them out of disaster after
disaster, to aid in remaking the farming sector a bit & utilising knowledge
which is there, so that people are getting good outcomes for all, rather
than struggling on as is, inefficiently & in some cases disastrously. to
educate the public (this isn't going to happen this week - as i said the
govt wants you to buy a cabbage, not to grow one. most governments need
their heads read on this matter - they are simply _wrong_.) there are lots
of things to be done, it's a question of will, not of possibility.

two other things i was told recently by different people, neither of which i
have checked, but include as discussion points perhaps - firstly, that john
macarthur's obsession with sheep put the mockers on other peoples' ideas for
farming more suitable livestock. secondly, that a chicken farmer needs
(iirc) 20,000 birds to be considered a primary producer. (20,000!!! i
consider 20 birds to be primary production! ;-) clearly, there's a bit of
re-thinking that needs to be done. re-thinking is good.
kylie

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

all these things are interrelated. thank you for reading my rant! :-)
kylie



Current economic dogma says you must have growth around 3% per year for a
healthy economy. Nobody knows how to do it with much less without having
unacceptable unemployment. Thus the current model condemns us to be
constantly expanding: population, energy use, mineral use, land use, must
all
grow indefinitely. Except that obviously in the real world they cannot.

Political systems around the world that reward short term popularity and
punish long term planning don't help.

we know that the current model doesn't help - it's getting the beancounters
& other bottom-feeders to accept that is the problem. the first world govt
to actively remake the situation is going to be everyone's hero.

of course, most govts that have a great idea are invaded by the u.s. &
crushed for the next 50 years ;-)
kylie

Charlie wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:59:33 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:


of course, most govts that have a great idea are invaded by the u.s. &
crushed for the next 50 years ;-)
kylie


Hey, you need to update! We are now on the Hundred Year Plan. Our
Repugnican candidate, John McCentury is talking a hundred years in
Iraq.

truly?! my goodness.

Got Oil!

(er, won't all the oil be gone by then?)


Foo, we yanks, gonna grab it all. All for us and none for others.

**** me, hurry and put us out of our misery and save yerselves.

Charlie

well, not to rain on your parade, but self-hating americans are nearly as
tedious as the other kind! g! i know, it hurts to realise that nothing
about yourselves is unique or particularly interesting in either a good or a
bad sense, but you'll manage :-)

have you seen our spiffy new prime minister creating necessary, yet polite
and pleasant, runctions in china? what a one he is!! i don't know that the
general public actually _likes_ him or not, but my word, there is a great
deal to be admired. sometimes he makes my jaw drop right off my head. you
want to find yourselves someone more like that. (obama?)
kylie

Chookie wrote:

Hah. I've tried to grow coriander in Sydney. I'd never seen a plant with
only two leaves bolt before...

Lol, I know exactly what you mean.

In article ,
"0tterbot" wrote:

Charlie wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:59:33 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:


of course, most govts that have a great idea are invaded by the u.s. &
crushed for the next 50 years ;-)
kylie


Hey, you need to update! We are now on the Hundred Year Plan. Our
Repugnican candidate, John McCentury is talking a hundred years in
Iraq.

truly?! my goodness.

Got Oil!

(er, won't all the oil be gone by then?)


Foo, we yanks, gonna grab it all. All for us and none for others.

**** me, hurry and put us out of our misery and save yerselves.

Charlie

well, not to rain on your parade, but self-hating americans are nearly as
tedious as the other kind! g! i know, it hurts to realise that nothing
about yourselves is unique or particularly interesting in either a good or a
bad sense, but you'll manage :-)
I beg to differ with you 0tterbot. We Americans seem to live in a
strange state of schizophrenia. Most people who meet us find that we can
be charming and thoughtful, yet most people would say that our
government is self-serving at best, and at worst, criminal. We consume
25% of the worlds energy and presently have plans to continue fouling
the air that you breath by extracting fossil fuel from oil shale and tar
sands long after the Saudi wells run dry. Global warming just may be a
new marketing opportunity;-) Our government, with our tax dollars,
spends 40% of the worlds budget on weapons. That means that we are a
bunch of dangerous motherf***ers. We are also the world largest arms
suppliers, so any war is a good war for us:-) You, my friend, have no
control over the 800 lb. gorilla in the cage with you, we do, and don't
exercise it. I am always impressed that a six month old child from
anywhere sounds and acts the same. We are all born equal (no nation has
a monopoly on saints or sinners) but the tribe that we are born into
determines our personal power and pecking order. We, the Americans, are
in a position to exert pressure on that gorilla. Charlie, was selflessly
ignoring his tribe, and beseeching his brothers and sister of our
species to save humanity. Can you imagine his hubris?


have you seen our spiffy new prime minister creating necessary, yet polite
and pleasant, runctions in china? what a one he is!! i don't know that the
general public actually _likes_ him or not, but my word, there is a great
deal to be admired. sometimes he makes my jaw drop right off my head. you
want to find yourselves someone more like that. (obama?)
kylie
--

Billy

Impeach Pelosi, Bush & Cheney to the Hague
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:14:17 -0500, Charlie wrote:

Hey, you need to update! We are now on the Hundred Year Plan. Our
Repugnican candidate, John McCentury is talking a hundred years in Iraq.
Got Oil!

They call themselves the Project for a New American Century for a reason.

"0tterbot" wrote in message

have you seen our spiffy new prime minister creating necessary, yet polite
and pleasant, runctions in china? what a one he is!! i don't know that
the general public actually _likes_ him or not, but my word, there is a
great deal to be admired. sometimes he makes my jaw drop right off my
head. you want to find yourselves someone more like that. (obama?)

There's something about Obama that I feel is a bit plastic. Dunno what it
is but I just haven't warmed to him.

"Terryc" wrote in message
Chookie wrote:

Hah. I've tried to grow coriander in Sydney. I'd never seen a plant
with only two leaves bolt before...

Lol, I know exactly what you mean.

Plant in your winter. You must both be in a much hotter climate than I am.
I had huge bushes and I planted in spring.

"Chookie" wrote in message
news:ehrebeniuk-E4EAEC.23360110042008@news...

Hah. I've tried to grow coriander in Sydney. I'd never seen a plant with
only two leaves bolt before...


I only grow it during the winter, it's frost hardy.

David

Charlie wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:28:55 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:
have you seen our spiffy new prime minister creating necessary, yet polite
and pleasant, runctions in china? what a one he is!! i don't know that
the
general public actually _likes_ him or not, but my word, there is a great
deal to be admired. sometimes he makes my jaw drop right off my head. you
want to find yourselves someone more like that. (obama?)
kylie


What? He's sucking up to the new big money since our economy is going
down the shitter? What a louse. :-)

no, i meant that sincerely!! i am very impressed. it's not many p-m.s who
can or would tell the chinese (in mandarin) that they have a few human
rights issues!


You're right. I am not sure about obama, as far as his policies are
concerned, but, damn, the boy has charisma and is fast on his feet.
*If* things were to go as he portarys, perhaps you all would love us
again. But one must always ask, who really controls the show?

well, don't ask me!

i also think yanks have an over-inflated idea of how much they were ever
loved in the first instance g
kylie

"0tterbot" wrote in message
Charlie wrote in message

What? He's sucking up to the new big money since our economy is going
down the shitter? What a louse. :-)

no, i meant that sincerely!! i am very impressed. it's not many p-m.s who
can or would tell the chinese (in mandarin) that they have a few human
rights issues!

I agree that seeing him talking directly to the Chinese was very impressive.
I dont think too many world leaders would have the range of languages that
he does. But I do think they have to get off their arses and start doing
something.

Since they've taken over the role as the Government, they've probably only
sat for about 4 weeks. Not enough to do a bloody thing of use, yet.


You're right. I am not sure about obama, as far as his policies are
concerned, but, damn, the boy has charisma and is fast on his feet.

The trouble with 'charismatic' leaders is that the instant people see
through the 'charisma', they drop like a ton of lead. I'm not yet convinced
that Obama has anything of substance. Hillary does, but she certainly has
baggage.

*If* things were to go as he portarys, perhaps you all would love us
again. But one must always ask, who really controls the show?

i also think yanks have an over-inflated idea of how much they were ever
loved in the first instance g

:-)) It does tend to come as a surprise to many Americans that they aren't
universally loved, but I do think that Charlie might be an exception to that
grouping as he seems to have made an effort to look beyond his borders.

It's not so difficult to understand such a mind set if you think of us
having 300 million people on our continent - imagine trying to keep up with
current affairs within the nation in that circumstance, let alone trying to
know what is going on in the rest of the world. Add to that being the most
powerful nation on earth and it must be a bit of a heady mix.

I've always thought that we were extraordinarily lucky to be where we are
and what we are. We're a piddling little, unimportant nation stuck at what
other nations see as being the bottom of the world, but that works to our
benefit. We take in news and media from all sorts of nations and because we
all feel that we are isolated, we travel, and for our size, we travel a lot.

Love Kevin,
Love his approach, but lets face it.
You cant change course overnight re change of government.
It seemed to me that the Libs were acting as if they knew what was
around the corner before they lost the plot.
With pipelines being blown up, English oil workers on strike, they have
all the excuses to have every ones budgets blow sky high.
Better be careful in investing, except locally.
French Truffles look like a good market to be in...
Weather had better shape up this season.
We will all be in trouble.
Seems like the government knows this, and so restricting what
supermarkets are doing to farmers prices. And about time too....
Re human right issues, we may have a few locally too, with our natives.
Thats the pommy influence of past generations.
Lets get it right this time.




FarmI wrote:
"0tterbot" wrote in message
Charlie wrote in message

What? He's sucking up to the new big money since our economy is going
down the shitter? What a louse. :-)
no, i meant that sincerely!! i am very impressed. it's not many p-m.s who
can or would tell the chinese (in mandarin) that they have a few human
rights issues!

I agree that seeing him talking directly to the Chinese was very impressive.
I dont think too many world leaders would have the range of languages that
he does. But I do think they have to get off their arses and start doing
something.

Since they've taken over the role as the Government, they've probably only
sat for about 4 weeks. Not enough to do a bloody thing of use, yet.
You're right. I am not sure about obama, as far as his policies are
concerned, but, damn, the boy has charisma and is fast on his feet.

The trouble with 'charismatic' leaders is that the instant people see
through the 'charisma', they drop like a ton of lead. I'm not yet convinced
that Obama has anything of substance. Hillary does, but she certainly has
baggage.

*If* things were to go as he portarys, perhaps you all would love us
again. But one must always ask, who really controls the show?

i also think yanks have an over-inflated idea of how much they were ever
loved in the first instance g

:-)) It does tend to come as a surprise to many Americans that they aren't
universally loved, but I do think that Charlie might be an exception to that
grouping as he seems to have made an effort to look beyond his borders.

It's not so difficult to understand such a mind set if you think of us
having 300 million people on our continent - imagine trying to keep up with
current affairs within the nation in that circumstance, let alone trying to
know what is going on in the rest of the world. Add to that being the most
powerful nation on earth and it must be a bit of a heady mix.

I've always thought that we were extraordinarily lucky to be where we are
and what we are. We're a piddling little, unimportant nation stuck at what
other nations see as being the bottom of the world, but that works to our
benefit. We take in news and media from all sorts of nations and because we
all feel that we are isolated, we travel, and for our size, we travel a lot.

"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
...

I agree that seeing him talking directly to the Chinese was very
impressive. I dont think too many world leaders would have the range of
languages that he does. But I do think they have to get off their arses
and start doing something.

Since they've taken over the role as the Government, they've probably only
sat for about 4 weeks. Not enough to do a bloody thing of use, yet.

well no, but what can you do in just 4 weeks? :-)

i do, however, think that symbolic actions are important (in terms of
getting us all moving on to where we are going) & there's been a lot of
that. actual sitting time isn't set by govts, so what can one do? in the
meantime, i love the way they are going through like a dose of salts. we
NEEDED it!

also, i am secretly shallow so keep that in mind when i say: i hate his
ties. he never wears a tie i like. his taste in ties is absolutely foul.
something should be done..!

but i can forgive a bad tie in someone who i sincerely believe is all set to
do the right things, not awful things like ahem did.

You're right. I am not sure about obama, as far as his policies are
concerned, but, damn, the boy has charisma and is fast on his feet.

The trouble with 'charismatic' leaders is that the instant people see
through the 'charisma', they drop like a ton of lead. I'm not yet
convinced that Obama has anything of substance. Hillary does, but she
certainly has baggage.

all i can really say on this subject (like i even CARE!) is that neither of
them (none of them!) could be worse than the incumbent.

*If* things were to go as he portarys, perhaps you all would love us
again. But one must always ask, who really controls the show?

i also think yanks have an over-inflated idea of how much they were ever
loved in the first instance g

:-)) It does tend to come as a surprise to many Americans that they
aren't universally loved, but I do think that Charlie might be an
exception to that grouping as he seems to have made an effort to look
beyond his borders.

charlie is noice. :-)

having said that, any country probably has a majority of nice (in their way)
individuals. it's how they act collectively that matters, in many ways. that
seems to be the problem with the farcical olympic torch business - most
chinese people are lovely, but the govt there is appalling. i think some
chinese are feeling rather oppressed in a personal way by the protests when
it's actually a governmental thing that shouldn't be taken personally.

It's not so difficult to understand such a mind set if you think of us
having 300 million people on our continent - imagine trying to keep up
with current affairs within the nation in that circumstance, let alone
trying to know what is going on in the rest of the world. Add to that
being the most powerful nation on earth and it must be a bit of a heady
mix.

I've always thought that we were extraordinarily lucky to be where we are
and what we are. We're a piddling little, unimportant nation stuck at
what other nations see as being the bottom of the world, but that works to
our benefit. We take in news and media from all sorts of nations and
because we all feel that we are isolated, we travel, and for our size, we
travel a lot.

i think obscurity is great. not to mention, necessary.
kylie