GardenBanter.co.uk

GardenBanter.co.uk (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/)
-   Australia (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/australia/)
-   -   Large scale permaculture (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/australia/172713-large-scale-permaculture.html)

David Hare-Scott 07-04-2008 01:56 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
I am interested in any work that has been done on how practical and cost
effective a large scale commercial growing operation using permaculture
principles is or might be.

Does anybody know of:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale permaculture
2) Any case of a large scale permaculture operation now working or under
construction

David



Terryc 07-04-2008 02:26 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
David Hare-Scott wrote:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale permaculture


Lettuce, tomatos, cucumbers,
You can find the latter two in the ABC landline archives.

2) Any case of a large scale permaculture operation now working or under
construction


As mentioned above.

BTW. "large scale" means having significant impact on the Australian
marke, rather than large scale as in broad acre,

Jock[_2_] 07-04-2008 02:32 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
look he
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=e...adelaide&meta=
not sure where you are but it's as close as google.....
Jock

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
I am interested in any work that has been done on how practical and cost
effective a large scale commercial growing operation using permaculture
principles is or might be.

Does anybody know of:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale
permaculture
2) Any case of a large scale permaculture operation now working or under
construction

David





Terryc 07-04-2008 04:22 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
Terryc wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale
permaculture



Lettuce, tomatos, cucumbers,


Woops, those are hydroponics.
Real brain fart there.

Tried the Permaculture sites?
Its whole focus is really small scale, although I believe they have
organised a few village size sites in various places OS, such as Africa,
Cuba, etc.

len gardener 07-04-2008 08:22 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
g'day david,

there is this place here in south aus'

http://foodforest.com.au/

don't know that it fits your scale or not they are growing edible
stuff using p/c principals, but it is still marginal land that is
being used for less the habitat which it would serve the community
better as.

permaculture is more a mind set of ideas to look after the planet
better, once commercialism comes into it then profit will over ride.

anyhow the place above was featured on ABC landline last sunday.

permaculture would be all about farming sustainably, that is
supporting a well developed habitat as well as being close to those
who need what you are growing (food miles), it's not that you can
produce something out of very marginal land.

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 21:56:18 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:
snipped
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/

len gardener 07-04-2008 08:35 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
again david,

here is the transcript link to that food forest story i don't think it
is the same as the food forest link:

http://www.abc.net.au/landline/conte...6/s2208413.htm



On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 21:56:18 +1000, "David Hare-Scott" snipped
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 08-04-2008 03:15 AM

Large scale permaculture
 

"len gardener" wrote in message
...
g'day david,

there is this place here in south aus'

http://foodforest.com.au/

don't know that it fits your scale or not they are growing edible
stuff using p/c principals, but it is still marginal land that is
being used for less the habitat which it would serve the community
better as.

permaculture is more a mind set of ideas to look after the planet
better, once commercialism comes into it then profit will over ride.


I agree about the mindset. But we are embedded in a largely free enterprise
society in which you have to be commercially viable to keep going. Mollison's
philosophy is such that he would remake much of society, its values and
motives not merely how we get our food. Although he does give a nod to
"legality, people, culture, trade and commerce" as a component in creating a
design. So perhaps he does accept that commerce and making a dollar is not
altogether evil. The question is how do you do it in a society whose
agriculture is based on permaculture?

I know of small scale operations where on a few acres a family is growing
enough to mainly feed themselves and sell some to make a dollar to buy what
they cannot grow. This makes that family very happy, they have the ability to
live in the way that they see it is proper to live.

However Mollison puts forward the idea that permaculture could/should replace
broadacre farming altogether. This leads me to a problem. I cannot see how
every family can have a few acres nor the will/ability to farm it. I cannot
see how we can get away from at least some specialists who use their skill to
get food from the land efficiently on a scale that permits the feeding of the
non-farmers who produce other things. In the long run the choice is to do it
sustainably or to starve when we have mined out the soil. So what replaces
broadacre?

David



David Hare-Scott 08-04-2008 03:34 AM

Large scale permaculture
 

Charlie wrote in message ...
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 21:56:18 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:

I am interested in any work that has been done on how practical and cost
effective a large scale commercial growing operation using permaculture
principles is or might be.

Does anybody know of:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale

permaculture
2) Any case of a large scale permaculture operation now working or under
construction

David


Maybe you will find these helpful.

http://www.polyfacefarms.com/default.aspx


http://kjpermaculture.blogspot.com/2...arm-model.html

Charlie


Thanks. From the look of their customer list they seem to be in the size
category I am interested in. I wonder if they have published anything on
their overall economics, the inputs they use and the productivity of their
land.

I would love to see such an operation but sadly that's out of the question.

David



Terryc 08-04-2008 03:38 AM

Large scale permaculture
 
David Hare-Scott wrote:
So what replaces
broadacre?


They need to become organic.

Billy[_4_] 08-04-2008 06:36 AM

Large scale permaculture
 
In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" wrote:

"len gardener" wrote in message
...
g'day david,

there is this place here in south aus'

http://foodforest.com.au/

don't know that it fits your scale or not they are growing edible
stuff using p/c principals, but it is still marginal land that is
being used for less the habitat which it would serve the community
better as.

permaculture is more a mind set of ideas to look after the planet
better, once commercialism comes into it then profit will over ride.


I agree about the mindset. But we are embedded in a largely free enterprise
society in which you have to be commercially viable to keep going. Mollison's
philosophy is such that he would remake much of society, its values and
motives not merely how we get our food. Although he does give a nod to
"legality, people, culture, trade and commerce" as a component in creating a
design. So perhaps he does accept that commerce and making a dollar is not
altogether evil. The question is how do you do it in a society whose
agriculture is based on permaculture?

Energy is costing more. Local food tastes better than trucked in food.
Diversified farmers cut out the middle man and get top dollar (for what
it is worth these days) for their crops. It looks like the market could
work to the consumers benefit. Unfortunately not all crop land is near
its' consumers, so something needs to be done about the expensive
bottlenecks i.e. Cargill, Archer Daniel Midlands, et al. and some kind
of social support and remediation for growers of mono-cultures.

I know of small scale operations where on a few acres a family is growing
enough to mainly feed themselves and sell some to make a dollar to buy what
they cannot grow. This makes that family very happy, they have the ability to
live in the way that they see it is proper to live.

However Mollison puts forward the idea that permaculture could/should replace
broadacre farming altogether.
This leads me to a problem. I cannot see how
every family can have a few acres nor the will/ability to farm it.


I cannot
see how we can get away from at least some specialists who use their skill to
get food from the land efficiently on a scale that permits the feeding of the
non-farmers who produce other things. In the long run the choice is to do it
sustainably or to starve when we have mined out the soil. So what replaces
broadacre?


The Cuban Model
The Revolution Will Not Be Microwaved by Sandor Katz
p. 28 - 30
Local and seasonal eating usually requires that we adjust our
expectations. Some foods we are used to eating on a daily basis may
simply not be possible in this scheme. For instance, unless you live in
Florida, you might have to let go of that morning glass of orange juice.
But other foods, no less delicious or nutritious (in fact generally far
more so), will replace them. We can learn to love what grows abundantly
and easily around us and reorient our tastes and our habits. Another
completely different take on the idea of a local food challenge a "land
fast," a period of eating only what can be harvested in the immediate
vicinity, in the gardens and the woods. In certain seasons, one could be
very satisfied.
Relatively few people have voluntarily chosen to make the switch to
exclusively local foods. But in some cases circumstances have resulted
in the abrupt disappearance of global trade, and it has been
demonstrated that people can survive and restore food sovereignty. Take,
for example, Cuba. Until 1989 Cuba's major trading partners were the
Soviet nations of Eastern Europe. Cuba exported sugar and imported most
other foods, as well as fuel, machinery, and chemicals. In 1989 about
three times as much Cuban land was planted in sugar cane than was
planted in all other food crops combined. Fifty-seven percent of the
calories in the Cuban diet were imported. But the abrupt disintegration
of the Soviet-allied governments and the Soviet Union itself resulted in
the sudden loss of these trading partners.
The loss of its trade partners meant a loss of two-thirds of Cuba's food
supply, as well as the fuel, machinery, and chemicals upon which its
agricultural system depended. Compounding the shortages was a tightening
of the U.S. economic blockade of Cuba in the early 1990s. The food
shortage was so acute that diseases of malnutrition became widespread.
Lacking the "inputs" (such as chemicals, fuel, and hybrid seeds)
required for industrial-style monoculture, Cuba was forced to transform
its farming system. Food production was decentralized, and farmers in
each region were encouraged to diversify rather than specialize. Urban,
family, and community gardening, which had always been features of Cuban
life, were officially encouraged, and a program ot public education and
model farms was undertaken to spread knowledge about biological farming
methods. The Ministry of Agriculture even replaced its front lawn with
vegetable gardens.

By 1999, Cuba had become a nation of food producers. Urban gardens alone
produced more than eight hundred thousand tons of food, mostly
vegetables. There is no way to compare this sector to pre-1989 levels,
because until then this sector was considered insignificant[ and not
counted. However, this remarkable statistic shows that cities can
produce food, though not in the style of acres upon acres of grain
fields; instead, intensive cultivation of yards and parks and rooftops
can ensure a steady supply of fresh produce to urbanites (for more on
urban gardening, see chapter 3).

The prospect of a crisis is obviously not the only compelling reason to
revive local food production. There are many benefits of local food,
starting with flavor, continuing through nutrition, and definitely
including community economic stability. But it's good for us who live in
a culture of constant convenience consumerism to be reminded that the
time-honored methods of producing food can still feed people perfectly
adequately.

For most people in most places throughout time, the food available has
been organic and local. Organic was all there was until the
mid-twentieth century, and anything beyond local, to the extent that it
was available at all, was an expensive luxury, out of daily reach for
average people. Abundant globalized food may not always be available to
us either. It is easy for me to imagine the United States, or the whole
world, in suddenly different economic circumstances, with an abrupt halt
to all international trade, as Cuba faced in 1989, that forces a
transition to greater dependence on community-based food production. The
skills and practice of food production are important to revive and to
prevent from disappearing.

The following is a little messy because I haven't finished cleaning it
up but perennial crops that can replace annual crop are being
developed. Scientific American, August, 2007

For many of us in affluent regions, our hath-room scales indicate that
get more than enough to eat, which may lead some to believe that it is
easy, perhaps too easy, for farmers to grow our food. On the
contrary, modern agriculture requires vast areas of land, along with
regular infusions of water, energy and chemicals. Noting these
resource demands, the 2005 United Nations-sponsored Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment suggested that agriculture may be the
³largest threat to biodiversity and ecosystem function of any single
human activity."
Today most of humanity's food comes directly or indirectly (as animal
feed) from cereal grains, legumes and oilseed crops. These staples are
appealing to producers and consumers because they are easy to
transport and store, relatively imperishable, and fairly high in protein
and calories. As a result such crops occupy about 80 percent of global
agricultural land. But they are all annual plants, must be grown anew
from seeds every year, typically using resource-intensive cultivation
methods. More troubling, the environmental degradation caused by
agriculture will likely worsen as the hungry human population grows to
eight billion or 10 billion in the coming decades. That is why a number
of
plant breeders, agronomists and ecologists are working to develop
grain-cropping systems that will function much more like the natural
ecosystems displaced by agriculture. The key to our collective success
is transforming the major grain crops into perennials, which can live
for many years. The idea, actually decades old, may take decades more
to realize, but significant advances in plant-breeding science are
bringing this goal within sight at last.


Roots of the Problem

Most of the farmers, inventors and scientists who have walked farm
fields imagining how to overcome difficulties in cultivation probably
saw
agriculture through the lens or' its contemporary successes and
failures. But in the 1970s Kansas plant geneticist Wes Jackson took a
10,00 year step into the past to agriculture with the natural systems
that preceded it. Before humans boosted the abundance of annuals through
domestication and Farming, mixtures of perennial plains dominated nearly
all the planet's landscapes-as they still do in uncultivated areas
today. More than 85 percent of North America's native plant species, for
example, are perennials. Jackson observed that the perennial grasses and
flowers of Kansas'S tall-grass prairirs were highly productive year
after year, even as they built and maintained rich soils.They needed no
fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides to thrive while fending off pests
and disease. Water running off or through the prairie soils was clear,
and wildlife was abundant.
In contrast, Jackson saw that nearby fields of annual crops, such as
maize, sorgum, wheat, sunflowers and soybeans, requent and expensive
care to remain productive. Because annuals have relatively shallow
roots-most of which occur in the top 0.3 meter of soil-and live only
until harvest, many farmed areas had problems with soil erosion,
depletion of soil fertility or water contamination. Moreover, the eerily
quiet farm fields were mostly barren of wildlife. In short, sustaining
annual monocultures in so many places was the problem, and the solution
lay beneath Jackson's boots: hardy
and diverse perennial root systems.
----------

Key Facts
o Modern intensive land use quashes natural biodiversity and ecosystems.
Meanwhile the population will balloon to between eight billion and 10
billion in the coming decades, requiring that more acres be cultivated.
o Replacing single-season crops with perennials would create large root
systems capable of preserving the soil and would aillow cultivation in
areas currently considered marginal.
o The challenge is monumental, but if plant scientists succeed, the
achievement would rival humanity's original domestication of food crops
over the past 10 millennia-and be just as revolutionary.
-The Editors
---------

If annual crops are problematic and natural ecosystems offer
advantages, why do none ofour important grain crops have perennial
roots? The answer lies in the origins of farming. When our
Neolithic ancestors started harvesting seed-bearing plants near their
settlements, several factors probably determined why they favored
annuals.

The earliest annuals to be domesticated, emmer wheat and wild barley,
did have appealingly large seeds. And to ensure a reliable harvest every
year, the first farmers would have replanted some of the seeds they
collected. The characteristics of wild plants can vary greatly, however,
so the seeds of plants with the most desirable traits, such as high
yield, easy threshing and resistance to shattering, would have been
favored. Thus, active cultivation and the unwitting application of
evolutionary selection pressure quickly rcsuhed in domesticated annual
plants with more appealing qualities than their wild annual relatives.
Although some perennial plants might also have had good-size seeds,
they did not need to be replanted and so would not have been subjected
to-or benefited from-the same selection process.

Roots as Solution
Today the traits of perennials are also becoming better appreciated.
With their roots commonly exceeding depths of two meters, perennial
plant communities are critical regulators of ecosystem functions, such
as water management and carbon and nitrogen cycling. Although they
do have to invest energy in maintaining enough underground tissue to
survive the winter, perennial roots spring info action deep within the
soil whenever temperatures are warm enough and nutrients and water
are available. Their constant state of preparedness allows them to be
highly productive yet resiliant in the face of environmental stresss.
environ i nental stresses.

In a century-long study of factors affecting soil erosion, timothy
grass, a perennial hay crop, proved roughly 54 times more effective in
maintaining topsoil than annual crops did. Scientists have also
documented a five fold reduction in water loss and a 35-fold reduction
in nitrate loss from soil planted with alfalfa and mixed perennial
grasses as compared with soil under corn and soybeans. Greater root
depths and longer growing seasons also let perennials boost their
sequestration of carbon, the main ingredient of soil organic matter, by
50 percent or more as compared with annually cropped fields. Because
they do no! need to be replanted every year, perennials require fewer
passes of farm machinery and fewer inputs of pesticides and
fertilizers as well, which reduces fossil-fuel use. The plants thus
lower
the amount ol' carbon dioxide in the air while improving the soil's
fertility.

Herbicide costs for annual crop production may be four to 8.5 times
the herbicide costs for perennial crop prodiiclion, so fewer inputs in
perennial systems mean lower cash expenditures for the farmer.
Wildlife also benefits: bird populations, for instance, have been shown
to be seven times more dense in perennial crop fields than in annual
crop fields. Perhaps most important for a hungry world, perennials are
far more capable of sustainable cultivation on marginal lands, which
already have poor soil quality or which would be quickly depleted by a
few years of intensive annual cropping. For all these reasons, plant
breeders in the U.S. and elsewhere have initiated research and breeding
programs over the past five years to develop wheat, sorghum,
sunflower, intermediate wheatgrass and other species as perennial
grain crops. When compared with research devoted to annual crops,
perennial grain development is still in the toddler stage . Taking
advantage ofthe significant advances in plant breeding over the past
two or three decades, however, will make the large-scale development
of high-yield perennial grain crops feasible within the next 25 to 50
years.

Perennial crop developers are employing essentially the same two
methods as those used by many other agricultural scientists: direct
domestication of wild plants and hybridization of existing annual crop
plants with their wild relatives. These techniques are potentially
complementary, but each presents a distinct set of challenges and
nclvnnrngcs as well.

Assisted Evolution

Direct domestication of wild perennials is the more straighcforward
approach to creating perennial crops. Relying on time-tested methods
of observation and selection of superior individual plants, breeders
seek to increase the frequency of genes for desirable traits, such as
easy separation of seed from husk, a nonshattering seed, large seed
size, synchronous maturity, palatability, strong stems and high seed
yield. Many existing crops, such as corn and sunflowers, lent
themselves readily to domestication in this manner. Native Americans,
for example, turned wild sunflowers with small heads and seeds into
the familiar large-headed and largeseeded sun flower [see box on page
88].
Active perennial grain domestication programs are currently focused
on intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium), Maximilian
sunflower (Helianthus maximiliani), Illinois bundleflower (Desmanthus
illinoensis) and flax (a perennial species of the Linum genus). Of
these,
the domestication of intermediate wheatgrass, a perennial relative of
wheat, is perhaps in the most advanced stages.

To use an existing annual crop plant in creating a perennial, wide
hybridization-a forced mating of two different plant species-can
bring together the best qualities of the domesticated annual and its
wild perennial relative. Domesticated crops already possess desirable
Attributes, such as high yield, whereas their wild relatives can
contribute genetic variations for traits such as the perennial habit
itself as well as resistance to pests and disease.

Of the 13 most widely grown grain and oil-seed crops, 10 are capable
of hybridization with perennial relatives, according to plant breeder T.
Stan Cox of the Land Institute, a Kansas non-profit that Jackson co-
founded to pursue sustainable agriculture. A handful of breeding
programs across the U.S. are currently pursuing such interspecific
(between species) and intergeneric (between genera) hybrids to
develop perennial wheat, sorghum, corn, flax and oilseed sunflower. For
more than a decade, UniversityofManitoba researchers have studied
resource use in perennial systems, and now a number of Canadian
institutions have started on the long road to developing perennial grain
programs as well. The University of Western Australia has already
established a perennial wheat program as part of that country's
Cooperative Research Center for Future Farm Industries. In addition,
scientists at the Food Crops Research Institute in Kunming, China, are
continuing, work initiated by the International Rice Research Institute
in
the 199Os to develop perennial upland ncr rice hybrides.

At the Land Institute, breeders are working both on domesticating
perennial wheatgrass and on crossing assorted perennial wheatgrass
species (in particular, Th. intermedium, Th. ponticum and Th.
elongatum) with .annual wheats. At present, 1,500 such hybrids and
thousands of their progeny are being screened for perennial traits. The
process of creating these hybrids is ilself labor-intensive and time-
consummg. Once breeders identify candidates for hyhridization, they
must manage gene exchanges between disparate species by
manipulating pollen to make a large number of crosses between plants,
selecting the progeny with desirable traits, and repeating this cycle of
crossing and selection again and again.

Hybridization nonetheless is a potentially faster means to create a
perennial crop plant than domestication, although more technologyis
often required to overcome genetic incompatiibilitiess between the
parent plants. A seed produced by crossing two distantly related
species, for example, will often abort before it is fully developed.
Such
a specimen can be "rescued" as an embryo by growing it on artificial
medium until it produces a few roots and leaves, then transferirng the
seedling to soil, where it can grow like any other plant. When it
reaches
the reproductive stage, however, the hybrid's genetic anomalies
frequently manifest as an inability to reproduce seed.

-------------

10 CROPS
Annual cereal grains, food legumes and oilseed plants claimed 80 percent
of global harvested cropland in 2004.
The top three grains covered more than half that area.
CROP LAND %
1. Wheat 17.8
2. Rice 12.5
3. Maize 12.2
4. Soybeans 7.6
5. Barley 4.7
6. Sorghum 3.5
7. Cottonseed 2.9
8. Dry beans 2.9
9. Millet 2.8
10. Rapeseed/mustaic! 2.2

-------------

A partially or fullv sterile hybrid generally results from incompatible
parental chromosomes within its cells. To produce eggs or pollen, the
hybrid's chromosomes must line up during meiosis (the process by
which sex cells halve their chromosomes in preparation for joining with
another gamete) and exchange genetic information with one another. If
the chromosomes cannot find counterparts because each parent's
version is too different, or if they differ in number, the meiosis line
dance is disrupted. This problem can be over come in a few ways.
Because
sterile hybrids are usually unable to produce male gametes but are
partially fertile with feni a 1c gametes, pollinating them with one of.
the original parents, known as backcrossi ing, can restore fertility.
Doubling the num1 ber of chromosomes, either spontaneously or by adding
chemicals such as colchicine, is another strategy. Although each method
al- lows for chromosome' pairing, subsequent chromosome eliminations in
each successive generation often happen in perennial wheat hybrids,
particularly to chromosomes in her if cd from the perennial parent.
Because of the challenging gene pools created by wide hybridization,
when fertile perennial 'hybrids are identified, biotechnology techniques
that can reveal which parent contributed parts of the progeny's genome
arc useful. One of these, genomic in situ hybridization, for example,
distinguishes the perennial parent's chromosomes from those of the
annual parent by color fluorescence and also detects chromosome
anomalies, such as structural rearrangement between unrelated
chromosomes (see bottom illustration on next page). Such analytical
tools can help speed up a breeding program once breeders discover
desirable and undesirable chromosome combinations, without compromising
the potential for using perennial grains in organic agriculture, where
genetically engineered crops are not allowed.
Another valuable method for speeding and improving traditional plant
breeding is known as marker-assisted selection. DNA sequences associated
with specific traits serve as markers that allow breeders to screen
crosses as seedlings for desired attributes without having to wait until
the plants grow to maturity [see &quotBack to the Future of Cereals," by
Stephen A. Goff and John M. Salmeron; SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, August 2004].
At present, no markers specific to perennial plant breeding have been
established, although it is only a matter of time. Scientists at
Washington State University, for example, have already determined that
chromosome 4E in Thelongatum wheatgrass is necessary for the important
perennial trait of regrowth following asexual reproduction cycle.
Narrowing down the region on 4E to the gene or gene's that produce the
trait would reveal relevant DNA markers. that will save breeders a year
of growing time in assessing hybrids.
Perennialism is nonetheless an intricate life
path that goes well beyond a single trait, let alone
a single gene. Because of this complexity, trans-
genic modification (insertion of foreign DNA) is
unlikely to be useful in developing perennial
grains, at least initially. Down the road, trans-
genic technology may have a role in refining sim-
ple inherited traits. For example, if a domesticat-
ed perennial wheatgrass is successfully devel-
oped but still lacks the right combination of
gluten-protein genes necessary for making good-
quality bread, gluten genes from annual wheat
could be inserted into the perennial plant.
Trade-offs and Payoffs
Although perennial crops, such as alfalfa and
sugarcane, already exist around the world, none
has seed yields comparable to those of annual
grain crops. At first glance, the idea that plants
can simultaneously direct resources to building
and maintaining perennial root systems and
also produce ample yields of edible grains may
seem counterintuitive. Carbon, which is cap-
tured through photosynthesis, is the plant's
main building block and must be allocated
among its various parts.
Critics of the idea that perennials could have

high seed yield often focus on such physiologi-
cal trade-offs, assuming that the amount of car-
bon available to a plant is fixed and therefore
that carbon allocated to seeds always comes at
the expense of perennating structures, such as
roofs and rhizomes. Doubters also often over-
look the fact that the life. spans of perennial
plants exist along a spectrum. Some perennial
prairie plants may persist for 50 to 100 years,
whereas others live for only a few years. Fortu-
nately for breeders, plants are relatively flexible
organisms: responsive to selection pressures,
they are able to change the size of their total car-
bon &quotpies" depending on environmental condi-
tions and to change the allocation of pie slices.
A hypothetical wild perennial species might
live 20 years in its highly competitive natural'
environment and produce only small amounts
of seed in any year. Its carbon pie is small, with
much of it going toward fending off pests and
disease, competing for a few resources and per-
sisting in variable conditions. When breeders
take the wild specimen out of its resource-
strapped natural setting and place it into a man-
aged environment, its total carbon pie suddenly
grows, resulting in a bigger plant.
Over time, breeders can also change the size
of the carbon slices within that larger pie. Mod-
ern Green Revolution grain breeding, when
combined with increased use of fertilizers, more
than doubled the yield of many annual grain

crops, and those increases were achieved in
plants that did not have perennating structures
to sacrifice. Breeders attained a portion of those
impressive yield expansions in annual crops by
selecting for plants that produced less stem and
leaf mass, thereby reallocating that carbon to
seed production.
Yields can be similarly increased without
eliminating the organs and structures required
for overwintering in perennial grain crops. In
fact, many perennials, which are larger overall
than annuals, offer more potential for breeders
to reallocate vegetative growth to seed produc-
tion. Furthermore, for a perennial grain crop to
be successful in meeting human needs, it might
need to live for only five or 10 years.
In other words, the wild perennial is unnec-
essarily &quotoverbuilt" for a managed agricultural
setting. Much of the carbon allocated to the
plant's survival mechanisms, such as those al-
lowing it to survive infrequent droughts, could
be reallocated to seed production.
Greener Farms
Thus, we can begin to imagine a day 50 years
from now when farmers around the world are
..walking through their fields of perennial grain
crops. These plots would function much like the
Kansas prairies walked by Wes Jackson, while
also producing food. Belowground, different
types of perennial roots-some resembling the
long taproots of alfalfa and others more like the
thick, fibrous tangle of wheatgrass roots-
would coexist, making use of different soil lay-
ers. Crops with alternative seasonal growth
habits could be cultivated together to extend the
overall growing season. Fewer inputs and great-
er biodiversity would in turn benefit the envi-
ronment and the farmer's bottom line.
Global conditions-agricultural, ecological,
economic and political-are changing rapidly
in ways that could promote efforts to create pe-
rennial crops. For instance, as pressure mounts
on the U.S. and Europe to cut or eliminate farm
subsidies, which primarily support annual crop-
ping systems, more funds could be made avail-
able for perennials research. And as pnergy pric-
es soar and the costs of environmental degrada-
tion are increasingly appreciated, budgeting
public money for long-term projects that will re-
duce resource consumption and land depletion
will become more politically popular.
Because the long timeline for release of pe-
rennial grain crops discourages private-sector
investment at this point, large-scale government
or philanthropic funding is needed to build up
a critical mass of scientists and research pro-
grams. Although commercial companies may
not profit as much by selling fertilizers and pes-
ticides to farmers producing perennial grains,
they, too, will most likely adapt to these new
crops with new products and services.
Annual grain production will undoubtedly
still be important 50 years from now-some
crops, such as soybeans, will probably be diffi-
cult to perennialize, and perennials will not
completely eliminate problems such as disease,
weeds and soil fertility losses. Deep roots, how-
ever, mean resilience. Establishing the roots of
agriculture based on perennial crops now will
give future farmers more choices in what they
can grow and where, while sustainably produc-
ing food for the burgeoning world population
that is depending on.them. *
BREEDING HYBRID plants can
require rescuing an embryo
from the ovary (/eft). A
researcher bags annual sor-
ghum heads to collect pollen,
with tall perennial sorghum in
the background {right}.
Perennial Grain Crops: An Agri-
cultural Revolution. Edited by
Jerry D. Glover and William Wilhelm.
Special issue of Renewable Agricul-
ture and Food Systems, Vol. 20, No. 1
March 2005.
Wes Jackson (35 Who Made
a Difference). Craig Canine in
special anniversary issue oiSmithson
ian, Vol. 36, No. 8, pages 81-82;
November 2005.
Prospects for Developing Peren
nial Grain Crops. Thomas S. Cox,
Jerry D. Glover, David L. Van Tassel,
Cindy M. Cox and Lee D. DeHaan in
BioScience, Vol. 56, No. 8, pages 64?
659;August 2006.
Sustainable Development of the
Agricultural Bio-Economy. Nich
las Jordan et al. in Science, Vol. 316,
pages 1570-1571;June 15,2007.
The Land Institute:




(THE AUTHORS]
ibii; :.; ^ r i; r. an agroecolo-
gist and director of graduate
research at the Land Institute in
Salina, Kan., a nonprofit organiza-
tion devoted to education and
research in sustainable agriculture.
Cindy M. Cox is a plant patholo-
gist and geneticist in the insti-
tute's plant-breeding program.
John P. Reganold, who is Regent;,
Professor of Soil Science at Wash-
ington State University at Pullman,
specializes in sustainable agricul-
ture and last wrote for Scientific
American on that subject in the
June 1990 issue.
---------

I hope you find something useful in the above.






David

--

Billy

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

George.com 08-04-2008 11:48 AM

Large scale permaculture
 

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
I am interested in any work that has been done on how practical and cost
effective a large scale commercial growing operation using permaculture
principles is or might be.

Does anybody know of:

1) Any publicly available study of the potential of large scale
permaculture
2) Any case of a large scale permaculture operation now working or under
construction

David


AGRICULTURE IN THE CITY
A Key to Sustainability in Havana, Cuba
read it online or download it
http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-31574-201-1....html#begining

have a squiz at
http://www.cosg.org.uk/rosset.htm
http://www.cosg.org.uk/mario.htm
http://www.organicconsumers.org/orga...ganic_food.cfm
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...3_korea_2.html
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~coho...a/an95rpp1.htm

rob


len gardener 08-04-2008 08:23 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
g'day david,

as humasn we need to get aways from the broadacre export farmer
mentality, the cost to habitat destruction is huge, and it also
impacts on our weather ie.,. reducing our chances of rain in the
droughts that are part of earths cycle. the b/a farmers here decimate
vast aeas of habitat on somewaht merginal ground, and after around 7
+- years they simply move on and leave the newly created desert behind
there is no requirement as there is with mining to rehabilitate the
area as they further encroach.

our farmers need to be in our communities where on small holdings
maybe up to 40 acres +- they produce in season staples for those
communities and supplied from farmer to consumer no middle man, the
farmer then gets to share the common wealth of his community, instead
of the way they now do it through a series of middle men who onsell
not so fresh food at prices people can barely afford and not
representative of what the farmers meager offering was.

like that adelaide hills thing that land should basically be returned
to habitat is has always been very marginal land (why do people think
the farmers walked away from it after they ahd milked it for waht they
could?), anyone living there should alocate enough land use for their
own personnal food needs, as any commercial venture sooner or later is
driven by the need for more and more turn over.

people can grow enough of the non staples their family needs in a very
small space, we had this type of system back in the late 40's and into
the 50's+, fresh in season food was affordable for all families, and
the food miles was very low so another positive factor, the farmer
casme around a couple or so times a week selling fresh produce, or we
went to the farm. eggs were right there as fresh as the day from the
farm, and fresh unadulterated milk was delivered intoi 1 gallon
stainless billy at our front door not sure may have been each second
day?? homes should be modest enough and land sufficient enough for
families to grow some of their own.

so to me the permaculture sustainable farmer is the one who is moving
closer to his consumers, not lauding themselves growing stuff on
denuded dry habitat land.

mollison uses those asian communities in asia where the farmer is a
neighbour and produces all the staples for that neighbourhood, makes a
lot of sense and no good putting it in the too hard basket because if
the oil crisis is as bad as what is indicated then our broadacre
farmers are going to have huge problems getting their produce to
market at an affordable profit making price.

need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the sooner
the better.

On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 11:15:17 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:
snipped
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/

J. Clarke 08-04-2008 08:41 PM

Large scale permaculture
 
len gardener wrote:
g'day david,

as humasn we need to get aways from the broadacre export farmer
mentality, the cost to habitat destruction is huge, and it also
impacts on our weather ie.,. reducing our chances of rain in the
droughts that are part of earths cycle. the b/a farmers here
decimate
vast aeas of habitat on somewaht merginal ground, and after around 7
+- years they simply move on and leave the newly created desert
behind
there is no requirement as there is with mining to rehabilitate the
area as they further encroach.

our farmers need to be in our communities where on small holdings
maybe up to 40 acres +- they produce in season staples for those
communities and supplied from farmer to consumer no middle man, the
farmer then gets to share the common wealth of his community,
instead
of the way they now do it through a series of middle men who onsell
not so fresh food at prices people can barely afford and not
representative of what the farmers meager offering was.

like that adelaide hills thing that land should basically be
returned
to habitat is has always been very marginal land (why do people
think
the farmers walked away from it after they ahd milked it for waht
they
could?), anyone living there should alocate enough land use for
their
own personnal food needs, as any commercial venture sooner or later
is
driven by the need for more and more turn over.

people can grow enough of the non staples their family needs in a
very
small space, we had this type of system back in the late 40's and
into
the 50's+, fresh in season food was affordable for all families, and
the food miles was very low so another positive factor, the farmer
casme around a couple or so times a week selling fresh produce, or
we
went to the farm. eggs were right there as fresh as the day from the
farm, and fresh unadulterated milk was delivered intoi 1 gallon
stainless billy at our front door not sure may have been each second
day?? homes should be modest enough and land sufficient enough for
families to grow some of their own.

so to me the permaculture sustainable farmer is the one who is
moving
closer to his consumers, not lauding themselves growing stuff on
denuded dry habitat land.

mollison uses those asian communities in asia where the farmer is a
neighbour and produces all the staples for that neighbourhood, makes
a
lot of sense and no good putting it in the too hard basket because
if
the oil crisis is as bad as what is indicated then our broadacre
farmers are going to have huge problems getting their produce to
market at an affordable profit making price.

need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the
sooner
the better.


How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or
Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really
understand the problem.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)



Billy[_4_] 09-04-2008 12:32 AM

Large scale permaculture
 
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote:

len gardener wrote:
g'day david,

as humasn we need to get aways from the broadacre export farmer
mentality, the cost to habitat destruction is huge, and it also
impacts on our weather ie.,. reducing our chances of rain in the
droughts that are part of earths cycle. the b/a farmers here
decimate
vast aeas of habitat on somewaht merginal ground, and after around 7
+- years they simply move on and leave the newly created desert
behind
there is no requirement as there is with mining to rehabilitate the
area as they further encroach.

our farmers need to be in our communities where on small holdings
maybe up to 40 acres +- they produce in season staples for those
communities and supplied from farmer to consumer no middle man, the
farmer then gets to share the common wealth of his community,
instead
of the way they now do it through a series of middle men who onsell
not so fresh food at prices people can barely afford and not
representative of what the farmers meager offering was.

like that adelaide hills thing that land should basically be
returned
to habitat is has always been very marginal land (why do people
think
the farmers walked away from it after they ahd milked it for waht
they
could?), anyone living there should alocate enough land use for
their
own personnal food needs, as any commercial venture sooner or later
is
driven by the need for more and more turn over.

people can grow enough of the non staples their family needs in a
very
small space, we had this type of system back in the late 40's and
into
the 50's+, fresh in season food was affordable for all families, and
the food miles was very low so another positive factor, the farmer
casme around a couple or so times a week selling fresh produce, or
we
went to the farm. eggs were right there as fresh as the day from the
farm, and fresh unadulterated milk was delivered intoi 1 gallon
stainless billy at our front door not sure may have been each second
day?? homes should be modest enough and land sufficient enough for
families to grow some of their own.

so to me the permaculture sustainable farmer is the one who is
moving
closer to his consumers, not lauding themselves growing stuff on
denuded dry habitat land.

mollison uses those asian communities in asia where the farmer is a
neighbour and produces all the staples for that neighbourhood, makes
a
lot of sense and no good putting it in the too hard basket because
if
the oil crisis is as bad as what is indicated then our broadacre
farmers are going to have huge problems getting their produce to
market at an affordable profit making price.

need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the
sooner
the better.


How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or
Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really
understand the problem.

--


Look a the Cuban system. Their system is working but they only started
it because they had no choice.
--

Billy

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

len gardener 09-04-2008 12:34 AM

Large scale permaculture
 
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote:
snipped
How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or
Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really
understand the problem.

--

maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the
problem"??

once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you
take away any thinking outside the square.

all tall buildings have rooves?

there are balconies?

most cities have large parklands?

melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by
occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments.

and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market
farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the
city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now
the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to
get there.

and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city.

and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become
very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop
the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent
enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their
shoes at any time.

in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for
up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times?

i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is
way too late maybe?

outside the square and the comfort zone.
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/


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter