https://www.slideshare.net/Fundacio...-la-biotecnologa-microbiana-en-la-agricultura Thank you Mr Barea
Great presentation, Thanks Permasculptor. Anyone ever notice how almost every culture has some one saying the problem is how to feed all the people on this planet? Then most of these folks walk along the Monsanto line of misconception. To my mind, the best way to insure against hungry people is for every country to begin nurturing the soil they live with, grow food stuffs the way mother nature designed. When we do these things, hunger seems to be put to rest as much as possible. Of course, the powers that be, no matter what country involved or language spoken, want to keep a population on the edge of malnutrition. It helps them keep control of the very people they claim to want to help climb out from under the struggle to get enough food for proper nutrition. Sadly, many "leaders" are really just terrorist hiding behind a façade of caring about their own people.
It always annoys the hell out of me when ever the topic of not being able to feed the world's population is discussed everyone avoids the elephant in the room. There are just too many humans and we persist in breeding like rabbits. Anyone who has ever grazed livestock knows there is such a thing as stocking rate. Under that rate your laughing, just on that rate you are fine so long as you don't have a bad year, over that rate and you rip the life out of your land and turn it into a desert. No different with humans. The earth has a stocking rate and many countries are way over that rate. But all the major religions of the world say "breed, breed, breed" and no politician is prepared to take on religion. I include the religion of Growth is good
as long as a herder thinks that wealth is determined by the number of animals there will be barren pastures. nomadic life is one thing, but once that stops then the area must be managed apropriately or it becomes barren. you can see that much of the world that used to be green and able to grow crops has been laid waste because of over grazing and over harvesting of forests or other crops. until those practices are stopped, the arable land will continue to decline and with that will come eventual famines. right now the over grazing is just one aspect of the tragedy we are making for ourselves. over pumping of water from the ground is another aspect and it's really bad for some folks because even if you conserve moisture and do things responsibly on your own property it doesn't mean your neighbors won't come along and drain the aquifer. India and China are both in dire straights on this type of problem, so they will likely be the ones to face it down and perhaps start solving it. the really good answer is to get enough people together to buy enough land to control what happens up top and also down below. so that the place can be managed sustainably. it is hard to do.
Is that true? I am personally unsure about that since around 85% of humans live near the coasts and riverways. Inland is by and far unused for food; Example... IOWA, US. Most people are starving for healthy food and the state does nothing but grow gmo-corn for ethanol which is why there is a sudden launch of CSA gardens.
The elephant is the argument as it is a fear inducing reactive statement. The corporate world is committed to such tactics there will never be enough for their agenda. The reality is their system of growing is creating malnutrition of the soil and humans they pretend to be championing whilst denying responsibility for their waste.
in any observation of how most people around here are choosing to live in their homes and how they treat their property i can see very little fruit and nut trees. gardening has increased, but i'm not sure how that will play out longer term. many of the local landowners who are not farmers have huge amounts of grass lawn that they mow and take care of. an utter waste of space and resources IMO. acres of it. silly.
Grass, in my opinion is ludicrous, why would anyone grow something that requires so much effort and gives back nothing but a place to wiggle your toes? We do have one spot that is just grass, because my wife likes to wiggle her toes in it. It covers about 60 sq. ft. out of 15 acres.
Is grass a waste? Depends on where you live. In very high bushfire areas lawns are an excellent fire break. My horses have always done a very good job of mowing so there's another plus. Grey water from the house waters the lawn. Lawn feeds the horse when other fed is not available because it is the middle of summer. The world is full of shades of grey.
I never speak for other parts of the planet, or people, only my opinion. I would prefer to see varied plantings that do more than just require the expenditure of Petro chemicals, are purposed more for status than function. That doesn't mean that other people shouldn't see values that I don't. ( I refer to my signature here as explanation). Here in Arkansas, grass fire breaks don't seem work because of the high winds, that usually pop up along with a wild fire (trees burn differently than savanna), all they do is provide instant fuel so fires can jump the break line. I don't mean grass doesn't have a place, just not "manicured lawn", which is only there to be admired, mowed and has no other real purpose other than ground covering. I of course do like the football pitch (soccer), but it serves as the venue of an athletic event medium, just as an American "football" field or polo field, they aren't just there for pretty looks. One can plant many different grasses for a pasture type lawn and when they are all together, it is not a monoculture as most lawns here in the USA tend to be.
Even a lawn let go to brown would be a good firebreak as the low profile wouldn't burn well. Your lawn serves multiple purposes (graze, greywater, firebreak, esthetics, ...) and is a good example of stacking functions. Often we work with the cards we are dealt, and if living with an existing lawn, put it to good use. You have successfully reduced your energy inputs into "lawn" to near zero while obtaining a yield ... good work! Our place here came with an extensive lawn, complete with a high-pressure watering system (sprinklers) in a semi-arid environment. Wow. The pop-up sprinklers were the first to go! Needless to say, it's mostly been "recovered" with mulches and ground covers. The remaining small "lawn" areas are left to fend for themselves and come back reliably every spring with patches of green, but turn to dormant brown as the summer progresses. Kept chopped fairly short (by hand), those patches would be very difficult to sustain fire (I've tried).
9anda1f On my other place, fire traveled across a couple hundred feet of mowed grass to set fire to the forest , burning my neighbor's Cadillac. It depends on how much heat is in the advancing fire and how much wind is behind it, we don't depend on a "lawn" to be a firebreak Love is the answer Uncle Ben