Gardening is calmer than politics or activism

Hello everyone,

I hope you are fine and dandy.  

I've been watching garlic growing up through the straw-covered vegetable beds, and there's a lot of dead nettle blooming to feed the early pollinating insects.  It will go to compost or be dug in later when I need the space.  I hope your own gardens and lives are interesting too!

Gardening is a sensible, easy, calming thing to do.  All I have to do is watch things happen, and make a few choices about what to put where and when.  To a great extent, the plants give me hints.  The conversations with the plants are easy.

Political stuff ... that's hard.  

When I'm involved in an organization or activist undertaking, I usually try to use teacher training basics: acknowledge the good points everyone has made and go on from there. 

That's easy to do with individuals and small groups. These days, however, I am not satisfied with any of the three levels of government, and find it hard to start with good points anywhere.

I've got several thoughts that seem at odds, but have to have a way to be reconciled.

1.  As small groups in a community get together for change, we need to more purposefully communicate with and learn the procedures of the "higher ups." We need to learn the most effective advertising manipulation techniques, and all the rules of corporate war. (yes, functionally, this is a "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" strategy)

2.  We small groups need to be kinder to each other, acknowledge our peopleness, have some fun, plan for the victory (as Elizabeth May says in How to Save the World in Your Spare Time).  We'll also have to find ways to acknowledge the peopleness of and to be kind to the political electees.

3. People I talk to in community, environment and special interest groups are all energy-sapped from having to fight the "higher ups" on policy and for funds ...  we aren't taking the time to do the small kindnesses. 

4. I'm leaning - practically parallel to the floor! - toward saying that everything needs to come from people and small organizations first ... do-able project by do-able project ... then challenge the higher ups (government levels) to participate in what's right.

The question is: how to step completely aside from the systems that put all the barriers on progress, while keeping an eye on them to know how they're plotting to stop what you do outside the system?

It's even difficult to phrase.  

I think I'll go and weed grass out of the front gardens for a while.

Very best regards!

Why's Woman

Some thoughts on genetically modified alfalfa, and beyond

Hello everyone,

A week or so ago I took part in one of the 38 cross-Canada protests against the introduction of Genetically Modified Alfalfa into Canada.  I don't usually go out to rallies because I am crowd-phobic.  This crowd of about 90 people was friendly, didn't have a lot of loud chanting (or boring speeches), and didn't put me into a panic attack. I had a lot of good conversations.  Genetic modification of crops is a topic I've been reading on for over twelve ears ... the general "what it's all about" and implications for Canadian and international agriculture, and - most importantly - for the people who farm. The notes below are just some thoughts ... and you'll notice I've not gotten into health issues. Not because I don't have concerns or because I think the GMO'd products are safe!  It's just that that side of things is too big for me.  For me, just from the concerns to food and land sovereignty, concerns about corporatization of food and agriculture, and patenting of life .... well, I think all the agri-chemical companies are evil.  Yes, I've said it: evil.  And this will get trolls making comments, for sure.  Oh well.  Here's the text I actually printed out and wore as a sign.  Wow, a rally and a big sign.  Not my usual behaviour.

Best regards,

Why's Woman

Some thoughts on genetically modified alfalfa, and beyond

Roundup Ready alfalfa seed is seed that has been altered so that, when glyphosate herbicide is sprayed on a field to kill weeds, growing alfalfa plants won't die from the glyphosate.  It is a Monsanto product; Monsanto is one of the 5 largest agri-chemical companies, worldwide.

Destruction of organics markets / job loss:  Genetically modified alfalfa will spread the modification to (will contaminate) non-genetically modified crops, either through pollen that drifts onto receptive alfalfa plants in other fields or when GM seeds get into another field and grow out. There's potential for Canadian domestic and (especially) export alfalfa markets to disappear. Farmers - organic farmers in particular - will lose money; workers will lose jobs.  This has already happened with canola and with flax.

That's just the visible tip of the deeply poisoned cyst that is genetic modification of seeds.

Patents and costs: All GM seeds are patented and cost more than non-GM seeds. Farmers have to sign agreements to buy the seeds. These say basically that the farmers will not save seeds from the resulting crop, and they won't have GM crops on their property unless they've paid for them. There are penalty clauses. Agri-chemical actually take plants from farmers' fields to test them for the GM trait, and sue the farmers if the GM trait has crossed into a next crop.  Keep in mind that  pollen and seed contamination happens between GM and non-GM crops.  The agri-chemical companies accept "settlement" money, or waste a farmer's time and money in court. 

Financially costly herbicide use cycle established: To grow to optimal yield these GM seeds have to be planted and grown on a schedule of herbicide use that kills basically everything in a field but the GM plant.  So farmers have to pay for herbicides as well as seeds.  The herbicides are made by the same companies that own the GM seeds. These companies make far more of their money from chemical sales than from seed sales.

Glyphosate responsible for herbicide resistant weeds:  Over the last 10/15/20 years, weeds resistant to glyphosate have been surviving and maturing to set seed. Their offspring have grown out more resistant weed plants - dubbed "superweeds" by media and science. Now, glyphosate as a general herbicide is less effective on one application (kills fewer weeds) and more applications are needed or combination herbicides are needed. (This is analogous to overuse of antibiotic drugs and resistant forms of diseases becoming the norm: stronger drugs needed).

Glyphosate kills soil life: Glyphosate herbicide damages soil micro-organisms. Right down at the plant root / soil interface (the rhizosphere) the glyphosate is changing all sorts of chemical/physiological happenings.  Damaged soil doesn't "get better" if you just leave it fallow the next year; glyphosate is persistent in the soil.  Glyphosate also kills earthworms, those amazing critters that aerate the soil and digest organic material so nutrient is available for plants.

Farmers' skills are ignored.  Farmers traditionally learn both the practical and science of growing our food. They know how to care for their land, develop seed suited to their area and that grows out well. It should remain their RIGHT to save the best seed from these best plants that they breed.

IS CANADA FOOD SECURE?  IS CANADA FOOD SOVEREIGN?

Is Canada food secure if it cannot feed itself without poisons embedded in its seeds?

Is Canada food sovereign if giant chemical companies own its seeds?

                         

written by an uncompromising organic home gardener, London, Ont.  April 9, 2013

Frugality, quality, artistry - in books and everything else

Good morning everyone,

I hope you are well.  We've had a lot of rain! Things are greening up. I hope your garden is doing well too.

I've just finished reading an Agatha Christie mystery titled The Seven Dials Mystery.

I'm a great fan of Agatha Christie. She understood people, there's a lot of humour and social insight in her characters, and as for plots, well, there are a lot of story lines that she wrote first. The Seven Dials Mystery  is a whacking good story!

It is the actual, physical copy of the book that I want to comment on here, however.

The edition I have is Penguin's 1948 edition of her 1929 work.  The paper looks like newsprint.  The pages are thin; when I turn them and two stick together I can see the print from the next page ghosting through. The page cuts are imperfect: the text is printed so close to the outside margins of the page that sometimes a cut has sliced through the outermost letters. The print on the page is not exactly square to the cut pages; I'll attribute that to the cutting, not the typesetter. 

The paper is low quality, probably because in 1949 England was still under "restrictions" as to how materials were used, and how much was used.  This was a carry over from World War II; restrictions on goods continued into 1953 or 1954.

My 1949 Seven Dials Mystery may have continued intact because the book hasn't had hard use.  Beyond that, its pages are intact because the pages were sewn in, not glued.  There was a quality production method used.  I'll choose to think that it was because the publisher knew its readers wanted a product that would last. 

Further - and to my complete delight - this book must be part of a special edition series.  The cover is a marbled green and black paper, with coordinating green binding tape.  The title and author's name are in embossed gold print - all capitals - on the spine.  I don't know if the series was just Agatha Christie's stories, or if it was a series of Penguin favorites. 

I do know why I'm writing about this pocket book.

It's because it's an example of using resources available as frugally as possible, and including artistry in the work.  It's making something to last, putting in quality.  Penguin books have a long history of bringing a wide range of topics to readers at a price they could afford.  

I think that, now and even more in future, we are going to have to combine frugality, quality, and artistry in products ... because we won't be having as many of them, as easily and ubiquitously available and we will need to craft our opportunities for delight.

There's my little speech for the day.  And if you haven't read any Agatha Christie mysteries, put her on your reading list. The Mysterious Affair at Styles was her first, of 85!

Best regards!

Why's Woman

TED Talk - Reversing desertification by using wholistic, planned grazing

Hello everyone,

I hope you are well.

Since my last post, and quite by coincidence, I've run across more condemnations of Canada's being ordered to pull out of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and I've listened to a terrific TED Talk by Allan Savory in which he discusses a livestock grazing technique that heals the land, encourages plant growth, and must surely have a lot of positive effects on water retention in the soil.

The talk, How Holistic Mob Grazing Can Green Desertified Grasslands and Reverse Global Warming, is found at 

http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change.html

In this presentation, ecologist Allan Savory explains how planned, wholistic grazing of livestock - with its mix of dung, urine and trampling grasses into a more easily decomposed mass by the next growing season - works to speed up decomposition of vegetation and ultimately makes for better soil that grows more plants which have more roots to hold soil. Basically, the wholistic, planned grazing is a way of having less bare soil; bare soil is much more prone to losing water, which leads to erosion.  Savory also points out how the system is tied to carbon and water, so becomes a way of retaining carbon in the soil; this could help lower the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Overgrazing by livestock had been thought to be a main cause of desertification, as well as a source of environmental methane.  But examples from US national parks - where by one means or another large  herds of grazers and their predators were removed - show large areas of increasing desert conditions, and  rising temperatures in the microclimates.  Examples from other countries too show that we need to understand an entire ecosystem to reverse desertification ...including the cycles of humid and dry seasons.  Plants grow differently under those circumstances. Particularly, there's not enough plant growth during a dry season to keep soil covered; covered soil holds moisture in.

Argh!  Me trying to explain this!  Well, check out Savory's talk.  He gets all the technical points in more easily than I can. And you get to see the changes brought about by the planned grazing. The photos are really exciting

http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change.html

As I listened to Savory I wondered whether two people dedicated to wholistic land management knew about Savory: Joel Salatin of Polyface Farms and a dedicated livestock shifter; and Prince Charles, who is an organics advocate and concerned with rainforest and natural area conservation.  Both did.  No surprise.

There are a few more things I want to write about - like David Suzuki's column on Canada pulling out of the UNCCD effort,  but I've got to get at making dinner.. 

Ah, realities.

Take care!

Why's Woman

Africa Centre for Holistic Management (http://achmonline.squarespace.com/) in Zimbabwe, a learning site for people all over Africa. In 2010, the Centre won the Buckminster Fuller Challenge for its work in reversing desertification.

In that same year he and his wife, with others, founded the Savory Institute (http://www.savoryinstitute.com/) in Boulder, Colorado, to promote large-scale restoration of the world's grasslands.

UN Convention to Combat Desertification must be really important science if Harper has pulled Canada out

Good Morning Everyone,

On the Christian calendar, today is Good Friday, and it will be Easter in a few days.  I hope that if you are celebrating you have a fine weekend.  And if you have another celebration or just a regular weekend, I hope that is fine too.

And now I'm going to launch into a rant.  I woke up this morning with Rick Mercer's voice in my head, and the radio wasn't even on in the background.  So here goes.

Truth be told, I had no idea there was a United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (http://www.unccd.int/en/Pages/default.aspx), and that every country in the world supported its efforts at finding out about why drought occurs and how to not have so many drought areas.

But now that Prime Minister Harper has ordered his environment and international minions - er ministers - to take Canada off the list of signatories, I know that this undertaking must be something really important and positive as far as environment issues goes ... and something I'm going to pay attention to.

There'll be a big conference April 9 -19 in Germany on the topic of combating desertification and at that conference the attendees are supposed to come with (or maybe it's supposed to have supplied ahead of time) their country's statistics about poverty and areas of land where there's drought, or threat of drought, or more drought than there used to me.

Because that's what "desertification" is really about.  It doesn't mean that a country has a desert and that desert is getting bigger.  No, it means that  in an area where water has been available, something in the environment has changed and there is less water going to the land and the entire ecosystem is being changed and conditions in the area are become like a desert.

Another thing I haven't done the research about - because I haven't time! and wish I had time! - is whether Canada has areas where this is happening.  Where aquifers are being messed up because of changes in climate (increased erratic weather) or because of a big project that is polluting a lot of water and somehow making it unavailable to the land and therefore to every living plant and animal that depends on it.  Doesn't that sound like a situation to call a desert?

Wait a minute!  What's that big project out in Alberta?  The one the Harperites and the oil industry don't like calling the tar sands?  Yeah, the oil sands.  That massive project to dredge up sludge that has oil mixed into the soil.  That massive project that has toxic holding ponds covering acres and acres of land. That massive extraction project that uses huge amounts of water from the local rivers and watersheds to perform the chemical magic that takes the oil out of the sludge. 

Whether the science is complete on how the watersheds are affected, enough data is in, and enough people just know from their experience, that bad change is happening out there. 

Sounds close enough to desertification for me.

And who lives in that zone?  What are their incomes?  There's gonna be some poverty too.

Maybe the tar sands is something the "Harper government" doesn't want to report to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification.  It's the sort of story likely to make the news, and show yet another way that they're trying to destroy the sciences in Canada and deny climate change.

Maybe that's what's behind the Harper government's withdrawal from the UN.

Steaming through my ears,

Best regards,

Why's Woman

p.s. And I bet Steve's office won't be having an event for on June 17, the world day to combat desertification

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

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

http://www.unccd.int/en/Pages/default.aspx

The Conference (has long title) The Third Special Session of the Committee on Science and Technology (CST S-3) with the UNCCD 2nd Scientific Conference on Desertification, Land Degradation and Drought and the Eleventh Session of the Committee for the Review of Implementation of the Convention (CRIC 11) will take place from 9-19 April 2013, at the World Conference Center in Bonn, Germany. http://www.unccd.int/en/media-center/MediaNews/Pages/highlightdetail.aspx?HighlightID=178

Canada quietly pulls out of anti-drought convention.  CBC report, March 28, 2013

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/03/27/un-droughts-deserts-convention-canada.html

World Day to Combat Desertification, Monday June 17, 2013

http://www.unccd.int/en/programmes/Event-and-campaigns/WDCD/WDCD2013/Pages/default.aspx?HighlightID=168

Joan Gussow - Think Globally Eat Locally

Hello everyone,

I hope you are all well ... and remember the mantra: there are live plants under the snow ... growing happens!

The other day I ran across an article by Joan Gussow, professor of nutrition, gardener and advocate for local food.

I nodded my way through the article, agreeing with her as she said talked about why we should be concerned about where our food comes from and that we should be particularly worried about the loss of farmland and the reduction in numbers of farmers ... and that this meant we are losing the ability to feed ourselves.

Then she referred to her "new" book, This Organic Life, (which I love and recommend!) and I realized that the article was not written in 2012, it was written in 2002. 

And somehow, her comments became even more relevant. 

How can we - shoppers, eaters - realize that what we buy affects the health of the land near us, and land and farmers in other countries?

What needs to be done so we recognize that a wide variety of local food can be grown? And that we may need to do some adjusting of diet, but can appreciate more the seasonal food?

How can we get to know who grows our food? Face to face?

Gussow talks about how her own commitment to - and enjoyment of - growing her own food has developed, and that it reminds her that "food is the generous outcome of a collaboration between our species and the rest of nature, not simply another product of industrial civilization."

Gussow's article of 11 years ago - like Rachel Carson's Silent Spring of 50 years ago  - shows us that problems were known about long before many of us ever thought of them. 

Relocalizing the food system may seem hard to do, but contemporary chemical monoculture is not feeding one billion  - or is it 2 billion? - people, and contempory agriculture and food processing has made another one billion overweight and sick. 

I remind myself that interest by young people in having small-hold organic farms, and programs such as FarmStart and Everdale are encouraging.  There is an ever-increasing interest in urban agriculture.  I hope that some days Michael Levenston, of the City Farmer website (www.cityfarmer.info) feels swamped by the good news he's able to pick up, and the number of cities in Canada and beyond that are looking at urban agriculture policies.

Agriculture needs to be organic, and local ... in our backyards and urban spaces.

I hope you enjoy Gussow's article.

Best regards,

Why's Woman

Gussow's article, Think Globally Eat Locally,  is absolutely worth reading.  Mother Earth News, February/March 2002

http://www.motherearthnews.com/Real-Food/2002-02-01/Think-Globally-Eat-Locally-Viewpoint.aspx

Wolf Tree Farm

Hello everyone!

Hope you are well.

I've just discovered Rebecca Hosking has a blog.  Rebecca made the wonderful documentary Farm for the Future - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixx1c3RSw_8

It's about her return to the family farm in Devon UK, and her exploration of permaculture as having possibilities for making it more sustainable, and less reliant on fossil fuel. 

I've watched it maybe 8 times, and have been wanting to know how she is, and how the farm is doing.

I did some more serious searching and discovered she has a blog!  www.wolftreefarm.blogspot.com

I'll be reading all the entries over the next while.  Hooray!

Best regards,

Why's Woman