Guest guest Posted December 2, 1999 Report Share Posted December 2, 1999 Dear Prabhus, Balabhadra Prabhu suggested I submit something just to get the ball roling on land reform. Here we go. Please give your comments and ideas. Madhava Ghosh, Rohita, Hare krishna dd, etc etc 1. Any devotee who has agricultural experience, or can demonstrate his ability to grow crops can lease ISKCON land. 2. All land must be fully utilised. 3.Any land not being used for agriculture or cow protection can be reclaimed by the land holder with 6 months notice. The tenant must submit a plan of land use to the land holder management and the minister of agriculture and cow protection if they disagree with the decision. They must be able to use the land within 6 months of notice of reclamation. 4.Any leased land can be passed down to children or dependants as long as the ISKCON rules governing agriculture are maintained. 5. Land is leased dependant on agricultural and cow protection practice and not on sadhana requirements 6. Land is leased at the rate of 10% of produce, or financial equivalent, as chosen by lease holder. This figure will apply for 3 years after which it can be negotiated in consulatation with the lease holder, the land holder and the ministery of agriculture and cow protection. 7. The maximum lease rate will not exceed 25% of produce. 8. All land will be farmed using oxen. No machinery can be used which replaces the oxen. 9. Oxen should be kept by the tenant 10. Oxen can be loaned/rented from the local goshala if available 11. All land farmed according to the following principles: No manufactured fertilizers/blood based fertilisers No pesticides used No herbicdes used 12. Working the land should be no less than 75% of the lease holders livelihood 13. Housing can be/should be loaned to the lease holder for the duration of the term of the land being used. 14. Excess land not farmed by oxen can be farmed using tractors, as long as there is always sufficient land kept available for use of new ox farmers. 15. Tractor land should be rented at the same rate as that found locally, renewable on a yearly/fixed period basis Any thoughts Prabhus. If this discussion gets off the ground will chaya devi be willing to keep track? ys syamasundara dasa Bhaktivedanta Manor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 1999 Report Share Posted December 6, 1999 "COM: Syamasundara (das) (Bhaktivedanta Manor - UK)" wrote: > [Text 2826485 from COM] > > Dear Prabhus, > Balabhadra Prabhu suggested I submit something just to get the ball roling > on land reform. Here we go. Please give your comments and ideas. Madhava > Ghosh, Rohita, Hare krishna dd, etc etc I am making comments here on the fly, and don't mean to imply the points I make are meant to be all the points I would make , or that they are that important to me. This is a brainstorming session, which I enter into tentatively because there are those who are intellectually challenged who don't understand basic concepts of brain storming, and treat every statement as some absolute to held against that person forever. This has a chillling effect on positive intellectual processes, resulting in the stunted growth we can so easily point out so many examples of. Also, I am not implying Syamasundara was completely off just because I make a lot of comments. He clearly stated he throw something out, walked teh point, just to get something going. > > > 1. Any devotee who has agricultural experience, or can demonstrate his > ability to grow crops can lease ISKCON land. The definition of devotee could create problems here. For instance, we all know devotees who think if you don't go to mangala arotik every day, you aren't a devotee. Then you could get into the staunch devotee but he is a rittvik, whatever. Agricultural experience these days in the West means primarily agribusiness. Any initiated devotee (?????) with agricultural experience or having gone through an agricultural apprenticeship, who will grow crops using small scale low impact methods.... > > > 2. All land must be fully utilised. > Well, I can look at forest land and see it as fully utilized if selective timbering is going on, someone else may see it and say it isn't fully utilized if it isn't cleared and growing crops. I have a lawn around my house, someone may say that it should be garden and is not fully utilized as a lawn. Pasture versus confinement and intensive cropping . When they did the homesteading out West in America, each homesteader got 160 acres. They had 5 years to build a house and have 5 acres under cultivation. In West Virginia, in order to qualify for agricultural status on your land for favorable real estate tax status(saves me a lot of money)., you have to produce $1000 worth of crops a year. Produce for self consumption, firewood, etc all counts towards it. That $1000 figure hasn't been adjusted for inflation for quite some time. Even yesterday, I was working on a terrace to have ready to garden next spring, expanding my operation. the first couple of years on the land, full utilization may be unrealistic. The first year I planted perennials and trees, and am now able to expand as those are more established. But I have chunks of ground that aren't fenced, aren't planted, and aren't forest. I have eventual plans, but who knows when I get to it. "All land" would mean 1000 sq feet out of 2 acres and I'm under utilising. > > 3.Any land not being used for agriculture or cow protection can be reclaimed > by the land holder with 6 months notice. The tenant must submit a plan of > land use to the land holder management and the minister of agriculture and > cow protection if they disagree with the decision. They must be able to use > the land within 6 months of notice of reclamation. > Suppose as a brahmacary, spmeone shared a straight razor with an HCV carrier and now has Hepatitis C. The best treatment currently available is one year of interferon/ribaviran which has serious side effects, meaning for a year he can't work. 6 months isn't even one whole cycle. > > 4.Any leased land can be passed down to children or dependants as long as > the ISKCON rules governing agriculture are maintained. Lease is assignable to family, I'd need more definition on dependents. > > > 5. Land is leased dependant on agricultural and cow protection practice and > not on sadhana requirements > > 6. Land is leased at the rate of 10% of produce, or financial equivalent, as > chosen by lease holder. This figure will apply for 3 years after which it > can be negotiated in consulatation with the lease holder, the land holder > and the ministery of agriculture and cow protection. > That is scary, but you address it in the next point I guess. This letting someone on for reduced amount early so they can get established is in general a good idea. > > 7. The maximum lease rate will not exceed 25% of produce. In West Virginia, for established fruit orchards, the rate is 5%. Also, it needs to be clearly stated what the trustee of the land trust is going to do in exchange for the 25%. That would include at minimum paying the land taxes. What about if the vaisya is extremely successful in finding some niche market, and comes under income tax pressure. Will the income tax be paid out of the 25%? In that ideal Vedic culture, that 25% included all taxes, which as mere islands in a larger society, we will still be liable for. What about fire insurance on the house? > > > 8. All land will be farmed using oxen. No machinery can be used which > replaces the oxen. > Little harsh, cuts me right out. The barn on my place was caved in when I got it. Although I would like to replace it, the money doesn't exist. so to get oxen, first I need to fix the barn. If you make an emphasis on oxen being used, then the land would minimum need to come equipped to have oxen, which means adequate pasturage and a barn. BArn building and new fencing are capital expenditures that would have to be in place prior to taking possession of the land if oxen is a requirement. What if someone has a need for a 1/2 acre for self feeding, and a 1/2 acre for cash crop/bartering. To require oxen useage would make it unrealistic for such a person. If a teamster was available for hire, then it may more realistically be specificed that the oxen need to be hired in preference to a tractor. Or you could make some prohibition on tractor ownership, or some adjusting schedule , say for the first 5 years not required to use oxen. I appreciate the principle behind requiring oxen, but if we put the bar too high, no one will be able to get over it. > > 9. Oxen should be kept by the tenant > > 10. Oxen can be loaned/rented from the local goshala if available How about hiring teamsters who specilize in keeping oxen? > > > 11. All land farmed according to the following principles: > No manufactured fertilizers/blood based fertilisers If the local municipality composts leaves and yard debris and sells it, would I be unable to buy and use that? Would that be considered manufactured? Also, I know it is a emotional issue, but what is the actual objection to blood based fertilisers? Assuming it is a by product from slaughtering, and not a primery product of slaughter. > > No pesticides used Rotonone is an organic insecticide. Would that be prohibited? > > No herbicdes used > > 12. Working the land should be no less than 75% of the lease holders > livelihood > Cuts me out. Although the majority of my time is spent on the land, it is a small minority of my income. I really am thinking this is too unrealistic. > > 13. Housing can be/should be loaned to the lease holder for the duration of > the term of the land being used. > This is really crucial. If having to move on the land, housing has to be built first, it really cuts into the first few years energy. If the 25% includes housing or not is a major issue. > > 14. Excess land not farmed by oxen can be farmed using tractors, as long as > there is always sufficient land kept available for use of new ox farmers. > I assume you are refering here to the remainder of land not leased. > > 15. Tractor land should be rented at the same rate as that found locally, > renewable on a yearly/fixed period basis > > Any thoughts Prabhus. If this discussion gets off the ground will chaya devi > be willing to keep track? > > ys > syamasundara dasa > Bhaktivedanta Manor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 1999 Report Share Posted December 19, 1999 Some remarks to the land discussions... Syamasundara: > 1. Any devotee who has agricultural experience, or can demonstrate his > ability to grow crops can lease ISKCON land. Madhava Gosh: <Any initiated devotee (?????) with agricultural experience or having gone <through an agricultural apprenticeship, who will grow crops using small <scale low impact methods.... Who will determine wether one has agriculture experience and what agricultural experience would be required ? Syamasundara: > 2. All land must be fully utilised. Madhava Gosh: <Well, I can look at forest land and see it as fully utilized if selective <timbering is going on, someone else may see it and say it isn't fully <utilized if it isn't cleared and growing crops. Yes, I think this is a touchy point. There should be some norm or expectations for land use, but you can't just determine someones personal freedom in developping his project by setting absolute goals that should be attained. Especially if they prove too narrow or high... this can be discouraging... Rather one (I feel) could be more served with guidelines, then with regulations. Showing care and support, insted of merely expecting and judging. Madhava Gosh: <When they did the homesteading out West in America, each homesteader got <160 acres. They had 5 years to build a house and have 5 acres under <cultivation. Yes, I was thinking something in the line of this. Some norm and goals to work towards, but enough space and time to work with, coupled with usefull guidelines and support... Madhava: <Even yesterday, I was working on a terrace to have ready to garden next <spring, expanding my operation. the first couple of years on the land, <full utilization may be unrealistic. The first year I planted perennials <and trees, and am now able to expand as those are more established. Shows some of the practical problems one will be facing in developping a project, which will put you in a difficult and pressuring situation if you have to live up to absolute regulations. Many will not be able to handle it... Madhava: <But I have chunks of ground that aren't fenced, aren't planted, and <aren't forest. I have eventual plans, but who knows when I get to it. <"All land" would mean 1000 sq feet out of 2 acres and I'm under utilising. Yes, but then why would one be given more land then one can handle ? Land can be used for many different purposes without being too labour/cash intensive. But if one has no clear plan and hope for using some of the land in order to sustain oneself, then why give more ? Give what one requires, with leaving options to expand as one goes along... Syamasundara: > 3.Any land not being used for agriculture or cow protection can be <reclaimed by the land holder with 6 months notice. The tenant must submit <a plan of land use to the land holder management and the minister of <agriculture and cow protection if they disagree with the decision. They <must be able to use the land within 6 months of notice of reclamation. Agian the same point: why give more then one requires and then reclaim ? I would think to give some land so one can get started for what one wants to achieve within (lets say) 5 years and apart from that leave options for giving more land after that period. Then one can get started and after some years will come to realise if one needs or wants to take on more. Madhava Gosh: <Suppose as a brahmacary, someone shared a straight razor with an HCV <carrier and now has Hepatitis C. The best treatment currently available is <one year of interferon/ribaviran which has serious side effects, meaning <for a year he can't work. 6 months isn't even one whole cycle. Yes, some of the problems one could be facing as one is developping a project. It would be easily solved if one just gets what one needs (secure basis one can rely on) with an option of expanding as one goes along. Syamasundara: > 4.Any leased land can be passed down to children or dependants as long as > the ISKCON rules governing agriculture are maintained. Madhava Gosh: Lease is assignable to family, I'd need more definition on dependants. Cows for one, I would suggest... Syamasundara: > 6. Land is leased at the rate of 10% of produce, or financial equivalent, <as chosen by lease holder. This figure will apply for 3 years after which <it can be negotiated in consulatation with the lease holder, the land <holder and the ministery of agriculture and cow protection. Madhava Gosh: That is scary, but you address it in the next point I guess. This letting someone on for reduced amount early so they can get established is in general a good idea. Yes, this is defenitely a consideration. I would say a 5 year period... and taking into account the family situation and needs, and investments one has to make in developping a project. One person will have a small family, another will have a larger one. One person will have supportive and rich relatives or friends, another will be forced to get a bank loan, etc... some of the things to take into consideration... Syamasundara: > 7. The maximum lease rate will not exceed 25% of produce. Madhava Gosh: <In West Virginia, for established fruit orchards, the rate is 5%. Also, < it needs to be clearly stated what the trustee of the land trust is going <to do in exchange for the 25%. That would include at minimum paying the <land taxes. Good point. I think the 25% should be all inclusive... taking into account a certain amount of expenditures. I can think of a few, but I'm sure others will have a clearer view... Madhava Gosh: <What about if the vaisya is extremely successful in finding some nice <market, <and comes under income tax pressure. Will the income tax be paid out of <the 25%? In that ideal Vedic culture, that 25% included all taxes, which <as mere islands in a larger society, we will still be liable for. What <about fire insurance on the house? What about capital investements one makes to improve the land ? I'm thinking of fertilisation of land that hasn't been fertilised for years, fencing, draining, building shelter for the cows, drinking facilities, getting the land registered as organic, etc... all expenditures that 1) will benefit the farmer surely, but 2) that also benfit the land holder (as it improves the quality and value of his property) and 3) a benfit the local bio-system (which we ultimately also do care for). We can't just expect the farmer to take this all on his shoulders, just because he is benefitting. He is not the only one... Syamasundara: > 8. All land will be farmed using oxen. No machinery can be used which > replaces the oxen. Madhava Gosh: <Little harsh, cuts me right out. The barn on my place was caved in when <I got it. Although I would like to replace it, the money doesn't exist. <so to get oxen, first I need to fix the barn. First of all, your situation is a little different then one who wants to get started and requires land. You have your own property and are already in a process of development. We can't just cut you out in fullfilling a standard. But, I think the point is that one who is just gonna get started, should have a clear plan and this should include using oxen to work the land. they might not be your own, but how are we otherwise gonna get decent cow protection... you know the quotes from SP.... Madhava Gosh: < If you make an emphasis on oxen being used, then the land would minimum <need to come equipped to have oxen, which means adequate pasturage and a <barn. BArn building and new fencing are capital expenditures that would <have to be in place prior to taking possession of the land if oxen is a <requirement. Or these expenditures can be reduced from your lease... Would be good in the first few years... takes off some of the financial stress... Madhava Gosh: <What if someone has a need for a 1/2 acre for self feeding, and a 1/2 acre <for cash crop/bartering. To require oxen useage would make it unrealistic <for such a person. True, we can't force people to take cows. Some might not want to take on the extra land and care it takes... but every larger farm should have oxen working. Madhava Gosh: <If a teamster was available for hire, then it may more realistically be <specificed that the oxen need to be hired in preference to a tractor. This would be a good proposition. The land should be worked by oxen where it is possible. It's a good way for the teamsters to get some extra income and better for the land and community spirit. <you could make some prohibition on tractor ownership, Where there are oxen and teamster available... What about horses ? I mean if there's no ox-teams available, would hiring a horse-team take preference on tractor use ? Here there are no ox-teams, but there's loads of horse-teams and teamsters. And they also would appriciate the extra income and being able to work the land. Now they are just able to do it for hobby and sporting amongst eachother. <schedule , say for the first 5 years not required to use oxen. I wouldn't couple land lease to oxen. Some might not want to take cows, some might not want to take a lot of land and just grow the little they need. But where possible oxen should be used, wether one has oxen oneself or hires a team to do the work. It's different when one wants to grow larger and for sure when one has cows oneself... Syamasundara: > 10. Oxen can be loaned/rented from the local goshala if available Madhava Gosh: <How about hiring teamsters who specilize in keeping oxen? How do you see this ? Syamasundara: > 11. All land farmed according to the following principles: > No manufactured fertilizers/blood based fertilisers Madhava Gosh: <If the local municipality composts leaves and yard debris and sells it, <would I be unable to buy and use that? Would that be considered <manufactured? If you knew what is in there, I don't know if you would want to use it... I work as a garbage man (who the cap fits...) collecting organic stuff for composting, and I wouldn't put it on my land. So much junk goes into it... Madhava Gosh: < but what is the actual objection to blood based fertilisers? Assuming it is a by product from slaughtering, and not a primery product of slaughter. So, who will tell what it is ? And by the way, is it a natural thing for the soil to be 'fertilised' by the blood of living entities. I think decaying organic matter (in whatever form found in nature) is a little different from the blood that has run from the slaughterhouse guttter. Just like the patties left by a few cows in the pasture, is a little different from the tons of slurry from the factory farm. I don't think it's such an 'emotional issue'... it's just COMMON SENSE ! >No pesticides used <Rotonone is an organic insecticide. Would that be prohibited? So, no chemical fertilizers used... Syamasundara: > 12. Working the land should be no less than 75% of the lease holders > livelihood Madhava Gosh: <Cuts me out. Although the majority of my time is spent on the land, it is <a small minority of my income. I really am thinking this is too <unrealistic. Yes, I also think so... there's many things to take into consdideration and I think too much regulations will suffocate healthy farming. Just look at 'farming' these days. You have to be crazy to be a farmer now, so much regulations, so much stress... Syamasundara: > 13. Housing can be/should be loaned to the lease holder for the duration <of the term of the land being used. Madhava Gosh: This is really crucial. If having to move on the land, housing has to be built first, it really cuts into the first few years energy. If the 25% includes housing or not is a major issue. It defenitely does ! But what if there's no housing, or the land holder itself can not get permission to built (which is the case overhere). I think generally the land holder will not be enthousiastic to make such an expenditure. All the time, energy and money it takes... just for facilitating someonelse... and like I mentioned, over here the land holder will NOT get permission to built on agricultural land. This can only be done by a practicing farmer ! So, then how will you do that ? Syamasundara: > 14. Excess land not farmed by oxen can be farmed using tractors, as long <as there is always sufficient land kept available for use of new ox <farmers. So, I feel it should be stated that 'excess land not used by oxen, should be held available for new ox-farmers and can be in the meantime farmed by tractors according to organic standards'. Otherwise they will go happily cash cropping all the land, and how will land become available if a ox-farmer wants to get started. Financial this will not be intresting for the land holder. Especially not the first few years. So, he won't be very much encouraged to reduce the cash cropping in order to free land... Syamasundara: > 15. Tractor land should be rented at the same rate as that found locally, > renewable on a yearly/fixed period basis Again referring to the previous point: so financially it will be much more intresting for the land holder to lease the land to tractor-famers. > Any thoughts Prabhus. some whom I hope will help the discussion rolling.. <If this discussion gets off the ground will chaya devi > be willing to keep track? I hope someone does.. dirk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 1999 Report Share Posted December 21, 1999 Up till here I more or less agree with the points raised. However: > Syamasundara: > > 8. All land will be farmed using oxen. No machinery can be used which > > replaces the oxen. > > Madhava Gosh: > <Little harsh, cuts me right out. The barn on my place was caved in > when <I got it. Although I would like to replace it, the money doesn't > exist. <so to get oxen, first I need to fix the barn. > > First of all, your situation is a little different then one who wants to > get started and requires land. You have your own property and are already > in a process of development. We can't just cut you out in fullfilling a > standard. But, I think the point is that one who is just gonna get > started, should have a clear plan and this should include using oxen to > work the land. they might not be your own, but how are we otherwise gonna > get decent cow protection... you know the quotes from SP.... Certainly we should plan to use them, and that should be a solid plan. I am in this situation right now. I have two acres, and right now it is just overwhelming the things I have to do. I am not allowing it to overwhelm me, I am realising that in order to make it all work, one has to pace oneself and do things in order of priority. That priority will also be dependant on each persons particular situation For instance. Our land has many many small rocks. Basicaly it is a land that had minimal clearing to plant tea 30 years ago. Now that the tea is gone, we have to prepare our beds, and it is a long slow process, having to seive out every spadefull of soil. Realisticaly it will take us a year to prepare all the beds, so what we are doing is planting pumpkins and other squashes which will cover 2/3's of the land to dampen weeds, and give us a bit of an initial crop: these things require a minimum of soil preparation. While we were doing this we were visited by a band of monkeys. We found deer prints in the wet mud, and pigs are still a persistant rumour. So we are going to have to fence. However we cant do that until I move onto the land (thieves stole the fencing of a nieghbor some time back), but I dont have time to build a cottage, as I need to grow food to survive in the next few months (cash is low). So I have to get an old bus to live in initialy. But even that will take some work. Everyday after a 5.30 am class we go out to the land and work it. We stop at about 12 or 1, and then head into town to locate and purchase all the things we need, which is just about everything: Fencing, pipes, tools, seeds, containers, buckets, timber, locating compost materials, etc etc. I also want to have dogs, chickens, guinea fowl, maybe a sheep or two, etc. All of these will require their habitats and shelter. Now in all this, eventualy I want to get a cow, and an ox. I would love to have them now, but as I never did any of this before, I am scared that I will not be able to fulfill my obligations to them, so I want to make damn sure I can take care of them properly, by getting myself sitated first. Of course if I was doing all this under the watchful eye of a caring ISKCON community, then they might lend me some of their oxen to do the work, which would make things incredibly easier. But ISKCON is so far away from being able to offer that kind of support, that a beginner is at an extreme disadvantage. > > Madhava Gosh: > < If you make an emphasis on oxen being used, then the land would minimum > <need to come equipped to have oxen, which means adequate pasturage and a > <barn. BArn building and new fencing are capital expenditures that would > <have to be in place prior to taking possession of the land if oxen is a > <requirement. > > Or these expenditures can be reduced from your lease... Would be good in > the first few years... takes off some of the financial stress... This would be of inestimable importance. > Syamasundara: > > 11. All land farmed according to the following principles: > > No manufactured fertilizers/blood based fertilisers > > Madhava Gosh: > <If the local municipality composts leaves and yard debris and sells it, > <would I be unable to buy and use that? Would that be considered > <manufactured? I think it is important to consider that initialy one has to bring in outside compost materials, especialy if ones soil is deficient. The more I get into these things I am amazed by Krsnas perfect system. If one grows only what one needs personaly, and returns all the scraps, and ones own byproducts to the soil, then the system can be made sustainable without external input. But whatever is grown for trade, you dont get the scraps, so you have to replace those scraps that are lost from somewhere. So the more you try to get profit from trade, the more you have to source from outside. In other words in a sense there is no profit. There is no free lunch. As soon as we take more than we need (remember it is all Krsnas) we have to pay the price commensurately. > > If you knew what is in there, I don't know if you would want to use it... > I work as a garbage man (who the cap fits...) collecting organic stuff for > composting, and I wouldn't put it on my land. So much junk goes into it... Yes it is a drag. We got all excited when after Gosh's excellent advice I contacted the racecourse, and they agreed to let us have all their grass clippings. Only to realise that they are all fertilised to the hilt with chemicals. > > Madhava Gosh: > < but what is the actual objection to blood based > fertilisers? Assuming it is a by product from slaughtering, and not a > primery product of slaughter. Personaly the idea gives me weak knees. Even though the blood may not be the primary product, surely by creating a demand, even for the blood, it is giving support, or at least tacit approval. I would rather have nothing to do with them, or even better, actively campaign to close them down. But I think better than campaining, is to be self sufficient, as Prabhupada says that we need ideal units of society, so that people can see it is possible to live from only what the Lord Provides. It would be so wonderful if ISKCON would only start to act in a responsible manner for our place on this planet, and actualy start to think in terms of giving initial support for those who want to live as Prabhupada instructed us to. Surely if this was done, our movement would enter a rennaisance of KRSNA consciousness. YS Samba das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.