VSDP

[Guest guest]

To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in accordance

with the wishes of His Divine

Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the ISKCON

Ministry of Cow Protection

and Agriculture presents a Sustainable Development

Plan to establish a world-wide

farming system utilising lifetime-protected farm

animals managed according to

sustainable principles and practices of land use,

which provides for quality of life

aspirations for the participants.

 

VISION

We seek to establish a world-wide farming system

utilising lifetime-protected

farm animals managed according to sustainable

principles and practices of

land use, which provides for quality of life

aspirations for the participants.

 

MISSION STATEMENT

By 2003, to have a functioning development plan which

can be implemented

throughout the world to realise the plan’s vision.

 

 

VAISNAVA SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The Vaisnava Sustainable Development Plan (VSDP) is a

systems-focused plan that

follows a process of progression from a farm’s current

reality, labelled ‘A’, to the defined

goal, labelled ‘Z’, which is taken from analysis of

the Vedic scriptures. The farm’s

current reality (A) will be compared to the vision

goal (Z) via an auditing system

measured according to the accepted sustainability

format of environmental, sociological

and economical principles. The farms audit structure

will be assessed on a scale of 0 -

100% for ‘A’, either as an individual farm for sole

use, or standardised between farms

with differing spatial factors. ‘Z’ is set at 100% and

should represent the epitome of

environmental, social and economic perfection within

spatial and temporal variances.

 

Reality ‘A’ = Audited present state on a 0 - 100%

scale.

Goal ‘Z’ = Audited ideal according to scriptures

as the 100% Absolute benchmark.

 

Upon such a comparative observation between farm ‘A’

and goal ‘Z’ then goal-oriented

hypothetical changes to the farm can be analysed and

implemented within a reiterative

system. This analysis can be both theoretical and

practical through pilot projects. Any

conclusions will, through the implementation of

various management tools, lead to

progress from A to Z, thereby fomenting a development

process ultimately leading to the

attainment of the stated vision. The percentage scale

of achievement within the guiding

principles are therefore managed by various practices,

management tools, which will

differ in their means but will eventually lead to

their ends of the ‘Z’ 100% level as the

epitome of the plan’s vision.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL & ECONOMIC AUDIT FRAMEWORK OF

INDIVIDUAL FARMS

 

 

AUDIT FRAMEWORK

The audit framework of the farms are based on

environmental, social and economic

factors as in accordance with the principles of

sustainable development. The

environmental principles are based on ecological

concerns, and can be measured using

corresponding physical aspects of the five great

elements - earth, water, fire, air and

ether. The social principles are based on meeting the

basic human needs of eating,

sleeping, mating, defending and life education. The

economic principles are based on the

the management process according to the 5WH formula -

what, how, who, where and

when?

 

 

ENVIRONMENTAL

The environmental principles are based on ecological

concerns, and can be measured

using corresponding physical aspects of the five great

elements - earth, water, fire, air

and ether. The word ‘ecology’ means the study of the

home, with the home being taken

from a micro to macrocosmic viewpoint. Within these

‘homes’ are always found the five

basic elements and concurrent principles of their

corresponding physical manifestation

can be observed in whatever biome or ecosystem found

across the planet.

 

‘Z’ can be set as the highest state of ecological

harmony, wether for a desert or tropical

rain forest, taking into account sub-climax biome

conditions and the ‘nature-orientated’

human element of ecosystem management to plagio-climax

conditions. Present reality

‘A’ can then be juxtaposed to the set ideal condition

and measures brought forth to move

the ecosystem in the former direction. The audited

categories can be both a) Elemental

(empirical) and b) Sensual (subjective) in their

analyses:

 

 

1) a) Earth = Soil fertility, measured taking into

account the mineral cycle, soil

conservation and structural improvement.

b) Smell of soil, flora and fauna.

 

2) a) Water = Water conservation in the biomass,

taking into account conditions

within the biomes hydrological cycle.

b) Taste of flora and fauna-derived produce.

 

3) a) Fire = Energy conservation in the biomass,

taking into account conditions

within the biomes energy cycle.

b) Sight of visual landscape.

 

4) a) Air = 3 Dimensional landscape spatial

arrangement.

b) Touch as sense of feeling of presence in

landscape.

 

5) a) Ether = 3 Dimensional landscape temporal

arrangement - succession.

b) Sound of flora and fauna.

 

Example using above analytical environmental criteria:

Empirical analysis:

A 100 hectare farm in warm temperate zone of South

East USA with 100 head of cattle.

(5) Predominantly grassland with restrictive

successional opportunities due to high

intensity grazing keeping the land at a grassland

plagio-climax state. (4) 10 ha of

woodland mainly on field boundaries with 3 ha on a

7-year rotational coppice. (3) Low

biodiversity and energy conservation, main energy

flows from grass to animal with loss

in animal metabolism and animal-derived produce. (2)

Good land drainage, though low

water storage due to low tree cover. (1) Good soil

structure and conservation due to

organic farming practices, improvements could be made

with more tree cover leading to

deeper rooting and more leaf litter.

 

Sensual analysis:

A 100 hectare farm in warm temperate zone of South

East USA with 100 head of cattle.

(5) Low diversity of sound due to low biodiversity,

except for cows and few trees. (4) A

feeling of spatial emptiness not contrasting to

surrounding land area. (3) A visually

sparse landscape. (2) Food produced is tasty due to

organic nature but lacks in diversity.

(1) The smell of the land is of the cows and their

stool. Little aroma of other flora and

fauna.

 

SOCIAL

The social principles are based on the human needs of

eating, sleeping, mating,

defending and life education. Audit categories are

according to an absolute needs-based

assessment:

 

1) Diet and bodily health = Predominantly a locally

produced lacto-vegetarian diet with

meat eating only as a result of necessary culling due

to maintaining ecological principles.

Ayur vedic medicine preferred lessening to homeopathic

and allopathic.

 

2) Housing and clothing = Produced from local material

using local labour and skills.

 

3) Family = To form marital bonds and raise children

within extended family unit.

 

4) Protection of interests = To maintain diet, house,

family and education in face of

external and internal conflicts. To organise family,

village, locality and country political

framework to ensure continuity.

 

5) Education = To be educated in needs-based material

life and in spiritual matters.

 

 

 

Make a great connection at Personals.

http://personals.

[Guest guest]

Dear Ananda Maya,

 

I don't know if we have been reading the same books

for the past many years, or that we both read it

differently, but I for sure have read that the

administrative class of people, the land owners and

organisers, were responsible for maintaining

ecological equilibrium within predominantly forested

land. In fact Arjuna went hunting, with Krsna I

believe, though he did not hunt, and in the process he

killed, or should I say culled, an enormous quantitiy

of wildlife that was becoming a nuisance to the

village people of the area; that being the only reason

to cull. The dead animals were then eaten, as the

princely order were allowed, if not demanded by

scripture, to recycle the bodies of the culled

animals. This I take from the Krsna book, forgive me

if I am wrong, but that is what I remember of it. I

did not mention the culling of domesticated livestock,

it was implied as only wildlife, and only when the

ecological balance is tipped in their favour to the

detriment of people, meaning when tigers attack

humans, locusts destroy crops, etc. Is this not in

Prabhupada's writings?

 

You say:

 

There can be no

> mention of meat eating on a devotee conference or in

> a devotee plan, and if

> it's not 'devotee' then what is it?

 

Hold on a mo. Arjuna ate meat, the ksyatrias ate meat,

it was part of their remit to maintain the ecosystem

free of peril for villagers by culling unwarranted

wildlife. Were they not devotees? Have I read other

literature to yourselves? And I ask this seriously,

because I'm sure I've read that many times, especially

in Krsna book. If I'm wrong then so be it. I would not

condone the killing of animals and eating them for its

ends sake, only for a greater means, and one that is

sanctioned. And as far as I know it is sanctioned by

Prabhupada.

 

Also, what other absolute basic principles are they

than ensuring an edible landscape (environment) and

the needs of eating, sleeping, mating, defence and

life education (social); and is this not what

Prabhupada emphasised?

 

I do not ask the above flipantly, but this is my

understanding after reading Prabhupada's books for the

past 15 years. And if I'm wrong I want to know I'm

wrong. If right too.

 

In good faith,

 

Mark

 

 

> 1) Diet and bodily health = Predominantly a locally

> produced lacto-vegetarian diet with

> meat eating only as a result of necessary culling

> due

> to maintaining ecological principles."

>

> Sorry I've been off for about a week working but am

> trying to catch up. Am I

> reading this right, that we have even mentioned

> "meat-eating" as any kind of

> necessity but also in connection to "culling". I'm

> not sure what kind of

> plan that fits into, but none that I would ever want

> to be part of. I'm

> sorry but I think we are not doing this right at

> all. Firstly I think we

> have to get the basics right. Are we tring to

> present a plan based on Srila

> Prabhupada's teachings. Secondly are we trying to

> set an example to others

> so that they may follow once we have some proper

> implementation. Next are we

> looking at ISKCON as being other than the sum total

> of us all, because

> ISKCON the institution exists as a property holder

> and on paper, but the

> essensce of ISKCON is us. WE THE MEMBERSHIP of

> ISKCON is the living

> organisation so if it is so sectarian and

> narrowminded, how come we are

> working here to implement something in it. Can we

> look at what we're doing

> again and start the plan which has a simple template

> in clear plain English

> which everyone can understand, and then flesh it out

> when it is agreed upon.

> Otherwise we will be reading the same piece of

> information over and over

> again until we become snow-blinded and miss wording

> as mentioned earlier.

>

>

> If anyone on the conference is interested in

> organics, rural development or

> any other means of existence that is contrary to our

> 'minimum standard' of

> beliefs, are they sure they are on the right

> conference. There can be no

> mention of meat eating on a devotee conference or in

> a devotee plan, and if

> it's not 'devotee' then what is it?

 

 

 

 

Find a job, post your resume.

http://careers.

[Guest guest]

Dear Syamasundara,

 

At the moment it is fine that the GBC proposal goes

through. I tend to multi-task, but others maybe not,

so one at a time.

 

In brief, I do think though that the whole business of

culling wildlife is not an exception to a rule, but a

scriptural allowance in itself. The use of

domesticated livestock to create a silvo-pastoral

(trees with pasture land) landscape from the

surrounding (now mostly destroyed) highforest serves

as a buffer from the wildlife, which at times need to

be culled to maintain the land use system. There is no

sentimentality here, just pure pragmatism that is

sanctioned and demanded to protect the people. I don't

feel it to be something seperate from the system, and

if it was then the system would not be Vedic, as I

have read and understood Prabhupada. Again, when this

is discussed further, correct me if I am wrong.

 

Mark

 

 

 

(das) (Bhaktivedanta Manor - UK)"

<Syamasundara (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

> I do not think there has been an exceptance of any

> particular view regarding

> the killing of wildlife.

>

> I think perhaps the memebers of the conference are

> looking at the GBC

> proposals at the moment and are not scrutinizing the

> recent VSDP writings.

>

> My personal view would be as Ananda Maya Prabhu's

> that mention of any type

> of kiling although mentioned in the scriptures would

> not be a suitable

> contribution from the cow conference.

>

> Our main buiseness is establishing systems that

> protect animals and in

> particular the cows. Once we have established a

> clear protection system then

> maybe if required we can look at the exceptions or

> scriptural allowances.

>

> Srila Prabhupada mentions that if people want to eat

> meat they should eat a

> dog or a pig, but our buiseness is not to promote

> that, our buiseness is

> promote cow protection.

>

> Our primary focus is the ISKCON world and those who

> identify with it. when

> we have something concrete for that then maybe it

> may be appropriate to look

> to the general world.

>

> ys syam

 

 

 

 

Find a job, post your resume.

http://careers.