Guest guest Posted December 11, 2001 Report Share Posted December 11, 2001 Here are some thoughts from Balabhadra for the environmental Guideline which include thoughts from Mark and Madhava Gosh. Please share your thoughts also so the guideline can be expanded. ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDED I) Land Fertility 1) Feeding the soil with on farm inputs. a) Animal manures, crop residue, methane digester slurry, night soil, vermi culture b) Off farm inputs such as rock phosphates, crushed coral, seaweed, municipal leaf gathering in fall seasons, that can not be secured fron an on farm situation. As an example: in Hawaii most of the soils are acidic and crushed coral is high in lime. This is what is available and used extensively for sweetening the soil. The coral comes from dredging of harbors and not from the destruction of reef ecosystems. II) Water Retention and Drainage 1) Erosion pervention a) By wind (dry land farming) can be prevented by b) By water (hillside farming) can be prevented by III) Architecture of the Land 1) Agroforestry 2) Permaculture 3) Vastu Sastra a) explain concepts IV) Management of Natural Resources 1) Bio-diversity a) microbes and worms rank higher than nonmoving living entities (the standing people). b) Chemical fertilizers fry biotic life, addition of bio matter enhances it. 2) crop rotation 3) Wood lot management ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTED I) Land Fertility 1) Feeding the soil with off farm inputs a) agricultural waste products from processing plants. Most of these waste products will be from crops which have been grown with petrochemical fertilizers, insecticide, so that you can guarantee that these will be non organic. II) Water Retention and Drainage 1) Erosion pervention a) By wind (dry land farming) can be prevented by b) By water (hillside farming) can be prevented by III) Architecture of the Land IV) Management of Natural Resources Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 14, 2001 Report Share Posted December 14, 2001 The knowledge I have is taken from studying ecosystems and soil science at Uni and mixing it in with Vedic terms, it may be speculation or it may be right, that needs to be seen. When looking at the quality of the sence of smell and its physical manifestation of solid earth and the minerals that have been uplifted into the biomass then in measurable terms we can analyse dry-weight biomass both in the soil and in the above-soil biology. This shows the mineral content that was taken up by the flora and fauna in the ecosystem, the more biomass then the more biology in a given area. Also, I think Earth would correspond to soil structure in combination with air, i.e. spacing. Many indigenous tribes could tell the fertility of the land by its smell and when analysed "scientifically" via more mechanistic parameters - soil structure, air and water spaces, humus content, soil texture - the results were a very good match. This has been the findings of development field workers that a lot of indigenous knowledge can arive at similar conclusions via different methods. It should not suprise us that smell links with soil stucture, biomass and ultimately soil fertility as according to the Vedas it is smell that creates earth, not the other way around. Or at least that is how I have understood it. Water is easily measured as in biomass minus dry-weight biomass, what has been rid is the mositure content. Again soil structure defines drainage and moisture retention. Fire is measured in a bomb calorometer, though I can't remember how to do this, and shows the energy within the biosystem. Air - I have taken it in terms of spacing as 3D architecture. As in an urban environment there is the architecture of the buildings, so in a rural environment there is the architecture of the land. A field monoculture of wheat is different to a silvopastoral lanscape of ranch land with intermittent trees, or a dense forest thicket or a forest thinned to bring forth more light and allow different plants in lower tiers of the forest. That is 3D architecture, the whole of agroforestry, permaculture, etc, is about creating a 3D landscape. I don't know of a better term for it and that is what is used in the science. For ether I have taken this in terms of temporal (time) arrangements, thus succession. Is it subcimax, plagioclimax or climax vegetation, is it primary or secondary succession and in what stage of colonisation? All these terms can be found in studies of geography and ecosystems. Within the material substrate of the 5 elements the living forms exist exploiting the substrate and each other for sustenance. The quantity and quality of the living entities is defined under biodiversity. So to make relenvant the above there is a scale between what is bad practice and what is good practice. Depending on the site location and site specifics, including bedrock, latitude and climate (forming a biome), then the land and its ecosystem can be analysed. Earth - it would be seen to be good practice to have a lot of above-soil minerals locked in the biomass, but a maximisation of this would lead to high forest, which would not be good for human consumption needs. So an optimisation is needed, but what defines the optimum? This is a social perspective, which shows that the env, soc, econ categories are linked. What is to be maximised is a diversity of useful resources from a biodiverse ecosystem according to human needs, and that will define the optimum biomass. Soil structure is a straight forward quality with only a constant betterment that can be measured, but does soil structure fit in Earth or Air, as it is the soil's architecture? The more I think of it the more I see it in terms of air, because the soil once burnt loses its air, fire and water to become mineral, which is earth alone. Water is to be optimised as too little leads to water stress, too much to cell expansion and explosion(excess turgidity) and flooding. What defines the optimum? Again the answer is in soil science, but I don't have the books with me to convey the equation. Fire - optimised of maximised? Probably optimised with the same criteria as before in Earth. Air - 3D spacing, now this is the optimising factor. Here we create a plagio-climax landscape, preventing mature highforest to maximise landscape usefulness for human needs, including domestic animals, and to an extent wildlife, as part of our needs. From monocultures to polycultures with or without silvo-arable or pastoral, to complex home gardens as in permaculture and ancient land uses. Ether - the time element, can be measured in the progress we have to take the land to the desired land form through its various successions. Biodiversity - maximised or optimised? Biodiversity is seen from the micro flora and fuana that are found everywhere, but are highly relevant for land fertility, to macro biology. Again it is in the social needs that define the optimum. Soil fertility would therefore be a measurement including soil biology as well as structure and texture, as shown in soil science. It is NOT a stand alone issue, it is a mixture of bioliogy with the 5 elements. Also above-soil land fertility is the same mixture. So, to conclude, soil and above-soil land fertility can be arrived at and measured. But whilst it is possible to measure the material and spiritual constituents of the land in terms of the 5 elements and the biology, what constitutes good practice is seen in terms of human needs, and that in its terms is seen on an absolute level as only taking what is absolutely necessary(Isopanisad). If we are to be realistic then we should say that we are going from a maximised state of needs to the optimum and that the land use practice and form of land fertility will reflect this movement. I would also suggest the social principles to be in line with the basic necessities to eat, sleep, mate, protect self and maintain family and to seek peace, freedom (moksa). These again are now in a state of maximisation, the spiritual ideal is to optimise them, yet we must be realistic in where we start. This then gives us a sliding scale of principles on which management practices can move up or down according to perceived benefits or costs. It may also be true that a human managed plagio-climax landscape could well be more fertile than a climax ecosystem with much more biodiversity. This has been shown to be the case in agroforestry research. I have shown this before, but the more I look at it the more sence it makes, and if the Vedas can't provide real principles then what can? Other ideas though please. Mark Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at or bid at http://auctions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2001 Report Share Posted December 18, 2001 > > Environmental > Recommended > > > 1) Land Fertility > > 2) Soil Structure > > 3) Water Retention and Drainage > > 4) 3D Architecture > > 5) Bio-diversity Erosion pervention by wind (dry land farming) by water (hillside farming) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Some random thoughts just thrown out for discussion. It should not suprise us that smell > links with soil stucture, biomass and ultimately soil > fertility as according to the Vedas it is smell that > creates earth, not the other way around. Or at least > that is how I have understood it. I am the primeval scent of the earth. (Bhag gita something something) > > Water is easily measured as in biomass minus > dry-weight biomass, what has been rid is the mositure > content. Again soil structure defines drainage and > moisture retention. > Water erosion plays in here. > Fire is measured in a bomb calorometer, though I can't > remember how to do this, and shows the energy within > the biosystem. I have no idea how to relate to that. > > Air - I have taken it in terms of spacing as 3D > architecture. As in an urban environment there is the > architecture of the buildings, so in a rural > environment there is the architecture of the land. > A field monoculture of wheat is different to a > silvopastoral lanscape of ranch land with intermittent > trees, or a dense forest thicket or a forest thinned > to bring forth more light and allow different plants > in lower tiers of the forest. That is 3D architecture, > the whole of agroforestry, permaculture, etc, is about > creating a 3D landscape. I don't know of a better term > for it and that is what is used in the science. Has to do with wind erosion and with evaporative losses from the soil. > > For ether I have taken this in terms of temporal > (time) arrangements, thus succession. Is it subcimax, > plagioclimax or climax vegetation, is it primary or > secondary succession and in what stage of > colonisation? All these terms can be found in studies > of geography and ecosystems. The Grandfather trees are the earth sky nexus and bring down the subtle energies. As do cows with horns. I will send under separate cover an article about succession that is not so relavent here but that I found fascinating.. > > Within the material substrate of the 5 elements the > living forms exist exploiting the substrate and each > other for sustenance. The quantity and quality of the > living entities is defined under biodiversity. In the scale of life as defined by Srila Prabhupada's books, microbes and worms rank higher than nonmoving living entities (the standing people). Chemical fertilizers fry biotic life, addition of bio matter enhances it. > > > So to make relenvant the above there is a scale > between what is bad practice and what is good > practice. Depending on the site location and site > specifics, including bedrock, latitude and climate > (forming a biome), then the land and its ecosystem can > be analysed. Bearing in mind that excellent dry flatland temperate farming techniques can be very different from hillside rainy subtropic techniques. > Earth - it would be seen to be good practice to have a > lot of above-soil minerals locked in the biomass, but > a maximisation of this would lead to high forest, > which would not be good for human consumption needs. > So an optimisation is needed, but what defines the > optimum? This is a social perspective, which shows > that the env, soc, econ categories are linked. What is > to be maximised is a diversity of useful resources > from a biodiverse ecosystem according to human needs, > and that will define the optimum biomass. and this whole low input idea (which is different than low impact ) which I never read the website yet, but our soils in NV are low in phosphorus and i do buy some rock phosphate, I can't have that be considered a bad practice. > 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.