The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate
On Mar 10, 7:48*am, "Jim Webster"
> wrote:
> "Buxqi" > wrote in message news:59efd2f5-c0db-4189-a512-
>
> *>
>
> Look up my post on "Forest Gardening".
>
> It's an intruiging idea. Where can I buy the produce of
> forest gardening?
> Could any of the products reasonably
> become dietary staples like grain or beans?
>
> *--------------------
>
> the problem with forest gardening is the yields are too low for sustaining
> world populations
Hmm. Well the cynical part of me says that if it produced good
enough yields it would be more widespread but think about it.
When you plant out a wheat field you get one layer of crop.
In a forest garden you have canopy trees, large shrubs, shade
tolerant smaller shrubs, herbs, ground cover, climbers and
vines and root crops - that's seven layers of plants, each
producing edible food.
Apparantly the system is already commonly used in
tropical zones but a recent inovation in temperate zones,
partly because not enough light penetrates the canopy for
most of the better known species but lesser known shade
tolerant plants can be used instead.
> and it doesn't happen in any significant extent
Doesn't mean that it couldn't although in the
context of reducing one's ecological footprint
without growing one's own food if I can't locate
a commercial forest garden, it's a bit irrelevant.
Also a diet that is both vegan and forest garden
seems a bit too restrictive. One or the other,
maybe. Both is a step too far...
> Jim Webster
|