46 responses
john starts with ... Hello, all you Permaculturalists. Please block your ears because I'm about to shatter an icon or three. OK. Permaculture is a cult that ostensibly is about garden "design" but like Scientology it is actually about selling expensive courses to insecure individuals who seek reassurance in "qualifications" At the heart of Permaculture is the alliterative "Food Forest" a worthless concept that conjures up the Garden of Eden and lyrical traipsing thru a delicious and effortless landscape. And it's all piffle. Placing trees close together means shading of fruit and loss of quality . Air circulation is compromised and disease thrives. The birds and other animals have little trouble finding your fruit but the ability to use nets is made much more difficult because of interlacing branches. And yet no one says this . Has anyone in reality tried this concept? To me the phenomenon of Permaculture testifies to human gullibility and the need for relevance in our lives , no matter what. | About the Author john 20th January 2012 5:03pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
| About the Author brad gooseberry hill 20th January 2012 7:03pm #UserID: 2323 Posts: View All brad's Edible Fruit Trees |
|
|---|---|
Mike says... I don't know too much about permaculture but I do know high density plantings can be successful and have no extra fungal problems.Smaller varieties pruned to have open canopies or even be espaliered with only small gaps between is the way of the future.Have a look at numerous fruit orchards compared to past orchards.My short heavy trees are easier to net and control pests on than big trees where birds and flying foxes can consume fruit higher up and bugs are out of sight. Many of the tropical rainforest species perform very well in closed canopy conditions as I have seen many times. It does depend on the species and how they are fertilised and mulched.Nearly all the old wide spacing recommendations and disease fears however are now obsolete.John I would say the central density theme of your observation is not correct. | About the Author Mike Cairns 20th January 2012 8:15pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
john says... We are talking of two different things, Mike. I'm talking about a "food forest" with its wide diversity of fruits ;you refer to orchards and their monoculture. Sure some plants can be successfully grown in density but that is not a pattern I'd recommend in general. And that is not how I'd lay my bets. | About the Author john 21st January 2012 9:30am #UserID: 0 Posts: |
john says... Having read several Permaculture books ,attended one course and visited the teacher's garden I think I can make the following comments. Permaculture is exploiting people's desire for paper qualifications. The courses are wildly expensive and pressure is brought to bear for more investment. The books do not address the serious problems of fruit fly ,animal damage and plant choice or plant diseases. and yes, these topics are part of "design" as good design can mitigate all of them. There are other aspects that resemble a cult but I do not have the room to enumerate. | About the Author john 21st January 2012 9:49am #UserID: 0 Posts: |
denise says... Perhaps a lot depends on experience and skill. Also some cultivars or seedlings can produce better in shade than ones developed for a full sun monoculture. Time will tell. Some years ago I trialed a number of potato varieties in moderately heavy shade. All were barren except one that produced surprisingly well. Is there any feedback from anyone regarding any cultivars of fruit trees that are disease resistant and bear well in some shade such as in a well spaced food forest? I think that the food forest is only one aspect of permaculture design. There are also rows and groves, where light gets to the side where you can grow a wider range. You need to use common sense in designing your garden by adopting your techniques to the trees that are suitable and that you want to grow.You can have a food forest with light loving plants around the edge and all the rest in the middle. | About the Author denise 21st January 2012 10:49am #UserID: 0 Posts: |
| About the Author MaryT Sydney 21st January 2012 10:50am #UserID: 5412 Posts: View All MaryT's Edible Fruit Trees |
|
john says... If I understand you correctly Denise ,you are sure there are tree that produce tasty fruit in shade but cannot name any.And there are those that are disease resistant but cannot name any. Allow me to aver - stone fruit needs sun and lots of it . Same for apples. Prune your trees accordingly. Allow space for air circulation to prevent fungal attack . Just as importantly leave space in order to facilitate the use of nets | About the Author john 21st January 2012 12:36pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... John perhaps you are right about permaculture culture but it happens to alot of fads that get 'franchised'.It could be the zumba or abswing of the horticultural world. Monocultures present a higher disease and pest risk than mixed plantings for sure.Some shade tolerant species like monstera,mangosteen and a few herbs can be productive in shaded conditions but these are the exceptions. | About the Author Mike Cairns 21st January 2012 12:38pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... Duku,Langsat and salak produce in shadey conditions with little air movement.Jackfruit,chempadak,mabolo,star fruit and quite a few other rainforest trees don't seem to get fungal problems due to poor air circulation which may be due to rainforest adaptation.They do pretty well in dappled light and when crowded in back yards and even orchards.I don't know if such species are those being advocated in food forests. | About the Author Mike Cairns 21st January 2012 4:02pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
HappyEarth says... Hi John, Whilst I do agree with some of the points you make, I wouldn't go as far as calling food forests a fraud... certainly not in a suburban, non-commercial situation. We've been developing a 'food forest' for the last 4 years and it has been an overwhelming success. You can check out what we have done and see for yourself at: www.happyearth.com Your correct though when you say "conjures up the Garden of Eden and lyrical traipsing thru a delicious and effortless landscape". All though I feel like we are living in the 'garden of eden' it certainly wasn't (and still isn't) an effortless process. It takes alot of knowledge and time to set one up, and requires continual (although minimal) effort to keep going. Regarding tree spacing, we space our fruit trees appropriately and keep most pruned to about 2-3m. They can be netted and easily harvested. Our food forest is incredibly productive, with ground covers e.g sweet potatos, edible herbs and shrubs (e.g. tumeric, ginger, galangal) and fruit trees above. Its also incredibly beautiful. Hope this helps, Rich www.happyearth.com.au | About the Author HappyEarth Wollongong 21st January 2012 6:25pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
| About the Author peter adelaide 21st January 2012 6:48pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
|
Mike says... I think it is better to scrutinise the merits of permaculture than dismiss it outright or call it a fraud.John says it testifies to human gullibility, the need for relevance and exploits peoples' desire for paper qualifications.He also says he attended a course and read permaculture books.After the comment by Rich (I grow productive,tumeric and galangal in the shade) I just don't know so I guess I have to research it and see for myself. | About the Author Mike Cairns 21st January 2012 8:08pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Al says... John you are very obviously employed by the permaculture society to raise awareness of there cause. Never have I read and learned so much about the subject of which I new so little about. This is a common advertising campaign that has been used since day dot. Put a smart-ass monkey on the front line to showcase the banality and arrogance of their critics, and ostracise any question of their derision. Make up your own minds people. There are some very smart people that are very critical of the "food forrest" and may present it in such a way that may actually make you think. Any news is good news in the commercial world, and this fellow is doing more good for the cause than anyone else on this forum. | About the Author Al 22nd January 2012 12:43pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Rev says... I'm in indonesia now and can tell you first hand that food forests are not fiction My main concern is that the neophyte might assume that all plants like to grow in such an environment. This would be a forgivable error and good reason to come here and study the gardens in java, Bali or Papua. Clearly some plants do better in simulated clearings, while others do well in shelter petai jengkol mangosteen wild mangos and many others are good primary forest species Durian rambutan avicado etc need more open secondary forest While banana custard apple passionfruit etc are forest edge plants The concept is solid but in the west it's in it's infancy Yes you should prune to manage light and air. Hand tools are very effective here And yes you do fertilize, yes even with synthetics Synthetics are not harmful if clean and fed to soils with ample organic matter As food forests evolve we will discover the species that are suitable and those that are not Yes fruit fly is an issue and I'd def say don't grow loquats or peaches anywhere except In a chicken run! But jaboticaba, santol, black sapote, thick walled citrus are almost immune The poster has some valid points Food forests need more criticism and design feedback from evidence, but those who say it's a fraud clearly have not travelled or taken account of peer reviewed analysis of the productivity of food forest home gardens | About the Author Rev Abroad 22nd January 2012 1:20pm #UserID: 1806 Posts: View All Rev's Edible Fruit Trees |
john says... To all those who don't know what defines a forest from a woodland ,here it is. If trees are spaced more than their height apart than it is a woodland . When permaculturalists talk about a "forest " they do mean a forest not a woodland. Happy Earth ,I have visited your community garden and ,yes, it is a good one. Tell me if I'm wrong but it seems light on stone fruits and apples and citrus and more into exotics. Moreover ,according to an accepted definition your spacing is that of a woodland. My other beefs with PCulture is its emphasis on courses and its neglect of what really occupies most of my time,namely warding off animals and f.fly | About the Author john 22nd January 2012 1:30pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... Well Rev hits the ball out of the park with his summation.Which accepted definition are you talking about john as it does not seem to be australian? Spacing of trees is a lesser attribute in classifying whether a vegetation community is a woodland,forest or even rainforest as giant trees can have huge crowns.Canopy cover%,tree height and even statification are factors.To qualify as a forest canopy cover might be only 70% and the trees might not be touching.The 'open-ness'can thus be quite high andit still be a forest.Have a look at a jarrah or marri forest. | About the Author Mike Cairns 22nd January 2012 2:00pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
amanda says... Well john...I know for certain my stone fruit need shade here? ;) I could choose to cover my orchard in synthetic fabric that doesn't supply/improve anything except shade...or perhaps I could plant a useful, much taller, nitrogen fixing tree in strategic places. Using chop n drop, leaf litter - it becomes mulch also. A habitat and maybe a bee magnet etc. A canopy that also helps to moderate the weather. I can prune out the canopy when needed, maybe choose a decidious spp. Your comments re: what stone fruit need certainly don't apply to my situation/climate. I have to leave inner branches mostly intact - or the bark get sunburnt. Full sun is no good here..? Perhaps it's a case of 'taking what u need' from many sources, to make it work better for your own situation. Adapting even!? Humans are good at that. Permaculture has never claimed to be a silver bullet. Unless u actually try things out for yourself (john) - then it's hard to say what will and won't work for your situation. As for the insects/F.fly...my point was that even the best science hasn't solved that problem satisfactorily at all. That kind of says it all really. It's even possible it may never solve it... :-( Insects are the perpetual battle since we first planted crops - nothing new under the sun there. Sound like u want 1 + 1 to equal 2. That's pretty unrealistic when you dealing with nature... :) (and no - I don't have a permaculture or food forest set up...but I do use some of the principles - that have I have found work for my situation) | About the Author amanda Geraldton. WA 22nd January 2012 2:50pm #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
Mike says... Many orchards with large trees would fall under most structural definitions of a forest and be not unlike some almost monculture pine forests.I suppose that would make them food forests.I am sure you are correct about the sunlight intensity of an area also being a consideration amanda.The uv here today is at 15 and it stays in the extreme range formost of the year. | About the Author Mike Cairns 22nd January 2012 3:09pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... 70% is the lower threshold for rainforest but some forests are less than 50% cover which is about the same as many back yards.The permaculture folk don't mean a woodland at all. I did twist you words and perspectives in response to a perceived insult, sorry for that.I do believe both you and Amanda have contibuted plenty that I have read and I've picked up quite a bit.The insults that accompany your posts are not needed. | About the Author Mike Cairns 22nd January 2012 3:59pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... I frequently get a couple of flathead species in my castnet and they have those extra gill spines and even an extra row of bones in the flesh.They are a bit like whiting being keepers when you're after good fish.Tomorrow I hope to be getting red emperor and coral trout. I did get a bit nasty in a past exchange and misrepresented johns views a little.While the density and forest definition has relevance I was interested to hear more about the industry.If there is unrealistic expectations,pressure to buy products and that kind of thing or the merits of the principles. | About the Author Mike Cairns 22nd January 2012 7:02pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
MaryT says... All of the above, Mike. I've done the course and yes some of the principles have merit but yes, there is an industry and I see it as a 'brand', a 'bundled package' separated from everyday good logical practices in name only. However, I do believe that Permies have good intentions; if there are people making a living from it I doubt if it would be very profitable. Also I have observed that devotees can become quite religious and some are not aware of any other schools of thought. | About the Author MaryT Sydney 22nd January 2012 10:02pm #UserID: 5412 Posts: View All MaryT's Edible Fruit Trees |
Rev says... The author doEs miss the point that the ff model isn't aimed at plantation style or orchard style production It is a form of land use that is semi-intensive Land is planted with a variety of compatible useful trees and requires little work or inputs after establishment to gain a yield. There is a wide range of produce available spread over time. Fruit, nuts, fungi, spices, medicines, timber, fuelwood It can tick over for years with minimal inputs. You know that mango will just keep going, the jakfruit getting greater girth, the galangal and bamboo clumps expanding, that old bush lemon and the Lilly pilly you can count on. Compared to what you put out, you get a very good return And if for some reason you do want to intensify Then that garden can be pruned and opened up, releasing a lot of growth potential and stored fertility. You've got quite a stored bank of energy and nutrients Analogous to cyclical Swidden (slash and burn) systems Which are perhaps the only form of agriculture that can be sustained over the long term. I went walking past the traditional market today and more than half of the products would be produced in semi intensive mixed agroforestry Aka food forest.. They are especially important for endemic crops, medicinal plants, and spices. Intensive crops are more productive overall, but at a higher total cost of input Sometimes we don't have the time or incentive to manage intensively. Mowing rows in an orchard is expensive and hot work. Food forests are gladed environments and far more pleasant to work in with loppers and a sickle. There simply isn't enough labour, fossil fuel or fertilizer in the world to service all the land intensively. Food forests do act as buffer strips between human Agroecologies and natural systems made by and for other animals. | About the Author Rev Abroad 23rd January 2012 12:34am #UserID: 1806 Posts: View All Rev's Edible Fruit Trees |
Rev says... To say they don't work just flies in the face of 800 years of tradition in java alone. The only reason people are still earning $2 a day and doing ok is because of their gardens. Millions of people worldwide depend on these food forests It's not botany speak, so let's not haggle over meaning of forest But it rolls off the tongue easy enough for the layman and it describes what it means to succinctly. They've covergently evolved from Amazonia to Africa to the pacific, Sri Lanka and java have the most developed and studied models. In the last few decades a lot of work has gone into legumes for nitrogen and forage, but nowadays the research has shifted to domesticating new high value forest crops to increase nutrition, domestic economy and preserve biodiversity. Mollisons promotion of food forest structure wasnt idle theory, it's all drawn from published research on Asian and pacific garden systems. The difference being that Permaculture is a design system and tries to break down what works into it's dynamic elements so that it can be reassembled - well if you do it right And no a Pdc will not qualify you to do this Only making your own gardens until you get it right will qualify you You can't blame pc for food forests, it didn't invent them. Maybe take it up with some pacific islanders while you eat taro, coconut, pacific longans and drink kava, all from their food forests. | About the Author Rev Abroad 23rd January 2012 1:00am #UserID: 1806 Posts: View All Rev's Edible Fruit Trees |
Rev says... It doesn't help that for many species we've bred or selected for monocropping from very limited stock Avocados apples and apricots in this country all derive from very narrow genetic base Bred for full sun high input The mesoamericans domesticated Avos 7000 years ago (at least) and until the 20th century it was all seed grown ! Now everyone's advised off seedlings?? My friends on atherton tablelands have a copse of avo and white sapote emerging from an ancient compost pile and the Avos are abundant and great quality- like a reed/ hass hybrid Food forests are cheap. You can plant seedlings - preferably from mixed variety orchards so that better chance of outcrossing. Seedling subtropicals are often quite good | About the Author Rev Abroad 23rd January 2012 5:24am #UserID: 1806 Posts: View All Rev's Edible Fruit Trees |
Rev says... A suggestion.. If you want food forest varieties you'll have to select them Fruit fly? As I mentioned the pomelo is so thick skinned that nothing gets inside Crossing it with oranges and mardarins makes analogues to tangelo and tangerines Changed in flavor while selecting for robust growth of pomello and hardiness to crappy conditions Root rots ate avo problem so we should be planting hybrids of edible types with rootstocks like duke 7 which has significant resistance | About the Author Rev Abroad 23rd January 2012 5:40am #UserID: 1806 Posts: View All Rev's Edible Fruit Trees |
| About the Author Al 23rd January 2012 11:08am #UserID: 0 Posts: |
|
amanda says... Rev - u really hit the nail on the head here and have many interesting and novel comments, and new ways of looking at the problems :) I was also thinking about how much output people want/need? Feeding a village is one thing - but feeding a city of millions is a big job? I am not ashamed to admit that in the past I have wanted to proudly wanted to show off a "trophy" tree loaded with fruit. But - I now regret growing my trees here more the old fashioned way - with high inputs (like u say) because most of the time have more fruit than I can eat, store or even give away....or that I can manage time-wise, often enough. I am guilty of allowing F/fly to get away from me - because I have over extended myself with fruit trees. Anyway - to cut a long story short - I would change my approach in the blink of an eye now - and from getting in there and trying different things - I know how I would do it, for my particular situation. Ah hindsight! ;-) | About the Author amanda Geraldton. WA 23rd January 2012 12:00pm #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
john says... To Rev. I don't think that Permaculturists had Java in mind when your average suburbanite starts a "food forest" Java bears little resemblance to most of our spaces in Australia. It is tropical ,volcanic and supports vegetation that evolved to cope . Yes, you can grow rambutan ,jack fruit etc closely packed and not suffer too much in fungal rots but it certainly not the case with temperate fruit crops. On the topic of how incredibly productive Javanese gardens are let me give you my experience from living there . First Javanese are lavish in their use of pesticides. Yes, everything looks lush in the tropics but they merely eke out a living from the land; malnutrition is commonplace. The actual product of their land is ,as you state , $2 a day. | About the Author john 23rd January 2012 2:33pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
brad says... John selectively taking design errors and calling them permaculture and ignoring other examples to make your case, shows bias rather than leading to a really illumination discussion. e.g. Rev also wrote "My friends on atherton tablelands have a copse of avo and white sapote emerging from an ancient compost pile and the Avos are abundant and great quality- like a reed/ hass hybrid " Here's a suggestion. Not sure where your location and soils are - but tell the forum John and let people describe a food forest they would recommend there. | About the Author brad gooseberry hill 23rd January 2012 3:39pm #UserID: 2323 Posts: View All brad's Edible Fruit Trees |
Abundant says... Have seen plenty of temperate food forests in the south. Whether they border on food woodland is not important, but they do fit alot in a small space. Pepinos on the ground level ripening fine, cape gooseberry,ruburb growing to perfection under the 100 year old chestnut trees, asima tribola under these as well (many delicious fruit this year!), blackberry is wild and have removed alot but allowed a very small amount to grow so kids can enjoy for the 8 weeks they go on, Advocados and white sapotes out of control in a frost free environment under larger canopy trees, pears/apples/plums dotted around mainly at the forest/tree/wood edge, cherimoya scattered throughout some have 5 fruit, some 50 who cares too much for me to eat so I swap em....its all pretty dense...sounds like a food forest to me though! This is my place and have many different principles employed, permaculture worked well for me, sorry I just can't see how it is a fraud so you haven't shattered anything for me...believe what you will...I'll keep enjoying the forest I've created...hehe | About the Author Abundant 23rd January 2012 3:40pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
john says... To Abundant-Yes, it is important if it "borders on woodland" as the close plantings of "food forests" is an integral part of the advice handed out by PC. No one argues that a wider spacing of many different plants is not worthwhile. For your next exercise look up fruit fly in your Permaculture text and see what it says. Mine says nothing . And please don't say that f.fly has nought to do with design. | About the Author john 23rd January 2012 4:40pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
amanda says... Well, I am really interested in how we can take the best out of each and every practice/science/philosophy et al - and make it work for us? We can agree/disagree that our climate is changing...but one thing is certain (here at least) water is becoming a big issue? We are going to need to adapt to this...maybe sooner rather than later? How will we do this? I am in a coal-face climate (IMHO) - the scales tip quite a lot here...how do we cope with fully half of an annual rainfall when the average is less than 500mm to start with? In my dreams all of the disciplines come together and share knowledge, info and experience - on a Neutral platform. I am certain progress would be much faster..? I don't understand where the funding priorities are these days? We spend more on war toys etc than on solving these important problems it seems. What I am happy to see here - at least we talking about it..and that's got to be a good start...? :) | About the Author amanda Geraldton. WA 23rd January 2012 10:09pm #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
BJ says... At the risk of revealing my complete ignorance – I don’t quite understand how “food forests” are a fraud. My fruit trees are planted approximately 1.5m apart – so clearly closer than they are tall. They are under-planted with things like pumpkins, tomatoes, peas, strawberries etc. Certainly I supplement with supermarket produce, and I find the nastiest chemicals I can to combat fruit fly – but other than that it works (most other pests seem to be dealt with naturally, and compost and local poo seems to be slowly creating soil). I don’t have much land (gardens are only 50cm wide), so I don’t really have a huge amount of choice but to cram things in. Perth is hot and bright, so shade is a good thing for many “full sun” plants. The way I see it, if some of these concepts get more people planting – and LOOKING AFTER – the occasional fruit tree ... then it isn’t such a bad option. The seeking of money for such advice and promises of a “cure” to the modern age to me are a different issue. But planting what grows and potentially close planting where space is limited isn’t a bad thing for the back-yard gardener who wants some fun and a taste. | About the Author BJ Perth 23rd January 2012 10:20pm #UserID: 3414 Posts: View All BJ's Edible Fruit Trees |
amanda says... BJ Perth...we should never feel that revealing our lack of knowledge puts us at risk :) I am really glad u have posted this - I have been feeling the same thing about our sunshine too...exactly. I stuck to the spacings on the plant labels :-( In hindsight - I could have placed them so much closer...there is no way many of my fruit trees are actually going to get that big here!? My orchard has turned out nothing like I expected and the spacing has really stuffed my plans up for a more widespread canopy..? (which was supposed to shade the soil etc..) I could have saved myself so much work and sub surface irrigation area too. I reckon it's a good post BJ. | About the Author amanda Geraldton. WA 23rd January 2012 11:38pm #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
| About the Author amanda Geraldton. 400kms north of Perth 24th January 2012 12:58pm #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
|
Mike says... High density mixed home and farm lots are also commonplace in Thailand and laos using many of the same species Rev has mentioned.While there are good alluvial soils and basalt derived soils the same practices are carried out on poorer soils that are continually improved with various natural fertlisers and mulch.The use of pesticides and inorganic fertlisers is very modest except maybe in big commercial monocultures.There is no reason why tropical and sub tropical Australia especially on the krasnozem and alluvials could not have the same success with suitable species. | About the Author Mike Cairns 24th January 2012 5:15pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
johm says... Mike, there is no doubt that rainforest derived species tolerate crowding and have fewer disease problems. Permaculture started in temperate climes and the centre of gravity is still there.What is really only stating the obvious is that temperate crops like stone fruit and pome fruits don't tolerate shading and, apart from anything else, the fruit yield is smaller and the taste is poor. A similar discussion on this very topic was underway in www.cloudforest.com (However,they managed a more civil discourse) | About the Author johm 24th January 2012 5:56pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
| About the Author Mike Cairns 24th January 2012 6:19pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
|
Anon says... Seems like we didn't solve the problem the last time around either. http://www.daleysfruit.com.au/forum/the-trouble-with-permaculture/#comment | About the Author Anon 24th January 2012 10:47pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
amanda says... At great personal risk, I'd like to ask a question..? If shading is an issue..then could staggering trees from likely tallest, to likely shortest - in a north-south orientation assist with this problem? Pruning is something that's pretty mandatory anyway..so trees can be kept within bounds? And designing for the pevailing winds to penetrate properly? (eg: my orchard is designed around not blocking the cooling afternoon summer breezes) And as Julie mentioned in the other thread - PC does not necesssarily have to be organic - so would u would not treat the F/Fly and fungal problems as you would in any other garden? | About the Author amanda Geraldton, 400km North of Perth 25th January 2012 10:52am #UserID: 2309 Posts: View All amanda's Edible Fruit Trees |
brad says... Johm (hehe) - I'm not aware of any permaculturalist suggesting pome fruit be grown that way. Got any example of that? Both backyards and orchards have moved to closer plantings of smaller trees but that's a different discussion. (With perths weather this week they really do like a bit of shade) I wonder if there's confusion between a low human input near self - sustaining food forest versus a backyard densely planted managed garden food forest. The latter isn't permaculture (doesn't mean you can't use their toolbag) It seems the fruit fly solution for the former is species selection and maybe ground birds. the latter either an enclosure or run chooks (excluding orchard style sprays) | About the Author brad gooseberry hill 25th January 2012 2:04pm #UserID: 2323 Posts: View All brad's Edible Fruit Trees |
| About the Author Mike Cairns 26th January 2012 10:56am #UserID: 0 Posts: |
|
john says... Looks like i was talking over your heads ."food forest is a fraud "was an imitation of PC's alliteration. I could have said food forest is a "worthless concept except perhaps in tropics" but that's not really punchy. Mike ,read the discussion in www.cloudforest.com and see what a difference civil discourse makes. | About the Author john 26th January 2012 1:50pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
Mike says... The heading was punchy alright and stimulated discussion.That is true of cloudforest but you have not always fostered civility yourself.I would have to agree that crowding generally promotes diseases and pests in essentially all environments and lowers yields.It can just be managed in some places a bit better with effort. | About the Author Mike Cairns 26th January 2012 3:43pm #UserID: 0 Posts: |
| About the Author Nick Altona, VIC 26th January 2012 4:24pm #UserID: 2663 Posts: |
|
BJ says... I had a read of the cloud forest discussion link – It is very helpful, and seems to answer a lot of my questions (thanks for the link John). Essentially the “food forest” people are referring to isn’t just close planting (such as for the “fruit tree hedge” with tendered under-crops, which is a better description of the situation I am in). The difference in definition could be the cause of some confusion. The “food forest” apparently involves no pruning, minimal tending and just lets nature take its course (plant and harvest)... which obviously wouldn’t result in optimal fruit production and taste! Obviously close planting isn’t fatal to production or taste where the plants, nutrients and pests are properly managed (particularly in areas where there are not too many critters that also find the crop tasty). Close planting is not ideal for commercial enterprise – but home gardeners may not have the luxury of such space, so I personally don’t think it is to be totally condemned if you’re willing to put in the effort to manage and potentially accept a slightly lower yield than is optimum for a commercial setting. But ... I would recommend more planning than I did when close planting to ensure families are separated where possible, soil is properly prepared, and an understanding is gained as to how much pruning is required (I do a lot of pruning and am learning slowly that sometimes I don’t prune enough, or prune the wrong branches). So my vote is close planting an managed under-crops is a YES. Food forest outside of the tropics is a NO. (The effort required in Australia to provide the water and nutrients would quickly undo the “plant and harvest” concept. I think all plants outside of their native habitat need dedicated time and management!) | About the Author BJ Perth 26th January 2012 7:14pm #UserID: 3414 Posts: View All BJ's Edible Fruit Trees |