cap_scaleman (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} cap_scaleman) wrote,@ 2008-08-31 13:37:00 |
|
| Entry tags: | agriculture library, companion planting, garlic, masanobu fukuoka, one straw revolution, pear tree, pesticides, pollution |
Plant som garlic, save a pear tree and microorganisms
On our lawn we have two apple trees and one pear tree. Unfortunately the pear tree has been the victim of some kind of disease or fungus (or both) which in turn makes it wither and produce no pears at all. This is the result of several years of a loss in pears coming from our own pear trees as far as I can recall. However, we are not the people to take care of our fruit trees. We do not cut the fruit trees at all and therefore we have had a yield different from year to year.
But now, all of a sudden, it is time to take some action in order to "save" the pear tree. I asked my mom what the plan was to do for the poor pear tree which the reply was, not to my surprise, to spray it with some pesticide. At the instant my suggestion was to let garlic grow there instead -(Garlic accumulates sulfur: a naturally occurring fungicide which will help in the garden with disease prevention.)- but all that was concluded was that it wouldn't work. To say that it wouldn't work, I wonder, is based on what? My parents are not scientists nor are they farmers. Still the conclusion is pesticides.
When Masanobu attended a meeting on the problems of pollution he writes this:
" The people in the audience looked at eachother in disbelief. The purpose of the meeting was supposed to have been to determine how to deal with the pollution which had already contaminated the environment, and to take measures to correct it. Instead, here was this representative from the Fisheries Bureau saying that mercery is necessary for the tuna's survival. This is what I mean when I say that people do not grasp the root cause of pollution but only see it from a narrow and superficial perspective.
I stood up and suggested that we take joint action to set up, then and there, a concrete plan to deal with pollution. Would it not be better to talk straightforwardly about discontinuing the use of the chemicals which are causing the pollution? Rice, for example, can be grown very well without chemicals, as can citrus, and it is not difficoult to grow vegetables that way either. I said that it could be done, and that I had been doing it on my farm for years, but that as long as the government continue to endorse the use of chemicals, no one else would give clean farming a try.
Members of the Fisheries Bereau were present at the meeting, as were people from the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Agricultureal Co-op. If they and the chairman of the conference, Mr. Ichiraku, had really wanted to get things going and had suggested that farmers throughout the country should try growing rice without chemicals, sweeping changes could have been made.
There was one great problem, however. If crops were to be grown withour agricultural chemicals, fertilizer, or machiner, the giant chemical companies would become unnecessary and the government Agricultural Co-op Agency would collapse. To put the matter right out front, I said that the Co-ops and the modern agricultural policymakes depend of large capital investments in fertilizer and agricultural machinery from their base of power. To do away with machinery and chemicals would bring about a complete change in the economics and social structures. Therefore, I could see not way that Mr. Ichiraku, the Co-ops or the government officials could speak out in favor of measures to clean up pollution
When I spoke out in this way, the chairman said, "Mr. Fukuoka, you are upsetting the conference with your remarks," shutting my mouth for me. Well, that's what happened."
