Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
The permaculture survey of the same land, on the other hand, is almost blind to the grass.
A list of resources to be found on the land cites 'timber and poles from the hedges and bor-
der with the river, freshwater from the spring, clay rich earth, good range of terrain suitable
for a range of activities, good existing fences' - there is not a word about the main crop
actually growing on the land at the time, namely somewhere in the region of 75 tonnes of
grass a year. The word 'grass' occurs just twice in nine pages of text, whereas the ecolo-
gical survey uses the word 'grass' 28 times in a document of the same length. On the other
hand the word 'tree' occurs 30 times in the permaculture design, although the only trees
are in the hedgerows and along the banks of the river, and the word 'mushroom' occurs 11
times.
There is a wide ideological gulf between these two approaches which I would like to see
bridged. I don't believe it is a given that all 'the grasslands should be kept as grassland',
certainly not the less species rich zones - there is no shortage of average quality grassland
in the West Country. On the other hand the livestock and grassland are part of a complex
and diverse biosystem which for centuries was the preferred choice of people whose car-
bon footprint was far lower than ours, so it seems daft not to give it due consideration.
There are plenty of similar examples, where, for example, permaculturists take over
pasture land, and concentrate on planting trees or creating ponds in small areas whilst
abandoning the grazing so that the grass becomes weedy, overstood and a nightmare to
manage. One permaculture group I know, with about 20 acres of grassland, currently rents
much of it out to a local sheep farmer, who not only grazes it but removes some of the fer-
tility in the form of hay, because the community has a policy of not keeping livestock for
meat.
Why do so many permaculturists in the UK shun the virtues of grass and focus on trees,
forest gardens and horticulture as a means of producing food? In some cases it may be be-
cause they only have access to a small amount of land; I know of several instances where
conversion of an acre or two of pasture to a mixture of raised beds, forest garden, orchard
and coppice provides a far more productive and biodiverse environment than would keep-
ing a few sheep or a couple of horses on it.
A bias towards trees may also stem from permaculture's preference for perennial crops.
There are several good reasons for favouring perennials over annuals: they require less
tillage, they sequester carbon, you don't need to put aside a proportion of the harvest for
seed and they don't suffer the diseases that annuals are prone to when planted on the same
ground over a number of years. Growing perennials, in Whitefield's words, is 'a direct im-
itation of nature. Annuals are rare in natural ecosytems. They normally need bare soil to get
established, and are quick repair specialists, able to move in quickly and heal the wound.
But they are soon succeeded by perennial plants.'
Perennials also often play a main role in another key permaculture concept, stacking -
growing two or more crops at different height levels with a view to obtaining a higher total
