#sustainable agriculture meaning

[agrocomp0sites]

Sustainable Practices for a Healthier Planet

Outline Main Topic Subtopics Introduction – Definition of Sustainability Sustainable Practices – Importance of Sustainable Practices – Examples of Sustainable Practices – Benefits of Sustainable Practices Environmental Sustainability – Key Concepts in Environmental Sustainability – Ecosystem Services and Sustainability – The Role of Biodiversity in Sustainability Sustainable Development…

[cookie-nom-nom]

The Impacts of Agricultural Practices on Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi

By popular demand (one single person) I present a semster's worth of research into the scientific uncertainty surrounding Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as pertaining to agriculture because oh boy. is there some uncertainty. Which is a boring way of saying the world is ripe with potential and the mycology is a blossoming field of research! Yippee!

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) have potential to increase the efficiency of modern agricultural practices due to its beneficial impacts on crops. AMF are a broad category of fungi species that live in the soil and connect to the roots of plants, forming symbiotic relationships between them and other plants connected through the mycelium network. Due to their fine mycelium and ability to extract nutrients from inorganic compounds, AMF can access nitrogen and phosphorus from the soil and exchange it with for carbon compounds generated in photosynthesis by their plant hosts (Hodge and Storer 2014). This can provide crucial, often limiting nutrients to crops which otherwise deplete the nutrients in the soil with each harvest. AMF have also been found to increase plant resistance to pathogens, drought, or salinity (Cheng et al. 2023; Buysens, de Boulois, and Declerck 2014). However, the benefits of AMF to crops vary wildly, and in the wrong conditions AMF can become parasitic to their hosts (Hodge and Storer 2014). The complexity of AMF networks makes it difficult to ascertain their impacts, with variables such as available nutrients, soil conditions, or species involved in the symbiosis changing the results of studies. One component of addressing its potential use comes from examining how current farming practices impact the effectiveness of AMF for agriculture and the uncertainty obfuscating it.

Nutrients

Modern agriculture depends on ample fertilizer use to maintain yield output, which has heavy environmental costs, from excess nutrients causing eutrophication, to being carcinogenic and potentially radioactive, to the damage from mining and processing phosphate (Lubkowski 2016). One of the main advantages of AMF symbiosis is increased access to nutrients for the crop hosts, thus positioning it as a potential alternate source of nutrients. Understanding both the impact of fertilizers on AMF networks and how they compare in enriching crops is crucial when considering the potential of AMF in agriculture.

Over time, conventional fertilizers' usage greatly decreased the diversity of AMF species and their impact on crops (Oehl et al. 2004; Wang et al. 2018; Peng et al. 2023). Organic fertilizers resulted in nearly double the amount of AMF species compared to the plots using artificial fertilizers (Oehl et al. 2004). The composition of the fungal species was also different, with the species prevalent under organic farming more closely resembling those of a natural ecosystem. Furthermore, the dominant AMF species under long term, high intensity artificial fertilizer were less beneficial to crops (Peng et al. 2023). Potentially less efficient AMF species were selected for by high input farming as the crop would trade for phosphorous less readily due to the abundance from the fertilizer (Oehl et al. 2004). Less diversity in AMF resulted in decreased benefits to crops, suggesting that farming techniques that increase the diversity of AMF will be more beneficial to farmers (Oehl et al. 2004; Wang et al. 2018). However, Peng et al. found that the lower AMF diversity in fertilized fields did not cause lower crop yield, but did find increased soil stability and nutrient cycling (2023). As it was the diversity of the AMF being measured, the diverse and partially conflicting results are logical because of the different AMF species and dynamics present in each study. AMF diversity appeared to relate to multiple but inconsistent positive effects for agriculture and was clearly harmed by the use of conventional fertilizers.

Fertilizer negatively impacted the root colonization of AMF (Oehl et al. 2004; Sheng et al. 2012; Peng et al. 2023). Cultures taken from organic farming plots had a higher chance of inoculation and faster root colonization compared to traditional fertilizer use (Oehl et al. 2004). AMF species that quickly and more fully colonize roots would be highly valuable in modern agriculture, which prioritizes annual plants and thus would need to quickly renew relationships with AMF networks in order to benefit from the symbiosis. Potentially the particular species predominate under organic farming was well suited to swift colonization of the crops used. Alternatively, the diversity of the AMF species may have been the cause due to an increased chance of having a fungal species suited to the crop species. More testing is necessary to ascertain which variable has the greatest impact on root colonization.

Other indicators of fertilizer impact on AMF growth were not so clear-cut, as hyphal and spore density had conflicting responses to long-term fertilizer use. Sheng et al. posited that the limited benefits of AMF in fertilized fields could be attributed to added phosphorus causing limited hyphal growth in the top layers of soil, reducing the amount of root connections with crops (2012). However, Peng et al. found that hyphal length density increased with the addition of nitrogen and phosphorus in tandem but having neutral impact separately (2023). Potentially the negative impact Sheng et al. noted was influenced by a lack of nitrogen, but that would not fully explain the anathema results. Additionally, in two experiments fertilizer increased the spore density, potentially due to the fungi being in unfavorable conditions and consequently switching from an emphasis on hyphal growth to spores to increase their long-term survival (Sheng et al. 2012; Peng et al. 2023). In contrast, Oehl et al. found a decreased abundance of spores in fertilized fields (2004). The reason for the stark contrast in results is unclear, and could be contributed to different crop species, duration of studies, soil characteristics, or any other plethora of variables that without further study will not be elucidated.

Soil Organic Matter (OM) also influenced the relationship between AMF, fertilizer, and harvest due to influencing the amount of nutrients available to plants. The benefit of fertilizer on inoculated raspberries was significantly less pronounced in high OM environments, where the weight of berries had a negative relation to the amount of fertilizer (Chen et al. 2022). In low nutrient conditions with low OM and fertilizer usage, inoculated raspberries had small berries, potentially due to the host and fungi competing for limited nutrients. A similar trend was found with the fruit set, or percentage of flowers that produced berries. In an inoculated field with low OM, fertilizer increased the fruit set but in high OM it decreased (Chen et al. 2022). Furthermore, the highest fruit set belonged to an inoculated field with high OM and no fertilizer. Therefore, there is likely a limited range of available nutrients (whether from OM or fertilizers) wherein AMF are beneficial to crops, suggesting that future experiments concerning AMF and fertilizer must take pre-existing soil nutrients into consideration. Further testing is required to determine the optimal combination of OM and fertilizers to achieve the benefits of AMF, because as of yet the impact of nutrients on AMF networks is still not fully understood.

Crops

The AMF represent only one half of the symbiotic relationship, and so the hosts available to them greatly determine the impact of AMF. The harmful effects of annual monocultures are well established, resulting in decreased biodiversity and nutrient loss that could negatively impact AMF networks (Crews, Carton, and Olsson 2018). The prevalence of monocultures in modern agriculture raises the question of how the limited selection of hosts impacts AMF networks.

Crop diversity is clearly linked to AMF diversity. Oehl et al. suggested that the seven- year crop rotation method used in their experiment contributed to the high diversity of species, as they had more similar numbers of species in wild grasslands than is found in cropland that utilizes the same monoculture every year (2004). Intercropping systems were likewise found to sustain richer and more diverse AMF communities than monocultures (Lu 2018; Cheng et al. 2023). It is likely that the variety of the hosts provides a variety of symbiosis opportunities for differently adapted AMF species to bond with, thus increasing the AMF diversity and richness.

But as previously discussed, AMF diversity is not a clear indicator of benefit. Crop diversity may benefit AMF networks, but farmers are more interested in how that impacts crops. Intercropping results in a significant increase in yield compared to monocultures, known as over yielding. Cheng et al. found a positive correlation between intercrop yield and AMF diversity, though Wang et al. clarified that not all inoculated crop species in an intercrop system experienced an increased yield, further cementing how varied AMF-crop interactions are (2023; 2018). Lu hypothesized that the AMF nutrient transfers explained over yielding in intercropping system but due to confounding variables it was difficult to ascertain (2018). Notably, the yield benefits of intercropping were diminished in fields with high amounts of phosphorus from added fertilizer (Wang et al. 2018). Combined with the theory that less beneficial AMF were selected for in fertilized fields, the success of intercropping beneath conditions favorable to AMF suggests AMF could be a contributing factor to the over yielding phenomena found in intercropping and thus practice that support AMF are vital to intercrop systems (Oehl et al. 2004; Peng et al. 2023).

Annual crops dominate modern agriculture and thus their relationships with AMF are valuable to examine. The disruption of the soil from the tillage necessary for annual crops results in severe soil and nutrient erosion in a way that is unsustainable (Crews, Carton, and Olsson 2018). Tillage has a harmful impact on AMF due to severing the mycelium networks, so the practices associated with annual crops are already known to harm AMF communities due to severing mycelial networks and causing changes in nutrients (Peng et al. 2023; Sheng et al. 2012). Periods of bare soil between yearly annuals and destruction of weeds result in stretches of time when AMF have reduced host possibilities. Overall, the associated farming techniques used for annuals are not beneficial to AMF.

Annual crops also face the added complication of new plants having to re-establish their symbiosis with AMF. Due to the lag in benefit from AMF, short-lived plants may be less likely to invest in a symbiotic relationship with them. Perennial legumes with AMF networks had more growth than annual species, with increased nitrogen and phosphorous given to the crops (Primieri et al. 2021). It was possible the AMF reinvested in perennials over and over because they have proven to be good symbionts, whereas there was a time lag in reinvesting in a new year of annuals. Therefor agriculturalists using perennials may have even more investment in using practices that compliment AMF as they have an increased impact. However, the study’s results should be treated with caution as the perennial crop was an undomesticated crop species due to farming crops being mostly annuals and comparisons show that domesticated species can be less able to support AMF (Primieri et al. 2021). Because species react differently to AMF symbiosis, studies between annual and perennials were difficult to construct. However, combined with the associated practices of tilling and periods with decreased access to hosts, it is likely that AMF is more helpful to farmers in perennial systems. Though there is some uncertainty, the consensus of research is that perennial and diverse crops have more beneficial symbiotic relationships with AMF.

Pesticides, Herbicides, and Fungicides oh my!

Conventional farming heavily relies on utilization of hazardous chemicals to kill organisms that pose threats to crops, be they rivalrous weeds, hungry herbivores, or fungi plagues. While pesticides seek to target specific species or groups, the introduction of toxins in the environment often has unintended side effects that could be influencing mycorrhizal networks. Studies conflict greatly whether pesticides help or hinder AMF, in part thanks to the plethora of confounding variables involved.

The species involved in the system are a large factor in the effect pesticides have on AMF. Different AMF species have various methods of dealing with toxins in their environment, such as compartmentalization, producing protective molecules, and transporting pollutants (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Therefore, the response an AMF network has to pesticides will depend on the predominant fungal strains. As AMF are in symbiosis with plants, their species are also relevant. The application of herbicides to weeds limits the number of hosts the AMF are able to rely on. However, in some studies the AMF were able to recover after a few weeks, though their ability to do so was dependent on the crop species they were partnered with (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Other studies even found herbicides had a neutral or positive impact on AMF. Soil bacteria that associate with AMF can also vary in quantity and quality within the same field, especially species that biodegrade pesticides and influence their persistence (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Due to AMF being symbiotic networks, the species at play, be they fungal, plant, or bacteria, can all highly influence how the system responds to pesticide disturbances.

Fungicides potentially pose a threat to AMF due to being designed to target fungi. At IC50 threshold to control a fungal pest, three fungicides had no impact on AMF except for flutolanil decreasing root colonization (Buysens, de Boulois, and Declerck 2014). Pencycuron had no effect on AMF at threshold concentrations and was contact based compared to the other tested fungicides, which were systemic and infiltrated the body of the plant (Buysens, de Boulois, and Declerck 2014; McGrath 2004). Potentially the integration of flurolanil in the host plant made it more hazardous for AMF. Alternatively, contact fungicides applied through foliar spray could be less likely to contaminate the soil (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Azoxystrobin, like flurolanil, was a systemic fungicide but had lower systemic activity, which could be why it did not have adverse effects on AMF at the threshold level. Pencycuron and flutolanil were species specific fungicides, so the difference in impact could be attributed to increased effectiveness against a fungus similar to AMF species (Buysens, de Boulois, and Declerck 2014). At levels exceeding the threshold all three fungicides had significant negative impact on spore production, mycelium and root growth, and germination. Therefore, carefully choosing the type and quantity of fungicide is crucial to not harm beneficial fungal species.

When the pesticide is applied also greatly impacts the AMF as certain stages of its life cycle are more vulnerable to interference than others. Certain pesticides impeded germination, but multiple studies found that germination was not completely terminated, and that once the pesticide was removed germination was no longer impeded and AMF were able to establish (Buysens, de Boulois, and Declerck 2014; Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). In early stages of its lifecycle, AMF had a limited time to find a host and will die if one is not found. Pesticide interference should be avoided in this stage so the AMF and crops can form symbiosis (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Once established, AMF will be harmed if most of its plant hosts die, so non-selective herbicides can threaten them. They could depend on spores and colonized root fragments should they lack a host, however.

Pesticides vary in effectiveness based on environmental and agricultural conditions, confounding their impact on AMF. The history of the field being tested could greatly affect AMF networks. Practices like tilling and other soil disturbance made AMF colonies more vulnerable to being negatively impacted by pesticides, possibly due to not being as well established as an undisturbed network and thus less resilient. The sheer number of variables involved in studying pesticide’s impact on fungi deeply confound the results of studies.

The amount of exposure to the pesticide impacts to what degree AMF are affected, but it is highly influenced by confounding factors that make it difficult to assess its impact. Practices like tilling and other soil disturbance made AMF colonies more vulnerable to being negatively impacted by pesticides, possibly due to not being as well established as an undisturbed network and thus less resilient (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). The persistence of the pesticide depended greatly on soil condition, including type, pH, moisture, organic matter, and the ability for microflora to degrade substances, all influencing how much exposure the AMF had long-term (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Furthermore, the type, dose, and application method of pesticide was dependent on the crop being grown, creating even more variation in AMF reaction, and thus confounding studies. In one experiment, going over the recommended dose of a pesticide could either impact the AMF negatively, positively, or not at all, but in another it reduced the effectiveness of symbiosis and the amount of phosphorus transported to the plant (Hage-Ahmed, Rosner, and Steinkellner 2018). Due to the variety of conditions impacting AMF exposure to pesticides, it was difficult to gauge their impact on AMF, and uncertainty in this aspect of studying agricultural AMF held great uncertainty.

Conclusions

The intense networks of factors involved in agriculture systems mean measuring the impact of farming techniques on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi is difficult. Given the variety of the fungal species involved in AMF networks, it may not be fully possible to have fully accurate generalizations about the impact of farming. With each system of unique combinations of hosts, fungi, and other soil microbiota comes new dynamics to be studied. This is further compounded by soil conditions, nutrient availability, tilling, and potentially many other variables not discussed in this paper. Uncertainty is rampant in this area, particularly as the usefulness of AMF have been discovered only relatively recently. The most evident example is in the realm of pesticides, where the intensity of the variability of results obfuscates broader patterns. However, there is growing evidence that many conventional farming practices such as fertilizers, monocultures, and annuals are damaging to AMF colonies and potentially diminish the benefits they can offer crops. If farming is to become sustainable while still providing enough food for the growing human population, healthier farming practices must be utilized. Though there is uncertainty, there is also great potential once we understand the factors influencing successful AMF symbiosis.

Bibliography

Buysens, Catherine, Hervé Dupré De Boulois, and Stéphane Declerck. 2014. “Do Fungicides Used to Control Rhizoctonia Solani Impact the Non-Target Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus Rhizophagus Irregularis?” https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-014-0610-7.

Chen, Ke ID, Jeroen Scheper, Thijs P M Fijen, and David Kleijn. 2022. “Potential Tradeoffs between Effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Inoculation, Soil Organic Matter Content and Fertilizer Application in Raspberry Production.” https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269751.

Cheng, Yunlong, Xing Xu, Yang Zhang, Xudong Gu, Haohie Nie, and Lin Zhu. 2023. “Intercropping of Echinochloa frumentacea with Leguminous Forages Improves Hay Yields, Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Diversity, and Soil Enzyme Activities in Saline–Alkali Soil.” Agronomy 2356: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13092356.

Crews, Timothy E., Wim Carton, and Lennart Olsson. “Is the Future of Agriculture Perennial? Imperatives and Opportunities to Reinvent Agriculture by Shifting from Annual Monocultures to Perennial Polycultures.” Global Sustainability 1 (2018): e11. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2018.11.

Hage-Ahmed, Karin, Kathrin Rosner, and Siegrid Steinkellner. 2018. “Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Their Response to Pesticides.” Pest Management Science 75 (3): 583–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5220.

Hodge, Angela, and Kate Storer. 2014. “Arbuscular Mycorrhiza and Nitrogen: Implications for Individual Plants through to Ecosystems.” Plant and Soil 386 (1-2): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-014-2162-1.

Lu, Xingli. 2022. “Effect of Intercropping Soybean on the Diversity of the Rhizosphere Soil Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Communities in Wheat Fields.” Clean – Soil, Air, Water 2100014: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.202100014.

Lubkowski, Krzysztof. 2016. “Environmental Impact of Fertilizer Use and Slow Release of Mineral Nutrients as a Response to This Challenge.” Polish Journal of Chemical Technology 18 (1): 72– 79. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjct-2016-0012.

McGrath. 2004. “What Are Fungicides.” What Are Fungicides. https://www.apsnet.org/edcenter/disimpactmngmnt/topc/Pages/Fungicides.aspx.

Oehl, Fritz, Ewald Sieverding, Paul Mäder, David Dubois, Kurt Ineichen, Thomas Boller, and Andres Wiemken. 2004. “Impact of Long-Term Conventional and Organic Farming on the Diversity of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi.” Oecologia 138 (4): 574–83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40005539.

Peng, Zhenling, Nancy Collins Johnson, Jan Jansa, Jiayao Han, Zhou Fang, Yali Zhang, Shengjing Jiang, et al. 2023. “Mycorrhizal Effects on Crop Yield and Soil Ecosystem Functions in a Long- Term Tillage and Fertilization Experiment.” New Phytologist 2023: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19493.

Primieri, Silmar, Susan M Magnoli, Thomas Koffel, Sidney L Stürmer, St ̈ Stürmer, James D Bever, and W K Kellogg. 2022. “Perennial, but Not Annual Legumes Synergistically Benefit from Infection with Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Rhizobia: A Meta-Analysis.” New Phytologist 233: 505–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17787.

Sheng, Min, Roger Lalande, Chantal Hamel and Noura Ziadi. 2013. “Effect of long-term tillage and mineral phosphorus fertilization on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in a humid continental zone of Eastern Canada.” Plant and Soil 369 (1-2): 599-614. http://dx.doi.org.webster.austincollege.edu/10.1007/s11104-013-1585-4.

Wang, Guangzhou, Chengcheng Ye, Junling Zhang, Liz Koziol, James D Bever, and Xiaolin Li. 2018. “Asymmetric Facilitation Induced by Inoculation with Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Leads to Overyielding in Maize/Faba Bean Intercropping.” Journal of Plant Interactions 14 (1): 10-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2018.1550218.

[laneaconite]

Flora Meets Fauna

We grew up in a house at the top of a hill, With a yard that stretched on, long and wide. Divided in thirds by graying wood fences and the metal arched trellis built for sweet morning glory to climb. Speckled by fruit trees, Overgrown with juniper and rubber rabbitbrush. I can still feel the soft puncture of powder blue juniper berries and the crush of their cones hidden inside.

I have vivid half-memories of that skinny mottled trunk, Dark amber bark glowing red in the setting sun. A decade and a half after the tree died of natural causes, My mother says she never got to taste its cherries. It was only us: Myself, my sisters, who climbed up to nestle in its branches And feast upon the fruit hidden within. It was only us, and squadrons of orderly red ants scavenging low hanging fruit and the birds who picked at the crown only they could reach.

Only us, climbing up into her trembling limbs, Bark stretched and split like old scars. We picked and ate anything left, brushing leaves out of our faces And spitting the pits onto the ground below. I can’t remember how they tasted, But their absence sits like a stone in my heart.

All the trees shed their leaves and went dormant every winter, It was clockwork, we knew just how to Rake the leaves into a pile, bag them up before they rot beneath the snow. When we didn’t, we would learn just how much harder the ground could grow And what it meant to starve the perennials. The trees went dormant every winter and we waited for the warmth, And we waited for the cherries, But then came spring, summer, and autumn—

Our peach tree was a thing of beauty: It grew sidling on top of the hill, nestling against lilacs. The trunk was broad and divided low into strong, heavy branches. Wrapped in elder gray-brown lenticels, growing lighter in color As it reached for the sky. Its youngest branches shone bright green, fading to red— budding fragrant, verdant, oblong leaves. Every other year it bore a bounty of gorgeous Golden fruit, exquisitely sweet. The pink and yellow flesh was soft and sun-warmed, And the juice streamed all the way down to my forearms, After just the first bite. Yielding against my front teeth. I can still feel the bristly peach fuzz Which coated my arms as we picked Plastic laundry pails full of fruit to feed the whole family.

My parents did all in their power to keep this tree alive, Wrapping her sagging old branches together, dressing her wounds, Building a support structure to hold her up. But God knows how long she served that house— Or whose original hand lovingly raised her from the ground— But our tree was doomed from the start. For her greatest branch extended beyond our yard.

For a decade or so, the exchange worked: He could take all of the peaches that grew on his side, A bounty and blessing we nourished. And for ages I couldn’t imagine what could compel him To saw that gorgeous branch off and discard it, Leaving our beautiful tree bereft, bleeding honey-colored sap. But it’s a simple, philistine answer: he didn’t like children, Or seeing our overgrown back garden beside his perfectly mowed lawn. He built a ten foot fence, And the peach tree died that same summer.

Another decade passed and Her skeleton still stands there, brittle branches reaching up Like twisted aching fists into the sky. The birds still perch upon its ghost, and mom hangs feeders With seeds and homemade nectar from her stable center.

-Lane Aconite, Original draft written April 25th, 2023 Edited March 14th 2024

Hello my lovely readers, this is another poem of mine that's been edited so significantly from its original that I wanted to include my first draft below the cut. The story the poem above tells is a more grounded and nuanced emotionally, as well as more vivid in its imagery. It captures the scope of the story in a more honest way than my first version, which was too soaked in the acerbity I was feeling at the time. I just didn't have the energy to give it my all like I do now.

We grew up in a house at the top of a hill, The yard was speckled by fruit trees. After the tree died of natural causes My mother says She never got to taste its cherries. It was only us: Myself, my sisters, and squadrons of orderly red ants Who climbed the trunk and feasted on the low hanging fruits And the birds who picked at the crown only they could reach.

Only us, climbing up into the trembling Grey-brown branches. We picked and ate anything left, Spitting the pits onto the ground below. I don’t remember how they tasted, But I remember their absence keenly.

The peach tree was a thing of beauty The trunk broad, thick, and divided Low into strong, heavy branches, With fragrant, verdant, oblong leaves. Every other year it bore a bounty of gorgeous Golden fruit, exquisitely sweet. The yellow and pink flesh was soft and sun-warmed, And the juice streamed all the way Down to my forearms, After just the first bite. I can still feel the bristly peach fuzz Which coated my arms as we picked Laundry pails full of fruit.

My parents did all in their power To keep this tree alive But it was old, and doomed, For a great branch extended beyond our yard. And for a time, the exchange worked: He could take all of the peaches That grew on his side, A bounty and blessing we nourished. I can’t imagine what compelled him To saw that great branch off, Leaving our beautiful tree bereft, Bleeding honey-colored sap. The peach tree died that same summer.

The truth of the matter is yes, both trees died. I can't eat peaches from the grocery store because they're picked early in the season to be shipped across the country and ripened artificially using ethylene gas. This method only penetrates the outer layer of the fruit, so they look pretty but appearances can't hide how hard and sour their flesh becomes the closer you bite toward the pit. Artificially ripened fruits can also be toxic to workers producing them and the consumer depending on the chemicals used. The summer sun's just irreplaceable. The cherry tree was chopped down, the trunk left partially standing in a shape somewhat like a seat. I used to sit there sometimes to write in my journal. A surprise peach tree sprouted up in the middle of my parents' greenhouse from a spat peach pit, or one that rolled down the hill while picking. They had to move the greenhouse to the opposite side of the hill, digging out a huge recess to fit it, just so this new tree would thrive and bear fruit. I helped in moving the greenhouse, but moved away that autumn. The new peach tree bore her first fruit that year, and even more the next, but I still haven't had a chance to visit and taste a real peach again.

[abhi4994]

ORGANIC SPICES

[headspace-hotel]

This is approximate since calculations vary, but somewhere in the neighborhood of 20% of carbon emissions since the Industrial Revolution have come from destruction of terrestrial ecosystems—wetland destruction, deforestation, degradation of grasslands and so on

Soil, soil communities, root systems, carbonate rock, wood, living plants, and peat in wetlands—all holds carbon

Now consider what plants do for you

The mere sight of plants and trees improves mental and physical health. I won't elaborate much more upon this, the positive effects are incredible and overwhelming.

Trees and vines that shade your home and outdoor areas: reduce the cost of cooling, meaning less electricity is used. Shade reduces the risk of death in extreme heat events.

(Trees also reduce light and noise pollution)

Edible plants (many wild plants and many plants you can grow): provide you with food reducing your dependence on industrial agriculture and cars to reach supermarkets

Community gardens and orchards: creates resilience and interdependence among small local communities, reducing the power of capitalism and increasing the ability of individuals to organize and create change. Makes more sustainable and plant based diets accessible to people for whom they would ordinarily be inaccessible

Compost piles for gardening: less greenhouse gas emissions than result from waste breaking down anaerobically in landfills

No more traditional lawns: much less use of gas powered lawn mowers, weed whackers etc. which are, by themselves, significant contributions to carbon emissions and urban pollution

Crafting and creating using plants: Locally available wild plant species can be used by local crafters and creators for baskets and containers, yarn, fabrics, dyes, and the like, resulting in less dependence on unsustainable and unethical global industries

More people growing and gathering edible and useful plants and using them = larger body of practical, scientific and technological insights to draw from in order to solve future problems

In conclusion: Plants

[acti-veg]

Leather vs. Pleather: 8 Myths Debunked

Since we are all beyond tired of seeing the same regurgitated leather posts every day, I've compiled and briefly debunked some of the most common myths peddled about leather and pleather… So hopefully we can all move on to talk about literally anything else.

1) Leather is not sustainable.

Approximately 85% of all leather (almost all leather you'll find in stores) is tanned using chromium. During the chrome tanning process, 40% of unused chromium salts are discharged in the final effluents, which makes it's way into waterways and poses a serious threat to wildlife and humans. There are also significant GHG emissions from the sheer amount of energy required to produce and tan leather.

Before we even get the cow's hide, you first need to get them to slaughter weight, which is a hugely resource-intensive process. Livestock accounts for 80% of all agricultural land use, and grazing land for cattle likely represents the majority of that figure. To produce 1 pound of beef (and the subsequent hide), 6-8 pounds of feed are required. An estimated 86% of the grain used to feed cattle is unfit for human consumption, but 14% alone represents enough food to feed millions of people. On top of that, one-third of the global water footprint of animal production is related to cattle alone. The leather industry uses greenwashing to promote leather as an eco-friendly material. Leather is often marketed as an eco-friendly product, for example, fashion brands often use the Leather Working Group (LWG) certificate to present their leather as sustainable. However, this certification (rather conveniently) does not include farm-level impacts, which constitute the majority of the negative environmental harm caused by leather.

2) Leather is not just a byproduct.

Some cows are raised speciifically for leather, but this a minority and usually represents the most expensive forms of leather. This does not mean that leather is just a waste product of beef and dairy, or that it is a completely incidental byproduct; it is more accurate to call leather a tertiary product of the beef and dairy industries. Hides used to fetch up to 50% of the total value of the carcass, this has dropped significantly since COVID-19 to only about 5-10%, but this is recovering, and still represents a significant profit margin. Globally, leather accounts for up to 26% of major slaughterhouses’ earnings. Leather is inextricably linked to the production of beef and dairy, and buying leather helps make the breeding, exploitation and slaughter of cows and steers a profitable enterprise.

3) Leather is not as biodegradable as you think.

Natural animal hides are biodegradable, and this is often the misleading way leather that sellers word it. "Cow hide is fully biodegradable" is absolutely true, it just purposely leaves out the fact that the tanning process means that the hide means that leather takes between 25 and 40 years to break down. Even the much-touted (despite it being a tiny portion of the market) vegetable-tanned leather is not readily biodegradable. Since leather is not recyclable either, most ends up incinerated, or at landfill. The end-of-life cycle and how it relates to sustainability is often massively overstated by leather sellers, when in fact, it is in the production process that most of the damage is done.

4) Leather is not humane.

The idea that leather represents some sort of morally neutral alternative to the evils of plastic is frankly laughable, at least to anyone who has done even a little bit of research into this exploitative and incredibly harmful industry. Cows, when properly cared for, can live more than fifteen years. However, most cows are usually slaughtered somewhere around 2-3 years old, and the softest leather, most luxurious leather comes from the hide of cows who are less than a year old. Some cows are not even born before they become victim to the industry. Estimates vary, but according to an EFSA report, on average 3% of dairy cows and 1.5 % of beef cattle, are in their third-trimester of pregnancy when they are slaughtered.

Slaughter procedures vary slightly by country, but a captive bolt pistol shot to the head followed by having their throats slit, while still alive, is standard industry practice. This represents the “best” a slaughtered cow can hope for, but many reports and videos exist that suggest that cows still being alive and conscious while being skinned or dismembered on the production line is not uncommon, some of these reports come from slaughterhouse workers themselves.

5) Leather often involves human exploitation.

The chemicals used to tan leather, and the toxic water that is a byproduct of tanning, affect workers as well as the environment; illness and death due to toxic tanning chemicals is extremely common. Workers across the sector have significantly higher morbidity, largely due to respiratory diseases linked to the chemicals used in the tanning process. Exposure to chromium (for workers and local communities), pentachlorophenol and other toxic pollutants increase the risk of dermatitis, ulcer nasal septum perforation and lung cancer.

Open Democracies report for the Child Labour Action Research Programme shows that there is a startlingly high prevalence of the worst forms of child labour across the entire leather supply chain. Children as young as seven have been found in thousands of small businesses processing leather. This problem is endemic throughout multiple countries supplying the global leather market.

6) Pleather is not a ‘vegan thing’.

Plastic clothing is ubiquitous in fast fashion, and it certainly wasn’t invented for vegans. Plastic leather jackets have been around since before anyone even knew what the word vegan meant, marketing department have begun describing it as ‘vegan leather’ but it’s really no more a vegan thing than polyester is. Most people who wear pleather are not vegan, they just can’t afford to buy cow’s leather, which remains extremely expensive compared to comparable fabrics.

It is striking how anti-vegans consistently talk about how ‘not everyone can afford to eat plant-based’ and criticise vegans for advocating for veganism on that basis, yet none of them seem to mind criticisms directed at people for wearing a far cheaper alternative than leather. You can obviously both be vegan and reduce plastic (as we all should), but vegans wear plastic clothing for the same reason everyone else does: It is cheaper.

7) Plastic is not the only alternative.

When engaging in criticism of pleather, the favourite tactic seems to be drawing a false dilemma where we pretend the only options are plastic and leather. Of course, this is a transparent attempt to draw the debate on lines favourable to advocates of leather, by omitting the fact that you can quite easily just buy neither one.

Alternatives include denim, hemp, cork, fiber, mushroom fiber, cotton, linen, bamboo, recycled plastic, and pinatex, to name a few. There are exceptions in professions like welding, where an alternative can be difficult to source, but nobody needs a jacket, shoes or a bag that looks like leather. For most of us, leather is a luxury item that doesn’t even need to be replaced at all.

8) Leather is not uniquely long-lasting.

The longevity of leather is really the only thing it has going for it, environmentally speaking. Replacing an item less often means fewer purchases, and will likely have a lower environmental impact than one you have to replace regularly. Leather is not unique in this respect, however, and the idea that it is, is mostly just effective marketing.

As your parents will tell you, a well-made denim jacket can last a lifetime. Hemp and bamboo can both last for decades, as can cork and pinatex. Even cotton and linen can last for many years when items are looked after well. While some materials are more hard wearing than others, how long an item will last is mostly the result of how well made the product is and how well it is maintained, not whether or not the item is leather.

[bumblebeeappletree]

Every once in a while I’ll see some posts about everyone should become vegan in order to help the environment. And that… sounds kinda rude. I’m sure they don’t mean to come off that way but like, humans are omnivores. Yes there are people who won’t have any animal products be it meat or otherwise either due to personal beliefs or because their body physically cannot handle it, and that’s okay! You don’t have to change your diet to include those products if you don’t want to or you physically can’t.

But there’s indigenous communities that hunt and farm animals sustainably and have been doing so for generations. And these animals are a primary source of food for them. Look to the bison of North America. The settlers nearly caused an extinction as a part of a genocide. Because once the Bison were gone it caused an even sharper decline of the indigenous population. Now thankfully Bison did not go extinct and are actively being shared with other groups across America.

Now if we look outside of indigenous communities we have people who are doing sustainable farming as well as hunting. We have hunting seasons for a reason, mostly because we killed a lot of the predators. As any hunter and they will tell you how bad the deer population can get. (Also America has this whole thing about bird feathers and bird hunting, like it was bad until they laid down some laws. People went absolutely nuts on having feathers be a part of fashion like holy cow.)

We’re slowly getting better with having gardens and vertical farms within cities, and there’s some laws on being able to have a chicken or two at your house or what-have-you in the city for some eggs. (Or maybe some quails since they’re smaller than chickens it’s something that you’d might have to check in your area.) Maybe you would be able to raise some honey bees or rent them out because each honey tastes different from different plants. But ultimately when it comes to meat or cheese? Go to your local farmers. Go to farmers markets, meet with the people there, become friends, go actively check out their farm. See how the animal lives are and if the farmer is willing, talk to them about sustainable agriculture. See what they can change if they’re willing. Support indigenous communities and buy their food and products, especially if you’re close enough that the food won’t spoil on its way to you. (Like imagine living in Texas and you want whale meat from Alaska and you buy it from an indigenous community. I would imagine that would be pretty hard to get.)

Either way everything dies in the end. Do we shame scavengers for eating corpses they found before it could rot and spread disease? Do we shame the animals that hunt other animals to survive? Yes factory farming should no longer exist. So let’s give the animals the best life we can give them. If there’s babies born that the farmer doesn’t want, give them away to someone who wants them as a pet. Or someone who wants to raise them for something else. Not everyone can raise animals for their meat. I know I can’t I would get to emotionally attached. I’d only be able to raise them for their eggs and milk.

Yeah this was pretty much thrown together, and I just wanted to say my thoughts and throw them into the void. If you have some examples of sustainable farming/agriculture, please share them because while I got some stuff I posted from YouTube, I’m still interested to see what stuff I might’ve missed!

[fatehbaz]

---

For the Maya, the honey bee is more than an insect. For millennia, the tiny, stingless species Melipona beecheii -- much smaller than Apis mellifera, the European honey bee -- has been revered in the Maya homeland in what is now Central America. Honey made by the animal the Maya call Xunan kab has long been used in a sacred drink, and as medicine to treat a whole host of ailments, from fevers to animal bites. The god of bees appears in relief on the walls of the imposing seacliff fortress of Tulum, the sprawling inland complex of Cobá, and at other ancient sites.

Today, in small, open-sided, thatched-roof structures deep in the tropical forests of Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula, traditional beekeepers still tend to Xunan kab colonies. The bees emerge from narrow openings in their hollow log homes each morning to forage for pollen and nectar among the lush forest flowers and, increasingly, the cultivated crops beyond the forests’ shrinking borders. And that is where the sacred bee of the Maya gets into trouble.

---

In 2012, the Mexican government granted permission to Monsanto to plant genetically modified soybeans in Campeche and other states on the peninsula without first consulting local communities. The soybeans are engineered to withstand high doses of the controversial weedkiller Roundup; multiple studies have shown exposure to its main ingredient, glyphosate, negatively impacts bees, including by impairing behavior and changing the composition of the animals’ gut microbiome. Though soy is self-pollinating and doesn’t rely on insects, bees do visit the plants while foraging, collecting nectar and pollen as they go. Soon, Maya beekeepers found their bees disoriented and dying in high numbers. And Leydy Pech found her voice.

A traditional Maya beekeeper from the small Campeche city of Hopelchén, Pech had long advocated for sustainable agriculture and the integration of Indigenous knowledge into modern practice. But the new threat to her Xunan kab stirred her to action as never before. She led an assault on the Monsanto program on multiple fronts: legal, academic, and public outrage, including staging protests at ancient Maya sites. The crux of the legal argument by Pech and her allies was that the government had violated its own law by failing to consult with Indigenous communities before granting the permit to Monsanto. In 2015, Mexico’s Supreme Court unanimously agreed. Two years later, the government revoked the permit to plant the crops.

---

As Pech saw it, the fight was not simply about protecting the sacred bee. The campaign was to protect entire ecosystems, the communities that rely on them, and a way of life increasingly threatened by the rise of industrial agriculture, climate change, and deforestation.

“Bees depend on the plants in the forest to produce honey,” she told the public radio program Living on Earth in 2021. “So, less forest means less honey [...]. Struggles like these are long and generational. [...] ”

---

Headline, images, captions, and all text by: Gemma Tarlach. “The Keeper of Sacred Bees Who Took on a Giant.” Atlas Obscura. 23 March 2022. [The first image in this post was not included with Atlas Obscura’s article, but was added by me. Photo by The Goldman Environmental Prize, from “The Ladies of Honey: Protecting Bees and Preserving Tradition,” published online in May 2021. With caption added by me.]

[reasonsforhope]

"When Francois Beyers first pitched the concept of 3D ocean farming to the Welsh regulators, he had to sketch it on napkins. 

Today the seafood farm is much more than a drawing, but if you walked along the Welsh coastal path near St David’s, all you’d see is a line of buoys. As Beyers puts it: “It’s what’s below that’s important.”

Thick tussles of lustrous seaweed suspend from the buoys, mussels cling to its furry connective ropes and dangling Chinese lantern-esque nets are filled with oysters and scallops. 

“It’s like an underwater garden,” says Beyers, co-founder of the community-owned regenerative ocean farm, Câr-y-Môr. The 3-hectare site is part of a fledgling sector, one of 12 farms in the UK, which key players believe could boost ocean biodiversity, produce sustainable agricultural fertiliser and provide year-round employment in areas that have traditionally been dependent on tourism. 

Created in 2020 by Beyers and six family members, including his father-in-law – an ex-shellfish farmer – the motivation is apparent in the name, which is Welsh for “for the love of the sea”. ...

Pictured: Drone shot of Câr-y-Môr, which is on the site of abandoned mussel farms. Image: Scott Chalmers

Ocean farming comes from the technical term ‘integrated multi-trophic aquaculture’, which means a mixture of different seaweed and shellfish species growing together to mutually benefit each other. But it’s not just a way of growing food with little human input, it also creates ocean habitat. 

“You’re creating a breeding ground for marine animals,” explains Beyers who adds that the site has seen more gannets diving, porpoises and seals – to name a few – since before the farm was established.

Ocean farms like Câr-y-Môr, notes Ross Brown – environmental research fellow at the University of Exeter – have substantial conservation benefits.

“Setting up a seaweed farm creates an exclusion zone so fishermen can’t trawl it,” explains Brown, who has been conducting experiments on the impacts of seaweed and shellfish farms across the UK. 

Brown believes a thriving ocean farming industry could provide solutions to the UK’s fish stock, which is in “a deeply troubling state” according to a report that found half of the key populations to be overfished. “It would create stepping stones where we have safe havens for fish and other organisms,” he adds. 

But UK regulators have adopted a cautious approach, note Brown and Beyers, making it difficult for businesses like Câr-y-Môr to obtain licenses. “It’s been a tough old slog,” says Beyers, whose aim is to change the legislation to make it easier for others to start ocean farms. 

Despite navigating uncharted territories, the business now has 14 full-time employees, and 300 community members, of which nearly 100 have invested in the community-benefit society. For member and funding manager Tracey Gilbert-Falconer, the model brings expertise but most importantly, buy-in from the tight-knit local community. 

“You need to work with the community than forcing yourself in,” she observes. 

And Câr-y-Môr is poised to double its workforce in 2024 thanks to a Defra grant of £1.1 million to promote and develop the Welsh seafood industry as part of the UK Seafood Fund Infrastructure Scheme. This will go towards building a processing hub, set to be operational in April, to produce agricultural fertiliser from seaweed. 

Full of mineral nutrients and phosphorous from the ocean, seaweed use in farming is nothing new, as Gilbert-Falconer notes: “Farmers in Pembrokeshire talk about their grandad going down to the sea and throwing [seaweed] on their farms.” 

But as the war in Ukraine has caused the price of chemical fertiliser to soar, and the sector tries to reduce its environmental impact – of which synthetic fertiliser contributes 5% of total UK emissions – farmers and government are increasingly looking to seaweed. 

The new hub will have capacity to make 65,000 litres of sustainable fertiliser annually with the potential to cover 13,000 acres of farmland. 

But to feed the processing hub, generate profit and reduce their dependency on grants, the co-op needs to increase the ocean farm size from three to 13 hectares. If they obtain licences, Beyers says they should break even in 18 months. 

For now, Beyers reflects on a “humbling” three years but revels in the potential uses of seaweed, from construction material to clothing.  

“I haven’t seen the limit yet,” he smiles."

-via Positive.News, February 19, 2024

[thedansemacabres]

Introduction To Supporting Sustainable Agriculture For Witches and Pagans

[ID: An image of yellow grain stocks, soon to be harvested. The several stocks reach towards a blurred open sky, focusing the camera on he grains themselves. The leaves of the grains are green and the cereals are exposed].

PAGANISM AND WITCHCRAFT ARE MOVEMENTS WITHIN A SELF-DESTRUCTIVE CAPITALIST SOCIETY. As the world becomes more aware of the importance of sustainability, so does the duty of humanity to uphold the idea of the steward, stemming from various indigenous worldviews, in the modern era. I make this small introduction as a viticulturist working towards organic and environmentally friendly grape production. I also do work on a food farm, as a second job—a regenerative farm, so I suppose that is my qualifications. Sustainable—or rather regenerative agriculture—grows in recognition. And as paganism and witchcraft continue to blossom, learning and supporting sustainability is naturally a path for us to take. I will say that this is influenced by I living in the USA, however, there are thousands of groups across the world for sustainable agriculture, of which tend to be easy to research.

So let us unite in caring for the world together, and here is an introduction to supporting sustainable/regenerative agriculture. 

A QUICK BRIEF ON SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 

Sustainable agriculture, in truth, is a movement to practise agriculture as it has been done for thousands of years—this time, with more innovation from science and microbiology especially. The legal definition in the USA of sustainable agriculture is: 

The term ”sustainable agriculture” (U.S. Code Title 7, Section 3103) means an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will over the long-term:

A more common man’s definition would be farming in a way that provides society’s food and textile needs without overuse of natural resources, artificial supplements and pest controls, without compromising the future generation’s needs and ability to produce resources. The agriculture industry has one of the largest and most detrimental impacts on the environment, and sustainable agriculture is the alternative movement to it. 

Sustainable agriculture also has the perk of being physically better for you—the nutrient quality of crops in the USA has dropped by 47%, and the majority of our food goes to waste. Imagine if it was composted and reused? Or even better—we buy only what we need. We as pagans and witches can help change this. 

BUYING ORGANIC (IT REALLY WORKS)

The first step is buying organic. While cliche, it does work: organic operations have certain rules to abide by, which excludes environmentally dangerous chemicals—many of which, such as DDT, which causes ecological genocide and death to people. Organic operations have to use natural ways of fertilising, such as compost, which to many of us—such as myself—revere the cycle of life, rot, and death. Organic standards do vary depending on the country, but the key idea is farming without artificial fertilisers, using organic seeds, supplementing with animal manure, fertility managed through management practices, etc. 

However, organic does have its flaws. Certified organic costs many, of which many small farmers cannot afford. The nutrient quality of organic food, while tending to be better, is still poor compared to regeneratively grown crops. Furthermore, the process to become certified organic is often gruelling—you can practise completely organically, but if you are not certified, it is not organic. Which, while a quality control insurance, is both a bonus and a hurdle. 

JOINING A CSA

Moving from organic is joining a CSA (“Community supported agriculture”). The USDA defines far better than I could: 

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), one type of direct marketing, consists of a community of individuals who pledge support to a farm operation so that the farmland becomes, either legally or spiritually, the community’s farm, with the growers and consumers providing mutual support and sharing the risks and benefits of food production.

By purchasing a farm share, you receive food from the farm for the agreed upon production year. I personally enjoy CSAs for the relational aspect—choosing a CSA is about having a relationship, not only with the farmer(s), but also the land you receive food from. I volunteer for my CSA and sometimes I get extra cash from it—partaking in the act of caring for the land. Joining a CSA also means taking your precious capital away from the larger food industry and directly supporting growers—and CSAs typically practise sustainable and/or regenerative agriculture. 

CSAs are also found all over the world and many can deliver their products to food deserts and other areas with limited agricultural access. I volunteer from time to time for a food bank that does exactly that with the produce I helped grow on the vegetable farm I work for. 

FARM MARKETS AND STALLS 

Another way of personally connecting to sustainable agriculture is entering the realm of the farm stall. The farmer’s market is one of my personal favourite experiences—people buzzing about searching for ingredients, smiles as farmers sell crops and products such as honey or baked goods, etc. The personal connection stretches into the earth, and into the past it buries—as I purchase my apples from the stall, I cannot help but see a thousand lives unfold. People have been doing this for thousands of years and here I stand, doing it all over again. 

Advertisement

Farmers’ markets are dependent on your local area, yet in most you can still develop personal community connections. Paganism often stresses community as an ideal and a state of life. And witchcraft often stresses a connection to the soil. What better place, then, is purchasing the products from the locals who commune with the land? 

VOLUNTEERING 

If you are able to, I absolutely recommend volunteering. I have worked with aquaponic systems, food banks, farms, cider-making companies, soil conservation groups, etc. There is so much opportunity—and perhaps employment—in these fields. The knowledge I have gained has been wonderful. As one example, I learned that fertilisers reduce carbon sequestration as plants absorb carbon to help with nutrient intake. If they have all their nutrients ready, they do not need to work to obtain carbon to help absorb it. This does not even get into the symbiotic relationship fungi have with roots, or the world of hyphae. Volunteering provides community and connection. Actions and words change the world, and the world grows ever better with help—including how much or how little you may provide. It also makes a wonderful devotional activity. 

RESOURCING FOOD AND COOKING 

Buying from farmers is not always easy, however. Produce often has to be processed, requiring labour and work with some crops such as carrots. Other times, it is a hard effort to cook and many of us—such as myself—often have very limited energy. There are solutions to this, thankfully:

Many farmers can and will process foods. Some even do canning, which can be good to stock up on food and lessen the energy inputs. 

Value-added products: farms also try to avoid waste, and these products often become dried snacks if fruit, frozen, etc. 

Asking farmers if they would be open to accommodating this. Chances are, they would! The farmer I purchase my CSA share from certainly does. 

Going to farmers markets instead of buying a CSA, aligning with your energy levels. 

And if any of your purchased goods are going unused, you can always freeze them. 

DEMETER, CERES, VEIA, ETC: THE FORGOTTEN AGRICULTURE GODS

Agricultural gods are often neglected. Even gods presiding over agriculture often do not have those aspects venerated—Dionysos is a god of viticulture and Apollon a god of cattle. While I myself love Dionysos as a party and wine god, the core of him remains firmly in the vineyards and fields, branching into the expanses of the wild. I find him far more in the curling vines as I prune them than in the simple delights of the wine I ferment. Even more obscure gods, such as Veia, the Etruscan goddess of agriculture, are seldom known.

Persephone receives the worst of this: I enjoy her too as a dread queen, and people do acknowledge her as Kore, but she is far more popular as the queen of the underworld instead of the dear daughter of Demeter. I do understand this, though—I did not feel the might of Demeter and Persephone until I began to move soil with my own hands. A complete difference to the ancient world, where the Eleusinian mysteries appealed to thousands. Times change, and while some things should be left to the past, our link to these gods have been severed. After all, how many of us reading know where our food comes from? I did not until I began to purchase from the land I grew to know personally. The grocery store has become a land of tearing us from the land, instead of the food hub it should be.

Yet, while paganism forgets agriculture gods, they have not forgotten us. The new world of farming is more conductive and welcoming than ever. I find that while older, bigoted people exist, the majority of new farmers tend to be LGBT+. My own boss is trans and aro, and I myself am transgender and gay. The other young farmers I know are some flavour of LGBT+, or mixed/poc. There’s a growing movement for Black farmers, elaborated in a lovely text called We Are Each Other’s Harvest. 

Indigenous farming is also growing and I absolutely recommend buying from indigenous farmers. At this point, I consider Demeter to be a patron of LGBT+ people in this regard—she gives an escape to farmers such as myself. Bigotry is far from my mind under her tender care, as divine Helios shines above and Okeanos’ daughters bring fresh water to the crops. Paganism is also more commonly accepted—I find that farmers find out that I am pagan and tell me to do rituals for their crops instead of reacting poorly. Or they’re pagan themselves; a farmer I know turned out to be Wiccan and uses the wheel of the year to keep track of production. 

Incorporating these divinities—or concepts surrounding them—into our crafts and altars is the spiritual step towards better agriculture. Holy Demeter continues to guide me, even before I knew it. 

WANT CHANGE? DO IT YOURSELF! 

If you want change in the world, you have to act. And if you wish for better agriculture, there is always the chance to do it yourself. Sustainable agriculture is often far more accessible than people think: like witchcraft and divination, it is a practice. Homesteading is often appealing to many of us, including myself, and there are plenty of resources to begin. There are even grants to help one improve their home to be more sustainable, i.e. solar panels. Gardening is another, smaller option. Many of us find that plants we grow and nourish are far more potentant in craft, and more receptive to magical workings. 

Caring for plants is fundamental to our natures and there are a thousand ways to delve into it. I personally have joined conservation groups, my local soil conservation group, work with the NRCs in the USA, and more. The path to fully reconnecting to nature and agriculture is personal—united in a common cause to fight for this beautiful world. To immerse yourself in sustainable agriculture, I honestly recommend researching and finding your own path. Mine lies in soil and rot, grapevines and fruit trees. Others do vegetables and cereal grains, or perhaps join unions and legislators. Everyone has a share in the beauty of life, our lives stemming from the land’s gentle sprouts. 

Questions and or help may be given through my ask box on tumblr—if there is a way I can help, let me know. My knowledge is invaluable I believe, as I continue to learn and grow in the grey-clothed arms of Demeter, Dionysos, and Kore. 

FURTHER READING:

Baszile, N. (2021). We are each other’s harvest. HarperCollins.

Hatley, J. (2016). Robin Wall Kimmerer. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. Environmental Philosophy, 13(1), 143–145. https://doi.org/10.5840/envirophil201613137

Regenerative Agriculture 101. (2021, November 29). https://www.nrdc.org/stories/regenerative-agriculture-101#what-is

And in truth, far more than I could count. 

References

Community Supported Agriculture | National Agricultural Library. (n.d.). https://www.nal.usda.gov/farms-and-agricultural-production-systems/community-supported-agriculture

Navazio, J. (2012). The Organic seed Grower: A Farmer’s Guide to Vegetable Seed Production. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Plaster, E. (2008). Soil Science and Management. Cengage Learning.

Sheaffer, C. C., & Moncada, K. M. (2012). Introduction to agronomy: food, crops, and environment. Cengage Learning.

Sheldrake, M. (2020). Entangled life: How Fungi Make Our Worlds, Change Our Minds & Shape Our Futures. Random House.

Sustainable Agriculture | National Agricultural Library. (n.d.). https://www.nal.usda.gov/farms-and-agricultural-production-systems/sustainable-agriculture

[freshly-vegan]

You can say "veganism is better for the environment" as nicely as possible and people will still accuse you of hating disabled people, poor people, native people etc...

(To be fair, I won't comment on sustainance hunting from natives because I don't know enough about it.)

But veganism is better for the environment than the majority of (at least western!) meat eating practices.

Sometimes being poor or disabled means making choices that aren't great for the environment. I'm sorry, nobody likes admitting it, and I don't say it to judge or hate. I have to do things that aren't sustainable too, I get it. You do what you can and accept that some things you can't. That's ok, it happens.

Acknowledging the environmental impact of a non-vegan diet isn't inherantly an attack on those who can't. Sometimes you have to let things go. Similiar to how "donating to charity is good" doesn't automatically mean you're a terrible person if you can't afford to do so.

So in the nicest way...breathe, relax, move on. Get angry at the people who think we should just die if we can't be useful or whatever, not the people advocating for less animal agriculture.

[itsmeatballworld]

| silence in the library |

pairing | boyfriend!daryl dixon x f!reader

summary | when searching through Alexandria’s local library, Daryl decides to take advantage of his moment alone with you.

wc | 2k

warning | SMUT so 18+ only! p in v (wrap it irl), mutual masturbation, praise kink, etc. it’s smutty lol

a/n | thank you to my lovelies @weretheones @devnmon @ivuravix @finalgirlrick​ @normanplusdaryl​ @spncupcake​ for beta reading my mess <3 ily!!!

MDNI banner from @/cafekitsune

“Higher.”

He grunted as his hands slid past your knees.

You wiggle forward, but it was pointless. “Just a bit higher, Daryl.”

He adjusts his grip on your legs again.

“Okay, now hold it there.”

Right there. With all your strength, you reached out.

“Got it!” Your fingers wrapped around the leather spine, cradling it close to your chest. The book was dusty but just the one you’ve been looking for.

Daryl tightened his grip, “alright?”

“Yeah,” you replied. “Just don’t drop me, baby.”

“Nah. Never.”

You dipped your head, staring down at your dark-haired boyfriend. Straddling his shoulders was the only way you’d be able to reach the selves without a ladder. Plus, it was fun. Why spend time searching for a ladder when you had him standing next to you?

After your feet touch the ground, the leather-bound book drops to the table.

“This was the last one.” You admired each of the old and new books, quickly organizing them into piles. “I think we’ve got enough.”

“Good,” he steps closer to examine the stack of novels. He leans into your side, sliding his arm around your waist. His muscles tighten as he pulls you back against his broad chest.

“We really need those too?”

He pointed down to a set of old farmer almanac books.

“It’s on the list,” you murmur between flipping pages. “Take it up with Michonne.”

When you and Daryl signed up for the run, Michonne gave you a list of books they needed to plan the community gardens. There were hopes these works would still be available, considering agricultural books weren't always flying off the shelves compared to other genres.

Old English Farming Book. Mini-Farming. All filled with self-sustaining concepts to produce crops and allow people to thrive beyond consumerism. And with thanks to you and Daryl, you managed to gather enough readings on the list.

“Pussy…willow?”

“It’s a type of flower.” You rolled your eyes but couldn't fight the stupid smirk on your face. “Are you reading over my shoulder?”

“Mhm.” His hand pressed into the curve of your side.

The local library was smaller than the others around Alexandria, which made it much easier to search. This room was set back off the main floor, tucked behind rows and rows of dark wooden shelves stacked with books. Even at the end of the world, you didn't dare ruin the librarian’s methodical arrangements.

With one arm keeping you close enough to feel his chest rise and fall, Daryl’s other hand settled on your shoulder. He started kneading at your tight muscles, digging his rough fingers into your skin a bit more each time.

You scanned the pages of the book, but nothing stuck. Each word you read seemed to drift off the paper and into thin air, vanishing from your mind. Sentences started and stopped without meaning. Restarting the page didn’t change where his hands were and what you wanted him to do with them.

His fingers were gentle yet strong. All you could think about was how he circled and dug in. Again and again.

“Daryl.”

You tried to ignore how he responded to your voice. His fingers spread out, then he palmed at the muscle.

Daryl wasn’t direct when he wanted something. But when he wanted you, he gave noticeable hints. First, he’d find a way to twist himself against you or wind his hands under your shirt. It was always light but obvious contact.

And with him there was always a time and place for intimate moments. Daryl wasn't the kind of guy to grab you and fuck you without a plan. He liked the comfort of your bedroom. He liked the opportunity to be close and confined with you.

He wanted time to worship you, feel you, pleasure you–without the risk of the dead or living invading the rare moments he gets you all to himself. But today was different. There was something in the way his eyes lingered on you. How every time he stepped into your space, his hands would find themselves on your skin.

You cleared your throat, trying and failing to curve the fluttery feeling in your belly. He was your boyfriend but you hated getting distracted. Especially on a run.

“It… uh, it says we should be able to grow beets and squash too. Maybe if we can find some okra seeds, we can plant those next to the tomatoes–”

“Mhm.”

You glanced over your shoulder. He was not reading with you anymore.

“Are you just gonna stare at me all day?”

“I’m thinkin’ bout other things.” His hands slid down before finding the clasp of your belt. Daryl’s thumb hooks your belt loop as his big hand splayed out across the front of your jeans.

Still watching him, you flipped a page in the book. That page turn sparked something behind those deep blue eyes. He dropped his chin so his lips were inches from yours.

“Put the book down,” he grumbled. A sly smile crossed his face as he dipped lower. “Help me get these pants off.”

Like something magnetic tugged you together, his lips caught yours. Chests were flush against one another as Daryl hoisted you up and onto the table. Your back jammed into a book edge but Daryl was already clearing the space.

He was quick to slip each piece of clothing off that was necessary, leaving only your bra clasped to your chest.

Spread out for him like this was exciting. He hungrily watched you as the pile of clothes grew beneath his feet. Yet he was still dressed. So you squirmed, reaching for his belt –

He stopped you.

“Stay still.”

“But I wanna make you feel good,” you murmur.

With one hand he undid his buckle and tossed it to the side. “Nah, that’s my job.”

His hunger for you was avid and obvious from the bulge in his boxers. But when he lowered his mouth to your exposed pussy, it was even clearer.

There was something so powerful about him when he was between your legs. He had an unbreakable hold on you that made your head spin. His tongue was dangerously good at this and he knew it. It wasn't very hard to get you close when he went down on you.

He was gentle yet rough as he took his time to work your pussy. He licked your sensitive clit with broad strokes, then tighter circles, making you see stars. You shut your eyes, twisting your fingers through his hair as he lapped at your core.

You gasp, “Fuck–Daryl.”

That pattern was magical.

His mouth sucked and licked as you buck up against him. His hands slowly moved closer to your breasts, squeezing you through the fabric. You gasped, wishing the constant pleasure would both end and never stop. Almost like he heard you, Daryl moved.

“Hold on,” he pants.

A cold chill tickled your skin where he slipped away, which had your hands reaching to pull him back. But when your eyes rested on him, you stopped.

Taking himself in his hands, he stroked his throbbing cock. He ran his thumb across his swollen tip, working the shaft in tight circles.

“Touch ‘ur self.”

Hesitant, you sat up onto your elbows. Daryl rolled fist and pumped himself, struggling to quiet his moans.

“Now?”

Ignoring your question, he continued to pump himself. There was something so sinfully hot about watching him jerk himself off. Your fingers slip past your stomach to your pussy, gently finding the swollen and sensitive spot he’d been deliberately stimulating.

He was aching, twisting and pumping himself slow then fast. He couldn't help himself from muttering praising words about how good he felt and how good you were doing.

That’s my girl.

Faster.

Just–uh–like that.

Every single word kept you going. His voice was gruff and scratchy as he praised you. So you returned the favor.

You like that?

God, you feel so good.

You’re so big.

Coaxing you closer and closer, each moan was stifled by your own will. But it was getting harder to wait. Watching him above you working himself raw was starting to make you crazy. You bucked up, fighting the urge to give in before he did.

“Oh god,” you gasp as you rub and circle your swollen clit.

“My girl,” he whined. “Fuckin’ sexy.”

It took all your strength to stop. You sat up, hooking your legs around Daryl to pull him back to you. “Inside me.” Everything sounded like a plea, as if you’d implode without his touch. “Inside. Me. Now.”

Daryl didn’t think twice. He leaned over you once more and thrusted his slick, aching cock inside you to finish.

“‘s my girl,” he grunts. “Like that?” His hips rut into you again as he grabs hold of your ankles.

Yes. Each thrust was deep and mind-numbing. Your hands cling to his vest in an attempt to hold yourself steady. He pushed your legs closer to your chest as he cradled your ankles, making himself sink deeper. A cry escapes your lips as his pace slows with the angle shift, dragging his cock in and out in short yet deep strokes.

Words seemed lost on your tongue. Yes. Yes, oh god, yes. But all that you could muster were earth shattering moans.

Waves of heat and pleasure that built up for so long came crashing down with haste. Moans were the least of your sounds. Desperation to ride out your high fueled your own movements as his hips rocked against you. You were pulsating around him, tightening and releasing without thinking anymore when he came. It was hot and fast, leaving Daryl grunting as he tightened his grip on you.

There, in the final moment of pure ecstasy, he lowered your legs and pulled you in close. Your lips met before Daryl breathed into your neck. “Ain’t yah… supposed to be quiet in these places?”

Through hot and ragged breaths, an exasperated chuckle left your lips. “Technically.”

“Shit.” He put his boxers back on and passed your jacket. “Sounded better with us in ‘ere.”

Clothes were still piled below in random stacks. Each piece was handed out quickly as it was getting late.  

You lowered yourself onto the dusty rug and slipped on your pants. But like the unspoken gentleman he is, your boyfriend helps you dress, winding your belt back through its loops.

“I can do that,” you murmured.

“Nah. I got it.”

Even now, you couldn't help but smile. Daryl was rough around the edges, but beyond the rough exterior was a sweet soul.

There was a softness to his touch that drove you wild. He cared about every inch of you and did his best to show you. Taking care of you in the smallest, silliest ways was important.

But you could dream about him later when these books were dropped off. After finishing with the clothes, each of you grabbed a stack of books. As you meandered through the library one last time, you strangely wanted to stay here.

In your own world, in this silly little bubble beside shelves of agricultural books. It was a haven.

Near the lobby, you were inches from the door when he stopped.

“Hold up.” Daryl drops the stack of books, hopping over the main counter. He scanned the table, shoving things around until a crooked smile pulled at his lips.

“‘Ey. Hand ‘em over.”

Curious, you place your stack down next to his and watch as he lifts a stamp. Property of Alexandria Public Library. Each bookcard was marked before he joined you again.

You smirked, “having fun?”

“Mm-hm.” With his free arm, he circled you close to his chest. Daryl kissed your temple before shouldering the front door open.

“Pop the trunk.”

The door shut behind you with a thump.

“That was fun.”

“Wanna go again later?”

With a mischievous smile, it was finally time to head home.

><<>><

><<>><

[portraitoftheoddity]

Trigun: Stampede, Wolfwood, and Food

So, I think a major part of any worldbuilding should always involve food, and where it comes from. The worldbuilding around No Man's Land in Trigun: Stampede is a little tricky in this regard, since there's shown to be no real agriculture or plant life (Meryl's utter shock at the "flora" on Ship Three as a total foreign phenomenon suggests it's more rare than in the manga) so sustainable human-friendly food sources are rare and not really addressed. We see characters eating worms, and presumably there's whatever it is worms eat, and beyond that, it's suggested that pretty much all of humankind's nutrition comes from plants.

The desert dudes living off worm meat refer to "plant-based food" as an "extravagance" in the opening scene of episode 4 (aptly named "Hungry"). Meryl, by contrast, is grossed out by the idea of eating worm meat -- I think we can infer then, that Meryl, being a college-educated city girl, probably had regular access to Plant-generated food, while Outlanders are more dependent on alternative sources of nutrition.

Wolfwood, I think, falls closer to the latter category -- He's very used to eating worms, as we see in this episode, not even flinching at grabbing and devouring a whole worm, and even smoked dried worm legs as a kid in a later flashback, so supplementing his diet and other aspects of his life with worms is probably something he's used to doing for survival:

And I gotta say, the way Wolfwood antagonizes the others about eating worm-based food?

Yeah, it's a power play in some respects -- he's making a point to Vash about 'kill or be killed' to survive when he catches and throws a worm at him, and he's taunting Meryl to get a rise out of her with the roasted worm meat at the end of the episode.

But there's something very "Gross Big Brother" about it -- he's antagonizing them, but there's also some underlying level of care in it. He is showing Vash how Wolfwood thinks it's necessary to survive; he's bullying Meryl into eating the food that's available, because Wolfwood probably grew up with the understanding that you couldn't afford to turn your nose up at whatever food you got.

It's food, it's there, it's a valuable and scarce resource, and as much of an asshole as Stampede!Wolfwood is, he has those ingrained big brother instincts to look out for those around him. And food is an important part of that, because when you live with scarcity, food is life.

The whole bit with Zazie in disguise might be a charade (assuming Wolfwood already clocked Zazie from the get-go and it didn't take the worm devouring them for that card to be revealed) but it still pulls from Wolfwood's characterization in the '98 anime where he gives two of his last pieces of food to a couple of hungry-looking kids:

And the sentiment of "you still deserve to eat" as an expression of care is still real for him, especially given his smile when Vash repeats his words, finally eating some of the worm meat at the end of episode four:

Our worldbuilding implication is that food is scarce and rare in the Outlands, and Wolfwood is someone who knows how to survive by any means possible -- including eating whatever is available -- which is something he's nonetheless willing to share with others, because at his core he's a decent person who isn't as selfish as he may pretend to be.

And food is one hell of a love language.

[star-anise]

You just posted like ten different things about potatoes in the span of maybe five minutes, and I gotta know your take on "The Martian".

Like, the (fictional) man alone on a planet literally only survives because of potatoes shrink-wrapped in plastic for a Thanksgiving meal. If they weren't slated to be on Mars for Thanksgiving, he would have died.

And Andy Weir (author of the original novel) did such a good job with the science of every other element to the story, I honest-to-god believe that potatoes could actually manage to grow in Martian soil (even if that's not been proven for certain afaik).

Which means..... could potatoes terraform Mars into sustaining life??? Are potatoes the key to the universe???

Haha sorry for going so hard on them! Those were mostly all posts from 2020 when gardening and fantasy worldbuilding were lockdown fixations for me. One of them blew up recently so I wanted to give The People more of the content it seemed they were looking for. I don't actually know a lot about potatoes. I just think they're neat.

I do not want to take apart the concept of "colonizing Mars" as some kind of woke gotcha. I want to take your question seriously and charitably. However, I just am the kind of person who's like "Hmm, 'colonize', we should really stop and unpack that word," so let's do that, without forgetting the potato element.

(What "I don't know a lot" means: Potatoes were a crop my family grew several acres of for a few years on our farm before we switched our focus to sheep. I am about 50% as reliable as a horticultural brochure on various potato diseases and growing condition issues. I have listened to two University lectures and read perhaps four historical journal articles beginning-to-end on how the Columbian Exchange affected early-modern Europe, that and half as much again on medieval and early modern European farming practices and population changes, and perhaps three science/history articles specifically on the domestication and proliferation of the potato. I am a white Canadian who actively seeks out information and training in Indigenous history and culture in the Americas, but that's probably still only equal to like, two Native Studies classes in university. I know more than the average person on this topic, but I am also not an expert compared to people who have devoted serious time to learning about this.)

But I have some intuitions in a couple of ways:

The Martian is probably being wildly over-optimistic about its potatoes. They would probably have been irradiated into sterility before being vacuum-packed, and I don't think you can split and propagate them that quickly or successfully. However, potatoes can definitely grow in all kinds of conditions (including under my sink).

They might not be the world's healthiest or happiest potatoes, tho. Soil quality definitely affects the end product. Presumably Watney, being a botanist studying Mars' soil composition, knew how much he had to ameliorate his soil with latrine compost (which would definitely have needed a LOT of processing, since human waste is generally not good for plants, but maybe he used chemicals to speed that up?) to get good soil. However, we would probably need to add a LOT of shit to Mars' soil (and air, and water) for it to host plant life.

Mark Watney makes a joke about having "colonized Mars" because "colony" is Latin for "farm" and he farmed on Mars so haha, funny joke! And we talk about colonies on Mars partly because that's what science fiction did, and a lot of science fiction has been into that colonialism aesthetic. But colonialism and empires actually aren't great, not just because they necessitate huge amounts of racism, oppression, and genocide—I know, you asked me a fun question about potatoes and did not sign up for this, I'm not here to drag you, hear me out—but because they're also really sucky models for agriculture and successful societies generally.

My British ancestors tried to be colonial farmers in a place that is sometimes colder than Mars (Canada's Treaty Six), and let me tell you: IT SUCKED. Most of the crops and herbs and vegetables and flowers that settlers here brought from home and are used to? DON'T FUCKEM GROW. For the Canadian prairies to become conventional farmland, farmers and scientists had to scramble to find, or produce, cold-hardy varieties of everything from wheat to roses. A lot of flowers and plants that are unkillable invasive zombie perennials in other climates don't survive our winters no matter hard we try. The trees and flowers that hold cultural or sentimental attachments for us often don't grow here. The climate is so harsh and population is spread so thin that we cannot do the 100 mile diet and eat foods we're familiar with, and can hardly even manage the 1000 mile diet. (Not that I try, but, my family did once look into it)

A huge number of colonial homesteads, where the pioneers go out on their little covered wagon and build little houses on the prairie? Failed miserably and got bought up by land speculators. My own family came out to Alberta in the 1880s and moved around from land assignment to land assignment, like, six times before settling at their current place in the early 1900s.

Meanwhile: POTATOES

Potatoes are less than ten thousand years old! I am not any kind of expert on archaeology, please nobody throw things, but humans showed up in the Andes (think: high, cold mountains) of South America roughly 9,000 years ago. There are hundreds of wild potato varieties, but they generally produce fairly tiny tubers. It took active work of Indigenous Andean people around 8,000 years ago around Lake Titicaca to cultivate specific strains of potato, doing oldschool genetic modification to make them bigger, more delicious, and hardier. From that cultivation effort around a single species of wild potatoes, they produced thousands of cultivated potato varieties.

Ancient Andean farmers and botanists also played a big part in cultivating quinoa from wild amaranth, as well as producing modern food crops you probably haven't heard of, like oca, olluco, mashua, and yacon, and also coca, which may get a bad rap because it's what cocaine and coca-cola are made from but you cannot deny it's got kick.

Basically, Indigenous people of the Americas (South, Central, and North) went all in on botany and plant cultivation. Plants that we take for granted now have mostly been developed by Indigenous people in the past few thousand years: Tobacco, sunflowers, marigolds, tomatoes, pumpkins, rubber, vanilla, cocoa, sweetcorn, maize, and most kinds of pepper except peppercorn. These things were not found; they were made, by careful cultivation of the world as it was.

This gives us a vision of the future. Colonization, and industrial agriculture, both lean us towards the vision of a totally uniform end product, with the same potato varieties grown on each farm because we have made every farm the same. Instead we could embrace biodiversity and focus on privileging local knowledge and considering the interactions of environment, plants, microbiota, and people. We could create potatoes that were happy on Mars. We could create Mars that is happy to have us. We could create a society that can accept what Mars has to offer.

A lot of why we dream about colonizing Mars is the idea that the Earth itself is dying, that we are killing it, and we need to abandon this farmstead and seek out a new frontier. I acknowledge that shit is bad, but I don't agree with that framing. I am increasingly persuaded that there is a third path between ecological destruction and mass exodus, and I think we need to reject European colonial mentality that creates the forced choice. I find far more use in privileging the knowledge of people who live on and with land than their landlords and rulers, and I especially find value in Indigenous knowledge of land management practices and food production.

I am absolutely not saying that Indigenous people were or are wonderful magical ~spiritual beings~ who frolicked in an Edenic paradise that only knew death and disease once white people showed up. This isn't noble savage bullshit, nor am I invoking people who existed once but whom I have never met. I am saying that I have Indigenous neighbours, colleagues, relatives, and elected representatives. I have learned about mental health, leatherworking, botany, and ecology from Metis and First Nations elders and knowledge-keepers. And like. They have good and useful shit to say.

This is about culture, not race. It is not that their biological DNA means that they know more than me about how to get food from this landscape. It's about cultural history and what we learn from our heritages. What have our cultures privileged? Like, Europe has historically been super into things like metallurgy, domesticating livestock, and creating dairy products. If I want to smelt iron or choose animals to make cheese from, European society would have a lot of useful information for me! And what Indigenous cultures in the Americas have historically focused on instead of cows and copper* include 1) getting REAL familiar with your local flora and figuring out how to make sure you have lots of the herbs and grains and roots and berries you need, and 2) how to make a human society where people can live and have good lives, but do not damage the environment enough to impair the ability of future generations to have the same sort of life.

*Several indigenous American cultures did practice various forms of metallurgy. It's just one of those proportional things, about what societies really go for

Conclusion

I think we could use the processes that formed the potato to find and foster forms of life that could survive on Mars. It would involve learning to think that botany is a sexy science, and understanding just how rich and complicated the environment is. To oxygenate the atmosphere, we'd have to get super enthusiastic about algae and lichen and wetlands. We would have to learn to care deeply about the microorganisms living in the soil, and whether the potatoes are happy.

We'd have to create an economy that counts oxygen and carbon dioxide production on its balance sheets. To learn how to wait for forests to grow back after a fire, instead of giving up in despair because the seedlings aren't trees yet. To do the work now and be hopeful even though we might not see the payoffs for decades, or our victories might only be witnessed by future generations.

So yes, I think we could totally plant potatoes on Mars

But I also think that if we ever got there, we'd have turned into the kind of people who could also save Earth in the first place.

Which makes it a good enough goal in my opinion.

[acti-veg]

Lab grown meat is not vegan. The animal cannot consent to donating its tissue. Further, it normalizes eating animals. Finally, how the fuck do you think its safe? What processed food of the last several decades hasn't bee n found to fuck up our guts and cause cancer?

Normally love your stuff just bummed you're into lab grown animal protein as a vegan.

A transition away from animal agriculture and towards lab grown meat or fermented proteins would result in the suffering and deaths of billions fewer animals, as well as significantly less water and land use, and far lower GHG. As animal advocates, are we really going to oppose a technology that involves far fewer animal inputs on the basis that it still involves some?

Lab grown meat obviously is not vegan, at least not yet, but it isn’t for vegans. It is for the vast majority of people who do eat meat and have no intention of stopping. If we can offer an alternative that is chemically identical but harms far fewer animals, why wouldn’t we do that? Everyone going vegan is just not going to happen anytime soon, do we consign animals to the slaughterhouse in the meantime for the sake of ideological purity?

Eating animals is already normalised, in every society on earth. What this normalises is the consumption of alternative proteins, which absolutely must be part of any sensible transition towards sustainable agriculture. The problem with meat isn’t that it is animal flesh and there is something intrinsically evil about that, it is that obtaining it requires exploitation and harm.

Besides, it’s not like I’m cheering on lab grown meat here. That article is not even in favour of lab grown meat, and neither is the author. Monbiot is concerned about how the anti-cultured meat legislation will apply in broad strokes to any alternative protein, especially fermented proteins, which he believes offers the best alternative to animal proteins. That is a very legitimate concern.

As for safety, again, lab grown meat is biologically and chemically identical to organic meat. Meat is not the healthiest of foods, but this particular meat being cultured rather than slaughtered doesn’t mean it is somehow dangerous. In fact, there is nothing inherently unsafe about processed foods in general. Hummus is processed, so are baked beans, so is wholemeal bread. ‘Processed’ as a byword for ‘unsafe’ is pure pseudoscience, popularised by social media influencers and so-called ‘health gurus.’

I know you mean well, but this insistence that it is either full blown veganism for the entire population or nothing, is completely unhelpful. The reality is that we have to consider viable alternatives that are significantly more sustainable and more humane, we cannot be boycotting everything that doesn’t represent a perfect solution. It won’t get us anywhere.

Like you, I have no intention of ever eating lab grown meat. That said, I’m certainly not going to oppose the advent of a technology that has the potential to save billions of lives, feed the world using far fewer resources, and may help to avert the worst impacts of climate change. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Palestinians have historically cultivated the land, not just with olive trees, but also with figs, apricots, oranges, and dates. Yet, Zionist propaganda, though a concentrated effort to steal Palestinian land, has insisted on “making the desert bloom.” The desert has already been blooming and supporting its Indigenous population, as it has for thousands of years. Since the early twentieth century, Zionists have nevertheless co-opted the language of environmentalism and sustainability as a means of forcing the native Arab population off of the lands they covet. The Jewish National Fund (JNF), a self-described Zionist organization, has an explicit mission: to acquire land throughout Palestinian territories and plant trees—with “proud Jewish identity.” The JNF claims to have planted 240 million trees over 227,000 acres. This tree-planting crusade is detrimental to the land. Pine trees that constitute the colonist’s imaginary of a forest in Europe replace the native plant species and change the soil’s chemistry, such that agricultural crops cannot thrive. This further displaces Palestinians, as well as the nomadic Bedouin peoples, who rely on the land for grazing their cattle. Settlers want to extract from the “blooming desert.” In contrast, the Indigenous approach to land is one of mutual respect and nourishment: the land sustains life and culture, a culture that settler-colonialism wants to erase. To achieve this end, the Zionist occupation has used a variety of tactics to disrupt the Palestinian economy, including controlling water resources so that groves cannot be irrigated as needed, which is especially important now given the effects of the climate crisis. Additionally, the Zionists instituted a permit system that has prevented olive farmers from accessing their trees for all but a handful of days per year. This has made it difficult, if not impossible, to do necessary maintenance like pruning and weeding, greatly impacting the quality of the harvest. Most egregiously, the Zionists erected walls separating farmers from their groves, slicing up plots of land that have been in the same family for generations. Such measures have forced olive farmers to rely on olives of subpar quality. Because of the limited days that farmers are given to access their trees, they might be forced to pick the olives before peak ripeness, affecting the quality of the olive oil produced and therefore the prices that the oil will fetch. A 1994 New York Times article summarized the struggle succinctly: “The Palestinians planted tiny olive trees; the Israeli soldiers dug them up. The Palestinians lay down in the road to block a bulldozer; the Israelis carted them off to police vans.”