Re: UPDATE from Victoria
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 5:21 pm
Hi ghosta,
I appreciate your informative reply. The term ‘weeds’ doesn’t mean much to me these days. After learning about Peter Andrews and Natural Sequence Farming I began to view ‘so called weeds’ in a new light. What he taught me was not to blindly accept and follow the destruction of all plants that are deemed unwanted. I work in the field of conservation which of course ties in with farming, human living, wildlife and much more. Looking at NSF allowed me to begin seeing weeds as plants that perform a function. So that is what I look at now. I look at the plant and try to work out by carrying out my own observations, reading and learning from others and past experiences. What ever way I can, I try to learn as much as I can about the plant, where and why it grows as so many have probably done before but with a very open mind as to, can it belong here. Like food production, can a weed be useful in many more ways that first thought. Some examples are the functions the weed may carry out and I have found often that an introduced weed such as Blackberry may have a counterpart such as the native Raspberry which would perform the same function as the blackberry. If it is native it is accepted and a lot of people hate Blackberry and would more than likely hate the native Raspberry also. My point being, we need to see the function and the link in the system that the weed is performing. I agree that not all plants are welcome in all situations and that is for the farm manager to decide but stiff legislation has already decided (wrongly so) that certain plants must be eliminated, controlled and not always for the right reasons. Sure Peter Andrews is using weeds in a system he understands but I am hoping to understand as much as possible how they effect the natural environment and how and why they are where they are, and doing what they are doing. That is a very interesting subject and not one that too many people will even contemplate thinking about because of the hard and fast rules about what belongs here. I have started reading the information link you posted and also want to read Duane’s link as well. I will be back to chat about that later. For now I hope you might think over what I have said with a very open mind.
Kind regards
Shirley.
I appreciate your informative reply. The term ‘weeds’ doesn’t mean much to me these days. After learning about Peter Andrews and Natural Sequence Farming I began to view ‘so called weeds’ in a new light. What he taught me was not to blindly accept and follow the destruction of all plants that are deemed unwanted. I work in the field of conservation which of course ties in with farming, human living, wildlife and much more. Looking at NSF allowed me to begin seeing weeds as plants that perform a function. So that is what I look at now. I look at the plant and try to work out by carrying out my own observations, reading and learning from others and past experiences. What ever way I can, I try to learn as much as I can about the plant, where and why it grows as so many have probably done before but with a very open mind as to, can it belong here. Like food production, can a weed be useful in many more ways that first thought. Some examples are the functions the weed may carry out and I have found often that an introduced weed such as Blackberry may have a counterpart such as the native Raspberry which would perform the same function as the blackberry. If it is native it is accepted and a lot of people hate Blackberry and would more than likely hate the native Raspberry also. My point being, we need to see the function and the link in the system that the weed is performing. I agree that not all plants are welcome in all situations and that is for the farm manager to decide but stiff legislation has already decided (wrongly so) that certain plants must be eliminated, controlled and not always for the right reasons. Sure Peter Andrews is using weeds in a system he understands but I am hoping to understand as much as possible how they effect the natural environment and how and why they are where they are, and doing what they are doing. That is a very interesting subject and not one that too many people will even contemplate thinking about because of the hard and fast rules about what belongs here. I have started reading the information link you posted and also want to read Duane’s link as well. I will be back to chat about that later. For now I hope you might think over what I have said with a very open mind.
Kind regards
Shirley.