Many people believe we need to separate ourselves from nature. They think that humans are an overwhelming source of harm against the natural world and thus we need to set aside sanctuaries and preserves where there is little to no human impact. These in and of themselves are not a bad idea. We do need to protect species against habitat destruction, pollution and other potential harms that people are creating for wild ecologies. However, this mindset can take a dark turn when people come to the conclusion that the only way to save the earth is to remove people from the equation completely. Not only do they believe that human numbers should stop growing, but some believe we need to do things like sterilize people and even phase out human growth altogether leading to a controlled human extinction.
The main problem with this mindset is that they are looking at only one side of humanity which is it's destructive side. But there is another side that is often overlooked that can actually heal and restore natural ecosystems and make them even more ecologically productive than nature itself can.
Unfortunately this "good" side of humanity is not in control for the most part right now and it is evidenced pretty obviously in the dominant way we grow our food using conventional agricultural practices. Annual tilling of the ground leads to depletion and erosion of the topsoil. Vast fields of monocrops creates largely lifeless areas that only support the hardiest and most adaptable wildlife. Large scale irrigation draws down reservoirs and aquifers leaving less water in rivers for fish such as salmon and steelhead. Frequent spraying of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides kills off the beneficial soil life leading to dead lifeless soils as well as chemical runoff into rivers and oceans creating huge dead zones. All of these practices are increasing slowly over time and as our need for more food grows to feed the growing population of earth they will destroy natural wildlife habitat and continue to pollute the earth.
So from a certain perspective it is easy to see why a lot of people have an overall negative view of humanity and think that the earth would be better off without us. I however do not hold this view. I think there is a way to prevent these problems and not only stop the destruction of the natural world, but actually improve it and make it even more productive than what nature can do on it's own. The key would be not to separate, but to integrate humans with the natural world.
What do I mean by this? Well basically there is only so much land on earth. We need land for our own settlements as well as for all the food we need to feed the world. We also need to protect and even restore the natural environments so that we can reverse environmental damage and prevent species extinction. The only way to really do this is to largely share the same space with the natural world. Our food production areas need to double as great wildlife habitat. Cities and towns can also be integrated with the natural environment to some extent and even the extraction of resources such as mining and logging can be done in a way that is largely sustainable or at the very least able to be restored after the extraction process is done.
But the largest areas on earth that will need this integration are our food producing regions.
So how then could we go about this integration of natural ecosystems and our agriculture? Luckily there are many different options for us to choose from. For large scale commercial agriculture one way might be what is referred to as restoration or regenerative agriculture. This style of food production uses no till methods, polyculture plantings, natural forms of fertilization and pest control, cover crop plantings, livestock integration and many other methods that leads to very productive and resilient crop production that can often exceed the production of conventional crops. The other benefits of this type of system is less inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, etc which leads to lower overall costs and higher profits. It also will naturally build the topsoil over time and increase fertility leading to even more productive harvests down the road. The use of polyculture also supports a more diverse range of wildlife and leads to a healthier ecosystem. One person who is well known for this style is Gabe Brown and I would recommend googling some of his lectures if you're interested in learning more.
Another possibility is to use what's known as permaculture. Permaculture is a very broad category of agriculture and goes even beyond agriculture in a sense. The basic premise is to mimic nature in order to produce a sustainable and highly productive source of food. One well known method is to create what's known as a "food forest". With a food forest you mimic a natural ecosystem by planting edible plants for all the niches in the ecosystem. For example you could have nut trees in the canopy, fruit trees in the subcanopy, berries for the shrub layer, grapes and kiwis for the vine layer, root vegetables for the root layer, etc. These types of systems are usually very diverse and since they grow and develop just like a natural forest would they tend to make excellent habitat for a huge variety of wildlife. Other things you can do with permaculture are make hugelbeds and earthworks that help store moisture underground lessening the need for irrigation especially in drier regions. Permaculture offers a huge amount of possibilities for the integration of human and natural ecosystems and some people who are popular proponents of this system include Geoff Lawton, Sepp Holtzer and Paul Wheaton. I would highly recommend checking them out.
The last food producing system I will talk about is the one I created this blog for which is my own wild game system that not only integrates the natural world with a human source of food, but it makes the resources of the natural world, wild game, into a sustainable food source. With this system you are basically creating optimal habitat for multiple game species in order to produce a high amount of wild game calories on a per acre basis. So in practice this would mean planting the most optimal plant species that will be able to feed game species year round as well as produce plant based foods for people to harvest as well. This would look very similar to the concept of a food forest, but would likely be more open resembling more of a savanna ecosystem for the majority of the target game species in America, but could easily be altered depending on the species that you'd be managing for. A lot of these areas would include forbs and broadleaf browse species that would produce a high amount of optimal forage for various herbivorous game species such as deer and elk. A lot of the food species would double as cover providing everything needed by the game in a relatively small area. I believe that If done correctly a system like this could produce a very high amount of meat calories per acre as well as some plant calories and could potentially be more productive and with less inputs than more conventional food producing systems. This system would not only produce high numbers of game, but also a ton of other non-game wildlife that would benefit from the high production value of the managed ecosystem.
I believe that in order to solve the world's environmental problems as well as feed the earth's growing population then it will be completely necessary to integrate ourselves and our production systems with the natural environment. Luckily for us there are several possible options to use to successfully produce this outcome. It will likely take a mix of these types of food producing systems as well as ones that have yet to be thought of in order to fulfill this integration. And once these systems are implemented and refined then it's likely our quality of life and our health would greatly improve and we could once again see the positive side of humanity and its ability to live in balance with the natural world.
No comments:
Post a Comment