The guardian of the land and the owner of the land will ideally be the same person...

But not if the owner uses the land purely for financial gain!

Agriculture, environment, sustainability

With all the talk of climate change, and with the supposed recycling of waste that now gets done, we think we are environmentalists now.

The reality is many of our industries as literally at war with nature.

Agriculture drenches the environment in poisons, slaughters wild animals by the million, ruins waterways, and destroys native bushland.

Other resource-based industries are similarly brutal and destructive.

This is justified under the banner of necessity. But is it really?

Do we really need to be at war with nature to live comfortable and fulfilling lives?

I would like to think not.

There are far more efficient ways that are more nurturing to the earth than current techniques.

Permaculture is one example of a far more efficient food producing system, than the current petrochemical model, in terms of land use and such.

Vast areas of monoculture crops are just unsustainable, no matter how you look at it.

It's just not in harmony with the ways of nature, which none of us are above.

My environmental concerns

From an environmental perspective I have no concern with the world ending, or the human race ending. I don't see either of these things happening. Instead, what I am concerned about is the diminution of the quality of life on earth. That is, a decline in the actual experience of being alive on this planet.

This could be due to less pleasant or healthy conditions or less availability of goods and services (including recreational services provided by natural resources). These things could be caused by pollution of the air, water or sea or by the removal or degradation of natural areas.

The needless burning of unwanted vegetation

A lot of burning of unwanted vegetation goes on in the countryside, here in Australia, and probably around the world.

Heaven forbid the vegetation should be left to provide habitat for animals and insects, to enrichen and help structure the soil, and to generally improve the local environment!

I guess it's just too "untidy" for the anally retentive minds of the property owners to handle.  Everything must look like a lifeless 1950's suburban yard.  So as a result we get a lifeless, boring environment that is hostile to life and the air full of sickening smoke, just so some tight asses can have a "tidy" property!

I side with the natural people 99% of the time-

although I reserve the right to disagree!

How paradise on Earth will be created

I believe paradise on earth will only be created when every man and woman grows in love and awareness to the point where their thoughts and actions promote and contribute to life rather than detracting from it and destroying it.

I don't believe paradise will be achieved through the descent to Earth of some supernatural being from the heavens.  This would still leave the problem of unenlightened humanity.  For it would take more than the appearance of one person to suddenly enlighten everybody, I believe.  After all, the original appearance of Christ and Buddha did not result in the sudden enlightenment of all humanity so why would a reappearance of either now be any different?

Sharka Todd

Stop burning vegetation needlessly!

I see people burning vegetation on their properties and polluting the air when the natural purpose of dead vegetation is to house animals and insects and to feed and structure the soil.  To burn vegetation needlessly is not only a waste, it actively degrades the environment and reduces its ability to sustain life.

Sharka Todd

Every creature that liveth is my brother!

Natural places being "loved to death"

Photo: Sharka Todd

It is often said that some natural places are in danger of being “loved to death” but I can say that many natural places are in far greater danger of not being loved enough and therefore exploited for monetary gain without any significant public outcry.   The more people that love an area, the more difficult it becomes for those who seek only to profit financially from exploiting the area, through mining or logging, for example, to achieve their aims!

I discovered this the hard way when one of my favourite natural places was recently logged to such an extent that most of the natural value of the area was lost.  I loved the fact that I could visit the area and be alone in nature there, with trees that were over 70 years old.  However, the fact that few people knew about the area and enjoyed it (which I liked because it meant I could find solitude there) also meant that it was easier for the organisations that managed the area to come in and log it mercilessly.  The name of the area is Stoodley Arboretum (located near Sheffield, Tasmania) and it has lost over half its usable area thanks to intervention by the careless and loveless machine men of the logging industry.

Stoodley Forest by Sharka Todd

Places such as the Stoodley Forest need to be managed by the people who use it on a regular basis and care for it rather than by a faceless organisation located hundreds of miles away who are staffed by people who have no real knowledge or care for the place.  This holds true for all natural resource management decisions- they belong to the people who care, not faceless bureaucrats.  Locals who care for the area should be making the final decision on what happens there, not those whose only interest in the area is financial or in meeting "quotas"!

Sharka Todd

The trade-off of destruction for money...

is not one I buy!

Sharka Todd

In God there are no rules-

but you may find you are moved to help creation, rather than to harm it!

Sharka Todd

An abundance of natural vegetation is needed for a healthy environment

Pic: Sharka Todd

Plants are important to keep moisture in the ground and the soil stabilized

Natural vegetation should be left untouched in hollows, on steep ground and on top of hills, if we want to keep a healthy environment.  In this way we will keep water in the soil and reduce erosion while providing habitat for insects and larger animals.

Ideally, 50% or so of any local environment should be given over to natural vegetation, if we wish to provide a home for our animal friends and an interesting, health-giving and beautiful environment for humans to inhabit!

Sharka Todd

Current “best practice” in the logging industry

Stoodley Forest Tasmania. Photo by Sharka Todd

1.    Clear cut large areas of forest, shocking and disfiguring the environment and removing the home for a large number of plants and animals.
2.    Use heavy machinery to push remaining vegetation into piles, compacting and ruining the structure of the soil.
3.    Burn these massive piles, sending smoke and CO2 into the air for miles and polluting the lungs of all around.
4.   Replanting the area, adding artificial fertilizers that pollute water courses to make up for the nutrients removed by logging and burning.
5.   Planting poison baits in the area to kill native wildlife to prevent them from grazing in the area.

Sharka Todd

A comment about forest reserves

 Stoodley Forest- photo by Sharka Todd

Originally posted as a comment on an article about planned logging of the Lapoinya forest in Tasmania.

There needs to a balance between "working forests" and forest reserves preserved near communities for recreation.

Mick, in the comments above, correctly points out the amazing ability of nature to heal itself and regenerate.  But as a person who has spent a great deal of time in state and private forests throughout Australia I would have to say it amazes me that almost every square inch of the land has been rolled over and remade by heavy machinery- compacting the soil and generally degrading waterways and land.  Only remote and rocky terrain has avoided this treatment.

It's not a question of not longing logging forests but of achieving a healthy balance between areas preserved for recreation and areas open for logging.

And I wish to stress that recreational areas need to be preserved near communities so that the population can enjoy them freely and easily.  It's not enough to have reserves 50 or 100km away from population centers.  They need to be within easy driving distance (10-20km) and they should be of sufficient size so that you can get lost there and find some solitude.

Sharka Todd

As an environmental scientist (PIC)

Rationales used by “machine men” to justify destructive action

If I didn’t do it, someone else would.
It has to be done to keep the economy strong.
It will grow back/repair itself/recover in time.
I need to do it to feed my family.
It’s always been done this way.
This is the economically/scientifically efficient approach.
It doesn’t matter- trees/birds/wildlife etc. don’t really count.
It's just the way of the world!

Sharka Todd

Machine man v feeling man

 
There are “machine men” - those who ignore or shut down their feeling nature and “feeling men”- those who feel and act on their feelings, when appropriate.

Almost all the terrible things that happen in the world- to people, animals and mother earth- happen because of machine men.

The intellect, acting alone, is a dangerous thing.  Only when coupled with the feeling nature, which opens us up to the experience of others and to our own empathy and compassion, are we likely to act in ways that are harmless, both for ourselves and others.

Some people shut down their feelings in some domains of their life while allowing themselves to feel in other areas.  This allows them to be destructive in one domain while constructive in another.  This leads to a divided man and is not to be recommended.

I believe we were born with a feeling nature for a reason and that is to encourage us to act in ways that are beneficial to creation as a whole rather than just suiting our own limited mental concepts.

When we ignore our feeling nature destruction is the result. This can be seen in all the violent acts that occur on the earth against other people, animals and the planet itself.

Many of these actions are viewed as "necessary" but this is only because those that carry them out or condone them are deluded by distorted thinking and have shut down their feeling nature which would tell them these things are wrong.

This denial of feeling makes these people a danger to all life.  We must regain our connection to our feeling nature and act according to its dictates (in conjunction with our rational nature) if we are to become noble co-creators on this wonderful planet.

Sharka Todd

See also: Rationales used by “machine men” to justify destructive action
, We can't know something by thinking about it and The head and heart must be in balance.

EF Shumacher's book remains important!

Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered is a collection of essays by British economist E. F. Schumacher. The phrase "Small Is Beautiful" came from a phrase by his teacher Leopold Kohr.  It is often used to champion small, appropriate technologies that are believed to empower people more, in contrast with phrases such as "bigger is better".

First published in 1973, Small Is Beautiful brought Schumacher's critiques of Western economics to a wider audience during the 1973 energy crisis and emergence of globalization. The Times Literary Supplement ranked Small Is Beautiful among the 100 most influential books published since World War II.  A further edition with commentaries was published in 1999.

Trees- more than meets the eye!

Text by Matthew Ward, photo and graphics by Sharka Todd.

The exclusive focus on "climate change" is dangerous!

The single-minded focus on climate change to the exclusion of other environmentally pertinent topics I find dangerous.  It means, for example, that China can build a monstrous dam, displace thousands of people, destroy a vast natural area and be seen as a good guy because they are enhancing "renewable energy" in the country.  We need to have a broader approach than that!

Sharka Todd

See here a discussion of the Three Dams controversy in China by SBS Australia.