Forecast: Tuesday,
60% chance of morning thunderstorms; highs in the mid-60s. Friday, sunny, highs
in the low 60s.
Spring is a-springing
this week on the farm--the rain and warm temperatures are greening up the
fields and the buds on the trees are starting to break into leaves. We are
scrambling to finish up pruning in the orchard, planting new trees, and getting
the gardens ready for planting. We'll have you help us with these things this
week, as well as planting potatoes.
Potatoes are one of
those crops whose history is so intimately connected with human history that
it's difficult to say which one of us (the potato or the human) has been more
changed by our interactions. For a quick (30 min) summary of this history,
watch the potato segment of Michael Pollan's "The Botany of Desire."
It starts around 1:23:30: http://naturedocumentaries.org/126/the-botany-of-desire/.
Then, for a more in-depth look at how climate change is affecting Peruvian potato farmers and how they are using their traditional farming methods to adapt, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLI2KySC9-U.
Then, for a more in-depth look at how climate change is affecting Peruvian potato farmers and how they are using their traditional farming methods to adapt, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLI2KySC9-U.
The US Fish and
Wildlife Service defines Traditional Ecological Knowledge as: "Traditional
Ecological Knowledge, also called by other names including Indigenous Knowledge
or Native Science, (hereafter, TEK) refers to the evolving knowledge acquired
by indigenous and local peoples over hundreds or thousands of years through
direct contact with the environment." (https://www.fws.gov/nativeamerican/pdf/tek-fact-sheet.pdf).
You can see that the Peruvians are using this type of intimate knowledge of
their ecosystem to adapt to the changes occurring in that ecosystem due to climate
change. In contrast, the potato industry featured in "The Botany of
Desire" is responding to ecological changes by using the tools of Western
science.
In your
comments, please respond to the following:
As you look at these two different
farming systems, what do you notice? What do you expect the short and long-term
effects of each farming system on their local ecosystem and community might be?
What do you imagine the short and long-term global effects of each farming
system might be?
Prior to taking
this class, what did you know about systems of traditional ecological
knowledge? Where have you encountered this type of knowledge in your life and
what have you learned about it?
ReplyDeleteWhen I look at different farming systems I realize that farming for many indigenous mountain peoples is similar to one another, but far away from the farming that I have been exposed to in Michigan. The differences lie in the forward thinking that the indigenous people use to prepare and be aware of. I also realize that these indigenous communities are sometimes completely dependent on the crop they grow, so that changes their relationship to the land immensely.
I expect the long term effect of saving hundreds of different potato types will eventually pay off. As shown in "The Botany of Desire”, Ireland caused the mass famine of their population by only growing one type. So, by storing seeds they can make sure this does not happen. Thankfully they have a network of other mountain indigenous farmers to depend on.
Prior to coming to this class, I was aware of the Irish potato famine… but I was not aware of the long lineage of potatoes and how the Incas were even dependent on the hardy and nutritious potato.
1. I noticed that there was a stark difference between the relationship with the potato between the Western farmers and the indigenous peoples living in Potato Park, Peru. The western farmers seemed to have a monetary relationship with the potato rather than a spiritual or traditional relationship as the Potato Park peoples did. They thought of the potato in more of a macro level perspective and seemed to grow potatoes for their own individual gain rather than for their community. I expect the short and long-term effects to be different for both farming systems on the local ecosystem and community. The major difference between both systems was the use of chemicals (pesticides) to promote potato growth. The western farmers may see benefits in the short-term, but we have no idea what future problems we may encounter in the long-term due to long-term chemical use and GMO food production on humans as well as the environment. The potato farmers in Potato Park listen to their ancestors as well as the environment in order to grow their potatoes,thereby ensuring that their food system will continue to flourish and maintain itself in the long-term.
ReplyDelete2. Prior to taking this class I was never aware of or taught about systems of traditional ecological knowledge.
1) Looking at these two different farming practices in the two videos and seeing what the people had to say about their practices, I was struck by the attitude revealed in the farmers' use of language. While the Idaho potato farmers used phrases to the effect of "We would like to have it another way, but what other option do we have?", the Peruvian farmers talk about using diversity as a safeguard against complete devastation. The first group's use of language tells me that they are reacting to climate change while the second group's use of language tells me that they are preparing for inevitable change, and I think that is really telling about the chances of each farmer's long-term survival. While the Idaho farmers are stuck in the short-term now, the Peruvian farmers are using knowledge of their past to inform the present and (hopefully) ensure their future.
ReplyDelete2) Prior to this class, I was aware of the importance of traditional ecological knowledge. In past AnSo classes, especially the senior capstone class I was in last quarter, we discussed issues surrounding the theft and destruction/devaluation of Indigenous knowledges by the West through colonial systems. It is extremely important that any traditional ecological knowledges we obtain for use in the West does not harm those who taught us. That being said, I think these knowledges that have been developed and passed on for thousands of years would benefit the environment and all of humanity, as long as it is shared and practiced in good faith without harming the people who possess it.
1. I noticed that potatoes were more integrated into their daily life for the people who grew potatoes in the highlands for generations. It seemed less like a job and more like a natural part of their daily life. Having a diverse amount of potatoes and planting primarily to provide for themselves also changed the way that they viewed farming practices. I particularly liked the idea of placing specific varieties in specific areas/altitudes because they grew best there. In contrast, most commercial farming methods rely on one type and puts it across an entire field. The long term effects of monoculture are that it is easy to lose diversity or an entire crop quickly. However, in the short term, many different varieties are not what people/businesses want to purchase from the farmers and people are often suspicious of "familiar" food that looks different. Long term with only one crop makes for a less viable farm and ecosystem in the long run.
ReplyDelete2. Most of my knowledge about systems of traditional ecological systems was from knowing about thanksgiving and the "three sisters". In many ways, I also knew that local people who have been growing crops for years before (and often still) without "modern" technology produce less overall yield, yet they are often able to subsist without much "outside" help. I wonder if there is a way to both subsist and also produce large amounts of food in a way that is more sustainable--modern and traditional working together to produce food.
As you look at these two different farming systems, what do you notice? What do you expect the short and long-term effects of each farming system on their local ecosystem and community might be? What do you imagine the short and long-term global effects of each farming system might be?
ReplyDeleteFrom the videos provided, I was able to discern many differences. One thing I really appreciated was how collaboration and sharing was a key way in which the Aymara continue to have a ton of diversity in their potato-- and how ceremony AND even shared ways of thinking about your place in the world facilitates this process of keeping the different kinds of potato. With regard to the farmers in the US, this connection and analysis was severely lacking, even in the face of intense forms of percarity and risk associated with farming on that scale, with monocultures, etc.
I suspect the short term and long term affects of each kind of farming in either mode will be opposing. Short term the Idaho farmers will get a lot of yield, but they will either run out of money first, or destroy the land. The Aymara farmers may have different yields, but over time their crop will be healthier and less likely to die by different blights.
The impact on community and ecosystem also differ in that the Aymara are working collectively and in-sync with their surroundings and other people-- even with communities across the ocean. For Idaho farmers, they still seem like they have a sense of community, but little by little their community is being squeezed and run out by the demands put on them by the way they farm. The ecosystem will definitely suffer as a result of the high pesticide use, water use, and monoculture.
2. Before taking this class, I gained some understanding of this knowledge through CES courses and personal research, but this is the first time that I am putting any of this knowledge into action. I have also been teaching myself about foraging, which is a practice where this kind of knowledge is directly implicated and must be addressed.
Some of the things I have come to learn are ways to think about the land and how to interact with it. To understand that the land keep our stories and keeps us at the same time. I have learned about how the way we talk about the land determines how we treat it. I have learned about the arbitrariness of borders and property. I have learned about the different ecosystems that exist here and their fragile existence.
1.) When thinking about the system shown in "Botany of Desire," it is crazy to think that thousands of years of polycultural (?) knowledge have been discarded for the sake higher yields for a global market. I connected it to the seed documentary in the sense that we really are able to see how crop diversity has continued to diminish, which if we do not act fast, will become a long term effect of this system. One of the potato farmers was talking about how many farms around him had gone under, which really seems to speak to the precariousness of even these large scale farming operations. The Peruvian farmers demonstrated the preservation of ancient knowledge, and it was so cool to see the ancient terraced observatory in which crops were grown at different levels to see what grew best. The crops grown were much more integrated into the lifestyles of the people, who had ceremonies and a distinct cuisine centered around the potato. This type of commitment combined with valuable knowledge of polycultural practices will help sustain the hundreds of varieties of potatoes they grow as well as keep the land agriculturally viable.
ReplyDelete1.) I knew a little bit from elementary school about the crop rotation the Three Sisters, but the majority of my awareness of traditional ecological systems came from my time in Ecuador. While there, we got to learn about traditional medicine and cuisine from plants found in the rainforest versus those grown by indigenous communities in the mountains, ultimately contrasting these to the larger farms supplying food to chain restaurants in the city of Quito.
1. What strikes me the most when comparing the American mode of potato farming to that of the Peruvian's is the relationship between the land, the people, and the crop. The Peruvian people orient themselves around the nature and what is the naturally most logical thing to do or grow. In Peru there are thousands of varieties of potatoes, by taking advantage of this biodiversity they are able to select which crops will thrive in certain climates, and which crops are best for which nutritional needs. In contrast, the whole of Idaho was literally a desert and we have used complicated and moderately expensive irrigation techniques to turn Idaho into the potato producing phenomenon it is today. Also Americans- mainly American Corporations- have decreased our potato production to primarily one variety the Russet potato. These are two incredibly contrasting ideologies when it comes to crop cultivation. It seems to me that the Peruvians are working with nature whereas the Americans are fighting against it. I believe in the long-run working with nature is more sustainable, and Michael Pollen's historical recounting of the Irish Potato Famine seems to support this belief.
ReplyDelete2. Prior to this course I did not have very much in depth information on traditional ecological knowledge. I had a history class where we talked about agriculture in some societies (Native American, Ancient Egyptian, and Mesopotamian) but it was not very detailed.
Something that is immediately clear is the composition of these two farming systems, one being a monoculture and one planting hundreds of potato varieties. I would attribute this to the systems these groups of people are in rather than the individuals themselves. In “The Botany of Desire” I believe the farmers who produced potatoes for large corporations such as McDonald's want to increase their variety, but doing so would not sustain them and their families financially so they were stuck in a pattern that they know does not work.
ReplyDeleteThus long term effects can be summarized by a single word, security. As many of the indigenous people said, they wanted to keep their traditions alive as well as understood that growing several crops provided a level of food security. The monoculture farms are at risk of collapsing due to pests or disease at any time and as the effects of climate change become more pronounced, this risk only increases. Short-term, corporations see profit while farmers live on the margins. However, when an event analogous to the potato famine enviably occurs it will result is these farmers being without income or work and corporations without product.
Prior to this class, my education of indigenous knowledge was mainly what we learned in Roots in the Earth my freshman year. Most distinctly I remember the story for the three sisters and how these three crops (squash, corn, and beans I believe) were planted together because of the benefits they provided each other.
The most striking difference that I notice between these two farming systems is the relationships they have to the potatoes. Michael Pollan emphasized the need for control that was really shown, as well as practiced, through the mass cultivation of the potato. Control is exercised through choices of variety, genetic mutation, and the use of fertilizer and pesticides. Control over the potato is antithetical to the relationship had by the Peruvian farmers. Their worship of the potato, care for seeds, promotion of diversity, use of traditional tools, and variation of practices based on potato variety shows a relationship that is not about control but care and respect. The impact of these farming practices were also well put by Pollan when he talks about continuing attempts, failures, and consequences of trying to control nature. Nature cannot be controlled. Therefore, such efforts damage relationships with land, community, and food. I don’t see the attempt to control as something remotely sustainable because, as potato farmers in the U.S. have seen, there is always something new to control.
ReplyDeletePrior to this class, I had mostly learned about traditional ecological knowledge from AnSo courses. I have never applied the knowledge in this way, nor had such a close view of actual practices. The majority of the exposure that I have had has been writings and theory on the importance, subjugation, and erasure of such knowledge, not its specific content.
The biggest thing I noticed watching these two extremely informational videos was the difference in trust for ancestral ways of doing. While it seems as though most of the world has looked to the United States for it’s model of efficiency, most cultures have also held on to some of their practices that were handed down through generations. I think one of the biggest issues is a lack of respect for our elders in the Western world- which shows up in the form of many farming traditions disappearing from modern day practice even if they may remain in the memories of the eldest subset of population. This is the same reason history is such an underrated subject in terms of importance. Which in part, I understand. With the rise of Internet technology, I’m way less likely to call my mom, a very busy woman, when I have a regular household question when the answer is also right at my fingertips. And so we go losing certain cultural habits, stories, and beliefs that had been ingrained for a reason. It’s hard to differentiate between great innovative thinking and innovation that takes away from the very sound structure our ancestors survived on for so many years. I think about how the first reactions to genetically modified potatoes were similar to some of the reactions happening now to social justice movements. Some of the best advice and only ecological knowledge I’ve received in my life has been passed down either through my grandma or my father. He thought he was going to go into agriculture for a lot of his youth, so most of my knowledge when it comes to maintenance of climate-appropriate crops from him. In terms of sustainable food preparation methods, and what to do with food scraps in order to reduce waste, much of it comes from my mother and grandma.
ReplyDeleteI expect that with this shift we will stray further and further from traditional ecological knowledge and also further from “control,” unlike Michael Pollin insinuates. I mean how much control do we really have when we have to decide between either GMOs or chemical pesticides just to feed our nation? As is mentioned, the logic of nature will always prevail in the end and if we don’t give up this seeming “control,” we think we have, we will end up lost without the help of these indigenous populations some day. Isn’t it almost comical that the white man has always sought control over “not as advanced” indigenous populations and now we are about to dig ourselves into the same hole the Irish did. And this idea of control STILL permeates through our culture- how many books are there that are titled “How to Influence Others,” or even “How to Control Your Own Thoughts.” And I’m guessing these chemical sprays CANNOT be good for the soil and that many of it rises into the atmosphere to contribute to climate change as well, which affects everyone. In terms of our food choices when it comes to being vegan, paleo, or whatever, it makes me realize we sort of have blood on our hands no matter where we choose to eat in the society we live in- for the very reason that we are basing our eating patterns on control, cravings and reaping from the earth, rather than cohabitating.
There is a vast amount of knowledge about the local ecosystem and community when we patiently examine different farming systems. From an agricultural perspective, farmers are the people who are doing the groundwork and they know the relationship between the land and nature better than anyone else. Culturally, the intimate relationship that the indigenous people have with their plants, their community, and the land establishes a fundamental respect and gratitude for the natural harmony within agriculture. I believe that these close connections are often what we lack in modern, commercial farming. Without paying our due respect to the land, our society often takes the land for granted and exploits the harvest from a sense of ownership, instead of stewardship. Solely depending on monoculture, we harvest at the expenses of long-term damage for short-term profit. I think that our farming systems need to start local, re-establishing our conversations with the land and its ecosystem for long-term sustainability.
ReplyDeletePrior to taking this class, I don’t know much about systems of traditional ecological knowledge. I guess my closest interactions have always been with my grandparents. Their generation has always been farming-focused and working closely with the land. My limited knowledge about traditional systems of farming mostly comes from listening to my grandparents’ stories at the dining table, and I definitely hope to learn more through this seminar.
In looking at these two farming systems, I am struck by a couple of things. One, as many of my classmates have already shared, is the distinction of relationships with the land. The monoculture system portrayed in Michael Pollen's film demonstrates an attempt at ownership or conquest of the land and plants in order to serve humans. The Guardians of Diversity, on the other hand, prioritized the sharing of ancestral knowledge and adapting to the needs of land, as well as the people benefiting from it. The second thing that struck me (though it did not surprise me) was the dismissal of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as a plausible agricultural system for the United States. This came up for me when the man who created the NewLeaf potato commented that diversification of crops is a great practice for indigenous communities but that it could never possibly serve in a place like the U.S., which needs to feed so many people both domestically and internationally. This kind of dismissal otherizes and delegitimizes TEK and I think it reflects a broader society in which many refuse to change the fundamental system at play. Following this thought, it is clear to me that an agricultural system that relies on monoculture crops and patchwork solutions ultimately harms the land and all the actors involved (including humans). Alternatively, I imagine that the indigenous practices shared in the other video ultimately serve both the land and the various actors involved. The latter also fosters a mindset that Pollen was attempting to push through: that humans are a part of nature. This is an idea that we have become unbelievably far removed from and one that, in many ways, also encourages us to continue harmful practices.
ReplyDeletePrior to taking this class, I knew a fair amount about TEK as an idea, albeit not specific information itself. There is a nature camp where I grew up and though I never attended, my friends were constantly discussing forms of TEK, which provided the basis for this program. I appreciate that even if I did not always know TEK myself, I was taught to have a high respect and curiosity for it.
I notice that the two systems seem to reflect the cultural developments they come from. The indigenous system comes from a much smaller, more tightly-knit society; and because of the strength and close connection of the small population to that identity, such diverse, traditional cultivation methods hold great value and are very possible. The Western system, on the other hand, coming from a society that is less homogenous, less connected to the land and its food-crops, and much larger, does not have that unified identity from which diverse cultivation of traditional crops draws its strength. As such, short and long-term impacts of the Western system could be more immediate, but also could drive its ecosystems much farther from equilibrium.
ReplyDeleteTraditional ecological knowledge is often much less disruptive to its ecosystems. Such knowledge is, as mentioned in the quote, an evolutionary knowledge, acquired over long years. Following the evolutionary thought, ideas “mutate” or come up in communities, and survive according to their “fitness”: that is, their accuracy and success at helping their communities survive. Because of this, at any given point or “snapshot” of history, several kinds of “knowledge” exist: knowledge that survives because it works and is beneficial; knowledge that is inaccurate or even harmful, but has not yet faced enough disturbance to eliminate it; and knowledge that is rather harmless, accurate or not, that has, likewise, not faced sufficient disturbance to eliminate it from general practice.
The contrast between the Russet Burbank farmers and the Peruvian potato farmers was stunning to say the least. I am hardly convinced they are employed in the same endeavor.
ReplyDeleteOne in Idaho, with fields as large as the eye can see, plants a single potato species. His struggle is with bio-tech industries, chemical companies, pests, and macroeconomic commodity prices. It all seems fairly complex, abstract, and uncertain. There is an anxiety about crop failures. Maybe a guilt with his relationship to the land. The fields are stripped year to year, sprayed with this and that, as he hopes to find stability through a science which is yet to seal the deal.
The Peruvian farmers look back on their past to find ancient laboratories and scared wisdoms. They are employed in the act of resilience: to the land, with the land, and for their continued prosperity. They nurture seed banks with hundreds of different potato strains, each promising a solution to another's problem. Thousand year old traditions promise consistency and bountiful yields. They give thanks to the land, to the crop, and to one another.
I was struck by the difference between the missions and how these differences influence the processes pf growing potatoes so vastly. The way that the Peruvian folks interacted with folks was so centered in community surviving whic really speaks to their priorities and the groups issues.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of TEK, I didnt know much about it but it makes me want to learn more now that my peers do. It seems good for us and the environment and watching it florish revision.