May 5, 2017 A little environmental philosophy

When we do breeding in our current place, there is little space. This isn't really a problem for us, or for the puppies, but it does present a good reminder that there is an inherent carrying capacity to any piece of ground.

Eleven puppies is a bunch of puppies. They eat more than ten and the waste of eleven is roughly equal to the food intake. So when we set them up for breakfast, lunch, or dinner, we have to clean the pen. This isn't much trouble. We simply remove the old bath towels and put down new ones. We wash maybe twenty towels a day, so laundry is a twice a day job. But not all waste goes on the towels so that it can be neatly handled, some ends up on the tarp beneath the towels. So we have to sanitize the tarp at least once a day and the job is horrible.

This brings me to a discussion about "carrying capacity", which you can avoid entirely at this point.

I suggest you avoid it.

But you might want to continue reading the philosophical ideas I once learned once in an environmental philosophy class.

I chose the WIKIpeadia version since I could not have said it better. . .

---

"The carrying capacity of a biological species in an environment is the maximum population size of the species that the environment can sustain indefinitely, given the food, habitat, water, and other necessities available in the environment. In population biology, carrying capacity is defined as the environment's maximal load, which is different from the concept of population equilibrium. Its effect on population dynamics may be approximated in a logistic model, although this simplification ignores the possibility of overshoot which real systems may exhibit." -WIKI "Carrying capacity was originally used to determine the number of animals that could graze on a segment of land without destroying it. Later, the idea was expanded to more complex populations, like humans. For the human population, more complex variables such as sanitation and medical care are sometimes considered as part of the necessary establishment."

As population density increases, birth rate often decreases and death rate typically increases. The difference between the birth rate and the death rate is the "natural increase".

The carrying capacity could support a positive natural increase or could require a negative natural increase. Thus, the carrying capacity is the number of individuals an environment can support without significant negative impacts to the given organism and its environment. Below carrying capacity, populations typically increase, while above, they typically decrease. A factor that keeps population size at equilibrium is known as a regulating factor. Population size decreases above carrying capacity due to a range of factors depending on the species concerned, but can include insufficient space, food supply, or sunlight. The carrying capacity of an environment may vary for different species and may change over time due to a variety of factors including: food availability, water supply, environmental conditions and living space. The origins of the term "carrying capacity" are uncertain, with researchers variously stating that it was used "in the context of international shipping" or that it was first used during 19th-century laboratory experiments with micro-organisms." -WIKI

---

 . . . This idea is what I use to test whether on of my ideas would "fit" onto the little bit of land we have. You can put ten thousand chickens into cages, maximizing the income found in chicken farming, but this might overburden the land and cause you to need to immunize yourself and the chickens against health issues. You might also use anti-biotics to keep everyone healthy. But is an extra dollar worth the exchange? We think not.

You can also plant fruit trees four feet apart and maximize the amount of fruit picked, this would require fertilization with chemicals (harmful to the natural biome), and much higher levels of irrigation (harmful to the water table). You would also need pesticides as well. But do we really need another GMO peach at any cost to our land? We think not.

You can also plant fruit trees four feet apart and maximize the amount of fruit picked, this would require fertilization with chemicals (harmful to the natural biome), and much higher levels of irrigation (harmful to the water table). You would also need pesticides as well. But do we really need another GMO peach at any cost to our land? We think not.

But there are way of creating symbiotic relationships which should increase density, while not stretching the carrying capacity of the land. 

• We can stack plants in such a way that the land is nourished as the plants use the nourishment. 

• Chickens can fertilize the soil's biome while at the same time reducing the pest population.

• Water can be recycled through the system; used for washing, then for watering; or used for watering then collected and used again.

So the idea of our Farm plan is to only put those things onto the Farm which the land itself, along with a measured amount of water, using naturally occurring fertilizers, and few pesticides (if any, and only environmentally safe) as possible. In the end we may not every be "certified organic", but we might become "naturally grown", while still making clean food which is harvested lightly on the earth.

These are all theories at this point, since we haven't built anything yet. But we want everyone to know that these things are being considered from the onset of the Farm project.