The War on Willows

Any questions or comments you have about Natural Sequence Farming processes. These could include general questions or ones about your personal problems.

PLEASE NOTE :
We do not endorse any answers from anyone in this forum except Peter Andrews himself.

Please remember, Natural Sequence Farming has to be tailored for your specific problem and to follow general advice may create more problems for you.

Moderator: webmaster

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: The War on Willows

Postby Shirley Henderson » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:25 pm

Image

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: The War on Willows

Postby duane » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:25 pm

Ghosta,

So pleased to see that you're off the barbed wire fence. Ouch, it must have hurt....you were quick to declare your real interest.

You have now officially declared your position.....a 'Willows Warrior'.

I told you it's war!!!!

Prepare yourself for the slaughter. You're in our sights.....

Or you can just go away.......back to Tasmania, I believe you said.

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: The War on Willows

Postby Shirley Henderson » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:27 pm

Image

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: The War on Willows

Postby Shirley Henderson » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:29 pm

Image

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: The War on Willows

Postby Shirley Henderson » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:32 pm

Image

webmaster
Site Admin
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 6:11 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: The War on Willows

Postby webmaster » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:04 pm

Here is an interesting document posted with permission of the author/s.

WIllows - Weeds of Retention

Webmaster
The Forum for Peter Andrew's Natural Sequence Farming

ghosta
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: The War on Willows

Postby ghosta » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:15 pm

duane wrote:Ghosta,

So pleased to see that you're off the barbed wire fence. Ouch, it must have hurt....you were quick to declare your real interest.

You have now officially declared your position.....a 'Willows Warrior'.

I told you it's war!!!!

Prepare yourself for the slaughter. You're in our sights.....

Or you can just go away.......back to Tasmania, I believe you said.


What childish comments you make Duane.

After reading Peter Andrews book, I thought he made some pretty good points about the benefits of Willows. But after reading the articles I posted I thought that the benefits to the environment of eradicating willows were unquestionable. Whilst a individual farmer may benefit from willows correctly managed, there is a price that others will have to pay though the spread of unwanted willows to other farms, reserves etc.

Fortunately there is a win- win situation for all concerned. Willow lovers can plant the other species of willows that do not cause a nuisance to others, and other tree species can be planted to obtain NSF benefits. And the destruction caused by unwanted willows can be halted by eradicating the nuisance species. I know Peter does not agree with this idea, but any farming practice should be viewed in totality and the effects on others needs to be taken into account; to do otherwise is selfish.

Duane and others may adopt a dogged stance on this issue and harm the cause of NSF. Why make a fight and get the community offside when there is no need?

Shirley thanks for posting your photos. Hopefully it will be easy to burn the piles of logs when conditions dry out

matto
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:20 pm
Location: victoria and southern nsw

Re: The War on Willows

Postby matto » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:50 pm

Hi Duane,
You must be referring to the Principles and Pathways book, that section was preceeded by a paper Weeds or Wild Nature? that can be read at http://permacultureprinciples.com/downl ... nature.pdf Apparently he is working on a book dedicated to this topic that I hope will be published soon.
Last edited by matto on Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: The War on Willows

Postby duane » Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:11 pm

Michael Wilsons paper on Willows is posted above by the Webmaster. It provides some balance to the current bias.

Recommended reading for those wanting to learn about the positive benefits plants provide.
Last edited by duane on Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ghosta
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: The War on Willows

Postby ghosta » Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:45 pm

matto wrote:Ghosta, you have to remember that David, and Peter I beleive, are working towards sustainable, or even more bravely towards regenerative, agriculture.
To make the balance, sometimes the plants will be seen as invasive and may need to be controlled, but when the situation favours the naturalised plant, it should be managed rather than eradicated.


Matto- thats fine in theory, individuals have different ideas on what managed means, and hence management standards will vary and in some cases may actually not be effective. Once it start to affect someone else, in my view its cut and dried, its eradication or measures guarenteed to prevent the effect.

Thats also one factor not addressed in the article posted by the Webmaster. A farm is not a unit by itself, what you do can affect others. And the implications of the unforseen...like a dam that burst must also be considered.

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: The War on Willows

Postby duane » Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:47 pm

I am looking to provide some balance into the whole willows debate.

Ghosta has a fixed position. He agrees with the current AG policy as shown by his bias in presenting two googled article highlighting the -ive point of view. He would be far more credible if he were to post some balancing arguments in the affirmative.

He stands condemned for his poor science, just like Kurt Kremer and the recent CSIRO work.

The important issue associated with the recent CSIRO work is not the science under question. But that it reports some facts in isolation, and the author even states that the findings have to be moderated in the real world. The danger, however, is how the science will be manipulated by people with vested interests. Its too much like the specious Intelligent Design advocates, in that a small disassociated fact can be built into an explanation for a “cult”.

The nature of the research work indicates that it specifically set out to depreciate the role of willows in the Australian landscape, otherwise why engage and report on such a narrow question. The only way to get an answer is to ask the researcher who funded the work and what were the terms of engagement. (The article says it was funded by a private company funded by the Australian, NSW and Vic governments.)

We have this idea that we can ameliorate erosion and river incision using native plants, plants that did not evolve in the un-natural landscape that we have created today. Native plants are a miss match to the problem as we are asking them to create a band-aid they were not conditioned to do. We need extraordinary plants to solve the problem. Willows are just one of those plants that can be temporally used in the landscape to give the natives the time to re-establish. We need to use all the resources we can muster because the damage is so severe. Are the Willow warriors declaring the damage is simply the emergence of just another weed or is there a deeper problem at heart. The emphasis on willow management ought not to be just pull them out no matter what, but on actually using them to best advantage.

I believe the author of the paper has placed herself in a very unenviable position. She cannot win as her work will be deliberately misused.

I went to the launch in June 2010 of the DVD associated with Willows removal program, the willow warriors, the organisers devoted a lot of space to the needs of canoeists to navigate our waterways. They were extolling a key advantage of willow removal was to allow canoeists unimpeded navigation. The willows were an obstacle. A few weeks later I heard on the ABC’s Bush Telegraph program, a canoeists advocating willows should be removed at a faster rate and more finances approved. The inference here is that the willow destruction people see the canoeists as a major beneficiary of willow removal. This seems a pretty minor priority for the removal of willows, and yet it is overtly promoted. Along a 6km section of Berrima Creek, for instance, $300,000 was spent on willow removal and planting native plants. There were still many willows remaining protecting the banks from erosion and the natives were struggling. There was a decided need for follow-up maintenance. Without the willows would there be ponds of water in the creek providing a habitat for fauna such a platypus, and navigation in some of the creek for the canoeists, or are we to accept that the water would pond up for some reason without naturally forming weirs. It seems to me that without the willows the canoeist would only have a drain on which to paddle in times of high flow. The point here is why bring up the needs of canoeists if willows are a major environmental issue worth spending hundreds of millions dollars on annually. Here is an example how vested interests have manipulated the real priorities to the awaiting community.

And to finish Ghosta said "Hopefully it will be easy to burn the piles of logs when conditions dry out" Some people Ghosta just can't take advice
"it is far better to remain silent and thought a fool, then, to speak out and remove all doubt".


You can deal with everything except ignorance.

Here we have the Australian environmental expert, who has the answer to all our environmental woes....exterminate most plants, burn everything, drain the landscape, promote erosion, degrade and not aggrade the landscape......to mention just a few.

Burning : Bad move Ghosta....

JimA
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:26 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: The War on Willows

Postby JimA » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:05 pm

Ghosta thinks CSIRO deserves defending, despite its decline over the decades.
Now hostage to both government policy and corporate funders (‘commercial-in-confidence’ = travesty of open science).
Its Chairman, Macquarie-banker, lawyer and Greenie, (no scientist) advocates Climate-Change alarmism, so that too.
Armed in ideological self-righteousness, so impervious to criticism, PA aims rather at those who adjudge it.

Stringybark
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:24 am
Location: Wagga Wagga. NSW

Re: The War on Willows

Postby Stringybark » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:13 pm

Willows wan... err, I mean warriors?
Bugger that. I'm a Salix supporter!

The term "plant succession" says it all for me. You've got to have something growing in the ground. Or the ground heads for the coast.
If you don't like Willows, plant something (suitable to your ideas/needs) to outcompete them. Every plant does a job of some description.

As stated many times before in this forum. There is no plant that has taken over the world yet.

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: The War on Willows

Postby duane » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:18 pm

POSITIONS VACANT.
SMH 11.12.10 CSIRO are seeking to fill the following position. Head of CSIRO. Must have wide range of environmental experience in promoting increasing CO2, encouraging global warming by weed eradication and willow removal, slash and burn, biodiversity reduction, chemical agriculture and GM crops.


Ghosta.......your CV fits this position to a tee. Best wishes. I trust your application will be successful.

PS I am happy to act as a referee and give you a good reference.

ghosta
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: The War on Willows

Postby ghosta » Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:07 am

Stringybark wrote:The term "plant succession" says it all for me. You've got to have something growing in the ground. Or the ground heads for the coast.
If you don't like Willows, plant something (suitable to your ideas/needs) to outcompete them. Every plant does a job of some description.

As stated many times before in this forum. There is no plant that has taken over the world yet.


Lets look at this as a practical solution.
Your farm has willows which you underplant with suitble species. All is going well and the wilows begin to die out. We have a wet year and floods occur. Willow branches are torn off and are carried downstream for miles and are caught in the debris. They begin to shoot. What do you do now?
Well you could say its not my problem. Those with willows can underplant if they want to or remove them themselves.
You could adopte Duannes attitude and say Im doing you ignorant hicks a favour, the willows are great and you farmers are just stupid. I know better than anyone else, Ive read a book about it.
Any other suggestions?


Return to “All General Questions about NSF”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests