4 ms·

The farmers restoring Hawaii’s ancient food forests that once fed an island

8 points by rblion 4y ago

codefreeordie 4y ago
The "food forests" that once "fed an island" fed an island populated by a small tribe of subsistence farmers. Modern agriculture has created the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen, but sure, go ahead and go back to tiny populations always on the edge of starvation. Though the process of getting back to a tiny population is not going to be fun.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  An estimated 2-3 hundred thousand up to to about 700k Hawaiians lived on the islands before outside influence, but go ahead and consider them savages or whatever, buddy.
  - codefreeordie 4y ago
    They weren't savages, insofar as "savage" has any actual non-derogatory meaning. They were a people living in a low-tech (by modern standards) civilization. They clearly did some super cool things, technology-wise, including some remarkable navigation. That doesn't make it a good idea to throw away modern agriculture and go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best. 200k people used to live on the islands. 1.5 million do now.
    - eesmith 4y ago
      I have a few issues with your statements: > the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen This abundance requires a lot of fossil fuels, which does not appear to be a long-term sustainable mechanism. How productive are modern methods if the amount of oil used is reduced by 95%? Modern methods, as applied to Maui, caused agriculture production to switch to pineapple and sugarcane, significantly decreased soil quality, and contributes to species extinction. This does not appear to a be long-term sustainable process. The economics requires cash to pay for the import of 85-90% of their food. The cash comes from tourism. The recent pandemic shows the fragility of the system, because when tourists don't come, locals don't get money. How will they pay for food? The method is being applied to land that modern agriculture deems "lifeless", so it is not replacing existing agriculture. > to throw away modern agriculture and go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best. The article describes an artificial system with humans highly involved in the process. This is not simply "whatever happens to grow naturally". Or as the article puts it: "It isn’t just about looking back, but rather mixing ancient regenerative farming practices with modern tools and technologies to meet the climate and food challenges facing Hawaii in the 21st century." Quoting one of the farmers: “Our yields cannot match industrial farming but our return on investment is the healthy land and water we’ll leave for our kids … this isn’t just about bringing back the rains, it’s the right thing to do as Hawaiians.” How important is cheap pineapple and not-so-cheap sugar [1] to you to justify poor quality land and water in Hawaii? [1] U.S. trade barriers result in doubling the price of sugar in the U.S. compared to the rest of the world.
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      > go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best Uh, they specifically had technology and practiced agriculture in a specific way, not just randomly collecting shit and eating it. What century are you from that you think everyone but the modern human was just “hoping for the best”? Hawaiians were getting along really well with high quality of life until suddenly outsiders came in and utilized “modern methods” in everything, resulting in tons of damage to the environment.
- rblion 4y ago
  You are part of the problem with your hubris. I live in Maui, you are way off. I'm too tired to type it all out. I'll share my project here soon and you'll see first hand what I mean.
- porcoda 4y ago
  Citation needed for those tiny populations dancing on the edge of perpetual starvation. Look, I’m the first one to get in line to skewer people appealing to the “myth of the noble savage” to argue that all was wonderful before the big bad imperialist white people showed up, but I’m also equally skeptical of anyone who makes a claim without evidence that without “modern” technology or methods some peoples would be languishing in a world of starvation and sadness. It’s entirely possible that without what we consider “modern” methods, some people actually were getting on just fine.
- DemocracyFTW2 4y ago
  > Modern agriculture has created the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen The apparent cornucopia that is the modern supermarket is in fact a huge Diesel engine that runs 24/7, achieving high outputs at the price of the atmosphere, land cover, biodiversity of flora and fauna, and so on pp. Not that ancient man had no influence or only desirable influence on their land, or that some cultures (e.g. mesoamerican ones) were not after centuries at a local point-of-no-return in terms of land use. But stating that only modern agriculture with its vast demands on water, fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources (like phosphate) can save today's hungry billions conveniently neglects that we are the ones that eat our descendants' futures by dumping all the oil (in the form of energy) and phosphate (in the form of fertilizer) onto our fields. According to the National Geographic (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/farmers-are-facing-a-phosphorus-crisis-the-solution-starts-with-soil https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/farmers-a...), "farmers [in Europe] apply roughly 4 kilograms of phosphorus for each kilogram that we consume in food. For U.S. diets, that ratio is about 9 to 1, and in China, it may be as high as 13 to 1". Add to that pesticides, irrigation and not least the est. 50% loss of all foodstuff between the farmer's field and the consumer's stomach and it all starts looking less like a miracle. Historically, it looks more like a hayfire. The candle that burns twice as bright.

8 points by rblion 4y ago

The "food forests" that once "fed an island" fed an island populated by a small tribe of subsistence farmers. Modern agriculture has created the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen, but sure, go ahead and go back to tiny populations always on the edge of starvation. Though the process of getting back to a tiny population is not going to be fun.

ok_dad 4y ago
An estimated 2-3 hundred thousand up to to about 700k Hawaiians lived on the islands before outside influence, but go ahead and consider them savages or whatever, buddy.
- codefreeordie 4y ago
  They weren't savages, insofar as "savage" has any actual non-derogatory meaning. They were a people living in a low-tech (by modern standards) civilization. They clearly did some super cool things, technology-wise, including some remarkable navigation. That doesn't make it a good idea to throw away modern agriculture and go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best. 200k people used to live on the islands. 1.5 million do now.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    I have a few issues with your statements: > the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen This abundance requires a lot of fossil fuels, which does not appear to be a long-term sustainable mechanism. How productive are modern methods if the amount of oil used is reduced by 95%? Modern methods, as applied to Maui, caused agriculture production to switch to pineapple and sugarcane, significantly decreased soil quality, and contributes to species extinction. This does not appear to a be long-term sustainable process. The economics requires cash to pay for the import of 85-90% of their food. The cash comes from tourism. The recent pandemic shows the fragility of the system, because when tourists don't come, locals don't get money. How will they pay for food? The method is being applied to land that modern agriculture deems "lifeless", so it is not replacing existing agriculture. > to throw away modern agriculture and go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best. The article describes an artificial system with humans highly involved in the process. This is not simply "whatever happens to grow naturally". Or as the article puts it: "It isn’t just about looking back, but rather mixing ancient regenerative farming practices with modern tools and technologies to meet the climate and food challenges facing Hawaii in the 21st century." Quoting one of the farmers: “Our yields cannot match industrial farming but our return on investment is the healthy land and water we’ll leave for our kids … this isn’t just about bringing back the rains, it’s the right thing to do as Hawaiians.” How important is cheap pineapple and not-so-cheap sugar [1] to you to justify poor quality land and water in Hawaii? [1] U.S. trade barriers result in doubling the price of sugar in the U.S. compared to the rest of the world.
  - ok_dad 4y ago
    > go back to just eating whatever happens to grow naturally and hoping for the best Uh, they specifically had technology and practiced agriculture in a specific way, not just randomly collecting shit and eating it. What century are you from that you think everyone but the modern human was just “hoping for the best”? Hawaiians were getting along really well with high quality of life until suddenly outsiders came in and utilized “modern methods” in everything, resulting in tons of damage to the environment.
rblion 4y ago
You are part of the problem with your hubris. I live in Maui, you are way off. I'm too tired to type it all out. I'll share my project here soon and you'll see first hand what I mean.
porcoda 4y ago
Citation needed for those tiny populations dancing on the edge of perpetual starvation. Look, I’m the first one to get in line to skewer people appealing to the “myth of the noble savage” to argue that all was wonderful before the big bad imperialist white people showed up, but I’m also equally skeptical of anyone who makes a claim without evidence that without “modern” technology or methods some peoples would be languishing in a world of starvation and sadness. It’s entirely possible that without what we consider “modern” methods, some people actually were getting on just fine.
DemocracyFTW2 4y ago
> Modern agriculture has created the most amazing abundance the world has ever seen The apparent cornucopia that is the modern supermarket is in fact a huge Diesel engine that runs 24/7, achieving high outputs at the price of the atmosphere, land cover, biodiversity of flora and fauna, and so on pp. Not that ancient man had no influence or only desirable influence on their land, or that some cultures (e.g. mesoamerican ones) were not after centuries at a local point-of-no-return in terms of land use. But stating that only modern agriculture with its vast demands on water, fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources (like phosphate) can save today's hungry billions conveniently neglects that we are the ones that eat our descendants' futures by dumping all the oil (in the form of energy) and phosphate (in the form of fertilizer) onto our fields. According to the National Geographic (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/farmers-are-facing-a-phosphorus-crisis-the-solution-starts-with-soil https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/farmers-a...), "farmers [in Europe] apply roughly 4 kilograms of phosphorus for each kilogram that we consume in food. For U.S. diets, that ratio is about 9 to 1, and in China, it may be as high as 13 to 1". Add to that pesticides, irrigation and not least the est. 50% loss of all foodstuff between the farmer's field and the consumer's stomach and it all starts looking less like a miracle. Historically, it looks more like a hayfire. The candle that burns twice as bright.