|
Post by wombat on Feb 25, 2015 12:04:25 GMT -5
In "Land and Freedom" by Seaweed, he details something known as a Permanent Subsistence Zone. This largely translates into a habitat area where subsistence is practiced and perhaps also defended. He challenges bioregionalism as a territory with contrived physical boundaries, opting to instead favor the idea of a habitat, which has some boundary considerations, but based on local immediate relationships of people with their surroundings.
Though some may desire to be able to practice a forager's life and perhaps have the fullest capability of doing so, the boundaries of property directly conflict with most approaches. Even if we take a cue from RedWolfReturns in his essay "Now What?" and stick to purchasing land around parks and forests, a nomadic forager life can't be fully practiced without some compromises. However, to me, since we all have to make compromises in our personal approaches to rewilding, sharing a relationship with other inhabitants that may be sympathetic can establish a PSZ. Homesteads, Amish villages, vacation land owners, retired land owners, off the grid permaculturalists and many others could join in an approach to keeping land around forests away from resource exploitation. Joining with regional hikers, campers, bushcrafters, survivalists, primitive skills lovers, birdies, etc. I could see a growing social approach to challenging civilization through communicating lifeways. This, in turn, would allow for practicing foragers to go through national forests, bouncing from public lands to friendly private lands and back.
I believe some of this is practiced to some degree in some places, but I've not heard of any specific examples other than perhaps the indigenous land defenses from resource extraction, primarily in Canada. I am a bit out of the loop on this and wouldn't mind a discussion on any of what I mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by KT on Feb 25, 2015 15:40:29 GMT -5
I think you'll really dig the interview with Andrew Badenoch of Feralculture Land Project in BAGR1. That land project is based off of buying land in nodes rather than just as many acres in one spot as possible. His view of buying land as "land liberation" is very much in line with the PSZ idea, but spacing it out differently. I certainly think there's merit to the idea. I know that there are innate rejections of property and that having property requires taxes and all that unpleasantry, but at the same time I can't really oppose people trying to pull land out of production or extraction zones. There is a part of resistance that is purely based in conservation of wilderness so that wildness can thrive there. This is a two fisted deal, right? Stand your ground, gain more ground. I will say that the Amish are certainly no safe haven from resource extraction! I think the downfall of "land liberation" would be thinking that land ownership is a failsafe. It most definitely is not. As the pipelines issue really heats up, a lot of what we're seeing is imminent domain being the card in the back pocket. If there is a market stake in your land, they can work around you. That's not an argument against buying land, it's just a recognition of the realities inherent in life during the collapse: desperate needs create desperate moves. But this tie to the land is important because someone has to defend it and someone most definitely has to fight to maintain it and allow the land to heal and/or remain wild. Likewise, the fracking industry (like any extraction industry) will find ways to demolish land without ever directly touching it. Killing waterways is the historical go to, but with things like horizontal drilling and going beneath far wider spreading water tables, that impact is infinitely accelerated and intensified.
|
|
|
Post by northernfrostbite on Mar 4, 2015 21:29:43 GMT -5
|
|
boxcar
New Member
Photo was 2010, Zion, Illinois.
Posts: 27
|
Post by boxcar on Mar 5, 2015 20:03:40 GMT -5
I Posted a Link on another page about the 1867 Mineral Rights, a MP3 on a Website: thinkorbebeaten.com/BTGK/btgk-7.html7. 128-Hal Anthony on Mineral and Property Rights I Believe this may be a TOOL for Aquisition of Land; WATER is classified as a Mineral! A Placer of 20 Acres can sustain a Small Feral Culture of Hydro Culture farm, even in the Desert! Public Lands, BLM Lands and National Park Wilderness Lands ARE UNDER This Act. Listen to The man's Findings, I cannot record it, I cannot figure out how to Record from ISP on Audacity using Ubuntu Linux! It sounds Awful to record from MIC. Also, I can't afford the $10 to download all the MP3s in this Offer. I SHOULD, but....what can I say? Retired HOBO, a Retired BUM! Nuff Said!
|
|