Subject: Re: The Permaculture Institute

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:06:53 -0400 (EDT)

Kirby, did I ever e-mail you back to let you know that I couldn't read the
attachment you sent about Cross Timbers.  Alas.  But I am going to be in
Austin for the Green Building Conference--matter of fact, Ozark CoHousing did
an entry for the design competition--and wondered if your show will be on the
tour.   Maybe we could make a plan to meet.  Rebecca Bryant

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:31:18 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 10/12/97 11:27:06 AM, you wrote:

>Dan,
>
>It's interesting to hear some feedback about the Permaculture Institute set
>up by Scott and Bill.  My hunch is that they felt there was a need for a
>national permaculture group, not to call the shots but rather to provide
>information and help coordinate projects.
>
[snip}
>Do you think there should be a national permaculture organization?  There
>could even be several of them.  Just because someone makes an organization
>national in scope doesn't mean that it's the only one that can exist.
>
>        KIRBY [@ Cross Timbers Permaculture Inst. on Lake Buchanan, TX;
>512-756-7878; web address csf.colorado.edu/perma/]

I'm going to pass on the issue of whether or not Bill and Scott would want to
control North American permaculture. This is a personality issue, and not
appropriate for a public debate unless some truely awful things are done. I'm
sure some altruistic reasons are generally part of the overall motivation.
 The fact is that the first step for the group was to promote an Australian
permaculturist, not American teachers. (This has been the pattern with most
of the North American Institutes Bill established, so I can't really see
thinking that it was just to launch the institute.) Giving certificates to a
group of 125 smacks something like the loaves and fishes story.  It is hard
to see how Bill evaluated the qualifications of these individuals before
issuing certificates.  So we have an institute that promotes zero standards
for certification.  How useful to North American permaculture!  

With 2,500 people reportedly having taken certificate permaculture courses in
North America, it would seem that there is a body of people to consult.
 Permaculture is based on emulating the efficient ways of Nature.  Nature
uses anarchistic designs, not hierachical designs.  The very structure of a
501(c)3 violates permaculture.   Maybe one is useful--I'll grant that, and
I'll grant that purity never, to my knowledge, occurs in Nature.  However
there are better ways to short circuit hierachical (and patriachical)
structures than having two men who are promoted by the "National"
organization, appoint themselves to the board, and then a woman who does the
organizational work of secretary/treasurer.  Probably I miss some subtlety
here.

Until someone shows me the light, I guess this is the way I see it.  I don't
doubt that Bill also wants permaculture to prosper in North America.  But his
design is bad in this case.   He isn't using the principles he taught to me
and many, many others.

I hadn't considered the latest incarnation of what started out as NAP (North
American Permaculture) many years back as relevant enough to have an opinion
on until I was denied access to my own work on the permaculture directory.
 Four people (and maybe some unsung others behind the scenes) have
contributed to the directory, whose long-awaited next edition seems to be in
some weird limbo.  (It would take about two weeks to get it out.)  Guy
Baldwin originated the directory in the 1980s.  At that time I probably was
doing most of the permaculture outreach in North America and I use the list
several times.  I always requested address corrections from the post office,
an extremely expensive service.  I supported this important resoruce in every
way I could, appreciative of Guy's efforts on a vital but essentially
thankless task.  Guy sold the directory to Peter Bane at the same time he
sold the Activist.  I used Peter's information several times and went to some
troubles to see to it that both Guy and Peter got copies of address
corrections, to save money from being spent twice for the same info, as well
as to make sure that addresses were not lost.  I put in more work when Peter
passed the list onto John  making sure that John has every bit of info I had,
looking up on my rather large database (about 35,000 names and addresses) to
see if I had current addresses of "missing" people, etc.  It was my opinion
that this work was to continue to be of benefit to the entire permaculture
community.

Last month I asked John to rent me the entire list--typically we have charged
one another around 8-10 cents per address within the movement to rent lists.
 He said no, policies have changed, and now only the new Institute can have
the list.  John cited his opinion that Bill Mollison is "commander-in-chief"
in his explanation--I confess to being so dumbstruck by the military allusion
that I missed what Bill's role is, if any, in our constriction of any
permaculturists right to network with the rest of us.  According to John,
Peter and Guy can't have the whole list either.

John did give me Florida addresses (since I am in Florida) and email
addresses since I teach an online course.  I appreciate this much and of
course I continue to send corrections on that information.  We do have about
1,000 permaculture graduate addresses from various sources, most of which we
cannot sell or rent due to agreements, and we used these, as we wanted to
announce our new center to the entire movement.  Most of you have seen that
letter.  Nothing subversive about it.  About 1/8 of the addresses were out of
date resulting in a great deal of wasted money and resources (address
corrections for first mail cost $.50 plus the original postage plus the
printing costs--adds up quickly.  We aren't rich.)
With the updated info Johh has, we could have avoided most of these bad
addresses and paid a lesser sum to John for his troubles instead of the post
office, which is a black hole as far as permaculture is concerned.  John
would have more update info without the expense, too, as you can be damn sure
now we will not send address corrections without something back.  

The addresses are something generated by a very broad base of permaculture
teachers which we all expected would continue to be available to any
permaculturist for any reason.  Now the Institute, which had no role in any
of this work or expense, controls the list, at least de facto.  Bill is cited
in the justification by John, who has been previously very cooperative.  OK,
I didn't need to publish this, but you did ask, your question seemed sincere,
and therefore I felt honorbound to give you an adequate answer.

I went through this in more detail once, less detail another time and both
messages crashed.  AOL has crappy software, in my opinion, and it has been
eating up my time today.  So if I sound a bit peevish, AOL gets 99 percent of
it.

As I explained in a more considered version of this note, this sort of thing
is to be expected.  Years ago I did not understand that, and was upset when
permaculture people acted contrary to our principles.  Now I see that we come
out of the Western anti-culture and that baggage is around for us to trip
over, which we do with regularity that is comical from a distance.  It seems
we need to look more closely at what we bring--corporate structures, desire
to control networking information, seeing people who want training as an
income opportunity (not necessary for personal wealth--we've got that far),
and start to unpack and through out some of the necessary luggage.  The
patterns from which we arise will continue to permeate our movement for a
long time to come, in my opnion.  The best way to deal with them is to point
them our each time we notice them and see if there is not some alternate way
to do things better.

I have presented these views because they were requested.  I'm not interested
in a debate.  Flamers can have the field to themselves.  I've been observing
these issues since 1981 so it may do to pause, even if you disagree, and see
if there might be something valid in my opinions.  Personally, I've concluded
that the way to change these things is to change them in myself.  So I'll
continue to work with John instead of blowing him off as I would have 10
years ago.  I'll do him one better.  However I can see that there may be
alternate directories developed as people decide that they have something to
say to North American permaculturists as a group.  And Kirby your idea of
several national or continental organizations will be a fantasy if people
can't contact one another to contact them.

Our own work has been, in part, concerned with developing other forms of data
bases that will enable all manner of connections.  We encourage people to
contact one another, indivudally and as groups, to form their own webs of
exchange and cooperation, for example through our TRIP (The Resources of
International Permaculture) directory.  We publish the information, anyone
can use it, and we'll sell a disk with the information to anyone who wants
it.  The course graduate directory used to be available on a similar basis.
 Now that the new Institute has formed it is not.

Anyone who wants to contact John Irwin directly for clarification can email
him at [email-masked]   John is a good guy who is trying to do
his bit.  I sure disagree with his decisions, but I would feel badly if
anyone flamed him because of this post.  I'd be delighted to read some
clarification in this discussion group as I am at a loss as to what purpose
constricting our ability to network serves.

I didn't do very well staying out of this discussion, but you can belive I am
going to try harder.  The time spent away from implementing our design isn't
worth discussion of something that will self-destruct, with any luck, in a
few years anyway.

For Mother Earth, Dan Hemenway, Yankee Permaculture Publications (since
1982), Elfin Permaculture workshops, lectures, Permaculture Design Courses,
consulting and permaculture designs (since 1981), and now correspondence
courses via email.  Next starts in Oct. 1997. Internships available.
Copyright, 1997, Dan & Cynthia Hemenway, P.O. Box 52, Sparr FL 32192 USA
 [email-masked]  

We don't have time to rush.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 18:26:00 -0400 (EDT)

Sorry, that was a personal message for Kirby Fry.  I didn't realize the
"Reply" button went to the entire list.  Rebecca Bryant

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 07:08:45 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 10/13/97 4:13:23 PM, you wrote:

>Kirby, Dan, et. al:
>
>Bill Mollison as vice president of anything sounds idealistic to me.  The
>guy's going "mythical"...or haven't you heard?

Actually, I haven't heard as I try to avoid the permie gossip channels.  But
I'm really interested in what going mythical is.  Sound like fun.

Dan

---

From: Kirby Fry <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:24:26 -0400

Dan,

>> The fact is that the first step for the group was to promote an
Australian permaculturist <<

Did the Permaculture Institute promote those design courses last summer?  I
honestly can't remember what was on the flyers.

However, I don't believe you mentioned what was wrong with promoting
Australian permaculture teachers.  It would certainly be nice if they
promoted north American teachers.  Or are you implying that travelling to
another continent to teach is unethical?

I, on the other hand, might say that using the planet's resources to send a
good teacher accross the sea would be the MOST ethical thing we could do
with those resources.

>> So we have an institute that promotes zero standards for certification.
<<

That's not exactly true.  I know Bill expects the students to receive 72
hours of class room time to obtain their certificate.  I would call that a
standard.

>> Nature uses anarchistic designs, not hierarchical designs.  The very
structure of a 501(c)3 violates permaculture. <<

This statement seems to be extremely subjective to me.  Am I supposed to
logically conclude that registering a group with the government is
completely counter productive?

I agree that a permaculture movement could be totally successful without
creating any kind of corporation, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that
by creating any kind of corporation a Pc movement couldn't be successful.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 08:00:32 -0400 (EDT)

>good teacher accross the sea would be the MOST ethical thing we could do

I have gone over this in previous posts.  Historically, such institutes have
only promoted Australian teachers.  Australian teachers already have an edge,
according to Bill, in that their transport and some expenses are subsidized
by the Australian government, so long as they siphon money back to Australia.

An institute that claims to represent North America and manages to commandeer
quasi-exclusive use of the mailing list to which many of us have given major
input and dozens of teachers have helped build ought to be involved in
promoting North American permaculture teachers as their first priority.  As I
mentioned earlier, Bill might well be a good person to bring in from time to
time for advanced teaching to teachers.  Frankly, we have a number of
teachers in North America who are at least as effetive at teaching
permaculture as Bill. Clearcutting the market drives them into other
activities.  

Nobody is going to tell Bill what to do regardless of what happens or is
said.  If anything, he is apt to show up more if asked to stay away.  I don't
think that Scott is much different, though I don't know him and have only
spotty contact.  I could be wrong there--it would be a surprise, but
surprises can be nice.

I guess I want to know why you feel it is useful to extend this discussion.
 You seem to support this institute and I'm happy to let my concerns stand.
 I'd rather not be going over and over the same ground.  It can't help the
institute to have these issues raised over and over again.  What is your
angle.  Clearly you want to argue and not to listen, but do you want to argue
badly enough to harm your cause?

I agree that it is often a good idea to cause pollution to send a teacher to
places where a teacher is needed.  Obviouisly, if good, well established,
Mollison-blessed teachers are screaming in pain when he comes and clear-cuts
the market from under them, this is not a case of needed teachers.  This is a
case of income--whether it is to be used for one purpose or another.  It
seems rather close to the permaculture ethic about competition to be
comfortable.  The US is rich and diverting money from our permaculture
movement, which is NOT rich, can do good works elsewhere.  Have we
volunteered for this transfusion.  I think not.

Indeed there is a dire shortage of funds to meet requests for teaching in
India, Africa, South America Asia, and other places where I have had to put
people on endless hold because we cannot subsidize their needs.  It is sad to
have to tell these people that they need to learn fundraising as we can't
just hop in a plane and fly over.  Mostly, they think all Americans are rich
in ways that we are mostly not, particularly the dozens who have given up
regular income to teach permaculture.  North America is hardly short of
teachers.  

Your point is exactly why I feel that there is a problem with the jet-set
international convergences.  We could have permaculture on a strong footing
just about everywhere there is a life-or-death need for it with the funds
expended in transport, etc., for these events.   When I get on board a jet, I
always question whether the destruction to the ozone and general hydrocarbon
pollution from the jet engines is justified by what I might help to happen as
a teacher.  Being a spiritual person, I also pray to the Earth Mother and
sundry associates that I have chosen wisely and that the cost to the planet
will be repaid many times.  I would have to have a very powerful reason to go
to Australia and teach where there are plenty of permaculture teachers and
where any impidement to the faster spread of permaculture is hardly the need
for more teachers.

While Bill is a special case, HOW special he is might be worth his
consideration in these matters.  Discussing this between you and me isn't
going to change what Bill does.  Give it a rest.

standard.<<

So after 72 hours of hearing someone talk, a person has a license to tinker
with nature and call it permaculture?  That is a standard for teachers,
maybe, but not for their students.  The certificate becomes an attendance
affadivit and nothing more.  There is no competency or comprehension
evaluation required.  These would be standards as far as I am concerned.

>>Am I supposed to
logically conclude that registering a group with the government is
completely counter productive?<<

---

From: Kirby Fry <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 10:05:57 -0400

Dan,

We were talking about the Permaculture Institute because of accusatory and
presumptuous sentiments that YOU expressed about it.  It shouldn't be too
hard for you to realize that not everyone immediately understands or is in
agreement with your brash outlining of what permaculture is all about.  So
please don't get perturbed if someone asks you to explain yourself.

Your description and complaint of all of these "new" permaculture
institutes supporting Aussie teachers sounds like pure whining to me.  Your
version of bioregionalism is getting closer to biofascism.  Who gets to
define what "Natural" is?  Who gets to make the rules about how to behave
in a regionally-correct manner and who gets to enforce those rules?

I would much rather learn about permaculture informally in the country side
and never see a design certificate than take one of your standardized
competency evaluations.  For me that typifies the mental morass that the
west is mired in... and you want MORE of it instead of less.

Maybe that's what I was trying to ferret out of you, how badly do you want
executive/private electronic mailing lists, teacher standardization,
competency testing, design patenting, literature and logo copyrighting,
organizational licensure, etc?  Who do you represent, surely not just the
divine lady you harald in your signature block?

Furthermore, do you really know what the these "new" permaculture
institutes are doing or do you just spend your time fantasizing about it so
that it suits your paradigm of who's right and who's wrong?  Why, if you
bothered to ask US for instance we would glady tell you what we're up to,
but somehow it seems too late for that.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:59:10 -0400 (EDT)

And here, I thought, whinning is whinging.

Like anything, if I don't like it, there is no obligation to buy in. Let the
winnowing proceed.

Milo Clark
Berkeley CA USA

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 08:38:28 -0400 (EDT)

>512-756-7878; web address csf.colorado.edu/perma/]

Kirby:

Again you are misleading, quoting falsely, and putting words into my mouth.
 I had no need to go into my  concerns about these organizations, which
mainly comes down to the fact that they are imposed from above without
reference to whether the mainstream of permaculturists wants them and and
whether they get a choice as to who runs them.  For wanting to see inclusive
instead of dictatorial processes, you stated implied that I said permaculture
would be just fine if we did not cooperate with one another.  However, it
seems to me that imposing an organization rather than consulting the 2500
permaculture intelligent adult permaculture design course graduates who may
indeed have opinions on the matter.  You are right that I did not understand
that there were two organizations.  Since I am pretty well plugged in to
permaculture communictoins, this just indicates that this was an accomplished
fact before anyone had a chance to be consulted.  There are people who will
like this hierachical arrangement and who will participate.   OK.  

Regretfully, I was dead wrong when I concluded your inquiry about my views
was a sincere question.  Obviously you have been disingenuous from the start,
using my impulse to answer sincere questions to entrap me in you flame war.  

I would not have answered this post except that you have committed the sin
that you accuse me of.  (again)  You claim to understand my course and
criticize it in public on false premises.  We have no standardized tests.  We
do have standards.  There is a difference.  Everyone in any of our courses
must make a strong contribuation to a permaculture design.  In our online
course, where collaboration and cooperation among the students on a design is
not practical, each student completes his/her design.  This is the major
criterion, though there are others.  This gives me a chance to evaluate the
student's comprehension of what constitutes a permaculture design.  The
designs themselves are obviously NOT standardized--they must be site specific
and student specific, though if a standard solution to a problem within the
design exists, we don't require students to reinvent the wheel.  We work with
every student to help get the design up to par--our goal is to graduate
people, not to deny them certification.  
	The standards pertain to course content, the course reading list, time spent
in instruction, and a minimum competency for a student design.  We hardly
expect professional designs from beginning students, though we are often
pleasantly surprised.  We do not expect every student, or even most students,
to become professional designers.  I have concerns about making people
dependant on permaculturists as designers--again I opt for inclusiveness,
giving people opportunities for self-empowerment by learning design whenever
possible and practical.  And I'm no purist--I see a need for some consulting
too, but far less than teaching, at least for me.  Our evaluation of a
student's application for certification always takes into account the amount
of growth we've seen and the proclivities of the student.  I recall one case
where a student's design work was just a series of questions.  It was awful as
 design, but as a teaching instrument it was good and as a teaching
instrument it indicated that he had a good grasp of the concept of
permaculture design.  There was no problem in passing him.
	I've no problem with advanced diplomas if they are given out on the basis of
merit rather than rewards for irrelevant services or tokens of friendship.  I
say this holding 5 myself, and having seen the lack of standards, wondering
if they are worth the space in the file cabinet.  If the advanced diplomas
will be indication of merit rather than rewards for playing ball with the
appointed leadership, the effort is worthwhile.  There are still risks in
adopting the corporate form, all the more so since you don't seem to
acknowledge them.

It seems to me that you can announce the merits of these sundry organizations
without trying to draw me into an arguement.  I don't think promoting
dissention is a way to strengthen the permaculture movement.  However, when
you attack my course with misinformation, I have to respond in public.

You must realize that by being created as a form of decree rather than by
agreement among a significant fraction of the movement, there will be many
permaculturists who choose not to participate or who participate very warily.
 Rather than make an issue about this difference, your cause would be better
served by simply announcing what God hath wroth, so to speak, and what it is
intended to do in a bit more detail.  Who knows, maybe I'll want to join.  Do
members get a vote?

For the second time, Kirby, give it a rest.  And if you are incapable of
that, try to separate your arguments from personal attacks, please.  It
doesn't do permaculture any good.  

If its not in our food chain, we're not thinking.

---

From: "Eugene F. Monaco" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:27:09 -0400

Message text written by INTERNET:[email-masked]
>I've no problem with advanced diplomas if they are given out on the basis
of
merit rather than rewards for irrelevant services or tokens of friendship. 
I
acknowledge them.<

Folks, I agree that perhaps this discussion has gotten out of hand
emotionally, but I think there are serious issues here nevertheless.  The
issue of accrediation has come up before.  There are many folks working in
the kingdoms of corporatia or officia (read government) that can get
reimbursment for courses that are accrediated.  This would help struggling
consultants.

Everybody knows that that accrediation was created to weed out the
charlatans, and that in that proces, some slip through the cracks and
others get left out.  I think many of us agree that permaculturists have
been left out.  Those of us that have degrees from accrediated institutions
are perhaps more sensitive to this than others.  Of course it doesn't mean
that everyone with a degree in something makes a valuable contribution,
they don't; likewise, some of the most successful in their fields have no
degrees: Sam Walton never finished high school; Bill Gates quit college in
his 3rd year (whether you personally think these folks are great or not is
irrelevant, the point is they're tops in their fields).

Bill Mollison dropped academia as an institution because it seemed to be
the best choice for him at the time.  This leaves many of us feeling short
when we have gotten our unrecognized advanced degrees in the field.  To my
knowledge only Slippery Rock U offers a masters program in permaculture,
and it's not in permaculture per se, but rather an environmental blah blah
blah masters with a permaculture twist.  Perhaps this is the legacy of
Mollison that we'll just have to overcome.

There is a parallel here with chiropractors.  There was a time when
chiropractors were considered by the AMA as charlatans.  Now they've gotten
acceptance, and it's the herbologists and accupuncturists and naturopaths
who are the charlatans.  Yet some make ground as the thing evolves. 
Naturopathy is recognized in Nevada but not Tennessee.

Clearly there are few if any permaculture teachers in N. America that have
put more effort into permaculture education standards than Dan H.  That he
would be somewhat miffed at the P.Institute being created outside of him is
IMO understandable.  That being said, I think it's also true that the
stated attempts of the P. Institute to gain accrediation is an idea who's
time has come.  Unfortunately, almost no one recognizes permaculture design
certificates as being worth anything other than attendence certificates,
like you get when you go to any pop course.  In certain limited instances,
one might be able to win a few points with a potential client, or among
others in the permaculture network by proclaiming holdance of these
certificates, but that is a personal thing more than anything else.

Once someone steps up and claims to be the holder of the keys to the
standards, it will cause riffs among the other pioneers who are around. 
And pioneers aren't likely to give up ground any more than they do in
nature; but succession persists nevertheless.

Perhaps its time for the P.Institute to extend an invitation to those
previously left out of the process, kinda like they did in Philadelphia
200-some years ago.  I think we'd all be the better off for it all.

Gene Monaco
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
East Tennessee Permaculture  ([email-masked])
Herbs, consultations, & training for total health and environmental
sustainability
PO Box 11851, Knoxville, TN  37939      (423) 457-4354
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 09:01:15 -0400 (EDT)

Nice post, Gene.  While I don't hold much truck with advanced degrees
necessarily meaning anything, they aren't necessarily meaningless either.

The problem here is the process.  If the process is not consistent with
permaculture, it is self-corrupting.  However this discussion, which at one
point I thought I was going to be able to avoid, is irrelevant except that a
small fraction of the permaculture movement now knows what has been decided
for them.  There is a history of awful human relations behind previous
permaculture institutes that were established by decree for North America,
with people who were doing something and swept aside actually moving and
swearing me, for on, to secrecy as to their new address to avoid any further
contact with Bill and his appointees.  I was not part of this--it was all on
the west coast and I was on the east coast with no interest in personally
being involved in larger organizations than myself.  It began to get me
thinking about what processes should be consistent with permaculture,
however.  Ultimately, hierachical forms and permaculture, which is inherently
anarchistic, are at odds.  Since the abient society--I eschew the word
"culture" with reason--is intensely hierachical, trying to keep
permaculture's integretity while subsuming it to one of these hierachical
forms has burnt out more than one person with as many good intentions as
Scott.  The individual makes his/her own choices, of course, as is right.
 But when it damages what we all are trying to do, we all have a right to be
concerned.  See what happens now over the next 5 or 10 years.  The energy is
in motion, now, cautionary advice despised, and the flow will play itself
out.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 22:00:33 -0700 (PDT)

Dan H. wrote 10/25/97 and Scott P. replies 

>a small fraction of the permaculture movement now knows what has been decided
>for them.  

Once again Dan I must insist that nothing has been decided for anyone who
doesn't want to participate.  Anarchism doesn't proscribe action by the
individual nor does it prohibit others joining in on a good idea.

>to avoid any further contact with Bill and his appointees.

I really think that this is a cheap shot.  I have known Bill for some eleven
years now, teaching with him, on the road with him, and consider him a good
friend as well as mentor.  I have never known Bill to appoint anyone for
anything.  Bill chooses, just as we all do, to associate with those with
whom he shares a common interest and finds pleasant to be with.  Bill
doesn't appoint anyone his associates are mutually selected! Bill more than
anyone I know has fought for the past 6 years, (three international
permaculture conferences) against the idea that we needed a permaculture
standards board to pass on the merits of teachers, and design practitioners.
Sort of an AMA of permaculture. 

I agree with his sentiment but am also concerned with the paucity of ethics
in some of the graduates who are now teaching and designing.  I don't have a
solution but I am alarmed at the lack of depth of understanding of natural
principals exhibited by some teachers.  I think that now that permaculture
is a known word and has some commercial value that the predators and bottom
feeders are moving in and we have no strategy to protect the integrity of
the permaculture movement. It was only yesterday, it seems, that I was
spending most of my time defining permaculture to a bemused listener.  Now
it is fairly common knowledge.  This is something that all of us have to
work on and think about before permaculture becomes another commodity.

Scott Pittman <[email-masked]>
Ingenio Patet Campus