Thoughts on sustainability

One of our goals and objectives is the pursuit of sustainability. What does this mean, though? Is it possible? The term sustainable is frequently used in reference to our personal agricultural and homesteading practices. It's something I've been thinking about and which I think ought to be considered.

What does it mean for our practices to be sustainable? Webster's defines it as “of, relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged.” For us, that means replacing the minerals and nutrients taken from the soil in growing food and forage. Additionally, to truly be sustainable, external resources would not be brought in to supplement or augment growing and harvesting our food, hay, and firewood.

Do we do this? No. We use machinery which requires fuel derived from petroleum. We cut and haul in firewood from other farms. We have had manure brought in from outside our farm. I've also taken several tons of hay off of the fields without putting amendments back on the fields as sustainability would require (this is an area to be addressed).

Do I want to be sustainable? Yes and no. I want to work toward being more sustainable than conventional agricultural practices and to have the ability and capacity to be completely sustainable at some point (if required). As long as I use machinery that is powered by internal combustion engines, I'm not practicing sustainability (unless, maybe, I can set up a wood gasification system on my tractor). I am not ready to do without these things though. The amount of physical labor required to grub hoe my garden instead of disk or till it and the labor required to scythe hay and haul it to the barn in loose form is mind-boggling (especially without the help of some sort of draft animal, be it horse or ox).

One of the problems with complete sustainability is that it is unrealistic, just like the term self-sufficient. We are created to need a community, the support of a structure larger than ourselves. I believe this is natural, normal, and necessary. We are social creatures and can accomplish so much more in conjunction with other individuals than we can alone.

What does this mean for homesteaders? It means we need each other. Homesteading is bigger than we are. My farm cannot be completely sustainable without a great amount of work. Using resources that come from outside our gates makes the work we have to do more doable. We also have resources that can be shared with others in order to make their work more doable. If we view sustainability from a personal, farm-specific perspective, we will find that it is an elusive, if not impossible, goal to attain. But, if we view it in terms of community, it is more realistic.

It's difficult for individuals who wish to homestead to capitalize on the notion of community with like-minded families. We seem to live so far apart mostly. Intentional communities that have been attempted have their own sets of problems. It's not easy. There used to be more community when people were mutually engaged in the process of growing their own food and helping one another with the work at hand. Mechanization and industrialization killed much of that as the rogue American independence triumphed over the strength and richness of real community.

I like to read about how things were done a hundred or more years ago in rural America. There were multiple diverse farms with people working to supply their own needs and for their neighbors' needs. Villages and towns were supported by a belt of these farms that grew (or could grow) most if not all of their food needs. In return, the people in the villages/towns provided for needs on the farms that otherwise would have been difficult to produce on site, from shoes to salt to farm equipment. There is a richness in such a situation and a sustainability that we can only dream of today.

Our current agricultural system involves the consumption of great amounts of petroleum. Even industrial organic agriculture consumes great quantities of petroleum, nearly as much as conventional, just not in the form of petroleum-based fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Industrial organics has adopted the conventional model merely with substitutions for the synthetic additives. Is the industrial organic model more sustainable? Although it has certain elements that make it 'better' than conventional, it is hardly more sustainable in the form it has taken.

True sustainability involves a retrogression to some age-old, pre-mechanized, pre-industrial practices, including the development of community inter-dependence. Without that, our efforts at sustainability involve a movement in the direction of more ecological responsibility, better stewardship of the land God has blessed us with, and the adoption of the philosophical and moral principles of the original organic agricultural movement (not its current iteration in the form of industrial agriculture).

Will this happen? Not without great disruption to the current order, I'm afraid. Do I want that? No, because it would bring great suffering. We live in an age that is based upon unsustainable practices such as a debt-based economy and petroleum-based agriculture and lifestyle. At some point, the resources we're exploiting will run out and the debt will have to be paid. Both of these outcomes will be difficult and painful because by-and-large, we are unprepared for it.

So, I come back to where I started. What does it mean to practice sustainability? For me it means working toward and reaching a point at which I can provide for my family and others in need without depleting the resources available to me and without being dependent upon external resources. It means working with and for those that live with and around me in order to help one another. It's less of a realistic goal to be achieved than a direction around which we seek to organize our life. It's a moral choice that reveals itself in what we do as a form of stewardship of the land and responsibility to ourselves and to others.