Archdruid Watch: Tillicum River
by Jason GodeskyThere’s not much to say about this week’s story, “Tillicum River,” that I didn’t already write about Adam’s morbid fantasy in general. Overall, I could see a town like Tillicum River springing up, at least as a transitional form. Already down to 500, and presumably continuing to decline, with gardens and localized currency and a good mix of cultural forms converging, Tillicum River could become a sustainable, horticultural village.
Of course, peppered through is Greer’s usual pessimism, generally grounded in a distinct lack of understanding of how ecologies work, or how past collapses have transpired. Take this, for example:
Now, other than the highway and the healing scars of logging during the war—the government fueled its tanks and planes on wood alcohol once the last overseas oil was lost, and ravaged much of the nation’s woodlands doing it—the hills looked as though they had never been visited by people at all. The woods to either side of the road offered little in the way of forage; it was a hungry time.
To transition tanks and planes to wood alcohol would be a massive undertaking, and how would the wood alcohol fuel be transported, anyway? All this would be undertaken after the last overseas oil was lost, when the capacity to do so was eliminated?
Peak energy also means peak capacity. When Cahokia peaked, it didn’t begin cutting down more forest. When Rome collapsed, it didn’t consume more land. No; in every collapse that has actually happened, civilizations contract. They don’t begin exploiting new lands, they use all the energy they can just to try to hold on to the lands they already have. The Roman Empire had to face serious farmland abandonment issues in Gaul and Britain, for example. The United States is already seeing this in the Great Plains.
As for food to forage on either side of the road, that may well have been Adam’s perspective, as I’m sure it would be most people’s; which is precisely why along the side of a road so often provides so much food. Transition areas are the most ecologically active, and along road sides you can find wild carrot, yarrow, plantain, dandelion, burdock and many, many others. Few of these are recognized as food by most civilized people, and throughout history, it’s been cultural constructions of food, rather than actual lack of edible material, that’s led to starvation.
John Michael Greer’s “Archdruid Report” comes out every Wednesday, and one of his favorite topics is the failing of primitivism, or “apocalyptic narrative,” as he prefers to pigeon-hole it. Unfortunately, Greer also thinks that actual primitivists stopping by in the comments to defend their “apocalyptic narrative” side-tracks the disucssion of how looney and wrong their narrative is. Primitivists who try to answer Greer’s attacks are eventually censored and banned. Enter “Archdruid Watch,” a weekly response to Greer’s weekly attack, on a forum that encourages discussion and dissenting views, rather than squelches them from the bully pulpit. If you think we’re wrong, by all means say so. It’s not as though we’ll delete what you have to say just because you make a good point—and that’s not something all blogs involved here can say.
- Last Week: “Culture Death“
- Next Week: “Cities in the Deindustrial Future“
I should also note that “the hills looked as though they had never been visited by people at all” would not be true at all.
Old growth forest is quite a different thing to young forest.
Young forests will first consist of certain species of tree capable of colonising a bare terrain rapidly, and only at the end of their lifespan will they die out largely en masse (albeit over a period of time measured in decades), and make way for a second range of species, more capable of getting started than species that just died out (since there is less sunlight available at the ground since the forest is now established).
In turn, at the end of their lifespan, yet other types of species will tend to take their place.
These waves of replacement take centuries to play out before the forest acquires the complexity of an old growth forest, along with an intricate, heterogeneous ecosystem.
So yeah, they may both be green and smell nice, but a young growth forest will not offer as many resources as an old growth forest to someone looking for sustenance.
The wood of young forests is usually pretty crappy from a building material point of view as well.
Comment by Davel — 7 August 2007 @ 9:51 AM
Well, yeah, but (at least out my way), I could reasonably expect to find some combination of (at least!) the following edible species in a young forest: russian olive, poplar, multiflora rose, sassafras, wild brambles, wild carrot, evening primrose, dandelion, plantain, wood mints, crabapple, japanese barberry, burdock, lamb’s quarters, maple, hickories and more. I wouldn’t be very surprised to find any of the following either: pawpaw, persimmon, oak, walnut/butternut, sunflowers (seed or tuber).
Which is to say that there’s enough there to support some fauna in addition to the flora, so I could also reasonably expect to find at least some combination of: rabbits, squirrels, raccons, possums, turkey, deer, quail, grouse, along with smaller birds such as pigeons/doves and with the possible addition of ducks & geese if there’s a sufficient body of water. And this completely ignores fish (again, if water), insects and mollusks (like snails & slugs).
Granted, I’m much less familiar with the west coast, and certainly many of the food sources I just listed are seasonal, but….
Comment by jhereg — 7 August 2007 @ 10:45 AM
You’re talking about succession, Davel. My own Allegheny National Forest is a very young forest. And it’s true, it doesn’t provide as much as an old growth forest. But I’ve also heard the opposite case argued, that young forests are almost useless. That’s simply not true. Even a young forest can provide you with everything you need. It’s not as rich, but it’s still richer than most of the earth. The !Kung thrive in the Kalahari, and as endangered as the Allegheny is, it’s still a long way from being the Kalahari.
Comment by Jason Godesky — 7 August 2007 @ 10:54 AM
very OT, sorry for sandbagging the thread. I’m just curious as to what Anthropik thinks of this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/science/07indu.html
Comment by scats — 7 August 2007 @ 10:23 PM
Well, I agree with the “Food Race” constraints of pre-industrial Europe, but the idea that the Industrial Revolution followed from a gradual filtering out of the upper class and its “values” is just silly. Values adapt to economic circumstance, not vice versa. Most importantly, he overlooks the most obvious explanation: fossil fuels replace human labor, and make invention and constant growth possible, even profitable. It’s an “Age of Exuberance,” just like an algae bloom. Do we need to look at the differing “values” of algae living off autumnal deritrus, vs. algae simply living off the regular nutrient flow in a stream?
Comment by Jason Godesky — 8 August 2007 @ 7:34 AM