Does Human Progress Necessitate Ecological Destruction? Or Are We Capable Of Being A Keystone Species ?

Dispelling some common myths including the "humans are inherently greedy destructive sinners" myth, the "clearcutting all the forests is sad, but we had to because 'progress'.." myth and more

I strongly disagree with Lee Durrell’s usage of the term “progress” and human in the quote shown below. It expresses a prevalent myth that dominates the thinking in today’s academic and social media landscape.

Human “progress” and food production does not necessitate deforestation and ecological degradation.

If you replace the word human with “imperialistic anthropocentric civilizations” than the quote would be accurate, but to say that all humans have been clearcutting and decimating forests as their cultures progress is a fallacy.

There have been cultures clearcutting, burning and extracting from forests for a very long time yes, but while some cultures were chopping ancient forests down for short term gain, as I elaborate on in articles such as this, this and this (and as is touched on in the video in the note linked below) others were actively cultivating food within old growth forests, adding more biodiversity to those habitats and creating moral imperatives that encouraged long term ecological stewardship of forests.

We can find ancient examples of both potential paths being expressed by cultures that were driven by different worldviews.

As far back as ancient Mesopotamia and the Biblical stories we have accounts of massive clearcutting operations carried out in the name of imperialistic conquest, vanity and superstition.

The story of an ancient warlord seeking immortality was Etched on clay tablets four millennia ago in Mesopotamia, it concerns King Gilgamesh, supposedly a “wild bull of a man” with gigantic muscles and an even more gigantic ego.

He heard that the once mighty and lush temperate cedar forest of Lebanon held the key to everlasting life and he set out to carve his way through the forests in search of his prize. I was said that the Cedars of Lebanon are guarded by the a being called Humbaba. Gilgamesh and his men cut down (clearcut) the cedar forests during his quest for immortality.

Some consider the tale as the earliest record of major anthropogenic deforestation of a climax forest ecosystem.

Later we have the story of Solomon’s industrial-scale logging operations, described in 1 Kings 5 and 2 Chronicles 2, occurred during the mid-10th century BCE. King Solomon engaged in a massive clearcut logging operation to build the Temple in Jerusalem and his palace. It is written that Solomon sent 30,000 laborers into Lebanon to cut timber, using Sidonian loggers who were expert at felling the trees.

It is estimated that only 0.4% of the original, primary ancient cedar forests remain in Lebanon today. Most of that once lush temperate forest ecosystem that would have abounded with springs and streams is now desertified (aside from a few remnants of untended forest and at least one manmade food forest oasis).

Well, while those egotistical clowns were hacking down 2000-3000 year old trees in Lebanon to make some vain temple for their anthropocentric religions, there were an array of other cultures that existed concurrently around the globe that were doing the opposite of that.

Those other (often animistic worldview guided) cultures viewed the forests themselves as sacred and recognized the forest ecosystem as the most reliable part of Creation through which they can acquire food, medicine and clean water (via tending the forest as a garden).

Some of the cultures that were actively engaged in forms of regenerative agroforestry and forest gardening/food forest design (the intentional integration of trees and shrubs into crop and animal farming systems and/or altering and enhancing biodiversity in forests to produce food and medicine with plants and fungi) included:

• Amazonian Indigenous Societies: Evidence suggests that pre-Columbian societies in the eastern Amazon were practicing polyculture agroforestry around 4,500 years ago (roughly 2500 BCE). They managed forests to increase the abundance of edible species, such as fruit and nut trees, rather than relying solely on open-field agriculture.

• The Yumbo were an indigenous group that inhabited the cloud forests of western Ecuador, particularly in the Chocó-Andean region. Their territory stretched from what is now Carchi to the Esmeraldas province, where they lived in harmony with (and actually enhanced the biodiversity of) the dense forests and the surrounding mountains.

  Their food forest design system was known as the chakra integral, (an indigenous agroforestry practiced in the forests of Ecuador for millennia before the arrival of Christopher Columbus) Meaning “big round garden” in the pre-colonial Yumbo language, the chakra integral forms a landscape that resembles a mosaic, which is economically productive and ecologically friendly to the area’s biodiversity.

  These pre-Inca tribes had a massive role to play in building the history of Ecuador and altering forest ecology, species distribution and increasing biodiversity so that the landscape could support more humans.

  The Tulipe valley, where the Yumbo lived for more than 2,000 years from 800 BC, is rich in archaeology today. Much of what survives allows researchers to build a picture of these peaceful food forest farmers and traders.

• The Gedeo People (Ethiopia): The Gedeo people in Southern Ethiopia managed agroforestry homegardens that integrated trees with staple crops like Enset (Enset ventricosum), often utilizing the forest and enriching forest biodiversity with perennial crops.

• The Indigenous Berber (Amazigh) people of modern day Morocco created a food system that has produced food sustainably in the middle of a desert for over 2 millennia.

  The food forest is situated in the High Atlas Mountains near the town of Inraren (or Tamzergourte) in the Paradise Valley region. It is a Multi-layered agroforestry system relying on date palm overstories and 3-tier agriculture to transform desert into lush, productive ecosystems (which actually resulted in creating flowing fresh groundwater springs where none existed before). Key methods include passive water management (khettaras) using gravity and organic matter to channel and sink water into landscape, companion planting to create shade and humidity, and community-managed, low-tech, organic farming techniques.

• Aboriginal Australians also extensively cultivated nutrient dense tubers like yams for thousands of years, managing vast “park-like” agricultural landscapes rather than relying solely on grains or hunting. Early explorers documented expansive yam fields, sometimes stretching to the horizon, and noted sophisticated practices like leaving top tubers to regrow.

  Colonial people brought sheep and after they murdered and displaced indigenous farmers their poly cultures were decimated and replaced with inferior (external resource dependent) wheat and livestock farming.

  Eel farming in pre-colonial Australia was another amazing regenerative farming system that connects to the ocean. It is one of the oldest examples of aquaculture/mariculture and regenerative hydraulic engineering. The Gunditjmara people created a system of channels, developed into weirs, dams and traps for fish and eels. Their complex of stone arrangements including stone houses began around 6,000 years ago – some would say that is before Stonehenge and the Pyramids.

• Indigenous Neolithic/Bronze Age European Communities: People in Europe were increasingly managing woodland areas in that time frame including Hazelnut and Oak food forest cultivation. This often involved coppicing (cutting trees to promote growth) to provide reliable supplies of wood and fodder for livestock, often in combination with forest grazing.

Researchers found 5,700 years ago people were cultivating hazelnut food forests in southern Denmark, southern Sweden all the way to Scotland and Cornwall.

(For more information read “The Lost Forest Gardens of Europe”)

• Several cultures in Asia had advanced food forest farming systems in place in that time frame (and earlier).

  For instance, the Chestnut food forest cultivating Jōmon people (from what is modern day Japan) cultivated food forests for over 1500 years in several locations. The Sannai-Maruyama Site (Aomori Prefecture) offered significant evidence of 5,500-year-old chestnut food forest site, where researchers found evidence of large-scale, sustained chestnut (Castanea crenata), oak (Quercus crispula), lacquer trees (Toxicodendron verniciflua) and walnut (Juglans ailantifolia cultivation, including managed groves maintained for roughly 1,500 years. Modern academics often dismiss such cultures with the term “hunter-gatherer” but this generalizing and dismissing term fails to accurately describe food forest tending cultures such as the Jōmon (and their Ainu descendants). Such labels are typically applied by the propagandists of imperialistic empires seeking to downplay the accomplishments of the people they stole land from.

  The Jōmon people (c. 14,000–300 BCE) cultivated chestnut (Castanea crenata) forests and managed groves as a stable, long-term food source, planting them around settlements for centuries. Evidence from sites like Sannai-Maruyama shows they maintained these trees, using them for food and construction, demonstrating active, early arboriculture rather than simple foraging. The oldest known nut remains were found in the Omiya-no-moriura ruins (10,900–10,700 BCE), in which carbonized and peeled nuts were discovered^16.

  

  old growth Chestnut tree in Japan (a remnant of one of the ancient food forests described above)

  Food forest cultivation continued in the form of Satoyama (里山) gardens until recent centuries when industrial logging took precedent over regenerative food production. Satoyama refers to the traditional Japanese rural landscape, representing a "socio-ecological production landscape" that exists between flat agricultural plains and mountainous forests. It represented a sustainable, harmonious relationship between human communities and nature where trees provided ecosystem for animals, built soil, cleaned water and protected against erosion while also providing food for humans.

  We find another example in the Southeast Asian Rainforests with food forests that are approx. 11,000 years old. Evidence suggests that rainforests in this region are not pristine, wild forests, but rather ancient, intensively managed “cultural artifacts” created by humans since the end of the Pleistocene. These jungles function as food forests, with high densities of trees that produce choice edibles and edible plants. There is evidence that humans in the Kelabit Highlands of Borneo used controlled fires and coppicing to clear underbrush (while leaving some species of trees intact) planting abundance of food-bearing plants afterwards (which became self-sustaining populations). This technique parallels the a similar cyclical tropical food forest design technique that was utilized by the Maya people called the Milpa.

  Pollen samples from around 6,500 years ago contain abundant biologically activated charcoal infused with broken pottery and bones, indicating the occurrence of not just manmade fire, but also active soil enrichment practices for cultivation reminiscent of the Amazon’s Terra Preta creators. “However, while naturally occurring or accidental fires would usually be followed by specific weeds and trees that flourish in charred ground, we found evidence that this particular fire was followed by the growth of fruit trees. This indicates that the people who inhabited the land intentionally cleared it of forest vegetation and planted sources of food in its place. As is the case for imperialistic regimes globally, laws in several modern statist regimes in Southeast Asia do not recognize the rights of indigenous food forest dwellers on the grounds that they are nomads who leave no permanent mark on the landscape (despite the fact there is evidence to demonstrate their active management of the forests for more than 11,000 years). Significant evidence has been found showing that Javanese Pekarangan (Homegardens) and Talun-Kebun food forest systems have been active since 3,000 BC.

We find yet another example in the Central Asian Walnut-Fruit Food Forests. Located in the Fergana Valley of Kyrgyzstan, these are some of the world’s largest remaining old growth anthropogenic walnut and fruit forests (containing the progenitor of all apples). They include over 300 species of plants, including ancient strains of apples, pears, and plums. Archaeobotanical studies confirm nut cultivation (walnut/pistachio) occurred 7,800 years ago, with the forests acting as a long-term, human-influenced (enhanced) ecosystem.

ancient walnut food forest, Fergana Valley of Kyrgyzstan

Every autumn, most of the village of Arslanbob in Kyrgyzstan travels up into the Babashata Mountains’ foothills to harvest what may be the world’s largest walnut forest. They move into tents in the 385-square-kilometer forest, spending two months picking over 1,000 tons of walnuts.

Arslanbob’s walnuts are famous around the world for their genetic diversity, dark kernels, and unique flavor. Harvesters can sell shelled walnuts for over $9 per kilogram, a price which triples after they are sold to consumers abroad. They are so prized that during the harvest, shops in Arslanbob accept walnuts in lieu of money. They are used to make walnut milk or the walnut-and-honey sweet known as zhansak.

The Fergana Valley contains massive, old growth walnut (Juglans regia) food forests (up to 30,000 hectares), specifically in the Arslanbob region, which have been tended for over 3 thousand years continuously by the indigenous Yenisei Kyrgyz people. These forests are not just walnuts, but a mixture of domesticated ancestral fruits, including wild apples (Malus kirghisorum) which is a subspecies of Malus sieversii (Asian wild apple), plums (Prunus sogdiana), hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), rosehip (Rosa canina), and pistachio (Pistacia vera and pears.

Lastly, we find another example of ancient food forest design in the Khasi Forest Gardens in Meghalaya, Northeast India. They are ancient, community-managed agroforestry systems that integrate biodiversity enhancement with traditional livelihood, dating back over 4 thousand of years. In addition to the advanced food forest cultivation, the Khasi people have also applied biomimicry into creating exceptional feats of engineering that persist for centuries to millennia. Meghalaya is the wettest region on Earth. It is geographically a single massif of tableland riddled with outflowing streams creating narrow, steep-sided slopes. Living root bridges (LRBs) are the crucial passageways for rural communities located on these slopes, as they allow them to cross the shallow canyons and gushing rivers.

Their traditional jhum (or shifting cultivation, again similar to the Milpa) allows them to cultivate many edible and medicinal plants including (but not limited to) : Sohphie (Myrica nagi) Sohiong (Prunus nepalensis) A fruit native to the region, often processed into jams or juices, Sohshang (Eleagnus khasianum) A local berry, Soh Phoh Khasi (Docynia indica khasiana) A traditional pear-like fruit, Sohphan (Flemingia vestita) A traditional tuber, Edible Ferns, Bamboo Shoots, Finger Millet: A nutritious grain grown, Sesame Seeds, and heirloom Hill Paddy, Traditional varieties of rice as well as various leafy greens, herbs (such as jamyrdoh) and medicinal plants.

The Khasi people have lived in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills for millennia, developing deep knowledge of local ecology and establishing the “Sacred Groves” (Lawkyntang) protected by local communities as the abode of forest spirits (similar to the practices of my Gaelic ancestors) and as protected areas of biodiversity that simultaneously offer a space for prayer and ceremony as well as gathering medicine and food. The Khasi are a matrilineal society, and property ownership, including the land for these forest gardens, is traditionally passed down through the mother, which also governs how the forests are managed. The sacred groves and food forests, such as the famous Mawphlang Sacred Grove, cover over 78 hectares and act as a repository for rare plants, including those used in traditional medicinal practices (dawai khasi).

Double living root bridge in East Khasi Hills surrounded in food forests.

The living root bridges stacked with food forests found in Meghalaya are an example of sustainable indigenous bioengineering and regenerative agriculture in which the Khasi and Jaintia communities shape tree roots and tree species distribution into an enduring, living architecture and food production system.

• Maya Ancestors (Mesoamerica): The roots of the Maya milpa system, which incorporates trees and shrubs with crops like maize, beans, and squash to create a sustainable, biodiversity-rich ecosystem, were established in these early, long-term managed agricultural systems.

• The indigenous people of Turtle Island were using a combination of seed saving, coppicing, controlled brush burning and choice tree species planting to create a mosaic of anthropogenic forests in both what is now described as north western BC, Canada (modern day location of “Hazelton” and surrounding region) all the way East to what is now called Ontario, Quebec and south down to South Carlina and across to the middle Mississippi valley. Manmade Hickory and oak food forests existed where I live now (southern Ontario) and in modern day Memphis north to St. Louis and extending about 300 miles east and west of the river, mostly in Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky, and Tennessee in that time frame.

Our ancestors that saw this world through an animate worldview considered humans as possessing unique gifts that enriched the beauty and health of the earth, and they considered putting those gifts to good use for the benefit of all beings as a sacred duty. Some of them left behind a measurable and quantifiable legacy of increased biodiversity, soil depth, beauty and self-perpetuating food production systems that we still benefit from today (centuries to millennia later).

Human beings are not innately ecologically degenerative.

Anyone that tells you human beings are innately ecologically degenerative is pushing misanthropic propaganda.

Statist regimes and anthropocentric extractive worldviews on the other hand are indeed (IMO) inherently ecologically destructive.

As I explored in this article on Pine Trees and in my article on Oak Trees, governments incentivized clearcutting food forests and decimating ancient biodiverse ecosystems (that already produced copious amounts of food) sometimes just burning them to the ground so that people could claim “free land” “given” to them by the government.

Below is an account from Henry David Thoreau’s essay titled “Ktaadn” describing what he witnessed while travelling up the Penobscot River in Maine 180 years ago.

“The mode of clearing and planting is, to fell the trees, and burn once what will burn, then cut them up into suitable lengths, roll into heaps, and burn again; then, with a hoe, plant potatoes where you can come at the ground between the stumps and charred logs; for a first crop the ashes sufficing for manure, and no hoeing being necessary the first year. In the fall, cut, roll, and burn again, and so on, till the land is cleared; and soon it is ready for grain, and to be laid down..

The lumberers rarely trouble themselves to put out their fires, such is the dampness of the primitive forest; and this is one cause, no doubt, of the frequent fires in Maine, of which we hear so much on smoky days in Massachusetts. The forests are held cheap after the white pine has been culled out; and the explorers and hunters pray for rain only to clear the atmosphere of smoke (after they burn all the primary forest to the ground)..

..we began to follow an obscure trail up the northern bank of the Penobscot. There was now no road further, the river being the only highway. On either hand, and beyond, was a wholly uninhabited wilderness, stretching to Canada. Neither horse nor cow, nor vehicle of any kind, had ever passed over this ground; the cattle, and the few bulky articles which the loggers use, being got up in the winter on the ice, and down again before it breaks up. The evergreen woods had a decidedly sweet and bracing fragrance; the air was a sort of diet-drink, and we walked on buoyantly in Indian file, stretching our legs. Occasionally there was a small opening on the bank, made for the purpose of log-rolling, where we got a sight of the river,—-always a rocky and rippling stream. The roar of the rapids, the note of a whistler-duck on the river, of the jay and chica-dee around us, and of the pigeon-woodpecker in the openings, were the sounds that we heard..

..We came to the Mattaseunk stream and mill, where there was even a rude wooden railroad running down to the Penobscot, the last railroad we were to see. We crossed one tract, on the bank of the river, of more than a hundred acres of heavy timber, which had just been felled and burnt over, and was still smoking. Our trail lay through the midst of it, and was wellnigh blotted out. The trees lay at full length, four or five feet deep, and crossing each other in all directions, all black as charcoal, but perfectly sound within, still good for fuel or for timber; soon they would be cut into lengths and burnt again. Here were thousands of cords, enough to keep the poor of Boston and New York amply warm for a winter, which only cumbered the ground and were in the settler’s way. And the whole of that solid and interminable forest is doomed to be gradually devoured thus by fire, like shavings, and no man be warmed by it.

..The mission of men there seems to be, like so many busy demons, to drive the forest all out of the country, from every solitary beaver-swamp and mountain-side, as soon as possible.”

- Henry David Thoreau (1846)

The propagandists of industrial civilization would have you believe that the behavior described above by Henry David Thoreau above (which resulted in what you see in the map above) was unfortunate but inevitable and unavoidable but such narratives are either based in ignorance or are an intentional attempt at obfuscation and gaslighting.

Here where I currently live (known by most as south western “Ontario”, “Canada”) the majority of the local population are ignorant to these facts and have been raised to believe that all the forests had to be felled and cleared so we could grow food.

Look at the map below and then watch the following videos for context:

What was once a thriving forest ecosystem with Paw Paw (Asimina triloba) groves thriving underneath a 100 foot high plus super canopy of Butternut, Eastern White Pine, Sycamore, Black Walnut, American Beech, Shellbark (“Kingnut”) Hickory, Shagbark Hickory, Sugar Maple and Tulip trees with large tracts of anthropogenic food forest mixed in is now mostly GMO soy and corn fields, strip malls, hydroponic greenhouses, factories and concrete.

Based on my research and field expeditions I estimate that no more than one tenth of once percent of the original forests (untended primary Carolinian Forest, which stretched from horizon to horizon as well as anthropogenic old growth food forests, which used to cover tens of thousands of acres here in Essex county alone) still exist today.

Essex County, Southern Ontario, today, over 1700 square kilometers with less than 1.6 square kilometers of primary forest remaining. Mostly toxic and soil degrading GMO corn and soy fields, some patches of untended second growth forest, with a growing number of toxic chemical dependent, fracking extracted petroleum gas dependent hydroponic greenhouse operations suffocating the land in and around Leamington.

The most aggressive and arrogant deforestation of Southern Ontario (peaking in a clearcutting frenzy about 120 years ago) was in large part instigated and encouraged by the “Dominion of Canada” government putting out advertisements offering “free land” to anyone that would clear the forest, sell the old growth trees to the military for their ship masts and grow a monoculture annual crop on the land. The government propaganda conditioned settlers to view the forest as an “obstacle” and something that needed to be cleared to bring “order” to the land.

One of the most vivid description of the extremely productive ancient Food Forests of Eastern North America I have encountered so far comes from an early pioneer from the state of Michigan, 1884.

“In the forest we found the whole family of oaks, of the Michigan family, some twelve different kinds, and among them the burr oak, bearing an acorn good to eat, and on which hogs would fatten. In the timbered lands were the new trees called the basswood, of which the best timber for building was made; and the black walnut, more valuable than cherry for cabinet work. It also bore a large and very rich nut, and with it were the whole family of the hickories, all bearing good eatable nuts. Besides these were the butternut, the beechnut, and the hazelnut, all bearing an abundance of their fruit. Throughout the woods we saw the grape-vine hanging from the trees laden with its fruit. We saw vast thickets and long rifts of blackberry bushes lately burdened with their tempting berries. And we were told that the woods and hillsides and openings, in their season were fairly red with the largest and most delicious strawberries, while the wild plum grew along the small streams, the huckleberry and the cranberry on the marshes, and the aromatic sassafras was found throughout the woods. The annual fires burnt up the underwood, decayed trees, vegetation, and debris, in the oak openings, leaving them clear of obstructions. You could see through the trees in any direction, save where the irregularity of the surface intervened, for miles around you, and you could walk, ride on horse-back, or drive in a wagon wherever you pleased in these woods, as freely as you could in a neat and beautiful park.”

“Pioneer Annals” by A. D. P. Van Buren, in “Report of the Pioneer Society of the State of Michigan”, Volume 5, 1884, pg. 250.

Just like here in southern Ontario, 99.9% of ancient food forests in Michigan are all chopped down now except for fragment remnants.

Contrary to what Big Ag academics will tell you, none of that was necessary. People could have left 75% of that forest intact and had populations of humans living here the same as today (and eating a better diet than most do today from a food forest).

We know from ethnographic and historical research that many human cultures have held biocentric and animist views and also lived in balance with their ecosystems. For example in books like The Dark Emu and The Largest Estate On Earth the authors explore how Australian indigenous peoples created advanced riparian zone and tidal zone enhancing farming systems that involved reverence and recognition of the spirit of eels and other beings they farmed and hunted, in Tending the Wild the author explores the oak forest tending people of California that see trees as elders, teachers and providers and in dissertations such as Lyla June’s Architects of Abundance: Indigenous Regenerative Food and Land Management Systems and the Excavation of Hidden History she explores how many peoples of pre-colonial Turtle Island shaped entire ecosystems regeneratively with an animistic ethos, in Ropes to God: Experiencing the Bushman Spiritual Universe, Bradford Keeney describes the African Bushman tribe’s innate connections with their surroundings. Keeney has a number of works on the Kalahari Bushman peoples, and they all are fascinating accounts of people who clearly recognize the equality of themselves and all life and who work to build spiritual connections to that larger world. We can see many more examples of these in the Graeber and Wengrow book, The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity (where they explore the concept of human freedom, among others). In fact, the idea of an animistic and biocentric society is so threatening to those carrying anthropocentric views that indigenous cultures carrying such views are often the tragic subject of mass genocide and intentional cultural erasure (and inserting implanted anthropocentric sociopolitical worldviews in the place of animism). This is what the government of Canada and churches stated the explicit purpose was for the “residential schools” (“re-education” concentration camps) here in Canada.

While increasing our population even more may not be wise, our great numbers could translate into great quantities of food forests, regenerative ocean gardens and regenerative home gardens that increase beauty, biodiversity, stabilizing erratic weather, cleaning water and leaving a legacy of abundance and spiritual nourishment for future generations.

The same human hands that destroy can create wondrous things … humanity can be a balm for the living earth instead of a plague. It requires a shift in perspective and abandoning inherently anthropocentric and degenerative belief systems like statism and our refocusing our creative gifts locally to our watersheds and bioregions. It requires a handful of seeds and a heart full of faith and it necessitates embracing an animate worldview that promotes reciprocity based relationships with our fellow beings.

And contrary to what conventional misanthropic ecologist academics may tell you about how clearing forests was necessary for a growing population, regenerative agroforestry was (and is) capable of supporting a much larger population density than grain agriculture, so that argument is fallacious.

In school we learn about how much “arable” land that is available to grow food (with maps like the one shown below by the USGS)

according to the big ag academics the green areas are the only places you can grow food (and food can only be grown in biodiversity stripped monocultures) they are mistaken.

That map above represents a massive failure of imagination and exemplifies the ecological illiteracy embedded within the dominant statist institutions guiding modern industrial civilization.

Large portions of the green areas they highlighted on the map (which the conventional academic thinkers will tell you should be ecologically sacrificed for monoculture farming) either were food forests or could be a food forest (perennial polyculture regenerative food system involving beings like Buffalo).

The areas I have circled in blue could be cultivating crops like this, this, this, and this.

The areas circled in orange could be cultivating crops like this, this and this.

The Ancient cultures of what is now called “Australia” had advanced regenerative farming techniques that functioned for millennia and were lightyears beyond the feeble and extractive imperialistic grain farming and sheep livestock farming imported there by anthropocentric cultures. We can and should revitalize those ways of cultivating food.

Many areas that have been desertified are landscapes that could be re-hydrated and reforested using regenerative techniques.

Many of the tropical rainforest regions on this map (circled in pink) either already contain ancient food forests (not recognized as food production systems by idiotic monoculture thinking profit minded academics) or could be tended as regenerative agroforestry farms (without diminishing biodiversity nor requiring large amounts of deforestation).

And as you have seen if you read my most recent in depth regenerative agroforestry design focused article on shiitake mushrooms, or this note, or this note (on Oyster mushroom cultivation), nutrient dense edible fungi can be cultivated in the vast majority of the landmass of Earth (both inside and outside, using free materials). Where old growth predominantly evergreen (coniferous) forests are the natural expression of a climax ecosystem in places like the PNW of Turtle Island, the shade provided by the giant ancient trees provide shade for cultivating mushrooms on hardwood logs and many high value rhizomatous plants and shade loving berries/vines can be cultivated in those intact ecosystems (enabling ancient forest ecology to remain intact while feeding people and providing ecological benefits for local communities).

What about regenerative ocean farming? (the areas of the map shown below could all be cultivated as regenerative kelp food forest farms with adjasent regenerative tidal zone gardens.

What about the potential for goats, Pinenut cultivation and resilient niche medicinal crops on mountainous landscapes?

Wild Buffalo roaming free within Hickory / Oak Savanah food forests ?

All of those things can be cultivated and thrive within a functioning forest ecosystem.

Conventional grain agriculture, when highly intensified, can support roughly 1,300 persons/km² of arable land. That form of food cultivation decimates soil ecology and desertifies once lush biodiverse landscapes.

If you are unfamiliar with Dave Montgomery’s books shown in the image below, watch this presentation for some basic data.

Regenerative agroforestry systems have been proven to be capable of sustaining high population densities ( 1,300–2,300 persons/km²) depending on bioregion, while maintaining a lush forest ecology that simultaneously cleans and produces water, soil and clean air. And that does not even account for stacking mushroom cultivation within those systems which would enhance that number significantly.

So no, human “progress” does not require the destruction of forests. That is, unless you define “progress” as imperialistic expansion of hubristic anthropocentric cultures. The story of scarcity we have been told is a fallacy, a manufactured crisis and failure of imagination. We each have the potential to either be part of a keystone species or keep feeding into their imperialistic and anthropocentric scarcity generating systems.

Rather, real human “progress”, is in my opinion, something that can serve to regenerate, protect and enrich forest habitats (while supporting a relatively high population density). And it is that type of progress that I work towards and gather knowledge to empower others interested in working towards as well.

---

In closing I will share a couple quotes from a book I feel can offer a great starting point for those that want to embark on a path to become an agent of regeneration and abundance (a member of a Keystone Species).

“The best way to create change is to create alternative options that are so much more appealing than the status quo. For example, let’s say you are concerned about palm oil plantations destroying rain forests in Southeast Asia. You could tell everyone you can to stop buying palm oil; you can make a video about it, write a book describing the horrors of deforestation and the loss of orangutans. You can shout and shout about it, but at the end of the day, people are often going to buy what is on the shelf at the store. If you wanted to get people to buy less palm oil, then at some point you have to offer an alternative, and it should be better than palm oil. Telling people all about the hazelnuts you grow and process into oil is a lot more inspiring than trying to make them feel guilty about buying palm oil. You will get a lot more traction by offering something new or creating positive choices for folks to make. If you just say no all the time, then you are actually a negative force. To create positive change, we have to be a creative, positive force. It is much harder than traditional protests. It takes a lot of energy, knowledge, inspiration, and faith. That faith comes from understanding our sphere of influence.

People care what happens on this planet. The media and mainstream public are not so aware of this, but you should be. A lot of people care. I know: I speak to them all the time because of my work. There are many people who really care about frogs and rivers and oceans. There are countless people who love nature, are inspired by her, and value nature beyond any measure of money. I don’t know why we are not more widely represented, but I do know that I can be a voice for nature. I refuse to be shy about how much I love trees and wildlife. If people think that’s weird, I think they are weird. I love the Earth. In fact, how ridiculous is it to not love the Earth? And yet people will label you for doing so. They will call you a tree hugger or a radical. I think it is radical to cut down 95 percent of our forests, plow up all the grasslands, poison rivers until they are undrinkable, and kill people for cheaper oil. I don’t think I’m a radical compared with the actions of my civilization. The weird thing is that most people in this civilization agree with me. They love trees and rivers and wildlife. We are all just caught up with the movement of the herd. We can see that the herd is not going the best way, but so many of us are not saying anything about it even though we care. When you speak up about your love for nature, you will be surprised at how many people feel the same way. But the important thing is to not just speak about it. You’ve got to do something.

As humans we have a tremendous amount of power at our disposal. We can use our power in any direction. It’s not necessarily positive or negative, creative or destructive; it is simply power. We can use our power to foster staggering abundance and diversity or we can use it to create a mass extinction. We can steer our power in many directions.

The human species can be caretakers for wildlife. We can enhance habitat more profoundly than any other animal. Beavers have their role, slowing creeks into ponds. Bees pollinate flowers, herbivores enrich the soil, birds spread seeds ... every species has its role, its contribution.

Ours has become lost to us, but it is one we can regain.

There was a time when humans enhanced habitat. They did it for themselves, as all animals do. It was beneficial to have large populations of wildlife for hunting. Forests were thinned heavily, grasslands were burned, fruit and nut trees encouraged. The results were abundant ecosystems that fed people and wildlife. Yet today we believe that food comes from farms and that farms are big open fields of one crop. The truth is much more complicated.

I believe there may have been more food in America before European contact than there is today. If you think that’s crazy, consider these facts.
Today there are 80 million cattle in the United States compared with an estimated 60 million wild bison 500 years ago. Pound for pound that’s about the same, and those bison lived without fences, feed, antibiotics, or water inputs. They reproduced without artificial insemination. Those bison also lived alongside massive herds of elk, antelope, and deer, all of which fed on perennial grasses that never needed irrigation because their roots extended dozens of feet beneath the surface of the American prairie. There are stories of salmon filling rivers. Sturgeon spawns that fed ancient cities, billions of shellfish, and massive nut trees, like the ancient American chestnuts that covered the ground with nuts a foot deep. I’m not going to attempt to do the math, but I think the loss of fish, large herbivores, and giant nut trees has not been equally replaced with the calories that industrialized agriculture provides.

There is a fallacy that North America was once a wild continent where nature abounded because the people were simple and primitive. This is a lie propagated by a European culture that was blind to the decimated civilization they encountered. They could not see the managed landscape because it did not fit into their idea of farming They did not see the millions of people who died in the wake of disease that spread faster than they did. There were cities in North and South America that were as big as any in the world at the time. Cahokia was a city in Ohio that had trade routes established from Nova Scotia to the Rocky Mountains.

If you have not read Charles Mann’s book 1491, I cannot recommend it highly enough. It shattered my beliefs about the American wilder-ness. This “pristine” land was managed by people. America was home to the largest forest gardens in the world, and to thriving cities. It was as populated as Asia or Europe at the time before contact. We were all lied to in school. Perhaps you heard the story of Cortés conquering the Aztec empire with a few dozen soldiers on horseback. The truth is, Cortés enlisted the help of the Aztec’s rivals. Along with 200,000 native soldiers, Cortés fought the Aztec in one of the largest battles in ancient history. I don’t know why we were lied to, why we were taught that Native American contributions were small and insignificant-that they were just simple nature lovers. Perhaps our teachers’ teachers could not bear the thought of living on top of a decimated civilization that was able to thrive without degrading the environment. They felt too guilty, or maybe they were blinded by racism. Just remember, our version of history has been passed down to us by people who fully believed in slavery, oppression of women, and the white man’s burden.

Im sure there are lots of other things they left out. Archaeologists are discovering many of them today. It has been our belief that the Amazon was always a wilderness. We are now learning that it was home to a great civilization with extensive trade networks, enormous orchards. and one of the biggest cities of the ancient world, rivaling Egypt’s. An entire civilization vanished from disease, leaving behind pottery shards, deep black soil, and giant food trees that still live today. These people knew how to stabilize tropical soils; they knew how to live in a way that enriched the land around them. They left behind some clues for us to learn how they did it.

Without a history of lies, we can see that people are able to thrive and nature can thrive at the same time. I actually believe that we can’t thrive without vibrant nature. If you think our civilization is thriving. consider our rates of suicide, depression, and complaining. People in my country are among the richest and most miserable people in the world.
Many of us hold deep-seated guilt about destroying oceans, rain forests, and the future, whether we admit it or not. No one feels good about the destruction of nature, not even the most narcissistic billionaire holed up in his tower. People care about nature; it is part of who we are. It tugs on all of our heartstrings.

It is in my best interests to stabilize and build soil, to have high populations of bats and insect-eating birds, and to maintain a highly diverse plant community. I pull carbon out of the sky, not because I am concerned about climate change, but because the trees I grow make money, pay my bills, and feed my family. It’s important for caretaking to be in the best interests of everyone. Drawing a line on a map and designating a wildlife sanctuary only goes so far. We need land for growing food and for people’s houses. We do not need bare-dirt monoculture farming and tract housing with sterile landscape shrubs next to the pristine, untouched nature preserve. We can have diverse farms that build soil and increase biodiversity. We can have neighborhoods filled with fruit and nut trees, berry bushes, medicinal flowering perennials, and gardens. Caretaking benefits us as much as it benefits wildlife. To draw a line between us and nature hurts everyone involved.

Nature, the ecosystem, is everywhere, in every neighborhood and city that has a plant. You don’t have to drive to a national park to see an eco-system. There is one right outside your door. It may be dysfunctional, but it is there, waiting for your hands.

Perhaps you have heard the phrase Leave no trace or Take only pictures.
This epitomizes thinking in the environmental movement-that nature is fragile and needs protection. The truth is, we are all part of nature.

It cannot be separated by lines on a map. Our involvement in nature can enhance or hinder biodiversity. It is a matter of making educated choices. Instead of trying to have as little impact as possible, I want to have a huge impact. I want to leave behind millions of trees, a bunch of ponds, enriched soil, and wild stories. If the goal of environmentalists is to have no impact, then the best thing they could do would be to die— that would have the least impact. Even in death, though, their body will feed the soil. We.are having an impact no matter what. Make it one that you are proud of. If you are not sure how to do that, then listen closely to the world. Look at nature everywhere you go and see what is happening. Learn to identify plants and trees so that you can actually read the story being told by the world, not the news. If you seek a path forward, you will find it. Nature is talking loudly all the time; you have just been domesticated and conditioned not to hear her. Learn as much as you can about trees, plants, animals, fungi, and ecosystems, and you will see so many places where you can step in and become a powerful positive force. In fact, once you are able to see what is happening in ecosystems, you will find yourself with nowhere near enough time to act out all your inspirations.”

- Akiva Silver (from “Trees of Power: Ten Essential Arboreal Allies” cover shown below)

“It’s about signing that contract -committing to the deed of planting trees- and then carrying out our part of the agreement. It is an optimist’s manual of solutions- not easy or quick duct-tape fixes to environmental problems, but real, good, long-term answers to the question of how to be fully and vibrantly human in a world of Nature.

It is not a map to the high end of a sinking Titanic, nor a cry to bring out the lifeboats. We are not aboard a doomed ship, bobbing in a frigid sea; we are on Earth, exactly where we are supposed to be, surrounded by all that we need, in a garden that wants tending.

Akiva and I know that work well: the dirty fingers and worn hands of a planter, transplanter, pruner, thinner, mulcher, weeder. This is followed by the heart-pounding thrill of harvest-filling sacks of nuts, baskets of apples, tubs of berries, barrels of sap, boatloads of wild rice. Next comes the deep satisfaction of turning that harvest into food: bottles of delicious nut oils, golden maple syrup, cider and applesauce, fruit leather, flour. This wholesome tending to the process of life leaves a warm glow in our hearts, the deep comfort of living in a world of life-giving trees. Yes, there is work to do - marvelous work, the kind that to chipmunks and orioles is just life.

Trees beckon us to sit at their feet, humbly, and listen. They speak of the supposedly distant past, reminding us that it was scarcely more than yesterday. They link us to a future that becomes, through them, imaginable, almost palpable. Perhaps we cannot guess what the future holds, but we can plant it. We do not have to be shortsighted just because we are short. Trees are the answer to so many of our ills, and the ladder to so many of our dreams. They are the arms and hands of the Earth, reaching up to the heavens on our behalf, grasping the slippery currency of sunlight and rendering it, through their wondrous alchemy, into the stuff of life-our life and theirs. All the trees ask in return for that gift is that we live and work among them. Their leaves whisper of an alternative economy, serving different values, that will be here, scarcely more than tomorrow.”

—Samuel Thayer (in the forward for “Trees of Power: Ten Essential Arboreal Allies Book” by Akiva Silver)

---