I observe this not to discourage conversation on these topics, but
to remind people that past messages are archived in a variety of
places. Searching there before starting or restarting discussion
serves efficiency and is easy--and also includes perspectives of
those who have already shared them (one of the joys of an archived
list server). And that way, people can move on to discussing, from
whatever perspective, emerging issues.
1. The SAN Web site, whose home page is at:
archives both SARE publications and project information *and* SAN
There is a site search engine at SAN's home page; click on the word
SEARCH on the left of the screen.
For instance, searching on
<cover crops AND kill>
yields these links:
1: Managing Cover Crops Profitably, Part2
Score: 1000, Size: 37 kbytes, Type: HTML file
2: Managing Cover Crops Profitably Part 1
Score: 875, Size: 50 kbytes, Type: HTML file
3: Managing Cover Crops Profitably, Part 3
Score: 750, Size: 57 kbytes, Type: HTML file
4: SARE 1998 Project Highlights
Score: 500, Size: 43 kbytes, Type: HTML file
That on-line version of the Cover Crops book is packed with info,
which was recently updated by SAN and is now available in print.
2. You can view past SANET messages and discussion threads by going
to the SAN Web site, then click on the word SANET-mg (on the left).
The first-level organizing principle is that messages are organized
by blocks of time. Go to a block, then sort the messages within that
time-frame by author, date, or subject. You can then use the "find"
feature on your browser to seek different topics.
3. In addition, various other folks have archived SANET messages.
There is a Webbed gopher (strange beast, but dang can it swim) in
The first-order organizing principle is topic (like pesticides, weed
management, agricultural politics). I was under the impression that
this archive was no longer being maintained...yet I found some rather
recent SANET stuff in it tonight.
4. The newsgroups
bitl.sanet (on IGC only)
archive SANET traffic; depending on how your Internet news service is
set up, you might be able to review the entire archive and search it.
The IGC one, which (used to? still does?) echo/es the list goes all
the way back to '91.
5. Another strategy is to search with AltaVista or another search
engine on <SANET> plus a topic. I regularly find variously archived
SANET traffic that way. AltaVista has an advanced search engine that
allows Boolean operations (AND, OR, etc.)---it's simple to use, too.
I'm sure there is other stuff out there as well. Not to mention that
a number of these topics are covered on other newsgroups, mailing
lists, and Web sites.
Again, this is *not* intended to discourage discussion. But it seems
to me no more "practical" to demand that everyone keep rehashing the
same old discussions of production methods than it does to, say,
tolerate and encourage those who wish to discuss emerging
sustainable food system issues, like:
-- farmers' and consumers' concerns about the evolution of the
organic standards debate or
-- farmers' and consumers' concerns about the political economy of
-- the place of ethics and spirit in a food system steeped in profit
and high technology/non-scale-neutral fixes for social problems or
-- the concerns of African-American/Black or women farmers or
Nor does it make sense to me to assume that Controlling open exchange
will somehow generate "better" discussion. That assumption is part of
why so many peer-reviewed journals are of no use whatever to those of
us in the field. Ag science has often had its head up its tailpipe in
this century...and sustainable ag is in its third decade of
challenging that in a comprehensive, empowered way.
It mystifies me to have people on a sustainable ag list server
telling others what to think and threatening to leave because they
don't like what's being shared or how it's being shared or "voting"
on how to silence them. Or using land ownership or full-time farming
or a Ph.D. as a criterion for evaluating people's contributions. Or
making comments about how people express themselves. Those are the
tactics of snobs and bullies. It aches me to see them here.
Especially given the number of people I've had e-mail me to say they
are afraid to post to SANET, for fear of being taken apart by people
whose apparently skipped the Manners part of kindergarten.
I'm reminded of a dialogue from Plato--the /Phaedrus/. It has to do
with the relationship between written information (scratches on
pages) or the opinions of the famous...and the pursuit of true
knowledge (which Socrates said had a "soul").There was also
something about the value of dialogue between people of very
different viewpoints. I'll dig it up. There's a wonderful bit about
listening to the oracle-oaks of Dodona, rather than Experts. Reminds
me of that disreputable shamanic ideologue cheddarhead Aldo Leopold,
who opined that even the land should have a voice in agriculture.
But you know that postmodern/new age ontological relativist
Socrates--talking to trees, asking questions, corrupting the
young, all that.
Well, they made sure he got *his* cup of hemlock, didn't they?
Finally, to my virtual grazing compadre Greg Gunthorp. What some
call bullshit is what others have observed to be the parent of
compost and therefore soil. (See Walt Whitman, /This Compost/, posted
here by Willie Lockeretz in I think 1994.) So long as the warm dark
seething transformations not starved of light and air.
Michele Gale-Sinex, communications manager
Center for Integrated Ag Systems
UW-Madison College of Ag and Life Sciences
Voice: (608) 262-8018 FAX: (608) 265-3020
Salamanders are important. --Mister 3D
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command