Why Perennials
| From a Plants For A Future leaflet by Ken Fern, author of the book 'Plants For A Future'
Sitting on a coach on the way home from London, I was eating a meal that included roasted chestnuts. Opposite me were a couple of people eating sandwiches. I started to think about the different foods we were eating. Nutritionally they were somewhat similar, both chestnuts and wheat being good sources of carbohydrate, though the chestnuts are rather lower in protein. I then thought about the work involved in growing, harvesting and utilizing each of these foods.
With the sweet chestnuts all you have to do (once the trees have been planted and are old enough to bear fruit) is come along in the autumn and harvest the seeds - the plants will continue to yield for possibly hundreds of years without any
help from you. With the wheat, however, it is quite a different matter. Here the ground must be cultivated every year in order to prepare a seed bed; the seed must then be sown; a method found of controlling the weeds; fertilizers added in order to achieve satisfactory yields; fungicides and insecticides applied in order to control pests and diseases and then large machinery used in order to harvest the crop.
This is all so much extra work, particularly when you consider that, even with all this effort put into growing it, the
yields of wheat will still be less than the yields of chestnuts could be from the same area of ground. It made me wonder why
on earth people had fallen into the trap of growing annual crops.
When you go on to consider the wider effects of growing annual crops such as wheat compared with tree and other
perennial crops then the issue seems to move from the farcical to the totally ridiculous. Not only have we given ourselves so
much extra work for lower returns, we have also devised a method of growing our food that is extremely damaging to our
environment and to all the plants and creatures that live in it (which includes us of course).
Let me try and explain this in more detail and, as an example, let me first look at a field of wheat and then compare
this with a woodland.
Annual monoculture
In a field of wheat all the plants have the same nutritional requirements, their roots occupy the same levels in the soil
and will only be able to obtain nutrients from this one level of the soil. Any nutrients that have been washed lower down into
the soil will be lost to the plants and will eventually find their way into the water system either to be washed out to sea or to
pollute our drinking water. Genetically very similar, these plants are all susceptible to the same pests and diseases and all have
similar climatic requirements. If one suffers, they all suffer. The system is dependent on large inputs of fertilisers, herbicides,
pesticides, fungicides etc. The soil is little more than a medium to hold the plant up, and even this it is becoming less able to do
well as soil structure and depth are destroyed. The Fenlands, for example, are losing 30 mm of topsoil every year.
A field of wheat is like a desert to most of our wild animals and plants - the intensive growing regime means that very
few species of plants will be able to grow in the field and thus there will be very few animals that will be able to survive in and
around the field. In the edition of The Guardian newspaper dated 12/08/94 there was an article about the declining
population of some of our commonest species of birds. Apparently, in the period between 1969 and 1991 tree sparrow
populations declined by 85%, corn bunting by 76%, grey partridge by 73%, turtle doves by 75% and skylarks by 50%. The
article went on to blame current agricultural practices that have seen hedgerows destroyed, meadows ploughed up and fields
harvested before the birds had a chance to finish rearing their young. It said that the dawn chorus, that enchanting time of the
morning when the air is alive to the sound of bird song, is heard no more in many parts of E. Anglia, where an eerie silence
now greets the dawn.
It can be argued that yields of wheat have increased dramatically in the last 100 years, from around 1 ton per acre at
the beginning of the century to 3 tons or more now. But is this sustainable? No it is not! In fact when you take into account all
the energy that is expended in making the farm machinery, in fuelling it, in making the fertilisers etc. and all the other things
that need to be done in order to produce the food, far more energy is actually used up in growing the food than the food itself
yields in energy! This ridiculous state of affairs is only possible due to the current abundance of fossil fuels, but how long are
they going to last?
Woodland systems
The canopy of trees creates a sheltered and more stable environment
inside the woodland. Temperature fluctuations are less extreme than in
an open field, there is less wind and frost and so plants are less
subject to the vagaries of our weather. Because of all the different
available habitats there is a wide range of creatures able to live in
the woodland and the more diverse the numbers of species that live in
an eco-system, the more stable it becomes. The force of the rain is
broken by the trees and the rich carpet of organic matter in a woodland
absorbs the rain and allows it to drain into the soil and enhance the
water table instead of running off into the rivers and thence to the
sea, taking valuable soil and nutrients with it.
There are various fungal and bacterial activities taking place on the root systems of the woodland plants which
increase the abilities of plants to take up nutrients from the soil and also produce nutrients for all the plants to utilise. Recent
research has demonstrated that the greater the diversity of plants growing in an area then the greater the total amount of
growth that takes place. Thus we see that a woodland is not only self-sustaining and highly productive, it can also lead to a
gradual build-up of fertility, unlike annually cultivated soil which needs constant inputs if it is to remain fertile.
The value of diversity.
There was an article in the Spring 1994 edition of 'Kew' magazine. It was talking about a group of chimpanzees that
live in a small area of forest, called Gombe, in Africa. The forest is a reserve and is surrounded by cultivated land. The article
continued:-
'Outside Gombe, the local people are struggling to live off perhaps 30 different types of
foods, mostly introduced species of plants grown in drought conditions on easily eroded soils....
But the chimps seem to be expert botanists, knowing exactly where and when the next crop of fruit
will be. There may be only six major plant foods each month but, over the year, more than 150
species are used.
Some of the fruits they eat are delicious and they can certainly teach us a great deal about a
balanced diet and preventative health-care. But although a lot is known about the chimps' social
behaviour, our understanding of their botanical knowledge and its significance to us is in its
infancy. Few of their food plants have been tested for nutrients or medicinal properties.'
It seems that the chimpanzees are more intelligent than we are!
Selecting the plants.
The main difficulty is that people have been selectively breeding the traditional annual crops over a period of
thousands of years. In that time the cultivated plants have often changed dramatically from the original wild species
(cauliflowers, brussel sprouts and cabbage all derive from the same wild plant) whilst the taste and yield has also undergone
great changes. Thus the cultivated lettuce was derived from a bitter tasting poisonous plant and the wild ancestor of carrots has
a thin woody root that really does not make very pleasant eating.
This selective breeding, however, has also had a number of disadvantages. We might have ended up with a lettuce
that has mild flavoured leaves that go well in a salad, but we also have a plant that is very susceptible to pests and diseases,
whilst it also requires a lot of attention when growing since it is unable to compete with most other plants. Thus if anyone
wants to eat lettuce all the year round they have to sow seed on at least 10 occasions over the year - which means preparing
the soil, weeding, watering if the weather is dry, trying to prevent the plants running to seed if the weather is hot and trying to
prevent them rotting if the weather is wet. We also have to supply nutrients and organic matter to the soil if we are to produce
a good quality plant. Even with all this attention, we will produce a plant that is considerably lower in nutrients than the wild
plant it was bred from.
Most of the perennial plants that we recommend for woodland plantings have never been selectively bred for yields,
flavour etc. Thus the harvest might be lower than you would expect from cultivated annuals, or it might be more fiddly - but
all the plants on the lists below produce very tasty crops. Once established these plants will continue to yield their harvests for
many years with very little work on behalf of the grower. Not only that, but they will tend to suffer far less from pests and
diseases, will not require much in the way of fertilising and will be far more resilient to the vagaries of the weather. Since
many different species will be able to occupy the same area of land, overall yields can be much higher than from annual
plants. There is also a lot of scope for careful selective breeding in order to produce more productive and easier to harvest
cultivars. Any selective breeding, however, should always take into account any potential negative effects on the plants.
A woodland garden.
There is no space in this leaflet to talk about the plants that can be grown in this woodland system - if you would like
more information on these then please ask for our leaflet titled
Woodland Garden Plants.
However, I would like to list just a
few of the plants that you could be growing to supply food all the year round.
Visit the Plants For A Future website for further information.
|