Seeds of Change, a US and British seed seller, want you to Dig Your Dinner (and maybe even lunch).
They’ve launched a campaign (with cool graphics) to promote gardening. While you may not join the program (for £20) and receive their seeds, you can heed their message.
In addition to the often-discussed benefits of gardening (eating really local, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, the ability to eat organic, propagating endangered varieties), I believe that growing your own food will reduce waste.
If you put in the time to reap and sow your own produce (not to mention setting up your beds, weeding, etc.), you’re less likely to let it go for naught. And while you may have an abundance of crops mid-summer, you’ll learn to cook and can or find neighbors happy to take handouts.
Seeds of Change’s message is a timely reminder, as now is a great time to start planning your garden. And a backyard plot (big or small!) makes a great new year’s resolution. So come on, people–can you dig it? (Couldn’t resist.)
10 Comments
I like how some communities have gardens available for rent. I live in a condo, and do not have sufficient bright light or space to grow anything that I am interested in eating.
Has anyone tried those plug in garden things, aeroplants, I think they are called?
I haven’t tried aeroplants, but I want to second your idea on community gardens. I grew up across the street from rentable plots and I’ve seen them in some really urban areas. I was thinking of this option, but didn’t spell it out. Thanks!
P.S. if no space is officially available nearby, there’s always guerrilla gardening on forsaken land. Shhh.
Yea, there’s guerrilla gardening, which is pretty awesome. Also, you can do window boxes; at CHOW we have a window box program where people plant window boxes for donation, and we also have a “plant a row” program, where people in the community plant a row in their own gardens for donation. Also, with the foreclosure and real estate crises, there are cities all over the country that are putting liens on property, and even eventually gaining control of plots of land. In some cases, the city even plows over condemned houses and takes control of the land. Here in Binghamton, they have been plowing over houses and back-filling the property, planting grass and building fences. We’re looking into getting control of some of those plots for community gardens. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some vacant lots in your city, owned by the city, that the city would be happy to have turned into green spaces.
Peace and Love,
Dan
Oh, come on guys – illegally using someone else’s land? That’s just plain not right! You know better!!!
I’m still looking at alternatives, eventually I’ll find something.
My legal team advises me to write: No further comment.
But seriously, I’m not advocating guerrilla gardening…just saying some people do it. And some do it quite well. Many do it for public beautification, not growing veggies.
I’m sure you’ll find the right solution for you.
GLM,
I’m not talking about growing pot in the middle of someone’s rows of corn here. I’m talking about using vacant arable land for growing food.
Technically speaking, someone could argue that taking food waste from a dumpster is trespassing and theft. As a matter of fact, I’ve been arrested for just that. Did I think it was “just plain not right,” because I was told that that was the case? No. I assessed the situation, and realized that if people were going hungry all around me while other people were “just plain right,” so far as the law is concerned, when they trash edible food, then right and wrong must not be figuring into the situation.
In his Second Treatise on Civil Government, John Locke says that a man has a right to the fruits of his labor, and that when a man leaves those fruits on the ground to rot, another man has the right to procure them and put them to good use. The idea of absentee ownership–the idea that someone can own something that they do not use or personally labor for–is a relatively new invention. If a person owns something, but does not use it–and in the case of guerrilla gardening, does not even notice that someone has planted crops on their land and worked the earth from sow to harvest–then they simply have no qualm with the guerrilla gardener.
Part of pulling off an operation like that is not getting caught (because even if you know the law to be unjust, you also know the consequences which the law can bring to bear upon you). This means that much of the land that is guerrilla gardened is abandoned (if not legally, then quite literally)and should be worked, if someone is willing to work it. I say, more power to the guerrillas (both food recovery guerrillas, and food production guerrillas).
Of course, I don’t suspect that Jon has anything further to say on this subject and I appreciate the space in which to have the conversation nonetheless.
Peace and Love,
Dan
Nice one, Dan. You’re right–I don’t have anything to add to your informed treatise.
I do:
An unjust law is still a law. You have the right in this country to advocate for change. It’s a shame that instead you’re taking the attitude that you’re “special” and those laws don’t have to apply to you. Taking an approach of entitlement instead of activism is sad, but I see that more and more these days.
It’s too bad, Jonathan, that you agree that you’re too special to follow the rules like everyone else. Good luck with your blog.
Gretchen
Gretchen,
Please don’t put words in my mouth. I don’t think anyone is saying they are “too special” to follow the rules, but Dan seems to be advocating for disobeying laws he views as unjust. As long as someone is willing to accept the consequences–usually getting arrested–what’s the problem? I think a little civil disobedience can be healthy from time to time (Jim Crow laws, war on false pretenses).
I agree that activism is important, but some people would argue that putting derelict land to good use is just that.
For the record, I am fortunate enough to not have to think about breaking the law to grow crops because I have a backyard. For that property, I pay my fair share of taxes (i.e. following the rules).
I hope you’ll keep reading and making the discussion interesting by challenging what you believe is wrong. But I disagree with your take on the issue that a law should never be challenged. I think it’s more complex than that.
Gretchen,
Sorry about the miscommunication. I was trying to express my sense that some laws can and should be disobeyed, but that those who disobey them must be aware of the consequences, and that those consequences may come to bear upon them. As an activist it seems important–in order to raise up the issues which demand your attention–to see the many tools at your disposal for bringing about some semblance of change. Some tools are as crude as the issues are difficult; some methods may be righteous while others remain necessary and what is practical so very often lacks compassion.
Risk and sacrifice are important aspects of raising any social issue to the level of public awareness and discourse. I would hate to see you disengage from this or any forum (which addresses important issues), because of miscommunication, or disagreement.
Peace and Love,
Dan
P.S. When Jon said “I agree” he was referring to my statement that he didn’t have anything further to say on the subject. He wasn’t actually saying “I agree with what you have said, Dan” which may be where some of this confusion is coming from.