[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: fence posts




I am not talking abstractly of ideals. I am speaking specifically of the
decision of either charring wood to preserves its resistance versus using a
toxic chemical.

Let us not forget that we must use technology that is now known to be not
the most ecologically economic, only if we need to. Char if you have enough
breathing forest around you to filter the amount of toxins released. This
knoweldge  can be deduced from observation. Leaching toxins into the soil
every 10 or so feet that will eventually find underground water flow is not
a good decision if other less toxic methods are available.
If you feel that burning wood to create coals would produce more toxins than
soil based ones and water based ones with chemical fence-posting, then you
probably do not have enough forest around you. Then maybe chemicals are the
way to go.

I also feel that chemicals promote sloth. I don't mind digging a new post
hole for a fence repair every 20 to 30 years. It is my service to the earth
for having the beauty of decay that I mend my fences every so often.

If I were hibernating more than working to pay the rent this winter I may
not be so grouchy like a woken bear. My appologies, please enjoy your
holidays and cherrish rest like the sleeping bears that now dream inside our
earth.

Yaya