PLANT RELATED THINGS HYPOCRISY IS BAD, MM-KAY? Double standards really bother me. Here's one: Question: what plant has fiber stronger and more durable than cotton and seeds higher in protein and Omega-3 fatty acids than any other plant material, yet is illegal to grow in the United States? In Canada it's said by some that this came about because the corporation that introduced sythetic fibers to the world lobbied to have it banned so that they wouldn't have to compete with it. Question: what plant product has an intoxicating effect similar to that of alcohol, yet is not addictive? This product can be ingested in food or in smoke form, yet unlike nicotine, which _is_ addictive and is usually delivered via smoke to the lungs, and unlike alcohol and caffeine, which are addictive to many people and ingested in liquid form, this substance can get you arrested. Alcohol and nicotine destroy many lives and many people's health and caffeine is a multimillion dollar, legal, business, but this other stuff is considered the gateway to cocaine, LSD and other really serious drugs. We are allowed by law to drink and smoke ourselves to _death_ using these other substances, but possession of THC- bearing material makes you a criminal. And even though the THC can be processed out of Cannabis sativa, leading to very tasty, nutritious, non-narcotic food products and durable clothing, instead of regulating its cultivation, the U.S. government declares it forbidden and thus loses out on a huge potential profit-generating enterprise, aside from denying consumers viable alternatives to soy-based vegetable protein sources and synthetic fabrics. Where's the capitalism in this kind of attitude? Where's the entrepreneurial spirit? Before you say "no", LEARN ABOUT HEMP. THE LAWN FETISH Now a little botany quiz: How do those big showy flowers disperse their pollen? By animal carriers like bees and beetles and nectar-eating bats. How do grasses disperse _their_ pollen? By wind. So between grasses and what we call flowers, meaning the plants with big showy flowers, which pollen is more likely to get up your nose? That's right, grass pollen. But people think flowers will make them sneeze. So we just put flowers on the borders of these vast expanses of trimmed grass-leaves called lawns, and we take out the whole ecosystem that was there before, including all the wild flowers. Without them, many insects go hungry and disappear, making the animals that eat them also disappear- those that escape the lawnmower blades, that is. And it's not just flowers. Where I live now, in the New Jersey pinelands, blueberries thrive in the woods, but developers take them out and put in lawns under the few trees they leave standing, when they're not putting houses up on perfectly good farmland, and the people that buy the houses either have no idea what was there before or consider any plant that's not bought in a store to not belong on their property. Somehow the American Dream has come to include having your very own strip of green turf to water and fertilize, only to have the mown clippings-- the biomass product of all this care-- carted away to the municipal dump, or if you're lucky, the municipal compost pile, ready for other people to come help themselves to. So the lawns must continually be fertilized to replace what's thrown away. Some homeowners are smart and mulch their own grass clippings, but many of them still keep the lawn trimmed with mowers that pollute more than the worst SUV or luxury sedan. Some buy electric mowers, and if their utility company is forward-thinking, those things are powered by renewable energy like wind, water or solar power. Or even biomass incineration or methane production, fueled partly by grass clippings! Scott used to make great push-mowers which eliminate the pollution problem and also double as exercise devices, but they've been discontinued in favor of these flimsy new ones which don't have the heft to generate any blade momentum. If you scour the thrift shops, though, you might come across a nice old one for five bucks like I did. (I don't use it now, though, since I have no lawn at all. Five acres and no lawn; imagine that. Only blueberries and mountain laurel among the trees.) Don't misunderstand me: I like the look of a greensward as much as anyone and I love golf, baseball and other lawn sports; but people waste water in deserts so they can have lawns, they pump chemicals into their lawns that leach into the water table and kill things, and they reduce the biomass production capacity in areas that could support mature forests, impoverishing the whole planet. Think: is a cactus garden really any less appealing than a lawn in Arizona? There are communities here and there that are combating this lawn mania by requiring native vegetation to be used, and the National Wildlife Federation [Tami: you can make this a link. I think it's www.nwf.org] has a Backyard Habitat Program that helps people make their properties more attractive to wildlife. But there are many more communities that actually have lawn laws such that a homeowner _must_ maintain a certain area as a lawn and _must_ keep it mowed to a certain height, or risk a fine. These laws need to be fought one by one at the local level. The beauty of nature needs to be taught to most people. [www.nanps.org nativeplantsoc@yahoo.ca] Even if you do keep your lawn, why is it that so few people in Suburbia grow any food plants on their properties? The amount of energy they spend on their lawns is at least equal to what a little garden would require. Is wartime the only appropriate time for citizens to grow their own food?? (For those too young to remember or who haven't been told, Victory Gardens were encouraged during World War Two so the troops wouldn't go hungry having to split the food with us civilians. They also made steel pennies so the copper could be saved for bombshells.) Tomatoes are great for the prostate: every man should have a few vines. Grapes are good for the heart: everyone with well-drained soil should have an arbor. Farms are turning into developments everywhere: what about towns buying them in co-op style and having the residents grow crops on them? Not for profit: for the fun and pleasure of it. It would keep a lot of kids out of trouble if they had some tomato or grapevines to keep care of. Just a thought.