Various Approaches (to land management), All "Right"

Cite three-plus examples of local people (not by name!) I know who are “doing the right thing” each in their own very distinctive style—in other words, there is no single formula.

1. M. Shaw—rightwing private-property-rights fanatic who has been managing his 60-acre property in Santa Cruz County for the past ten-plus years in a way unique in my experience and with amazing success
   1. A “pure” technique with no planting of any kind—entirely weeding and thinning.
   2. A “learn-as-you-go” system, with solid continuity, i.e. the same people doing the work from start to (I almost said finish, but there is no finish), and assuring continuity by passing the job from master (father) to apprentice (son).
   3. A “several birds with one stone” system, giving employment to immigrant (Mexican) workers who already have skill in the kind of fine-tuned hand-management needed.  This fills a human and social as well as ecological need, giving the worker a personal investment in good “stewardship”, and pride in a job well done and of value, and an education (therefore an interest) in the local flora; potential to give an active and significant involvement in California land management to a disenfranchised yet increasing segment of our population (the soon-to-be majority, no doubt).
   4. All “appropriate technology”; human-scale technology (mostly machetes!)
   5. A slow-and-steady, into-perpetuity approach (exactly what is needed) rather than the one-shot, get-in-and-get-out approach (a complete waste of time, but the way such things are currently done—with three to five years of follow-up at most).
   6. A technique with rapid (and amazing results in increased diversity/productivity/viability of native flora-and fauna too of course, the one inevitably following the other.
   7. A system with none of the down sides of the usual “restoration” work based on planting, i.e. genetic scrambling, incidental introduction of pathogens, pests, weeds, depletion of wild seed-stocks from collection sites, misidentification problems (ubiquitous), clutter of the site with ancillary litter (driplines, plastic liners and pots, pin flags, gopher baskets, etc. etc.)

ETC.

1. Wildlands Restoration Team—a completely different kind of enterprise but with may of the same benefits discussed above, and avoiding the same drawbacks.
   1. This work relies on volunteer rather than paid labor.
   2. So far the scope is limited to public lands (just as the Shaw ype is limited to private kinds).
   3. The local Wildlands Restoration Team has been blessed with a dedicated and energetic organizer; its effectiveness relies on that.
   4. It is entirely about removing invasive plants; there is no planting involved of any kind.
2. Freddie and Ellen—The other side of the ecological coin, i.e. using backyard space that was taken from nature and would be wasted, and wisely, rather than trying to “restore” wildness to such lost land (almost always, a feel-good exercise in futility), using the land to feed the family living there rather than require the indirect destruction of even more wildland elsewhere to do so.  This is every bit as valuable as anything more direct most of us could do, although, being indirect, requires a little more logic to comprehend.  It has also the following other benefits:
   1. Giving kids a hands-on understanding of natural processes, including a knowledge of where their food comes from.
   2.  It is “organic”, and helps build soil and fertility rather than diminish it.
   3. It makes vastly better bird habitat than ordinary “landscaping”, on a par with gardening designed specifically for birds.*

*For “birds”, read also butterflies, bees, and other “beneficial” insects, and various other forms of “wildlife”.