|
Seeds
Fri Feb 04, 2011 at 07:32:10 AM PST
|
|
Crossposted from the Worldwatch Institute's Nourishing the Planet.
In Dhading province in central Nepal, most people are farmers, who depend on rain-fed agriculture for food and income. But erratic rainfall and natural disasters in recent years, including widespread drought and recurring landslides, are threatening the livelihoods of the region's farming communities.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 526 words in story)
|
|
Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 12:29:29 PM PDT
|
( - promoted by NourishingthePlanet)
This is the first post in a regular series about African indigenous crops that can improve food security and protect the environment.
Ever heard of the Bambara Bean? How about Nyimo or Vignea Subterranea or the African Groundnut? No matter what you call it, this little bean, which is indigenous to tropical Africa, is highly overlooked by scientists, development agencies, and humanitarian programs, even though it packs a lot of nutrition. The bean may have originated in Mali, but it's also popular in Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon. It is now widely distributed and grown in Asia, parts of Northern Australia, and South and Central America and is often found for sale on street corners in Johannesburg.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 234 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jul 01, 2010 at 13:47:24 PM PDT
|
Wow. Read this opening to the article Wanted: GM Seeds for Study:
A battle is quietly being waged between the industry that produces genetically modified seeds and scientists trying to investigate the environmental impacts of engineered crops. Although companies have recently given ground, researchers say these firms are still loath to allow independent analyses of their patented - and profitable - seeds.
The article goes on:
In February 2009, frustrated by industry restrictions on independent research into genetically modified crops, two dozen scientists representing public research institutions in 17 corn-producing states told the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the companies producing genetically modified (GM) seed "inhibit public scientists from pursuing their mandated role on behalf of the public good" and warned that industry influence had made independent analyses of transgenic crops impossible.
The article describes how scientists used to be able to just go to the seed store and buy seeds if they wanted to test them. With patented genetically engineered seeds, that is not the case:
If a scientist wanted to compare brands of seeds, for instance, or their environmental impact, he or she had to seek permission from each seed company or gene patent holder. Open access to the study's data and the right to publish that data had to be secured, while, for their part, the companies sought to protect their patents and intellectual property rights. Even if the companies did not object, contract negotiations, made on a case-by-case basis, could be extended and onerous. Making things worse was that with fewer public monies available for farm research, scientists, and their universities, found themselves increasingly dependent on the seed companies for funding.
Here's one more important quote:
For 10 years, Shields says, he and his fellow scientists worked around the companies' restrictions. But they felt that too many scientific issues were not being addressed. In particular, scientists could not be certain that multi-year studies would be renewed or that they'd be allowed to follow up on unexpected findings "which reflects the very essence of scientific inquiry." Such uncertainties, says Shields, meant that many experiments were never initiated.
This is an important article. The end of the article goes on to describe a new development - a voluntary agreement with no enforcement mechanism that the seed companies will loosen up and allow more independent research to take place. There are several catches to this agreement, however. For example, seeds only fall under the agreement AFTER they are commercialized. Thus, there will still be little (if any) independent testing of GE seeds before they are legal. That seems incredibly foolhardy, for obvious reasons. What will be the bigger impact of this agreement: allowing for independent research or merely creating the appearance that there is independent research taking place?
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Sun Feb 14, 2010 at 19:49:03 PM PST
|
With a few exceptions, every single plant-based food you eat comes from a seed. And the animal products you eat came from animals that ate plants that came from seeds. In fact, the only foods you eat that don't come from seeds are fungi or ferns. Those come from spores. The average American might not give a lot of thought to seeds, but seeds play a pretty big role in his or her life nonetheless. As a sustainable food activist and writer over the past several years, I've had to learn quite a bit about seeds. But it didn't really hit home until I started gardening.
This diary is cross-posted from Firedoglake.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 1717 words in story)
|
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 at 15:32:20 PM PDT
|
I'm not sure whether to find this title more disturbing or schadenfreude-inducing: "'Superweed' explosion threatens Monsanto heartlands." Apparently a new "superweed" called Evil Pigweed has evolved to resist Monsanto's Roundup. Sooo... now that the crops AND the weeds are Roundup Ready, it kinda defeats the point of buying Roundup Ready seeds, doesn't it? How evil is this pigweed? Well...
"Palmer pigweed is the one pest you don't want, it is so dominating," says Culpepper. Pigweed can produce 10,000 seeds at a time, is drought-resistant, and has very diverse genetics. It can grow to three metres high and easily smother young cotton plants.
Farmers abandoned 10,000 acres in the heart of the superweed explosion, and other farmers report hand weeding their fields. I'm no farmer but I'm curious if cover crops might help suppress weeds in areas that haven't been hit (or haven't been hit hard yet) with this superweed. But Monsanto's got other suggestions for the farmers:
Indeed, according to Monsanto press releases, company sales representatives are encouraging farmers to mix glyphosate and older herbicides such as 2,4-D, a herbicide which was banned in Sweden, Denmark and Norway over its links to cancer, reproductive harm and mental impairment. 2,4-D is also well-known for being a component of Agent Orange, a toxic herbicide which was used in chemical warfare in Vietnam in the 1960s.
Why do we consider these chemicals acceptable to use at all let alone on our food???
|
|
Discuss
:: (19
Comments)
|
|
Sat Apr 04, 2009 at 18:41:37 PM PDT
|
|
Monsanto's blog has a post up about Indian farmer suicides. Naturally, they say it isn't their fault. Well... since they brought it up, I decided to listen to Vandana Shiva on Democracy Now from December 2006 when she spoke on the subject. She kinda thinks it IS their fault.
I've attempted to transcribe the Vandana Shiva interview below, although I'll admit that I only got about half of it so I do recommend listening to the interview yourself. And - please - drop a line to your Senators telling them about the Indian farmer suicides and citing them as a reason to oppose S.384.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 470 words in story)
|
|
Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 12:00:00 PM PDT
|
Montana's House passed a bill that required biotech companies to (get this) obtain a farmer's permission before sampling crops on his or her land. Yeah, totally outrageous, I know. It's not banning GMOs or anything - just asking companies to respect a farmer's freaking property while trying to intimidate or possibly sue him. All it had to do was pass the Senate. So check this out:
Montana Biotech Seed Bill Tabled by Senators
Montana Senators have sidelined a seed bill that sought standards for how biotech companies test crops for patent infringement, burying the bill after getting a private dinner with Monsanto representatives.
You almost don't even need to read the rest of the article. The Senate vote to table the bill went down 6-3 after - you guessed it - SIX Senators dined with Monsanto reps at the Montana Club. Apparently Monsanto did not pay for the dinner - it says "another bill opponent" did that. (By the way - if anyone out there wants to bribe the Montana Senate, they're going for cheap these days. I looked at the Montana Club menu and the entrees are about $10-$20.)
Update from the comments: Apparently I picked the wrong Montana Club - the link above goes to a restaurant in Missoula, but this one is for one in Helena. Entrees run from $20-$34. Still... it's pathetic to think that even I can afford to bribe the MT state senate.
|
|
Discuss
:: (13
Comments)
|
|
Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 17:09:37 PM PST
|
|
Time to plant, that is. Spring passes quickly up here in the desert, and we start early. Every February, I start going about town looking at the trees budding out, waving my finger at them and saying "Stop! Go Back! I't a Trap!!" But they never listen, and sooner or later, somebody loses that year's crop from their front yard fruit tree. It's always a gamble, starting the spring season, in a place where it can be freezing one night and 90oF the next day. Meanwhile, I have ascertained over the years that early-mid February is a good time for starting seeds here in SE New Mexico, at 3300' above sea level.
|
|
There's More...
:: (21
Comments, 925 words in story)
|
|
Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:00:00 AM PDT
|
This diary is a follow-up to one I posted earlier this week that might have had inaccurate information. Here's what I was able to come up with. From Global Seed Industry Concentration
With the January 2005 acquisition of Seminis for $1,400 million, Monsanto takes a dominant position in the fast-growing vegetable seed market - a previously untapped seed segment for Monsanto. Under a variety of brand names, Seminis supplies over 3,500 seed varieties to fruit and vegetable growers in 150 countries. The Seminis acquisition includes the following brands:
- Royal Sluis
- Petoseed
- Bruinsma
- Asgrow Vegetable Seeds
For Monsanto, "vegetable seed is the next logical strategic move" because it's a "high value, high growth segment in agriculture."13 According to Monsanto, seed and trait gross profit as percent of sales is higher for vegetables (64%) than for soybeans (63%) or for corn (57%). Monsanto now assumes a leading market share in the global vegetable seed market, where they were virtually invisible before:
Beans Monsanto controls 31% of the global seed market
Cucumbers Monsanto controls 38% of the global seed market
Hot Pepper Monsanto controls 34% of the global seed market
Sweet PepperMonsanto controls 29% of the global seed market
Tomato Monsanto controls 23% of the global seed market
Onions Monsanto controls 25% of the global seed market
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 223 words in story)
|
|
Sat Aug 16, 2008 at 08:00:00 AM PDT
|
Monsanto's products are apparently so popular that they can hardly keep up with demand. At least, that's the reason they gave for raising prices. They sent a letter out to customers in March, announcing the price increase. The result?
Globally, about $411 million, the amount Roundup net sales increased from March through May over the same three months in 2007, according to Monsanto's third quarter, Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission June 27.
That's a 54 percent increase.
Additionally, they plan to boost prices on Roundup Ready corn seeds next year. The article I've linked to above goes through their potential competitors and... oh there aren't any. Monsanto's totally in charge, and they can set whatever prices they want.
(I had previously included a list of seed companies believed to be owned or supplied by Monsanto but apparently the list was unsubstantiated by the person who sent it out. Please accept my apology for any misleading information I had posted.)
|
|
Discuss
:: (8
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|