How GM Crops Endanger Environment and Agriculture (A Must Read)

[nosmokes]

This is an excellent article and overview of the dangers and false promises of AgBiotech.I strongly recommend reading the full story to anyone with interest in the subject.I find it distressing that while the subject of GMOs comes up at least occasionally if not on a regular basis in the press and the media of even developing countries like India, you'd be hard pressed to find anything like this sort of coverage in the US, where the grocery shelves are full of GMO products and there ain't even a requirement they be labeled as such so you have the option to avoid them.
--###--

original-mainstreamweekly

How GM Crops Endanger Environment and Agriculture

Saturday 26 January 2008, by Bharat Dogra

Recent advances in genetic engineering have emerged as one of the most important influences on the future of agricultural and food systems. With genetically engineered crops spreading rapidly to millions of hectares in countries like the USA (which export food to many countries) this is a crucial time to carefully examine the many sided impacts of genetic engineering on agriculture.

The science of genetics was transformed by the discovery of DNA and the steady increase in knowledge about this molecule which carries the hereditary information in the cells. The structure of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the same for all living organisms; what differs is the precise ordering of the chemical base in the DNA molecule. This is what makes each creature unique. So several scientists started thinking that they can modify life forms by changing this ordering. Some scientists, including those supported by big business, tried to alter the genetic make-up of living things by transferring specific genes from one organism to another.

Particularly in the context of agriculture and animal husbandry, this technology has far-reaching implications as it allows the introduction into plants and animals of entirely new characteristics, including genes originally found in unrelated plants, animals or micro-organisms. This is very different from traditional breeding practices, and we need time to consider all its possible impacts. However, the technology is spreading so fast that very adverse consequences can result even before we have the time to understand the implications. At a very early stage of its development this technology has got heavily concentrated in the hands of a few giant corporations which are interested in its quick commercial exploitation to recover their investments and reap profits. In the process, critics fear, very serious and irreversible damage can be caused to our environment, to our food system and to the health of millions of people.

A lot of discussion on this issue has concentrated too narrowly on whether the GM crops helped to increase per acre productivity. In this context the experience generally has been that the high expectations created by big companies promoting GM crops were not justified. In some cases the yields for a short initial period were indeed high, creating a rush for the new seeds, but after some time such expectations could not be maintained. On the other hand, there are many examples of farmers who invested their meagre resources and borrowed heavily to buy expensive GM seeds and other supporting inputs (for example, herbicides linked to these seeds) but later felt betrayed as the low yield left them indebted and saddled with debts. There were even reports of suicides by these farmers. There have been allegations of GM crops like Bt cotton being introduced in rainfed areas like those of Vidarbha (India) for which these were not suited.

~snip~
.
.
.
complete article here

[SpiralHawk]

1. To avoid mutant, chemicalized corporate food-facsimile craplola, check out CSA

The Agri-bizz corps and their repubicon homelander cronies are mutating the entire food chain, and doing it occultly (as usual) -- that is, they make sure their mutant cloned crap has no labels. If you want it, you can't identify it. If you don't want it, you can't identify it. You have zero information, zero choice.

Kiss your free will goodbye. Republicon homelanders are CLAMPING DOWN on free will in every dimension of life, and food is one crucial area of their Evil Ahrimanic antichrist-like activity in this realm.

To thwart radical, right-wing republicon homelander corporate CONTROL of the food you put into your body, and a definite numbing of your intellect and your senses, you must take direct action. Now. As the page linked below points out, CSA is one pathway to clean, healthy food -- and maintenance of your integrity and free will.

http://www.chiron-communications.com/farms.html

"Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) offers a way for every human being to be directly involved in the care and healing of the earth, while also ensuring a supply of clean, healthy food for their families and their neighbors..."

(snip...)

[nosmokes]

2. bullseye again SpiralHawk!

CSAs also have the added benefits of supporting local family farmers, bypassing the corporate chains and keeping your dollar in local circulation instead of corporate HQ which could be who knows where.

[Two Americas]

3. good thread

I want to make one point SpiralHawk, from the perspective of the agricultural community. CSA is well-intentioned and a legitimate and positive trend within the movement against corporate agri-business, however it is not a good solution on the large scale to feed the public, which is one of the three prime goals of agriculture.

On the farm, we always said that we were working for ASC - Agriculture Supported Communities. Farming is not a charity cause. We would never place membership, ideological, or lifestyle requirements on people to determine who is and who is not welcome to the bounty, and we saw ourselves as in service to the community not the other way around. No one went hungry in the county, whatever it took. Sure we probably looked and talked like "red necks" to visiting suburban liberals, but we got the job done and you can't judge the book by the cover.

We have tens of thousands of small family farms still surviving, though struggling, in traditional cooperative agricultural communities. We don't need to re-invent the wheel there.

The worry is that the CSA concept works against public education and gives people a false view of the realities of agriculture. It reflects the fact that we are in a unique time and place in history. For the first time ever most of the people in this country are 3-4 generations removed from the farm and completely ignorant about farming and farm life. From that point of view, CSA makes sense, as people have no knowledge of "ASC" anymore.

[SpiralHawk]

4. The community supports the farm, the farm supports the community

I see CSA as a two-way street. It is far more difficult to be ignorant of the circumstances that farmers and their families face when you see them and talk to them most every week to pick up the food you are going to feed to your family and yourself.

I know that's an ideal, that does not play out in every circumstances. But to this outside observer (I have belonged to two CSAs over the years, and may soon belong to another -- long story), most often the education does happen: consumers learn from the farmers, and the farmers learn from the consumers -- with predictable ups and downs and ins and outs.

I agree that large-scale ag is needed also. No argument. Absolutely. But large-scale ag need not rape, pollute, mutate and otherwise degenerate the essential capital of fertile soil, water supply, and healthy seed stock -- not to even begin getting into industrial-scale corporate feed lots for meat, etc. Yuckapoo.

We have a long way to go. But with the will, we can turn ag around, both big ag and community ag. I think it absolutely needs to happen. Now.

The republicons and republicon-minded folk -- if they remain true to their already mutant type -- will continue to rape the earth, and to do all they can to obstruct healthy alternatives so that they can maitain CONTROL and strive to impose CONTROL ON OTHERS...

[Two Americas]

5. good points

I see CSA as a two-way street. It is far more difficult to be ignorant of the circumstances that farmers and their families face when you see them and talk to them most every week to pick up the food you are going to feed to your family and yourself.

Getting people back in touch with the farm through a variety of strategies is my life's work, so I fully support what you are saying here.

I know that's an ideal, that does not play out in every circumstances. But to this outside observer (I have belonged to two CSAs over the years, and may soon belong to another -- long story), most often the education does happen: consumers learn from the farmers, and the farmers learn from the consumers -- with predictable ups and downs and ins and outs.

I remember back 35 years ago talking to one of the pioneers in organic farming, and he said something to me half in jest that I think still applies. He said that he was finding that it was vastly easier to turn a farmer into a hippy than to turn a hippy into a farmer. Most small family farmers have long since been turned into "hippies" - that is to say that progressive agriculture - so called "conventional" by those removed from and ignorant about farming - has moved way beyond the original organic paradigm, while organic adherents are still stuck back in the thinking from the 60's and the movement has become an ideological and political movement rather than an agricultural movement and is becoming more and more divorced from the realities of farming.

Organic in fruit growing today still represents a fraction of 1% of the food needs of the public,. It is 99% hype and advocacy and about 1% about feeding anyone. The practices are also more hazardous and less sustainable than what the real growers are doing, since “organic” has come to mean “natural” - which is to say that it means nothing. Approved chemicals for organic are more toxic and harder on the soil and require much more spraying than real growers would ever use. Also, the consumer demand for organic has merely led to a tidal wave of un-inspected imports being labeled “organic’ - most organic produce in the supermarket is grown outside of the US and beyond the effective purview of the USDA —where getting “organic certification” is a matter of bribing a few local officials, and the organic trade is now completely dominated by large corporations. Modern organic fails at feeding the people, fails at strengthening agricultural communities, fails at being sustainable, fails at overcoming corporate domination of our food supply, and fails at producing safer food.

We have a neighbor who has been dedicated to running a CSA for decades now, and probably an exceptional example of the model. After over 25 years they are still reliant on grants and donations and have not expanded the number of people they reach much at all. They do a nice job at what they do. But they are surrounded by 300 small family farms, and the one I worked at last received a thousand times as many visitors to tour the farm and see how a real farm works than the CSA operation gets. Those 300 family farms in the county are making a living at farming, are very progressive and sustainable in their practices, and are helping to feed Chicago. If we take making a living out of farming and sustaining the community of 300 family farms and feeding Chicago out of the picture, then we really are not talking about farming anymore, but about hobby gardening and a leisure time activity for a select few.

Therefore the notion that CSA is the only, or even a good way to educate the public about agriculture is of limited value.

I agree that large-scale ag is needed also. No argument. Absolutely. But large-scale ag need not rape, pollute, mutate and otherwise degenerate the essential capital of fertile soil, water supply, and healthy seed stock -- not to even begin getting into industrial-scale corporate feed lots for meat, etc. Yuckapoo.

What we are talking about here is not large versus small, rather it is about absentee owner corporate agri-business farming versus family farming within traditional cooperative agricultural communities. In deciduous fruit growing, 300 acres give or take seems about ideal for family management, and it is when 10,000 acres are managed plantation style, with corporate ownership and the inevitable complete lack of responsibility to anyone but Wall Street and shareholders that involves that causes all of the problems. The tail is wagging the dog in agriculture. The corporations are too big and too powerful, and are steamrolling traditional cooperative agricultural communities around the world out of existence in the pursuit of total domination and exploitation of both resources and labor.

[nosmokes]

7. I can't speak for Illinois, obviously, but here in Oregon CSAs are a rapidly

growing sector of agriculture along w/ traditional market farmers.All of the CSAs I'm familiar with have a membership that is growing every year and there are a couple of them here in Lane county that have 'subbed' out contracts to some of the market farmers to meet the demand. Maybe it's the demographic of old hippies here bu I would think Chi-town would be a market that was readily open to the CSA philosophy. I agree that we're going to have need of larger scale ag than small family and market farms, but I don't believe that we need, nor can we support, the mega farms of thousands of acres of monocropping that we have today.

[Two Americas]

8. yes

I have worked mostly in the Midwest, but will be in Oregon this spring and I look forward to meeting many people there whom I know only from phone and email. I understand that things are different there. I know from living in northern California for 10 years back in the 80's that it is almost like being in a different country out west.

I don't believe that we need, nor can we support, the mega farms of thousands of acres of monocropping that we have today.

Couldn't agree more.

I strongly support the goals of organic, CSA, and farmers markets. The reality is falling far short of the ideal - or even working against the ideal - and there is much overlooked knowledge and wisdom in the traditional cooperative agricultural communities that goes unnoticed and untapped.

Farmers markets in the Midwest are dominated by weekend growers and hobby farmers, and feature much price cutting and seconds. This makes them useless to the serious and more progressive farmers. CSA can't be ramped up to meet the needs of the public, and reinforces the two tier food system that is developing - the better stuff for the enlightened few, and let the poor eat cake, as it were.

[SpiralHawk]

12. I feel CSA could be ramped up to meet much more of the public need, but...

that won't happen from inspirational rhetoric, and is sure as hell won't happen from governmental involvement (which in my view would be the Kiss of Death).

CSA expansion -- to the level where it would really make a major difference in national food supply -- will have to come out of recognition, and direct action, by consumers, and then the response of the men and women who are called to the vocation of farming. That will only come about as NEED increases hand in hand with awareness of what corporations are doing to the land, the water, the farm families, the animals, and the food. All the evidence is out there. Wake up America.

Many CSAs have innovative relationships with FOOD Banks and other organizations, so they do and can provide high-quality, non-toxic food to lower-income people. That kind of activity can also be easily expanded with right will.

[Two Americas]

16. we part company there

That sure as hell won't happen from governmental involvement.

I have to part company with you there SpiralHawk, and express my strongest disagreement.

Throughout history, going back to the Romans and much earlier than that, the most enlightened, progressive and peaceful civilizations have seen food and farming as public resources to be managed through public agencies for the public benefit.

The Republicans are trying to put food and farming into private hands. It makes no more sense than placing our water supply into private hands.

The Republicans have been in control of the public agencies for food safety, agricultural research and outreach, and all of the social programs that enabled 90% of the population to move away from the farm and to be able to take food for granted. They have run those agencies into the ground, and want us to think that it is government that is the cause of the problems.

[nosmokes]

17. Another hit dead center SpiralHawk.

The two CSAs I'm most familiar with as well as ones I just have a passing knowledge of have member supported subsidy programs for low income folks as well as work exchange for all or part of the cost of a share. And the work could be anything from manual labor at the farm to sitting in a chair in the shade making change at a farmers market for a couple of hours.And of course food stamps and WIC coupons are accepted. In short,there are many efforts made to reach out to low income folks and get them involved on the front end, as well as a close relationship w/ the county food bank which is a regular stop 2X week in season for one farm and weekly for another.

I don't know that gov't help would be the kiss o death necessarily. Some grants that would help beginning farmers purchase land and existing farmers weather the transition from conventional to organic wouldn't be frowned upon from my perspective. Money to set up a year round indoor or covered farmers market or Co-Op here in Lane County with cold storage and freezer space and such wouldn't be a bad thing either.But these are all local details, as far as the overall philosophy goes it's educating the consumer and I don't know that Uncle's money would bea bad thing there? But I haven'tr really given this subject re: gov't money any thought.

[truedelphi]

10. I live in Northern Calif - everything is either being turned into a casino

Or hundreds of acres of vineyards.

Even if the farmers don't use pesticide (which most of them DO use), they strip the land of everything, including brush and grasses.

Due to loss of habitat, the birds are suffering and one of the local sports writers says that the deer are taking a hit as well.

The older vineyard families always had hedgerows and trees etc. And planted roses on the borders with oak trees lining the roads. It was quite a bit better for the animals.

[Two Americas]

19. of course

Those industries are subsidized in various ways, and agriculture is at a disadvantage.

All farmers use pesticides by the way. Every restaurant, every school, every grocery market, every warehouse, every office building, every day care, every school and virtually every suburban home and lawn "uses pesticides." The difference is that in farming it is heavily supervised and regulated - or was before the Republicans took over and corporate farming became the rule. When you walk into any restaurant, the likelihood that the place had been sprayed right before opening with whatever the owner found in the shelf at Sam's Club, by and untrained and unsupervised employee is about certain.

"Organic" does not eliminate spraying - in fact, it often requires much more spraying - nor does it eliminate the use of toxins. The definition of an approved organic pesticide is that it be "natural" - a very slippery and ambiguous definition - and many of the numerous toxic chemicals approved for organic are far more dangerous and hard on the environment than the methods of so-called "conventional" family farmers.

Since there is no way to tell an "organic" tomato from any other tomato by actually testing the tomato, there is no way to regulate organic, and we have a flood of produce coming into the country now that is probably not inspected at all, let alone are the corporate farms that are the source of massive windfall profits through pandering to the misguided public demand for organic being inspected or certified for their practices.

[truedelphi]

22. I would have to disagree with you on just about everything you say

In Northern California, people are really starting to understand that spraying "anything" on crops is non-desirable. I have friends who run apple orchards and small family farms and they don't spray. Except for things like heavy oils. Or certain detergents. None of the things they use would be dangerous to consume.


You say, "numerous toxic chemicals approved for organic are far more dangerous and hard on the environment than the methods of so-called "conventional" family farmers."

Give me a break. That ain't so. As one example, the toxins used on potatoes are so toxic that farmers cannot re-enter their fields for three to four days.

Of course, your beliefs are not your fault. For instance, many people out there have been told that Monsanto's RoundUp is only table salt and water. However, RoundUp is glyposate, water, polyoxyethalynamine (POEA) whioch turns into dioxane, a carcinogen. RoundUp also contains formaldehyde, although Monsanto lied through their collective teeth to leave that info off the label, when it applied for its license.

This was done as formaldehyde is one of the most carcinogenic things out there, and if they had admitted that to the EPA, the EPA would have had to either re-write the rules, or regulate RoundUp to the point that only licensed pesticde applicators would be allowed to use it.

I can actually tell an organic tomato from one that has been sprayed because I am chemically sensitive. I can walk through a farmer's field and tell you what chemical the guy used, unless he didn't use any. Malathion makes my scalp itch like crazy. I can smell the others, even in tremendously low doses. The formaldehyde in RoundUp makes my legs and knees feel like I am going to collapse. Unless it is an extra heavy dosing, then my whole body goes numb.

And I will agree that it is hard to have something totally organic. Whole Foods lets their workers wear heavily fabric softener-ized clothing in their stores - I have quit buying my produce there as I am so susceptible to fabric softener - I am better off with a piece of fruit with conventional pesticides lightly used than the apples heavily handled by WF's people.

One of the better values is finding a farmer at a local farmer's market who is not fuly Organically certified, but about to be so in a year or so. She or he charges less than the other farmers, and the only difference is the number of years that his field ws sprayed and the six year requirement of the certified farmers. (Or maybe it's a four year requirement, I no longer know.)

I actually approve of "conventional" produce where I live - a grocery store where I shop is out in the boonies and most of the veggies are local and not left in trucks for hours on the freeways, as is true of city bought produce.

[Two Americas]

23. not about beliefs

Rotenone and heavy metals are approved for organic, and I have seen them used very, very heavily, because they are "natural" yet we would never use those. At the same time, completely safe or non-persistent chemicals are not approved for organic because they are "synthetic." Toxicologists know that a molecule is a molecule - that the artificial distinction between "natural" and "synthetic" is nonsensical - and those toxicologists, who don't care one way or the other about the philosophical and political feud, and if anything are biased toward organic because that is where the money is these days - tell me that organic orchards they inspect are toxic wastelands after a few years.

Listen, there are progressive and conscientious growers out there, and it is good that you are working with growers you trust. I am not dissing them or anything they are doing. Nor am I defending Monsanto, for God's sake. There is no hard and fast line between organic and non-organic, and the organic label is no guarantee of food or farm safety, unfortunately.

California is unique, since we see such extremes there in farming practices. It is a dry environment, which means that it is much easier to ward off mold, fungus, and various pests. The perfect place to grow without using any pesticides is the desert, bit the trade off is that this involves more environmental damage.

California is also the home of gigantic factory farming - the worst of the worst for mono-cropping, and for using toxic chemicals.

If you can not see me as the enemy, and are seriously interested in food and farm safety, there is much to learn. The creation of an artificial all-or-nothing ideological divide makes it almost impossible to discuss these issues.

I will be there this season - there are a few fruit growers I need to visit. I would love to meet you and perhaps we can vists and survey some orchards while I am there. It would be fun.

[Two Americas]

24. by the way

By the way truedelphi, I too am chemical sensitive, and can recognize what is happening in an orchard when I walk into it by smell myself. Yes, there are bad actors out there, but fewer and fewer in my experience. What is happening on the factory farms in California I don't have any direct experience with.

I stay away from varnishes and paints and all sorts of chemicals that people routinely use in their homes. The out-gassing volatile chemicals from every consumer product, and in carpeting, furniture, clothing, building materials and on and on are a nightmare. I have been notoriously fussy and militant all my life about this, and I well know the frustrations involved when people around you are so cavalier and dismissive about this.

I can tell you this: I would rather, and do, eat fruit, and a lot of it every day, right off of the tree from the growers I trust than I would to eat a piece of fruit that has sat out on a counter in a suburban home, because of the large amount of airborne toxins in the average suburban environment.

[truedelphi]

27. I agree with your last paragraph

Having belonged to some very "out there" anti pesticide organizations, it never failed to amaze me that people who didn't want a little pesiticde sprayed on a piece of fruit six weeks before it was harvested, would let their husbands sand furniture in a room out gassing into the kitchen.

While an uncovered soup pot bubbled - breathing in and out the fumes of paint and varnish.

One anti-pesticide leader I know let her husband work on his boats in their garage which was, you guessed it, right below the main area of the house, and the stairway vented all the gasses directly into the home. My skin would turn blue while I was visiting, and my entire body would go numb.

then there are the homes where everyone Glades and Febreezes until there isn't a smidge of oxygen left - but hey, at least their lawn is organic!

[truedelphi]

6. Also you have to wonder if in their paternalism - the Great White Hope Monsanto

Might not bother bailing out the farmers overseas if the GM crops don't meet their profit margin.

It reminds me of how the Innuit in Northrn Canada and Alaska quit doing their normal hunting, as they would get a lot of canned goods and dried foods from the Fur Traders and outposts. They never thought that they would be left on their own. But during the first bad years of the Depression, none of the white traders showed up - the main companies had felt the profit margin woudn't be enough of a margin to pay for sending their people there.

And thus having no dried food from their hunts, only furs that had gone untraded, the Innuit faced starvation for the first time in their history.

[Two Americas]

9. control

It is all about control for corporate agri-business. GE crops, terminator seeds, trade-marked varieties, patented life forms - all about control of the marketplace.

[JohnyCanuck]

11. World's genetic resources threatened by GM genebanks robbers

The world's genetic resources threatened by GM genebanks robbers

Dr Pietro Perrino from the Institute of Plant Genetics in Bari, Italy, tells a sorry tale of the destruction of seeds and germplasm held in genebanks throughout the world subsequent to the rise of genetic engineering. On the one hand, genetic engineers have ruthlessly plundered the seeds and germplasm held in the genebanks for genes, DNA sequences and varieties which they patent in acts of biopiracy. On the other and, they are colluding in the destruction of the genebanks themselves <9, 10> ( SOS: Save Our Seeds , Italy's Genebank At Risk , SiS 27).

Perrino explained how genebanks came about through the need to collect, conserve and protect crop diversity because of the genetic erosion caused by industry-led agricultural revolutions that attempted to increase crop yields from monoculture crops of a few species. In the past forty years 1 400 genebanks have been created to compensate for the negative effects of the “Green Revolution.” However, the second generation of the “Gene Revolution” where new varieties can be made by taking the genes from any organism: animal, fungus, plant, microbe or virus to create new plants, are a direct threat to the larger indigenous genetic bases.

Pietro said, “We urgently need to protect the genebanks as they may soon be the only source of uncontaminated seed stocks in the world. This may be why the biotech industry and their supporters are so keen to see them destroyed after they've sequenced the genomes and patented the genes.” Furthermore he called upon the regulators of in-situ plant conservation, organic farmers, natural reserves, and nature conservation organisations to fight what he calls the “genebanks robbers”, the genetic engineers who seek to replace genebanks with DNA biobanks filled with synthetic plant resources that are not only useless, but are also dangerous for biodiversity, and for the health of living organisms, including human beings.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Scientists_for_a_GM_free_Europe.php

[lovuian]

14. they want to starve the world

its true evil

[Two Americas]

18. profit

They seek power and control, to generate wealth. The motive is profit. Our response should be that there are some things - food, water, education, public safety, to name a few - that are off-limits and do not belong in a "free market" paradigm.

That is why the "personal choice" response - lifestyle or philosophy changes, CSA, organic, gardening - all very similar to libertarian ideas about personal freedom and personal choice as opposed to social programs and collective action, is so weak and ineffective, and why after 30 plus years of relentless advocacy for those we have made little or no progress, and the state of our food and farming infrastructure gets worse and worse.

We may as well tell people to manage their own water supply and water quality as to offer individualistic solutions to the food crisis.

[SpiralHawk]

13. Something to keep in mind while considering farming.

I feel this blunt news calls for positive, proactive steps now.

No time to waste. Renew and revitalize ag now to produce more food and cleaner food.



UN Warns: World food stocks dwindling rapidly

By Elisabeth Rosenthal – International Herald Tribune
December 17, 2007

ROME: In an "unforeseen and unprecedented" shift, the world food supply is dwindling rapidly and food prices are soaring to historic levels, the top food and agriculture official of the United Nations warned Monday.

more...

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/17/europe/food.

[JohnyCanuck]

15. Maximize backyard production with Square Foot Gardening

I haven't tried this myself (yet), but I read about it on the web. Here's the web site that explains how it works: www.squarefootgardening.com


SQUARE FOOT GARDENING

THE MOST PRACTICAL PREPAREDNESS GARDEN

During a time of crisis, when we may be living on what we can produce, it will be important that gardening have the features of Square Foot Gardening:

• Easy to understand. Does not require extensive training or years of experience
Anything to make gardening easier or simpler should be done. This is especially true for beginners, but even experienced gardeners will benefit from easier methods.

• Requires much less effort; No Heavy Digging, No Tilling, Very Little Weeding
There will be much to do. Having LESS to do in the garden will really help!

• 5 times more productive than conventional gardening
Few families have enough land to be self-sustaining. Therefore, high production in a small space is needed. The Square Foot Gardening method is at least 5 times more productive in the same amount of space as conventional row gardening.

• Uses much less water - Each plant is given just enough
Water may not be flowing from the tap, and may even have to be carried long distances by hand. Using a minimum amount of water will be important.

• Uses fewer seeds. No seed goes to waste
Seeds may not be easily available. None will go to waste through over-sowing.

• Is not dependant on fertilizers. Your own compost provides the nutrients
Commercial fertilizer may not be available. Compost is renewable and sustainable.

• Does not require a tiller or other expensive tools
Gasoline to run a tiller may not be available, nor may other garden tools.

• Can be done anywhere - Soil is not an issue
Traditional gardening usually takes several years to “condition” the soil. Square Foot Gardening uses an easily prepared soil mixture that replaces “bad soil”, providing excellent results immediately.

As an essential part your preparedness program:

Learn and practice Square Foot Gardening - begin today

During a time of need, many people will be digging up their lawns to plant gardens, only to become frustrated with the results. Please don't be one of them - PREPARE NOW

http://www.squarefootgardening.com

[Orwellian_Ghost]

20. K&R n/t

[SpiralHawk]

21. Final kick for those who want to face the future proactively

eom

[countryjake]

25. My county depends heavily on seed crop..large part of our economy...

and we rank as a major world supplier of vegetable seed. Certain GM seeds were banned here, as they corrupted the crop, even if they are planted five miles from a seed farmer's fields. It's an ongoing battle to keep any sort of foreign contamination out...just one backyard broccoli plant or garden cauliflower or flowerbed cabbage head can ruin acres of seed and render a farmer's harvest worthless on the market. And that was true even before GMs.

Just mention the words "GM crops" around here and you will get one good earful on the subject. With the sagging economy and farm labor shortages, Monsanto has been making moves on some of our century-old seed companies who struggle to stay afloat in the market, and along with that monster agri-business, comes their clout of striking down the carefully coordinated practices of buffering, pinning, and specializing our seed crops...age-old methods of ensuring pure product falling to chemically engineered "superior" seeds. Not uncommon to see a gaggle of old farmers, with shovels and pitchforks in hand, trying to fight off the invasion of court-backed mega-farms..corporations bent on destroying the small family-owned operations, who no longer have the funds to resist.

Biodiesel boom scares seed growers
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/304510_canola21.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/312712_canola23.html

http://www.seedalliance.org/index.php?page=Biofuel_Canola

[JohnyCanuck]

26. Monsanto = Terrorist

Well, at least they're terrorizing me when I think what the money-hungry bastards want to do to our food supply.