momoese

I just remembered Monanto does read the websites and blogs looking for farmers who use their product talking trash about them. I understand Harvey.

momoese

harveyc

I am sure they monitor for adverse information but to think any farmer would be worried about speaking negatively about Monsanto is crazy. In my experience, most farmers are more willing to fight than most folks and they're vocal. There's no way Monsanto is going to get them to not speak out about what they are unhappy about.

That moratorium on GMO alfalfa was lifted last year and that's what allowed me to replant my acreage. Like I wrote earlier, I went completely to GMO alfalfa this time around.

__________________

sunfish

momoese

No comment?

harveyc

The litigation you cited is in regards to canola. There is no such thing as heirloom canola seed. I don't know of any case where someone was sued by Monsanto for saving their heirloom seed so there isn't much for me to respond to.

I already said I don't think it's right that Monsanto sues someone for keeping seed that was accidentally contaminated. I think they should have to prove that it was saved intentionally because it was contaminated and that the grower should be able to file suit against neighbors who were the source of contamination.

FWIW, our alfalfa is not allowed to go to bloom so there is not any contamination taking place.

I have my doubts of anybody going broke because of legal fees spent fighting Monsanto. I'd like to see the specific facts about a case rather than general claims.

I worked in agricultural lending for many years. I will be vague about the specifics of the case as our clients were required to sign non-disclosure agreements when settling with a chemical company (was not Monsanto). These growers claimed crop losses due to contamination of the fungicide they had purchased. While the losses were real, the were greatly exaggerated. The compensatory settlements received were much more than they had ever earned and proved to be a windfall for the growers. This is just an example to show that claims are not always really factual.

__________________

momoese

I was talking about corn, soy, cotton etc. There is no organic Canola plant because it's GM rapeseed. Canola is just an acronym for Canadian Oil Low Acid. There is organic Rapeseed though.

harveyc

Sure, I think people should be able to save any heirloom seeds they want to. I already said that.

Do you think it's bad that unions "own" government leaders or just when corporations do?

__________________

harveyc

I'm biased because Monsanto has made my life easier and allowed me to farm while exposed to less toxic chemicals that I otherwise would be. It goes back a long ways. In the early 1970s one of my chores was to go out into the corn fields with a burlap sack and a shovel. My job was to dig up Johnson Grass rhizomes and collect them along with the seed heads and take them out of the field to be burnt. Often, some seed had already fallen and some rhyizomes were missed. It was a very hot dirty job. When Roundup came out it was hard to believe that there was something that finally would easily kill Johnson Grass. Going into the field with a backpack sprayer allowed me to kill a lot of Johnson Grass with Roundup very easily and much more effectively. Mitchel, I suggest you try the old method for a week and let me know how that works for you. I'd be glad to hook you up with a grower, okay?

__________________

harveyc

Great, organic canola oil
Organic Canola Oil
Maybe they can sell the Brooklyn bridge as well.

BTW, we use mostly rice bran oil in our household.

__________________

momoese

Just a little misleading. We use almost olive oil mostly, unless I want flavor for fried seafood then I use peanut. For baking I have been using organic lard.

I don't really want unions or corps owning the government. Of the two Monsanto scares me the most with their seemingly unlimited power and thirst for world domination.

Btw I now call our president GMObama. You should love him for what he's done to help Monsanto.

harveyc

Mitchel, I think you've read too many blogs created by Monsanto haters. Monsanto does not want to dominate the world except in the imaginations of minds similar to those who feared Godzilla would rule Earth. Monsanto's executives want to generate increased profits by creating/offering products that customers willingly choose to buy. Their power is not unlimited or even close to it.

I think Obama's position on pesticides/GMO products in a little bit funny only because some of his fanboys (not implying you were one) made a big deal when Michelle planted her organic White House garden in front of the media spectacle. I still despise him for his socialist and pro-abortion positions.

Most people who use peanut oil do so because of its high smoke point, not the flavor. Rice bran oil has an even higher smoke point and is a healthier alternative, being high in monounsaturated fats.

__________________

Richard

Heirloom seed (by law) is simply off-patent and reproduces true from seed. Some of the best Alfalfa cultivars you can grow in California are from Stover Seed, and they are heirloom varieties.

My father was an Alfalfa farmer before switching careers in the 50's. The practice at the time was to buy seed every 5 years and in-between grow an acre or two just for seed -- typically in the middle of the rest of the harvest.

For small farms, it is presently cheaper to buy the premium Stover seed than the cost of harvesting and processing seed on their own.

Stover and others over the past 75 years have be hybridizing alfalfa varieties for numerous regions in North America. I seriously doubt the economics of someone buying seed to avoid litigation. It is either a foolish choice, or an over-dramatized article that an "organic" produce manufacturer or trade group paid for to appear right next to their ads in an organic-lifestyle publication.

"Organic" is big business too -- albeit in stealth mode.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

momoese

Harvey I've read so much, and watched so much about Monasanto that my head spins. They are the most (I know you hate it when I say this) Evil corporation the world has known. The court cases are there, the emails, the this and that. It's not wishing or conjecture. They may have made your life easier as a non organic farmer, but they have ruined many more lives.

Edit to say this is of course just my opinion. Others may choose Mcdonalds, Chevron, some of the pharms, Microsoft, Dow, etc.

momoese

It can and is often cross pollinated with GMO pollen which ruins it.

Richard

The point is, that it is usually cheaper to buy new seed (non-GMO) each year than harvest seed from your plot. So the "pollution" cry is overblown. It is primarily coming from individuals who want to process their own seed despite the economics of the situation -- and clearly their seed is inferior to available inexpensive non-GMO hybrids. These same people are suffering economically from other poor decisions and placing the blame elsewhere. They suffer from a false understanding of agriculture. You'll find this kind of behavior in every sector of society.

Of course, I don't mean to let Monsanto off the hook. I'm definitely not a fan of this company and despise many of their practices.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

momoese

It sounds like this is what your speaking about, but the plants in question were tested and found contaminated.

Phantoms in the machine: GM corn spreads to Mexico

Richard

Yes, the plants were contaminated as they have been elsewhere.

The issue is that in most cases the economic loss is a fallacy because either (1) the farmer was going to buy and plant new seed anyway, or (2) the farmer could buy new high quality non-GMO seed inexpensively but instead expends a greater amount of cost and labor harvesting their own seed.

ALSO, I believe you know that the fertilization of corn, grain, or whatever by pollen from a Monsanto strain or any other strain does not change the nature of the harvested food? It only changes the genetics of plants grown from seed of that crop.

So for example, we can have an organic, non-GMO grain plantation which is cross pollinated with some pollen from a non-organic GMO source. That "contaminated" crop is still considered organic and non-GMO. However, if you were to let some of those grains mature, harvest the seed, and plant them, then the crop it produces is definitely a GMO product. Ironically, if it were grown certified organic, it would be considered a certified organic GMO crop.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

harveyc

Mitchel, I think you're reading too much from the same sort of blogs where like minds like to rally behind their common beliefs. I know a few folks that work for Monsanto. They are just ordinary folks. I know one who is a CRFG member and loves growing unusual plants just like you and me. I've been in contact with farmers from several states and have never come into contact with anybody who has felt they were harmed by Monsanto. Are there some out there? Sure! But they are not nearly as frequent as you likely believe.

Fasten your head and think straight, my friend.

I still think you should give the shovel and burlap sack approach a try. I'm pretty sure it will just make you tired without causing any head spinning.

__________________

momoese

Well, whether it costs more or not to harvest their own seed is irrelevant, it should always be there choice if they so wish.

Yes I understand that pollination does not affect the current crop, unless we are talking about Monsanto thugs invading your property and testing it. It does however affect the next crop, and every crop there after.