Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1999-09, Page 12FIRE PROTECTION with the all stainless steel Sent 111 Chimney 20% Off Complete Chimney Pkgs. 6", 7" and 8" in stock Sale ends Nov. 13, 1999 SENTINEL, a ULC listed to 2100° F chimney. Your best choice. 30 yr. warranty WELBECK SAWMILL LTD. Mon. to Fn. 8 am to 6 pm - Sat. 8 am to 4 pm Evenings: Mon. Wed. & Fri. 7 to 9 pm RR 2 Durham ON NOG 1R0 519-369-2144 8 THE RURAL VOICE Robert Mercer Seeds that breed true The whole debate over genetically modified crops is about seeds and their reproductive technology. The question of — is it good or bad — obscures the fundamental argument about nature's prodigious capacity to reproduce, and man's wish to warp it in the name of profit. If farmers were to own a seed company, their outlook might be more horizontally integrated into the whole farm management profit picture than vertically within the seed sector only. They might even be prepared to pay for research and develop seeds that bred true to their foundation stock. This could happen as it was attempted when farmers held back their grain from harvest to plant again the following spring. That was before biotechnology. The trouble with today's technology of "hybridization" and the "Terminator gene" is that they both reduce yield in the next generation. So the question arises — What if a farmer's seed company went back to the basics and used today's technology to produce a genetically modified plant that would produce a harvest crop that is also a seed crop for the next crop because it bred true to the foundation seed? The yield may be less, but so too is the seed price, and when grain prices are low, seed prices do not follow markets lower. It has not been in the interest of seed companies to even• try to develop seed technology that brings no profit. But for a farmers' seed company that might be called Farmers' World Wide Seed Co- operative, the motive force behind the research would be on total production costs and profit margins, not just unit seed bag profits. Just as private enterprise has produced, and very successfully produced, a sterile crop, now is the time for those most at risk — farmers — to search for and develop a crop with induced perpetual. fertility. This is, of course, taking a dangerous turn -about in scientific, economic and political thinking. It is totally against conventional wisdom and those attempting it will bear the brunt of misgivings from many with a closed mind or an alternative agenda. We have been taught, and have accepted, that hybridization is an advancement. It is. But now that costs to the farmer for this luxury are beginning to outweigh the yield advantage, it is time to rethink the process. The production risk as always, lies solely with the farmer and he/she deserves better. Corn, wheat or soybeans that breed, grow and harvest true to the foundation seed with genetically modified DNA would be the goal. Then there would be "free" seed world wide and an automatic advantage to farmers who would turn that into greater production, especially in third world countries. It would therefore be a disaster to seed companies. This goal for perpetual fertility would be for the benefit of all without return to the research effort as it would not be patentable or controllable. What a fight this would be! But what a benefit to mankind! This is work worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. The trick is to think with an open and inquiring mind and to listen only to those who have NO links to agri-industry — be they government,