savoy011

Huichol yarn weaving of a sacred ceremony for maize USDA Co-Existence Policy Proposal Statement of Dr. Devon G. Peña The Acequia Institute Submitted to USDA-APHIS | March 4, 2014 I am submitting this statement to express opposition to the proposed USDA co- existence policy. As a plant breeder, seed saver, traditional acequia farmer, and agro-ecologist familiar with the scientific evidence on gene flow I am unequivocally opposed to this policy. Asking for co-existence with GMO crops means seed-savers and plant breeders like myself have to accept the inevitability of severe business losses due to damage to our native seed stocks and active plant breeding programs. I ask that you consider the fact that farmers like myself are the keepers of the nation’s diverse bioregional ‘arks’ of native seeds and these are the ultimate basis of all agriculture in this country. As vulnerable traditional seed savers, we cannot accept co-existence. The scientific fact of gene flow makes it so. Let’s not p...

Moderator’s Note: As has become customary, I am posting a selection of student research notes and essays prepared for a political ecology seminar I teach during fall quarter at the University of Washington. Taught as an advanced reading and discussion seminar, the course involves heavy reading loads and weekly writing aimed at development of analytical and critical skills. All of the students prepared a total of eight (8) critical reading summaries. They also produced the essays presented here which are synthesized from quarter-long topical research projects and presented in the form of a series of 2000-word posts. Some of these posts are autobiographical in nature and draw from personal life histories and experiences – but they are not self-indulgent empty exercises in navel gazing. The students of the so-called Millennial Generation are critical realists not because it might be an intellectual fad but as a matter of historical and structural circumstances. This is a group of seriou...

Credit: Union of Concerned Scientists Moderator’s Note: I am reposting a statement from the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER) that defends the Séralini study but goes further by demonstrating that the latest analysis by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which supports the retraction, also violated scientific standards and applied double standards. Recall, that the editorial authority at the Elsevier publishing corporation that piublishes the journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology violated scientific principles by issuing the retraction. It appears we have another rat in the mix and EFSA is also adopting a double standard in which only studies challenged are those suggesting GMO food safety is a legitimate concern . The double standard in this case is clear since the Monsanto and Séralini studies adopted comparably well-vetted and quite similar research designs and methodologies. ENSSER is a scientific organization and not ver...