<div>I understand the general idea behind gene banks is that they might offer some sort of limited remedy in the event of climate change or nuclear holocaust, in terms of reseeding the planet in a worse-case scenario.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>With respect to this thread, however, I am not sure how to process the suggestion that gene banks are valuable when you can't control the change. The article of dicussion points to confirming evidence that genetically modified corn has contaminated Mexico's wild maize.. This is confirmation in addition to the original evidence published in Nature, in a study authored by Ignacio Chapela and David Quist. The ensuing controversy almost cost them their careers. (<a href="http://ngin.tripod.com/deceit2.html" target="_blank">http://ngin.tripod.com/deceit2.html</a>)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So what we are talking about here is contamination that has occurred though development of proprietary genetically modified crops by multinational corporations (such as Monsanto) and with the deregulatory support, sometimes as well as shared intellectual property rights, of the United States government. These same players have an influential role in gene banks.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>And the issue is that once these proprietary crops are grown in the wild, their genetic drift can not be controlled and therefore they contaminate wild species with their transgenes. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Since we can't control the way multinational corporations and the United States government are genetically contaminating our natural resources, violating species boundaries and introducing genetic constructs designed (in some instances) to deliberately shut down natural reproduction, is it a good thing they have access to the gene banks so they can also control what little may be let of life when the collective effects of their genetic tampering reach such proportions that a global catastrophe ensues? As Steve points out, reintroduction would be compromised by the prevailing genetic environment. Genetic contamination can not be called back.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Of course, gene banks are a useful resource. It is especially disheartening that wars have destroyed regional banks, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>But it is essential to consider the ways we might take back control of events, by taking responsibility for safeguarding the environment and our food security, and placing the world on a less threatening course.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>1) The pursuit of genetic modification is fueled by intellectual property rights incentives. The patenting of life has never been voted on by the American people. Is it constiutional? We need to get this issue in front of Congress.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>2) Review repercussions of the Bayh-Dole act and the corporate-university relationship. We need research for the public good, not just research for corporate profit and market control.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>3) Reorganize economic and technologic development to address ecologic imperatives, instead of maximum efficiency and economic profit for the controlling few.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The best way to preserve genetic plant resources is to grow them. We need ecologic resilience, not novelty introduced for the sake of a patent and a market monopoly. What if we took the funding for patent-oriented research and instead supported farmers and conservationists in the growing of heirloom crops, medicinal and native plants, and in ecologic restoration projects? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The current trend is to interfere with natural safeguards in order to re-arrange nature to accommodate existing corporate priorities and industrial processes (as well as introduce new market monopolies). One isolated example is forest trees that are being engineered for decreased lignin (making them weaker and susceptible to disease) in order to accommodate the paper industry because this makes trees more easily processed into paper. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>In other words, the way the paper industry is currently set up, it would create an expense for them to change their equipment and way of doing things to make paper out of alternative sources, such as hemp or kudzu.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So, instead of investing in alternative technologies for paper manufacture, we are decimating the genetic integrity of forest trees and continuing to obliterate our forests. Meanwhile, kudzu (which can also be used as a medicine) grows unabated while we rant about how evil it is instead of harvesting it for paper manufacture and medicine while leaving our forests intact.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I say "we" because whoever, whatever, wherever we are, we have to assume collective responsibility for the direction our society is going. I know I do not have easy answers or expect anyone else to either. But communication is essential to the healthy functioning of all organisms and biologic systems. It is in this spirit that I speak, in the hope that we can collectively see our way through and effect change where an individual can not.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In summary: Essential oganizational structures (DNA code) within Nature are being rearranged (forcefully bombarded with foreign genes from other genera and kingdoms) to benefit the status quo. But current economic and bureaucratic structures are not even reliable in their own realms, much less as an adequate replacement for the intricate web of relationships that define living organisms and systems.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Let's keep keep Nature the way she is and rearrange the status quo. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>best regards,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Gena Fleming</div><br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2009/2/27 Steve Erickson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wean@whidbey.net">wean@whidbey.net</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>But the what are you going to do with the material other than<br>slice and plice? Reintroductions into the wild are going to be<br>
recontaminated.<br>-Steve Erickson<br>Forsty Hollow<br>==================================<br>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="Wj3C7c">> This is one reason that gene banks are important. I'm not<br>saying it's a<br>> replacement for the wild species, but when you can't control<br>the change,<br>> better to get a sample of what's out there before the<br>
change happens,<br>> right?<br>><br>> Patricia S. De Angelis, Ph.D.<br>> Botanist - Division of Scientific Authority<br>> Chair - Plant Conservation Alliance - Medicinal Plant Working<br>Group<br>> US Fish & Wildlife Service<br>
> 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 110<br>> Arlington, VA 22203<br>> 703-358-1708 x1753<br>> FAX: 703-358-2276<br>> Working for the conservation and sustainable use of our<br>green natural<br>> resources.<br>
> <<a href="http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal" target="_blank">www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal</a>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> Gena Fleming <<a href="mailto:genafleming@gmail.com">genafleming@gmail.com</a>><br>
> Sent by: <a href="mailto:native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</a><br>> 02/23/2009 04:12 PM<br>><br>> To<br>> <a href="mailto:apwg@lists.plantconservation.org">apwg@lists.plantconservation.org</a><br>
> cc<br>> <a href="mailto:native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org</a><br>> Subject<br>> [PCA] Invading Transgenes<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>
> I think it's imperative that we recognize transgenes from<br>transgenic<br>> "forest" (planation) trees and other modified plants will also<br>> inevitably<br>> escape and contaminate the wild.<br>
><br>> Why are we reorganizing nature? How is this passing for<br>"science"? -<br>> Gena<br>> Fleming<br>><br>><br>> Excerpt and link:<br>><br>> "NOW it's official: genes from genetically modified corn<br>
have escaped<br>> into<br>> wild varieties in rural Mexico. A new study resolves a<br>long-running<br>> controversy over the spread of GM genes and suggests that<br>detecting such<br>> escapes may be tougher than previously thought.<br>
> In 2001, when biologists David Quist and Ignacio Chapela<br>reported<br>> finding<br>> transgenes from GM corn in traditional varieties in Oaxaca,<br>Mexico, they<br>> faced a barrage of criticism over their techniques. Nature,<br>
which had<br>> published the research, eventually disowned their paper,<br>while a second<br>> study by different researchers failed to back up their<br>findings.<br>> But now, Elena Alvarez-Buylla of the National Autonomous<br>
University in<br>> Mexico City and her team have backed Quist and Chapela's<br>claim. They<br>> found<br>> transgenes in about 1 per cent of nearly 2000 samples they<br>took from the<br>> region (Molecular Ecology, vol 18, p 750)."<br>
> Full article:<br>><br>><br><a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126964.200-transgenes-found-in-" target="_blank">http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126964.200-<br>transgenes-found-in-</a><br>> wild-corn.html<br>
><br>><br>______________________________________________<br>_<br>> native-plants mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org</a><br>><br>
<a href="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-" target="_blank">http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-</a><br>plants_lists.<br>> <a href="http://plantconservation.org/" target="_blank">plantconservation.org</a><br>
><br>><br>> Disclaimer<br>> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual<br>who is<br>> posting the message; they are not official opinions or<br>positions of the<br>> Plant Conservation Alliance.<br>
><br>> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to<br>> <a href="mailto:native-plants-request@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants-request@lists.plantconservation.org</a> with the<br>word<br>> "unsubscribe" in the subject line.<br>
><br></div></div>> -----<br>><br>><br>______________________________________________<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">_<br>> native-plants mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org</a><br>><br><a href="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-" target="_blank">http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-</a><br>
plants_lists.<br>> <a href="http://plantconservation.org/" target="_blank">plantconservation.org</a><br>><br>> Disclaimer<br>> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual<br>who is<br>> posting the message; they are not official opinions or<br>
positions of the<br>> Plant Conservation Alliance.<br>><br>> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to<br>> <a href="mailto:native-plants-request@lists.plantconservation.org">native-plants-request@lists.plantconservation.org</a> with the<br>
word<br>> "unsubscribe" in the subject line.<br></div>---------------------------------------------<br>Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration<br>Helping Nature Heal<br>Box 53<br>Langley, WA 98260<br>(360) 579-2332 <a href="mailto:wean@whidbey.net">wean@whidbey.net</a><br>
=======================================<br></blockquote></div><br>