Socially and Ecologically Responsible Agriculture Network

[Douglas Hinds <cedecor AT gmx.net>]

Hello Sal and other USDA Organic-Certification list members
following this thread:

s> How is that going Douglas . We certified organic growers may have
s> to set up some organic gmo free seed banks to protect our seed
s> from GMO contamination.

That's my whole point. Those that know (as you do) and those that
care (as you do) are going to have to do what needs to be done, with
or without the USDA. You and the rest (in other words, WE) are going
to have to form a network of individuals and groups and enclaves all
over the world, even there within the belly of the beast, like Jonah
and the Whale.

I am not and have never been opposed to USDA Organic Certification.
I HAVE been opposed to MANDATORY USDA Organic Certification ever
since I read the Organic Food Production Act of 1990 (which took 12
years to take effect), for reasons that weren't obvious to all those
involved at the time, but have now become much more obvious to many,
today.

I have always been in favor of USDA Organic Certification as an
OPTION, available to all and any that choose to exercise it,
depending on the particular merit of USDA Organic Certification in a
particular situation, based on a free and informed consent as
determined by those directly involved in that situation.

If OFPA opened the door to corporate participation that's fine with
me. I'd rather that the conventional food industry got involved with
biologically intensive farming systems and put the chemicals aside.
(In fact, GM crops represent a way for the chemical industry -which
bought the GM seed companies- to hedge their bet.

It's their last, dying shot at preserving the permanent and self
perpetuating state of dependency that their proprietary products
trigger in farmers that inadvertently upset the ecological
equilibrium of their farms through the use of these products.

Having deprived themselves of the benefits that only biological
organisms and the biological processes and substances they produce
provide, the farmers that subscribe to these systems have fallen
prey to the permanent and self perpetuating state of dependency that
Chem-GM company's proprietary products were designed to produce.
This is what happens when natural systems are replaced by
proprietary artificial ones.

Other artificial systems that create false dependencies include USDA
Organic Certification, thus complicating a movement which was never
intended to be more than a transitional phase by those that created
it, in any case.

Since you're farming organically and are Certified as USDA Organic,
I strongly suggest you pressure the USDA to define their stance on
issues like whether the coexistence of GM and Organic Agriculture is
conceivable, what the USDA can do to protect the organic industry
from contamination via gene flow from GM crops and whether or not it
has the obligation to do so. And while you're at it, I suggest you
contact your congressional representatives regarding these same
issues, too.

You should be able to register your comments or your "request for
clarification" and would do well to get both "a comment reception
number" and the name of the person receiving it. If you deliver them
in person, put it in writing and have them seal a copy as "Received".

In any case, the time has come for those imbued with the original
organic spirt, the indomitable, visionary and dynamic spirit that
drove the movement to where it is now, to look ahead. This does not
mean that USDA Organic Certification will not continue to be a valid
option for some growers in the near future. It means that other
valid options, options not contemplated or fully implemented by USDA
Organic Certification or the NOP can be taken advantage of now in
another and potentially compatible setting.

Doing just that motived me to ask someone else to configure a
Socially and Ecologically Responsible Agriculture Discussion Group a
a couple of months ago on a publicly sponsored host well known for
it's vision and leadership in support of needed social change.

As you know, a few unforeseen and rather bizarre "complications"
developed, which required reforming that effort on a more solid
foundation.

At present:
[SERAnet] - the Socially and Ecologically Responsible Agricultural
Network; and

[SERA-Es] - La Agricultura Socialmente y Ecológicamente Responsable
en Español - have been configured and those who wish to do so can
subscribe by navigating to:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/seranet
and
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sera-es
respectively.

Neither list has been officially announced as yet however, and no
list specific information has been placed on the subscription page,
(although an interesting -but by no means complete- introductory
letter will be received by those subscribing to SERAnet).

At this point myself and Kathy Carter-White are on-board as moderators,
but a total of three or four moderators are contemplated and if you
have the time and interest, I think you'd make a good one, Sal.

A fairly long list of ex-SERA members have asked me to subscribe
them but I plan on mounting a much clearer and more detailed
definition of the principles and objectives of SERA than the one I
wrote for the first SERA list, before any widespread announcements
go out.

www.seranet.org has also been registered, and content will be placed
on all three websites (also <www.ibiblio.org/cedecor>) ASAP,
depending on whether I go to Mexico City this week or not.

Meanwhile, the subscription mechanism IS already functioning, and I
will be subscribing (only) those who asked me to do so, fairly soon.

SERAnet's archives are open to the public and will remain so. Any
conflicts that may arise will be dealt with (naturally) in a
Socially and Ecologically Responsible manner. (Even discussion
groups have an ecology). No arbitrary actions will be taken and the
foundations and motives for any actions that could possibly be taken
(if no other alternatives exist) will be discussed in depth
beforehand.

We are talking about a new and very different SERA, based on the
principles that unfortunately, couldn't be developed in the anterior
context.

s> how does Mexico look.

The decision has been made to examine the GM crop issue in depth and
take the time necessary to do so. The pressure being applied by
mercenary interests has been recognized for what it is and a
corresponding value placed on it.

We have a number of important advantages that the USA would do well
to emulate if at all possible:

A series of both traditional and recent Electoral Reforms:

  No re-election,

  Campaigns Funding is limited and the ability of private interest to
  contribute curtailed,

  Campaigns Funding is supplied by an independent governmental
  agency staffed by the political parties themselves, which oversees
  elections, evaluates their results and deals with electoral
  controversies.

Land Reform:

  No individual or corporation can own more a than a limited amount
  of land. This indicates an official recognition of the link
  between land and liberty as a common right for all, in relation to
  a basic and finite resource. Corporate interests and "efficiencies"
  are secondary issues.

Natural Resources form part of the national heritage and are
expected to be used in the public interest.

(This why Standard Oil and British Petroleum were "asked to leave"
many years ago, and Mexico paid them well after the expropriation
occurred -even though the Americans and British set fire to "their"
wells upon leaving- thus saving Mexico from a fate similar to that
of Cuba - which has a much different form of government, anyway).

Mexico is a country of institutions and the population is well
organized. While the defense of the public interest by existing
organizations has been less than overwhelming in the past, new
organizations and new leadership in the traditional ones are showing
great promise.

Collectively, these factors allow me to be optimistic about the
possibility of improving on the way things are at present.

Re GM crops in Latin America:
Monsanto has announced that it has stopped selling soybean seeds in
the world's No. 3 producer - Argentina, one of only four countries
in the world that has allowed the use of GM crops to become
generalized; so generalized that most of the GM seed used is bought
on the black market, which means Monsanto lost control over the use
of GM soy seed and was left out in the cold, profit-wise. They are
pouting, at present.

s> Its close and we have friends like you there.

That's right, and you're welcome anytime. How did your Cherimoyas
do this year? (I'm eating a very good one at the moment).

Douglas

A last word with reference to SERAnet:

More than a discussion list, a law based, law abiding version of a
"liberation front" capable of freeing ALL farmers from the current
state of artificial dependency described above and pave the way for
making an orderly and integral transition to a truly equitable,
socially and ecologically responsible, more humane and civilized
world community is contemplated.

In order to do that we need to provide a tight focus and precise
agenda. Those that don't participate can lurk, but my feeling and
motivation is that we really do need to walk this along rather let
it disperse, much as the tribes did before they become domesticated
("privatized", actually).

Remember that Benito Juarez (mentioned in the SERAnet Welcome
Letter), was a full blood Zapotec who managed to loosen the grip
that a couple of privileged interest groups used to maintain Mexican
society under their control.

Today's dominant socioeconomic-political system also maintains the
population divided and their efforts fragmented by diverting all
those efforts toward a ready niche market (and anything can be
justified and euphemized by a those controlling the reins of a
corrupt system). IOW, even social justice is converted into a
commodity, and biznez goes on as usual. No in-depth reforms occur.

With enough foresight an alternative that improves on the currently
available options can go mainstream and foment real and lasting
social change if done in a perceptive, resourceful and integral
manner. As long as everyone continues pulling in his or her own
direction, little will change for the better, for most.

Two major goals: Developing and making available improved Crop and
Location Specific BIAPS - (Biologically Intensive Agricultural
Production Systems similar to the BIFS developed by SARE) and;

Establishing functional Socially and Ecologically Responsible
alternative Distribution Systems for agricultural products and
foods;

Constitute fundamental reasons for forming this incipient yet well
grounded and well planned movement.

See you all there, sooner or later.