|
|
Post by paquebot on Nov 11, 2010 12:50:38 GMT -5
If one wants to join SSE, remain in SSE, or leave SSE is of no matter. As long as I am a member, I shall retain the right to either defend or criticize either the organization, the leadership, or both. If one is not, nor ever has been an SSE member, criticizing all that SSE stands for also criticizes everything that I do or have accomplished in assisting the gardening world.
And since PVPs and Luther Burbank seemed to have been important items in this thread, I shall proffer some facts. Luther Burbank, as an individual, was granted 16 PVPs posthumously for his efforts. When addressing the US Congress to pass the Plant Patent Act, another holder of many patents stated: "This will, I feel sure, give us many Burbanks." That person was Thomas Alva Edison. There is no excuse for anyone with the wherewithal to do so to not become another Burbank.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Nov 11, 2010 13:38:01 GMT -5
criticizing all that SSE stands for also criticizes everything that I do or have accomplished in assisting the gardening world. In my world view I can't imagine having that tight of an affiliation with any organization: Where my identity is a subsidiary of the organization. Paquebot, are you on the board of directors of SSE or in it's management or an employee? That sort of devotion to an organization is completely foreign to me. I can't feel it towards a god, nor a political party, nor a church, nor a nation, nor a business, nor a hero figure, not even to a blog site. |
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Nov 11, 2010 18:30:25 GMT -5
If one wants to join SSE, remain in SSE, or leave SSE is of no matter. As long as I am a member, I shall retain the right to either defend or criticize either the organization, the leadership, or both. If one is not, nor ever has been an SSE member, criticizing all that SSE stands for also criticizes everything that I do or have accomplished in assisting the gardening world. And since PVPs and Luther Burbank seemed to have been important items in this thread, I shall proffer some facts. Luther Burbank, as an individual, was granted 16 PVPs posthumously for his efforts. When addressing the US Congress to pass the Plant Patent Act, another holder of many patents stated: "This will, I feel sure, give us many Burbanks." That person was Thomas Alva Edison. There is no excuse for anyone with the wherewithal to do so to not become another Burbank. Martin Martin, I truly hate to hear that this is the way you feel, I certainly mean no skin off of your back, but my critisizm of SSE started long before this thread and will continue long after this thread is over, no disrespect to you. I do find it odd that you have such a devotion to any organization that mearly questioning their motives seems to you to be some sort of betrayal of friendship. For what it's worth Alan Kapuler has in the past made critisizms of SSE and yet remains a member, not because of the organization but because of the membership. Blind devotion makes no sense and I agree wholeheartedly with Joseph on this issue. As far as the Edison quote, indeed, so where exactly are those Burbanks? Oh, that's right, they already exist and have opted out of a patently absurd system of ownership of life, I can think of many of them; Ettlinger, Kapuler, Morton, Wagner, Peters....should I keep going? |
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Nov 11, 2010 19:05:08 GMT -5
Apparently to you, the only reward is measured in dollars, but there are many people who, thankfully, do not share your priorities. Reward comes in many forms. I have done more chestnut breeding than anyone I know of, and produced some superb chestnuts, yet I have received no financial reward of any kind. I give scion wood away to anyone who asks. I give nuts away. I will never patent anything. According to you, what I have done with chestnuts cannot happen because I receive no financial reward. In a word, you are wrong. You also ignore the fact that many folks made a living from breeding plants long before any type of PVP existed. What a shame that you are unfamiliar with Luther Burbank, or Felix Gillet, or Albert Etter. A great deal of superb plant breeding was done before any type of PVP existed, much of it for the love of doing it. Finally you ignore the fact that most money that is made in plant breeding is made as a result of marketing skills and not as a result of brilliant breeding. The Honey Crisp apple is a marketing victory, not a breeding victory. Its flavor is markedly inferior to hundreds of other cultivars. Nor is the patent needed to make money. Anyone who breeds a tree fruit automatically has a multiple year head start on anyone else who wants to propagate that same fruit, thus allowing them the opportunity to make some money, if that is their goal. If you don't understand why this is a fact, you may wish to give it further thought. On the other hand, numerous plant patents exist that will bring their owners no money. And even today, a great deal of money is made on varieties that are not patented. How can that be? Perhaps you should spend some time thinking about that also. No one owns the genetics to a plant, and as long as legalized criminals think they do, there will be other people who will work to insure the free use of those genetics. I could care less about what you do with chestnuts any more than expecting you to care what I may do with tomatoes. We are each the minimum personnel required to develop a new variety. Apparently you have read little of what has been presented. I am very familiar with the works of Luther Burbank and it was because of his work that the PVP act was passed. He was all for it. I have many times referred to the fact that he was granted a number of PVPs after he was dead. Since you work with trees, you should also be aware of the number of apple trees which must be grown from seed before one is suitable for commercial production. I used to repeat the figure of 10,000 until someone in the industry said that it was closer to 12,000. If you happen to not like Honeycrisp, that's an individual preference and your problem. And, the fact still remains that there is no incentive to do anything without some reward. What that reward is is up to the individual. Martin Martin, two things here, "not caring" what Castanea does is one thing, but generally people here do care, I know I for one do and find his work amazing, just as I find the work of tomato breeders or other plant animal breeders interesting. I think what your missing here is the point entirely. Particularly pointing out quoted numbers of apple trees it takes to produce/find a "commercial" variety to someone who obviously already knows the statistics, it's just a bit demeaning don't you think? I believe what you are partially missing here is the divide between your line of thinking and the type of thinking that others are focused on. Your soley focusing on those interested in the world and or national market and making it in a "corporate" structured world, to you that is the definition of success and to you it's the only way you see things benefiting the greater good. To those such as myself, catanea, joseph, and others, as much good and more can be done by one person bio-regionally. If you truly know Burbank you know that the majority of his work also was based on such ventures, as was the work of James JH Gregory and Oscar H. Will, sure they ocassionally stumbled into something that worked in a wide variety of climates, but that was not the primary focus. Also, I will argue with any fruit breeder that number of trees and how many must be grown to find a good one, particularly if you know the source of the seeds and the surrounding pollinators as well as have access to the pedigree of the parents. The truth is we are living in a new economy and the reason that artisonal and mom and pop shops are poping up everwhere isn't just because it's trendy, but because it's proven that focusing on the local economy works, I'll tie this into the apple breeding discussion by saying that there are both a ton of home brewers out there now as well as micro-breweries and vinters and orchardist focused on cider and perry production and thus the expectation of finding great new cider apples is more than enough to gain and hold my attention and the attention of many others. It's also more than enough attention that I was able to sale nearly 500 apple pipin seedlings this past spring at 5.00 a piece to 4 seperate orchards looking for and willing to experiment with "off type" apples. It is all about how your market what you do and whether you can subsidize what you do. I won't argue with you, most people won't make it as purely plant breeders, but if you take the time to notice that our definition of success and hapiness are different from yours and look at the group of people your speaking to you will realize that breeding plants is just one part of what we do with many other agricultural persuits both subsidizing the plant breeding and supplying income, we may not change the world as a whole or the nation as a whole but we certainly do more than our fair share for the local economy and have changed the thought patterns of those still caught up in the "green revolution" of the 40's and 50's and the "gene revolution" of the 90's and 00's |
|
|
|
Post by silverseeds on Nov 11, 2010 21:13:40 GMT -5
I only read about half the thread, I will get back to it later.
One thing I wanted to say though is that thomas edison being the person who held burbank up and said that PVP would ensure more burbanks, is such an interesting symbology. Edison was himself a very bright man, but in many respects stood on the back of tesla. Using his wealth to ride on top of tesla.
Did the world need PVP to ensure burbank? obviously not. Or tom wagner, or tim peters, or alan...... Doesnt appear so. If anything I think PVP ensured there were less such people. It sure hasnt appeared to have helped any of them make a great amount of money from their work, and they've been trying to do so. Im not even speaking for Tom or Tim I have no idea their stance.
Back before money was involved with patents, and education was about education. Unniversities did this as a natural course. Id love to see that be a central point for long term projects. with locals being able to have access to the seeds of the projects by payment of course, to further the goals. Universities get public funding.
In such a market the seed companies would have to be breeding TRULY superior crops to earn the business, and stay on top.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Nov 11, 2010 22:52:28 GMT -5
One thing I wanted to say though is that thomas edison being the person who held burbank up and said that PVP would ensure more burbanks, is such an interesting symbology. Edison was himself a very bright man, but in many respects stood on the back of tesla. Using his wealth to ride on top of tesla. Theres more truth in that quote about Tesla than you'd get most of mainstream America to ever admit to. |
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Nov 11, 2010 22:55:36 GMT -5
I could care less about what you do with chestnuts any more than expecting you to care what I may do with tomatoes. We are each the minimum personnel required to develop a new variety. Apparently you have read little of what has been presented. I am very familiar with the works of Luther Burbank and it was because of his work that the PVP act was passed. He was all for it. I have many times referred to the fact that he was granted a number of PVPs after he was dead. Since you work with trees, you should also be aware of the number of apple trees which must be grown from seed before one is suitable for commercial production. I used to repeat the figure of 10,000 until someone in the industry said that it was closer to 12,000. If you happen to not like Honeycrisp, that's an individual preference and your problem. And, the fact still remains that there is no incentive to do anything without some reward. What that reward is is up to the individual. Martin Martin, two things here, "not caring" what Castanea does is one thing, but generally people here do care, I know I for one do and find his work amazing, just as I find the work of tomato breeders or other plant animal breeders interesting. I think what your missing here is the point entirely. Particularly pointing out quoted numbers of apple trees it takes to produce/find a "commercial" variety to someone who obviously already knows the statistics, it's just a bit demeaning don't you think? I believe what you are partially missing here is the divide between your line of thinking and the type of thinking that others are focused on. Your soley focusing on those interested in the world and or national market and making it in a "corporate" structured world, to you that is the definition of success and to you it's the only way you see things benefiting the greater good. To those such as myself, catanea, joseph, and others, as much good and more can be done by one person bio-regionally. If you truly know Burbank you know that the majority of his work also was based on such ventures, as was the work of James JH Gregory and Oscar H. Will, sure they ocassionally stumbled into something that worked in a wide variety of climates, but that was not the primary focus. Also, I will argue with any fruit breeder that number of trees and how many must be grown to find a good one, particularly if you know the source of the seeds and the surrounding pollinators as well as have access to the pedigree of the parents. The truth is we are living in a new economy and the reason that artisonal and mom and pop shops are poping up everwhere isn't just because it's trendy, but because it's proven that focusing on the local economy works, I'll tie this into the apple breeding discussion by saying that there are both a ton of home brewers out there now as well as micro-breweries and vinters and orchardist focused on cider and perry production and thus the expectation of finding great new cider apples is more than enough to gain and hold my attention and the attention of many others. It's also more than enough attention that I was able to sale nearly 500 apple pipin seedlings this past spring at 5.00 a piece to 4 seperate orchards looking for and willing to experiment with "off type" apples. It is all about how your market what you do and whether you can subsidize what you do. I won't argue with you, most people won't make it as purely plant breeders, but if you take the time to notice that our definition of success and hapiness are different from yours and look at the group of people your speaking to you will realize that breeding plants is just one part of what we do with many other agricultural persuits both subsidizing the plant breeding and supplying income, we may not change the world as a whole or the nation as a whole but we certainly do more than our fair share for the local economy and have changed the thought patterns of those still caught up in the "green revolution" of the 40's and 50's and the "gene revolution" of the 90's and 00's Telling someone something that that person already knows is no more wrong than that person telling me that I did not tell something I did. Make sense? That person stated that I obviously did not know anything about Burbank when it was already apparent that I indeed did. Tit for tat. Still also hold to what I said about the chestnuts. My interest in those trees is no more or no less than that person's interest in my tomatoes. Tit for tat. Those "Burbanks" do exist. You are one of them. I am one of them. There are other individual gardeners here who also who do the same. Do you not wish to be considered as what Edison predicted? Your name is already associated with some new varieties. One was mentioned in IDig today. Was it wrong for someone to give you credit for it? This is a case of not being able to have your cake and eat it to. You are an individual plant breeder just the same as Burbank was. As such, you can not claim that what you are doing is wrong. One difference is that he had grants backing him and thus he was usually playing with money which wasn't his own. And to SSE again, rant all you wish for as many times as you wish and all you'll accomplish is to take up storage space as it won't change that organization one tiny bit. I don't like Obama, Pelosi, and General Motors but no matter what I say here isn't going to do any more than wear my nails out on the keys. Anything I would type would be considered about as meaningless as Kent Whealy's rant. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Nov 11, 2010 23:06:47 GMT -5
I thought of an idea which may be helpful in settling this. Everyone list whatever grievances they have with SSE. Presently there is a survey which is available to those who have access to the Yearbook on the Internet. This IS an SSE thread and thus would be the place for anyone to look for such grievances. We then can determine if this heirloom thing is really worth the time and effort that everyone seems to devoting to it. Please be as brief as possible rather than what gives the appearance of merely a long tirade.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by mnjrutherford on Nov 12, 2010 7:43:48 GMT -5
I find the large, glossy catalog I receive each year wasteful and contrary to the stated image. I would prefer a smaller format on recycled paper that is not chemically enhanced so that once used, it can be safely composted.
Thank you for asking Martin!
|
|
|
|
Post by PatrickW on Nov 12, 2010 11:19:35 GMT -5
If one is not, nor ever has been an SSE member, criticizing all that SSE stands for also criticizes everything that I do or have accomplished in assisting the gardening world. Sometimes I think the world we live in has become very confusing and warped. If we want to promote organic foods, the way to do that is not to go to the supermarket and buy certified organic products. The way to do that is buy from small and local. If we want to promote sustainable agriculture, the way to do that is not buy commercial certified organic seeds, but rather use seeds available on this forum and other similar places. There are a lot of arguments for buying a second hand car, or doing without, instead of buying the latest greatest super efficient hybrid. We all want to spend our money on the best possible cause, and promote our own ideals, but sometimes what we are told to do and what everyone else is doing, is simply not the right thing. It's just no longer clear if being a member of the SSE and giving them money is really promoting all that they stand for. It's just also not the case that PVP is what Burbank would have wanted it to be, or what it should be. I think it's really important we keep challenging the 'truths' in the world around us, and work for our ideals instead of what other people tell us to do. |
|
|
|
Post by PapaVic on Nov 12, 2010 16:00:08 GMT -5
I think most people are opportunists and I think this is the natural state of the human animal.
Therefore, most people will use a resourse to their personal advantage. I think this is true of people who use natural resources, physical resources such as germplasm depositories and other means of germplasm distribution, or resources such as the U.S. Postal Service or the Internet.
To a large extent, this natural tendency to use resources in a basically selfish manner is and expression of the human trait of self-preservation ... kind of like a basic instinct.
I don't think Kent Whealy is unlike most people. And I don't think most people are unlike one another, regardless of their stated philosophies to the contrary.
Simple as that.
pv
|
|
|
|
Post by PapaVic on Nov 12, 2010 16:27:12 GMT -5
I think most people are opportunists and I think this is the natural state of the human animal. Therefore, most people will use a resourse to their personal advantage. I think this is true of people who use natural resources, physical resources such as germplasm depositories and other means of germplasm distribution, or resources such as the U.S. Postal Service or the Internet. To a large extent, this natural tendency to use resources in a basically selfish manner is and expression of the human trait of self-preservation ... kind of like a basic instinct. I don't think Kent Whealy is unlike most people. And I don't think most people are unlike one another, regardless of their stated philosophies to the contrary. Simple as that. pv What is your point exactly? Based on the content of the thread, your post could be interpreted a few ways ... My comments are simply observations and opinions regarding the actions of humans generally and with regard specifically to Kent Whealy, his actions over the past couple of years, broadly regarding the comments found within some of the posts in this thread, the use of SSE as a resource generally, and not directed at "altruistic" or "opportunistic" intentions of anyone in particular, other than as stated in my first comment. pv |
|
|
|
Post by lavandulagirl on Nov 12, 2010 20:06:50 GMT -5
My issue with SSE is, honestly, an image one. With the dust up over Kent being forced out, and Amy Goldman coming in, the scene that was painted was one of an ugly divorce, followed by an opportunist with money taking the reins. Kent's letters over the last couple years have been the ramblings of a bitter, bitter man. Now, it may be he has some good reason to be bitter. Or, he may in fact be a philanderer and a demagogue. And the ties that SSE seems to be making with the corporate world trouble me. However, being one to see evil in most corporate deals, I may be making too much of that.
Whether Kent or the current SSE are more to blame, the overarching image is tawdry. And that's why I now prefer to buy, or trade, seeds from and with smaller holdings.
|
|
LoreD
gardener
Posts: 226
|
Post by LoreD on Nov 12, 2010 20:32:33 GMT -5
I had some issues with the way Kent Whealy was fired. He was the founder, and was more than just an employee of SSE. I never thought that the reasons that were given by the Board were enough for him to be fired.
After his firing, a whole group was all over the internet talking about the infidelity issue, which I thought was completely immaterial to the situation. It seemed to me as if the Board was using surrogates to smear him.
I've looked at the SSE catalog and was underwhelmed. Overpriced seeds that could be purchased anywhere. I prefer to order from FEDCO, Baker Creek, Victory, or any of a dozen other commercial sources. I think that supporting companies that provide open-pollinated seeds is the best way of making sure that these seeds survive.
Kent Whealy built SSE, now its someone's plaything.
LoreD
|
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Nov 13, 2010 0:23:35 GMT -5
Another thought. From the time I joined SSE, I've been sending them a sample of seeds whenever I grow a variety which hasn't been listed before. (They will also often buy new ones if not donated.) According to Kent Whealy, those must still belong to me. I could care less if they end up in Svalbard of Timbuktu. At same time, have also sent samples to SESE. If neither grow them and just stick them in cold-storage, I don't care as long as there is a chance that someone may grow them in the future. Same goes for any other company involved in supplying vegetable seeds. There was an IDig member a few years ago who got a number of super tomato varieties from me and he worked for Seminis. If they ever end up being offered to commercial growers through that system, that will have them be a lot more useful than sitting in a jar here.
Wish that I could find a GW thread from around 2004 in the Wayback Machine. I had been an SSE store customer for years and the story I was getting from Aaron Whaley and the Ass't Mgr were not what we were being fed on GW. It was a very long thread and in the end Craig LeH. called me "consistently negative". I took that as a compliment!
But, I stayed with SSE since I already knew where most of the dirty laundry was hanging and could avoid it. I do think that their public catalog prices are fair. After a bit of thought, I also think that the last Yearbook price increase was meant to be a fair one for the growers. As borne out by the increase in requests from the previous year, it was not a deterrent. The option of allowing an individual to set his/her own prices has always been there and mine will again be basically half price for 2011, as it was in 2009.
Also, look around and find how many "heirloom" seed companies have popped up in the past 10-15 years. It seems that no matter what obscure variety of something is mentioned, it's available commercially from some little Internet company which started up in the past several years. Prior to that, the only mention was usually in the SSE Yearbook. Usually no question about the source. For that very reason, I'm going to just keep adding to my total listings for as long as I am able to continue finding decent varieties to list. That Yearbook represents one awful lot of Burbanks and Livingstons who are preserving the past so that the future may enjoy it.
Martin
-30-
|
|
