It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Lose your property for growing food?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 10:49 AM

Before getting all carried away. Have you read the act or you taking someone elses word for what its about. You might want to read it. I don't see where it poses a threat to the average person growing a garden or selling at a farmers market. I could be wrong.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:35 AM
I have been seeing this bill discussed on gardening forums, and it seems that even among those people who have actually read the bill, the exact ramifications are unknown. It sounds like the bill is intended to regulate those who sell what they grow, not home gardeners, but I might be mistaken. I think it would be extremely difficult for the government to enforce a law that restricts or bans home gardening. It would require officials going door to door and inspecting the premises of every landowner, and furthermore, for the inspectors to be knowledgable enough to tell the difference between landscaping and plants grown for the exclusive purpose of becoming food. Heck, a lot of weeks are edible--are they going to ban dandelions and chickweed? I'm just saying I don't think it's possilbe for the government to ban home gardening. You can grow your stuff inside under lights, you can use edible landscaping, you can save your own seed from year to year, there are a lot of things you can do to get around any such law.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 05:22 PM
Well I saw Michele Obama on the News yesterday planting an organic garden in the White House grounds - and she was encouraging everyone to grow their own vegetables. This surely implies we can grow our own food.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 05:48 PM
reply to post by Scarcer

Bury him on the farm

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 04:20 PM
Did some research on HR875, and although I am not convinced this will affect me as a backyard organic gardener, if definitely will negatively impact small and organic farmers, community-supported agriculture, and farmer's markets. Along with NAIS, bills like HR875--there are several other similar bills like this making their way through Congress--are designed to concentrate the production/processing/distribution of our nation's food supply into the hands of a powerful few corporations by eliminating their competition. I have just written my congressional representatives to urge them to oppose HR875. Regardless of whether the bill passes or not, I will continue supporting local agriculture, purchasing from farmer's markets and roadside stands, and raising food from my own land. It's one thing for them to pass a stupid law like this, but quite another thing to enforce it!

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 05:30 PM
This is Fascism to the core. Who the hell is the government to tell people what they can and can't do with their yards?

[edit on 22-3-2009 by Donnie Darko]

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 05:55 PM
Yes indeed, Michelle Obama will be arrested and tried for treason for planting a victory garden on the White House Lawn. Kids selling Lemonaid will be required to certify that the lemons used were Monsanto Approved Lemons that were grown with Monsanto Pesticides and Monsanto Chemical fertilizers. That old apple tree in the back yard could get you ten years hard labor if one of those apples happens to fall and roll off your property. Those flowers you are growing out front are edible and you better have an inspection sticker on each and every one.

Or, we could just ignore the bill for Home use and focus on how it helps to ruin the commercial farmers in the US, toxifies our soil and bodies, and drives the cost of food up.

Monsantos logo....... " Without Chemicals, Life itself would not exist"

Lets face it. Big Agro, Big Pharma, and Big Banking is ruining the world at an ever increasing rate.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 07:09 PM
I've been reading a lot of the discussions about this legislation, as I have recently become an avid backyard fruit and vegetable gardener for my family's consumption. I find it hard to fathom how they could, as a previous poster has stated, inspect every inch of privately owned property across the country. This would entail a huge number of inspectors, and I doubt they would look to local officials, as they are already overdrawn. Furthermore, as a previous poster also stated, how can they ban backyard gardening while Michele Obama is planting one at the White House? Are they going to tear up the lawn at the White House too?

I think that this legislation is meant to impact, to the benefit of big agribusiness, the small to medium sized organic farms that have the resources and man power to support small communities. Think about it. If this legislation can shut down all of the organic farms accross the country, then they also eliminate all of the farms that are producing organic seed. If they can eliminate all of the organic seed, then everybody will be forced to use the GMO seed. One obvious effect would be huge profit for agribusness.

The scary part is that here you have the First Lady encouraging people to plant backyard gardens, while congress is implementing a law that would essentially force people to buy seed from a select few corporations.

Just take a minute to think about how creepy that is, coincidence or not. I often read comments that refer to the idea that if you control the food you control the people. What about letting the people think they are in control of their own food, all the while, they are uknowingly using GMO seed in their gardens?

Edit to add:

This legislation must be squashed. Simply because, if this legislation passes, there is a potential for all organic, non-GMO seed production to cease, forcing every gardener or farmer, regardless of scale, to use only GMO seed. Technology and our improving understanding of genetics are great things, but this is not a question of whether or not GMO is good. This is a question of choice. If you eliminate non-GMO seed and produce from the markets, people have no choice. People should at least be given the chance the choose between organic and GMO. This legislation makes the choice for the people, when many people are not even aware that they have a choice.


[edit on 26-3-2009 by PH43DRUS]

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by PH43DRUS

Good post. A star for you.
Although the legislation does not seem to target home gardens, you rightly concluded that the result will be the elimination of organic, non-GM seed. Monsanto, and its political stooges, are behind this treasonous act. Those that control the food control the world.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:08 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Thanks for the reply and star.

You are right, as well, about Monsanto's agenda.

I've bought my first non-GMO seed last fall. When I have some spare cash, I buy some more seed. Consider it my rebuttal to Monsanto's actions.

In fact, I challange everyone to start their own micro-non-GMO seedbanks while there is still time. Monsanto is doing it, on a slightly larger scale, of course. Surely, a few million people with small seedbanks and the right message can outmatch this corporate giant. Heck, just the act of buying the seed will help the economy!

Everyone has a choice.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:14 PM
reply to post by PH43DRUS

Yes, agreed. By the way, you can save seed for many years, if you take certain precautions. Here is a great site that explains how to do that:

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:23 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Without reading the link, I agree--seed saving is the key. An individual can only buy so much, but by growing the seed you buy, saving the seed from that crop, and repeating the process, the size of your seedbank grows exponentially. Of course, seed vitality decreases with time, but done right, this can provide seed for a lifetime. Even multiple generations. I get the sense that people are disconnected from the foundations of prosperity. To avert these crises we face, I think, people need to get back to their roots. Namely, water, food, shelter, family.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:40 PM
reply to post by PH43DRUS

Of course, seed vitality decreases with time,

Actually, that is why I posted the link. It explains that need not be the case.

Storing Seeds for Long Term Storage Contrary to what you might assume, if properly cared for, high quality vegetable seeds have an amazingly long storage life. What many people do not realize is that in nature, the seed is designed to remain viable until the conditions of the soil and weather are ideal for germination.
So just how long do seeds remain viable anyway? To be honest, there is really no definable limit, as was recently proven in Israel with the successful germination in 2005 of a 2000 year old seed of the extinct Judean Date Palm that came from an archeological dig at King Herod's palace near the Dead Sea. In 1978, a 1200 year old Lotus seed discovered in a dry lakebed in China was also successfully germinated, which prior to the Date Palm was the world's oldest successfully germinated seed. More recently, the Millennium Seed Bank successfully germinated three species of plants from 200+ year old seeds.

In the realm of vegetable seeds, reports of 25 to 50 year old seeds germinating are quite common place and it was reported that during World War 2, cabbage and other Brassica seed that was hundreds of years old were successfully germinating after a seed repository was bombed by Germany's Luftwaffe. Needless to say, although the germination rate of seed does decline as time passes (and different crops decline at different rates), seed still has a remarkable vitality.

To store seeds properly, the essential goal is to place the seed into a set of conditions that are the polar opposite of what is required to germinate the seed. For proper germination, for the most part, seeds require moisture and warmth. (Some species also require light and other conditions. Humidity also plays a role). Needless to say, to store seeds, a cool, dry place with little to no humidity is always best.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:48 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Wow! Great link. Two thousand year old seed that germinates successfully, certainly, is news to me.

I know I'm new here, but I guess this is my first hands-on lesson--read the links first.

Thanks, again, Professor.

[edit on 26-3-2009 by PH43DRUS]

posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 01:58 PM

"Even at Monsanto, many in-the-know employees won't consume the company's own GM creations."

By Jeffrey Smith

April 1, 2009

If President Obama's new Food Safety Working Group dedicates all their time and credentials to prevent future food recalls, they will have saved thousands of people--but forsaken millions. Over the last decade, our radically changing diet has ushered in the explosive growth of food-related ailments, such as allergies, asthma, obesity, diabetes, autism, infertility, gastro-intestinal disorders, and learning disabilities. Of all the changes in our food, the most dangerous transformation was the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops.

When these gene-spliced concoctions, such as GM soy, corn, canola, and cottonseed, came on the scene in 1996, the proportion of Americans suffering from three or more chronic ailments. After just 9 years, that nearly doubled to 13%. GM foods are the prime suspect. Government policy at odds with science.

Until now, the government has sidestepped the controversy by hiding behind FDA policy, which asserts that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are "substantially equivalent" to natural foods and therefore don't require any safety studies. But as Obama acknowledged, "many of the laws and regulations governing food safety in America" are outdated.

In truth, the FDA's GMO policy was not even up-to-date when it was implemented in May 1992. FDA documents made public from a lawsuit revealed that virtually all the agency scientists asked to comment voiced strong warnings that GMOs may cause serious health problems. But the FDA was under orders from the White House to fast track GM foods, and the person in charge of FDA policy was the former attorney of biotech giant Monsanto--and later become their vice president. The scientists and the science were ignored.

Now that animals fed GMOs--in labs and farms around the world--have exhibited symptoms related to the growing list of diseases in the US population, the President's Food Safety team, including Dr. Margaret Hamburg as FDA Commissioner, must update GMO regulation. A scientifically sound regulation would translate into an immediate ban of current GM crops, and the implementation of rigorous safety testing requirements before any GMO was put back into the food supply. And certainly mandatory labeling, as promised by President Obama during his campaign, must accompany any GM food approval. Presidents and industry insiders avoid GMOs. The Obama family has wisely opted out of exposing themselves to GM foods by requiring organic--and therefore non-GMO--foods served at the White House. They are even planting an organic garden on the south lawn of the White House, to feature 55 types of vegetables.

The Bush family also had an organic kitchen policy. Laura Bush was "adamant" about it, but kept it all quiet. Even at Monsanto, many in-the-know employees won't consume the company's own GM creations. Back in 1999, the management of the cafeteria at Monsanto's UK headquarters in High Wycombe, England wrote: "In response to concern raised by our customers .. . . we have decided to remove, as far as possible, genetically modified soy and maize (corn) from all food products served in our restaurant. . . . We have taken the above steps to ensure that you, the customer, can feel confident in the food we serve."

And one former Monsanto scientist told me that his colleagues, who were safety testing milk from cows injected with the company's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone, decided to stop drinking milk--unless it was organic.

It's now time to let us all opt out of this dangerous and failed GM experiment. If Obama's team is serious about food safety and public health, they must take GMOs off our plates and put them back into the laboratory.

© 2008 Jeffrey Smith - All Rights Reserved

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in