J. L. HUDSON, SEEDSMAN, BOX 337, LA HONDA, CALIFORNIA 94020-0337 USA
ESSAYS
The Public Domain Seed Pledge
We recognize that the biological diversity of the Earth has intrinsic value, beyond any value to
humanity.
We recognize that the biological diversity of the Earth is the result of ages of evolution by the
community of all living beings, therefore humanity's efforts at breeding or selecting improved
varieties for our own use only builds on the fruits of countless generations of effort by the whole
of life.
We recognize that existing cultivated varieties are the result of the efforts of countless
generations of gardeners and farmers throughout the world, therefore our own efforts at breeding or
selection of improved varieties only builds on these gifts that have been freely shared with us by
our ancestors.
THEREFORE we recognize that the biological diversity of the Earth, and the diversity of all
cultivated species are the common heritage of all life, and of all humanity, and we REJECT the theft of the
biological commons by individuals, corporations, and governments through plant patenting, gene
patenting, Plant Breeder's Rights (PBR), Plant Variety Protection (PVP), or any other form of
intellectual property applied to living things. We reject life patents in any form.
We pledge that we will not patent or otherwise seize control over the varieties we produce or
reproduce. We pledge that we will not sell or distribute patented or PVP- or PBR-controlled seeds or
plants in any form. Further, we will distribute the seeds and plants which are in our trust only
with the express prohibition of their use in any breeding, selection, genetic engineering or any
other activity which is intended to result in any form of life patent, so that the seeds, plants, their progeny,
and all genetic material will remain in the public domain in perpetuity.—J.L. Hudson, Seedsman, 1
January 2002
About Difficult Seeds
Over millions of years, wild plants have evolved germination strategies
which ensure their survival, but which may not be convenient for the home gardener who wants a quick
and even stand of plants from a packet of seed. Many seeds sprout irregularly, so that if the first
flush of seedlings is killed by adverse weather, insect predation, etc., more will come along to
take their place. In adaptation to various environments, some seeds need periods of cold, warmth,
darkness or light, fire, etc. Some have seedcoats of varying hardness or impermeability, and others
contain chemical germination inhibitors which must be leached from the seed before it can sprout.
Some species disperse themselves over wide areas by being eaten by animals, the seed sprouting far
from the mother plant, the seedcoat softened by digestive juices. Many seeds have internal clocks,
and give much higher germination at certain times of the year, regardless of the treatment given.
All seeds wait for the correct time and conditions before sprouting, and the gardener must mimic
those conditions to ensure successful germination.
We are continually testing seed for germination, and conduct research into improving methods of
handling difficult species. For slow seeds, which take months or years, making a standard test
impractical, we may use 2,3,5-triphenyltetrazolium chloride to test for hydrogenase enzyme activity,
which quickly indicates whether there is a living embryo in the seed. It can take years of research
to determine the best ways to germinate a specific species. Oryzopsis seed has been studied
for over 50 years, yet we still do not fully understand its requirements. Even then, seed collected
from one population may germinate readily, yet the same species gathered in a cold-winter area may
need cold treatment.
We offer many seeds which are easy, and sprout quickly and evenly. But with some you must be
prepared to experiment, be patient, and use your initiative and intuition. Remember that with some
rare species, you are venturing into unknown territory. Most corporate seed companies will not carry
difficult seeds, only selling, easy, mass-produced varieties. We like to offer a more challenging
alternative.—J.L. Hudson, Seedsman, November 1989.
About Organic Seeds
One of my earliest memories is of watching my father
turn the compost pile. The sight of the teeming life within the pile, and the
warmth and rich scents it gave off, are still so clear to me that I feel like I
could reach out into that memory, and pull myself through, shedding over a
half-century of years and return to that happy summer day. I learned organic
gardening from my father, and have practiced it to this day. A few years ago,
when visiting my father, I noticed some weed killer in the garage - a strange
and unexpected sight, and I did not realize at the time that it was one of the
first signs of the Alzheimer's that finally killed him. So it was only madness
that brought him to put poison on his land, and this pointed out to me again the
madness of industrial agriculture.
There are nearly 7 billion people in the world, and all of us need to eat. Can
this number of people be fed by organic agriculture? Without fossil-fuel mined
phosphates, without fossil-fuel fixed nitrogen? Without fossil-fuel driven
tractors to till, and trucks to take the food to people?
Maybe. We don't know. It would take a massive, worldwide reorganization of human
society to achieve this.
Can this be done?
When the oil runs out, we, or our descendents, will find out.
Until that time, we support an orderly move towards a more sustainable, more
regenerative agriculture. Theoretically, we have the knowledge and the
technology to make this transition with minimal suffering, but we feel it is
unlikely that humanity will choose to take the steps necessary to create a
viable future. Currently, our species is on a path that seems destined to create
a future of the maximum possible human suffering.
While we use organic methods ourselves, and we fully support organic
agriculture, we must object to the "organic seed requirement" of
current law. This requires organic growers to plant only organically-grown seed,
otherwise their crop will not be considered "organic."
Most people do not realize that this requirement was inserted into the law at
the request of a large corporate seed company in one of their attempts to gain
control of the organic seed market, or that many in industrial agriculture
support the organic seed requirement because it will be an additional burden on
organic farmers, which will lessen their economic viability.
There are currently some exemptions to the organic requirement, but again, the
corporations are pressing for and "end to the loopholes", and claim
that no matter what the cost of organic seed, or no matter how limited the
selection of organic varieties, that this is no excuse for organic growers to
fail to buy their product.
We are also seeing serious profiteering by a few organic seed suppliers at the
expense of their fellow organic growers, with some organic seed selling for ten
times or more the cost of conventional seed. There is absolutely no excuse for
this - NO organic seed is worth TEN times its conventional counterpart.
While we fully support the move towards the organic production of seed,
we do not believe that there is any solid evidence that organic crops grown from
conventional seed are any different from those grown from organic seed. In over
thirty years distributing seeds, we have seen excellent organic seed as well as
excellent conventional seed, and poor organic and poor conventional seed. We do
believe that organically-grown crops are superior in many ways to those
grown by industrial agriculture. We do believe that when seeds are grown
organically for many generations, that particular strain will be
better-adapted to organic production, but I doubt that anything under ten years
will be significantly better.
The key to the quality of seed lies in the DNA - the genetic content of the
seed, and only secondarily from the conditions of production, harvest, drying,
and storage. Without good DNA, no matter what the conditions of production, the
seed will not be worthwhile to plant.
For example, wild-collected seed is not considered to be "organic". If
a grower wants to produce an organic crop of a medicinal plant, and that seed is
available as certified organic, under current rules she must use the
organic seed, and cannot use the wild-collected seed. Wild populations of
medicinal plants may vary considerably in the specific medicinal properties, or
in adaptation to specific local conditions, and several organic growers have
expressed concern that some medicinal crops in cultivation are in serious need
of the greater genetic diversity that would come from an infusion of wild genes
from wild plants. Under current rules, plants grown from wild seed could never
enter the organic market. This is causing the same kind of genetic uniformity
seen in conventional agriculture, which is contrary to organic principles of
diversity.
Also, many traditional vegetable varieties vary considerably - some growers are
careful about reselection for superior traits, others are not. If a specific
variety is available as "organic", an organic grower would be required
to use the seed, regardless of quality.
We support organic agriculture, and we also support small-scale, family farms.
Should we purchase "organic" seed produced by a large corporation, or
seed from a struggling small farm who does not happen to have organic
certification? What would you do?
We believe that organic growers need the freedom to plant the best seeds and the
best varieties they can find, regardless of how they were produced. We feel that
the dangers of the loss of genetic variation in our food crops by the limitation
of available variety, and the consolidation of control of seeds by corporate
interests, currently far outweigh the advantages of "organic seed".
When we have spoken about our concerns with organic growers, most have heartily
agreed with our views, but a few have taken a very fundamentalist hard-line that
"We support 'organic' no matter what!" and that organic seeds should
be required no matter what other harm this causes. We would suggest that it
would make more sense for these organic purists to also require that organic
growers may not use plastic irrigation pipe (a major source of toxins), or any
fossil fuel or electricity (sources of environmental harm) in their operations
or when transporting their product to market. Should we require that organic
growers use only human and animal power to plow and ox-carts to carry their
produce to market? The "agri-smog" of pesticides from California's
agricultural Central Valley is killing frogs far downwind, high in the Sierra
Nevada. Can any grower downwind of this kind of agriculture be considered truly
"organic"?
In the summer of 2004, we replaced some of our ageing, flexible black
polyethylene waterlines with larger-diameter, more permanent buried PVC pipe
with glued connections. Periodically I emptied the pipeline and refilled it,
checking the expelled air - for over 6 months, it smelled strongly of PVC
solvent, and over a full year later, it still smelled faintly of solvent. The
solvents used in PVC glue are toxic, and no doubt contaminate the water the
pipes carry to our plants - for this reason we flush them before use. Although
miles of PVC pipe are used in organic operations, we know of no other organic
grower that has checked this source of toxins. Should we require that organic
growers use expensive steel pipe? Should we require that water lines not be used
for a year, until all trace of solvent has dissipated into the air? Should we be
absolutists, and make it even harder than it already is for small growers to
remain economically viable, or do we accept the reality that nowhere on the
planet is free of man-made toxins?
We would like to point out, that while we fully support organic agriculture,
we do not support fundamentalism, irrationality, or superstition, and we
certainly do not support profiteering or corporate attempts to control organic
seed supplies. We are opposed to making organic agriculture into a
fundamentalist religion, and we are opposed to the theft of the word
"organic" by government bureaucracy, and we are opposed to the
corporate takeover of the "organic movement".
"Wait a decade or two and every potato coming out of the state of Idaho
will be labeled 'organic', a word already under very serious stress. The process
will be entirely predictable. The big food companies will buy federal and state
legislation designed to put the small producers out of business, the same way
the meat companies finished off the small packers and processors years ago, by
insisting on hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of stainless steel and other
'sanitary' equipment, all intended to bankrupt the local sausage or ham maker.
Wall-Mart's buying power will drive down organic food prices and start to drive
small farmers to the wall."
—Alexander Cockburn, "Wall-Mart's Coming Lunge into Organic Food",
an article on the corporate takeover of organic and the weakening of organic
standards.
We need to build bridges, not walls. Instead of a black/white -
organic/conventional standoff, with the small-scale grower caught in the
cross-fire, we need to provide for a whole range of possibilities that will
allow farmers to easily move along a spectrum of alternatives towards a healthy
agriculture, rather than building a wall they must vault over.
Take back organic!
About Hybrids
The word hybrid is used in two very different ways in the seed trade.
First, to designate F-1 hybrids, and second, to designate open-pollinated plants which originated in
the crossing of two distinct varieties or species.
F-1 means 'first filial generation', and F-1 hybrids are the first generation produced
by crossing unlike parents, the offspring of which exhibit 'heterosis' (hybrid vigor) and are very
uniform. The characters of F-1 hybrids are not stable, so that seed saved from F-1 plants will not
come true, and may produce many distinct types in the second generation, often reverting to various
ancestral forms. Therefore, the original cross must be repeated each year in order to produce seed.
The second meaning of the word is much older, going back to the last century. Many flower mixtures
are called 'Hybrids' or 'New Hybrids'. These are not F-1 hybrids. They are the result of
crossing unlike parents in order to produce variation, the progeny were then selected for desired
attributes such as new flower colors, etc., and these characters fixed by selection. These are open
pollinated, and are relatively fixed. The original crosses are not repeated - the various strains
are kept pure by selection and isolation. I distribute this type of seed.
Open pollinated. or O.P., means that bees, wind, and the agencies of nature are allowed to pollinate
the flowers, rather than by emasculating the flowers and applying pollen by hand as in F-1 hybrids.
I do not distribute F-1 hybrids. First, because the grower cannot save his own seed from them to
multiply the plants as he chooses. This insures the gardener's and farmer's dependence on the seed
company to produce and sell the seed to him each year. Second, gaze at a field of F-1 plants. They
appear to be almost machine-made. This genetic uniformity of the first generation causes
vulnerability to crop failure. Two famous examples of crop failures in genetically-uniform crops are the wheat stem rust epidemic of 1954 which took 75% of the crop, and in the southern corn blight epidemic of 1970, which destroyed 20% of the crop. Even more devastating was the Irish potato blight of the 1830's, in which 2 million people starved, and 2 million fled, reducing the country's population by half, was also because of uniformity in the crop—because potatoes are propagated vegetatively, they have high genetic uniformity in fields, actually being clones of the same plant. Although the wheat and potatoes were not F-1 hybrids, they highlight the problems that may occur with genetic uniformity.
Third, the widespread cultivation of F-1 hybrids to the exclusion of the old open pollinated
varieties narrows the genetic base of our crops, and contributes to the 'genetic wipe-out' which is
alarming biologists and agronomists throughout the world. Finally, the methods used to produce the
F-1 seed each year are inhumane, and contribute to the exploitive world-view which is destroying our
environment.
An important point: in wild nature, hybridization between populations, races, varieties and species
is a common, natural occurrence. In wild nature this is a highly beneficial process, promoting
diversity and evolution. The objection here is to controlled, large-scale industrial
production of hybrids, leading to uniformity rather than diversity, and leading to the corporate
control of germplasm. There is no problem with natural hybridization, or with home gardeners
experimenting with hybridizing plants in their backyards, except that each individual should give
consideration to the ethical questions about the invasiveness and inhumaneness of the procedure.
Certain people have mis-interpreted our opposition to hybrid seeds as a justification of their
erroneous ideas against so-called "race-mixing". I would like to make it very clear that
the classification of human beings on the basis of skin color or other superficial characteristics
is not biologically sound. A rose of any color is a rose. The equality of human races is a
scientific fact, as is the fact that there is no such thing as a "pure" race. Contrary to
racist superstitions, it is a scientific fact that the mingling of human races socially, culturally,
and by intermarriage is a highly beneficial process, and should be encouraged.—J.L. Hudson,
Seedsman, 1974, 1986 and 1996.
"They do not want to know that centralization is not only the death-knell of liberty, but
also of health and beauty, of art and science, all these being impossible in a clock-like,
mechanical atmosphere."—Emma Goldman.
"Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes
nothing, than he who believes what is wrong."—Thomas Jefferson.
See Also:
The Shoe Trees of the Colorado and Mojave Deserts