Everyone needs to read this!!!!!!

Discussion in 'Gardening and Agriculture' started by redneck1861, Nov 30, 2010.

  1. redneck1861

    redneck1861 New Member

    3
    0
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2010
  2. NaeKid

    NaeKid YourAdministrator, eh?

    8,000
    10

  3. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    Here is something I just discovered tonight and it really caught me off guard. Think the .gov can't control what you grow in your own yard for your own PERSONAL consumption? THINK AGAIN!

    If s510 becomes law there is little know supreme court ruling from 1942 that will give the FDA the power to tell you what you can or can't grow.

    It's the case of Wickard v. Filburn 317 U.S. 111 (1942)

    An overview:

    The specific question presented in Wickard was whether wheat that never left the farm should be subject to the marketing quotas established by the (Second Agricultural Adjustment Act).

    The specific question presented in Wickard was whether wheat that never left the farm should be subject to the marketing quotas established by the act.

    The man who challenged the act's wheat quotas was Roscoe C. Filburn, a small Ohio farmer. Filburn maintained a herd of dairy cattle, raised poultry, and sold milk, poultry, and eggs in the open market. He planted a small acreage of winter wheat that he fed to his chickens and cattle, ground into flour for his family's consumption, and saved for the following year's seed. Filburn did not sell a single bushel of wheat in the open market. In 1941, Filburn sowed twelve acres of wheat more than he was permitted by Second Agricultural Adjustment Act's regulations. This unauthorized planting yielded 239 bushels of wheat, on which the federal government imposed a penalty of 49 cents a bushel. Filburn contested the government's assessment, arguing that the federal power to regulate commerce did not extend to the production and consumption of wheat that was never marketed...

    ...Following the logic of the important Commerce Clause case of United States v. Darby Lumber Co. (1941), ( supreme court justice)Jackson held for the Court in Wickard that the quota on wheat authorized by the Second Agricultural Adjustment Act was constitutional under Article I, section 8 of the Constitution, which permitted Congress to “regulate Commerce … among the several States.” Jackson maintained that wheat consumed but not marketed still had an effect upon interstate commerce and thus could be regulated. Filburn's 239 bushels of home‐consumed wheat might by itself have seemed trivial, but it was part of a much larger story. In the early 1940s more than 20 percent of all the wheat grown in the country never left the farm. By consuming their own grain, Filburn and thousands of farmers like him cut the overall demand and depressed the market price of wheat. Their actions clearly affected interstate commerce and were, Jackson concluded, subject to federal regulation.

    http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O184-WickardvFilburn.html

    And here's an article that goes into more detail about this 1942 decision, how it can still be used to control small scale farmers and the possible ramifications of it.

    Feds order farmer to destroy his own wheat crops: The shocking revelations of Wickard vs Filburn
     
  4. BizzyB

    BizzyB BucketHunter

    112
    1
    Being the 'Bear-of-little-legal-brain' that I am, it seems Wickard v. Filburn provides precedent for also twisting the preamble of the Constitution -- you know the part about promoting the general warfare -- to ensure crops go where Uncle Sam decides they need to go.
     
  5. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Hi Uncle Joe...I hear about 100 + cities are bankrupt in that they can't pay police, fire fighters, garbage collectors, etc..and selling parking meters for revenue!!

    Ya think when TSHTF, they're really gonna hire new bureaucrats to come and spy on our yards when they don't even have funds to pick up their own s**t??

    I like to think this was an act of 'show-off' and retribution for those leaving because they got the boot.:mad:

    So, I'm not worried about my friendly community growers who take their wares to the Ag. building for me to buy....we're gonna have a lot more important things to be focused on...like the Zombies armed to steal our stuff??:gaah:
     
  6. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    I'm not really concerned about the FDA coming in here and taking or fining us for what we grow. I just never knew there was a legal precedent in place for them to fall back on should they deem it necessary.
     
  7. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Yes, I read that SC case and the findings with wonderment...amazing how even in the 40's, the saying 'don't trust the gubermint' applied.
    I would think Monsanto smiles each time they read about that case.

    On another note...did you hear about the labs findings??
    They have discovered that you CAN use hybrid seeds for seeding..if that's even the term...yep---the plants aren't strong and as productive at first, but I read that the 2nd/3rd (and sometimes it takes the 4th generation) to revert back to non-hybrid....(I know I didn't explain this well)
    I like to think God is in charge...leading...if we just follow.
     
  8. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    Yep, they will grow. The genetic make up of hybrids are just a combination of different varieties of the same crop. Flavor enhancement and resistance to disease and bugs is the result. Save and use the seed from year to year and after a couple generations one of the original genes will exert itself and revert back to the original plants. It just may not have the same properties and characteristics as the one you started with.
     
  9. worldengineer

    worldengineer Well-Known Member

    300
    3
    Found that out this year in the garden. We had a very good haul of Squash, Tomatoes, Cucumbers, Corn, Potatoes went in the ground to late so they didn't do great, and an assortment of other stuff. Finally figured out how to grow Basil (realized you don't pluck a leaf and try and eat it raw).

    Well after the abundant harvest we had alot of food get over grown or get sickly and die. Anyways during fall we went to plant some greens and noticed that tomatoes, corn, squash and everything we had planted the tilled under had sprouted. This is all hybrid varieties thus confirming that.

    I think the government can try to regulate what we grow. But I assure that when that happens the S will have HTF. Or be getting mighty close.
     
  10. Emerald

    Emerald Well-Known Member

    1,897
    1
    I'm not too worried about this law at the moment-like JayJay said- they are gonna be too busy to bother with us.
    But on the subject of hybrids not sprouting-total myth but they do tend to revert back to either one or another of the first 2 to 4 plants that were crossed to make the hybrids.
    You can help this process along if you want to grow them out and select for the best plant each year, or for traits that are desirable to you. And within about 4 to 5 years of selective seed saving you will end up with a (well usually) good open pollinated plant/veggie that is becoming more suited to your area.
    I even do selective seed saving of the heirloom and OP plants that I grow and maintain seed on- if you select plant to save seed from that are always the earliest producers in your area you are saving seed from a plant that you know will do well for you. The more you do that the better the strains become and that is generally how come there are many different strains of a certain tomato--like the Brandywine--there are about 5 or 6 different strains of that one going around and some do better in my area than others do.
    I have been growing and saving seed for quite a few years now and have done tons of "homework" on it so that, while I am not a pro by any means at it , I can save almost all of the plants that I grow at the moment.. and keep the lines quite pure at the same time.
     
  11. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Oh, wow...are we talking pod people, here???:eek::eek::eek::eek:

    Sort of exciting!!!! Just kidding!!:beercheer:

    I'll say again..Emerald...can I be your adopted sister or brother??? A friend?? You'd be a great neighbor.
     
  12. The_Blob

    The_Blob performing monkey

    4,230
    4
    this is because:
    A. the genetic tampering (ie the Kill Gene) is imperfect
    B. not all hybrids are given the Kill Gene
    C. there is so much redundancy in living systems
    D. much of the genetic code does NOT code for proteins which is why even though EVERY generation of every species of lifeform is technically a 'mutant' (yes, even clones can be genetically differentiated due to many many factors {example: genetic drift}) individual mutations generally have no discernable effect due to the tremendous amount of 'information' in the gene code

    yes, I'm sure that's more information than you wanted to know :rolleyes: