Plant breeding in the public interest

[Paul Cherubini]

Patrick Foley wrote:

> But it may be disastrous for the long-term public interest to commit much of our land
> and harvest into a few hands and a few genotypes.

 I wrote:

> Can you give us some specific scenarios or models of potential "disastrous"
> consequences? Perhaps examples from other industries long controlled by a few
> hands?

Patrick Foley wrote:

> Surely you are not asking for a lesson in the dangers of concentrating 
> power in a few hands? Nor can you be ignorant of the dangers a genetically
> depauperate population or cultivar faces. Let us not argue over the obvious.

These "dangers" and "disastrous consequences" are not obvious to me. That's
why I requested specific scenarios and models or examples from other industries.

The petroleum industry, for example, has been concentrated into a 
few hands for 30 years. What disaster has befallen us due to that situation? 

If there are serious dangers of a genetically depauperate population or cultivar, 
please enlighten us with historical examples (that are relevant to the transgenic
crops we have today) of disastrous consequences that have resulted from 
that situation.

If I sound like a skeptic it's because in 1970, for example,  Paul Ehrlich 
cavalierly used terms like "disastrous" and "catastrophic" to describe what 
was going to happen to the world's ecosystems, food and fossil fuel 
supply in the 80's and 90's due to the green revolution and agri-business. 

Paul Cherubini