Outline
- Post gold-rush: a connection to industrialized agriculture?
- Modern crop development: plant breeding, hybrid crops
- Patenting foods: when did it start?
- Pesticides: post-WWII, development of new pesticides.
- Genetic engineering: resistence to pesticides, other agro-related goals? Funders, control.
- Synthetic biology: methods, goals, patenting. Funders, control.
Notes
(from Insects and Institutions) California fruit growers decided in the late 1800's that their future would be in specialization, e.g. grow the things that grew better in CA than anywhere else in the world. (globalization of food, already!) But: lots of pests coming along with massive monocropping of introduced species. Enter Charles W. Woodworth, "one of the leading economic entomologists of the time," founder of the Entomology department at UCB. He "was no bug-loving scientist. Woodworth never studied an insect for any other reason than to find the most effective way to kill it." Lead arsenate, the widest-used pre-DDT pesticide, was introduced, and its hazards were discovered: farmers needed scientists to tell them how to do it. Simultaneously other scientists advocated for using biological controls, but Woodworth, in charge, advocated for insecticides. Woodworth researched arsenical insecticides, put out bulletins, and wrote the 1901 California Insecticide Law to prevent fraud, requiring insecticides manufactured in the state to be registered with the UC. In 1907 two of Woodworth's students, William Volck and Ellerslie Luther invented a non-defoliating insecticide, "basic lead arsenate", founded California Spray-Chemical, the first modern insecticide company, and manufactured under the brand Ortho. It later became part of Standard Oil, now Chevron. Shell Chemical, Union Carbide, and Dow Chemical all also emerged at this time to produce pesticides. The UC advised farmers about which companies to trust, while there was a revolving door between the UC and the companies.
(from an Overview of Ag Mechanization) California farms were making a lot of money compared to the rest of the country, and rapidly mechanized in the 1870-1930 period. They were larger, and labor was scarcer, so mechanization was encouraged. The rest of the country was family farmed, but CA was not (see quote). The first shift was from oxen to horse-drawn machines. It moved from making lots of wheat to more specialty crops. It also adopted tractors early (the late nineteens). Bonanza farms were a national phenomenon -- the first big factory farms, highly dependant on migrant labors.
- "Grain combines, tracklaying tractors, giant land planes, and sugar beet harvesters, to name but a few, emerged from Califor-
nia's shops revolutionizing production processes around the world."
- "Here (in California) "factories in the field" depended on a migrant proletariat to gather the harvest These economic factors stimulated the adoption of labor-saving machinery."
- "Finally, California farmers were the nation's pioneers in the utilization of electric power on farms. The world's first purported use of electricity for irrigation pumping took place in the Central Valley just before the turn of the century."
(from A Stylized History) CA ag always driven by riches-seekers, often for foreign markets. Also shaped by "absence of water in the right place." Has always depended on a large supply of ag labor (various immigrants). Always been dominated by large-scale sophisticated operations.
- Missions: 1769-1821 twenty-one missions.
- 1821-1848 (mexican independence - mexican-american war): large land grants; cattle (3 million -- today we have 4-5 million). 7000 (white?) people.
1848-1860s (gold rush & growth) from 26,000 people to 380,000 (white?) people.
- lots of wheat was grown 1870-1890 but dissappeared partly 'cause they farmed out the soil!
Advent of refrigerated rail cars important in the massive extensive -> intensive shift (e.g. to fruit, nuts, cotton) of 1870-1930.
centrifugal pump -> groundwater use, pumped it all out 1910-1950.
1937 began Central Valley Project (Bureau of Reclamation) -> 1953 Delta-Mendota canal completed: added 1 million acres in San Joaquin valley
- braceros in 1942-1964 through the 'boom' war years and postwar expansion... water replacing labor as dominant issue.
- 1948: CA largest ag state in the union.
- 1960s California Water Project (state) added another 1/2 million acres in southern San Joaquin
Big water & urban development 1950-1970 moved ag away from LA, Orange, Santa Clara, and San Diego to the south san joaquin valley. LA county went from top ag county to not even top ten in 20 years.
50s & 60s new water and federal subsidy increased cotton & rice farming
- CA began the cattle feed lot in the 60s
- late 70s- more internationalization
- farm financial crisis late 70s-80s
- "California agriculture has always been “demand driven.” It was never subsistence, family-farm agriculture like that which characterized much of early U.S. agriculture (Cochrane 1993); rather, it was driven by entrepreneurs seeking riches by serving high-value and/or newly emerging markets. These markets were generally distant and often foreign..."
(from CVP overview) Opposition to CVP came from the small farmers of the Central Valley Project Conference, headed by the Master of the California Grange, and opposing the Central Valley Project Association. CVPC pushed for limited acreage and public control; CVPA "viewed these as anathema".
- 1990 steelhead and salmon populations less than 5% of 1969.
(from UC research) CA has more biotech jobs than the rest of the US. "One in three California biotech firms (and one in six nationwide) was founded by UC scientists, and 85% of California biotech firms employ UC alumni with graduate degrees." Lots of links!!
List of "discover grant" funded projects: http://ucdiscoverygrant.org/portfolio/funded/biotech.asp (mostly health)
List of "discover grant" industry partners: http://ucdiscoverygrant.org/portfolio/sponsors/biotech.asp (lots of "now Novartis..."
"UC and Biotechnology
To ensure that UC will continue to play a crucial role in the research discoveries that fuel the multi-billion dollar bio-technology industry, the UC Discovery Grant program builds links between UC researchers and California business with the goal of fostering research, positioning California for international competitiveness in emerging areas of biotechnology and identifying biotech solutions to important statewide problems."
- Two new buildings at UCSC, at UCB: Stanley, etc. etc..
(OTT report) The top UC income from patent revenue was the Hep B vaccine, patented by UCSF in 1979 & 1981 -- $20,000,000 in FY2002-2003.
(JGI site)
- timeline: (1980) "After genetically engineering a bacterium capable of breaking down crude oil, Ananda Chakrabarty seeks to patent his creation under a provision of patent law providing patents for people who invent or discover any new and useful "manufacture" or "composition of matter." A patent examiner and the Patent Office Board of Appeals reject the patent on the grounds that living things are not patentable. The decision, however, is reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5 to 4 decision. The Court rules that while natural laws, physical phenomena, abstract ideas, or newly discovered minerals are not patentable, a live artificially-engineered microorganism is."
about us: "The Joint Genome Institute’s overarching mission is to provide integrated high-throughput sequencing and computational analysis to enable genomic-scale/systems-based scientific approaches to DOE-relevant challenges in energy and the environment."
Mention phylogenetics, etc.? See "center for integrative genomics", etc..
(from "killing fields":) UC Riverside biological control unit in 1923; Berkeley in 1944. "By the early 1970s, the Division adopted a distinctive, some might say flamboyant, camaraderie among its faculty and their antagonism toward the over-reliance on pesticides and agrochemicals in American agriculture." Saw conventional farming as part of the *problem*; monocropping and pesticides inhibited successful use of predators/parasites. Refers to The Pesticide Conspiracy, written by Van Den Bosch, at Berkeley. A trend in ag research was integration of pesticides and biological controls; critiques of this met with hostility. Refers a lot to a National Research Council report, "Alternative Agriculture" from 1989. Mentions, for instance, how pesticides are artificially cheap (don't include health costs), and how a good biological control doesn't require continued purchases -- no industry support. Therefore, need public support... but very little public support. There are various specific examples of successful biological controls. Says Altieri: "Efforts to redefine biological control to include molecular biology approaches are starting to divert our already limited resources into biotechnology." In 1994, the CA Commodity Committee (agbusiness-funded) recommended to the UC that industry "recieve greater involvement in university policy and program development" and that all ag-related research and extension activities at Berkeley be transferred to Davis and Riverside. The UC's Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, having some of the same members as the CCC, went along with this. Led to drop of 50% in Biological Control at Berkeley, to less than self-sustaining. Farmers spread a billion pounds of pesticides annually. (cited)
- "It was little wonder that during the 1980s and 1990s efforts to support and expand the uses of biological control were often predicated on a reductionist, even molecular approach that turned a blind eye toward the context of its applications. Thus, those entomologists who developed pesticide resistance in predators and parasites fostered closer links with inputs provided by the agri-chemical industry by extending the marketability of pesticides with increasing numbers of resistant pest populations."
(from Plowboy interview:) "Although I would say that some of these men are stooges, while some are dupes and others are merely unaware of what they're doing . . . my point is that entomologists have played a subservient role in insect control for the last quarter century. In other words, my profession has been dazzled by the toxicologists and physiologists and chemists . . . and, of course, many entomologists were susceptible to the temptation that the chemical firms offered. Those industries lured these scientists—with grants and such—in specific research directions which have all led to an insect killing—rather than insect management—approach . My profession sometimes seems to have abandoned all its other possibilities in the quest for better bug killers."
Look up Dan Koshland? (Ignacio's article...)
(another green revolution)
- "The Green Revolution actually deepens the divide between rich and poor farmers. In the
1960s, at the beginning of the first Green Revolution, the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations promoted industrial-style agriculture in the Global South through technology “packages” that included modern varieties (MVs), fertilizer, pesticides, and irrigation. The high cost of these purchased inputs deepened the divide between large farmers and smallholders because the latter could not afford the technology. In both Mexico and India, seminal studies revealed that the Green Revolution’s expensive “packages” favored a minority of economically privileged farmers, put the majority smallholders at a disadvantage, and led to the concentration of land and resources."
(Berdahl's speech) "The research in genetically modified agricultural crops, which has caused enormous public concern here in Europe, and faces growing criticism in America, could have tremendous impact on the nutrition for many parts of the world. But the early uses of genetic modification have not been to create, for example, vitamin-rich strains of rice that would benefit the health of much of the world's population, because that is not where the profits are to be had. Instead, the earliest applications of genetic modification has been to produce crops that are resistant to herbicides and pesticides because the companies providing the herbicides and pesticides are also investing in the development of crop strains that can tolerate their herbicides and pesticides."
References
Insects and Institutions: University Science and the Fruit Business in California
Agricultural History -- the journal, free from 1927-1957, or -2003: UC E-links
Plant Hybridization and Plant Breeding in Eighteenth-Century American Agriculture -- white folks (unintentionally) selected for fewer ears per stalk on corn.
An Overview of California Agricultural Mechanization, 1870-1930, by Alan L. Olmstead and Paul Rhode, Agricultural History, Vol. 62, No. 3, Quantitative Studies in Agrarian History. (Summer, 1988), pp. 86-112.
Insects and Institutions: University Science and the Fruit Business in California
lead chapter in the book California Agriculture: Issues and Challenges, “An Overview of the History of California Agriculture” by Alan Olmstead and Paul Rhode (1997).
II. A Stylized History of California Agriculture from 1769 to 2000 in Whither California Agriculture: Up, Down or Out? or (Stylized History) " A more recently revised chapter by Olmstead and Rhode (2004), “The Evolution of California Agriculture: 1850–2000,” is contained in Siebert."
CVP overview (by the Bureau itself)
UC contributions to ag -- see linked NPR story.
UC and Farming Industry on Morning Edition, May 23, 2001 -- or for a link that works, Wayback machine
Who Benefits From The University of California's Biofuel Research by Miguel A Altieri and Eric Holt-Gimenez
UC research -- biotech & genomics
OTT report 2003 and more recent ones
JGI timeline of genome research
The Ecological Impacts of Agricultural Biotechnology by Altieri
THE KILLING FIELDS: SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT BERKELEY by Bruce H. Jennings
- Robert Van den Bosch, The Pesticide Conspiracy (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1978). Bioscience/Moffit HD9660.P33.U59.
Interview with Van den Bosch, "plowboy interview", mother earth news.
another green revolution in africa, funded by rockefeller & gates World Hunger: Twelve Myths (Lappé et al, second edition, 1998) -- Green revolution failings