Comments on: Indian fruit genebank threatened by democracy

By: Anil Sinha

Anil Sinha — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:38:16 +0000

It is just simply vandalism. It shows that our politicians of whatever hue they are -are simply hell bent on looting the public. May God give these idiots some commonsense.

By: In other pomegranate news… at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog

In other pomegranate news… at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:42:03 +0000

[...] insect pest. Is this variety conserved ex situ? If so, I hope it is found in a genebank other than the one in Jharkhand that was reported late last year to be threatened with annihilation. We haven’t heard [...]

By: Zareen

Zareen — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:46:17 +0000

I’d like to help – but I can’t ‘take this up’ alone. I am a doctoral student in water-resource management and work in Maharashtra (or rather, that is where my research is). If I may ask, who have you contacted, and what has been the response? Have you followed up in any way? If you can get back to me, perhaps we can do something together.

By: Fruit genebank follow-up at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog

Fruit genebank follow-up at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 22:30:38 +0000

[...] been trying to keep an eye on the threat to the fruit tree genebank built up by the Horticulture and Agroforestry Research Programme (HARP) in Jharkhand State, India, [...]

By: Eliseu Bettencourt

Eliseu Bettencourt — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:48:21 +0000

Let me express my indignation and bewilderment. Two decades or so ago, the whole matter concerning plant genetic resources were based on the universally accepted principle that PGR were a heritage of mankind and consequently should be available without restriction (International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, 1983).

This paradigm, by pressure of, mostly, developing countries, was radically changed with the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992), which, in its Article 15, recognizes the sovereign rights of States over their natural resources and the authority to determine access to genetic resources resting with the national governments and is subject to national legislation.

In line with this, the Undertaking was revised and harmonized with CBD. The revised text, under the form of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) entered into force on the 29th June 2004 and its Article 10 reads: â€œIn their relationships with other States, the Contracting Parties recognize the sovereign rights of States over their own plant genetic resources for food and agriculture, including that the authority to determine access to those resources rests with national governments and is subject to national legislationâ€.

Did we come all this way to see one of the countries that during the negotiations most battled for the sovereign rights over PGRFA, decide to destroy valuable and irreplaceable resources for the benefit of a few privileged people and detriment of millions?

India signed and ratified the ITPGRFA in 10/06/2002. The International Treaty is a legally binding instrument for those countries that are Contracting Parties.

The CBD, the FAO Commission on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA) and the Governing Body of the ITPGRFA are urged to take note of this unjustifiable intention of India. We also challenge and urge the distinguished Delegates of India to the international Bodies e.g. CBD, CGRFA, GB of the ITPGRFA, to denounce and call urgent and decisive action to stop this barbaric act.

By: Ehsan Dulloo

Ehsan Dulloo — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:24:57 +0000

This is outrageous. This shows again the value that politicians place on genetic resources. There is still a lot to do to create awareness among politicians in a country about the importance of these genetic resources. Do they have any plans to relocate the collection elsewhere and in other collections. I believe that field collections have a big long term sustainability problem. That is why Bioversity is working to develop other conservation strategies that can be more flexible and sustainable in the long term. The collection at Jharkhand should be transferred to NBPGR. But first the cryoprotocols for mango and litchi need to be refined and resources are needed for this.

By: Indian fruit genebank threatened « Further thoughts

Indian fruit genebank threatened « Further thoughts — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:33:41 +0000

[...] fruit genebank threatened Posted on October 9, 2007 by Ian Jeremy at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog reports that the government of Jharkand State in India plans to bulldoze the field genebanks of the [...]