The land near San Pablo and Marin avenues was not unused—it was just waiting for spring planting by a group of researchers, several of whom study plant genetics and another, Miguel Altieri, who studies what many call sustainable agriculture.
The five scientists come from both the University of California at Berkeley and the Plant Gene Expression Center in the on Buchanan Street.
Berkeley Professor Altieri is out of the country on research, and couldn’t be reached for an interview. His website describes his work as agroecology: using modern ecological research methods to study traditional farming to design sustainable farming systems.
A video on YouTube, “Why is agroecology the solution to hunger and food scarcity?” captures the Altieri’s message: “We know one thing for sure – it is that industrial agriculture already failed to feed the world. We have 1 billion people that are starving. In addition to that, the ecological costs of industrial agriculture are huge,” he says.
His group’s research, according to his website, “provides the basic ecological principles for how to study, design and manage sustainable agroecosystems that are both productive and natural-resource conserving, and that are also culturally sensitive, socially just and economically viable.”
At the Gill Tract, Altieri’s group has been studying disease in dry-farmed tomatoes, and pest control from intercropping broccoli with other plants.
In short, Altieri’s work is about food stability—one goal of the occupying group. And, in fact, Anya Kamenskaya of the group Occupy the Farm, who is a former student of Altieri's, told reporters Monday that the group has not touched Altieri’s cover crop of fava beans.
The land the group is is the surrounding cornfield, because, Kamenskaya said, the benefits of corn research—which does not result in an edible crop—don’t go directly to the community, the way food could. She said this research could be done elsewhere.
RESEARCHER: "PURE SCIENCE" CONTRIBUTES, TOO
is one of four scientists who studies maize (corn to the rest of us) at the Gill Tract. Although her genetic research is pure science, not applied like Altieri’s, she said she feels that it, too, contributes to food stability.
“If we understand the basic process of the plant biology, we’re in a better place to breed for crops that can withstand changing climates, and that will provide food security,” Hake said.
Hake said maize is used for research for several reasons. The chromosomes are large, and more easily seen. Also, the male and female flowers are separated, so it’s easy to crossbreed. And finally, there are huge variations in maize.
Hake, who has been working at the Gill Tract site for 30 years, explained that the researchers’ work is not to create new products (such as in genetic engineering). “We’re trying to understand basic processes in plant biology.”
The other researchers who share maize acreage with Hake are Zac Cande who studies meiosis, Frank Harmon, who is studying the circadian rhythms of plants, and , whose work on the immune system of maize was in 2010.
Asked whether the corn grown for research could be eaten, Hake said no, for several reasons. First, the kernels (seeds) must be saved for replanting. (Genetics studies are based on following generations of a species.) And second, the corn—not sweet corn, but the hard type ground for cornmeal—is of inferior eating quality to what a farmer would raise.
For now, the occupiers are not in the way of her research, she said. Her corn is planted in June. Normally the winter weeds would be mowed down soon and the field prepared in May, she said.
“If these people mow down all the weeds and till it, maybe they’ll get it ready for us,” Hake said cheerfully.
Lisch, on the other hand, was not so optimistic.
He replied to a Patch inquiry: “All of us do basic research that is paid for by federal research grants. We don't grow GMOs at Gill, and we really don't appreciate our planting season being threatened because they want to make a political point.”
AN OPEN DIALOGUE WITH ACTIVISTS
Lisch attended a community meeting Monday night with Gill Tract activists, where he shared concerns about his upcoming planting season. He said he's for about 20 years, planting one seed at a time, weeding by hand and covering the crop carefully to protect it from crows and deer. Then comes the process of watching the corn grow and crossing it to study the outcome.
"It's not our land, but it feels very much like it was your backyard and someone came into it and said, 'We're not leaving,'" he said Monday evening. Lisch, an Albany resident, said he uses about a quarter-acre, or 20 rows, for his genetic research.
A number of activists approached Lisch after he spoke to the group to ask him about his work and his plans, and whether it might be possible to find a common goal.
"We might just be collateral damage," he said to one of them, in reference to his fellow researchers. "If the field isn't ready by June 1, I can't plant. I have a grant and I may need to tell them I can't plant, so I can't do my research."
Ultimately, he said he appreciated being able to have an open dialogue with the activists, despite their differences.
"They're not bad people," he said. "They're just good people on my land."
Click the "Keep me posted" button below for an update when we publish future stories on this topic. Read more here. Learn about the proposed .
Additional reporting to this story was contributed by Emilie Raguso.
If there's something in this article you think , or if something else is amiss, call editor Emilie Raguso at 510-459-8325 or email her at albany@patch.com.
It's the assumptions on both sides that drive me crazy! It's easy to sit at our computers at home and spew opinions when we have few details about what's going on. I appreciate Emilie (and others) going out there to find out what's going on. At the very least, I appreciate that this action may open up dialogue about UC's impact on Albany, which seems to be talked about very little. They build family housing that leaves our city left to pay for educating their students' children, and what do we get for it? They don't pay taxes to us. They won't even guarantee us the baseball fields unless we agree to their Whole Foods plan, and even then, it's only for 10 years. It would be one thing if CAL was still providing affordable education for its students, but it's not.
Kevin - I say "mean spirited" because the farmers were told UCB would be meeting with them at 2 PM yesterday, but representatives didn't come talk before turning off the tap. Dawn, you make a good-point. I am thinking of the words of the late Michael Rossman, science teacher, Free Speech Movement veteran, and collector of the famed AOUON political poster archives. See Free Speech, Free Spirit - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yzoQvbjr0w) My contention is that relationships need to be cultivated as well as the land. I think there's been a lot of brilliant planning in this action - but I also think that paying attention to relationships - with all their complexity - is the only way anything sustainable can really happen. In my case, reading about Damon Lisch's predicament has caused me to re-feel and rethink some of my support for the Occupy action.
UC provided FREE fields to Albany LIttle League for the past 50 years. I am not sure there would be ALL without the University. Albany elected officials, appointed commissioners, citizens and staff have spent 5 years working WITH the University on the mixed development project. Personally, I am unable/unwilling to attend any meeting or event that is held on private property without an invitation from the property owner. I am interested in the business plan for this farm, how has the financing been arranged, has a long range work schedule been created, how will the food be distributed, how will it be determined who will get the food, at what price (if any) how will any profit be used, will the farm be certified organic, who will take care of that, are there health permits required, who will take care of that, how will people learn when food is ready for distribution? who will distribute it?
I have heard from others, and experienced myself, that valid criticism about specific problems are not acknowledged, nor addressed by the city. But, if more than a tiny number of people actually show up, the city may actually realize that addressing these issues now will be more prudent than defending a lawsuit that is sure to follow. My opposition to the project is the size and it's lack of service to the community. If they included something like a food bank or assistance center for the needy, I'd be more inclined to overlook the negative impact of the disproportionally large development. We are the <1% (of people, who comment on the Patch and speak at meetings.) Bring your friends and neighbors. Maybe the Occupy Farm will result in more attendance at the meetings. Regarding ALL - UC has not paid property taxes on the land and the village children attend Albany schools (and can play little league,) so it's not like UC, a public university, is some magnanimous corporation. I think UC village is a great little community, and Albany deserves a great little natural foods store. I'd be willing to open a 15,000 sf store there.
Now I hope that the Occupy the Farm members will start working on a quick exit strategy if they don't already have one. This article, in particular, raised some red flags for me. When activists play judge and jury about which Gill Tract research is worth protecting, they risk alienating people who might otherwise be sympathetic to their cause. Anya Kamenskaya is free to believe that "the benefits of corn research don’t go directly to the community," but I'm troubled that she and other activists feel like they have the right to seize the plots of researchers whose work they do not like or value. It would be arrogant and presumptuous for me to think that I could determine the importance of a research project with questions about whether the crop is maize or whether the food is edible. I believe that we need to support alternatives to industrial agriculture, but I do not think this is the way to do it.
Sarah Hake
Frank Harmon
Part 1-The first observed urban turkey flock in this area was a small flock around Codonices Park established by Tilden Park Turkeys. This flock had an established route around the area. Early morning, area of North Berkeley Library. Late morning, area of Albany Library (I guess these early turkeys were literary turkeys). Late afternoon they hit the area of the Edible School Yard. They found out these were wild turkeys the day they locked one up in their chicken coop thinking it was a lost pet. I believe our Albany turkeys are an off shoot of this flock. The Gill Track turkeys were compromised on a tom and 2 hens, along with their offspring of the last 2 years. Sadly on of the hens was found ill at a home remodel in the area of Solano and Ramona. As far as I know this is the only adult turkey fatality that has happened in Albany.
Part 2- I believe the turkeys you saw near Berkeley City Hall are an offshoot from a flock that was established near the area of Willard Park a couple years after the Codonices Park flock was established. I'm not sure if the Gill Track turkey are the same turkeys that have been seen on Albany Hill. I the last few years is seem the Albany/Berkeley turkey flocks have not been roaming as much as the original Codonices Park flock. One thing I do know is that the during the winter smaller turkey flock in an area will at times join into one big flock. I have observed a flock of over 100 turkeys while camping at Pinnacles National Monument during the winter. By the way, I would have loved to have seen you observation of the interaction of the turkeys and the geese. One time I saw a Tom single handily drive of a small heard of deer so his hens could eat the acorns they had been eating.
Kevin - Albany Bulb isn't class 1 soil that's up for development. Albany Bulb is an old trash landfill...The reason the Gill Tract was picked is because of it's pristine soil that is about to be destroyed by development.
I think developing over the LAST piece of class 1 soil should be against the law and that soil/land should be protected. If these activists didn't have the boldness for this action it would be 'business as usual' and this lot would be developed on.
I agree that all considerations - researchers, UCB, activists, and residents - need to be taken into consideration during this process. I've been to a few of the meetings on the farm and they have said it many many times over that they in no way plan on staying on the land, and in fact, don't want to be staying over night. They are however doing this because if they leave overnight it will most likely get them locked out. Long term, they do not at all plan on wanting to stay there.
You are also incorrect in your assumption that Cal no longer provides affordable education. What Cal has done is to increase the number of out-of-state students who pay full tuition and use the money to provide financial aid to lower- and now middle-income students. Not a perfect solution, but it's a good one considering how much the legislature has cut finding to whole UC system over last several years.
http://albany.patch.com/blog_posts/gill-tract-turkeys-vs-chickens-in-an-suv
Non-Emergency (510) 642-6760 police@berkeley.edu Mitchell J. Celaya III, Chief of Police (510) 642-1133 mjc@berkeley.edu Jennifer Woods, Executive Assistant (510) 643-7500 jwoods@berkeley.edu
Right you are. There should be co-existence between the researchers and the urban community farmers.
To me what is most baffling about the situation is why the farmers have chosen to occupy the land used for research instead of the land that has been slated for the development that they are protesting. I briefly thought that the land might not be suitable for planting, but in another media account (SF Chronicle), they were said to have described all of the land as "pristine." Perhaps it is overly cynical to see the choice of plots as a deliberate attempt to antagonize the genetics researchers, but I'm at a loss for other explanations.