Only if you make hard selection and/or conditions are way diffrent. If you sow for example 10 seeds to any other conditions and don’t make any selection, just a seed increase, you will retain everything besides possible some epigenetic changes. If you feed them nutriens and water as well as making hard selection, you will probably decrease their adaptibility. If I made seed increase, I would have just marginally better conditions and make some selection if there are enough seeds for that.
2 Likes
Hi everyone,
Very interesting this discussion! I’m new on the GTS (whoop!) but this subject hits close to home for me in a related field (I hope it’s not too off topic)
I run a community food larder, part of a larger community volunteering project in our village and surrounding area.
I don’t know the numbers you are working with, and 10% does feel very low, but if I do some finger math it resembles the issue we have. Namely that it’s basically always the same few people who do all the volunteering. This covers everything from time and material contributions. In our case, if 3 people were to stop for whatever reason, the whole thing will grind to a standstill.
Now, I’ve tried being very angry and annoyed with the non-contributers. Didn’t do a damn thing! 
Not for me, since I was functionally cranky all the time. And not for them, since I’d swear that overall they didn’t even register my annoyance.
@Patate made a very interesting point about focusing on the 10% that dó contribute (my recap) and I think there’s something there. I’m pretty sure that facilitating the 10%, as I’m going to call them from now on, will be easier and as or more effective in yield/result as it would be to kick some of the 90% in gear. I will definitely be thinking on how to effectuate this in our setting.
The question did seem to split into two as discussions progressed.
Into “should we allow people to STUN, because we think that’s why we have low returns and we don’t want that?”
And “does STUN work in the first year?”
The first seems an implicit no to the second.
I do definitely believe a STUN bottleneck as you will is a useful technique and will definitely be trying a very STUN- like approach for my local adjustments. I believe it will work better, since I NEED to find the strong/useful genetics that will allow future generations to thrive without me if I’m unavailable. Which happens more than I’d like.
As an example I had two patches of field beans (tic beans, Maris). I don’t weed much at all, but one of them I gave a rough weeding as plants were starting to grow. Then I hurt my hand and couldn’t do the second patch.
First patch grew beautifully, second patch was very weed chocked and I gave up on it producing anything but flowers.
First patch ended up growing so tall they all fell over and the voles ate all the beans. Second patch has a few plants standing now, with so far uneaten beans. (By the voles that is, I had some)
Patch 2 survivors, definitely the seed I want to keep.
As for the seed sharing you run I don’t know enough of the details to give much useful advice on practical ways of adjusting to growing popularity.
I would say that as a newcomer I would have absolutely zero quelms about paying top price for grexes or landrace seeds provided to me.
Will I appreciate 3 expensive mixes more than when someone gives me their lovingly nurtured home saved seed mixes? For me, probably not, but I’m getting old 
but I will STUN either way.
The concept of “free” does drive capitalism-attuned people into overdrive more often than not. So it might filter out or slow down the freebie hunters somewhat.
x M
2 Likes