I believe the board has provided some valuable information. I have asked the following questions and have receive responses for most: (1) Response on why Kent was removed if possible. This seems to go back several years and all the details may never be known. This could be a soap opera. I respect the fact that due to personal or personnel issues all these details may not be available to the public. (2)A statement that the Board of Advisors will be retained with its current membership The board has indicated that it intends to maintain the Board of Advisors (3) Annual Report will continue to be available either through your web site, in a SSE publication or by request through SSE, They will publish SSE's financial statements in the annual Summer Editions as always (4) That the endowment to maintain SSE's seed collection be established No specific mention on that yet, but since the mission of the organization has not changed hopefully this should continue to move forward. (5) Statement that SSE's core mission will not change from preserving genetic diversity, seed exchanging and making these varieties available to its members. They have several time reinforced that SSEs mission and vision has not changed (6) What is SSEÂs governance structure? This has not changed even with the bylaw changes. We did not have governance before and do not have it now. Personally I feel even though adding governance would add expenses to membership that governance should be provided to members. Members established that valuable seed collection that exists and should have direct say on how it is used. (7) What committees have been formed since March 2007? SSE has six committees, in which SSE staff members, SSE Board of Advisors members, and SSE Board Members participate: Seed Collection Committee Publications Committee (SSE's publications include membership publications as well as books and a catalog) Audit & Finance Committee Personnel Committee Board Development Committee Executive Search Committee (ad hoc) All seem legitimate to me. (8)Why was the membership bylaw changed? I believe the response to this is that Iowa non-profit law changed. My brief research seems to indicate this language change although it seems dramatic, actually changed our member status very little, if at all. To quote IowaÂs code: "Member" means a person who on more than one occasion, pursuant to the provisions of a corporation's articles or bylaws, has a right to vote for the election of a director or directors of a corporation, irrespective of how a member is defined in the articles or bylaws of the corporation. We did not have governance before and do not have it now. This change may have the impression that our status or rights have been compromised when in fact they have not been. We never had governance. How that comes as a surprise to me even though I never received a voting form in the past give is alarming. I believe we always should have had governance and this issue just has opened my eyes to that. Iowa code still allows SSE to have membership and refer to us as members even though we are not members in the by-laws. This was the essentially the case before since we did not have governance and is the case today. (9) I also feel that an at-large member from a listed member that is not a major donor should be added to the board. This has not yet been addressed. A boardÂs widespread support requires a diverse board, including representation from groups the organization directly serves. (http://www.sos.state.ia.us/pdfs/Nonprofits/IAPP4CNE.pdf) I believe this should be examined as "members" who actually do the seed sharing should have an at large board member to represent our concerns, needs and wants for the organization. Hopefully the board will eventually fully answer my questions (4,8,9), but I feel they have answered many already. Two asides: Upon further research I believe SSE has always been a public benefit corporation even though members may of considered it more of a mutual benefit corporation when it concerned seed sharing. The board has a Fiduciary Duty. Although its actions may be unpopular nothing in its responses has indicated to me that they are not fulfilling this fiduciary duty.

Probably best to post this on the SSE website. Dean

"How many seeds do they remember you save if you are going to offer in the catalog?" I'm not sure I understand the question (George may have answered it above) but here's my part of the answer. Once you list seeds with SSE, the listings are entered into an Excel database, from which the Yearbook is generated. Then each year, as the next Yearbook of seed offerings is being compiled, you are mailed a listing of every seed that you have offered in recent years - which you edit & return. You check off those that you will be offering again; those left unchecked will remain in the database, but will not appear in the next Yearbook. You can also add, delete, or change your listings at this time. Dean, your suggestion of a member login is a good one; I also would like to see SSE become more "member interactive". They have recently added an email newsletter, and you can post questions to SSE staff through the website... but in my opinion, they could still do more. For all I know, there may be more changes already in the works. But nostalgia runs deep in a portion of the membership, so there could be some resistance against fully entering the digital millennium. Here's my thoughts... There could be, perhaps, two tiers of access; a basic level for all members, and an expanded access for listing members. At the basic level, at the very least, establish a board where members can correspond with other members. I believe that such a board would be very active, and would help new members (and those who can't make the campouts) feel a sense of belonging. There could also be seed saving FAQ's, links to seed saving resources, and perhaps reprints of selected articles from past SSE publications... but these features could be phased in gradually. For listing members (those who offer seeds) there would be a higher level of access. As you have suggested, Dean, this could include the ability to edit listings electronically - saving SSE some postage, and allowing members (especially those with large listings) the option of an earlier start. I, for one, would like to edit listings throughout the year... it would be a less daunting task than doing it all at once in November. The listed-member login could also allow searchable "read-only" access to SSE's "Super Yearbook", which is a database of all seeds & stock ever listed since SSE's founding. This would be a valuable research tool for the serious seed saver, since you could look up more information on a particular variety... I think that it would lead to more descriptive listings in the Yearbook. I will be communicating these ideas (as well as a few others) to the staff during my visit in September.

The Garden Seed Inventory, Sixth Edition is a book published & sold by SSE. It is a listing of all U.S. & Canadian seed companies that offered heirloom & OP (open pollinated) seed as of the time of publishing. It gives descriptions of all varieties, and a list of companies that offer(ed) them, both retail & wholesale. Anyone, member or non-member, can purchase the G.S.I. Because it was published in 2004, many of the individual listings are no longer accurate... but it is still a good place to start, if looking for a commercial variety. It is also an invaluable resource, if only for the huge list of heirloom seed companies (and their contact info) in the front of the book. For serious seed savers, it also lists varieties which have been dropped by the seed trade, and are in need of preservation... I look for those varieties in the Yearbook. (There is also a Fruit, Nut, and Berry Inventory, which I believe is being revised this year.) While the G.S.I. lists commercial sources, the Yearbook lists seed that is being offered for exchange by other SSE members. There were 13,280 varieties listed for 2008, the vast majority of which are heirlooms available nowhere else. The Yearbook is a benefit of SSE membership. All members are requested to submit a list of the seeds they will offer by November of each year, if they choose to do so. So which of the two books is better? They each have a different purpose, so it depends upon your needs as a gardener. As for SSE itself... if you search GW for "SSE", there are several threads, with opinions both pro & con. You can read the comments, and decide for yourself. Essentially, what you think about SSE depends upon what you expect from it. If you join to explore the enormous diversity of vegetables available to us, and to be a part of their preservation, SSE membership can be very fulfilling. You could spend your life trying new varieties each year, and never grow them all. This does not mean that you need to offer seed; only about 1 in 10 chooses to do so. If you only join SSE to get something, and don't support the goals of the organization, then some of the rules for exchanges can appear restrictive. And as in any grass-roots organization, there are those who take issue with some of the politics or policies of the organization... most of these still remain as members, because of the great work SSE continues to perform in the cause of preservation. There are many SSE members (self included) who post on GW. I can tell you that SSE has been very rewarding for me - it has vastly enriched my gardening experience. My vegetable garden is now 95% heirloom & OP... and trust me, I'm not giving up a thing in terms of quality or quantity. ;-) I love sharing seeds, and enjoy the fellowship with other members... just as I do with those I've met here on GW.