seed broadcast

Afternoon Update from DOJ-USDA hearings on competition in agriculture

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:28:00 GMT

Battery died and so was off for a bit. We had a good panel with state Attorney Generals who seem quite geared up on these issues. They also admit their limitations, that they rely on interpretations from judiciary to prosecute potential infractions. They pointed to several victories - including the cessation of the JBS merger in cattle (where 2 of the top 4 cattle processors were trying to merge) and a recent rejection of a Dean Foods acquisition in dairy. But, Montana AG Steve Bullock also pointed out that it would be easy to be skeptical and pessimistic and feel we have been here before. He pointed to competition hearings in 1999 that talked about many of these same issues (particularly concentration in livestock), and yet from 1999 to 2010 we didn't see much done about antitrust and plenty of consolidation. Steve believes we are in a different situation this time; that there is a new strong partnership between two agencies (DOJ and USDA), that never before have the head of these two agencies met to discuss these issues (as they did today), and that we have a particularly strong antitrust division in DOJ (as Christine exemplified this morning).

I want to believe Steve Bullock - that this is different and we have leaders that care. However, so much of this does feel like a shadow puppet show. The reality on the ground is that this room has farmers who are on the verge of going out of business, and several likely will this year. We have a government that in 1962 was public about reducing the number of farmers to 1/5th of its status - that wanted the sons and daughters of rural America to leave the farm. The reality is that we have a government that out of one side of its mouth talks about protecting us and at the other side compliments Monsanto for all the improvements they have provided to our farmers and our economy. This room has very few organic farmers, but every one of these conventional farmers here can empathize with many of the same issues that organic farmers feel. They are not only underserved, they are served poison. I talked to one who said he'd like to go organic, but feels it would be "unethical" because he grows corn-cattle in a sea of GMO pollen and he knows that he would get contaminated, and that even if the standard allows that, he couldn't stand it.

One farmer, George Naylor, said that it was hard to trust this process. He said, "It's like you're trying to close the door not only after the horses are out of the barn, but after the horse thieves have taken them and so we can't even get them back." He was one of several farmers who fear it is too late for them and their children. I spoke with over a dozen organic farmers and organic field crop seed companies and asked them to attend, and over and over I heard "I don't believe that they really want to, will, or can do anything." This hopelessness is one of the most dangerous traits that impacts the well-being of our agricultural systems. The antidote that most of us take is passionate anger at the system edged with ocasional humor, and work at times with blinders on to not see just how rough and scary things are. That said, I do believe that there will be some benefit from these hearings. Not everything we want, but there seems to be a possibility that the utility patent issue might really be examined. That would be big. Things are wrapping up, and I will post more stories, interviews, video, and pics in the coming week. Keep the faith, never stop. - Matthew

Afternoon Panel - How have technological developments and structural changes affected the competitive dynamics of the seed industry?

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:44:00 GMT

Afternoon Panel: How have technological developments and structural changes affected the competitive dynamics of the seed industry?

This is a depressing one to report on. Really scripted. Real b.s. - other than Neil Harl

This includes:

Jim McDonald (ERS) - moderator - lobbing softballs at these guys to try and show that everyone is working together.

Neil Harl (ISU)

- describes how PVPs worked and allowed for continued innovation by researchers and farmers. Points out that patents have done the opposite and limited choice. Says congress needs to intervene and referee to stop patent abuses. Points out that farmers don't want to "buy a lawsuit" when they buy seed. Reminds everyone that patented material does get into others seed, and this liability on farmers is unfair. Says we need regulatory action

Diana Moss (American Antitrust Institute) was funded by DuPont to write a paper against Monsanto's monopoly practices. But she is pro-patent and pro-biotech. Just wants generic biotech traits available, like we have in pharmaceuticals.

Jim Tobin (Monsanto)

- "patents have attracted a great deal of innovation. "

"Allows farmers to make more money."

(biotech) "saved kids from having to walk the beans every summer." (first job I ever had was walking soybean fields to seed them. what is wrong with laboring on a farm??)

Says there are 50 new traits being worked on in biotech by many companies. Licensed to 200 companies. A lot of choice today and going to be more in the future. Says Monsanto shouldn't be punished for being ahead of the competition.

Ray Gessner (soybean and corn farmer)

- No problems. Lots of choices for conventional growers in seed.

Dermot Hayes (ISU)

- We don't have strong enough intellectual property on wheat and so it lags behind. Need biotechnology and patents for wheat traits.

This panel is so imbalanced (other than Neil who really gets the negative impact of panels). This is the most stomach wrenching crap - exactly as we feared. They're talking about how exciting it will be when Roundup Ready goes off patent (2015) and lots of folks can use it. What they aren't talking about is that by 2015 Roundup (glyphosate) will be next to useless in US because of weed resistance to it from overuse.

They're bemoaning how expensive it is for Monsanto to get deregulation on a new product. Takes them so much time, money, etc. $100 million to bring a new trait from development, through regulation, and into the market = justification for patents.

Monsanto (Jim Tobin) patting itself on the back for how it's going to allow others to use the RR resistance trait and keep maintaining the quality of the trait for those who want to use it.

The crowd is rumbling. This all feels so scripted.

Now Tobin tells us that Monsanto has a 2,4-d resistance trait in the pipeline to replace roundup ready resistance. 2, 4-d!! So wait, their claims they are saving the environment with Roundup is temporary and they are going to push farmers into spraying a major cancer causing herbicide!!! And he sees this as a success and innovation.

Can't wait to see the published transcript of this session.

Morning Farmer Panel at Department of Justice hearing on competition in agriculture

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:35:00 GMT

Two great presentations from Eric Nelson (cattle and corn farmer from IA) and Jim Foster (independent hog farmer from Missouri). With a couple good mentions from Ken Fawcett.

Nelson hits hard on the patents restricting competition, points out studies that show that increased use of ROundup is damaging soils and increasing soil diseases, bemoans the loss of public sector research, and quotes Thoreau that a corporation has no conscience.

Points out that there has been a 153% increase in input (seed, fertilizer, herbicides) costs for farmers with a 20% increase in yields is what farmers - and that this is a result of consolidation and points out that farmers are not getting value worth increased costs. Rebuts Pam Johnson who claims that nothing is broken and that the biotech companies are only delivering new value. Keeps pushing the loss of land grant universities serving the needs of small and medium sized farmers. Says it's imperative we address this.

Ken Fawcett says "Farmers need opportunity to grow what they want to. And consumers should get to choose what they want and not what corporations tell them they should have.

Eddie Wise - ex-green bere (27 years) who returned to North Carolina to farm. Grew up on a share cropping hog operation. Now wants to have his own independent operation. Struggling to find the capital for his processing operation.

Foster says we need to see that "too big to fail" failed, that the system is not only cracked but broken. Paints a picture of how he has watched a vibrant rural economy become into collapsed silos, weedy abandoned fields, and rusted equipment. Points out specific sections of antitrust law that have been violated in packer ownership of animals. Points out America has deficit in ag - importing more than we export. Points out that Chicago style economics have failed us in multiple sectors. Says we need logical limits on farm payments to restrict growth that gives unfair advantage. Govt guaranteed loans favor farmers who have massive contracts with the likes of Cargill and Tyson, not his kids who want to run medium sized farms.

Says since 1980, in the US, we have lost

91% of hog operations

60% of cattle

80% of dairy

Crowd very fired up after Jim talks. Two rounds of applause.

Pam Johnson and Todd Wiley - both big producers (and Pam with a seed company that sells Monsanto products) keep repeating that the system is basically fine. Pam thinks we need to all get along and stop bashing poor old biotech. Says she "used to be small too" and so she "understands" the struggles of folks like Eddie, Jim, and Eric. Pam says GMOs "makes agronomic and economic sense" and believes price reflects the valu. sees a robust competitive marketplace in the 5 companies providing biotech traits.

Vilsack says - 900,000 of americas 2.2 million farmers have to work 200 days off the farm to keep the farm, along with loss of farms - he questions if we have the right mix of companies serving farmers. Concerned that we don't and that farmers will keep disappearing and that this is a crisis. Asks what we have to do to reverse the trends of abandoning farms.

Concluding comments from Christine Varney (Ass Att Gen): Joint task force between usda and DOJ to enforce packers and stockyard act is needed. She'll send lawyers DOJ way - Vilsack agrees to this here and now. They want to look for these places where DOJ and USDA intersect.

A few pics from the day

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:53:00 GMT

A few pics of the day so far:

where we are:

Attorney General Holder speaks with a rancher

Kristina Hubbard (Out of Hand Report), Harvey Howington (Arkansas rice farmer contaminated by Liberty Link GMO rice), me

Finally - a recognition of patents role in monopolies - big applause

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:29:00 GMT

Christine Varney - US Assistant Attorney General

"Patents have been used in the past to create or extend monopolies. We will be looking closely at any attempts to do so via abuse of the patent laws." - the first time mentioned and the audience responded with their first big burst of applause of the morning.

"We will closely scrutinize mergers that come before us." If they restrict competition

"They will not go through during this department of justice."

Companies that are large "have responsibility to behave in ways that keep the competitive market open"

They also have criminal authority. "It is illegal for competitors to fix prices and we will prosecute that criminally."

After she speaks Eric Holder recognizes what a great leader Christine is. The room is a little more electric and awake after her talk.

He also underlines that they won't allow big companies to misuse power. "Big is not bad. But big companies who misuse power will be stopped by this department."

Holder calls it an issue of national security. Believes his job is to make improvements that impacts people's day to day lives.

IA Attorney General Tom Miller's and Sec of Ag (IA) Bill Northey remarks

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:02:00 GMT

Tom Miller - IA Attorney General

- thanks Vilsack and Holder for creating this new relationship. Great for public interest for many reasons. Antitrust law is fairly limited, and judiciary interpretation even more limited.

Need to look at this from consumer protection law as well as antitrust law.

The states have never had the kind of healthy relationship with fed DOJ as they have right now in this administration. "Trust, cooperation and respect" that is in the public interest.

In IA office they have had an "obsession", some with examine contract problems in pork producers as well as seed. AG office went to IA legislation with "Growers bill of rights". They had a small victory in those rights, but not everything they wanted. Did protect farmers from poor contracts, whistle blowing, and release from contracts for getting involved in organizing.

With some other state AGs they have added their comments to federal DOJ on these issues. "seeds, cattle,hogs, dairy, and transportation" are of serious concern to several states. Competition in regards to seeds a particular concern. Mentions recent AP story - in soybeans 95% of soy has RR traits. 67% in corn. Additional the price is a concern, "Monsanto's place in seed is a competitive issue that needs to be examined."

- He did call Roundup a "wonderful trait" but other than this lack of understanding his competitive comments were strong.

IA Secretary of Agriculture - Bill Northey

Changes in last 10 years have been fairly dramatic. What's the impact been on producers from price increases in seeds. 10 year ago - $1billion in seed. Now closer to $2billion, but points out that the "value" of those crops has increased - that this has almost doubled as well. And that new technologies are a part of it. He's giving the biotech party line - if you get more money out of it than the seed is worth more and so will cost more.

"Don't want to lose the encouragement for developing new technologies".

"Seed has increased in value."

Rise in cost of inputs doesn't mean that they weren't worth it, and that there is anticompetitive practices. Everyone should be happy according to this guy as far as seed and other inputs. Farmers are just buying good value.

This guy is a mouthpiece for fertilizer, herbicide, and biotech industry. Farmers I see in my row are fidgeting and scowling more at each word he speaks.

The worst of all speakers in terms of recognizing the issues, much less respecting them.

Senator Grassley and Representative Boswell Remarks

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:53:00 GMT

Grassley (Iowa Senator) - needs to understand process as much as substance. Compliments DOJ and USDA for doing this "badly needed" and the cooperation across departments is essential for taking on lack of competition in agriculture.

Grassley, "There's not enough competition. This is not only a problem today, but a problem for young farmers getting started and keeping next generation of family farmers strong."

"Poeple use the term family farm loosely, but its imprint we understand what real family farms are."

"The government needs to be a referee"

Needs to be a formalization - he has written ACE legislation (agricultural competitive enhancement act) that he is promoting to increase dialogue and cooperation across departments, to develop "competition guidelines" and beef up antitrust enforcement.

similar to regulatory reform with wall street. Need greater transparency which makes enforcement easier.

Boswell (Iowa Congressman) -

Starts out with the factor of feeding a growing world. Says that there's room for everyone. That we need more research to feed people. Points out the UCFW union members in the audience and applauds their efforts and achievement.

Bowell is giving the most political of talks so far. The first three were strong. He is walking back and forth across the fence and not giving any substance. Keeps saying "fairness"

Refers to "Two major research companies that are helping us" do our best to feed. Obviously refering to Monsanto and Pioneer who built this building and bought his allegiance. Ugh. He was corporate fluff talk.

opening remarks - Secretary Vilsack and Attorney General Eric Holder

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:38:00 GMT

Vilsasck says we've lost 80,000 "middle sized" farms in the last year alone. Vilsack states the these workshops are long overdue. Starts out recognizing that seed, packers,and dairy are concentrated - questions if farmers are getting a "fair shake."

Eric Holder starts out with a quote from Eisenhower: "Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil, and you're a thousand miles from the corn field. He calls this "a historical milestone"..."Never has this happened since the founding of the Sheman Antitrust Act".

Expresses concerns that there are illegal activities, and that enforcement of antitrust laws are critical, but that this is bigger than DOJ and that is why they are partnering with USDA as there are likely regulatory issues at play. He gets it! Says we must not only keep up this work that we start to day, but that "we must expand it."

Holder:

"We are not afraid to hear from you what is on your mind. you have to be as frank as you can be."

"We have to protect both farmers and consumers from anti-competitive activity."

Mentions state attorney generals, FTC, and others as partners in these investigations.

"We will enhance our ability to do the job you expect from us if we have a very frank exchange of views this morning"

Questions for Dept of Justice and USDA

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:33:00 GMT

Here are some of the questions we'll be asking the DOJ-USDA today - these questions reworded in various days depending on who is at the microphone.

Questions to consider putting on the question cards:

1) How does the department of justice define an “independent seed company”? For instance, does it, as Monsanto does, include the nearly 30 companies owned by American Seeds Incorporated, a Monsanto holding company?

2) In their comments to the Department of Justice, Monsanto claims “farmer choice is increasing with time”, is there an independent study or reporting mechanism that assesses the loss or increase of diverse, site specific cultivars from which farmers might choose? What are the objective and independent measuring rods of competition, farmer choice and benefit?

3) What enforcement powers/mechanisms are currently available to ensure that there is a strong, vibrant competitive marketplace for seeds with fair pricing for farmers?

4) What role have patents and intellectual property in seeds played in the rapid concentration in the seed industry? Have patenting and intellectual property rights stifled innovation and seed development? How do we measure its positive or negative impact on innovation?

5) What changes in existing federal policy are necessary to restore competitiveness to the seed industry?

6) If anticompetitive practices in the seed industry are established/proven, what sanctions/remedies should be imposed/applied?

7) Organic producers continue to not have access to adequate quantities of organic seed. Have organic producers been disproportionally impacted by seed industry concentration in that the independent regional seed companies who might have served their needs are disappearing quickly?

8) What actions will the federal government take, not only to have better competition amongst the top 4-5 companies, but to improve market conditions so regional independent companies can thrive?

9) We used to have Land Grant Universities that released public cultivars to farmers through regional seed companies. Our public agricultural research programs are struggling and so they take funds from dominant corporate ag interests and don’t release varieties. Competition between public and private was a good thing, and helped make sure smaller markets were served. What happened to our public institutions, and what is the federal government going to do to ensure that these institutions serve public interests and not the will of the corporate trusts?

10) When congress passed the Plant Variety Protection Act they allowed farmers and researchers to save seed both for usage and for further breeding. This was seen as a way of rewarding intellectual property but also keeping seed innovation healthy. The seed industry seemed to do just fine with the PVP prior to the allowance on utility patents. Why not return to the PVP as the sole form of breeders’ rights? Where’s the flaw?

Blogging from the Department of Justice Antitrust Hearings

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:12:00 GMT

I'm in Ankeny, Iowa the first USDA-DOJ "Public Hearings Exploring Competition in Agriculture". We're at the FFA building at Des Moines Community College, and as you walk in the building you see a large sign in the atrium welcoming you to the "Monsanto Center for Biotech Education" - so we're not on our home court here, but we have some numbers. The farmers were here early waiting in the cold to get in the door and we have the clustered front and center. As we mill about waiting for the session to begin David Runyan, Moe Parr, Scott McCallister (all three harassed or sued by Monsanto) and Harvey Howington (rice producer contaminated by Liberty Link) have all been sharing their stories with media and each other. The room is said to hold 400, and with another hour before it begins it's clear that there will be standing room only. Rooms are set up with TV monitors for the overflow. There's a large contingency of representatives from the UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers) union - and they were very vocal at last night's town hall meeting regarding the impact that retailers like Walmart have to push down contract prices and costs that hurt everyone from the clerks, to the processors, millers, and of course farmers themselves. It's clear that concentration in seed, dairy, beef cattle, poultry, processing, and retail all work together to undermine the viability and success of family farms. These people are fighting not only for their livelihoods but for their lives, their communities, and their sense of moral justice. More as the day goes on.

OSA Board Member and Farmer Fred Kirschenmann, seed cleaner Moe Parr, and Indiana Farmer David Runyon.

On-farm seed breeding projects help farmers develop desirable crop traits

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:55:00 GMT

Organic Seed Alliance received a grant from Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) to develop breeding populations for organic broccoli, sweet corn, and red kale. OSA resarcher Micaela Colley worked on these populations on active organic farms, with strong involvement from farmers as well as OSA staff and university researchers. OSA believes in Participatory Plant Breeding as it is decentralized, and recognizes the value, knowledge and skills of farmers in adapting germplasm to their agronomic and market needs. OFRF's Winter Issue 2010 has a nice summary of the project with profiles of each farmer.

Article: On-farm seed breeding projects help farmers develop desirable crop traits

"Seedy Fellows - Talking Shop" In Good Tilth interview of OSA's John Navazio and Matthew Dillon

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 18:32:00 GMT

Andrew Rodman, editor of In Good Tilth, recently interviewed Organic Seed Alliance founders John Navazio and Matthew Dillon to discuss emerging trends, obstacles and successes in the organic seed sector. Read what they had to say about continued difficulty with availability of organic seed, contamination from genetically engineered crops, and the importance of evaluating and breeding varieties for organic conditions.

Full Article: Seedy Fellows Talking Shop

Frank Morton talks about the GE Sugarbeet Case with Cooking Up a Story

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:46:00 GMT

Cooking Up a Story is a fantastic web site that serves up video interviews, explorations, and other programming on food and farm related topics. The quality of their videos - both technically and in content - are fantastic. Check through their archive, but first make a stop at their interviews with Frank Morton of Wild Garden Seed (and OSA board member) regarding why he approached Organic Seed Alliance and Center for Food Safety with his concerns regarding the risks of GE contamination to organic beet and chard seed crops.

Two videos including a visit to Frank's fields.
Video Link 1: Seeds of Life: David vs. Goliath
Video Link 2: Seeds of Life: Beta vulgaris

Interview with OSA Director of Advocacy on Ethical Seed Systems

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:21:00 GMT

The Natural Food Merchandiser recently did an interview with Matthew Dillon on founding of OSA, farmers' roles in seed systems, and seed integrity. The audio interview can be found here.

Text of Justice's Ruling in RoundUp Ready Sugarbeet Case

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:16:00 GMT

For those of you who have requested more information on the sugar beet case blogged about below, here is the full

decision by Judge White in GE Sugar Beet Case

Please, if this is an issue dear to you, consider clicking on the link at the upper right of this page and supporting OSA advocacy work with a donation to Organic Seed Alliance.
In your donation place a message regarding your support of this case.

Thanks!
Decision by Judge White in GE Sugar Beet Case

Judge White's Decision: USDA-APHIS Violated National Environmental Policy Act in deregulation of RR sugarbeets

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:21:00 GMT

Great news for plaintiffs Organic Seed Alliance, High Mowing Seed, Sierra Club, Center for Food Safety, and the farmers and consumers we represent. And big thanks to our lawyers at Earth Justice and Center for Food Safety.

September 21, 2009, Federal District Court Judge White ruled that USDA-APHIS agreed with plaintiffs that USDA-APHIS violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failingto prepare an Environmental Impact Statement before deregulating RoundUp Ready sugarbeets, based on his finding that APHIS improperly failed to evaluate the impacts, including socio-economic impacts, resulting from possible cross-pollination of conventional sugar beets and Swiss chard and table beets in the Willamette Valley. The remedy phase of the case will occur on October 30.

Organic seed is the foundation of organic farming and organic food integrity. We must continue to protect this natural resource, along with the rights of organic farmers to be protected from negative economic impact from GE crops, and consumers rights' to choose to eat food free of GE components.

We'll keep you informed as we learn more. For now, here is a section from

Judge White's ruling:

"In light of the large distances pollen can travel by wind and the context that seed for sugar beets, Swiss chard, and table beets are primarily grown in one valley in Oregon, Plaintiffs have demonstrated that deregulation may significantly effect the environment.

As the court concluded in Geertson Seed Farms v. Johanns, this Court finds that the potential elimination of farmer’s choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer’s choice to eat non genetically engineered food, and an action that potentially eliminates or reduces the availability of a particular plant has a significant effect on the human environment. “APHIS’s reasons for concluding that the potential for the transmission of the genetically engineered gene is not significant are not ‘convincing’ and do not demonstrate the ‘hard look’ that NEPA requires.

Because APHIS concluded that it was not required to consider the effects of gene transmission and observed the lack of evidence regarding an organic beet seed market, it did not consider the effects of gene transmission on conventional farmers and consumers of sugar beet seed or of gene transmission to the related crops of to red table beets and Swiss chard. To the limited extent APHIS did examine this issue, it did so only on a cursory level. It did not consider the fact that the isolation distances are only voluntary. It did not examine whether the isolation distances were actually followed and likely to be followed in the future. Nor did APHIS analyze, in light of the evidence that pollen may travel significant distances, whether the isolation distances set by the Oregon Seed Certification Standards are sufficient to protect the non-genetically engineered crops. Moreover, there is no support in the record for APHIS conclusion that non-trangenic sugar beet will likely still be sold and will be available to those who wish to plant it and that farmers purchasing seed will know whether it is transgenic because it will be marked and labeled as glyphosate tolerant. Therefore, the Court finds that APHIS’s finding of no significant impact was not supported by a convincing statement of reasons and thus was unreasonable. APHIS is required to prepare an EIS."

Organic Flax Seed Contaminated by Genetically Engineered Flax

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:47:00 GMT

Once again an organic crop has been contaminated by a genetically engineered crop. This time the European Commission's Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed found the GE traits in German flax seed that came out of Canada. The Organic Trade Association of Canada reports that "the GE flax in question, called ‘Triffid,’ was designed specifically to withstand applications of synthetic chemical pesticides."

When will the organic community say ENOUGH! BASTA! GENUG! ASSEZ! In the US alone organic sales are over $25 Billion dollars annually. We are no longer a marginal voice, but we must be a unified voice. It's time to put pressure on our politicians to protect our basic freedom to operate an organic farm or business.

The Biotech community has been granted the freedom to operate without accountability, and yet we lack the basic rights of protection of private property (which agriculture products are) that are the foundation of western law. This goes against the basic conventions of good and bad neighbor agreements in which a neighbor who damage the private property of another neighbor, either by direct or indirect actions of their person or property (including biological entities such as animals and plants) is responsible for those damages. There is an immense historical record in common law and tort law that backs this position.

Organic Seed Alliance will be hosting a meeting of the organic community to discuss contamination issues this winter at our State or Organic Seed Symposium. We will discuss how to work as a community to address the contamination in organic systems, and develop action plans for maintaining the integrity of organic seed and food systems. Look for updates on the State of Organic Seed Report and Symposium on our web site soon on the Advocacy Page.

Update From the Field - #1

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:35:00 GMT

It's been a busy couple of weeks for OSA on a Southwest Seed Tour, with four events taking us from Santa Fe, NM to the Boulder, CO area. Over the next week I'll post several updates on these events.

The first stop along the way was the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) conference on

organic breeding. Three OSA staff were involved in discussions with a very diverse group of participants. Plant breeders from Iran, the Philippines, Korea, Agrican and European nations, and the Americas met to share their approach to breeding for organic systems, discuss concerns related to the development of plant and animal genetic resources, and promote biodiversity and social justice in breeding systems.

OSA's Education and Research Director, Micaela Colley, co-chaired a session on "Evolutionary Breeding" that included a presentation from our Senior Plant Breeder - Dr. John Navazio. John presented OSA's approach to breeding for heterogeneous environments - farming systems that wide ranging variability in conditions including disease and pest pressure, fertility, and climatic conditions. The conventional breeding approach of selecting for very narrow uniformity does not work well in these variable environments, and so OSA's approach is to breed for elasticity, resilience, and responsiveness to variability while still maintaining "relative" uniformity. John gave a great example of this work with a drought tolerant zucchini with deep roots to scavenge nutrients and a morphological structure that is resistant to the impact of high winds.

OSA's Director of Advocacy, Matthew Dillon, presented on Protoplast Fusion techniques in organic breeding. A group of European plant breeders (

Eco-PB) recently published a

report calling for a ban on protoplast fusion based on their definition of it as a form of genetic engineering, and asked for a US response to this.

Protoplast fusion is technique used by vegetable breeders to create male sterile inbred lines that are used in the creation of hybrids, predominantly in brocolli, cauliflower, cabbage, and chicories. For example: a radish cell and a cabbage cell are placed in a petri dish. Both cell walls are desolved. The cells fuse and the desirable mitochondrial DNA from the radish which contains thetrait of "male sterility" is transferred to the cabbage. Cell walls are regrown and a plant is grown from tissue culture. This is gene transfer that cannot occur in nature, but because the plants are in the same botanical/taxonomic family it is not considered genetic engineering by European Rules. (The

US definition applies only to recombinant DNA).

The fact that this form of gene transfer does not occur in nature is enough to make it an unacceptable technique from the OSA perspective. Additionally, we oppose this breeding technique because it is an evolutionary dead-end. Plant breeders often save seed from other breeders hybrid materials to develop new breeding populations. The protoplast fusion technique results in plants that cannot viably transfer their genetics to the next generation. This is built-in Intellectual Property protection for these companies, even more solid than a patent in that its biologically impossible to use the genetics. We oppose any technique or legal framework that prevents the further of plant genetic diversity and future breeding potential.

It was a great session brainstorming with our European colleagues on how to better address this issue, as seed produced using this technique is currently allowed in organic systems. We'll share a more detailed plan on how to address this and be taking it up in discussion with our Organic Seed Working Group.

Look for more updates on our Southwest Seed Tour next week.

Below, researcher at the IFOAM conference who are past OFRF grant recipients. Photo by Jane Soobey, OFRF>
L-R: Michael Mazurek, Cornell; Frank Kutka, NDSU; MIguel Altieri, UC Berkeley; Matthew Dillon, OSA; Walter Goldstein, Michael Fields Institute; Charles Martin, New Mexico State

OSA's Dan Hobbs Interviewed on Colorado Public Radio

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:53:00 GMT

Great interview of OSA's Executive Director on opportunities in organic seed production. OSA staff hosted 3 workshops in Colorado in August and September. More on those events soon,

http://www.kcfr.org/cgi-bin/comatters/comatters_play.asx?play=5130&type=comatters.asx

Organic Integrity Begins With Organic Seed Integrity

matthew@seedalliance.org (Matthew Dillon) — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:19:00 GMT

PCC Sound Consumer recently published an article by OSA's Director of Advocacy on the contamination of organic food and organic seed from genetically engineered crops. OSA is working with other organizations and advocates to address this issue, and encourages your support for this work. If we can't protect our foundation seed stock from contamination we can't protect our food. It starts with the seed. For the full article please visit Sound Consumer at: http://www.pccnaturalmarkets.com/sc/0909/sc0909-organic-integrity.html

To support OSA's Seed Advocacy Program: http://www.seedalliance.org/Support/

Together we can protect our plant genetic heritage while also developing seed that is appropriate and adapted to organic farming.