Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Monsanto versus Farmers

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

28 Apr 2005 12:15:11 -0000

 

Monsanto versus Farmers

press-release

 

 

The Institute of Science in Society Science Society

Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

========================================================

 

 

ISIS Press Release 28/04/05

 

Monsanto versus Farmers

*******************

 

The world's biggest genetically engineered seed owner

destroys time-honoured traditions of seed saving and drives

American farmers to destitution and bankruptcy. Sam Burcher

 

Odds stacked against farmers

 

Feudalism has returned to farming in the US and Canada,

according to the US Center for Food Safety's report

detailing the domination over American staple crops by the

corporations and their ruthless prosecution of farmers.

 

Once the ink is dried on the " technology agreements " signed

by the farmers buying genetically modified (GM) seed, they

enter into contracts that effectively relinquish to Monsanto

their right to plant, harvest and sell the GM seed. From

that moment on, they are also vulnerable to harassment such

as having their property investigated, litigations and out

of court settlements that are part and parcel of licensing a

Monsanto patented product.

 

No grower is safe from this onslaught as third generation

Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser discovered when he lost to

Monsanto in court for failing to pay royalties on GM canola

seed that had contaminated his non-GM canola crop. " The

corporations are becoming the barons and lords, which are

what my grandparents thought they had escaped. " Schmeiser

said.

 

To-date, Monsanto has filed 90 lawsuits against American

farmers; and 147 farmers and 39 small businesses or farm

companies have had to fight for their lives to avoid paying

additional court costs, attorneys' fees, and in some cases,

costs incurred by Monsanto while investigating them

 

The Center for Food Safety estimates that Monsanto has been

awarded over $15 million for judgments granted in their

favour. The largest recorded single payment received from

one farmer was US$3 052 800 (Farmer Anderson, Case no. 4:01:

CV-01 749).

 

Monsanto controls US staple crops by licence

 

For the first time in history, one company has unprecedented

control of the sale and use of crop seed. They have

accomplished this in three main ways: control of germplasm

through ownership of seed companies; domination of genetic

technology and seeds through patent acquisitions; and

breaking age-old farming tradition by forcing farmers to buy

new seed each year rather than saving and re-planting seed.

 

Buying or merging with most of the major seed companies,

including their recent acquisition of the giant fruit and

vegetable seed company Seminis, has made Monsanto's the

largest GM seed vendor in the world, providing 90% of the GM

seed sown globally. It has also cornered most of the soybean

market and 50% of the corn germplasm market in the US. And

if Monsanto doesn't actually own the seed purchasing

companies, it has been known to impose the condition that a

minimum of 70% (reduced from 90% by government regulators)

of its patented seeds are sold by subsidiary companies. This

ensures that its seeds are the most readily available to

farmers.

 

American farmers are hard pushed to find high quality,

conventional varieties of corn, soy and cottonseed.

Anecdotal evidence supports this. Troy Roush, an Indiana

soybean farmer says, " You can't even purchase them in this

market. They are not available. " Similar reports come from

the corn and cotton farmers who say, " There are not too many

seeds available that are not genetically altered in some

way. "

 

Over the last 10 000 years, diverse genetic pools have been

created and preserved by plant breeders. Monsanto has put

these diverse gene pools at risk by contaminating certified

and traditional seed stocks, and by not permitting farmers

to save seeds. A feudal system of seed ownership destroys

perhaps the key privilege of a farmer as the guardian of

societies' crop heritage. And it has turned agriculture into

an industry where the corporations consolidate their hold

over costly seeds and chemicals that increase farmers

spending on inputs. Meanwhile monopolies are created in

corporate manipulated markets that include fewer buyers who

demand the lowest possible prices for the outputs produced

by farmers, forcing them into a debt spiral. In 2003

Monsanto made $3.1 billion in pesticide sales and $1.6

billion in seed sales.

 

Farmers are under pressure to confirm their identity as

modern agriculturalists, particularly in developing

countries. But replacing the traditional strategy of saving

and replanting seeds from diverse varieties by a patented

seed with all its restrictions threatens food security at

household and global levels.

 

Patents place the burden on farmers

 

Over the past twenty years, Monsanto has voraciously

accumulated collected patents on engineered plants, seeds

and genetic engineering techniques, perhaps most

importantly, the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S

promoter, the commonest component in the genetic engineer's

toolbox. Along with CaMV35S, which other biotech companies

pay exorbitant fees to license, Monsanto owns 647 plant

biotech patents and a 29% share of all biotech research and

development.

 

Patents have changed the face of farming because the farmer

has lost control of seeds. Once farmers paid royalties on

seed to the US Plant Variety Protection Act or Canada Plant

Breeders Rights Act licensees who allowed seed saving. Since

the 1980s, the US Patent and Trademark Office began issuing

patents for GM organisms and seeds and have granted more

than 2 000 since 1985. Professor Lawrence Busch of Michigan

State University estimates the saving of soybean seed

dropped from 31% in 1991 to just 10% in 2001 after the

introduction of the GM soybean; this translates into an

additional $374 million in seed industry profits in 2001.

 

Robert Schubert, the author of Farming's New Feudalism

believes than an important strategy in saving independent

farmers is to remove agriculture, food and water from the

control of the WTO. His message is no " free " trade where

farming is concerned and no patents.

 

When Monsanto suspects that saved seed containing a

" Monsanto genetic trait, " have been grown, documentation is

requested from the farmers to confirm that the crop was

planted from newly purchased seed. If proof is not

forthcoming, then all of the growers' fields may be tested

and inspected to determine if saved seed was used. Even

after the farmer has extricated himself from Monsanto

technology agreements, if volunteer plants sprout up in his

fields from transgenic seeds purchased and sown from

previous years, he is still vulnerable to allegations of

patent infringement.

 

Farmers intimidated by Monsanto

 

Here's what typically happens to US farmers who fall under

suspicion of planting saved seed. Private investigators from

the Pinkerton agency hired by Monsanto arrive on the farm

without warning, sometimes accompanied by local police. They

then proceed to take samples and photographs over the course

of a few hours to a few weeks, without the farmer being

present.

 

One Mississippi farmer who runs a farm shop from his

farmhouse was subjected to constant surveillance by Monsanto

investigators who watched the family coming and going,

warned off customers, and even rented an empty lot across

the street from where to position their cameras.

 

Monsanto used entrapment to file a lawsuit against another

farmer, when one of their investigators begged seeds from

him to help solve an erosion problem too late in the season

to plant crops. If personal intimidation fails, Monsanto

resorts to another violation of privacy by sending a

registered letter threatening to " tie the farmer up in court

for years " if he refuses to settle out of court for patent

infringement. One farmer who challenged this intimidation

had his name blacklisted on thousands of seed dealers'

lists. He concedes, " It is easier to give into them than it

is to fight them. "

 

A further example is seed dealers who sell seeds in plain

brown bags so farmers sow them unknowingly. This happened to

Farmer Thomason who was harassed into court by Monsanto and

sued for over a million dollars. He had no choice but to

file for bankruptcy despite never intending to plant Bt

cotton.

 

In 1999, The Washington Post reported that the number of

farmers under investigation in US and Canada was 525. A

later report confirmed that Monsanto was investigating 500

farmers in 2004 " as they do every year. " Once a farmer

agrees to settle out of court he may be forced to present

all documents relating to farm activity within 24 hours of

request, purchase a specific quantity of company product and

disclose the names of other people that have saved company

seed.

 

Contamination of conventional seed stock

 

Researchers at the University of Manitoba, Canada tested 33

samples of certified canola (oilseed rape) seed stock and 32

were contaminated with GM. The Union of Concerned Scientists

tested traditional US seed stocks of corn, soy and canola

and found 50% corn, 50% soy and 83% canola contaminated by

GM.

 

One hundred percent purity is no longer achievable, and even

if non-contaminated seed could be purchased, some

contamination can take place in the field either by transfer

of seed by wind, animals or via farm equipment.

 

Monsanto dominates the sale of seed stocks yet puts the onus

of finding markets for crops on the farmer. Within their

contract is the " Technology Use Guide " which gives

directions on how to find grain handlers willing to accept

crops not approved for use in the EU. While Monsanto

acknowledges that pollen flow and seed movement are

sufficient to contaminate neighbouring non-GM fields their

implicit rule is that " the growers of the non-GM crops must

assume responsibility and receive the benefit for ensuring

that their crops meet specifications for purity. "

 

Monsanto profits from lawsuits against farmers

 

Outcomes of lawsuits brought by Monsanto against farmers are

mostly kept under wraps. If farmers are tempted to breach

confidentiality they can face fines greater than the

settlements. But where judgments have been publicly

recorded, sizeable payments benefit not only Monsanto, but

also partner companies.

 

Combined financial penalties have forced many farmers into

bankruptcy and off their land. Agriculture is suffering

losses all around because of the disappearance of foreign

markets. The US Farm Bureau estimates that farmers lose over

$300 million a year because European markets refuse GM corn.

The US State Department says that as much as $4 billion

could be lost in agricultural exports due to EU labelling

and traceability requirements. Organic and conventional

farmers alike have lost their premium markets through having

no choice but to sell their contaminated crops into GM crop

streams.

 

Monsanto denies making profits from the misery of farmers

and claims that proceeds go to agricultural school

programmes, which some does, but by no means all. An annual

budget of $10 million is set aside each year to run a

department of 75 staff dedicated to prosecuting farmers.

 

What Monsanto did next

 

Monsanto has another way of controlling patented genes. So

called " terminator technology " are seeds that become

infertile after one life cycle. The international moratorium

on terminator ended when New Zealand and Australia announced

it would support the technology's introduction on a case-by-

case basis at a 2005 meeting in Canada. The US

Administration in Iraq has already enforced the non-

replanting of seeds by farmers, under Order 81. Both GURTS

(Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) and " technology

agreements, " used as weapons against farmers when they

purchase GM seed, have not been legally challenged. It's

high time that patent laws on living organisms that are

encouraged by legislators, regulators and the courts alike,

come under public scrutiny.

 

Amending the Patent Act so that sexually reproducing plants

are not patentable and amending the Plant Variety Protection

Act (PVPA) to exclude such plants from protection under the

PVPA are two policy options suggested by the Center for Food

Safety to defend farmers from Monsanto. This would minimise

the damage done to farmers and agriculture in the long term.

Drastic policy changes are needed at state and federal

levels to address the hounding of farmers, their families

and small agricultural companies by the aggressive tactics

of a big corporation determined to destroy traditional

farming practices and rights that go back thousands of

years.

 

Farmers facing lawsuits or threats from Monsanto can call

this toll-free hotline for guidance and referrals: 1-888-

FARMHLP

 

Sources

 

Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers, 2005. A report by the Center for

Food Safety © 2004, Center for Food Safety

www.centerforfoodsafety.org. Robert Schubert. Farming's New

Feudalism, World Watch 2005. © Worldwatch Institute.

 

 

========================================================

This article can be found on the I-SIS website at

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/MonsantovsFarmers.php

 

If you like this original article from the Institute of

Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving

articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation

or purchase on our website

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/donations.

 

ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation

dedicated to providing critical public information on

cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability

and ecological sustainability in science.

 

If you would prefer to receive future mailings as HTML

please let us know. If you would like to be removed from our

mailing list at

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/mailinglist/.php

========================================================

CONTACT DETAILS

 

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London

NW1 OXR

 

telephone: [44 1994 231623] [44 20 8452 2729] [44 20

7272 5636]

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

 

MATERIAL ON THIS SITE MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR ANY PROFIT FREE

PURPOSES WITHOUT PERMISSION, ON CONDITION THAT IT IS

ACCREDITED ACCORDINGLY AND CONTAINS A LINK TO http://www.i-

sis.org.uk/.

ANY COMMERCIAL USE MUST BE AGREED WITH ISIS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...