- On March 29, 2001, a Canadian judge dealt a crushing
blow to Farmers' Rights by ruling that Percy Schmeiser, a third generation
Saskatchewan farmer, must pay Monsanto thousands of dollars for violating
the corporation's monopoly patent on genetically engineered (GE) canola
seed.
-
- Under Canadian patent law, as in the U.S. and many other
industrialized countries, it is illegal for farmers to re-use patented
seed, or to grow Monsanto's GE seed without signing a licensing agreement.
If the biotechnology corporations and U.S. Trade Reps get their way, every
nation in the world will be forced to adopt patent laws that make seed
saving illegal. The ruling against Schmeiser establishes an even more dangerous
precedent because it means that farmers can be forced to pay royalties
on GE seeds found on their land, even if they didn't buy the seeds or benefit
from them.
-
- Percy Schmeiser did not buy Monsanto's patented seed,
nor did he obtain the seed illegally. Pollen from genetically engineered
canola seeds blew onto his land from neighboring farms. (Percy Schmeiser's
neighbors and an estimated 40% of farmers in Western Canada grow GE canola).
Monsanto's GE canola genes invaded Schmeiser's farm without his consent.
Shortly thereafter, Monsanto's "gene police" invaded his farm
and took seed samples without his permission. Percy Schmeiser was a victim
of genetic pollution from GE crops--but the court says he must now pay
Monsanto US$10,000 for licensing fees and up to US$75,000 in profits from
his 1998 crop.
-
- The GE canola that drifted onto Schmeiser's farm was
engineered to withstand spraying of Monsanto's proprietary weedkiller,
Roundup. But Schmeiser did not use Roundup on his canola crop. After all,
if Schmeiser had sprayed his crop, the chemical would have killed the majority
of his canola plants that were not genetically engineered to tolerate the
weedkiller! Schmeiser didn't take advantage of Monsanto's GE technology,
but the court ruling says he's guilty of using the seed without a licensing
agreement.
-
- Monsanto (acquired by Pharmacia last year) is the world's
largest biotechnology corporation. The court ruling has far-reaching implications
for farming communities around the world. Last year, Monsanto's GE seed
technology was planted on 41.6 million hectares (103 million acres) worldwide.
That means Monsanto accounted for 94% of the global area sown to genetically
modified seeds in 2000. (Total worldwide area is 44.2 million hectares
or 109.2 million acres.)
-
- Thanks in large part to Terminator technology, the Monsanto's
name has became synonymous with GE seeds and corporate greed. Although
Monsanto disavowed "suicide seeds" in the wake of international
public protest, the company has routinely employed Draconian measures to
prevent farmers from re-using patented seed, including the use of private
police to root out seed-saving farmers, and toll-fee hotlines to encourage
rural residents to snitch on their farm neighbors. Monsanto has threatened
to "vigorously prosecute" hundreds of cases against seed saving
farmers, but Schmeiser's was the first major case to reach the courts.
Schmeiser courageously decided to fight back and speak out against bioserfdom.
-
- In North America, where many farmers have embraced GE
technology, there are signs of resistance worth noting:
-
- * The National Farmers Union of Canada has called for
a national moratorium on producing, importing and distributing GE food.
-
- * A bill introduced in North Dakota (U.S.), backed by
the state's wheat farmers, would impose a moratorium on growing genetically
modified wheat--a crop that Monsanto hopes to commercialize by 2003.
-
- * In March 2001 the National Farmers Union (U.S.) adopted
a policy supporting a moratorium on the introduction, certification and
commercialization of genetically engineered wheat until issues of cross-pollination,
liability, commodity and seed stock segregation, and market acceptance
are adequately addressed.
-
- * The Indiana (U.S.) House of Representatives passed
a bill last month defending the farmers' right to save seed.
-
- * Oklahoma's Secretary of Agriculture, Dennis Howard,
recently commented: "After reviewing Monsanto's 2001 Technology Agreement,
I would discourage any farmer from signing this document. Not only does
this contract severely limit the options of the producer, it also limits
Monsanto's liability...The protection of the Monsanto contract is strictly
one-sided and I would encourage producers to carefully consider this before
entering into this agreement."
-
- MainPage
http://www.rense.com
-
-
-
- This
Site Served by TheHostPros
|