|
|
 
|
Plant breeding issues heat up
by Paul Beingessner
(Tuesday, June 3, 2003 -- CropChoice guest commentary) -- Until fairly recently, Canadian farmers mostly grew crop varieties that were developed by public plant breeding programs at Canadian universities and government research stations. The goal of these programs was to produce varieties suited to the unique physical climate and agronomic conditions of the particular region of Canada. For example, many varieties of crops that work well in other parts of the world are not suited to the very short growing season in the Canadian
prairies. Because of this, early efforts at plant breeding were aimed at developing short season varieties of the major cereal crops.
Of course, there are many other factors, like diseases and insect pests, which provide ample work for ongoing plant breeding. Sawfly resistant wheats and resistance to smut and rust are just two examples of the ongoing benefits of plant breeding.
For nearly a century, this was the way it was. Public money was used to
create new varieties. This was viewed as a public good since it allowed
agriculture to progress and provide benefits to the economy and the
whole population. The results of this system, the new plant varieties,
were owned by no one, and hence by everyone, and were available to
anyone wishing to grow them. Farmers themselves multiplied the new
varieties and saved seed for each successive planting.
This all began to change a couple of decades ago when governments in
many developed countries began to look for ways to turn plant breeding
into a profitable business for private companies. In Canada, as
elsewhere, there appeared to be two reasons for this. The official one
was that by allowing and encouraging private companies to get into the
plant breeding game, there would be a large increase in money devoted to
plant breeding and, in the end, more and better varieties of crops
available to farmers. Everyone would win.
The unofficial reason seemed to be that governments wanted to shed the
responsibility and financial burden of public plant breeding, and turn
it into a profit center for transnational seed companies.
To accomplish this, the government in Canada passed Plant Breeders
Rights legislation. From that point on, new varieties would not be owned
by the public, but would be privately held. Farmers' rights to save seed
from these varieties began to erode.
Another result of the government's scaling back of plant breeding
resources was the increasing demands placed on farmers to fund research.
Check-offs were introduced to provide money for plant breeding efforts.
Of course, the benefits from having superior crop varieties go far
beyond the farmer's gate. By making agriculture stronger, better
varieties benefit everyone in the marketing and processing chain.
Nevertheless, it was farmers who had to pick up the tab.
Changes to the plant variety registration system also helped this
transition. At one time, a new plant variety had to be superior in some
respect to other registered varieties. In other words, a new variety
could not be registered unless it brought some benefit not yet
available. A subtle but extremely important change now allows varieties
to be registered if they are as good as existing varieties. Somehow,
this move was supposed to increase options for farmers.
The result has been a proliferation of new crop varieties, many
indistinguishable from each other except by their names. Farmers are
left with few reference points, other than company propaganda, to help
them figure out which ones really are better.
Even some varieties produced with farmers' money via the check-offs have
come to be privately owned. Farmers get to pay again and again. One
group that has resisted this is the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers.
Collecting and doling out a significant amount of check-off money for
research, the Pulse Growers made a decision not to pursue Plant Breeders
Rights for these new varieties. It was reasoned that since farmers paid
for them once through the check-off, they should not have to pay again.
While the Pulse Growers' decision is a bright spot of reason, the rest
of the plant breeding scene in a murky sea for farmers. Companies have
learned to go beyond the rights granted by Plant Breeders Rights
legislation, which allowed farmers to save their own seed. By using
contracts, rights holders are forcing farmers to pay a fee to use their
own seed.
Farmers have expressed the very real fear that before long, all crop
varieties will be subject to such requirements. Varieties, most of them
built upon the foundation of public breeding, will be simply another
profit center of chemical and seed companies. It will be one more way to
squeeze all but the slimmest of margins out of the farmer.
(c) Paul Beingessner : (306) 868-4734 phone, 868-2009 fax,
beingessner@sasktel.net
Related item:
Washington State wheat breeder won't sow Clearfield seed, Borlaug warns against privatization of public breeding; http://www.cropchoice.com/leadstry.asp?recid=1665
| |
