Enforcing single-season seeds, Monsanto sues American farmers

[Curtman]

:roar:

[Rink]

Those agribusiness wants these farmers to use up ALL of the seed they buy so that next year the farmers will have to spend more money for this fancy seed.

Can we say GREEDY practices with this fancy seed? and farmers who try to save money gets hurt financially by money-hungry agribusinesses.

[RuffhouseFarm]

A deal is a deal. If the farmers signed contracts agreeing not to use the residual seed for replanting, then I guess they breach the contract by then doing so.

What I don't understand is why the farmers would enter into these contracts. Is that the only way they can get this special resistant seed?

I understand the R&D to develop better seed is expensive and takes a lot of time, so I can understand Monsanto's point of view.

Maybe the farmers should just avoid the whole issue by buying regular seed without contracts or find improved seed that doesn't involve a no replanting of the residual seed clause in the contracts.

[DesertFox]

They want this seed because they save tons on pesticide. It cost Monsanto a bundle (and several years) to develop the seed.

[PrezLeefun]

agreed curtman

[wilson1]

That farmer was exceedingly wrong. He farms to many acres not to understand. He cheated and got caught. It was not a public variety (and there are many) it was a private variety. He could have chose not to use it, but as Fox points out, he saved tons of money and at the expense of Monsanto.<O:p</O:p

Round-up Ready beans are absolutely an incredible interception to excessive herbicide usage. For the record, yes they are genetically altered as even many organic seeds/trees/bushes/berries/etc. are. We owe Monsanto or Monsanto is owed. You just don’t know of past herbicide usage, I do.

As far as ADH, ADD, etc. etc. goes…you really need to set in on one of those conferences…I don’t think it has to do with Round-up Ready beans…it has do with the dumbing down of the high school diploma, you know so everyone gets one. But then again, just my thoughts.

[RuffhouseFarm]

My question is.. do we really want our foods coming from seeds that have had additives added to them? Whatever are we putting in the food these days. It's no wonder that organic stores are popping up all over the place and doing a pretty hefty business in these parts of the country.

They have to have something added within to make them resistant to pesticides,etc. I just wonder what the long term effects as well as short term on the crops and those that eat the harvest.

It isn't a wonder we have so many folks that are now being called bi-polar, adh, add, whatever the diagnoisis of the month may be.

I think those problems result from all the frenetic presentation to kids on TV. Their programs flash from one picture to another lightning fast, zoom, bang, flash, no continuity, no context, just zoom, flash, jump, and so on. No wonder they can't concentrate.

[Little Bit Farm]

Well personally, I think the whole cotton pickin scam is a load of crap! I object to the food supply being controlled by a bunch of corporate yayhoos. I object to the production of GE foods. I believe it is only a matter of time till these seeds make a whole lot of people ill. I also believe it is dangerous to the genetic stability of our food. For hundred of years seeds were handed down from generation to generation. The advent of plant patents is a travesty of massive proportions. I hope that Monsanto sues a lot more farmers, because every time they do, another farmer goes back to what's old and works. I am NOt confident in the ability of mankind to manipulate our food supply to this degree. The next horrendous realization is coming, similar to the realization of the damages of radiation. I have a question? How can anybody turn the safety of their food supply over to scientists, when VIOXX has just been pulled from the market, which is just representative of the massive number of drugs that have been recently introduced into the marketplace, and had to be pulled. DOES ANYONE CARE THAT WHILE DRUGS MAY GO TO A LIMITED NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS FOOD GOES TO EVERYONE? I am an extremely conservative person politically, and personally. However, I am NOT going to see my family suffer later in life(if I can avoid it once these genes stray into nature at large) from some horrible illness, because sane people didn't have the moral courage to stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! So to avoid that eventuality, I raise as much of our own food as I possibly can. I am giving my children the food they inherited from their grandparents. I realize that many of you reading this today are going to discount what I am saying. I realize that this is for the most part falling on deaf ears. However, you can't say you weren't warned. In the meantime, I save heirloom seeds. I preserve my own food. I seek out new ways to protect myself and my family from the coming wasteland. Unfortunately, even my best efforts may become moot if Monsanto, and other GE corporations get their way, and produce terminator seeds. Terminator technolgy is where a plant is developed to kill itself after one year. Already Monsanto has been suing farmers for escaped genes. They have also proven that some of these genes have escaped worldwide, to the point that many varieties of corn are or will be tainted. However, if terminator genes escaped into the wild, it could actually cause a chain reaction which could kill off entire populations of plants. I am praying that doesn't happen.

As for the person who said that people have been genetic engineering their plants before now, to this I say Balogna! The truth is that when I naturally hybridize a tomato, I use two tomatoes. However, today through GE technology, they are taking genes from not only other plants, but from other speicies, and even animals, and incorporationg them into our food supply. How long do you suppose VIOXX was tested before it made it even into human trials? Well there are no human trials on GE vegetables. Are you really willing to place your lives into Monsanto's hands? I'm NOT!

Little Bit Farm

[DesertFox]

So you don't think a farmer has an obligation to live up to the contracts he signs, LBF? For some reason I'da thought you did.

[Little Bit Farm]

My point had very little to do with the actual issue of the contract, because I am not sure of the actual circumstances. I know that in Canada, a man was sued who wasn't even using the Monsanto's seeds at the time. I believe Monsanto should not have the right to create a plant patent, because plants are here for ALL of us to use. If a farmer really does SIGN a contract, and then reneges, on the contract then he bears some responsibility. If however, a farmer, is being sued because there are stray genetics in his field, then I think Monsanto should just shut up. It is not the farmer's fault their genetics communicate to other plants. In fact, if this is the case then I think it is Monsanto that should be on the bad end of a lawsuit! In this case it seems the man was the beneficiary of one of these wonderful passive contracts that are so prevalent these days. In other words he was handed a piece of paper, and told to sign here. I think companies like Monasant ought to be forced to not only get a signature, but to explain in detail what their company expects by a representative.

This also brings up the issue of contracts. Everywhere I go these days, every business I deal with hands me a piece of paper that somehow obligates me. I never sign these pieces of paper. It is just assumed that I am in contractual agreement with them if I use their service or product. I object to this kind of passive agressive contract obligation that has become the norm. Last night My husband and I went down to H&R Block, and we were handed a litany of legal documents explaining our position in light of our use of their service. A contract used to be something you entered into by agreement on rare occasions. Now contracts are regularly just tossed into your lap, and covered by some o0ther piece of paper that is also tossed at you, but not necessarily when you get the first one. In addition, there is never any negotiation with these entities.


Little Bit Farm

[Rink]

Blame the lawyers and lawsuits for all those contracts being thrown at you, as nowadays businesses have to think of EVERYTHING in order to protect themselves from being sued into oblivion by idiots looking for a fast buck.

(one gripe of mine and I know this is a lil off the road, but go to any MacDonalds and ask for their cherry or apple pies, and if they have to cook it you have to Wait for them to cool down before they can give it to you, new policy, why? because sue-happy people are hell bent on suing MacDonalds or any other large business on the account the foods was too hot, or too something-or-another, now you cant get a nice hot apple or cherry pie without getting it cold because of the dadgummed lawsuit crap, so ya hafta take it home and heat it up in order to enjoy it.)

Hows them apples fer ya on contracts up the wazoo and lawsuits ad-infinitum thats remaking our society into a lukewarm, legally overburdened society.

[Faithful_Servant]

Well personally, I think the whole cotton pickin scam is a load of crap! I object to the food supply being controlled by a bunch of corporate yayhoos.
As opposed to our entire food supply being controlled by a bunch of agricultural yahoos?? [ sarcasm ]

I object to the production of GE foods. I believe it is only a matter of time till these seeds make a whole lot of people ill.
I believe that it's only a matter of time before we're using these super seeds to feed more people with less acreage, using fewer pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, etc.


I also believe it is dangerous to the genetic stability of our food. For hundred of years seeds were handed down from generation to generation.
With the gentic manipulation being done on a long term scale instead of a short term one. For the last several hundred years farmers have known to use the seeds from the best plants for their seed stock.

The advent of plant patents is a travesty of massive proportions.
Let's see here... Monsanto spends beaucoup bucks in developing these plants and they shouldn't be compensated for their investment? Maybe they should just give the seed away and then jack up thier prices on everything else they make? C'mon LBF, you're making no sense whatsoever.

I hope that Monsanto sues a lot more farmers, because every time they do, another farmer goes back to what's old and works. I am NOt confident in the ability of mankind to manipulate our food supply to this degree. The next horrendous realization is coming, similar to the realization of the damages of radiation.
We have always been manipulating our food supply, You have listened to too many loons talking about the completely unsupported dangers of GE foods. No one has ever shown any hazards caused by GE foods. The worst thing that has happened so far was that some Monarch butterflies feeding on corn that had been GEed to be bug resistant died. That's it! Some dead butterflies.

I have a question? How can anybody turn the safety of their food supply over to scientists, when VIOXX has just been pulled from the market, which is just representative of the massive number of drugs that have been recently introduced into the marketplace, and had to be pulled.
Who else would you turn over the safety of your food to? I know, the farmers. The same ones who ripped the nutrients out of soil through over-watering and over-use and had to have their fat pulled out of the fire by companies like Monsanto.
Vioxx was pulled because someone realized that if it was used outside of it prescribed manner, it could be dangerous. If used as prescribed, Vioxx is a safe and effective drug.


I am an extremely conservative person politically, and personally. However, I am NOT going to see my family suffer later in life(if I can avoid it once these genes stray into nature at large) from some horrible illness, because sane people didn't have the moral courage to stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! So to avoid that eventuality, I raise as much of our own food as I possibly can. I am giving my children the food they inherited from their grandparents.
You're jumping to a concusion without any facts, just fear-mongering because you've heard how dangerous it is to mess with Mother Nature. There has been no evidence whatsoever of any genetically engineered foods effecting people. In fact most genetic engineering has been directed towards making the foods we eat healthier and less dangerous by reducing the amount of pesticides and herbicides needed. I'm glad that you raise your own food and have the room, time and resources to do so, but not everyone has these advantages. So, companies like Monsanto are trying to make the foods we eat healthier, cheaper and more available.


I realize that many of you reading this today are going to discount what I am saying. I realize that this is for the most part falling on deaf ears. However, you can't say you weren't warned. In the meantime, I save heirloom seeds. I preserve my own food. I seek out new ways to protect myself and my family from the coming wasteland. Unfortunately, even my best efforts may become moot if Monsanto, and other GE corporations get their way, and produce terminator seeds. Terminator technolgy is where a plant is developed to kill itself after one year.
Terminator technology is one where the plant produces no viable seed. The flower people have been doing this for decades with sterile hybrids. Nothing new here except that Monsanto is taking the technology one step further in applying it to food crops.


Already Monsanto has been suing farmers for escaped genes.
You got a source for this? I've heard of GE companies getting sued when their GE plants interbred with other palnts, but not anything about a GE company suing someone for 'allowing' the genes to spread.


They have also proven that some of these genes have escaped worldwide, to the point that many varieties of corn are or will be tainted.

Again, do you have a source?
Has the 'tainting' caused any damage?
How many varieties of corn were 'tainted'?

However, if terminator genes escaped into the wild, it could actually cause a chain reaction which could kill off entire populations of plants. I am praying that doesn't happen.
If a plant isn't viable past one generation, how does it spread?

As for the person who said that people have been genetic engineering their plants before now, to this I say Balogna! The truth is that when I naturally hybridize a tomato, I use two tomatoes. However, today through GE technology, they are taking genes from not only other plants, but from other speicies, and even animals, and incorporationg them into our food supply.
What's the down-side? I see a food supply that is safer, more nutricious and more available. You see unproven ghosts that do not exist.


How long do you suppose VIOXX was tested before it made it even into human trials? Well there are no human trials on GE vegetables. Are you really willing to place your lives into Monsanto's hands? I'm NOT!

If you buy any of your vegetable, then the odds are you are putting your life in Monsanto's hands. Even when you buy organically grown food, there has been some form of additive somewhere along the line. Whether it was from the farmer that grew the seeds, the guy that first cleared the land that the crops were grown on or the produce manager who washed 'em down with a vegie cleaner, I'll guarntee that almost every veggie you buy has Monsanto's or a similar company's signature on it.

[Little Bit Farm]

As opposed to our entire food supply being controlled by a bunch of agricultural yahoos?? [ sarcasm ]

That's some attitude toward the people who feed you everyday. However, this is just as much in the laps of some farmers who have left the noble goals of feeding the population, and instead made farming a business.

I believe that it's only a matter of time before we're using these super seeds to feed more people with less acreage, using fewer pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, etc.


The question is, feed more people what? So far I haven't seen Monsanto produce plants that need less herbicides. Instead they have been producing products that purposely allow MORE herbicides.

With the gentic manipulation being done on a long term scale instead of a short term one. For the last several hundred years farmers have known to use the seeds from the best plants for their seed stock.


Not sure exactly what your point is here.

Let's see here... Monsanto spends beaucoup bucks in developing these plants and they shouldn't be compensated for their investment? Maybe they should just give the seed away and then jack up thier prices on everything else they make? C'mon LBF, you're making no sense whatsoever.

And why is it that seeds have been produced by companies all this time, and sold, and lots of money made, but suddenly Monsanto needs protection never provided to everybody else? Personally, I don't believe anyone should have the right to prevent people from growing things. So NO, I do not think that Monsanto should get special protection for their crops, and I don't care how much money they poured into it.

We have always been manipulating our food supply, You have listened to too many loons talking about the completely unsupported dangers of GE foods. No one has ever shown any hazards caused by GE foods. The worst thing that has happened so far was that some Monarch butterflies feeding on corn that had been GEed to be bug resistant died. That's it! Some dead butterflies.

And you want to eat that? First of all, we have been manipulating our food supply by natural means. At least were were until the advent of chemical farming. I have actually been listening to all sides of this debate. I subscribe to a newsletter that is actually pro-gmo farming called Agnet. I have subscribed for 3 years. I know this subject WELL. I also prefer to keep my friends close and my enemies closer.

Who else would you turn over the safety of your food to? I know, the farmers. The same ones who ripped the nutrients out of soil through over-watering and over-use and had to have their fat pulled out of the fire by companies like Monsanto.
Vioxx was pulled because someone realized that if it was used outside of it prescribed manner, it could be dangerous. If used as prescribed, Vioxx is a safe and effective drug.


Had to have their fat pulled out of the fire? How in the heck do you think that this country was able to feed not only it's own population, but also the population of many other countries before the advent of Monsanto? This country has been the Bread basket of the world for a LONG time. How about Baycol, Thalidamide, Fen Fen?

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/%7Edms/starguid.html#letter <HTTP: starguid.html %7Edms vm.cfsan.fda.gov>



To Corn Millers and Corn Food Products Manufacturers:

As you know, recent investigations have detected the presence of DNA from StarLink corn in several food products made from dry-milled and masa processed yellow corn. StarLink is a variety of corn that has been genetically engineered to produce the pesticidal protein Cry9C. In certain limited cases, the Cry9C protein has also been detected in corn seeds of a non-StarLink variety or in corn from such seeds. Unlike other varieties of genetically engineered corn, the Environmental Protection Agency authorized the use of StarLink corn only for animal feed use, not for human food use. However, some Cry9C-containing corn was mistakenly commingled with yellow corn intended for human food use. FDA is now issuing recommendations to the dry-milling and masa industry on sampling yellow corn to prevent the introduction of Cry9C-containing corn into the food supply. The FDA believes that the best strategy for keeping Cry9C protein out of the food supply is to focus intervention as early as possible in the preparation of yellow corn products for human food use, i.e., at the level of corn milling rather than at the level of production of finished foods.



You're jumping to a concusion without any facts, just fear-mongering because you've heard how dangerous it is to mess with Mother Nature. There has been no evidence whatsoever of any genetically engineered foods effecting people. In fact most genetic engineering has been directed towards making the foods we eat healthier and less dangerous by reducing the amount of pesticides and herbicides needed. I'm glad that you raise your own food and have the room, time and resources to do so, but not everyone has these advantages. So, companies like Monsanto are trying to make the foods we eat healthier, cheaper and more available.


First of all, I don't believe in Mother Nature. I believe in God, which is one reason I am totally against GMO foods. I believe God gave man the foods he intended for us to have. I believe that we are arrogant to take into our hands what has been in the hands of God for so long. So not only do I have a intellectual reason for being against GMO foods, I also have a religious one, which starts with the lie of Satan to Eve. Do you know what Round-up Ready Soy is? It is soybeans engineered to make it possible to use more herbicies on soybeans without killing the soy plants. Where is the reduction here?

Terminator technology is one where the plant produces no viable seed. The flower people have been doing this for decades with sterile hybrids. Nothing new here except that Monsanto is taking the technology one step further in applying it to food crops.


I know exactly what Terminator Technology is. The problem is that sterile Hybrids are not truly sterile. They simply produce less viable seed. An example of this is seedless watermelons. They still have some seed production, but have been selected, and hybridized for reduced seed production. However seedless watermelons, cannot be produced without special non seedless pollinators, which means without the intervention of the seedsman they would terminate. However, the issue is not sterility of the GMO plant, but rather the genetics that might get shared with other plants.

You got a source for this? I've heard of GE companies getting sued when their GE plants interbred with other palnts, but not anything about a GE company suing someone for 'allowing' the genes to spread.


Yeah, I do! His Name was Percy Schmeiser, and he spent years in court because he dared to save seeds from his own field of crops that happened to be next to his neighbor's GMO field.

<HTTP: interna.asp?idnews="23862" www.ipsnews.net>

AGRICULTURE:
Canada's Top Court Backs Monsanto Against Farmer

Stephen Leahy

Canada's top court ruled against farmer Percy Schmeiser on Friday, upholding agri-business giant Monsanto's patent on genetically modified (GM) canola, a decision observers say will have implications for agriculture worldwide.

BROOKLIN, Canada, May 21 (IPS) - Canada's top court ruled against farmer Percy Schmeiser on Friday, upholding agri-business giant Monsanto's patent on genetically modified (GM) canola, a decision observers say will have implications for agriculture worldwide.

However, the Supreme Court of Canada also ruled Schmeiser does not have to pay Monsanto's court costs of more than 200,000 dollars (146,000 U.S. dollars) and can keep 20,000 dollars in profits from his 1997 crop that sparked the six-year legal battle.

"I can save my home and my farm," Schmeiser said.

"My battle is over but not the battle in my heart. A farmer should never lose his right to use (his) seeds from year to year," the 73-year-old added in a press conference.

In upholding Monsanto's patent over the process that created the plant the court, in a tight 5-4 decision, in essence granted the company control over the plant. At the same time the majority decision said plants are higher life forms and therefore cannot be patented, explained Schmeiser's lawyer, Terry Zakreski.

Ann Clark, a crop scientist at the University of Guelph who has written extensively on this issue calls the decision "bizarre".

"These are the same set of judges who said in 2002 that higher life forms can't be patented," she told IPS.

That decision concerned a laboratory mouse used in cancer research, known as the Harvard Mouse.

The very unusual fact that Schmeiser did not have to pay Monsanto's court costs and that it was a 5-4 decision means there will be more litigation in future, Clark predicted.

"It's about as a weak a victory for Monsanto as you could get."

Nonetheless it is a serious loss, because not only did the court not recognise the fundamental right of farmers to save seeds, "it's allowing seeds to become a tool of oppression," said Terry Boehm of Canada's National Farmers Union (NFU).

Schmeiser has steadfastly maintained that his fields were contaminated by pollen from a neighbour's GM canola (oilseed rape) fields and by seeds that blew off trucks on their way to a nearby processing plant.

Monsanto maintains that Schmeiser knowingly infringed on their patents.

Lower courts and now Canada's highest court have ruled that no matter how the plants got there, Schmeiser infringed on Monsanto's legal rights when he harvested and sold his crop.

"We conclude that the trial judge and Court of Appeal were correct in concluding that the appellants 'used' Monsanto's patented gene and cell and hence infringed the Patent Act," said Friday's judgement.

All crop seeds are the result of thousands of years of seed saving and selection by farmers around the world, said Boehm. Allowing a de facto patent, "usurps the entire history of that seed".

Read the rest at the link.

If you buy any of your vegetable, then the odds are you are putting your life in Monsanto's hands. Even when you buy organically grown food, there has been some form of additive somewhere along the line. Whether it was from the farmer that grew the seeds, the guy that first cleared the land that the crops were grown on or the produce manager who washed 'em down with a vegie cleaner, I'll guarntee that almost every veggie you buy has Monsanto's or a similar company's signature on it.

I'm glad you at least admitting it is possible.

http://www.kitchendoctor.com/reprints/GMOcorn.html

And this one ought to make you sleep well at night.

http://www.gene.ch/genet/2002/Dec/msg00043.html

Scientists condemn new gene technique


Researchers have developed a technique to speed evolution by inserting human
cancer-causing genes into animals and plants.

Hundreds of mutant breeds - which would normally take nature millennia to
produce - could be developed in months by the method, known as hypermutability.


But the technique - designed to improve production of new animal and crop
breeds - has shocked many scientists and environmentalists. Some say the
process could result in organisms with human cancer-causing genes being released
into the environment. Others worry that attempts to accelerate evolution could
be dangerous.

However, its creator, the US-based company Morphotek, says it could be
valuable to drug and agriculture companies, making it possible to isolate highly
profitable breeds, drought-resistant plants or milk-rich cows.

Details of the method were passed to The Observer last week by a senior
British researcher working for one of Europe's largest biotech corporations.
Although a keen supporter of GM technology, the scientist was dismayed to learn
about Morphotek's plans after its directors launched a sales tour of Europe.

'I was completely shocked,' he said. 'What would happen if an organism
containing such a dangerous gene escaped? What if a gene got into the food chain?
Some people could suffer fatal reactions.'


That's right! Coming to a store near you, Cancer laden vegis. YUMMY!



Little Bit Farm

[DesertFox]

I understand your point, LBF, but seems to me a contract has priority to your point. Dude bought the seed on condition he not save any for next year. Then he saved some for next year.

Seems pretty simple to me.

[Little Bit Farm]

Actually, in this case this particular farmer made a grave error, and probably didn't read his contract. Or maybe, he read his contract and decided to ignore it. My response in this case was not to this farmers action or inaction, it was to the broader scope of whether the laws that are currently creating this situation are good law. My response was more to whether Monsanto ought to be able to prosecute anyone for saving seed. The answer for me would be no. However, that answer would also only apply in an ideal world, and when it comes to GMO crops NOTHING is ideal. In an ideal world, I would be able to go to my grocery store, and look at a label, and decided whether or not I wanted to eat GMO. In an ideal world, there would be animal and human trials of these crops to determine safety. In an ideal world, a farmer could not choose to drown his crop in herbicide because of a genetically altered organism.


Little Bit Farm

[Little Bit Farm]

And this is what I am talking about!

Here is a little blurb sent to me by e-mail:

January 13, 2005
Center for Food Safety Media Release
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/Monsantovsusfarmersreport.cfm (http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/Monsantovsusfarmersreport.cfm)
First-of-its-Kind Analysis Reveals Thousands of Monsanto Investigations,
Nearly 100 Lawsuits and Numerous Bankruptcies
Toll-Free Hotline Established for Farmers Facing Lawsuits or Threats from
Monsanto to Get Guidance and Referrals
WASHINGTON - The Center for Food Safety released today an extensive review of Monsanto's use and abuse of U.S. patent law to control the usage of staple crop seeds by U.S. farmers. The Center (CFS) launched its investigation to determine the extent to which American farmers have been impacted by litigation arising from the use of patented genetically engineered crops. Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers details the results of this research, discusses the ramifications for the future of farming in the U.S. and outlines policy options for ending the persecution of America's farmers.
"These lawsuits and settlements are nothing less than corporate extortion of American farmers," said Andrew Kimbrell executive Director of CFS. "Monsanto is polluting American farms with its genetically engineered crops, not properly informing farmers about these altered seeds, and then profiting from its own irresponsibility and negligence by suing innocent farmers. We are committed to stopping this corporate persecution of our farmers in its tracks."
The report finds that, in general, Monsanto's efforts to prosecute farmers can be divided into three stages: investigations of farmers; out-of-court settlements; and litigation against farmers Monsanto believes are in breach of contract or engaged in patent infringement. CFS notes in the report that, to date, Monsanto has filed 90 lawsuits against American farmers in 25 states that involve 147 farmers and 39 small businesses or farm companies. Monsanto has set aside an annual budget of $10 million dollars and a staff of 75 devoted solely to investigating and prosecuting farmers.
"Monsanto would like nothing more than to be the sole source for staple crop seeds in this country and around the world," said Joseph Mendelson, CFS legal director. "And it will aggressively overturn centuries-old farming practices and drive its own clients out of business through lawsuits to achieve this goal."
The largest recorded judgment CFS has found thus far in favor of Monsanto as a result of a farmer lawsuit is $3,052,800.00. Total recorded judgments granted to Monsanto for lawsuits amount to $15,253,602.82. Farmers have paid a mean of $412,259.54 for cases with recorded judgments. Many farmers have to pay additional court and attorney fees and are sometimes even forced to pay the costs Monsanto incurs while investigating them. "Monsanto is taking advantage of farmers with their marketing and their threats and lawsuits," said Rodney Nelson, a North Dakota farmer sued by Monsanto. "It's hard enough to farm as it is. You don't need a big seed supplier trying to trip you up and chase you down with lawyers."
Farmers even have been sued after their fields were contaminated by pollen or seed from a previous year's crop has sprouted, or "volunteered," in fields planted with non-genetically engineered varieties the following year; and when they never signed Monsanto's Technology Agreement but still planted the patented crop seed. In all of these cases, because of the way patent law has been applied, farmers are technically liable. It does not appear to matter if the use was unwitting or if a contract was never signed.
Various policy options supported by CFS include passing local and state-wide bans or moratoriums on plantings of genetically engineered crops; amending the Patent Act so that genetically engineered plants will no longer be patentable subject matter and so that seed saving is not considered patent infringement; and legislating to prevent farmers from being liable for patent infringement through biological pollution.
CFS has established a toll-free hotline for farmers facing lawsuits or threats from Monsanto to get guidance and referrals: 1-888-FARMHLP.


Little Bit Farm

[DesertFox]

One just wonders if CFS is the ACLU of agribusiness or something legitimate? Part of what makes me wonder is the use in this item of the term "farmers" to make it sound like those gigantic agribusinesses are just one little guy up agin giant Monsanto. No doubt some true farmers are involved, but I'd bet some of these sued dudes are as big as Monsanto is.

[Little Bit Farm]

It's true DF. We all have to pony up to the research table and decide what's what! It is an interesting thing to me. On the one hand I often fall way on the right from most of these environmental groups. I am not anti-corporation except when the corporation is doing something I consider to be immoral. In this case I have done my leg work. I understand the issues involved from both the farmers side, and the consumers side. I have written to companies producing biotech crops, and have openly stated my opinion, and getting an earful of theirs. For me it all comes down to what I want my children to eat. Am I willing to gamble with my kids lifetime health. 200 million acres were planted to GMO crops around the world last year. I believe with all my heart that there are going to be repercussions, repercussions we may not see until years after. Already we have unexplained things happening in our young girls who are hitting puberty sooner and sooner. Some say this is from hormones in meat. Maybe? How in the world are we supposed to know when no human trials are being performed to tell us? Exactly, at what point are we supposed to question the powers that be on these issues? As for this organization? All I know is that on this issue, I'm right with them.

Little Bit farm

[Little Bit Farm]

We live on four acres. Here is a list of most of what we produced in 2004.

Here is a list of the products produced on our farm this year: pork, chicken, duck, sunflower seed, corn, melons(largest crop ever MMMM!), southern peas, beans, English peas, carrots, potatoes, summer squash, mustard greens, tons of turnips, lettuce, radishes, tomatoes, herbs, winter squash, cucumbers, pears, apples, apricots, strawberries, plums, watermelons, milk, cheese, butter, vinegar, dried fruit, jelly, jams, and butters, canned fruit, pickles, and eggs. I gathered these things from the wild: blackberries, grapes, wild plums and cherries, black walnuts, pecans, and hickory nuts. I also sold: eggs, milk, and goats, ducks, and chickens. We raised baby: chicks, turkeys(hopefully next year we will have our own thanksgiving turkey), goats, ducks, bunnies, kittens, and puppies.

I'm sure i missed somethings in this list which I made up for our Christmas Letter this year.

Little Bit Farm

[Faithful_Servant]

One just wonders if CFS is the ACLU of agribusiness or something legitimate? Part of what makes me wonder is the use in this item of the term "farmers" to make it sound like those gigantic agribusinesses are just one little guy up agin giant Monsanto. No doubt some true farmers are involved, but I'd bet some of these sued dudes are as big as Monsanto is.

From CFS' 'About us' page -

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy membership organization established in 1997 by its sister organization, International Center for Technology Assessment, for the purpose of challenging harmful food production technologies and promoting sustainable alternatives. CFS combines multiple tools and strategies in pursuing its goals, including litigation and legal petitions for rulemaking, legal support for various sustainable agriculture and food safety constituencies, as well as public education, grassroots organizing and media outreach.

I think that this answers your question, DF. CFS is an activist group trying to legislate change through the courts instead of through the Law.

[Little Bit Farm]

From CFS' 'About us' page -

I think that this answers your question, DF. CFS is an activist group trying to legislate change through the courts instead of through the Law.

Personally, I am grateful they are taking the time. Every cause has it's lawyers these days. The Center for American Law and Justice, for instance. Did you actually read the report? The problem with discounting every organization because they have an agenda, is that EVERYONE has an agenda. Eventually you listen to nobody. I thought the report was extremely clear about what Monsanto has been up to. Did you have similar problems with the FDA letter to the corn millers. Exactly at what point do you believe anybody?

Little Bit Farm

[DesertFox]

Some agendas I agree with in toto. Others I agree with in part. This outfit's agenda leaves me stone cold. I detest environmental groups. They want us all living like cavemen and that's not good enough for moi.

We just disagree (again!), LBF. :)

[wilson1]

That group is tied to bunch, Fox. And you are right, check the financials.

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/11

Jeremy Rifkin

http://www.activistcash.com/biography.cfm/bid/1342

More..

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/1435

[Little Bit Farm]

I have a question. What happens when the enemy is actually right about something? I prefer not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Little Bit Farm

[DesertFox]

Little Bit, I'm not persuaded "the enemy" IS right about this. I'd have to hear a whole lot more to reach that conclusion.

[PaulRevere]

It seems to me that the legal argument would be that research and development of superior seed makes it intellectual property similar to computer software and pharmaceuticals. Patents and copywright laws protect these costly developments. Why shouldn't they apply to seeds?

[Little Bit Farm]

When I spoke of the enemy the first time, I was speaking of not only Monsanto, but the politicians who allow the law to be used to circumvent safety testing, labeling, and normal procedures when introducing something new into the food supply. For instance, research what kind of testing had to be done before Apartame was allowed on the market. If I was the owner, or shareholder in an artificial sweetner company, I would be angry that a corporation like Monsanto is getting special treement even though what they are doing is highly experimental when it comes to humans.

The second time I used the word enemy I was referring to the unspoken intimation that because of the fact the report I sent was put out by lawyers, and scientists, and that they were supported by liberal interests, the organization involved was automatically specious.

I do not feel that a corporation is automatically evil simply because it is a corporation. There are many fine corporations out there pursuing laudable goals, and contributing to our society in only the best ways. However, in the case of Monsanto, and other GMO companies, I do not feel that their goals are in the best interest of the public at large. I also feel that corporations by nature are about making money, as they should be. Even so, sometimes the pursuit of money, can temporarily blind people to danger. I honestly do not think the goals of Monsanto are to make people sick. I just think that people may get sick if their goals are accomplished. The enemy is not Monsanto by itself. If anything the enemy is complacency.

The FDA approves these products without proper tests. There are no human trials on this "food". The FDA has already had to pull some of this "food" off the market, as you can see from the letter I posted above. A human trial would have prevented that, and would have insured the safety of the population to at least some extent.

Here is my question? If these companies really are pursuing the best interests of the population at large, why not put their product to the test, and make their product available for both proper testing, and label their product so that the consumer can decide what to put in their body? Why must they sneak this food into people's mouth, if their product has so much value?

Little Bit Farm

[PaulRevere]

Well, we're veering off topic here, but I gave up a while back on being scared about "genetically altered" crops. Every domesticated animal and crop that we have has been "genetically altered" going back thousands of years, giving us milkier cows, beefier cattle, faster horses, and more bountiful crops of corn, potatoes, and everything else. I refuse to be scared of modern biogenetic science just because I don't understand it. It is accelerating the process that humankind has been clumsily pursuing since the domestication of the dog.

[DesertFox]

Quoth the Midnight Rider: Well, we're veering off topic here, but I gave up a while back on being scared about "genetically altered" crops. Every domesticated animal and crop that we have has been "genetically altered" going back thousands of years, giving us milkier cows, beefier cattle, faster horses, and more bountiful crops of corn, potatoes, and everything else. I refuse to be scared of modern biogenetic science just because I don't understand it. It is accelerating the process that humankind has been clumsily pursuing since the domestication of the dog. Agreed. My stomach long ago made it plain that anything it didn't like was gonna come back out by the same path it came in. My bowels long since established that whatever wasn't being put to good use was going to be ushered out by a different route.

I got confidence my viscera to know good food from bad.

[Little Bit Farm]

[QUOTEI refuse to be scared of modern biogenetic science just because I don't understand it. It is accelerating the process that humankind has been clumsily pursuing since the domestication of the dog.[/QUOTE]

It's the fact that you don't understand it that keeps you from being scared. Like a child that runs out in the road.


Little Bit Farm

[PaulRevere]

It's the fact that you don't understand it that keeps you from being scared. Like a child that runs out in the road.
Little Bit Farm
Yes, well, it also keeps me from voting for Democrats that want to scare me about social security, civil rights, global warming and every other doom-and-gloom scenario they and the enviro-wackos can think up.

BTW, our instincts are to fear what we don't understand - not what we understand. I said that I refuse to fear it just because I don't understand it. Just because you want to let yourself be scared about something you don't know anything about doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't share your feelings is like a naive toddler.

[Rink]

What scares me is this 'terminator seeds' if the gene that kills off the plants and seeds after a time escapes, you can bet good money we'll be having famine up the wazoo because we cant preserve our food supply from self-terminating.

[DesertFox]

Never happen.

[Rink]

They said the genetically altered corn wouldnt escape into the wild, but it did

[DesertFox]

Famine is what would never happen. Famine in America will never happen. At least, not until You-know-Who swings by again.

[Rink]

Um never say never Fox, famine can happen anywhere in the world.

[DesertFox]

No, it can't. Famines don't happen naturally; they only happen where govt gets too involved. Our govt is too big but it's nowhere near that point.

[PaulRevere]

No, it can't. Famines don't happen naturally; they only happen where govt gets too involved. Our govt is too big but it's nowhere near that point.
I don't know if that's entirely true, but the starkest examples of it being true is North Korea, 1920s Ukraine, the Great Leap Forward in China. In all these cases we see that communists were in charge.

[Rink]

Well gotta say the govt i bet has a good stake in these genetically engineered seedstufs, as they do get money out of it with all that patent stuff.

So the govt is involved, though to what extent i dunno.

I wouldnt put it past em to screw something up and it escape into the wild and cause a whole load of problems just like the genetically altered corn is doing.

In effect those 'terminator seeds' could possibly well make some plant species extinct by their terminating gene in them.

Just not a good idea to produce because theres just no way they know if that gene cant slip out into the wild.

[PaulRevere]

ancient Indians' first corn was no bigger than a tuft of wheat (modern, genetically enhance wheat, that is) and grown in Mexico. Through accident or trial and error, they gradually over centuries developed larger and larger ears. In the 20th century science was applied to corn and the size doubled then trebled compared to what the Indians knew. Hardier strains were developed. The result of this and of other crop development was that hundreds of millions of people were saved from starvation.

[Warlady]

I agree with Faithful Servant, Fox and Paul. There is no evidence that gentic seeds are harmful. Quite the contrary. Reduction in pesticides has made them and our environment a whole lot healthier. Monsanto will win this lawsuit.

[Little Bit Farm]

Yes, well, it also keeps me from voting for Democrats that want to scare me about social security, civil rights, global warming and every other doom-and-gloom scenario they and the enviro-wackos can think up.

BTW, our instincts are to fear what we don't understand - not what we understand. I said that I refuse to fear it just because I don't understand it. Just because you want to let yourself be scared about something you don't know anything about doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't share your feelings is like a naive toddler.

I have spent several years studying this issue. Have you? I'm not scared because I know nothing about it. I'm scared because I know this subject very well. I have studied both sides of this issue. In fact, I could probably debate the other side of this issue and win, or at the very least do as well as most who argue that GE food is good for us! In this case, I do not fear what I do not understand, I fear what I understand. And among other things, what I understand is human nature. GE ANYTHING is a grave mistake that we will all pay for eventually. I realized when I first responded to this question that I was not going to convince anyone. I honestly hope I am wrong. However, I don't think I am.

Little Bit Farm