Welcome to the SOD Organic Agriculture Protection Fund Website

Here is where you can:

• get the latest news
• find out more about how you can help
• learn more about organic agriculture in Saskatchewan and why this case is so important
• find out what the media and supporters are saying.

Seeds, Crops and GMOs:
New Variety Registration Regulations threaten organic farming and farmer independence.

Listen to this special Making the Links Radio program, "Seed Variety Control by Private Interests" on how the Canadian Food Inspection Agency seed regulations will be changed to accommodate the interests of private concerns and the transnational corporations who are pursuing genetically engineered seed production.

Host Don Kossick talks with organic farmer and National Farmers Union leader, Terry Boehm, about what these changes in seed variety registration will mean for farm communities and the organic farm movement in Canada.

The SOD position paper states, "The availability of high quality seed free from contamination by GMO varieties and seed that is certified organic or eligible for use in certified organic seed propagation is  fundamental requirement for organic grain faming in Canada. The proposed Seed Variety regulation threatens quality, access, public accountability, and the buyers right to unbiased information about seed."

Thanks to Don Kossick and Terry Boehm for making this information available to us.

You have until SEPTEMBER 12 2008 to comment on the proposed regulations by contacting:

Michael Scheffel
National Manager, Seed Section
Plant Production Division
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
59 Camelot Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0Y9
Telephone: 613-221-7541
Fax: 613-228-4552
Email: seedsemence@inspection.gc.ca

Individual action not the way to go

April 16, 2008

Today Larry Hoffman and Dale Beaudoin have elected not to proceed with their individual claims against Monsanto and Bayer, after having the courts deny them access to the class action procedure as a means to seek compensation for losses resulting from the contamination of certified organic fields and crops by genetically modified canola.

The question of liability of corporations for genetic contamination remains unresolved.

The court case on behalf of all certified organic farmers in Saskatchewan began in 2002 and was instrumental in bringing public attention to the liability issues surrounding GMO contamination. The organic farmers sought an injunction to prevent the introduction of GMO wheat. Monsanto withdrew its plans to introduce Roundup Ready wheat in 2004. The farmers continued their action to seek redress for losses due to the virtual elimination of organic canola as a crop due to widespread contamination of seed stock, as well as for losses due to unwanted GMO canola plants contaminating organic fields. During the course of their legal action no new GMO crops were introduced into Canadian agriculture.

Class action legislation is an important tool for groups of citizens to gain access to justice. When denied the benefit of class action procedure, individuals are unfairly pitted against large multinational corporations that have enormous resources. However, Hoffman and Beaudoin, along with fellow organic farmers, remain committed to protecting the right to grow GMO free crops, and the right to eat GMO free food.

“I believe our case has raised awareness around the impacts of products released into the environment,” says Larry Hoffman. “We will work to further address those issues in the future.”

“We are closing a chapter, but not the book. We will challenge Monsanto and Bayer for the liberty, freedom and right to grow GMO free crops. We want to be able to save and use our own seed,” stated Dale Beaudoin. “The courts of the land failed to see our side of the story on how we needed canola in our rotation of crops. I was proud along with my co-partner, to represent organic farmers in this legal action. Just as in the Biblical story of David and Goliath, David has his moment of victory. Someday we, the organic farmers, will receive the justice we deserve.”

For more information contact: Arnold Taylor at (306) 252-2783 or (306) 561-7788

"Infringing and trespassing plants. Patented seeds at dispute in Canada's courts"

(pdf 302k) Published in Focaal-European Journal of Anthropology 48 (2006): 83-98, by Birgit Muller, LAIOS-CNRS, Paris The author wishes to thank Berghahn Books and focaal for the exceptional authorisation to put this version of the article online.

Abstract: Patents on objects that have agency such as seeds pose new challenges for governance, raising fundamental questions of control and responsibility. In May 2004 the Supreme Court of Canada found the farmer Percy Schmeiser guilty of infringing the Monsanto patent on genetically modified canola, because he re-seeded part of his canola harvest although he knew or ought to have known that it contained seeds of GM canola plants that had blown into his field. A year later in May 2005, a group of organic farmers tried to get certification as a class against two biotechnology corporations Bayer Crop Science and Monsanto for polluting their fields with GM canola. At stake are the types of ownership that can be claimed over plants -- whether ownership can be claimed over a plant at the same time that liability for their reproduction is denied. The two court cases I discus allow us to more closely see how genetically modified canola plants have become objects of contention among Western Canadian farmers, how they transformed the farmers' daily work, the relationships between neighbors, and how they increased farmers' dependency on agro-biotech corporations.

"Giving Away the Farm? The Rights & Obligations of Biotechnology Multinationals"

by Martin Phillipson first published in 2005 in Vol 16 (2) of the King's College Law Journal, produced in the UK by Hart Publishing Ltd., posted here with permission. (pdf 64k)

Excerpt from Abstract: Two recent Canadian judicial decisions—one in the Supreme Court of Canada and one in the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench—show clear evidence of the lack of (and need for) balance in this context. This comment will focus on these decisions and assert that either judicial creativity or legislative intervention are required if any semblance of balance is to be achieved. It is submitted that analysing Canadian developments will produce insights of general application, as the issues addressed by the Canadian courts are of universal import.

"The Rights and Responsibilities of Ag-biotech Patent Owners"

(2007) 40:1 U.B.C. L. Rev (forthcoming). by Jeremy de Beer.

Excerpt from Abstract: "Property law, specifically intellectual property (IP) law, has had to face questions such as: what rights does a patentee have concerning the second, third and subsequent generations of progeny of transgenic organisms containing a patented biotechnological invention? Among the questions faced in tort law is the inverse: what are the responsibilities of a patentee when such things cause harm to persons, property or economic interests? Both questions are reflective of the social, legal, ethical and commercial controversies that permeate the topic of biotechnology."

Footloose: Civil Responsibility for GMO Gene Wandering in Canada"

by Jane Matthews Glenn published in the Washburn Law Journal (pdf)

Excerpt from introduction: "The most contentious issue facing genetically modified (GM) agriculture today is that of its co-existence with non-GM agriculture, both conventional and organic. Can GM and non-GM agriculture coexist peacefully, and what measures should be taken to ensure this? And if peaceful co-existence proves impossible, and there is admixture of GM and non-GM crops, who should bear the responsibility for loss?"