Topic: EU proposes ban on traditional seed varieties in response to agri-lobby

[Digeroo]

I have to say that I think we need to be very wary of seed companies.  I have grown courgette Clarita for many years possibly as many as 15 and suddenly it went off the market. Found that the suppliers have withdrawn it from UK.  Same with Amoroso brussel sprouts, that one has been bought by Monsanto and is no longer available in the UK.

I object strongly to having my choices restricted.

Though I am not clear how they can stop me saving seeds and swapping them.

Am I right that the potato famine was exaserbated by the lack of genetic variability in the crop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

I have some packets of brussel sprouts which only have 10 in the packet for 2.99.  Even for 50p I felt cheated.

[Robert_Brenchley]

You're right about genetic diversity and the potato famines, though there was more to in than that. People had to feed their families from very small plots on marginal land, while large quantities of food were produced for export to England. So they had to use the most productive crop, ie potatoes. Lumpers is extremely productive, and I'm told, a very good potato all round apart from its lack of blight resistance. Most people relied on it. Blight was introduced to England in the 1830's, and reached Ireland in the mid-1840's. People lost their potatoes, and had nothing else to fall back on. Some people grew another, less productive variety, the name of which I can't remember. It's got a bit of resistance to blight, and those who grew it survived better. Lack of variety is part of the story, but lack of land is the greater part.

[galina]

http://open-seeds.org/bad-seed-law/

This website lists all the commissioners and their email addresses and has a suggested wording for an email to be sent to them.

Please get writing to let them know that we are making a stand for diversity.

[Nomspatch]

This lady says it all...
Do yourself a favour and watch this....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bvkaAH_mv_s
join her petition at
http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/We_Will_Not_Comply/?wCgoWbb
WE WILL NOT COMPLY!!!!!

[Slugcrusher]

I have been following the recent outbursts on this subject with some exasperation, it all started back in 2005 when two French companies squabbled over sales of 'old varieties'.
Graines Baumaux a seed merchant also selling old varieties of seed took Kokopelli a seed club to court for selling around 460 old varieties of seed which are not in the EU list, the French Court upheld the claim and found against Kokopelli.
Kokopelli appealed on the grounds that the law discriminated against the biodiversity of plants by restricting sale to only recognised plant reproductive material (seeds).
The European Court of Justice asked their Attorney General to advise them on the current Council Directives regarding the case.

The Attorney General advised the European Court of Justice that 'Article 3(1) of Council Directive 2002/55/EC of 13 June 2002 on the marketing of vegetable seed, is invalid as it breaches the principle of proportionality, the freedom to conduct a business within the meaning of Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the free movement of goods established in Article 34 TFEU and the principle of equal treatment within the meaning of Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights'.
In addition, if the European Court of Justice had studied the rest of the directives they would have found that the later amended directives had allowed 'for acceptance of vegetable varieties which have been traditionally grown in particular localities and regions and are threatened by genetic erosion and of vegetable varieties with no intrinsic value for commercial crop production but developed for growing under particular conditions and for marketing of seed of those varieties'.

The European Court of Justice being lawyers ignored the advice and upheld the interpretation of the French Court leading to protest from 'Noahs Ark' and other protest groups. Hence the headlines 'EU BANS HERITAGE VARIETIES'.

The Common Agricultural Policy is under review and a draft consultation on harmonising and upgrading 12 existing directives is under way including the directives concerning plant reproductive material (seeds). Results of the vote on this consultation are expected early May.
Within the scope of the proposed directive it states; 'This Regulation shall not apply to plant reproductive material:
(a) intended solely for testing or scientific purposes;
(b) intended solely for selection purposes; or
(c) intended solely for, and maintained in, gene banks and networks of conservation of genetic resources associated with gene banks;
(d) exchanged in kind between persons other than operators
and;
Concerning old varieties, such as conservation varieties or amateur varieties, less stringent requirements will be laid down. The varieties will continue to be registered, however, on the basis of an 'officially recognised description' which shall be recognised– but not produced – by the competent authorities. For that description no DUS (Distinct, Stable and sufficiently Uniform, as well as productive) testing is obligatory'.

The Seed Law protects the positive effects that the breeding of new varieties has on the biodiversity in the plant breeding sector and guards the interests of gardeners who are buyers of seed and want good quality. The lobbyists are actively canvassing a 'No' vote, in effect voting against the very changes that are needed to ensure that biodiversity in plant reproductive material is recognised and protected within the rules. The overspill from their protest against the Agricultural Chemical Company Lobby is likely to squash a much needed upgrade in the Regulations and allow courts to continue to misinterpret EU law.

[ancellsfarmer]

Just suppose for a moment that this does get passed and become law. Then what ? Can we expect midnight raids to find the evidence of transgression. Will you get stopped and searched for a dodgy carrot seed of uncertain parentage. If I gave you a sample of carrot seed, would you expect to be able to identify the variety from the possible list available of known carrots ,visually? How about mixtures? What if you just had a few trapped in a turn-up, would this be a crime? Perhaps you could plead not guilty, suggesting they had been planted on you.
     This could get serious.
 A local youth was stopped by police, searched and found to have a "wrap" of powder. The policeman asked him what it was and the youth told him it was a named drug he had been given by a friend. He was arrested, charged and bailed. The  "wrap" was tested and found to contain a substance not forbidden. The youth was then charged with "attempting to possess a banned substance" and duly fined £70, reduced to £45 for pleading guilty ,plus costs of £30  and ordered to pay £20 to victims of crime fund.

[The Real Seed Catalogue]

@Slugcrusher:
As someone who has studied every article of the draft law from start to end, has been consulted by DEFRA on it, and also runs a seed company, may I politely suggest you may have misunderstood?

The first part of your post was a cut & paste summary of an old court case. But that is not what this campaign is about. And the second part of  your post is incorrect.

The latest draft of the new law is hugely restrictive and applies rules designed for industrial farmers to everyone, and if put into place as written will ban for the first time ever even swapping seed for free.  Yes, the executive summary , the 'introduction' at the start, says vague things about increasing biodiversity etc, but the actual articles, the bits that become law, are completely the opposite.

So, either you misunderstand, or you deliberately misinform. For example,  Read article 87(e)  - which says that an annual fee must be paid for all varieties of every vegetable anywhere in the EU.   Now, consider your own bean you've grown in your back yard & saved since a lad.  Who's going to pay the fee so you can pass it on to your son???? Who??

This is just a single example of how stupid the law is.  It is much worse than that, with many other equally stupid implications.  But unless you want wade through 200 pages of legal dross to figure out how it works, and how bad it really is , then you'll have to take others' views on it. 

This law was put together by the global industrial seed industry. The people who wrote it are counting on everyone just reading the fluffy summary and not looking at the small print. They're not evil, just looking to maximise their profits.  Unfortunately their lobbying has been too successful, and the resulting law is so extreme that it has all sorts of stupid effects on the home-gardeners and small market gardeners of Europe, who aren't even the original target. Even the two other directorates of the EU , DGAgriculture & DGEnvironment couldn't accept the resulting law, and they're not known for their reactionary views! 

This law is stupid, unworkable, and honestly, it really is worth complaining about.

Ben

[galina]

Thank you Ben for putting it so succinctly:

"So, either you misunderstand, or you deliberately misinform. For example,  Read article 87(e)  - which says that an annual fee must be paid for all varieties of every vegetable anywhere in the EU.   Now, consider your own bean you've grown in your back yard & saved since a lad.  Who's going to pay the fee so you can pass it on to your son???? Who??"

[Chrispy]

So, either you misunderstand, or you deliberately misinform. For example,  Read article 87(e)  - which says that an annual fee must be paid for all varieties of every vegetable anywhere in the EU.   Now, consider your own bean you've grown in your back yard & saved since a lad.  Who's going to pay the fee so you can pass it on to your son???? Who??

This is not true, 87(e) says that a fee has to be paid for each variety registered, it does not say all varieties have to be registered.

I don't know what the implications of this directive will mean, it is a lot to wade through, but it does not help, when we are just asked to trust, when what you say is so obviously biased.

[goodlife]

http://www.realseeds.co.uk/WAG.2.pdf
Well written and I'm happy to be included as 'seed club member'

I think it is time for me to have 'dip' into the real bit of paper. I have read the draft and even that is hair raising stuff  Huh..who needs horror films

[gavinjconway]

Signed.... 171469 signatures so far!!

[galina]

http://www.realseeds.co.uk/WAG.2.pdf
Well written and I'm happy to be included as 'seed club member'

I think it is time for me to have 'dip' into the real bit of paper. I have read the draft and even that is hair raising stuff  Huh..who needs horror films

Count me as a lapsed member of your seed club as well!  Haven't bought anything from you in the last year, but growing 4 of your varieties either seed saved myself or from swaps.  (your actual seed club is much larger, because your seed saving message IS successful).

[Robert_Brenchley]

Thanks for responding so fully, Ben.

[Slugcrusher]

Ben

I don't think I misunderstood that when the law was challenged in court, the result on the 12th July last year triggered a hysterical reaction, I just don't see anywhere in the proposed draft that heritage seeds are to be banned.

By 'introduction', or the 'fluffy summary' I take it you mean the scope of the proposed draft of the new law; how can I mislead anyone when on page 7, Article 2 says the regulation shall NOT apply to material: d) exchanged in kind between persons other than operators. So the analogy you've used, “Now, consider your own bean you've grown in your back yard & saved since a lad. Who's going to pay the fee so you can pass it on to your son???? Who??” doesn't mean much as this action  is, according to the scope, not applicable.

Article 87 goes on to say in 5. (a) refund fully or partly fees provided for in paragraph 1 collected from enterprises employing fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million;
and that member states can claim back fees as in 6. Union legislation applicable to State aid shall apply to the measures referred to in paragraph 5.

As far as I can see you are an operator selling seed and as such if you want to register an old/new variety you have to convince me that your produce is fit for purpose. The words 'EU Quality' assures me that what is in the packet is just that.

[galina]

Ben


 Article 2 says the regulation shall NOT apply to material: d) exchanged in kind between persons other than operators.

That is one of the statements that worry me greatly.  Apart from the fact that it is unknown at this stage who exactly is going to be defined as an operator.  A seed company of a certain size may be one thing, but how about an operator of a seed swap who charges a pound at the door to finance the hire of the hall? What about the same operator stipulating a 50p donation if you don't have your own seed packets to swap.  What about seeds for a membership fee? Seeds for a postage and 'handling' charge?  In every case money changes hands and if interpreted strictly, isn't an exchange 'in kind'.  If the 'in kind' requirement is meant to be genuinely without money, then seed libraries and seed exchange events are dependent on lenient interpretation.  I need total assurance that all of the above and variations will be specifically permitted.

As Ben pointed out, a seed selling micro company may be exempt but what about their seed producing side or outside seed producing 'operators'? 

Your last paragraph shows that you may have very different interests than those we seed savers and amateur plant breeders wish to protect.  You wrote:  "As far as I can see you are an operator selling seed and as such if you want to register an old/new variety you have to convince me that your produce is fit for purpose. The words 'EU Quality' assures me that what is in the packet is just that. "

There is no such thing as 'EU Quality'.  There are seeds that are widely adapted and seeds that are not.  Many times I have needed to 'adapt' a mainstream purchased seed to my garden conditions over a couple of seed saving cycles.  They were good quality seeds, just adapted to elsewhere and (as is common with quality EU seeds, they were probably grown in India!).  And when it comes to DUS (seed that is distinct, uniform and genetically stable) as a requirement for 'quality seed' I need to disagree with you.  Yes, I want seed that has been grown from healthy parent plants and that is what it says on the packet and not adulterated with inferior seed.  Germination testing is another requirement.  But uniformity and stability is not.  Let me explain:

There is a bean that produces two different colours of seed - Ukrainian Comrades  -
http://www.heritageharvestseed.com/beanstz.html    (scroll down)
it cannot be selected to only produce the one colour, so it is not uniform.  I have another bean that has both green and yellow pods, a heirloom from the Balkans.  Initially I thought it was a mistake and selected only the yellow pods for seeds, but the green comes back every generation.  It is a nice bean and I would not want to be without it.  But it is not uniform.  And there are many, many more examples.  I have been following up an accidental cross between runner and French bean for generations - not uniform and not genetically stable.  Definitely not a star performer throughout the season, but when both runnerbeans and French beans have finished cropping here (we are exposed and get bad gales), my cross performs like a trooper for a whole lot of late beans.  I would not want to be without it.  I want to be able to buy such seeds from 'operators' and I am not interested in DUS and VCU (value for cultivation and use) if the contents are honestly described - in this case' inter-species, genetically unstable bean, that comes into its own and produces masses of beans during October, just before frost'.  As a main bean, it is useless because it is late, nevertheless it has a special place in my garden.  Similarly: You can buy tomato seeds from a breeder in the USA that are promising crosses, but not yet fully genetically stable.  If honestly described as 'F4 seeds, which will show some variations to allow the gardener to select their own best adapted lines' then that is just fine by me.  I know what to expect, why I get these seeds.  Nothing to do with DUS and VCU. 

These 'quality EU' criteria are wrong for most gardeners and allotment growers, even if they are what agriculture requires.  And another example:  uniformity includes a uniformity of harvesting time.  In other words: all produce comes in at once.  That's fine for the farmer who wants to get a harvest done and dusted in one go, but the gardener wants to harvest for an expended period - not all at once.

I suspect you come from a different background Slugcrusher.  I think you simply may not (yet) understand why these projected new laws are problematic for many gardeners, amateur plant breeders and seed savers.  Unfortunately we are now having to look at different drafts, saying different things too.  Thank you Ben for providing some clarity.




 

[goodlife]

What you have typed Galina.. just shows how difficult it is to explain for politicians why not to vote for this law. Anybody who is not involved growing or dealing with the 'not so usual' vegetable varieties.. they won't understand what is involved and how diverse plant world really is.. bean is not just a bean..
It took great amount typing for you to explain just few examples.. many people would not have attention span long enough to listen half of it what is typed.
We all use these 'fancy words'....diversity, heritage etc....how good it would be to put table up on front of the voting ministers, stock it up with the odd looking veg and then start explaining what they 'do' and why it they don't fit in the normal categories..

And it is not all about just seeds...what category does the varieties fit in that can be only propagated vegetatively? What would happen to those? How do you explain that without writing a essay..

[Chrispy]

I can't see anything that would be a problem for us.

The mere act of buying a noncommercial variety to try out would mean that the directive would not apply. Article 2(a) and 2(b)

If you continue to buy and grow the same variety, then that may be more of a problem, but why do that, just save your own seeds.

[goodlife]

If you continue to buy and grow the same variety, then that may be more of a problem, but why do that, just save your own seeds.

Ah..but that is exactly the problem. It is alright if you already have a stock from which to grow and save...but if these seeds are not 'registered' and kept available for future purchases there is lot of people and potential seed savers that will miss out..it may mean that particular variety for not being available anymore will disappear altogether. You cannot always be sure that your seed saving is success and there is no 'nip into shops' to get more if they've gone.
If it means that seed suppliers have to pay annually to keep each variety registered..it is definite that many varieties will be cut down from their supplies to keep their profit margins alive.
It is not just about heritage varieties..but just about any variety. I save quite a lot of seeds for my own use and to share but I do buy lot too..just ordinary 'shop' varieties...as I cannot save everything that I may wish to grow. These restrictions may well mean that my ordinary 'brussels' variety of seeds are not profitable anymore to produce with the all the cost that this new law would demand. It would be very disappointing find many trusted varieties not being on shelves anymore.

[Jayb]

Apologies if this link has already been shared, http://www.seed-sovereignty.org/EN/

[galina]

Two more links:

The Soil Association website has a link to this petition:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/We_dont_accept_this_Let_us_keep_our_seeds_EU/?aJdTVab

Picman posted an interesting link from BBC Radio 4's farming today programme this morning:
from minute 18 onwards

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s7srx

Both Soil Association and Heritage Seed Library give their views based on the latest draft of the proposed legislation and are very worried about the implications.