Monsanto contracts ask too much, farmer says

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Published: April 15, 1999

Grant Jackson is so miffed at the way Monsanto does business, he’s organizing meetings to pressure the company to change its process.

His main concern is with the company’s mandatory contracts that farmers must sign to grow Roundup Ready canola.

“Farmers just don’t like the invasive nature of it, that it ties them up for three years and allows Monsanto to come on to their farm at any time,” said Jackson, a farmer from near Galahad, Alta.

He organized a meeting with Monsanto officials in Alliance, Alta., last month at which farmers told Monsanto officials they should ditch the technology-use agreements that cost farmers $15 per acre.

Read Also

Robert Andjelic, who owns 248,000 acres of cropland in Canada, stands in a massive field of canola south of Whitewood, Sask. Andjelic doesn't believe that technical analysis is a useful tool for predicting farmland values | Robert Arnason photo

Land crash warning rejected

A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models

By signing the contracts, farmers agree they will not use the crop for seed the following year, and they will allow company officials to inspect their bins and fields for the following three years. If farmers don’t abide by the contract, they may have to plow their crop under or pay crop profits to Monsanto.

“I guess there’s a line in the sand that you can go up to and once you cross it then the whole nature of producing food changes. There is something fundamentally wrong when you cross that line,” said Jackson.

Monsanto patented the technology to make canola plants resistant to glyphosate, the main active ingredient in Roundup. Seed companies can enter contracts with Monsanto to produce seed that is tolerant to the chemical.

Jackson, who also thinks the price of Roundup Ready seed is too expensive, is boycotting the canola along with about a dozen farmers in the area. He worries Monsanto is gaining too much control over the family farm.

“It’s chilling to think what we could be facing here even in five years where we would only be growing seed for a company that controls that right from the production of the seed to the marketing and what chemicals we use on it.”

Adele Pelland, manager of public relations for Monsanto, said the technology-use agreement is still on for 1999 and many farmers don’t have a problem with it. Last year 11,000 farmers signed the contracts. That number is expected to almost double this year, according to Aaron Mitchell of Monsanto.

Farmers who sign the agreement see the value in the technology, said Pelland, who stressed the company isn’t forcing them to do so. Monsanto is the only company to date with this type of grower contract.

“In the Camrose area I know there are concerns about the technology-use agreement, but it is their choice as to whether they see value on their farms and in signing the agreement,” she said, adding the company holds mandatory informational sessions for all farmers looking to buy the seed.

According to Bernie Tiessen, past-president of the Canadian Association of Agri-Retailers, most farmers don’t complain about Monsanto’s contract. When Roundup Ready seed first came on the market there were some concerns, but now farmers grumble more about cost, he said.

However, hybrid seed costs about the same per pound to plant when chemical costs are taken into consideration, he added. Farmers don’t need contracts to grow hybrid seed, like AgrEvo’s InVigor 2273, but the seed from hybrid plants will not grow the following year, so there is no need for a technology-use agreement.

“If you want a top-notched seed it’s not a far reaction to think the one is similar to the other,” said Tiessen, comparing Roundup Ready seed to hybrids.

Mitchell said if Monsanto didn’t charge a fee for the technology that goes with Roundup Ready seed, it wouldn’t gain back its research and development costs that date back to 1982. To create a level playing field for all farmers interested in Roundup Ready seed, Monsanto has to make sure all producers play fairly, he said.

“I think in the end we and the farmer would both lose if this approach fails.”

The company’s 1998 surveys show 84 percent of farmer who seeded Roundup Ready seed would plant it again, said Mitchell. According to random audits, 98 percent of farmers complied with the rules and 89 percent feel the audit process is fair.

Jackson thinks farmers seeding Roundup Ready seed haven’t thought about all of the ramifications.

“It takes a while to get our mind around this and understand just exactly what direction this is going. But in the past year we’ve heard about all the other crops that now are going to be Roundup resistant and we start to see the amount of control these companies can have.

“I can see them also joining up with grain buying companies where they would control everything and we’d have nothing left.”

Jackson is sending letters to newspapers about his concerns and thinks a larger scale boycott is possible.

“I told Monsanto at that meeting that if they carried on the way they were I would certainly put a lot of effort into seeing that they lost sales.”

explore

Stories from our other publications