EDMONTON – The agricultural industry will stagnate if developers aren’t better compensated for their research efforts, warn owners of new technology licenses.
Speaking at November’s Interprovincial Seed Trade meeting in Edmonton, Bob Graham, of Graham Farms in Olds, Alta., said the quality and competitiveness of Canadian agricultural products could suffer if something isn’t done soon to curtail genetic piracy of pedigreed seed lines.
Graham said England may have come up with at least one solution to the problem.
Seed levy
They’ve put a levy on all seed, not just on certified seed. This might be the most reasonable approach, because it spreads research costs across the whole industry. It’s a flat rate, applied at the cleaning level, and remitted to the breeder of record. The breeders of the most successful seed varieties get the most money, so it also results in fewer low value or “me-too” products.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
“New technology, be it improved genetics, pico herbicides or class two systemic fungicides, will all be seed delivered,” he said. “It adds cost to the seed vehicle, but it replaces a larger cost downstream in removal or reduction of field spraying for weeds or disease.
“Nobody’s going to be happy about paying more for new products, but this approach might be the least painful and most palatable road to continued commercial grain and oilseed improvements.”
Graham said the agricultural industry is facing reduced government support of varietal development.
“They’re curtailing their research programs, partly because of general cutbacks, but also because, like other developers, they’re not getting an adequate return on their investment. Government breeding programs have declined to 20 percent or 25 percent of what they were 10 years ago. In Australia, this problem practically wiped out introduction of new genetics.
Graham and others agree producers must buy into the whole system.
As Erin Mitchell, a representative of Monsanto, said at the interprovincial meeting, “please don’t buy our product (Round-Up Ready canola) unless you really agree with all the conditions imposed. If you do buy, we expect you to honor the contract signed. If this is unworkable, we’ll go elsewhere with our technology.”
Clarence Mastel, of the Alberta Wheat Pool, agreed developers of new products must get repaid for valid improvements.
“The long-term effect of grown-froms or brown-bagging, for instance, will be to severely reduce our investments in development of improved varieties. Canola and pea varieties might be most susceptible, because such a high percentage of the crops are grown from pedigreed seed, but coarse grain development could also suffer.
“The costs to the breeder are already very high. We have a big investment in research, technology, roguing and production of the first generation of certified seed. Producers must realize that grown-froms will have genetic impurities and won’t perform as well as true certified seed and this could downgrade the attractiveness of our agricultural production and our markets. We have to do a better job of educating farmers about these problems.”
A joint committee of breeders, producers and commodity groups is being formed to find solutions to the problem.
