EU seed laws

[NorthernRaider]

Roughly these proposals if made law will make it bloody hard for everyone from gardeners, preppers, homesteaders, seed coops etc

EU Seed Legislation
>
> On the 13th of June, the EU Commission will hold a conference in Brussels with the EU Parliament and EU Council to explain the package “smarter rules for safer food“; on seed marketing, plant pests, animal health and related official controls. The main lobby organization of the seed industry has already written a letter to MEPs:
> http://www.seed-sovereignty.org/PDF/ESA_...iament.pdf
>
> They are very satisfied with the proposal. This should alarm us!
>
> They write “The proposals of the European Commission … pave the way for establishing a modern, dynamic, harmonised and simplified legal framework for seed.”
> What does this mean?
>
> In this context ”modern” means: the law is made for the demands of the seed industry, and for the production of high input/yield varieties, dependent on fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals in order to grow and give a good harvest. More and more they use “modern” biotechnology, which are not classified as “classic” genetic manipulation, and so don't require special labeling. We demand transparency in breeding methods!
>
> “Dynamic” probably refers to the many delegated acts, more than 30. With these delegated acts the Commission reserves the right to change the details of the legislation at a later date by committee vote. The ESA itself correctly calls the proposal a “legal framework for seed”. We demand the EU Parliament should vote on the final law now! They should not adopt a legal framework that is later defined by industry dominated committees.
>
> “Harmonised” must refer to the fact that this law will be enacted simultaneously in all EU states. This is for the benefit of transnational corporations of the seed and agrochemical industries; they want to sell to a common market. We demand the EU states have the final say to adapt the law to local demands of agriculture and horticulture.
>
> The ESA welcomes the alleged “farmers’ access to the best plant varieties to improve their productivity”. We question the idea that the varieties of the seed industry are the best. They are the ones adopted to agrochemicals and to industrial agriculture and processing of food. These are not best adopted to local soil and climate, not best adopted to small scale agriculture or to the demands of the tastes of people. The ESA does not tell us the true costs of their industrial seed production: the farmers loss of ability to produce seeds and other propagating material by themselves, the loss of fertility of soil and the loss of the fauna and flora in the forests and fields through the use of agrochemicals.
>
> We demand farmers and gardeners should be able and allowed to produce their own seeds and propagating material, without any restrictions and without any mandatory registration of operators, without any mandatory registration of plant varieties and without any mandatory registration of seed lots!
>
> You don't need such a restrictive and bureaucratic legislation to produce healthy seed of high quality, even the seed industry doesn't need that, do they? That the ESA welcomes the proposals shows how unsure they are of their own seeds. They are afraid of free competition with farmers seeds, with ecological seeds and with seeds of diversity. ESA demands this restrictive and bureaucratic legislation, because the administrative burdens can only be covered by seed multinationals with their huge sales volume of seeds of their varieties. By this way the proposed seed legislation is strengthening the already alarming concentration in the seed market.
>
> The cheer of the ESA is an alarm signal for peasant seed production, for breeding of organic varieties and for the preservation and development of seeds of variety.
>
> Sincerely
> Andreas Riekeberg
>
> Campaign for Seed-Sovereignty
> http://www.seed-sovereignty.org/EN/
>
> P.S.: Please forward this link to friends to sign the petition https://www.openpetition.de/petition/onl...s(de%7Cen) (including the brackets)

---

Much has been made of this EU proposal because in theory it could made the bartering of heritage seeds that we as preppers are utterly reliant upon illegal and see community or coopetative seed banks illegal. This if true will require us who plan on growing our own food crops to try and obtain heritage seeds now that can be stored for many long years without deteriation, imagine the diificulty in achieving this.

I posted this not as a news article as prohbited under the newer house rules but because you can actually do something to counter the thread if you so choose by signing the petition.

[Jonas]

Looks like TPTB don't want anyone to be able to grow their own food. Sinister bastids, aren't they?

[NorthernRaider]

Monstanto and a few others are trying to do something similar over your side of the pond.

[Jonas]

They're trying, but folks over here have supplies of "heirloom" seeds. Any federal government puke steps onto our property and I'll "fear for my life" and shoot... nice and legal under Texas law... heh, heh, heh!

[BFG Central]

If you control the food you control the masses.
Sad but true.
Most of my planting in the garden this year is for seed production.
Im leaving the biggest and strongest plants to go to seed.
Iv been researching how to save my own seeds and this is the best info iv found so far.
http://www.realseeds.co.uk/seedsavinginfo.html

[Grumpy Grandpa]

NR, I'd seen this before somewhere, can't remember where but I didn't realise until now, seeing the date of that meeting in your post (13 June), that it had already taken place. What I saw was similar, describing the purpose of the thing and providing access to the petition and at the time, I re-posted it on (the dreaded!) Facebook, asking contacts to sign and re-post themselves.

It seems now though, that the die will have been cast and whatever was carried in the vote, we're stuck with. Let's hope that those in positions of power actually did us a favour this time and stuck it to the multi-nationals () but it's hardly likely, is it?

The wrong result will mean as you say, for us, law breaking if we continue to swap or trade in, heritage varieties and for Monsanto and their competitors, another dependent market for not only their 'interfered with' seeds, with annual repeat sales (because of in-built sterility,) but for the dangerous (and deadly to wild life,) chemicals necessary to make the damn things productive. These greed-driven bastards will have won again AND with the eager assistance of our democratically elected dictators!

Bugger it - I'm angry...

---

Perhaps the successful gardeners in our membership might consider making an offer or two in the 'Shopping Precinct' section of the Forum that others can take advantage of?

[Prepper1]

funnily enough, when I had my chickens I fed the mixwd seed, wheat and such.
Now theyve gone, they actually missed eating some and it grew!!
Now Ive got a small stock of dried wheat seeds that grew in my garden.
Next year I'll plant them and have even more to put by!

[BFG Central]

The point of this to me is not just heritage seeds but all seeds will need a licence which mean you can say goodbye to the days of cheap seed packets in shops and supermarkets.
It will squeeze the small to medium sized seed producers out of business and then it will all be controlled by the big boys who im sure are working hand in hand with the supermarkets/money men. (If they dont have there fingers in the comercial seed companies already)

---

Let be honest the big supermarkets dont want to sell you seeds to grow your own food, They want to sell you the fruit and veg at stupidly high prices.
So if they can limit what seeds are for sale and how much they cost they will have a massive amount of control.
Both in the domestic market and for farmers who wont be able to plant seeds they produced the year before, The offspring of those seeds are owned by the licence holder and not the farmer.
Farmer have already been taken to court in the USA for having crops planted next to GM crops owned by other farmers, these crops are pollinated by the wind but now have the GM genetics inside those seeds which is classed as theft. Farmers have lost everything over there.

Its not in there interest to help home food production, they have done everything in there power to get the total strangle hold over all the small shops,
They were buying up all building land near there shop to stop any competition from other shops. Tesco got banned by the UK government for buying up to much commercial land.
When that happened they started buying up small shops and opened up chains of Tesco Extra and One Stop.
The was just another way to get the strangle hold on the market share.
Tesco tried to do the same in the USA and pulled out when people refused to buy from them, (They lost 4 billion before they pulled out)
SORRY moan over.

What im trying to say is they are trying everything to control the market and the people.
I cant remember how much they made last year??? But that was after reinvesting a lot of there profit into rebuilding old stores and opening hundreds of small shop up and down the country.

[Grumpy Grandpa]

(7 June 2013, 08:32)NorthernRaider Wrote: ...On the 13th of June, the EU Commission will hold a conference in Brussels with the EU Parliament and EU Council...

...you can actually do something to counter the thread if you so choose by signing the petition...

Actually NR, we can't do a damn thing! That meeting's already happened.

---

Not by signing the petition anyway. Store your seeds now folks - before they're gone!

[BDG]

(17 August 2013, 22:37)BFG Central Wrote: The point of this to me is not just heritage seeds but all seeds will need a licence which mean you can say goodbye to the days of cheap seed packets in shops and supermarkets.

All seeds have had to go through bureaucratic type approval for years, which has always forced costs on seed producers. Producers of decent seeds and 'cheap' seeds had to go through the same legal hoops.

(17 August 2013, 22:37)BFG Central Wrote: Let be honest the big supermarkets dont want to sell you seeds to grow your own food, They want to sell you the fruit and veg at stupidly high prices.
So if they can limit what seeds are for sale and how much they cost they will have a massive amount of control.

They could, but the fact is, the law that people were getting their knickers in a twist about was not the final version. It was one that was scrutinised and changed.

The law actually makes things less restrictive than they were - small companies do not have to fully certify seed, companies can gain approval to self certify rather than getting a government body to do it and all perceived restriction about home gardeners and seed preservation banks were removed.

(17 August 2013, 22:37)BFG Central Wrote: Both in the domestic market and for farmers who wont be able to plant seeds they produced the year before,

I know a lot of farmers. Those that grow seed to sell as seed do so as part of a contract and are given seed from an approved source. Those that grow food from seed do not save seed. Growing to produce a crop and growing to produce seed are two very different businesses where crops are treated very differently.

The law as amended has no problems with people saving seeds.
The offspring of those seeds are owned by the licence holder and not the farmer.

(17 August 2013, 22:37)BFG Central Wrote: Farmer have already been taken to court in the USA for having crops planted next to GM crops owned by other farmers, these crops are pollinated by the wind but now have the GM genetics inside those seeds which is classed as theft. Farmers have lost everything over there.

That is a complete mistruth perpetuated by blogs and fringe new sites, special interest groups and crackpots.

What they all fail to mention when telling you this is that every single farmer who have been sued by Monsanto - every single one of them - have been found to be exploiting the GM technology, for example, those that happened to be growing round up ready crops (genetically engineered to be resistant to glyphosate so you can use it to control weeds in your crops) were all spraying with glyphosate (Round Up). This would kill the crop if it was conventional, rather than GM.

What farmer would seek out to kill the crop with a herbicide they did not normally buy in such a volume (all of the convicted farmers were buying lots more round up than in previous years) ? They were not convicted on fact the seed they were using and so the plants they were growing had GM genes; they were convicted as they were actively exploiting those genes.

How did Monsanto find out? Farmers in the areas who had paid full price for the seeds year on year told Monsanto or their representatives as they felt those farmers who were not paying were cheating - and stealing - from them.

(17 August 2013, 22:37)BFG Central Wrote: They were buying up all building land near there shop to stop any competition from other shops. Tesco got banned by the UK government for buying up to much commercial land.
When that happened they started buying up small shops and opened up chains of Tesco Extra and One Stop.

Tesco were not banned from doing anything by the government. If they were, the government would have fallen foul of anti competition laws and Tesco could have sued them.


Tesco were found out for buying land, putting restrictive covenants on it and then selling it on to discourage others from opening supermarkets. Thing is, covenants have to be enforced in the courts. They can also be removed in the courts. Any court, should it be tested, would see right away that such a covenant was malicious and anti competitive and remove the covenant.

I am no fan of tesco or monsanto, but when I see 73rd hand BS posted, I will do my bit to slow the internet rumour mill.