Q Many farmers have chosen to avoid planting the GMO seeds, for whatever reason, and aren't given the choice to extract them once the seeds have infiltrated into their crops. How is it legal to fine or sue a farmer after discovering a patented GMO on his/h

Many farmers have chosen to avoid planting the GMO seeds, for whatever reason, and aren't given the choice to extract them once the seeds have infiltrated into their crops. How is it legal to fine or sue a farmer after discovering a patented GMO on his/her land? Wouldn't it be more logical to permit the farmers to sue the owner of the GMO for intruding upon their crops?

AExpert Answer

This is a question that we've seen several times on GMO Answers, and a misperception that we’d very much like to correct. None of our companies has sued a farmer because of the inadvertent presence of patented biotech traits in the farmer's field.

 

We respect a farmer’s right to choose the best seed for him or her. In fact, our company is a supplier of non-biotech seed. Our agronomy and sales teams work with farmer customers to match the right seed—whether that's biotech or not—and the best management practices to their specific growing conditions. And what we see in the field is that farmers are successfully growing all types of crops (conventional, organic, biotech, specialty), sometimes even on the same farm, through good communication, cooperation, flexibility and mutual respect for each other’s practices and requirements. 

Posted on March 9, 2018
Thanks for the question. I believe you are asking about how corn hybrids are produced. For starters, corn plants have both female (silks and cobs) and male parts (tassels). This means that in a field of corn, any plant can fertilize any other plant (hybrid), including itself (inbred).   Breeders create new hybrids by cross pollinating genetics of a specific male inbred (plants with uniform performance) with a specific female inbred. This is done by planting one row of the male... Read More
Answer:
Posted on May 4, 2018
There would be more public seed development if genome editing technologies like CRISPR are not regulated as GMOs. Single point mutations are an extension of the undirected mutation breeding that is commonly used now. Having genome editing regulated like conventional plant breeding would allow university plant breeders to use the technology to develop new varieties without the stigmatism of them being GMOs. As for would it allow for more start-up seed companies, this is more doubtful. It is... Read More
Posted on May 4, 2018
There would be more public seed development if genome editing technologies like CRISPR are not regulated as GMOs. Single point mutations are an extension of the undirected mutation breeding that is commonly used now. Having genome editing regulated like conventional plant breeding would allow university plant breeders to use the technology to develop new varieties without the stigmatism of them being GMOs. As for would it allow for more start-up seed companies, this is more doubtful. It is... Read More