Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Monsanto Seed Business Role Revealed in the US Mainstream Media. Any Thoughts?

I saw this article yesterday on Monsanto and wondered what everyone thought of the issues.

Joe

AP INVESTIGATION: Monsanto seed biz role revealed
By CHRISTOPHER LEONARD (AP) – 1 day ago

ST. LOUIS — Confidential contracts detailing Monsanto Co.'s business practices reveal how the world's biggest seed developer is squeezing competitors, controlling smaller seed companies and protecting its dominance over the multibillion-dollar market for genetically altered crops, an Associated Press investigation has found.

With Monsanto's patented genes being inserted into roughly 95 percent of all soybeans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S., the company also is using its wide reach to control the ability of new biotech firms to get wide distribution for their products, according to a review of several Monsanto licensing agreements and dozens of interviews with seed industry participants, agriculture and legal experts.

Declining competition in the seed business could lead to price hikes that ripple out to every family's dinner table. That's because the corn flakes you had for breakfast, soda you drank at lunch and beef stew you ate for dinner likely were produced from crops grown with Monsanto's patented genes.

Monsanto's methods are spelled out in a series of confidential commercial licensing agreements obtained by the AP. The contracts, as long as 30 pages, include basic terms for the selling of engineered crops resistant to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, along with shorter supplementary agreements that address new Monsanto traits or other contract amendments.

The company has used the agreements to spread its technology — giving some 200 smaller companies the right to insert Monsanto's genes in their separate strains of corn and soybean plants. But, the AP found, access to Monsanto's genes comes at a cost, and with plenty of strings attached.

For example, one contract provision bans independent companies from breeding plants that contain both Monsanto's genes and the genes of any of its competitors, unless Monsanto gives prior written permission — giving Monsanto the ability to effectively lock out competitors from inserting their patented traits into the vast share of U.S. crops that already contain Monsanto's genes.

To Read the Rest of the Article - Click Here.

Views: 355

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm sure that Monsanto has the farmer's best interests at heart. Wouldn't they?
It is the power of money that allows them to do what they are doing with nobody at any level standing in their way. Not to say that we cannot make a difference.
Monsanto's best interest is at Monsanto's hart.
Ya think, maybe?

rein minnema said:
It is the power of money that allows them to do what they are doing with nobody at any level standing in their way. Not to say that we cannot make a difference.
Monsanto's best interest is at Monsanto's hart.
Can someone please explain to me how Monsanto corp. are able to sue farmers that have planted non Monsanto seed brands that have been pollinated by a neighbors round up ready Monsanto bean, the pollen carries the gene that shows in the bean. why can't the farmer sue Monsanto for contaminating his crop?
Also there is evidence that tests on the food safety of genetically modified crops where either falsified or conducted in a manner to achieve a predetermined outcome. If genetically engineered food causes cancer that takes 30 years to develop, as some independent test point to this possibility, then Monsanto has already killed off mankind.
interesting you should say that Pat.

Bayer Admits GMO Contamination is Out of Control

EXTRACT: Bayer has admitted it has been unable to control the spread of its genetically-engineered organisms despite 'the best practices [to stop contamination]'(1). It shows that all outdoors field trials or commercial growing of GE crops must be stopped before our crops are irreversibly contaminated.

for a complete article, go to:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aT1kD1GO...

and the verdict early in dec./09 http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_19777.cfm

makes one wonder how the integrity and traceability of crops can be maintained if there is contamination unbeknown to the farmer.
As it was put to me recently regarding another issue:
he who holds the gold makes the rules
In this case, Monsanto holds a product that they developed and no one else has been able to develop or market a similar or better product. If it was so bad for farmers then they would not buy it. It is no different than Microsoft and Intel owning the computer market in their respective divisions, whether we agree with how they got there or not.
When farmers complain to me about Monsanto's marketshare, I state - well, do not buy it then!
In marketing, the consumer's dollar speaks louder than any marketing campaign.
owning all the food in the world is very different than owning computer rights. as an agriculturist you must know this. Once the monopoly of the private ownership of all the worlds food is achieved as Monsanto and the word bank already have in sight, followed by pressure by the world bank on countries toward the privatization of fresh water distribution to companies owned by the word bank, all the boarders on our maps will be nothing but lines, more important than oil is food and water own it all you rule the word, poison it all you kill the world. We all know that large corporations will do anything for a buck and cannot be trusted. yet when they claim to be able to offer a few more dollars an acre this seems to blindly buy their trust. the problem is deeper than the seed choice of each individual grower, cross pollination is eradicating natural strains of corn, rice and soy world wide, once conventional strains are overwhelmed they fall under the criteria protected by the patent holder and become their property. then what happens if it is discovered that the genetically modified food is unsafe? There is no reversing the process.
Wayne, it almost sounds like you are campaigning for Trish Jordan's job.

Wayne Black said:
As it was put to me recently regarding another issue:
he who holds the gold makes the rules
In this case, Monsanto holds a product that they developed and no one else has been able to develop or market a similar or better product. If it was so bad for farmers then they would not buy it. It is no different than Microsoft and Intel owning the computer market in their respective divisions, whether we agree with how they got there or not.
When farmers complain to me about Monsanto's marketshare, I state - well, do not buy it then!
In marketing, the consumer's dollar speaks louder than any marketing campaign.
Why would you say that? ;-) I do not think I could get paid enough to move to "Winterpeg" and do her job.

John said:
Wayne, it almost sounds like you are campaigning for Trish Jordan's job.

good thing your not an Indian cotton farmer check out the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frVP6eEeKq4

John said:
Wayne, it almost sounds like you are campaigning for Trish Jordan's job.

Wayne Black said:
As it was put to me recently regarding another issue:
he who holds the gold makes the rules
In this case, Monsanto holds a product that they developed and no one else has been able to develop or market a similar or better product. If it was so bad for farmers then they would not buy it. It is no different than Microsoft and Intel owning the computer market in their respective divisions, whether we agree with how they got there or not.
When farmers complain to me about Monsanto's marketshare, I state - well, do not buy it then!
In marketing, the consumer's dollar speaks louder than any marketing campaign.
you have a good christmas.

Pat stocking said:
good thing your not an Indian cotton farmer check out the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frVP6eEeKq4

John said:
Wayne, it almost sounds like you are campaigning for Trish Jordan's job.

Wayne Black said:
As it was put to me recently regarding another issue:
he who holds the gold makes the rules
In this case, Monsanto holds a product that they developed and no one else has been able to develop or market a similar or better product. If it was so bad for farmers then they would not buy it. It is no different than Microsoft and Intel owning the computer market in their respective divisions, whether we agree with how they got there or not.
When farmers complain to me about Monsanto's marketshare, I state - well, do not buy it then!
In marketing, the consumer's dollar speaks louder than any marketing campaign.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Federal leaders promising to protect supply management

Liberal, Conservative and Bloc leaders are committed to preserving supply management

Canada invests $567M in African swine fever prevention, preparedness

The Government of Canada is committed to protecting the resilience of Canada's rural communities and the Canadian pork sector by supporting prevention efforts and preparing to respond in the event of an African swine fever outbreak. Last week Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Lawrence MacAulay announced a commitment of up to $567.16 million to support hog producers should there be a closure of key export markets for Canadian pork products and live pigs due to an ASF outbreak in Canada or the United States. While Canada remains free of ASF, a single detection of ASF in Canada would close export markets due to international trade regulations and import restrictions imposed by trading partners. Canada is heavily dependent on pork and live pig exports, and the closure of key export markets would be devastating to the pork sector. It would cause hog producers to incur extraordinary costs and force them to make difficult decisions about depopulating their herds. "Thanks to the hard wor

Using Models to Enhance Sow Productivity

Modern swine production demands precision in feeding high-prolific sows to ensure both longevity and optimal performance. Over the past decade, advances in sow genetics and feeding systems have reinforced the need for accurate nutritional programs that prevent overfeeding or underfeeding individual sows. Advanced sow nutritional and management models offer swine nutritionists reliable, data-driven insights to support long-term productivity. When provided with accurate information on sow genotype, productivity, feed programs, and barn environmental data, these models have proven effective in helping producers refine feeding strategies, optimize production, and reduce feed costs. Even minor improvements in feeding precision can result in substantial economic benefits. The role of models in sow nutrition Advanced analysis and predictive modelling capabilities can assist swine nutritionists in designing sow feeding programs by integrating complex data on genetics, production history, and

NPPC asks Canada to exclude U.S. pork from retaliatory tariffs

The National Pork Producers Council has urged the Canadian government to exempt pork from any retaliatory tariffs levied on U.S. products in response to President Trump’s duties on imports from Canada. The United States exported more than $850 million of pork to Canada in 2024, while the country sent $1.7 billion of pork to the United States. Additionally, Canada exported more than $560 million worth of live swine to the United States last year, primarily to U.S. finishing and slaughter facilities where they were comingled with U.S. swine, and much of the pork was later exported back to Canada. Trump has pledged to impose the tariffs on Canada – and China and Mexico – as a way to reduce the flow of illegal immigration and fentanyl into the United States, as well as to address an $80 billion trade deficit with Canada. In written comments to Canada’s Department of Finance, NPPC noted that “[T]he tit-for-tat tariff exchanges will disrupt supply chains that have been built up over decad

NPPC requests pork be exempt from Canada’s retaliatory tariffs

Years of work poured into building an integrated US-Canada pork market may come falling down as the Canadian government seeks to enact retaliatory tariffs on US products after the Trump administration imposed 25% tariffs on imports from Canada. In hopes of retaining the countries’ strong trade relationship, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) wrote to the Canadian government asking that pork products be exempt from any retaliatory tariffs levied on US products. “The tit-for-tat tariff exchanges will disrupt supply chains that have been built up over decades,” the group wrote to Canada’s International Trade Policy Division on March 21. “We request that Canada seeks to preserve the benefits of the integrated North American market to the maximum extent practicable, including by excluding US pork imports from retaliation.” In 2024, the United States exported more than $850 million worth of pork to Canada, while Canada shipped $1.7 billion lbs of pork to the United States. Canada a

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service