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: 409

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

Canadian Feedstocks Eligible Under 45Z Credit

Eligible feedstocks will include those grown in Canada under newly proposed rules for the U.S. clean fuel production credit, a development that could have significant implications for North American biofuel markets and Canadian oilseed producers. The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service on Tuesday released proposed regulations outlining how domestic producers can qualify for and calculate the clean fuel production credit, commonly known as the 45Z credit. The guidance reflects changes made under last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill and is intended to provide greater clarity and certainty for fuel producers navigating the program. The clean fuel production credit applies to clean transportation fuels produced in the U.S. after Dec. 31, 2024, and sold by Dec. 31, 2029. To claim the credit, producers must be registered with the IRS and comply with detailed certification, emissions accounting, and reporting requirements set out in the proposal. Among the mos

Beef Industry Groups Warn on Research Cutbacks

Canada’s beef industry is warning federal research cuts could undermine competitiveness, food safety, and export growth for years to come. The Canadian Cattle Association (CCA) and the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC) said in a joint statement Tuesday that announced reductions at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the planned closures of research facilities in Nappan, N.S., Quebec City, and Lacombe, Alta., will have far-reaching consequences for cattle producers, consumers, and Canada’s broader agri-food economy. While acknowledging federal fiscal pressures, the groups argue the loss of specialized public research capacity is shortsighted and difficult to reverse. The groups are urging AAFC to transfer key programs and researchers to other institutions if closures proceed, and to refund industry investments where projects are cancelled mid-stream. Over the past decade, beef producers have increased their own research funding by more than 600%, viewing innovation as essential

How the County of Newell Took Over CDC South and Protected Alberta’s Irrigated Research Hub

Once at risk of being lost, the Crop Diversification Centre South is being rebuilt through a county-led cost-recovery model, new leases, and growing interest from Alberta researchers. When the Government of Alberta exited direct agricultural research in 2019, few places felt the impact more sharply than the historic Crop Diversification Centre (CDC) South near Brooks. Long regarded as a cornerstone of irrigated crop and horticulture research, the facility suddenly found itself with only seven researchers to manage hundreds of acres, a complex of aging buildings — and no roadmap for the future. “We started getting complaints about weeds four feet tall,” recalls Candace Woods, project coordinator for the CDC South revitalization project. Woods had worked at the centre from 2015 until being laid off during the government transition. When she returned years later, she found a facility at real risk of being lost. “There wasn’t a long-term plan,” she says. “The County saw that if nobody

Empire shutters e-commerce facilities in Alberta

Empire Company Limited and its subsidiary Sobeys Inc have announced the immediate closure of its Alberta e-commerce facilities due to financial underperformance of its e-commerce network. The facilities comprise a customer fulfillment centre (CFC) in the Calgary area and a smaller support facility in Edmonton. In addition, the company is pausing development of a CFC in the Vancouver area. Empire will continue to support customers in Western Canada who prefer to shop online through its third-party partnerships. "We remain highly committed to grocery e-commerce in Canada and on continuing to make online shopping more convenient for our customers, while delivering immediate bottom-line improvements to our e-commerce business," said Pierre St-Laurent, president & CEO, Empire who assumed the role in November, 2025.  Empire will continue to serve customers in Ontario and Québec through its Voilà banner, supported by its existing CFCs in the Greater Toronto and Montreal areas. Those operat

Canadian farmers wanted for mental health survey

It will ask participants questions like how often they’ve felt sad, down or depressed in the last two weeks.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service