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: 490

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

I’m switching my wheat variety; do I need to change my seeding rate?

The short answer is yes; you will most likely need to change your seeding rate, but this is not just because you are planting a different wheat variety. Rather, seeding rates should be adjusted annually to reflect seed source characteristics (germination, thousand kernel weight [TKW]) and the environment the seed is being planted into, to ensure you can achieve your target plant population.   Let’s dig into why this is. For spring wheat, provincial target plant population recommendations are between 23-28 pl/ft2, with many producers targeting the upper end of this recommendation. Achieving your target plant stands sets your crops up for success, as crop uniformity is improved, weed pressure is combatted and resources are optimized.  Seeding rates should be calculated to achieve your target plant stand, which means accounting for germination percentage, expected mortality and, importantly, your TKW. TKW changes year-to-year and from variety to variety. Let’s consider an example to ill

How much 10-34-0 can be applied with my corn seed?

Oddly, I have had this conversation more this winter/spring than ever before. On paper, there is a finite answer. Anecdotally, there are a few different options and it is all dependent on soil type and soil conditions, moisture, etc. First of all, side-banding any type of fertilizer is much safer than placing it with the seed. Some fertilizers are safe in certain quantities with the seed, but very few. Side-banding is much safer and provides quick access to the roots. Midrow banding is the safest method, but roots take that much longer to access the fertilizer row, which negates the “starter” effect. The other factor that indicates the level of safety is soil moisture; the drier the soil, the more risky it is to place any fertilizer with or near the seed. I’m guilty of thinking that fertilizer toxicity to the seed is mainly due to the nitrogen content and a result of ammonia burn. Salt injury is actually more common and affects germination and early season growth, so applying fertili

AGT Food and Ingredients Inc. Announces Date for Q1 2026 Results and Conference Call

AGT Food and Ingredients Inc. (TSX: AGTF) ("AGT" or the "Company") announces the release of its Q1 2026 results on May 12, 2026 after market close and has scheduled a conference call at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time on May 13, 2026. To join the conference, please dial 1-833-821-0163 (toll free from Canada & the U.S.) or +1-647-846-7232 (from outside Canada & the U.S.). An audio replay of the conference call will be available on AGT's website after the call by visiting www.agtfoods.com. The financial statements and notes thereto for the three months ended March 31, 2026, as well as the related management's discussion and analysis will be filed on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.com and will also be available on the AGT website at www.agtfoods.com prior to the conference call. About AGT AGT is a globally diversified food company that produces high-quality, nutritious products for everyday consumption. Our products reach consumers in 127 countries, and our global footprint consists of 39 state-of-the

Rising Waters on the Canadian Prairies and Beyond

With flooding affecting several Canadian provinces, farmers are being urged to act quickly to protect crops, animals, infrastructure, and long-term soil health.

Is Your Bull Ready? A Year-Round Approach to Bull Management

Every cow-calf producer has either lived it or knows someone who has. Breeding season wraps up and everything looks fine, until fall preg-checks tell a different story: open cows, late calvers and a breeding window that slipped wider than planned. While cow nutrition, body condition and management are frequently evaluated, one critical factor is often underestimated—the bull. Most frustrating is that there are often no obvious warning signs during breeding. The bull was turned out, was covering cows and looked the part. On the surface, everything appeared normal. That’s exactly why a bull breeding soundness evaluation (BBSE) matters more than many producers realize. It is one of the few opportunities to take some guesswork out of bull performance. On a cow-calf operation, bulls get a lot of attention for a couple of months out of the year and very little once breeding season wraps up. The reality is that a bull’s value doesn’t start on turnout day, and it definitely doesn’t end when

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service