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: 431

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

CCGA Selected a Manitoba Top Employer

Canadian Canola Growers Association (CCGA) has been recognized as one of Manitoba’s Top Employers, a competition organized by the editors of Canada’s Top Employers, now celebrating 20 years of exceptional workplaces in the province. Earlier today, the results of the 2026 competition were announced online at Eluta.ca and in a special feature in the Winnipeg Free Press. “Being named one of Manitoba’s Top Employers for 2026 is a proud achievement for CCGA,” says Rick White, President & CEO at CCGA. “This honour reflects the dedication and passion of our amazing team and their commitment to our vision of Helping Farmers Succeed and advancing agriculture within the province and across the country.” To achieve recognition through Manitoba’s Top Employers, CCGA was assessed on eight criteria, including 1) workplace, 2) work atmosphere, 3) benefits, 4) vacation and time off, 5) employee communications, 6) performance management, 7) training and development, and 8) community involvement.

Farmers’ Markets Ontario names new executive director

Farmers’ Markets Ontario (FMO) has announced that Melanie Anderson, Ottawa, will assume the role of executive director, effective April 1, 2026. FMO is the only official provincially recognized organization representing more than180 farmers’ markets across the province.

Farmers again caught in geopolitical crossfire

A week ago, things were looking up for Prairie farmers. Canola prices were rising on news China would follow through on its promise to reduce its 75.9 per cent anti-dumping tariff on canola seed after Canada eased steep tariffs on imported EVs. Those canola tariffs have now dropped to 5.9 per cent, plus the nine per cent standard import tariff already in place. While not zero, tariffs of just under 15 per cent make it possible to restore trade flows and maintain China as Canada’s second-largest canola customer. As well, Canada’s prime minister was in India on another diplomatic defrosting mission with positive implications for agricultural exports. Any time the world’s largest exporter of pulse crops such as peas, lentils and chickpeas can make inroads into the world’s biggest market for those commodities, the sun shines a little brighter. While more sales to India weren’t on the agenda, the talks between Mark Carney and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi still shouted progress.

Pulse Market Insight #293

StatsCan Pulse Acreage Numbers (Mostly) Not Surprising The first official forecasts of 2026 seeded area were recently issued by StatsCan, with some “interesting” estimates for a few crops. For pulse crops though, most of the acreage numbers weren’t really out of line with expectations. It’s important to note that even though StatsCan’s estimates were issued in early March, they were based on a farmer survey that occurred between mid-December and mid-January. Since that survey, there have been sizable market developments that could influence acreage decisions. That said, crop rotations are largely fixed and a portion of the acreage was already decided back in December. But there is still room for some late tweaking around the margins. The most noteworthy event was the announcement by the Chinese government to scale back or eliminate import tariffs on canola seed, canola meal and peas, which injected more optimism into those markets. This development added some support for prices whic

Mustard Breakthrough Brings Yield Gains — But GM Concerns Echo Flax Triffid Crisis

Committee chair says a nearly 10% yield jump in mustard is encouraging for growers, but warns GM mustard contamination and federal research cuts could create long-term challenges for Prairie oilseeds. Big yield gains, high-stakes market risks and mounting concerns over federal research cuts dominated flax and mustard discussions at last week’s Prairie Grain Development Committee (PGDC) meetings in Banff, Alta. “We’re seeing a real leap forward in mustard,” said Ken Jackle, chair of the Prairie Recommending Committee for Oilseeds (PRCO), pointing to a new condiment mustard line expected to go forward this year. “It’s quite a yield bump. It’ll have quite a yield advantage over the existing checks.” How big a jump? Almost 10%, he said. For mustard growers, that kind of jump matters. Yield improvements in recent years have been steady, and Jackle credited Dr. Bifang Cheng’s breeding program at AAFC Saskatoon for keeping progress moving. “It’s good to see these increases in their yield

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service