57 



Amendments to the PVPA now seek a disproportionate set of 

 benefits for commercial plant breeders without corresponding bene- 

 fits for farmers and society. The farmer's exemption or farmer's 

 right has always been a prominent feature of the PVPA. The fun- 

 damental right of the farmer to save or sell protected seed was so 

 important that, when PVPA law was passed back in 1970, the as- 

 surance of the farmer's right was part of the bargain made to gain 

 passage of the legislation. 



But times have changed. For one thing, there has been tremen- 

 dous consolidation in the U.S. seed industry. Plant breeding and 

 seed sales are now dominated by multinational pharmaceutical and 

 chemical corporations. These companies now refer to the farmer's 

 right to save seed as the farmer's privilege. 



We do not support illegal brown bagging. We acknowledge that 

 there have been abuses, especially in niche markets. However, we 

 feel that the proposed amendments are too restrictive in dealing 

 with the problem. RAFI believes that attempts to restrict the farm- 

 er's exemption under PVPA will take us one step closer to total 

 elimination of the farmer's right to save seed. 



The seed industry acknowledges that it is both the practice of 

 brown bagging proprietary seeds as well as farmers saving their 

 seeds for replanting on their own holdings that erodes seed indus- 

 try sales. 



If it becomes illegal for farmers to sell proprietary seed to their 

 neighbor, will the seed industry return to Congress 1 year or 2 

 from now to argue that the real infringement is due to farmers sav- 

 ing proprietary seed for replanting on their own land? We predict 

 that this is precisely what will happen. 



The 1991 UPOV convention makes it optional for member coun- 

 tries to allow farmers to save patented seed for replanting on their 

 own holdings. If the U.S. Congress ratifies the new UPOV conven- 

 tion, we believe that this language leaves the door wide open for 

 a future ban on all farm-saved seed. 



We are also concerned that the PVPA fosters seed industry con- 

 centration and contributes to genetic erosion. A 1985 study on the 

 PVPA concluded that the passage of this law in 1970 contributed 

 to the large number of mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. seed 

 industry. 



Kent Whealy of the Seed Savers Exchange in Decorah, Iowa, 

 monitors the impact of seed industry consolidation in the garden 

 seed sector and its impact on genetic erosion. Here is what he 

 found. Between 1984 and 1987, 23 percent of the mail order seed 

 companies in the United States and Canada — that is 54 out of 230 

 companies — either went out of business or were taken over. 



Large corporations are buying out smaller family-owned seed 

 companies and replacing their regionally adapted collections with 

 more profitable hybrids and patented varieties. The collections 

 being dropped sometimes represent the life's work of several gen- 

 erations of seedsmen and are often well adapted to regional cli- 

 mates and resistant to local diseases and pests. 



The new corporate owners usually switch to generalized varieties 

 that grow reasonably well in all areas, thus assuring the greatest 

 sales in the broadest market. In the process, irreplaceable genetic 

 resources are being destroyed. 



