Link TV is featuring two interesting documentaries about people who share a common enemy; products/production that encroach upon neighbouring properties and destroy livelihoods.
One can be downloaded and/or viewed online. Range Wars Rage On is from the Sierra Club Chronicles series and follows ranchers of differing political ideologies who are united by fury and frustration with The Bureau of Land Management for allowing “increased drilling and allowing drilling practices that are killing ranchers’ cattle.” The government’s argument in this case is that since the lands on which the oil and drilling are taking place are publicly owned, “the Department of the Interior (has) the right to lease the subsurface mineral rights to oil and natural gas companies.”
A traditional New Mexico ranching couple Tweeti and Linn Blancett, lead their cattle up a slope, past a natural gas drilling platform and around industrial equipment that occupies the once-pristine public land where their cattle used to graze undisturbed. Now they can’t believe what they see: a natural gas clean up crew ripping the lining of a waste pit, allowing toxic, industrial waste water to seep into the land. This is a blatant violation of the environmental rules that govern the use of public lands. Chris Velasquez, a fellow rancher shares this same bond to the land and he is just as furious as to what is going on.
The other documentary, Life Running Out of Control, examines how Monsanto has taken land owners to court when natural agents such as the wind or birds carry patent-protected GM seeds onto their properties and cross-pollinate.
Percy Schmeiser is featured along with others who face his predicament, including organic farmers who are at risk of losing their certification due this contamination.
In the case of Monsanto v. Schmeiser, Monsanto argued “that it didn’t matter whether Schmeiser knew or not that his canola field was contaminated with the Roundup Ready gene, or whether or not he took advantage of the technology (he didn’t); that he must pay Monsanto their Technology Fee of $15./acre. The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with Schmeiser, ruling that he didn’t have to pay Monsanto anything.. …..full story.”
But key decisions were not overturned by the Supreme Court. Whilst “the judge agreed a farmer can generally own the seeds or plants grown on his land if they blow in or are carried there by pollen — the judge says this is not true in the case of genetically modified seed.”
Schmeiser, a seed developer, has lost 50-years of research due this contamination. His life savings were used up fighting this outrage. And his battles with Monsanto are not over. Not only does GM canola continue to contaminate his land, forcing him to plant crops not to his liking in order to better identify the GM plants, but Monsanto’s response only generated cause for another lawsuit.
Schmeiser is not an organic farmer. And according to this, it’s no longer possible to be one in the U.S.:
In particular, issues of genetic contamination loom large. Many farmers need to be able to assure customers in certain markets that their crops are GM free. In no instance is this assurance more paramount than with the case of organic farmers. The International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) is the world’s peak organic farming body. In 1999 their Buenos Aires Declaration stated that GM crops are incompatible with organic agriculture and cannot be certified as organic .
The consequences of this standpoint are clear when brought home to the Saskatchewan context. If an organic farmer in Saskatchewan has their Canola crop (or any other crop for that matter) infested with volunteer Canola they will likely lose their organic certification (a process which takes in excess of 5 years in most cases) and the financial consequences will be disastrous. However, the problems of contamination now appear to extend beyond problems relating to volunteer infestation by GM crops. Given the widespread use of GM Canola systems in North America, a major organic certification body (Farm Verified Organic) has stated that GM pollution of corn, canola and possibly soybean seed supplies “is now so pervasive, we believe it is not possible for farmers in North America to source seed free from it. “
The consequences of this statement are already being felt in certain markets. In April 2001 the Organic Federation of Australia warned its consumers that organic produce such as corn and canola imported from North America could no longer be guaranteed free from GM contamination. It is only a matter of time before more significant markets such as Japan and Europe begin to echo similar sentiments.
But as Schmeiser’s case illustrates, this is not a matter of organic v. GM crops. The right to farm GM free is under contention, a decision that Monsanto is making for all U.S. farmers with or without their consent. A workmate who also farms told me recently that Monsanto is always sending her such agreements to sign but she and her husband refuse to do so. Monsanto recognises the potential for being held liable should the contamination by GM crops ever put American farmers out of business, hence the wording of these “agreements”, at the same time it is getting its product into as many agricultural regions as possible betting that one day there will be no choice at all.
So goes democracy. It doesn’t matter if the land is public or private, money talks, justice walks.
Hopefully, Canada will fare better due the activism of its farmers.