By Gary Joiner
TFB Radio Network Manager
Texas Farm Bureau (TFB) and other agricultural groups have planted their support behind a bill in Austin to implement a statewide seed standardization law.
SB 1172, by Senator Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), prevents a political subdivision from adopting regulation on seeds, including planting seeds or cultivating plants grown from seeds. A statewide seed standardization law will ensure farmers have a consistent level playing field in all 254 Texas counties, according to TFB State Legislative Director Jim Reaves.
Reaves said the potential currently exists for a patchwork of local ordinances that could cause confusion and inconsistency for farmers who have fields in parts of two counties.
“If you’ve got some property, and part of your land is in one county, and the other part of your land is in another, it would be dealing with two sets of rules. And that would be very problematic for the landowner,” Reaves said.
The legislation designates the Texas Department of Agriculture as the agency to coordinate and administer the state seed standardization law. SB 1172 is pending after a March 20 hearing in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Water and Rural Affairs.
Companion legislation, HB 2758, has been filed by Rep. Charlie Geren (R-Fort Worth).
“A lot of the rural and ag folks have been working on a bill that would preempt local municipalities and counties from banning certain seeds,” Reaves said. “We don’t believe the locals have the science that the state of Texas has. So we think it’s better held in the state’s hands. It will basically tell cities that if you have problem with a certain seed, the state can ban it, but you can’t.”
Other groups joining TFB in support of the legislation include the Texas Seed Trade Association, Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, Texas Nursery & Landscape Association and Texas Grain Sorghum Association.
looks to me like a bill to allow companies promoting GMO seeds to avoid conflict with localities trying to save their crops and not be blackmailed into buying seeds from only one source. just a thought. carol moser
I totallyl agree with Carol. This is totally wrong anyway you look at it and probably the only seeds available will be Monsanto’s GMO seeds. I certainly hope enough people protest this bill that it won’t pass; it smells like Monsanto. Very stinky! Monsanto should be put out of business.
Here’s another thought. That farmers are somehow “forced” into planting anything is one of the most pervasive myths among many about agriculture. Most farmers I know find that one just a bit insulting
Carol Moser makes a good point but I’d like for the author of this piece to give us an example of what kind of seed my local municipality might ban that the state wouldn’t want banned and what seeds are currently banned? Also, is this the only issue this bill deals with? Are there no other parts of the bill that can cover other issues? I’ll have to read the bill but a little more who, what, when, where and why would be appreciated, for instance, who opposes this bill and what situation arose that brought it about?
The bill prohibits political subdivisions from regulating seeds or plants grown from seeds.
An example could be that Travis County decides to ban all GMO seeds. If someone farms in both Williamson and Travis Counties, they will have to make sure that they are planting the correct seeds in the correct fields. There will also be a difference in farming practices that the farmer will have to follow for each field. One field may not be tolerant to a chemical or have biotechnology so they will have to continuously monitor and spray for pests such as rootworms. These prohibitions could be burdensome on the farmer.
The state wouldn’t ban these seeds because they have been deregulated by EPA and USDA and deemed safe.
There have been instances, primarily in Hawaii, where a local government banned a certain kind of seed or practice. That takes away from the farmer what we call “regulatory certainty.” Not knowing how to plan for the whims of an uniformed local government with an activist bent. Might this affect GMO seeds? Maybe. Farmers will wrestle you for the right to plant them since they save him or her a fortune in insecticide he doesn’t have to put out nearly as much of, diesel since he has to cross the field fewer times and so on. Monsanto nor any other company has ever forced one of them to plant anything. The science of GMOs is pretty much settled. The evidence for the damage of biotech damage to human health of the environment has been added up and comes to the staggering number of – exactly zero. I never like being pushed to defend Monsanto, but really, they are just a company. Better than some – worse than some.
The science of GMOs is most definitely unsettled – that’s why people all over the US are still asking for GMOs to be labeled, and why the grocery industry is fighting against it. That’s why GMOs are banned in 38 countries around the world. Do the research for yourselves, folks.
Also, if “the locals don’t have the science that the State of Texas has,” then could it perhaps be shared with them? Sounds like they – and we all – would benefit from their education on the subject. Maybe a database or other electronic reference could be made accessible to county officials containing information (aka “science”) about such controversial seeds so they can make more informed choices.
All that exists, Raina. First, we have to agree on the term “science.” When I use it, I am talking about mainstream, peer reviewed studies endorsed by virtually every scientific agency in the world. Like these – http://www.siquierotransgenicos.cl/2015/06/13/more-than-240-organizations-and-scientific-institutions-support-the-safety-of-gm-crops/
I am not speaking of the studies done by anti-gmo activists like Seneff and Seralini who started with a conclusion and bent the data to fit. I also don’t give a lot of credence to published claims in The Natural News or by the Organic Consumers Association.
Absolutely Gene, we have to consider the source of information, their funding, agenda, etc. – it’s all part of being an informed citizen in today’s world.
I agree Raina – The demonization of biotech began when Greenpeace and other activists groups who used the ridiculous misnomer, “Frankenfood” to describe a perfectly safe product. It was – and is – selling fear. However, something changed in 2016 and it’s a lot harder sell.
Even the European scientific community admits their ban is political and not based on any reliable science. But great sums of money are raised on the lie. Activist organizations need a crisis to raise $$. People tend not to give when “everything is fine.”
If you believe GMOs are safe, my question is why? If you have any research not bought and paid for by large agricultural corporate concerns, please trot out some links. Big ag has a nasty habit of buying research that suits their agenda and putting the kibash on that which doesn’t. All GMO seeds do is guarantee glyphosate ends up in the food chain. If that’s the purpose of this bill, it will succeed. Giving organic farmers a chance to compete is not Monsantos purpose, so this bill does seem to accomplish their agenda. Research the Hawaiian papaya disaster caused by GMO and you may feel differently about the outcome of eliminating diversity in agricultural production through planting GMO varieties of cultivars.
Jasper, this is an old post. This bill did indeed pass the Texas Legislature and is now law. I won’t spend much time on it for that reason, but it’s hard to let this much misinformation just sit there unchallenged. You asked for links. You’ll never see them if you just mine information that promotes a tribal view. Why not just go out there and find them for yourself? I am an old hand at this. When I argue with GMO detractors, I always get, “Oh yeah, then what about this?” when I post a link. I’m just not going to respond to links from Seralini, Seneff or Natural News. Been there and done that.
Look for research on Golden Rice, bananas in Uganda and of course, the Hawaiian papaya crisis. I have no idea how you reached the conclusion that GMOs caused this. The truth is the exact opposite. The ring spot virus (not in any way GMO related) had wiped out the papaya industry. It was GMO research that saved it. You’re not going to find that in Natural News, but that’s what happened. Non-profit foundations are conducting the research on the bananas and Golden Rice.
Not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with university research or industry funded research. Jasper, you seem to be offended by the notion of anyone making money. How do you feel about the outrageous sums raised by Greenpeace, Mercola and Moms Across America, organizations that basically sell unfounded fear?
This argument is far from over but the media is on to the anti-GMO scam now. Virtually every legit reporter that takes this story on comes to the same place. GMOs are safe. We are up to more than three trillion meals served in North America alone without one instance of human health or environmental damage.
As for glyphosate, that’s really a separate issue. But where that chemical is used, it replaces other chemicals that are more toxic. Those are safe enough if used properly, but you have to be careful. Glyphosate is less toxic that identical doses of caffeine or salt!
It takes about 13 years and $136 million to bring a GMO product to market. All of this is under the watchful eye of the feds.