Vermont's Farmer Protection Act Update

A bill that would shift all liability for genetically engineered (GE) crops off farmers and onto biotech seed manufacturers was progressing steadily through the Vermont legislature as we went to press. The Farmer Protection Act is the only bill of its kind still alive in the nation after similar initiatives in Montana and North Dakota were defeated earlier this winter.

Currently, when farmers sign technology use agreements drafted by biotech companies - or even open a bag of GE seed - they must accept all liability for potential injuries-an unreasonable burden on farmers, argue many of the bill's proponents. "If the product is indeed safe, then the companies should be proud to stand behind it," asserts Amy Shollenberger, policy director of Rural Vermont, a farm advocacy group that has been instrumental in drafting and promoting the bill. "If it is not [safe], then farmers should not have to… pay the price for the damages."

The "strict liability" provisions of the Farmer Protection Act would hold biotech seed companies fully liable for a range of injuries, including the loss of a price premium a farmer or processor might suffer due to GE contamination, the additional handling, transportation or storage costs that contaminated crops might require, or the loss of a farmer's livelihood, reputation or organic certification.

The bill would also protect farmers who "unknowingly come into possession" of patented GE crops. To date, St. Louis, Missouri-based Monsanto Corp. has filed more than 90 lawsuits against U.S. farmers for patent infringement, winning judgments totaling over $15 million, according to the Washington D.C.-based Center for Food Safety. But many of the defendants claim that crops with patented genes appeared on their fields through no fault of their own, due to cross-pollination from neighboring farms, says the Center.

The biotech industry has vehemently opposed Vermont's Farmer Protection Act. Margaret Laggis, a lobbyist for the biotech industry association CropLife America, said the bill is misguided because it "contemplates a zero tolerance level for pollen drift," an impossible standard. She also noted that pollen contamination from GE crops does not threaten a grower's organic certification or prevent a crop from being labeled and sold as organic, according to USDA organic standards.

With regard to the strict liability standard, Laggis adds, "That kind of standard is usually used for things like explosives, which are inherently dangerous. It's hard to believe we're going to have that kind of standard for corn seed, which is not an inherently dangerous product."

The Vermont Senate passed the bill by 26-1 on April 5, and the House Agriculture Committee is expected to recommend the legislation's passage. Fifty-four representatives in the 150-seat House are co-sponsors, but the possibility of a veto by Governor Jim Douglas looms. Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr has testified against the bill, saying he fears it would amount to a "backdoor moratorium" on GE crops in the state.

For more information on the Farmer Protection Act, see "Vermont plows ahead on GE seed liability law" at www.vermontguardian.com/local/0105/GMOSeedBill.shtml.