The German Federal Seed Office as European Pioneer
by Rudolf Buntzel
Commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Agriculture, the German Federal Seed Office (FSO) has made a drastic recommendation to restrict the quantities which may be sold of seed which does not fulfil the strict registration conditions for marketing and circulation. The breeding and seed marketing sectors, organic farming organisations, conservation and environmental groups and the Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung (Forum Environment and Development) were invited to send representatives to discuss this recommendation in Hannover on 9 September, 1997. The meeting was chaired by the new FSO president, Dr. Jòrdens, former Director of the Environmental Division of the Ministry of Agriculture. Six representatives from groups with a non-commercial interest in seed attended.
The European Parliament has passed a new EU guideline for the marketing of seed which also makes provisions for the trouble-free transfer of "conservation varieties" ("landraces and varieties which are adapted to the local conditions and are threatened by genetic erosion"). A special registration procedure and unofficial tests are to be authorised EU-wide regarding these "varieties". These landraces will be included in the EU Common Varieties Catalogue, albeit in the "conservation varieties" section.
The FSO's recommendation takes an entirely different line from the draft of the EU guideline. In particular, the former greatly favours commercial seed users. The FSO wants a clear-cut distinction between varieties which are indisputably elite or high-yielding and "other seed" which do not require any tests or registration whatsoever and will not be included in the common catalogue. The FSO suggests that this "other seed" should be called "seed of origin". A limited quantity may be circulated under a special label provided that a few simple requirements are met.
In principle, this proposal met with the approval of non-commercial seed users. In any case, the National Association of Plant Breeders pledged to work towards the adoption of this recommendation at European level. The FSO wants to present this proposal to the EU Commission (and the Council of Ministers) as the "German Model" and hopes to achieve an amendment of the draft legislation by Parliament.
Should this recommendation be implemented, it would considerablyincrease the possibilities for a free exchange of seed and for minority groups with special interests regarding crop use without affecting the interests of the commercial, intensive agriculture sector. Furthermore, it could be realised with only a minimum of red tape, an advantage not only for those wanting to market alternative seed but also for the FSO itself. The advantage of creating a new "seed of origin" category is that it takes into account a plurality of different use purposes. For example, landraces and indigenous plant and seed stock could be freely exchanged for the purposes of nature conservation or landscaping, non-homogeneous varieties would be widely available for organic farming and seed could be exchanged for their conservation, collection and demonstration, and for use at exhibitions, for example in museums.
The FSO defines "seed of origin" as a plant population for which no registration or legal protection exists, nor for which an application for registration or protection has been made. It is classified according to its origin (regional or maintenance) and has a defined use. If seed of origin is to be marketed:
- it should be included in a special list of the FSO;
- it should be given its own label;
- a trading quantity limit should be established;
- it should comply with the criteria of trueness, ability to germinate and health;
- the person responsible for marketing should be made liable, and
- its entry on the list should bear the one-time cost of 250 DM.
It should be possible to describe this seed and to store it as conserved stock at the FSO. This seed can then be freely exchanged for a period of 10 years.
It is not yet altogether clear whether the various interests of all those affected by such legislation will be taken into account. Commercial breeders have expressed doubts mainly about possible abuse, fearing it could undermine the interests of the elite seed sector.
Organic breeders wonder about the all-round use possibilities of conventional elite seed for organic farming purposes, for example continuing use or conservation breeding after the normal registration has expired, or use following adaptation to the local conditions. The controversies surrounding the transition period, during which it is only possible to include registered seed in the category of "seed of origin" after its registration has expired, as well as the use of varieties which do not make it into the official register because of lack of homogeneity are particularly relevant for organic breeders. It was not possible to come to a common understanding on the transition period. Neither were theparties able to agree whether rejected varieties could be used as "seed of origin". In any case, commercial breeders are against a smooth transition between registered seed and seed of origin.
Nature and landscape conservationists are most concerned about the availability of indigenous seed for natural greenery (cultivation of flora for landscape and natural conservation purposes). The ban on the use of non-registered indigenous seed and the restrictive administration of seed mixtures, including grasses and herbs, in the Seed Trade Act, directly clashes with the provisions of the German Nature Protection Legislation. The main concerns are about seed injections to acquire the natural green cover rich in species and varieties. There is a risk of falsification of flora. A possible solution to this conflict could be achieved via the seed of origin regulation.
The conservation groups, for example the Association for the Conservation of Diversity in Useful Crops, are alarmed about the proposed clause in the definition of "seed of origin", in which seed should have "a certain value". They want to know whether this value is to be understood on economic terms, or whether it means that the biological diversity has an intrinsic value. In case of the latter, this clause should be scrapped totally. The FSO has stated its intention to think everything over. For them, it is a trifling question. The fee of 250 DM for every species to be marketed together with the work of notifying and keeping records, could be prohibitive in terms of time and money, especially for smaller quantities of seed exchanged between collectors. Breeders and the FSO played down the application procedure by saying that the current legal exemption for scientific and exhibition purposes already takes care of the conservationists' and collectors' concerns. However, it is not known whether in-situ conservation of plant genetic resources - for the sake of maintenance - is always to be interpreted as "research" in terms of conservation. Furthermore, it is doubtful that landrace crops, cultivated for example in farm-museums and used as ingredients in the preparation of old, original recipes, will continue to be seen as crops for mere "exhibition purposes". For all these reasons, conservation groups predict a need for specific rulings.
Although it is true that the proposal on the "seed of origin" could open a market niche, which could temporary fulfil certain expectations concerning the impact of Seed Trade Act reform, the question may put forward- especially in the near future when all elite seed varieties will probably incorporate gene technology in some way or other - whether a real reform of the Seed Trade Act (and perhaps of the Variety Protection Act), which extends to the conditions for registration and testing, should be strived for. The success of the market niche should not lead to neglect in theefforts towards amending the criterion of homogeneity and towards another definition of "cultural value".
September 12, 1997