Skip to content

Hello Mr. Bourlag

Ahundred years ago, the plant scientist Arthur Watkins launched a remarkable project. He began collecting samples of wheat from all over the globe, nagging consuls and business agents across the British empire and beyond to supply him with grain from local markets.

His persistence was exceptional and, a century later, it is about to reap dramatic results. A UK-Chinese collaboration has sequenced the DNA of all the 827 kinds of wheat, assembled by Watkins, that have been nurtured at the John Innes Centre near Norwich for most of the past century.

In doing so, scientists have created a genetic goldmine by pinpointing previously unknown genes that are now being used to create hardy varieties with improved yields that could help feed Earth’s swelling population.

Of course, population’s about to top out and we’re probably very close to peak wheat. But if it makes them happy…..

32 thoughts on “Hello Mr. Bourlag”

  1. And of course all that natural genetic material has been expropriated by the multi-national companies who own all the seed houses and are allowed by law to copyright any ‘new’ varieties of grain they produce from that basic natural DNA, and demand royalties from the farmers who use it to grow crops from their own seed. Ie they get to sell the seed to start with and then every year thereafter they get another royalty if you grow more crops from saved seed of that variety. Utter thieving cunts the lot of them, and the politicians too, who gave them the law they wanted, presumably after enough pockets had been stuffed with money.

  2. ‘Of course, population’s about to top out and we’re probably very close to peak wheat. But if it makes them happy…..’

    You do have a point Tim. But when you’re sure as hell about something, reality will screw you every time.

    That’s why I’m happy that they’re doing this. And I’m not paying for it, of course.

  3. I’d have thought you’d have been in favour of this Tim. After all, it’s increased productivity, so we’ll need less farm land for our wheat needs and can use more for rewilded areas where the Greens can frolic to their hearts’ content.

  4. Jim,
    If the seed companies couldn’t make money from breeding new varieties then they wouldn’t do it. We would have no new varieties. Same as new drugs for pharmaceutical companies. Or is is different cos it’s farming?

  5. Good luck getting any of that off (or should I say into) the ground in view of Greenpeace’s ongoing and extremely effective hatchet job on Golden Rice.

    Or maybe Chinese backed products are going to be more robustly defended.

    P.s. Peak Wheat? I thought we were told that disruption to Ukrainian wheat supplies would have catastrophic consequences.

  6. The Meissen Bison

    Didn’t Monsanto or Cargill try to patent the bark (?) of the neem tree some decades ago? India wasn’t having any of that. Allowing this kind of thing is what leads to governments ultimately conniving with industry against the interests of their own people.

    Tim seems to be a bit malthusian today!

  7. I was quite supportive of GMO before the covid jabs. Now, I wouldn’t trust anything they produce.

  8. Much of the fun and value on here is bouncing off each others comments. The current delay/moderation has pretty much put an end to that .

  9. “If the seed companies couldn’t make money from breeding new varieties then they wouldn’t do it. We would have no new varieties. Same as new drugs for pharmaceutical companies. Or is is different cos it’s farming?”

    The greatest rise in wheat yields occurred during the period before plant breeding rights were introduced (which was only introduced in 1997, thanks Tony and the EU!). Before that a seed company had to make a new variety that was really good, that produced more in order for people to buy it, and farmers could still plant next years crop with free seed. Now all they do is slightly tweak the DNA of last years variety a bit and bring out a new one each year. and guess what? Yields have plateaued. And they don’t care because they’ve got a nice little constant earner of a royalty of every acre of crop planted. They don’t need to sell all much new seed because they get paid regardless.

    If I breed a new cow that give 10% more milk, I can’t copyright it, and demand a royalty from ever calf it ever has, and any calves their calves have, in perpetuity. I can’t own the DNA of an animal, and neither should the seed companies (all owned by the likes of Monsanto etc) be able to own the DNA of a plant.

  10. Seed patents last for 20 years afaik.
    It won’t be long before some of the earlier ones come out of protection.

  11. ” Same as new drugs for pharmaceutical companies. Or is is different cos it’s farming?”

    It is different. The drugs the pharmaceutical companies come up with don’t exist in nature. They have literally invented them. Whereas the crops that Big Ag now owns exist in nature, they didn’t create them, they have just expropriated the pre-existing genetic material on the back of a legal land grab, enabled by the usual suspects, the political class, in return for some $$$.

    We the people used to have free access to the crops we eat, now they are owned by multi-national corporations, and performing seals like you lot all clap enthusiastically.

  12. So they didn’t breed the new varieties, they just found a new plant, bulked up the seed and sold it? Don’t think that how it happens.

  13. “So they didn’t breed the new varieties, they just found a new plant, bulked up the seed and sold it? Don’t think that how it happens.”

    They did breed a new variety, but from genetic material that they didn’t own in the first place. So they shouldn’t own the genetic material of the new varieties either. Any more than if you breed a new sort of dog and demand a royalty for any offspring it may have to the Nth generation. Its the fundamental nature of plants and animals – they are self reproducing, and if you breed a new version your only outlet is one off sales of the living product. Not a royalty for every copy it produces of itself in the future.

  14. Hmm, yes. Not my specialty but I thought that with many of the seeds they were hybrids (think that’s the right word) so they don’t, in fact, breed true in the next generation anyway? The reason you go back to the seed company is to gain access to the properly functioning blend, no?

    #Further, the only reason to pay hte seed company would be because it’s worth doing so. You can plant 10% of last years emmr, or enikorn, crop – as people have been doing for 10k years – without paying anyone, no?

  15. “Further, the only reason to pay hte seed company would be because it’s worth doing so. You can plant 10% of last years emmr, or enikorn, crop – as people have been doing for 10k years – without paying anyone, no?”

    No, if you save some seed from the harvest of a protected variety and plant for the next year, you have to pay royalties to the seed company. They own the actual genetic material, so you aren’t entitled to copy it without paying them a royalty, just like if you buy a book and want to copy that. They even demand a royalty if you plant some seed to create a green cover over the winter and plough it in next spring, and never harvest anything. You literally aren’t allowed to let ‘their’ genetic material grow for your benefit. Technically even volunteers (grains that evade the combine and fall to the ground and germinate without any assistance) are covered by the legislation and a royalty should be paid, though I’ve never heard of that being enforced.

    “I thought that with many of the seeds they were hybrids (think that’s the right word) so they don’t, in fact, breed true in the next generation anyway? ”

    No, all cereal crops grown in the UK are fully viable to grow from saved seed. Oilseed rape is slightly different, I think they will regrow from saved seed but it loses vigour on each generation, so one tends to buy new OSR seed each season. But for the others (wheat barley, oats, beans, linseed) you have to declare each year how many acres of each you have planted and send a cheque for royalties to the BSPB (British Society of Plant Breeders), the trade body that polices their copyrighted material.

  16. You can’t “copyright” wheat. You can patent an improvement.

    Patents last 14 years.

    So the companies can only retain the rights as long as they keep making improvements.
    It is an excellent system that has been in place for centuries, because it rewards innovation.

    Noone is stopping farmers using inferior wheat, and never will. It’s a stupid beat up by know nothings who just want to rail st corporation’s.

  17. “So the companies can only retain the rights as long as they keep making improvements.
    It is an excellent system that has been in place for centuries, because it rewards innovation.”

    No its NOT been in place for centuries, its only been in place since 1997. Prior to that seed houses could sell their seed (and no one else could sell that variety as seed) but individual farmers could grow as much as they liked from their own saved grain, foc. Now the seed companies get a royalty for every acre grown from farm saved seed, in perpetuity. There are varieties that are royalty free, that date from prior to 1997, but crucially no-one can sell them to anyone else, just use themselves. So unless you have managed to keep growing the same variety on your farm for over 25 years and saving the seed each year, then you’re out of luck. All you can buy are the new post 1997 varieties, and the seed companies have you by the proverbials.

  18. “Noone is stopping farmers using inferior wheat”

    Tell me where I can buy royalty free wheat seed in the UK, regardless of how ‘inferior’ it is. It can’t be done. The whole market is stitched by the the big corporations, and there’s no way of getting out of their grasp. All the old varieties are still owned by the seed houses, even though they don’t produce or sell them any more, so even if you had some old seed lying around and managed to produce some, you can’t sell it to other farmers, its against the law.

  19. “How would they know?”

    They send a form to every farm with arable crops that requires the farmer to fill it in detailing what crops they have grown from saved seed, so an invoice can be raised for the royalties. They can also access the records that Defra have of what crops have been grown, and will also have records from their members of how much new seed has been sold, so they can soon find out if people are taking the piss. And they are aggressive in taking legal action to recover unpaid royalties, with fines. Similar to the how the PRS police the rights of music copyright holders.

  20. Jim said:
    “There are varieties that are royalty free, that date from prior to 1997, but crucially no-one can sell them to anyone else, just use themselves. So unless you have managed to keep growing the same variety on your farm for over 25 years and saving the seed each year, then you’re out of luck.”

    I hadn’t realised that; I’d assumed it was a choice between ‘modern’ (royalties, restricted use) and traditional (open market).

    That sounds a bit dodgy,

  21. “I hadn’t realised that; I’d assumed it was a choice between ‘modern’ (royalties, restricted use) and traditional (open market).”

    No, its entirely closed. There are no royalty free seed varieties available on the market. The seed companies have no incentive to produce and sell them, because they would then be selling less modern varieties and be losing future royalties. And individual farmers aren’t allowed to grow the royalty free varieties and sell them to other farmers, as the seed company still own the rights to them. So the market is stitched up, and its all controlled by a free seed houses, all owned by large corporations. Who as we all know have our best interests at heart at all times……

  22. Controlled by a few seed houses, not free.

    Can we have an edit function please!!!! I’ll even pay for it.

  23. Interesting Jim. How did seed houses gain propriety over strains that must go back to before there were seed houses? Or does it only apply to fairly recently developed strains & traditional crops are too low yield to be of interest?

  24. Would it be possible or feasible for a farmers’ co-operative to obtain a suitable heritage variety from the John Innes Centre and start building up a stock of free seeds? Each member farmer dedicating a small percentage of his land to growing something that could be sold as seed?

    Might take a few years to get to quantities required, but won’t it be worth it in the end?

  25. Jim,

    Bloody hell. Let’s hope it doesn’t give Pharma any more silly ideas – after all, one can still buy paracetamol…

  26. Bloke in Keighley

    Not my field so I’m probably not up to date on some of this. Might answer BiS/BiW’s questions though.

    The big two bits are the National List and Plant Breeders Rights. I know nothing about PBR – I’d guess that’s the royalty side Jim mentioned.
    If a seed isn’t on the National List – you’re not allowed to ‘market’ (which includes both selling and giving away) the seed. Every EU country + the UK has it’s own national list, if you want to sell into the EU – it has to be on at least one countries. The UK list now has a bunch of seeds marked as ‘GB only’.

    The list gets updated monthly and it you have to pay for testing to have a seed added. Seeds also fall off the list after x years unless it’s retested and paid again.
    Typically there is a maintainer who is responsible for that – that’s going to be one of the seed companies.

    Oldest variety of wheat I can see on the current list is Maris Widgeon – which was developed 1964. Good thatching wheat. Not great for grain production. Anything older than that – nope. Can’t market.

    In theory a group/co-op could pay for testing, listing and maintenance, but that’s expensive and a lot of older heritage varieties (esp anything pre 1900) aren’t going to be DUS (distinct, uniform and stable) – so ineligible to go on the list

  27. “How did seed houses gain propriety over strains that must go back to before there were seed houses”

    Thats what I want to know too. All seed houses must have started off with traditional varieties of seed that were freely available, being whatever farmers grew and traded amongst themselves, with no plant breeding rights whatsoever. Then they must have bred their own newer varieties from those traditional ones, and presumably at some point the law was changed to give them control of those new varieties. And slowly over time the power seeped away from the farmers who actually grew stuff to the seed houses who controlled the seed. At some point farmers must have been legally stopped from selling grain for seed off their farms, as per the National List mentioned by BiK above. Its all a racket to grant the seed companies a licence to print money. They can literally name their price for seed, and farmers have to pay it, otherwise they have no crop. And its a closed shop, no-one can just set themselves up as a seed house, not without a huge investment in regulatory compliance.

    Its very similar to the whole ‘natural remedy’ issue that arose a while back – unless a natural remedy was placed on some register of medical products (and doing so cost a lot of money, being the same process that a new drug would have to go through) it could no longer be sold. And as these remedies were not patented and owned by anyone no-one was going to spend the money to register them, so they disappeared completely. And who benefited? The multinational pharmaceutical companies of course, who got rid of some cheap and simple competition to their products. But hey, everyone here loves large multinational pharmaceutical companies, don’t they???? They would never do anything shady at all…….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *